|
1
|
Liu S, Song B, Zhang L, Li X, Cui L. Clinical Trial Study Protocol: A Prospective Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial Protocol to Assess the Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block on Postoperative Analgesia and Recovery Quality in Laparoscopic Donor Hepatectomy. J Pain Res 2024; 17:3401-3408. [PMID: 39464411 PMCID: PMC11512518 DOI: 10.2147/jpr.s476966] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2024] [Accepted: 10/18/2024] [Indexed: 10/29/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction Liver transplantation is considered an effective treatment for end-stage liver disease. Laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (LDH) has become a new standard procedure. And it is important to minimize the pain of the donor. Good postoperative analgesia can reduce the occurrence of postoperative complications and promote the early recovery of the donor. Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block can provide effective analgesia for liver donors and reduce postoperative opioid consumption. This study aims to use ultrasound-guided TAP block for LDH to improve postoperative analgesia for donors while reducing opioid consumption and improving patient rehabilitation quality. Methods/Analysis This study is a prospective blinded, randomized, controlled clinical trial with a concealed allocation of patients (living liver donors) scheduled to receive laparoscopic partial hepatectomy 1:1 to receive local infiltration anesthesia or TAP block. This study will recruit a total of 80 patients. The primary outcome is the dosage of opioids within 24 hours after surgery. Ethics and Dissemination This trial has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Friendship Hospital of China Capital University. This trial study protocol was approved on 8 May 2023. The trial will start recruiting patients after being registered on the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. Trial Registration Number ChiCTR2300071694.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shen Liu
- Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, People’s Republic of China
| | - Bijia Song
- Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, People’s Republic of China
| | - Liang Zhang
- Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, People’s Republic of China
| | - Xiuliang Li
- Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, People’s Republic of China
| | - Lingli Cui
- Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, People’s Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Muaddi H, Gudmundsdottir H, Cleary S. Current Status of Laparoscopic Liver Resection. Adv Surg 2024; 58:311-327. [PMID: 39089784 DOI: 10.1016/j.yasu.2024.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/04/2024]
Abstract
The evolution of laparoscopic liver surgery, originating in the 1990s, has been marked by significant advancements and milestones, overcoming initial technical hurdles and gaining widespread acceptance within the surgical community as a precise and safe alternative to open procedures. Along this journey, numerous challenges emerged, leading to the accumulation of evidence and the development of guidelines aimed at assisting surgeons in determining the safety, suitability, and complexity of laparoscopic liver resection. This chapter provides a thorough examination of key aspects of laparoscopic liver resection, including difficulty scoring systems, criteria for patient selection, technical considerations, outcomes across different types of liver lesions, and the innovative solutions developed to address challenges, thus offering a comprehensive overview of laparoscopic liver resection, and highlighting its evolving significance in modern hepatobiliary surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hala Muaddi
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | - Sean Cleary
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
A R, M R. Future perspectives of robotics in liver transplantation. Updates Surg 2024:10.1007/s13304-024-01906-3. [PMID: 38850499 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-024-01906-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2023] [Accepted: 06/03/2024] [Indexed: 06/10/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Rammohan A
- The Institute of Liver Disease & Transplantation, Dr. Rela Institute & Medical Centre, Bharath Institute of Higher Education & Research, CLC Works Road, Chennai, India, 600044
| | - Rela M
- The Institute of Liver Disease & Transplantation, Dr. Rela Institute & Medical Centre, Bharath Institute of Higher Education & Research, CLC Works Road, Chennai, India, 600044.
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Ziogas IA, Kakos CD, Moris DP, Kaltenmeier C, Tsoulfas G, Montenovo MI, Alexopoulos SP, Geller DA, Pomfret EA. Systematic review and meta-analysis of open versus laparoscopy-assisted versus pure laparoscopic versus robotic living donor hepatectomy. Liver Transpl 2023; 29:1063-1078. [PMID: 36866856 DOI: 10.1097/lvt.0000000000000115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2022] [Accepted: 02/13/2023] [Indexed: 03/04/2023]
Abstract
The value of minimally invasive approaches for living donor hepatectomy remains unclear. Our aim was to compare the donor outcomes after open versus laparoscopy-assisted versus pure laparoscopic versus robotic living donor hepatectomy (OLDH vs. LALDH vs. PLLDH vs. RLDH). A systematic literature review of the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus databases was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement (up to December 8, 2021). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed separately for minor and major living donor hepatectomy. The risk of bias in nonrandomized studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A total of 31 studies were included. There was no difference in donor outcomes after OLDH versus LALDH for major hepatectomy. However, PLLDH was associated with decreased estimated blood loss, length of stay (LOS), and overall complications versus OLDH for minor and major hepatectomy, but also with increased operative time for major hepatectomy. PLLDH was associated with decreased LOS versus LALDH for major hepatectomy. RLDH was associated with decreased LOS but with increased operative time versus OLDH for major hepatectomy. The scarcity of studies comparing RLDH versus LALDH/PLLDH did not allow us to meta-analyze donor outcomes for that comparison. There seems to be a marginal benefit in estimated blood loss and/or LOS in favor of PLLDH and RLDH. The complexity of these procedures limits them to transplant centers with high volume and experience. Future studies should investigate self-reported donor experience and the associated economic costs of these approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ioannis A Ziogas
