S. Saleh

Effect of dexmedetomidine on hepatic ischemia–reperfusion injury in the setting of adult living donor liver transplantation

The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that intraoperative infusion of dexmedetomidine can exert a protective effect against hepatic ischemia–reperfusion injury (IRI) in adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLiver transplantation).

Effect of omega-3 on hepatic regeneration in adult living donors undergoing hepatic resections for liver transplantation: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (ω-3 PUFAs) have been shown to improve liver regeneration in experimental models. Aim was to evaluate the effects of ω-3 PUFAs on hepatic regeneration in adult living donors undergoing partial hepatectomy for liver transplantation (LDLT). METHODS Forty LDLT donors were categorized into 2 groups: received either intravenous ω-3 PUFA-enriched lipid emulsion 20% infusion 7 mL/kg once a day for 2 days before surgery and postoperative day (POD) 0 (S group) or glucose 5% (C group). Hepatic regeneration was assessed by volume of the liver after 1 month using computed tomography, and serial serum levels of hepatocyte growth factor were measured at POD 1, 3, and 5. RESULTS Liver volume after 1 month was significantly larger in the S group than the C group (1286.75 ± 122.781 cm(3) vs 1169.15 ± 128.3, respectively; P = .00). Both the regeneration index and the regeneration percentage were significantly higher in the S group than the C group (P = .02 and P = .00, respectively). Serum levels of hepatocyte growth factor were significantly higher in the S group on POD 1, 3, and 5 than the C group ([in pg/mL] 188.10 ± 74.25 vs 123.30 ± 13.56, P = .00; 127.55 ± 32.40 vs 109.25 ± 8.89, P = .02; and 109.45 ± 21.44 vs 96.70 ± 5.57, P = .01; respectively). CONCLUSION Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids effectively promoted liver regeneration and functional recovery following portal hypertension in the setting of LDLT.

Small for size syndrome difficult dilemma: Lessons from 10 years single centre experience in living donor liver transplantation

AIM To analyze the incidence, risk factors, prevention, treatment and outcome of small for size syndrome (SFSS) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). METHODS Through-out more than 10 years: During the period from April 2003 to the end of 2013, 174 adult-to-adults LDLT (A-ALDLT) had been performed at National Liver Institute, Menoufiya University, Shibin Elkoom, Egypt. We collected the data of those patients to do this cohort study that is a single-institution retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database analyzing the incidence, risk factors, prevention, treatment and outcome of SFSS in a period started from the end of 2013 to the end of 2015. The median period of follow-up reached 40.50 m, range (0-144 m). RESULTS SFSS was diagnosed in 20 (11.5%) of our recipients. While extra-small graft [small for size graft (SFSG)], portal hypertension, steatosis and left lobe graft were significant predictors of SFSS in univariate analysis (P = 0.00, 0.04, 0.03, and 0.00 respectively); graft size was the only independent predictor of SFSS on multivariate analysis (P = 0.03). On the other hand, there was lower incidence of SFSS in patients with SFSG who underwent splenectomy [4/10 (40%) SFSS vs 3/7 (42.9%) no SFSS] but without statistical significance, However, there was none significant lower incidence of the syndrome in patients with right lobe (RL) graft when drainage of the right anterior and/or posterior liver sectors by middle hepatic vein, V5, V8, and/or right inferior vein was done [4/10 (28.6%) SFSS vs 52/152 (34.2%) no SFSS]. The 6-mo, 1-, 3-, 5-, 7- and 10-year survival in patients with SFSS were 30%, 30%, 25%, 25%, 25% and 25% respectively, while, the 6-mo, 1-, 3-, 5-, 7- and 10-year survival in patients without SFSS were 70.1%, 65.6%, 61.7%, 61%, 59.7%, and 59.7% respectively, with statistical significant difference (P = 0.00). CONCLUSION SFSG is the independent and main factor for occurrence of SFSS after A-ALDLT leading to poor outcome. However, the management of this catastrophe depends upon its prevention (i.e., selecting graft with proper size, splenectomy to decrease portal venous inflow, and improving hepatic vein outflow by reconstructing large draining veins of the graft).

