검색
검색 팝업 닫기

Ex) Article Title, Author, Keywords

Current Issue

Split Viewer

Case Report

Ann Liver Transplant 2023; 3(1): 44-49

Published online May 31, 2023 https://doi.org/10.52604/alt.23.0002

Copyright © The Korean Liver Transplantation Society.

Modified left liver graft with funneling venoplasty of middle hepatic vein branches for pediatric living donor liver transplantation

Jung-Man Namgoong1 , Gil-Chun Park1 , Shin Hwang1 , Sang-Hoon Kim1 , Suhyeon Ha1 , Kyung Mo Kim2 , Seak Hee Oh2

1Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
2Department of Pediatrics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence to:Shin Hwang
Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul 05505, Korea
E-mail: shwang@amc.seoul.kr
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9045-2531

Received: March 21, 2023; Revised: March 30, 2023; Accepted: April 6, 2023

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

We present a case of funneling venoplasty of middle hepatic vein (MHV) branch-preserving left liver (LL) graft in a pediatric patient undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). The recipient was a 31-month-old girl who was diagnosed with biliary atresia. The patient underwent Kasai portoenterostomy. However, her liver function deteriorated progressively. Thus, we decided to perform LDLT at a body weight of 15 kg. The donor was the 41-year-old mother of the patient. To protect the donor’s remnant liver from excessive hepatic venous congestion (HVC), we recovered an LL graft with preservation of the large segment VIII vein branch. There were three separate outflow veins at the graft liver cut surface, which were unified an iliac vein conduit. Funneling unification bench work resulted in a 3 cm-sized single outflow vein orifice. Standard procedures of pediatric LDLT were performed. Early follow-up computed tomography scans showed no vascular complications with patent graft outflow veins and no HVC at the remnant donor right liver. The patient has been doing well for three months after transplantation. This case suggests that our surgical technique using customized funneling venoplasty could enable successful reconstruction of MHV branches at the LL graft. Our experience suggests that individualized reconstruction techniques should be applied for pediatric patients undergoing LDLT using an LL graft with variant MHV anatomy.

Keywords: Middle hepatic vein, Anatomical variation, Funneling venoplasty, Interposition graft, Left liver graft

A whole left liver (LL) graft has been used for liver transplantation in pediatric patients older than infants. The middle hepatic vein (MHV) can be included at the left liver graft. However, deprivation of MHV outflow drainage can result in significant hepatic venous congestion at the remnant right liver [1-3]. To prevent such detrimental hepatic venous congestion (HVC), we have reported surgical techniques for MHV-preserving LL graft [4]. However, such techniques usually result in excessively enlarged opening of the graft outflow vein, which is too large for most pediatric recipients. Complete preservation of the donor MHV trunk can make some branches of the MHV exposed at the cut surface of the LL graft. In such situations, a customized funneling venoplasty technique is necessary to make it suitable for LL graft outflow vein reconstruction for a pediatric recipient with a relatively small inferior vena cava (IVC) [4,5]. This technique is a counterpart of modified right liver graft with reconstruction of MHV branches [6]. We herein present a case of funneling venoplasty of MHV branch-preserving LL graft in a pediatric patient undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

The recipient was a 31-month-old girl who was diagnosed with biliary atresia. The patient underwent Kasai portoenterostomy at 1 month after birth. Liver function of the patient deteriorated progressively (Fig. 1). Thus, we decided to perform LDLT at a body weight of 15 kg because of a low pediatric end-stage liver disease score in the situation of marked shortage of deceased donors.

Figure 1.Perioperative computed tomography finding of the donor. (A–C) The anatomy of the middle hepatic vein has large segment VIII (V8) and segment V veins with a fissural vein. (D) Hepatic parenchymal transection line indicates the cutting lines of the middle hepatic vein branches. (E, F) V8 vein is preserved with minimal development of hepatic venous congestion.

The donor was the 41-year-old mother of the patient. Computed tomography (CT) volumetric volumes of the left lateral section and LL were 250 mL and 407 mL, respectively, which were estimated to be graft-to-recipient weight ratios (GRWRs) of 1.67% and 2.71%, respectively. We decided to use the LL of the donor. The anatomy of the MHV had large segment VIII (V8) and segment V (V5) veins at the right liver with separate ventral segment IVa (V4a) and dorsal segment IVb (V4b: fissural vein). Transection at the level of the MHV trunk would make two separate large graft hepatic veins, which might induce huge HVC at the right liver and require direct unification venoplasty. To protect the donor’s remnant liver from excessive HVC, we decided to preserve the large V8 branch at the donor remnant liver (Fig. 2).