- Department of Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
- Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
- Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
- Surgery Working Group, Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece
| | - Christos D Kakos
- Surgery Working Group, Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitrios P Moris
- Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Christof Kaltenmeier
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Georgios Tsoulfas
- Department of Transplantation Surgery, Hippokration General Hospital, Aristotle University School of Medicine, Thessaloniki, Greece
| | - Martin I Montenovo
- Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | | | - David A Geller
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Elizabeth A Pomfret
- Department of Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Kwon JH, Ko JS, Kim HJ, Han S, Gwak MS, Kim GS, Lee SY, Wi W. Comparison of the analgesic effect of intrathecal morphine between laparoscopic and open living donor hepatectomy: Propensity score matching analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2023; 102:e34627. [PMID: 37657001 PMCID: PMC10476809 DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000034627] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2023] [Accepted: 07/14/2023] [Indexed: 09/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Laparoscopic donor hepatectomy is being increasingly adopted in transplant programs due to its numerous advantages. However, the role of intrathecal morphine (ITM) in laparoscopic donor hepatectomy has not been thoroughly investigated. This study aimed to compare the analgesic effects and safety of ITM between laparoscopic and open donor hepatectomy. This retrospective study included 742 donors who underwent hepatectomy with ITM between April 2007 and June 2019. Among them, 168 and 574 donors underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH), respectively. Propensity score matching yielded two comparable groups of 168 donors each. The primary endpoint was the incidence of moderate-to-severe pain (maximum numerical rating scale [NRS] pain score ≥ 4) within 24 postoperative hours. The LH group had a significantly lower incidence of moderate-to-severe pain within 24 postoperative hours than the OH group (16.1% vs 64.3%, P < .001). Moreover, the cumulative rescue intravenous opioids (in morphine-equivalent dose) on postoperative day (POD) 1 was lower in the LH group than in the OH group (3.3 [0-8.3] mg vs 10 [3.3-17.3] mg; P < .001). There were no significant between-group differences in the incidence of respiratory depression (2.4% vs 0.6%; P = .371) and prescriptions for pruritus (14.3% vs 15.5%; P = .878). However, the prescriptions for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was significantly higher in the LH group than in the OH group (64.9% vs 41.7%; P < .001). The predictors of antiemetic agent prescription included the use of laparoscopic procedure (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-3.79; P = .021) and female sex (adjusted OR, 5.63; 95% CI, 3.19-9.92; P < .001). Preoperative ITM administration resulted in a significantly lower incidence of moderate-to-severe pain within 24 postoperative hours after laparoscopic donor hepatectomy than after open donor hepatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ji-Hye Kwon
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Justin Sangwook Ko
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hyo Jin Kim
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chung-Ang University Gwangmyeong Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Gwangmyeong, Korea
| | - Sangbin Han
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Mi Sook Gwak
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Gaab Soo Kim
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seung Young Lee
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Wongook Wi
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chung-Ang University Gwangmyeong Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Gwangmyeong, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Sato H, Sasaki K, Kobayashi S, Iwagami Y, Yamada D, Tomimaru Y, Noda T, Takahashi H, Doki Y, Eguchi H. Pure Laparoscopic Donor Left Hepatectomy Reduces Postoperative Analgesic Use and Pain Scale. Transplant Proc 2023:S0041-1345(23)00130-6. [PMID: 37032286 DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2023.03.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2023] [Accepted: 03/13/2023] [Indexed: 04/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many recent reports have described the efficacy and safety of pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (PLDH). Here we investigated the extent to which this technique could reduce patients' experienced pain. METHODS Among donor left hepatectomy procedures performed between July 2011 and November 2022, we retrospectively analyzed 20 open donor hepatectomy (ODH), 20 laparoscopy-assisted donor hepatectomy (LADH), and 5 PLDH cases. We compared these 3 procedures regarding the total amount of postoperative analgesic use (narcotics and non-narcotics) and the first date when the donor was completely pain-free, as evaluated by the patients using a pain scale. RESULTS Total postoperative fentanyl use did not significantly differ among the 3 procedures: median (range), ODH, 0.5 mg (0-2 mg); LADH 1.2 mg (0-7 mg); PLDH, 0.5 mg (0-3.5; P = .172). The percentage of patients who completely discontinued analgesics on postoperative day (POD) 5 was significantly higher for PLDH (80%) than for ODH (35%) or LADH (20%) (P = .041). The day when 50% of donors were completely pain-free on a pain scale was POD9 for ODH, POD11 for LADH, and POD5 for PLDH, significantly shorter in the PLDH group (P = .004). CONCLUSION At our institution, we found that PLDH was a useful technique for postoperative pain management compared with PDH and LADH. Our results suggest that PLDH effectively reduces the duration of postoperative analgesia use. Further studies are warranted as the number of PLDH cases gradually increases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiromichi Sato
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Kazuki Sasaki
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Shogo Kobayashi
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
| | - Yoshifumi Iwagami
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Daisaku Yamada
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Yoshito Tomimaru
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Takehiro Noda
