Liver Transplantation and Hepatobiliary Surgery in 2020

This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or be any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.The year 2020 had a rough start with a global pandemic, the new Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19). The impact was so severe for long-time that many elective surgeries were cancelled, and numerous transplants were postponed, unless truly life-saving. Despite these hurdles in our daily practice, more than 100 expert academic physicians and surgeons from 22 different countries joined forces to form a Special Issue in Liver Transplantation and Hepatobiliary Surgery. This article summarizes the current status of liver transplantation (LT) and hepatobiliary surgery today, and what limits are being pushed and pursued in the future. One important goal of this Special Issue is to emphasize the close relationship of LT and hepatobiliary surgery, and how innovations in both fields align with one another

Robotic Liver Resection: Hurdles and Beyond

Laparoscopy is currently considered the standard of care for certain procedures such as left-lateral sectionectomies and wedge resections of anterior segments. The role of robotic liver surgery is still under debate, especially with regards to oncological outcomes. The purpose of this review is to describe how the field of robotic liver surgery has expanded, and to identify current limitations and future perspectives of the technology. Available evidences suggest that oncologic results after robotic liver resection are comparable to open and laparoscopic approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases, with identifiable advantages for cirrhotic patients and patients undergoing repeat resections. Excellent outcomes and optimal patient safety can be only achieved with specific hepato-biliary and general minimally invasive training to overcome the learning curve

Robotic liver resection: hurdles and beyond

Laparoscopy is currently considered the standard of care for certain procedures such as left-lateral sectionectomies and wedge resections of anterior segments. The role of robotic liver surgery is still under debate, especially with regards to oncological outcomes. The purpose of this review is to describe how the field of robotic liver surgery has expanded, and to identify current limitations and future perspectives of the technology. Available evidences suggest that oncologic results after robotic liver resection are comparable to open and laparoscopic approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases, with identifiable advantages for cirrhotic patients and patients undergoing repeat resections. Excellent outcomes and optimal patient safety can be only achieved with specific hepato-biliary and general minimally invasive training to overcome the learning curve

Predicting Liver Allograft Discard: The Discard Risk Index

Background An index that predicts liver allograft discard can effectively grade allografts and can be used to preferentially allocate marginal allografts to aggressive centers. The aim of this study is to devise an index to predict liver allograft discard using only risk factors available at the time of initial DonorNet offer. Methods Using univariate and multivariate analyses on a training set of 72 297 deceased donors, we identified independent risk factors for liver allograft discard. Multiple imputation was used to account for missing variables. Results We identified 15 factors as significant predictors of liver allograft discard; the most significant risk factors were: total bilirubin > 10 mg/dL (odds ratio [OR], 25.23; confidence interval [CI], 17.32-36.77), donation after circulatory death (OR, 14.13; CI, 13.30-15.01), and total bilirubin 5 to 10 mg/dL (OR, 7.57; 95% CI, 6.32-9.05). The resulting Discard Risk Index (DSRI) accurately predicted the risk of liver discard with a C statistic of 0.80. We internally validated the model with a validation set of 37 243 deceased donors and also achieved a 0.80 C statistic. At a DSRI at the 90th percentile, the discard rate was 50% (OR, 32.34; CI, 28.63-36.53), whereas at a DSRI at 10th percentile, only 3% of livers were discarded. Conclusions The use of the DSRI can help predict liver allograft discard. The DSRI can be used to effectively grade allografts and preferentially allocate marginal allografts to aggressive centers to maximize the donor yield and expedite allocation

An international multicentre study of protocols for liver transplantation during a pandemic: A case for quadripartite equipoise.

BACKGROUND The outbreak of Covid-19 has vastly increased the operational burden on healthcare systems worldwide. For patients with end-stage liver failure, liver transplantation is the only option. However, the strain on intensive care facilities caused by the pandemic is a major concern. There is an urgent need for ethical frameworks to balance the need for liver transplantation against the availability of national resources. METHODS We performed an international multi-center study of transplant centers to understand the evolution of policies for transplant prioritization in response to the pandemic in March 2020. To describe the ethical tension arising in this setting, we propose a novel ethical framework, the Quadripartite Equipoise (QE) score, that is applicable to liver transplantation in the context of limited national resources. RESULTS Seventeen large- and medium- sized liver transplant centers from twelve countries across four continents participated. Ten centers opted to limit transplant activity in response to the pandemic, favoring a "sickest-first" approach. Conversely, some larger centers opted to continue routine transplant activity in order to balance waiting list mortality. To model these and other ethical tensions, we computed a QE score using 4 factors - Recipient Outcome, Donor/Graft Safety, Waiting List Mortality and Healthcare Resources for seven countries. The fluctuation of the QE score over time accurately reflects the dynamic changes in the ethical tensions surrounding transplant activity in a pandemic. CONCLUSIONS This four-dimensional model of Quadripartite Equipoise addresses the ethical tensions in the current pandemic. It serves as a universally applicable framework to guide regulation of transplant activity in response to the increasing burden on healthcare systems to allow greater global solidarity and transparency in these austere times