Figure 2.Pretransplant computed tomography finding of the recipient. (A) Liver cirrhosis with biloma is identified. (B) The portal vein appears normal with collateral formation.

A V8-preserving whole LL graft was harvested, with a graft weight of 320 g at the back table, equivalent to a GRWR of 2.13%. There were three separate outflow veins at the graft liver cut surface. We adopted the technique of MHV branch reconstruction developed for a modified right liver graft. A 10-cm-long cold-preserved iliac vein graft was prepared at the institutional tissue bank. The internal semilunar valves at the common iliac vein level were excised. Because the wall of the femoral vein stump appeared thicker, this stump was unified with the graft left hepatic vein orifice through central septotomy and running sutures. The V4b orifice was anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. The V5+V4a orifice was also anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. The distal end of the vein conduit was tightly ligated. A leak test using a sphoid was performed to check the security of anastomoses. The conjoined outflow orifice appeared to be rather small, thus an incision was made at the left lateral wall of the graft left hepatic vein (LHV). These procedures resulted in a single outflow vein orifice of 3 cm in the transverse diameter (Fig. 3).

Figure 3.Bench work for graft outflow vein reconstruction. (A) There are three separate outflow veins at the graft liver cut surface. (B) A 10-cm-long cold-preserved iliac vein graft was prepared. (C, D) The stump of the vein graft is unified with the graft left hepatic vein orifice through central septotomy and running sutures. (E) The fissural vein orifice was anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. (F) Segment V and segment IVa vein orifices are anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. (G) The distal end of the vein conduit is tightly ligated and a leak test is performed. (H) The conjoined outflow orifice is widened by making an incision at the left lateral wall of the graft left hepatic vein.

Because there was no anatomical variation in the recipient, standard procedures of pediatric LDLT were performed. After dissecting the recipient’s native liver was completed, the hepatic parenchyma was incised with a surgical knife, leaving a bulk of hepatic parenchyma around the hepatic vein trunks. The hepatic parenchyma was forcefully pulled out to detach it from the hepatic vein stumps, which made stump walls long and thick. No venoplasty was applied to the recipient’s IVC orifice. The interposed funnel-shaped orifice of the graft hepatic vein was anastomosed with the recipient’s IVC orifice by 1:1 size matching (Fig. 4). The recipient’s portal vein was normal-looking, thus it was anastomosed with the graft portal vein stump using a branch patch. Coronary collateral veins were ligated at the level of the less curvature of the stomach. The graft hepatic artery was reconstructed under surgical microscopy. Finally, Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy was performed.

Figure 4.Intraoperative photographs of graft hepatic vein reconstruction. (A) The recipient hepatic vein orifices are widely opened without venoplasty. (B, C) The conjoined orifice of the graft hepatic vein is anastomosed with the recipient inferior vena cava orifice by 1:1 size matching. (D) The interposed vein graft is bulged after portal reperfusion.

The pathology report of the explant liver revealed cirrhosis of macronodular and micronodular type, with marked loss of intrahepatic bile ducts. These findings were consistent with end-stage biliary atresia (Fig. 5). Early follow-up CT scan of the recipient showed no vascular complications with patient graft outflow veins (Fig. 6). The patient recovered uneventfully from the LDLT operation. She has been doing well for three months after transplantation. The donor also recovered uneventfully, showing no evidence of HVC at CT follow-up (Fig. 2).

Figure 5.Gross photograph of the explant liver.

Figure 6.Follow-up computed tomography images taken 4 days after liver transplantation. (A–C) The hepatic vein reconstruction appears smooth and streamlined without stenosis. (D) The portal vein reconstruction shows no stenosis.