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Hidenori Takahashi
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Yuichiro Doki
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Hidetoshi Eguchi
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Rammohan A, Rela M. Robotic donor hepatectomy: Are we there yet? World J Gastrointest Surg 2021; 13:668-677. [PMID: 34354800 PMCID: PMC8316848 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v13.i7.668] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2021] [Revised: 04/09/2021] [Accepted: 06/16/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
In living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) the safety of the live donor (LD) is of paramount importance. Despite all efforts, the morbidity rates approach 25%-40% with conventional open donor hepatectomy (DH) operations. However, most of these complications are related to the operative wound and despite increased self- esteem and satisfaction in various quality of life analyses on LD, the most common grievance is that of the scar. Performing safe and precise DH through a conventional laparoscopic approach is a formidable task with a precipitous learning curve for the whole team. Due to the ramifications the donor operation carries for the donor, the recipient, the transplant team and for the LDLT program in general, the development and acceptance of minimally invasive DH (MIDH) has been slow. The robotic surgical system overcomes the reduced visualization, restricted range of motion and physiological tremor associated with laparoscopic surgery and allows for a comparatively easier transition from technical feasibility to reproducibility. However, many questions especially with regards to standardization of surgical technique, comparison of outcomes, understanding of the learning curve, etc. remain unanswered. The aim of this review is to provide insights into the evolution of MIDH and highlight the current status of robotic DH, appreciating the existing challenges and its future role.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashwin Rammohan
- Institute of Liver Disease & Transplantation, Dr. Rela Institute & Medical Centre, Bharath Institute of Higher Education & Research, Chennai 600044, India
| | - Mohamed Rela
- Institute of Liver Disease & Transplantation, Dr. Rela Institute & Medical Centre, Bharath Institute of Higher Education & Research, Chennai 600044, India
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Vincenzi P, Gonzalez J, Guerra G, Gaynor JJ, Alvarez A, Ciancio G. Complex Surgical Reconstruction of Upper Pole Artery in Living-Donor Kidney Transplantation. Ann Transplant 2021; 26:e926850. [PMID: 33446626 PMCID: PMC7814512 DOI: 10.12659/aot.926850] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The use of allografts with multiple renal arteries has increased in the era of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Although several studies recommend reconstructing lower pole arteries (LPAs) to reduce risk of urologic complications, it is common opinion to ligate upper pole arteries (UPAs) with a diameter less than 2 mm because of increased risk of thrombosis related to their reconstruction. This retrospective study evaluates the feasibility and safety of reconstructing thin UPAs during living-donor kidney transplantation, with the goal of maintaining the integrity of the graft and assuring its maximal function. Material/Methods Data from 922 living-donor kidney transplants performed between 2009 and 2019 were reviewed. Six cases with UPAs were identified (0.65%). The study endpoints were incidence of allograft vascular and urologic complications, slow graft function, delayed graft function, graft failure, and graft and patient survival. Results The UPAs had a mean diameter of 1.8±0.28 mm. Methods of reconstruction included: interposition graft (n=2), end-to-side anastomosis inside the renal hilum to a branch of the main renal artery (n=3), and side-to-side anastomosis with the main renal artery (n=1). Additional reconstruction of LPAs (n=2) and main renal arteries (n=2) was performed. During a median (range) follow-up of 14.5 (9–49) months no complications were observed. Conclusions Ex vivo reconstruction of UPAs with a diameter less than 2 mm is worth attempting, particularly in the setting of living-donor kidney transplantation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paolo Vincenzi
- Department of Surgery, Miami Transplant Institute, Miami, FL, USA.,University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Javier Gonzalez
- Department of Urology, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
| | - Giselle Guerra
- University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL, USA.,Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Miami Transplant Institute, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Jeffrey J Gaynor
- Department of Surgery, Miami Transplant Institute, Miami, FL, USA.,University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Angel Alvarez
- Department of Surgery, Miami Transplant Institute, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Gaetano Ciancio
- Department of Surgery, Miami Transplant Institute, Miami, FL, USA.,University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL, USA.,Department of Urology, Miami Transplant Institute, Miami, FL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Cherqui D, Ciria R, Kwon CHD, Kim KH, Broering D, Wakabayashi G, Samstein B, Troisi RI, Han HS, Rotellar F, Soubrane O, Briceño J, Alconchel F, Ayllón MD, Berardi G, Cauchy F, Luque IG, Hong SK, Yoon YY, Egawa H, Lerut J, Lo CM, Rela M, Sapisochin G, Suh KS. Expert Consensus Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Donor Hepatectomy for Living Donor Liver Transplantation From Innovation to Implementation: A Joint Initiative From the International Laparoscopic Liver Society (ILLS) and the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (A-PHPBA). Ann Surg 2021; 273:96-108. [PMID: 33332874 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000004475] [Citation(s) in RCA: 64] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The Expert Consensus Guidelines initiative on MIDH for LDLT was organized with the goal of safe implementation and development of these complex techniques with donor safety as the main priority. BACKGROUND Following the development of minimally invasive liver surgery, techniques of MIDH were developed with the aim of reducing the short- and long-term consequences of the procedure on liver donors. These techniques, although increasingly performed, lack clinical guidelines. METHODS A group of 12 international MIDH experts, 1 research coordinator, and 8 junior faculty was