Joseph F. Buell

The International Position on Laparoscopic Liver Surgery: The Louisville Statement, 2008

Objective:To summarize the current world position on laparoscopic liver surgery. Summary Background Data:Multiple series have reported on the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic liver surgery. Small and medium sized procedures have become commonplace in many centers, while major laparoscopic liver resections have been performed with efficacy and safety equaling open surgery in highly specialized centers. Although the field has begun to expand rapidly, no consensus meeting has been convened to discuss the evolving field of laparoscopic liver surgery. Methods:On November 7 to 8, 2008, 45 experts in hepatobiliary surgery were invited to participate in a consensus conference convened in Louisville, KY, US. In addition, over 300 attendees were present from 5 continents. The conference was divided into sessions, with 2 moderators assigned to each, so as to stimulate discussion and highlight controversies. The format of the meeting varied from formal presentation of experiential data to expert opinion debates. Written and video records of the presentations were produced. Specific areas of discussion included indications for surgery, patient selection, surgical techniques, complications, patient safety, and surgeon training. Results:The consensus conference used the terms pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopy, and the hybrid technique to define laparoscopic liver procedures. Currently acceptable indications for laparoscopic liver resection are patients with solitary lesions, 5 cm or less, located in liver segments 2 to 6. The laparoscopic approach to left lateral sectionectomy should be considered standard practice. Although all types of liver resection can be performed laparoscopically, major liver resections (eg, right or left hepatectomies) should be reserved for experienced surgeons facile with more advanced laparoscopic hepatic resections. Conversion should be performed for difficult resections requiring extended operating times, and for patient safety, and should be considered prudent surgical practice rather than failure. In emergent situations, efforts should be made to control bleeding before converting to a formal open approach. Utilization of a hand assist or hybrid technique may be faster, safer, and more efficacious. Indications for surgery for benign hepatic lesions should not be widened simply because the surgery can be done laparoscopically. Although data presented on colorectal metastases did not reveal an adverse effect of the laparoscopic approach on oncological outcomes in terms of margins or survival, adequacy of margins and ability to detect occult lesions are concerns. The pure laparoscopic technique of left lateral sectionectomy was used for adult to child donation while the hybrid approach has been the only one reported to date in the case of adult to adult right lobe donation. Laparoscopic liver surgery has not been tested by controlled trials for efficacy or safety. A prospective randomized trial appears to be logistically prohibitive; however, an international registry should be initiated to document the role and safety of laparoscopic liver resection. Conclusions:Laparoscopic liver surgery is a safe and effective approach to the management of surgical liver disease in the hands of trained surgeons with experience in hepatobiliary and laparoscopic surgery. National and international societies, as well as governing boards, should become involved in the goal of establishing training standards and credentialing, to ensure consistent standards and clinical outcomes.

Malignancy after transplantation.

As newer immunosuppressive regimens have steadily reduced the incidence of acute rejection and have extended the life expectancy of allograft recipients, posttransplant malignancy has become an important cause of mortality. In fact, it is expected that cancer will surpass cardiovascular complications as the leading cause of death in transplant patients within the next 2 decades. An understanding of the underlying pathobiology and how to minimize cancer risks in transplant recipients are essential. The etiology of posttransplant malignancy is believed to be multifactorial and likely involves impaired immunosurveillance of neoplastic cells as well as depressed antiviral immune activity with a number of common posttransplant malignancies being viral-related. Although calcineurin inhibitors and azathioprine have been linked with posttransplant malignancies, newer agents such as mycophenolate mofetil and sirolimus have not and indeed may have antitumor properties. Long-term data are needed to determine if the use of these agents will ultimately lower the mortality due to malignancy for transplant recipients.

Experience with more than 500 minimally invasive hepatic procedures.