A conventional LL graft usually means inclusion of the MHV trunk at the graft liver side. However, deprivation of MHV outflow drainage can result in HVC at the remnant right liver [1-3]. To prevent such detrimental HVC, we have reported surgical techniques for V8-preserving LL graft. Our previous study on MHV anatomy revealed thar only 12 (8.2%) of 147 (8.2%) LL graft donor livers were indicated for tailored V8 preservation [4]. The anatomical conditions to determine the feasibility of tailoring V8 preservation included direct convergence of V8 on the MHV trunk, absence of multiple MHV-LHV branching at the graft cutting line, and HVC-prone MHV anatomy [4]. Our current donor did not meet these conditions, thus tailored V8 preservation was not indicated.

Instead of performing tailored V8 preservation without requiring a vein patch, we selected vein interposition at the expense of V8 preservation. This technique is a counterpart of modified right liver graft with reconstruction of the MHV branches [6]. Because pediatric recipients have smaller inferior vena cava than adult recipients, a customized funneling venoplasty technique is necessary to make the graft outflow vein orifice small. We previously presented a similar technique in a LDLT case using a left lateral section graft with type 4 LHV, which was a customized interposition-wedged unification venoplasty using an ilio-femoral vein homograft [1].

In the present case, HVC at the donor remnant right liver was prevented effectively. However, if suitable vessel homograft is not available, the MHV trunk could be transected to make single LL graft outflow vein without patch venoplasty. We have previously analyzed postoperative courses of 27 LL graft donor livers to understand resolution processes of HVC [4]. Significant communication between MHV and right hepatic vein was detected in 2 (7.4%) donor livers. We hardly identified it prospectively on preoperative CT, but it was easily identified retrospectively after comparison with the postoperative CT scan. We identified a unique phenomenon of V8 flow reversal after MHV clamping when there was a significant intervenous collateral vein. We think that prompt reversal of V8 flow might be beneficially associated with pre-existence or early formation of venous collaterals. In contrast, loss of V8 flow after its clamping implicates poor or delayed postoperative resolution of HVC. Another 10 donor livers have revealed definite enhancement of V8 in 1-week CT scans, which might imply timely occurrence of collaterals. However, such V8 enhancement was not detected in the other 15 donor livers. Absence of V8 enhancement was related to extensive occurrence of CT hypoattenuation [4]. Considering long-term morphological changes at the HVC area, we strongly suggest extensive HVC should be avoided if possible.

As abovementioned, our current technique is a counterpart of modified right liver graft with reconstruction of the MHV branches [6]. This type of liver graft can be called a modified left liver graft, as it is a part of graft standardization for LDLT [7]. Any MHV branches exposed at the LL graft cut surface can be reconstructed with an interposed vein graft. Although prosthetic vascular grafts can be used for adult recipients, they cannot be used for pediatric recipients. Thus, availability of sizable vein homograft is the prerequisite for MHV reconstruction.

In conclusion, our surgical technique using funneling venoplasty enabled successful reconstruction of MHV branches at the LL graft. Our experience suggests that individualized reconstruction techniques should be applied for pediatric patients undergoing LDLT using an LL graft with variant MHV anatomy.

All authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Conceptualization: JMN, GCP, SH. Data curation: All. Methodology: All. Resources: KMK, SHO. Supervision: SH. Visualization: SH. Writing - original draft: JMN, GCP, SH, SHK, S Ha. Writing - review &editing: JMN, GCP, SH.

  1. Hwang S, Kim KH, Kim DY, Kim KM, Ahn CS, Moon DB, et al. Anomalous hepatic vein anatomy of left lateral section grafts and customized unification venoplasty for pediatric living donor liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2013;19:184-190.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  2. Hwang S, Lee SG, Choi ST, Moon DB, Ha TY, Lee YJ, et al. Hepatic vein anatomy of the medial segment for living donor liver transplantation using extended right lobe graft. Liver Transpl 2005;11:449-455.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  3. Radtke A, Sotiropoulos GC, Sgourakis G, Molmenti EP, Schroeder T, Saner FH, et al. Hepatic venous drainage: how much can we learn from imaging studies? Anatomic-functional classification derived from three-dimensional computed tomography reconstructions. Transplantation 2010;89:1518-1525.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  4. Hwang S, Lee SG, Ha TY, Ahn CS, Park KM, Kim KH, et al. Feasibility assessment for tailoring preservation of segment VIII hepatic vein during left liver graft procurement. Hepatogastroenterology 2006;53:928-932.
  5. Namgoong JM, Hwang S, Ha TY, Yoon YI, Kwon YJ, Kwon H, et al. Funneling venoplasty for anomalous graft left hepatic vein in living donor liver transplantation using a split left lateral section graft for an infant patient. Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2021;25:408-413.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  6. Hwang S, Ha TY, Ahn CS, Moon DB, Kim KH, Song GW, et al. Standardized surgical techniques for adult living donor liver transplantation using a modified right lobe graft: a video presentation from bench to reperfusion. Korean J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2016;20:97-101.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  7. Hwang S, Ahn CS, Kim KH, Moon DB, Ha TY, Song GW, et al. Standardization of modified right lobe grafts to minimize vascular outflow complications for adult living donor liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 2012;44:457-459.
    Pubmed CrossRef