assembled. Comprehensive literature search was made and studies classified using the SIGN method. Based on literature review and experts opinions, tentative recommendations were made by experts subgroups and submitted to the whole experts group using on-line Delphi Rounds with the goal of obtaining >90% Consensus. Pre-conference meeting formulated final recommendations that were presented during the plenary conference held in Seoul on September 7, 2019 in front of a Validation Committee composed of LDLT experts not practicing MIDH and an international audience. RESULTS Eighteen Clinical Questions were addressed resulting in 44 recommendations. All recommendations reached at least a 90% consensus among experts and were afterward endorsed by the validation committee. CONCLUSIONS The Expert Consensus on MIDH has produced a set of clinical guidelines based on available evidence and clinical expertise. These guidelines are presented for a safe implementation and development of MIDH in LDLT Centers with the goal of optimizing donor safety, donor care, and recipient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Cherqui
- AP-HP, Hepatobiliary Center, Paul Brousse Hospital, Université Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Ruben Ciria
- Unit of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation. University Hospital Reina Sofía, Cordoba, Spain
| | - Choon Hyuck David Kwon
- Department of General Surgery, Digestive Disease & Surgery Institute, Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Ki-Hun Kim
- Division of Liver Transplantation and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Dieter Broering
- Organ Transplant Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Al Faisal University, Riyadh, KSA
| | - Go Wakabayashi
- Center for Advanced Treatment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Diseases, Ageo Central General Hospital, Ageo, Japan
| | - Benjamin Samstein
- Department of Surgery, Division of Liver Transplantation and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | - Roberto I Troisi
- Organ Transplant Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Al Faisal University, Riyadh, KSA
- Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University, Naples, Italy; Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Belgium
| | - Ho Seong Han
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Fernando Rotellar
- Department of General Surgery, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, School of Medicine, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - Olivier Soubrane
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Beaujon Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris and Université de Paris, Clichy, France
| | - Javier Briceño
- Unit of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation. University Hospital Reina Sofía, Cordoba, Spain
| | - Felipe Alconchel
- Department of Surgery, Virgen de la Arrixaca University Hospital, Murcia, Spain; Instituto Murciano de Investigación Biosanitaria (IMIB-Arrixaca), Murcia, Spain
| | - María Dolores Ayllón
- Unit of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation. University Hospital Reina Sofía, Cordoba, Spain
| | - Giammauro Berardi
- Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University, Naples, Italy; Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Belgium
| | - Francois Cauchy
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Beaujon Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris and Université de Paris, Clichy, France
| | - Irene Gómez Luque
- Unit of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation. University Hospital Reina Sofía, Cordoba, Spain
| | - Suk Kyun Hong
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Young-Yin Yoon
- Division of Liver Transplantation and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hiroto Egawa
- Department of Surgery, Institute of Gastroenterology, Tokyo Women's Medical University
| | - Jan Lerut
- Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique Université Catholique de Louvain Brussels, Belgium
| | - Chung-Mau Lo
- Department of Surgery, The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, China
| | - Mohamed Rela
- The Institute of Liver Disease and Transplantation, Dr. Rela Institute and Medical Center, Bharat Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India
- Institute of Liver Studies, King's College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Gonzalo Sapisochin
- Multi-Organ Transplant and HPB Surgical Oncology, Division of General Surgery, University Health Network, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Canada
| | - Kyung-Suk Suh
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Comparison of perioperative outcomes between pure laparoscopic surgery and open right hepatectomy in living donor hepatectomy: Propensity score matching analysis. Sci Rep 2020; 10:5314. [PMID: 32210359 PMCID: PMC7093441 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-62289-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2019] [Accepted: 03/06/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (PLDRH) is not a standard procedure for living donor liver transplantation but is safe and reproducible in the hands of experienced surgeons. However, the perioperative outcomes of PLDRH have not been fully evaluated yet. We used propensity score matching to compare the perioperative complications and postoperative short-term outcomes of donors undergoing PLDRH and open donor right hepatectomy (ODRH). A total of 325 consecutive donors who underwent elective, adult-to-adult right hepatectomy were initially screened. After propensity score matching, all patients were divided into two groups: PLDRH (n = 123) and ODRH (n = 123) groups. Perioperative complications and postoperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. Postoperative pulmonary complications were significantly more common in the ODRH than in the PLDRH group (54.5 vs. 31.7%, P < 0.001). The biliary complications (leak and stricture) were higher in PLDRH group than in the ODRH group (8% vs. 3%), but it failed to reach statistical significance (P = 0.167). Overall, surgical complication rates were similar between the two groups (P = 0.730). The opioid requirement during the first 7 postoperative days was higher in the ODRH group (686 vs. 568 mg, P < 0.001). The hospital stay and time to the first meal were shorter in the PLDRH than in the ODRH group (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, respectively). PLDRH reduced the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications and afforded better short-term postoperative outcomes compared to ODRH. However, surgical complication rates were similar in both groups.