Objective:To evaluate our experience with more than 500 minimally invasive hepatic procedures. Summary Background Data:Recent data have confirmed the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive liver surgery. Despite these reports, no programmatic approach to minimally invasive liver surgery has been proposed. Methods:We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent a minimally invasive procedure for the management of hepatic tumors between January 2001 and April 2008. Patients were divided into 3 groups: laparoscopy with intraoperative ultrasound and biopsy only, laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and minimally invasive resection. To compare the various forms of surgery, we analyzed the incidence of complications, tumor recurrence, mortality, and cost. Statistical analysis was performed using χ2 analysis, Student t test, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with the log-rank test, and multivariable Cox models. Results:A total of 590 minimally invasive hepatic procedures were performed during 489 operative interventions. The representative tumor histologies were: hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC; N = 210), colorectal carcinoma (N = 40), miscellaneous liver metastases (N = 42), biliary cancer (N = 20), and benign tumors (N = 176). Thirty-five patients underwent laparoscopic ultrasound and confirmatory biopsy alone; 201 patients underwent 240 laparoscopic RFAs, and 253 patients underwent 306 minimally invasive resections. Conversion rates to open surgery for the RFA and resection group were 2% overall. One hundred ninety-nine (40.6%) patients were cirrhotic; 31 resections were performed in cirrhotic patients. Complication and mortality rates for RFA and resection were comparable (11% vs. 16%, and 1.5% vs. 1.6%). However, complication rates (14% vs. 29%; P = 0.02) and mortality (0.3% vs. 9.7%; P = 0.006) rates were higher in the cirrhotic versus noncirrhotic resection group. Overall recurrence rates for RFA and resection groups were 24% and 23%, respectively. Local recurrence rates were higher in the RFA group (6.3% versus 1.5%; P < 0.06). Overall patient survival differed between HCC patients receiving RFA alone and those receiving RFA and OLT (P < 0.0001). Overall survival for cancer patients receiving RFA versus resection differed significantly when unadjusted for other covariates (P = 0.01), and remained marginally significant in a multivariable model (P = 0.056). Conclusions:Minimally invasive hepatic surgery has become a viable alternative to open hepatic surgery. Our present data are equivalent or superior to those encountered in any large open series. Our experience with RFA confirms a low local recurrence rate and an excellent technique for bridging patients to transplantation. Morbidity and mortality rates for minimally invasive hepatic resections in cirrhotics, is similar to other reported open resection series. This series confirmed excellent interim survival rates after laparoscopic HR and superiority over RFA in the treatment of cancer, with significantly lower local tumor recurrence rate.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy: an evolution in standard of care.

Objective:To analyze the results of 6 international surgical centers performing laparoscopic major liver resections. Summary Background Data:The safety and feasibility of laparoscopy for minor liver resections has been previously demonstrated. Major anatomic liver resections, initially considered to be unsuitable for laparoscopy, are increasingly reported by several centers worldwide. Methods:Prospective databases of 3 European, 2 U.S., and 1 Australian centers were combined. Between 1997 and 2008, 210 major liver resections were performed: 136 right and 74 left hepatectomies. Results and differences in surgical techniques between the 6 centers are outlined. Results:Surgical duration was 250 minutes (range: 90–655 minutes). Operative blood loss was 300 mL (range: 20–2500 mL). Thirty patients (14.3%) received blood transfusion. Conversion to open surgery was required in 26 patients (12.4%). Portal triad clamping was performed in 24 patients (11.4%). Median tumor size was 5.4 cm (range: 1–25 cm) and surgical margin was 10.5 mm (range: 0–70 mm). Two patients died during the postoperative period from pulmonary embolism and urosepsis. Liver-specific and general complications occurred in 17 (8.1%) and 29 patients (13.8%), respectively. Hospital length of stay was 6 days (range: 1–34 days). A further analysis of early (n = 90) and late (n = 120) experience showed improved surgical and postoperative results in the latter group. Conclusions:This multicenter study demonstrates that laparoscopic major liver resections are feasible in selected patients and results improve with experience. However, proficiency in both open liver surgery and advanced laparoscopy is compulsory and surgeons must begin with minor laparoscopic resections.

Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multi-Institutional, International Report of Safety, Feasibility, and Early Outcomes