Article

Case Report

Ann Liver Transplant 2023; 3(1): 44-49

Published online May 31, 2023 https://doi.org/10.52604/alt.23.0002

Copyright © The Korean Liver Transplantation Society.

Modified left liver graft with funneling venoplasty of middle hepatic vein branches for pediatric living donor liver transplantation

Jung-Man Namgoong1 , Gil-Chun Park1 , Shin Hwang1 , Sang-Hoon Kim1 , Suhyeon Ha1 , Kyung Mo Kim2 , Seak Hee Oh2

1Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
2Department of Pediatrics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence to:Shin Hwang
Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul 05505, Korea
E-mail: shwang@amc.seoul.kr
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9045-2531

Received: March 21, 2023; Revised: March 30, 2023; Accepted: April 6, 2023

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

We present a case of funneling venoplasty of middle hepatic vein (MHV) branch-preserving left liver (LL) graft in a pediatric patient undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). The recipient was a 31-month-old girl who was diagnosed with biliary atresia. The patient underwent Kasai portoenterostomy. However, her liver function deteriorated progressively. Thus, we decided to perform LDLT at a body weight of 15 kg. The donor was the 41-year-old mother of the patient. To protect the donor’s remnant liver from excessive hepatic venous congestion (HVC), we recovered an LL graft with preservation of the large segment VIII vein branch. There were three separate outflow veins at the graft liver cut surface, which were unified an iliac vein conduit. Funneling unification bench work resulted in a 3 cm-sized single outflow vein orifice. Standard procedures of pediatric LDLT were performed. Early follow-up computed tomography scans showed no vascular complications with patent graft outflow veins and no HVC at the remnant donor right liver. The patient has been doing well for three months after transplantation. This case suggests that our surgical technique using customized funneling venoplasty could enable successful reconstruction of MHV branches at the LL graft. Our experience suggests that individualized reconstruction techniques should be applied for pediatric patients undergoing LDLT using an LL graft with variant MHV anatomy.

Keywords: Middle hepatic vein, Anatomical variation, Funneling venoplasty, Interposition graft, Left liver graft

INTRODUCTION

A whole left liver (LL) graft has been used for liver transplantation in pediatric patients older than infants. The middle hepatic vein (MHV) can be included at the left liver graft. However, deprivation of MHV outflow drainage can result in significant hepatic venous congestion at the remnant right liver [1-3]. To prevent such detrimental hepatic venous congestion (HVC), we have reported surgical techniques for MHV-preserving LL graft [4]. However, such techniques usually result in excessively enlarged opening of the graft outflow vein, which is too large for most pediatric recipients. Complete preservation of the donor MHV trunk can make some branches of the MHV exposed at the cut surface of the LL graft. In such situations, a customized funneling venoplasty technique is necessary to make it suitable for LL graft outflow vein reconstruction for a pediatric recipient with a relatively small inferior vena cava (IVC) [4,5]. This technique is a counterpart of modified right liver graft with reconstruction of MHV branches [6]. We herein present a case of funneling venoplasty of MHV branch-preserving LL graft in a pediatric patient undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

CASE PRESENTATION

The recipient was a 31-month-old girl who was diagnosed with biliary atresia. The patient underwent Kasai portoenterostomy at 1 month after birth. Liver function of the patient deteriorated progressively (Fig. 1). Thus, we decided to perform LDLT at a body weight of 15 kg because of a low pediatric end-stage liver disease score in the situation of marked shortage of deceased donors.