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Broering DC, Berardi G, El Sheikh Y, Spagnoli A, Troisi RI. Learning Curve Under Proctorship of Pure Laparoscopic Living Donor Left Lateral Sectionectomy for Pediatric Transplantation. Ann Surg 2020; 271:542-548. [PMID: 29995683 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000002948] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the learning curve of an expert liver transplantation surgeon approaching fully laparoscopic living donor left lateral sectionectomy (L-LLS) under proctorship. BACKGROUND Laparoscopic liver resections necessitate a long learning curve trough a stepwise fulfillment of difficulties. L-LLS requires expertise in both living donor liver transplantation and advanced laparoscopic liver surgery. There is currently no data about the learning curve of L-LLS. METHODS A total of 72 pure L-LLS were included in this study. A Broken line model was used to identify the periods of the learning curve. A CUSUM analysis of the operative time was performed to evaluate improvements of outcomes with time. To evaluate the relationship between operative time and progressive number of procedures, a linear regression model was applied. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was carried out to identify the cutoff for completion of the learning curve. RESULTS Operative time decreased with the progressive increase of procedures. Two cutoffs and 3 different periods were identified: cases 1 to 22, cases 23 to 55, and cases 56 to 72. A significant decrease in blood loss and operative time was noted. The CUSUM analysis showed an increase in operative time in the first period, a stable duration in the second period, and a decrease in the last. Blood loss was significantly associated with an increase in operative time (P = 0.003). According to the ROC curve, the learning curve was completed after 25 procedures. CONCLUSIONS L-LLS is a safe procedure that can be standardized and successfully taught to surgeons with large experience in donor hepatectomy through a proctored learning curve.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dieter C Broering
- Organ Transplant Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
- Al Faisal University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
| | - Giammauro Berardi
- Department of Structure and Recovery of Man, Ghent University Faculty of Medicine, Ghent-Belgium
| | - Yasser El Sheikh
- Organ Transplant Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
| | - Alessandra Spagnoli
- Department of Statistical Sciences, Public Health and Infectious Diseases, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto I Troisi
- Organ Transplant Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
- Department of Structure and Recovery of Man, Ghent University Faculty of Medicine, Ghent-Belgium
- Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University, Naples, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Angelico R, Guzzo I, Pellicciaro M, Saffioti MC, Grimaldi C, Mourani C, Smedile F, Pariante R, Semprini A, Monti L, Candusso M, Dello Strologo L, Spada M. Same Donor Laparoscopic Liver and Kidney Procurement for Sequential Living Donor Liver-Kidney Transplantation in Primary Hyperoxaluria Type I. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2019; 29:1616-1622. [PMID: 31687885 DOI: 10.1089/lap.2019.0483] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Sequential liver-kidney transplantation (SeqLKT) from the same living donor has shown excellent results in children with primary hyperoxaluria type 1 (PH1), yet its experience is limited due to the invasiveness of two major procedures for liver-kidney procurement in a single donor. Despite laparoscopic nephrectomy and hepatic left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) being considered standard procedures in living donation, the sequential use of the two laparoscopic approaches in the same living donor has never been reported. Methods: Herein, we present the first two case series of laparoscopic liver-kidney procurement in the same living donor for SeqLKT in children with PH1 and review of the current literature on this topic. Results: In the first case, a 15-month-old boy received a SeqLKT from his 32-year-old mother, who underwent a laparoscopic LLS and, after 8 months, a laparoscopic left nephrectomy. In the second case, a 34-month-old boy received a SeqLKT from his 40-year-old father who underwent laparoscopic LLS followed by hand-assisted right nephrectomy after 4 months. Both donors had uneventful postoperative courses and were discharged within 5 days from each surgery. The first recipient had no complication; the second child after liver transplantation developed a partial thrombosis of the inferior vena cava, which did not preclude the sequential kidney transplantation. After 12 months, donors and recipients displayed normal liver and renal functions. Conclusions: Sequential laparoscopic liver-kidney procurement in the same living donor is safe and feasible, and might be considered as a possible strategy to promote SeqLKT in children with PH1 from the same living donor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roberta Angelico
- Division of Abdominal Transplantation and Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Isabella Guzzo
- Department of Nephrology and Dyalisis, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Pellicciaro
- Division of Abdominal Transplantation and Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Maria Cristina Saffioti
- Division of Abdominal Transplantation and Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Chiara Grimaldi
- Division of Abdominal Transplantation and Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Chebl Mourani
- Department of Pediatrics, Hôtel-Dieu de France Hospital (HDF), Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Francesco Smedile
- Department of Anesthesiology, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Rosanna Pariante
- Department of Anesthesiology, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Alessia Semprini
- Department of Radiology, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Lidia Monti
- Department of Radiology, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Manila Candusso
- Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Luca Dello Strologo
- Department of Nephrology and Dyalisis, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Spada