Iatrogenic Biliary Injuries: Multidisciplinary Management in a Major Tertiary Referral Center

Background. Iatrogenic biliary injuries are considered as the most serious complications during cholecystectomy. Better outcomes of such injuries have been shown in cases managed in a specialized center. Objective. To evaluate biliary injuries management in major referral hepatobiliary center. Patients & Methods. Four hundred seventy-two consecutive patients with postcholecystectomy biliary injuries were managed with multidisciplinary team (hepatobiliary surgeon, gastroenterologist, and radiologist) at major Hepatobiliary Center in Egypt over 10-year period using endoscopy in 232 patients, percutaneous techniques in 42 patients, and surgery in 198 patients. Results. Endoscopy was very successful initial treatment of 232 patients (49%) with mild/moderate biliary leakage (68%) and biliary stricture (47%) with increased success by addition of percutaneous (Rendezvous technique) in 18 patients (3.8%). However, surgery was needed in 198 patients (42%) for major duct transection, ligation, major leakage, and massive stricture. Surgery was urgent in 62 patients and elective in 136 patients. Hepaticojejunostomy was done in most of cases with transanastomotic stents. There was one mortality after surgery due to biliary sepsis and postoperative stricture in 3 cases (1.5%) treated with percutaneous dilation and stenting. Conclusion. Management of biliary injuries was much better with multidisciplinary care team with initial minimal invasive technique to major surgery in major complex injury encouraging early referral to highly specialized hepatobiliary center.

Evaluation of surgical complications in 204 live liver donors according to the modified clavien classification system

Background Several large centers have reported outstanding outcomes of living donor liver transplantation in decreasing mortality on the liver transplant waiting list. Nevertheless, living donor liver transplantation is not without risk to the volunteer donors. The rate of complications differs widely among transplant centers. Yet, there is no consensus on how to define and stratify complications by severity. Participants and methods This retrospective study to identify and analyze the surgical outcomes of 204 consecutive living donor hepatectomies was carried out between April 2003 and October 2013 by using the modified Clavien classification system, according to which grade I=minor complications, grade II=any deviation from the normal postoperative course requiring pharmacologic treatment, grade III=complications requiring invasive treatment, grade IV=complications causing organ dysfunction requiring ICU management, and grade V=complications resulting in death. Results The present study included 129 (63.2%) males and 75 (36.8%) females, with the donor’s mean age being 27.72±6.4 years (range: 19–45 years). There were 64 (31.4%) donors who developed postoperative complications, with a total of 74 complications. Ten (4.9%) donors had more than one complication. Twenty-nine (39.2%) donors had Clavien’s grade I complications, 38 (51.3%) donors had Clavien’s grade IIIa, six (8.1%) donors had Clavien’s grade IIIb complications, and there was one (0.5%) case of mortality (Clavien’s grade V). Conclusion Donor hepatectomy is a relatively safe procedure when performed by a dedicated and well-trained team. A prompt diagnosis and meticulous intervention is considered the first priority whenever a donor complication is expected. Furthermore, a continuous standardized reporting and a comprehensive database are crucial to precisely define true donor morbidity.

Secondary Liver Tumors

The liver is a common site of metastases. The most relevant metastatic tumor of the liver to the surgeon is colorectal cancer because of the well-documented potential for long-term sur‐ vival after complete resection. However, a large number of other tumors commonly meta‐ stasize to the liver, including cancers of the upper gastrointestinal system (stomach, pancreas, biliary), genitourinary system (renal, prostate), neuroendocrine system, breast, eye (melanoma), skin (melanoma), soft tissue (retroperitoneal sarcoma), and gynecologic system (ovarian, endometrial, cervix). [1]