Figure 1. Perioperative computed tomography finding of the donor. (A–C) The anatomy of the middle hepatic vein has large segment VIII (V8) and segment V veins with a fissural vein. (D) Hepatic parenchymal transection line indicates the cutting lines of the middle hepatic vein branches. (E, F) V8 vein is preserved with minimal development of hepatic venous congestion.

The donor was the 41-year-old mother of the patient. Computed tomography (CT) volumetric volumes of the left lateral section and LL were 250 mL and 407 mL, respectively, which were estimated to be graft-to-recipient weight ratios (GRWRs) of 1.67% and 2.71%, respectively. We decided to use the LL of the donor. The anatomy of the MHV had large segment VIII (V8) and segment V (V5) veins at the right liver with separate ventral segment IVa (V4a) and dorsal segment IVb (V4b: fissural vein). Transection at the level of the MHV trunk would make two separate large graft hepatic veins, which might induce huge HVC at the right liver and require direct unification venoplasty. To protect the donor’s remnant liver from excessive HVC, we decided to preserve the large V8 branch at the donor remnant liver (Fig. 2).

Figure 2. Pretransplant computed tomography finding of the recipient. (A) Liver cirrhosis with biloma is identified. (B) The portal vein appears normal with collateral formation.

A V8-preserving whole LL graft was harvested, with a graft weight of 320 g at the back table, equivalent to a GRWR of 2.13%. There were three separate outflow veins at the graft liver cut surface. We adopted the technique of MHV branch reconstruction developed for a modified right liver graft. A 10-cm-long cold-preserved iliac vein graft was prepared at the institutional tissue bank. The internal semilunar valves at the common iliac vein level were excised. Because the wall of the femoral vein stump appeared thicker, this stump was unified with the graft left hepatic vein orifice through central septotomy and running sutures. The V4b orifice was anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. The V5+V4a orifice was also anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. The distal end of the vein conduit was tightly ligated. A leak test using a sphoid was performed to check the security of anastomoses. The conjoined outflow orifice appeared to be rather small, thus an incision was made at the left lateral wall of the graft left hepatic vein (LHV). These procedures resulted in a single outflow vein orifice of 3 cm in the transverse diameter (Fig. 3).

Figure 3. Bench work for graft outflow vein reconstruction. (A) There are three separate outflow veins at the graft liver cut surface. (B) A 10-cm-long cold-preserved iliac vein graft was prepared. (C, D) The stump of the vein graft is unified with the graft left hepatic vein orifice through central septotomy and running sutures. (E) The fissural vein orifice was anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. (F) Segment V and segment IVa vein orifices are anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. (G) The distal end of the vein conduit is tightly ligated and a leak test is performed. (H) The conjoined outflow orifice is widened by making an incision at the left lateral wall of the graft left hepatic vein.

Because there was no anatomical variation in the recipient, standard procedures of pediatric LDLT were performed. After dissecting the recipient’s native liver was completed, the hepatic parenchyma was incised with a surgical knife, leaving a bulk of hepatic parenchyma around the hepatic vein trunks. The hepatic parenchyma was forcefully pulled out to detach it from the hepatic vein stumps, which made stump walls long and thick. No venoplasty was applied to the recipient’s IVC orifice. The interposed funnel-shaped orifice of the graft hepatic vein was anastomosed with the recipient’s IVC orifice by 1:1 size matching (Fig. 4). The recipient’s portal vein was normal-looking, thus it was anastomosed with the graft portal vein stump using a branch patch. Coronary collateral veins were ligated at the level of the less curvature of the stomach. The graft hepatic artery was reconstructed under surgical microscopy. Finally, Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy was performed.

Figure 4. Intraoperative photographs of graft hepatic vein reconstruction. (A) The recipient hepatic vein orifices are widely opened without venoplasty. (B, C) The conjoined orifice of the graft hepatic vein is anastomosed with the recipient inferior vena cava orifice by 1:1 size matching. (D) The interposed vein graft is bulged after portal reperfusion.

The pathology report of the explant liver revealed cirrhosis of macronodular and micronodular type, with marked loss of intrahepatic bile ducts. These findings were consistent with end-stage biliary atresia (Fig. 5). Early follow-up CT scan of the recipient showed no vascular complications with patient graft outflow veins (Fig. 6). The patient recovered uneventfully from the LDLT operation. She has been doing well for three months after transplantation. The donor also recovered uneventfully, showing no evidence of HVC at CT follow-up (Fig. 2).