- Division of Abdominal Transplantation and Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Shahbazov R, Maluf D, Azari F, Hakim D, Martin O, Dicocco P, Alejo JL, Saracino G, Hakim N. Laparoscopic Versus Finger-Assisted Open Donor Nephrectomy Technique: A Possible Safe Alternative. EXP CLIN TRANSPLANT 2019; 18:585-590. [PMID: 31526334 DOI: 10.6002/ect.2019.0115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Despite the present use ofthe laparoscopic technique for living-donor kidney nephrectomy, a search for alternative techniques continues.The aim of this study was to compare finger-assisted open donor nephrectomy versus laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study included retrospective data of 95 consecutive donors in a transplant center who were under going donor nephrectomy RESULTS: Donor demographics and clinical characteristics were generally similar between treatment groups. There were fewer female donors in the finger-assisted open donor nephrectomy treatment group (70.5% vs 29.5%; P = .003), but median body mass index was similar between groups (28 vs 26 kg/m²; P = .032). Patients who received laparoscopic donor nephrectomy had longer operative duration (3.5 vs 1.2 h; P < .001), longer combined length of incision (6 vs 5 cm; P = .001), andshorter median hospital length of stay (3 vs 4 days; P < .001). A left nephrectomy was preferred in both groups. Minor postoperative complications occurred less often in the finger-assisted open donor nephrectomy group (14.7% vs 31.6%; P = .0094). Donors who received laparoscopic nephrectomy had lower glomerular filtration rate at 1 year after donation (60 vs 89 mL/min/1.73 m²; P < .001) than donors who received finger-assisted nephrectomy. However, recipients of donors of both procedures had similar glomerular filtration rate at 1 year after transplant (65 vs 69 mL/min/1.73 m²; P = .5). CONCLUSIONS Our study demonstrated that finger-assisted open donor nephrectomy is a successful and safe alternative versus laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, providing favorable results for patients in terms of complications and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rauf Shahbazov
- >From the Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
A Single Center Experience for a Feasibility of Totally Laparoscopic Living Donor Right Hepatectomy. THE JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY 2019; 22:47-48. [PMID: 35602768 PMCID: PMC8980154 DOI: 10.7602/jmis.2019.22.2.47] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2019] [Revised: 06/05/2019] [Accepted: 06/08/2019] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Liver transplantation from living donors is a potential treatment for end-stage liver disease. With advancement of laparoscopic techniques and development of surgical devices, laparoscopic liver resection is becoming increasingly popular because of the minimal invasiveness and excellent cosmetic outcomes. However, owing to technical difficulties, pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy develops relatively slowly. Pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy has the great advantage of reducing morbidity, minimizing tissue trauma, and improving postoperative pain and cosmetic outcome. However, pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy may result in a longer operation time and increased risk of bile duct injury. With continuous technical development and building experience for standardization of the technique, pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy is expected to be further expanded in the future.
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Peng L, Zhou Z, Cao Z, Wu W, Xiao W, Cao J. Long-Term Oncological Outcomes in Laparoscopic Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2019; 29:759-769. [PMID: 30835156 DOI: 10.1089/lap.2018.0683] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) seem promising, but long-term outcomes of LPD for pancreatic cancer (PC) warrant further investigation. Methods: A systematic research of various databases was performed to identify studies analyzing long-term outcomes in LPD versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for PC. Survival parameters of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were extracted. The search was last conducted before May 23, 2018. Results: A total of 10 studies involving 11,180 patients (1437 in LPD and 9743 in OPD) met the final inclusion criteria. Pooled analyses showed that LPD was associated with longer DFS compared with OPD (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61 to 0.98, P = .033). No significant difference in OS was found between LPD and OPD (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.07, P = .672). In addition, patients of LPD had much shorter time to receive postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy compared with OPD (weighted mean difference: -10.17, 95% CI: -17.90 to -2.45, P = .010). Discussion: With regard to long-term survival, LPD is comparable with OPD for PC. Furthermore, LPD is associated with longer DFS compared with OPD. Future well-designed, randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up are still essential to further demonstrate the advantages of LPD for PC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Long Peng
- 1 Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China
| | - Zhiyong Zhou
- 1 Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China
| | - Zhongren Cao
- 1 Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China
| | - Weibo Wu
- 1 Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China
| | - Weidong Xiao
- 2 Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China
| | - Jiaqing Cao
- 1 Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Peng L, Cao J, Hu X, Xiao W, Zhou Z, Mao S. Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection for patients with previous upper abdominal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg 2019; 65:96-106. [PMID: 30946997 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.03.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2018] [Revised: 10/13/2018] [Accepted: 03/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is technical challenge for patients with previous upper abdominal surgery (UAS), especially for those with previous liver resection. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection for patients with previous UAS, in comparison with primary laparoscopic liver resection which means patients without previous upper abdominal surgery (non-UAS). METHODS All case-matched articles published from date of inception to 15th April 2018 were identified independently by two reviewers. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed. Data were extracted and calculated by random- or fixed-effect models. In addition, subgroup analysis according to patients with history of liver resection was performed. RESULTS A total of 8 non-randomized observational articles were included, with 1625 patients (430 patients in UAS group and 1195 in non-UAS group). The results showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups in perioperative outcomes. In the subgroup analysis of patients with a history of liver resection, however, LH for patients with previous liver resection had longer operative time comparing with patients without previous liver resection (WMD = 33.03, 95% CI 3.16 to 62.90, P = 0.030); other perioperative outcomes were similar between UAS and non-UAS groups. CONCLUSION LH is feasible and safe for selected patients with previous UAS comparing with that of primary resection, although LH has longer operative time for patients with previous liver resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Long Peng