Objective:To evaluate a multicenter, international series on minimally invasive liver resection for colorectal carcinoma (CRC) metastasis. Summary Background Data:Multiple single series have been reported on laparoscopic liver resection for CRC metastasis. We report the first collaborative multicenter, international series to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and oncologic integrity of laparoscopic liver resection for CRC metastasis. Methods:We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent minimally invasive liver resection for CRC metastasis from February 2000 to September 2008 from multiple medical centers from the United States and Europe. The multicenter series of patients were accumulated into a single database. Patient demographics, preoperative, operative, and postoperative characteristics were analyzed. Actuarial overall survival was calculated with Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results:A total of 109 patients underwent minimally invasive liver resection for CRC metastasis. The median age was 63 years (range, 32–88 years) with 51% females. The most common sites of primary colon cancer were sigmoid/rectum (51%), right colon (25%), and left colon (13%). Synchronous liver lesions were present in 11% of patients. For those with metachronous lesions liver lesions, the median time interval from primary colon cancer surgery to liver metastasectomy was 12 months. Preoperative chemotherapy was administered in 68% of cases prior to liver resection. The majority of patients underwent prior abdominal operations (95%). Minimally invasive approaches included totally laparoscopic (56%) and hand-assisted laparoscopic (41%), the latter of which was employed more frequently in the US medical centers (85%) compared with European centers (13%) (P = 0.001). There were 4 conversions to open surgery (3.7%), all due to bleeding. Extents of resection include wedge/segmentectomy (34%), left lateral sectionectomy (27%), right hepatectomy (28%), left hepatectomy (9%), extended right hepatectomy (0.9%), and caudate lobectomy (0.9%). Major liver resections (≥3 segments) were performed in 45% of patients. Median OR time was 234 minutes (range, 60–555 minutes) and blood loss was 200 mL (range, 20–2500 mL) with 10% receiving a blood transfusion. There were no reported perioperative deaths and a 12% complication rate. Median length of hospital stay for the entire series was 4 days (range, 1–22 days) with a shorter stay in medical centers in the United States (3 days) versus that seen in Europe (6 days) (P = 0.001). Negative margins were achieved in 94.4% of patients. Actuarial overall survivals at 1-, 3-, and 5-year for the entire series were 88%, 69%, and 50%, respectively. Disease-free survivals at 1-, 3-, and 5-year were 65%, 43%, and 43%, respectively. Conclusions:Minimally invasive liver resection for colorectal metastasis is safe, feasible, and oncologically comparable to open liver resection for both minor and major liver resections, even with prior intra-abdominal operations, in selected patients and when performed by experienced surgeons.

Are concerns over right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy unwarranted

ObjectiveTo examine the ability of several large, experienced transplantation centers to perform right-sided laparoscopic donor nephrectomy safely with equivalent long-term renal allograft function. Summary Background DataEarly reports noted a higher incidence of renal vein thrombosis and eventual graft loss. However, exclusion of right-sided donors would deprive a significant proportion of donors a laparoscopically harvested graft. MethodsA retrospective review was performed among 97 patients from seven centers performing right-sided laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Surgical and postoperative demographic factors were evaluated. Complications were identified and long-term renal allograft function was compared with historical left-sided laparoscopic donor nephrectomy cohorts. ResultsRight laparoscopic donor nephrectomy was performed for varying reasons, including multiple left renal arteries or veins, smaller right kidney, or cystic right renal mass. Mean surgical time was 235.0 ± 66.7 minutes, with a mean blood loss of 139 ± 165.8 mL. Conversion was required in three patients secondary to bleeding or anatomical anomalies. Mean warm ischemic time was limited at 238 ± 112 seconds. Return to diet was achieved on average after 7.5 ± 2.3 hours, with mean discharge at 54.6 ± 22.8 hours. Two grafts were lost during the early experience of these centers to renal vein thrombosis. Both surgical and postoperative complications were limited, with few long-term adverse effects. Mean serum creatinine levels were higher than open and left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy on postoperative day 1, but at all remaining intervals the right laparoscopic donors had equivalent creatinine values. ConclusionsThese results confirm that right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy provides similar patient benefits, including early return to diet and discharge. Long-term creatinine values were no higher than in traditional open donor or left laparoscopic donor cohorts. These results establish that early concerns about high thrombosis rates are not supported by a multiinstitutional review of laparoscopic right donor nephrectomies.

Donors with central nervous system malignancies: are they truly safe?