Figure 5. Gross photograph of the explant liver.

Figure 6. Follow-up computed tomography images taken 4 days after liver transplantation. (A–C) The hepatic vein reconstruction appears smooth and streamlined without stenosis. (D) The portal vein reconstruction shows no stenosis.

DISCUSSION

A conventional LL graft usually means inclusion of the MHV trunk at the graft liver side. However, deprivation of MHV outflow drainage can result in HVC at the remnant right liver [1-3]. To prevent such detrimental HVC, we have reported surgical techniques for V8-preserving LL graft. Our previous study on MHV anatomy revealed thar only 12 (8.2%) of 147 (8.2%) LL graft donor livers were indicated for tailored V8 preservation [4]. The anatomical conditions to determine the feasibility of tailoring V8 preservation included direct convergence of V8 on the MHV trunk, absence of multiple MHV-LHV branching at the graft cutting line, and HVC-prone MHV anatomy [4]. Our current donor did not meet these conditions, thus tailored V8 preservation was not indicated.

Instead of performing tailored V8 preservation without requiring a vein patch, we selected vein interposition at the expense of V8 preservation. This technique is a counterpart of modified right liver graft with reconstruction of the MHV branches [6]. Because pediatric recipients have smaller inferior vena cava than adult recipients, a customized funneling venoplasty technique is necessary to make the graft outflow vein orifice small. We previously presented a similar technique in a LDLT case using a left lateral section graft with type 4 LHV, which was a customized interposition-wedged unification venoplasty using an ilio-femoral vein homograft [1].

In the present case, HVC at the donor remnant right liver was prevented effectively. However, if suitable vessel homograft is not available, the MHV trunk could be transected to make single LL graft outflow vein without patch venoplasty. We have previously analyzed postoperative courses of 27 LL graft donor livers to understand resolution processes of HVC [4]. Significant communication between MHV and right hepatic vein was detected in 2 (7.4%) donor livers. We hardly identified it prospectively on preoperative CT, but it was easily identified retrospectively after comparison with the postoperative CT scan. We identified a unique phenomenon of V8 flow reversal after MHV clamping when there was a significant intervenous collateral vein. We think that prompt reversal of V8 flow might be beneficially associated with pre-existence or early formation of venous collaterals. In contrast, loss of V8 flow after its clamping implicates poor or delayed postoperative resolution of HVC. Another 10 donor livers have revealed definite enhancement of V8 in 1-week CT scans, which might imply timely occurrence of collaterals. However, such V8 enhancement was not detected in the other 15 donor livers. Absence of V8 enhancement was related to extensive occurrence of CT hypoattenuation [4]. Considering long-term morphological changes at the HVC area, we strongly suggest extensive HVC should be avoided if possible.

As abovementioned, our current technique is a counterpart of modified right liver graft with reconstruction of the MHV branches [6]. This type of liver graft can be called a modified left liver graft, as it is a part of graft standardization for LDLT [7]. Any MHV branches exposed at the LL graft cut surface can be reconstructed with an interposed vein graft. Although prosthetic vascular grafts can be used for adult recipients, they cannot be used for pediatric recipients. Thus, availability of sizable vein homograft is the prerequisite for MHV reconstruction.

In conclusion, our surgical technique using funneling venoplasty enabled successful reconstruction of MHV branches at the LL graft. Our experience suggests that individualized reconstruction techniques should be applied for pediatric patients undergoing LDLT using an LL graft with variant MHV anatomy.

FUNDING

There was no funding related to this study.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

All authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS

Conceptualization: JMN, GCP, SH. Data curation: All. Methodology: All. Resources: KMK, SHO. Supervision: SH. Visualization: SH. Writing - original draft: JMN, GCP, SH, SHK, S Ha. Writing - review &editing: JMN, GCP, SH.

Fig 1.

Figure 1.Perioperative computed tomography finding of the donor. (A–C) The anatomy of the middle hepatic vein has large segment VIII (V8) and segment V veins with a fissural vein. (D) Hepatic parenchymal transection line indicates the cutting lines of the middle hepatic vein branches. (E, F) V8 vein is preserved with minimal development of hepatic venous congestion.
Annals of Liver Transplantation 2023; 3: 44-49https://doi.org/10.52604/alt.23.0002

Fig 2.