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China
| | - Jiaqing Cao
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China
| | - Xiaoyun Hu
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China
| | - Weidong Xiao
- Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China
| | - Zhiyong Zhou
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China
| | - Shengxun Mao
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Peng L, Zhou Z, Xiao W, Hu X, Cao J, Mao S. Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open repeat hepatectomy for recurrent liver cancer. Surg Oncol 2019; 28:19-30. [PMID: 30851898 DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2018.10.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2018] [Revised: 10/21/2018] [Accepted: 10/27/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Repeat hepatectomy plays a key role in recurrent hepatic tumors. However, it is still unknown whether laparoscopic hepatectomy is suitable for recurrent liver cancers. The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) compared with open repeat hepatectomy (ORH). METHODS Several databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, The Cochrane Library and Ovid, were retrieved from date of inception to 31st March 2018. All articles comparing LRH and ORH were identified. Tumor characteristics and perioperative outcomes including resection type, operation time, blood loss, transfusion, complications and hospital stay were evaluated. Data were extracted and calculated using random- or fixed-effect models. RESULTS A total of seven non-randomized observational clinical articles including 443 patients were analyzed. LRH was associated with significantly lower blood loss (WMD = -389.09, 95% CI -628.34 to -149.84, P = 0.001), transfusion (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.03-0.74, P = 0.019) as well as limited hospital stay (WMD = -4.00, 95% CI -6.58 to -1.42, P = 0.002). No statistical difference was found in the field of tumor characteristics and other perioperative outcomes. In the sensitivity analysis of case-match studies, LRH was associated with significant limited hospital stay, but with significant longer operation time. There were 8 (1.8%, range 0-13.3%) cases of conversion in LRH group. CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of these limited data, LRH is as feasible and efficient as ORH by expert surgeons in selected patients, whose cancer is resectable at the time of surgery and who have Child-Pugh A or B cirrhosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Long Peng
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China
| | - Zhiyong Zhou
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China
| | - Weidong Xiao
- Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China
| | - Xiaoyun Hu
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China
| | - Jiaqing Cao
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China.
| | - Shengxun Mao
- Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Suh KS, Hong SK, Lee KW, Yi NJ, Kim HS, Ahn SW, Yoon KC, Choi JY, Oh D, Kim H. Pure laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy: Focus on 55 donors undergoing right hepatectomy. Am J Transplant 2018; 18:434-443. [PMID: 28787763 DOI: 10.1111/ajt.14455] [Citation(s) in RCA: 102] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2017] [Revised: 07/24/2017] [Accepted: 07/29/2017] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
Although laparoscopic donor hepatectomy is increasingly common, few centers with substantial experience have reported the results of pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (PLDRH). Here, we report the experiences of 60 consecutive liver donors undergoing pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (PLDH), with most undergoing right hepatectomy. None of the 60 donors who underwent PLDH had intraoperative complications and none required transfusions, reoperation, or conversion to open hepatectomy. Forty-five donors who underwent PLDRH between November 2015 and December 2016 were compared with 42 who underwent conventional donor right hepatectomy (CDRH) between May 2013 and February 2014. The total operation time was longer (330.7 vs 280.0 minutes; P < .001) and the percentage with multiple bile duct openings was higher (53.3% vs 26.2%; P = .010) in the PLDRH group. However, the length of postoperative hospital stay (8.4 vs 8.2 days; P = .495) and rate of complications (11.9% vs 8.9%; P = .733) and re-hospitalizations (4.8% vs 4.4%; P = 1.000) were similar in both groups. PLDH, including PLDRH, is feasible when performed by a highly experienced surgeon and transplant team. Further evaluation, including long-term results, may support these preliminary findings of comparative outcomes for donors undergoing PLDRH and CDRH.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K S Suh
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - S K Hong
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - K W Lee
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - N J Yi
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - H S Kim
- Department of Surgery, Chonnam National University Medical School and Hospital, Gwangju, Korea
| | - S W Ahn
- Department of Surgery, Chonbuk National University College of Medicine, Jeonju, Korea
| | - K C Yoon
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - J Y Choi
- Department of Surgery, Soonchunhyang University Seoul Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - D Oh
- Department of Surgery, Myongji Hospital, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
| | - H Kim
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
19
|
Li H, Zhang JB, Chen XL, Fan L, Wang L, Li SH, Zheng QL, Wang XM, Yang Y, Chen GH, Wang GS. Different techniques for harvesting grafts for living donor liver transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23:3730-3743. [PMID: 28611526 PMCID: PMC5449430 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i20.3730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2016] [Revised: 04/10/2017] [Accepted: 04/13/2017] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on minimally vs conventional invasive techniques for harvesting grafts for living donor liver transplantation.
METHODS PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched comprehensively for studies comparing MILDH with conventional living donor hepatectomy (CLDH). Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes (operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative liver function, length of hospital stay, analgesia use, complications, and survival rate) were analyzed in donors and recipients. Articles were included if they: (1) compared the outcomes of MILDH and CLDH; and (2) reported at least some of the above outcomes.