Background. In an era of organ shortage, the use of expanded or marginal donors has been attempted to increase transplantation rates and diminish waiting list mortality. One strategy is the use of organs from patients with a history of or active central nervous system (CNS) tumor. Methods. Sixty-two recipients were identified as the recipients of organs from donors with a history of or active CNS malignancy. Patient demographics, donor tumor management, incidence of tumor transmission, and patient survival were examined. Results. Of the organs recovered and transplanted from donors with astrocytoma, 14 were associated with at least one risk factor including high-grade tumor (n=4), prior surgery (n=5), radiation therapy (n=4), and systemic chemotherapy (n=4). One tumor transmission was identified at 20 months posttransplant with the patient expiring from metastatic disease. Twenty-six organs were transplanted from glioblastoma patients with 15 demonstrating risk factors including high-grade tumor (n=9) and prior surgery (n=10). Eight transmissions were identified with a range of 2 to 15 months posttransplant, with seven patients dying as the result of metastatic disease. Seven organs were used from donors with a medulloblastoma. Three transmissions were identified at a range of 5 to 7 months, all associated with ventriculoperitoneal shunts. Two medulloblastoma recipients died as the result of metastatic disease, whereas the third is alive with diffuse disease. The rate of donor tumor transmission, in the absence of risk factors, was 7%, whereas in the presence of one or more risk factor this rate dramatically rose to 53% (P <0.01). Conclusions. Organs from donors with CNS tumors can be used with a low risk of donor tumor transmission in the absence of the following risk factors: high-grade tumors, ventriculoperitoneal or ventriculoatrial shunts, prior craniotomy, and systemic chemotherapy.

Analysis of Factors that Influence Survival with Post-Transplant Lymphoproliferative Disorder in Renal Transplant Recipients: The Israel Penn International Transplant Tumor Registry Experience

Significant mortality is associated with post‐transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) in kidney transplant recipients (KTX). Univariate/multivariate risk factor survival analysis of US PTLD KTX reported to Israel Penn International Transplant Tumor Registry from November 1968 to January 2000 was performed. PTLD presented 18 (median) (range 1–310) months in 402 KTX. Death rates were greater for those diagnosed within 6 months (64%) versus beyond 6 months (54%, p = 0.04). No differences in death risk for gender, race, immunosuppression, EBV, B or T cell positivity were identified. Death risk increased for multiple versus single sites (73% vs. 53%, hazards ratio (HR) 1.4). A 1‐year increase in age increased HR for death by 2%. Surgery was associated with increased survival (55% vs. 0% without surgery) (p < 0.0001). Patients with allograft involvement, treated with transplant nephrectomy alone (n = 20), had 80% survival versus 53% without allograft removal (n = 15) (p < 0.001). Overall survival was 69% for allograft involvement alone versus 36% for other organ involvement plus allograft (n = 19 alive) (p < 0.0001). Death risk was greater for multiple site PTLD and increasing age, and risks were additive. Univariate analysis identified increased death risk for those not receiving surgery, particularly allograft involvement alone.

Hand transplantation in the United States: experience with 3 patients.

BACKGROUND Composite tissue allotransplantation (CTA) is a newly emerging field of transplantation that involves the simultaneous transfer of multiple tissues with differing antigenicity. Hand transplantation, the most widely recognized form of CTA, aims to improve function and the quality of life of upper limb amputees. METHODS In 1999, an institutional review board-approved hand transplantation protocol was implemented at the Jewish Hospital, University of Louisville. Suitable patients were evaluated and underwent hand transplantation. The surgical technique was akin to that used in limb reimplantation, and the immunosuppression protocol used was similar to renal transplantation. RESULTS Between 1999 and 2006, 3 patients underwent hand transplantation at our center. Although episodes of acute rejection were seen in all patients during the early postoperative period, only 1 immunologic event occurred after the first year. Graft function improved with time period. Carroll test scores were superior to those recorded with a prosthesis at the end of 1 year. Additionally, recovery of protective sensation was seen in all 3 patients and limited discriminatory sensation in 2. Complications related to immunosuppression have included cytomegalovirus infection in 2 patients, diabetes in 1, hyperlipidemia in 2, and osteonecrosis in 1. At a follow-up of 8, 6, and 1 year(s), all the recipients are healthy and have returned to a productive life. CONCLUSIONS The long-term success reported here should encourage wider application of the CTA in general and hand transplantation in particular. Methods of minimizing long-term immunosuppression need to be pursued.

West Nile virus encephalitis in organ transplant recipients: another high-risk group for meningoencephalitis and death.

West Nile virus infection has been spreading westward across the continental United States since 1999. Although it often presents as a mild, self-limiting viral illness, it can result in a devastating meningoencephalitis in some patient populations, particularly the elderly. We report in this article on two immunosuppressed transplant patients who developed a severe meningoencephalitis caused by mosquito-borne West Nile virus infection. Suggestions for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of West Nile virus infection in this patient population are described.