Figure 2.Pretransplant computed tomography finding of the recipient. (A) Liver cirrhosis with biloma is identified. (B) The portal vein appears normal with collateral formation.
Annals of Liver Transplantation 2023; 3: 44-49https://doi.org/10.52604/alt.23.0002

Fig 3.

Figure 3.Bench work for graft outflow vein reconstruction. (A) There are three separate outflow veins at the graft liver cut surface. (B) A 10-cm-long cold-preserved iliac vein graft was prepared. (C, D) The stump of the vein graft is unified with the graft left hepatic vein orifice through central septotomy and running sutures. (E) The fissural vein orifice was anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. (F) Segment V and segment IVa vein orifices are anastomosed with the vein conduit in an end-to-side fashion. (G) The distal end of the vein conduit is tightly ligated and a leak test is performed. (H) The conjoined outflow orifice is widened by making an incision at the left lateral wall of the graft left hepatic vein.
Annals of Liver Transplantation 2023; 3: 44-49https://doi.org/10.52604/alt.23.0002

Fig 4.

Figure 4.Intraoperative photographs of graft hepatic vein reconstruction. (A) The recipient hepatic vein orifices are widely opened without venoplasty. (B, C) The conjoined orifice of the graft hepatic vein is anastomosed with the recipient inferior vena cava orifice by 1:1 size matching. (D) The interposed vein graft is bulged after portal reperfusion.
Annals of Liver Transplantation 2023; 3: 44-49https://doi.org/10.52604/alt.23.0002

Fig 5.

Figure 5.Gross photograph of the explant liver.
Annals of Liver Transplantation 2023; 3: 44-49https://doi.org/10.52604/alt.23.0002

Fig 6.

Figure 6.Follow-up computed tomography images taken 4 days after liver transplantation. (A–C) The hepatic vein reconstruction appears smooth and streamlined without stenosis. (D) The portal vein reconstruction shows no stenosis.
Annals of Liver Transplantation 2023; 3: 44-49https://doi.org/10.52604/alt.23.0002

References

  1. Hwang S, Kim KH, Kim DY, Kim KM, Ahn CS, Moon DB, et al. Anomalous hepatic vein anatomy of left lateral section grafts and customized unification venoplasty for pediatric living donor liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2013;19:184-190.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  2. Hwang S, Lee SG, Choi ST, Moon DB, Ha TY, Lee YJ, et al. Hepatic vein anatomy of the medial segment for living donor liver transplantation using extended right lobe graft. Liver Transpl 2005;11:449-455.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  3. Radtke A, Sotiropoulos GC, Sgourakis G, Molmenti EP, Schroeder T, Saner FH, et al. Hepatic venous drainage: how much can we learn from imaging studies? Anatomic-functional classification derived from three-dimensional computed tomography reconstructions. Transplantation 2010;89:1518-1525.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  4. Hwang S, Lee SG, Ha TY, Ahn CS, Park KM, Kim KH, et al. Feasibility assessment for tailoring preservation of segment VIII hepatic vein during left liver graft procurement. Hepatogastroenterology 2006;53:928-932.
  5. Namgoong JM, Hwang S, Ha TY, Yoon YI, Kwon YJ, Kwon H, et al. Funneling venoplasty for anomalous graft left hepatic vein in living donor liver transplantation using a split left lateral section graft for an infant patient. Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2021;25:408-413.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  6. Hwang S, Ha TY, Ahn CS, Moon DB, Kim KH, Song GW, et al. Standardized surgical techniques for adult living donor liver transplantation using a modified right lobe graft: a video presentation from bench to reperfusion. Korean J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2016;20:97-101.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  7. Hwang S, Ahn CS, Kim KH, Moon DB, Ha TY, Song GW, et al. Standardization of modified right lobe grafts to minimize vascular outflow complications for adult living donor liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 2012;44:457-459.
    Pubmed CrossRef
The Korean Liver Transplantation Society

Vol.4 No.1
May 2024

pISSN 2765-5121
eISSN 2765-6098

Stats or Metrics

Share this article on :

  • line