RESULTS Of 937 articles identified, 13, containing 1592 patients, met our inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. For donors, operative time [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 20.68, 95%CI: -6.25-47.60, P = 0.13] and blood loss (WMD = -32.61, 95%CI: -80.44-5.21, P = 0.18) were comparable in the two groups. In contrast, analgesia use (WMD = -7.79, 95%CI: -14.06-1.87, P = 0.01), postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR) = 0.62, 95%CI: 0.44-0.89, P = 0.009], and length of hospital stay (WMD): -1.25, 95%CI: -2.35-0.14, P = 0.03) significantly favored MILDH. No differences were observed in recipient outcomes, including postoperative complications (OR = 0.93, 95%CI: 0.66-1.31, P = 0.68) and survival rate (HR = 0.96, 95%CI: 0.27-3.47, P = 0.95). Funnel plot and statistical methods showed a low probability of publication bias.
CONCLUSION MILDH is safe, effective, and feasible for living donor liver resection with fewer donor postoperative complications, reduced length of hospital stay and analgesia requirement than CLDH.
Collapse
|
|
20
|
Hori T, Kaido T, Iida T, Yagi S, Uemoto S. Comprehensive guide to laparoscope-assisted graft harvesting in live donors for living-donor liver transplantation: perspective of laparoscopic vision. Ann Gastroenterol 2016; 30:118-126. [PMID: 28042248 PMCID: PMC5198236 DOI: 10.20524/aog.2016.0088] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2016] [Accepted: 08/08/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A living donor (LD) for liver transplantation (LT) is the best target for minimally invasive surgery. Laparoscope-assisted surgery (LAS) for LDs has gradually evolved. A donor safety rate of 100% should be guaranteed. METHODS We began performing LAS for LDs in June 2012. The aim of this report is to describe the surgical procedures of LAS in detail, discuss various tips and pitfalls, and address the potential for a smooth transition to more advanced LAS. RESULTS Preoperative planning based on three-dimensional image analysis is a powerful tool for successful surgery. The combination of liver retraction/countertraction and the pressure produced by pneumoperitoneum widens the dissectible/cuttable layer, increasing the safety of LAS. A flexible laparoscope provides excellent magnified vision in both the horizontal view along the inferior vena cava, under adequate liver retraction, and in the lateral view, to harvest left-sided grafts in critical procedures. Intentional omission of painful incisions is beneficial for LDs. Hepatectomy using a smaller midline incision is safe if a hanging maneuver is used. Safe transition from LAS to a hybrid technique involving a combination of pure laparoscopic surgery and subsequent open surgery seems possible. CONCLUSION LDLT surgeons have a very broad intellectual and technical frontier.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tomohide Hori
- Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Kyoto University Hospital, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Toshimi Kaido
- Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Kyoto University Hospital, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Taku Iida
- Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Kyoto University Hospital, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Shintaro Yagi
- Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Kyoto University Hospital, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Shinji Uemoto
- Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Kyoto University Hospital, Kyoto, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Buia A, Stockhausen F, Hanisch E. Laparoscopic surgery: A qualified systematic review. World J Methodol 2015; 5:238-254. [PMID: 26713285 PMCID: PMC4686422 DOI: 10.5662/wjm.v5.i4.238] [Citation(s) in RCA: 127] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2015] [Accepted: 11/25/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM: To review current applications of the laparoscopic surgery while highlighting the standard procedures across different fields.
METHODS: A comprehensive search was undertaken using the PubMed Advanced Search Builder. A total of 321 articles were found in this search. The following criteria had to be met for the publication to be selected: Review article, randomized controlled trials, or meta-analyses discussing the subject of laparoscopic surgery. In addition, publications were hand-searched in the Cochrane database and the high-impact journals. A total of 82 of the findings were included according to matching the inclusion criteria. Overall, 403 full-text articles were reviewed. Of these, 218 were excluded due to not matching the inclusion criteria.
RESULTS: A total of 185 relevant articles were identified matching the search criteria for an overview of the current literature on the laparoscopic surgery. Articles covered the period from the first laparoscopic application through its tremendous advancement over the last several years. Overall, the biggest advantage of the procedure has been minimizing trauma to the abdominal wall compared with open surgery. In the case of cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and adrenalectomy, the procedure has become the gold standard without being proven as a superior technique over the open surgery in randomized controlled trials. Faster recovery, reduced hospital stay, and a quicker return to normal activities are the most evident advantages of the laparoscopic surgery. Positive outcomes, efficiency, a lower rate of wound infections, and reduction in the perioperative morbidity of minimally invasive procedures have been shown in most indications.
CONCLUSION: Improvements in surgical training and developments in instruments, imaging, and surgical techniques have greatly increased safety and feasibility of the laparoscopic surgical procedures.
Collapse
|
|
22
|
Brustia R, Komatsu S, Goumard C, Bernard D, Soubrane O, Scatton O. From the left to the right: 13-year experience in laparoscopic living donor liver transplantation. Updates Surg 2015; 67:193-200. [DOI: 10.1007/s13304-015-0309-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2015] [Accepted: 06/03/2015] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|