02 June 2020: Original Paper
Influence of Body Mass Index ≥30 on Pure Laparoscopic Donor Right Hepatectomy
Suk Kyun Hong ABCDEFG 1, Kyung-Suk Suh ABDE 1*, Jae-Hyung Cho BE 1, Jeong-Moo Lee BE 1, Nam-Joon Yi BE 1, Kwang-Woong Lee BE 1
DOI: 10.12659/AOT.923094
Ann Transplant 2020; 25:e923094
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (PLDRH) for donors with obesity has not been previously investigated. This study aimed to investigate the influence of donor obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m²) on and clinical outcomes after PLDRH.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Records of all living donors who underwent PLDRH between November 2015 and May 2018 and open conventional donor right hepatectomy (CDRH) between January 2011 and October 2015 at Seoul National University Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. The donors were divided into 3 groups: PLDRH BMI ≥30, PLDRH BMI <30, and CDRH BMI ≥30.
RESULTS: Donors in the PLDRH BMI ≥30 group (n=7) were compared with those in the PLDRH BMI <30 (n=65; control 1) and CDRH BMI ≥30 (n=8; control 2) groups. Graft weight was significantly heavier in PLDRH BMI ≥30 than in control 1 (P=0.012). The lowest hemoglobin (Hb) value was higher (P=0.014) and ΔHb% was lower (P=0.005) in PLDRH BMI ≥30 than in control 1. Similarly, the lowest Hb value was higher (P=0.021) and ΔHb% was lower (P<0.001) in PLDRH BMI ≥30 than in control 2. The peak alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (P=0.029) and ΔALT% were higher in PLDRH BMI ≥30 than in control 2. No significant differences in hospital stay and postoperative complications were found between PLDRH BMI ≥3 and control 1, as well as between PLDRH BMI ≥3 and control 2.
CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that PLDRH is feasible in donors with obesity.
Keywords: Hepatectomy, Laparoscopy, Liver Transplantation, Living Donors, adult, Body Mass Index, Female, Humans, Length of Stay, Liver, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Tissue and Organ Harvesting, young adult
Background
Since Cherqui et al. first reported on pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (PLDH) in 2002 [1]. PLDH has been increasingly performed and the type of graft has also been expanded from left lateral section to left hemiliver and, recently, right hemiliver [1–13]. Laparoscopic hepatectomy is associated with fewer overall complications, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay compared with open liver resection [12]. Thus, experienced centers opt to perform PLDH even for right hepatectomy. Reports showing the safety and feasibility of PLDH, including pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (PLDRH), are increasing [11–15].
Although PLDRH has been demonstrated to both a practical and safe method as compared to open conventional donor right hepatectomy (CDRH), the selection criteria still vary from one center to another [13–17]. PLDRH in obese donors also remains controversial. In gastric cancer surgery, obesity itself is a preoperative risk factor, and a laparoscopic procedure in patients with obesity is considered difficult [18]. Nevertheless, laparoscopic colorectal resection is reported to be safe and technically and oncologically feasible in patients with obesity [19–21]. Although obese donors with body mass index (BMI) ≥30 is not an absolute contraindication for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) [22,23], the impact of obesity on outcome of PLDRH may be different from other surgeries. However, to our knowledge, no study reporting the influence of obesity on the outcome of PLDH, especially PLDRH, has been conducted. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the role of obesity on the surgical outcomes of PLDRH.
Material and Methods
STUDY DESIGN:
This retrospective study was performed in accordance with the 1975 Helsinki Declaration and approved by the institutional review board of Seoul National University Hospital (IRB no. 1907-102-1048). Figure 1 summarizes the study design. The definition of obesity is BMI ≥30 kg/m2. Medical records of donors who underwent PLDRH at Seoul National University Hospital between November 2015 and May 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Two different comparative analyses were performed. In analysis 1, donors with a BMI ≥30 kg/m2 were compared with donors with a BMI <30 kg/m2 (control 1). To overcome possible selection bias, outcomes of a single donor surgeon, and those who underwent extended right hepatectomy sacrificing the middle hepatic vein were excluded and sex was matched. In analysis 2, donors with a BMI ≥30 kg/m2 who underwent PLDRH were compared with donors with a BMI ≥30 kg/m2 who underwent CDRH, which was performed between January 2011 and October 2015 (control 2). The period was limited to the most recent 5 years before PLDRH initiation at our center to minimize time bias. To overcome possible selection bias, donors with a BMI <30 kg/m2, outcomes of a single donor surgeon and those who underwent left hepatectomy were excluded. Because of the small number of donors, sex was not initially matched in analysis 2.
DONOR EVALUATION:
Live donor evaluation at our center is described in detail elsewhere [11,24,25]. While liver biopsy was not routinely performed, magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) to determine fat fraction and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in lieu of intraoperative cholangiography were routinely performed since 2009 [24]. Liver biopsy was selectively performed in potential donors having a fat fraction of >8–10% based on MRS considering together with old age, liver function abnormality, or high BMI. Macrovesicular steatosis <10% was accepted. A multi-disciplinary weight-loss program was initiated for donors who’s MRS fat fraction is >8–10%, also taking into account the condition of the recipient [25]. MRS was performed after the weight reduction program.
Our center started the PLDH program in November 2015 [26]. After accumulating experience, we performed approximately 90% of donor hepatectomies under pure laparoscopic technique without any selection criteria. A high BMI was not a contraindication for PLDH. Open conventional donor hepatectomy was performed only when the pure laparoscopic system was not available, when a well-trained scopist was not available, when the donor or the family opted for the open technique, or when the graft was right anterior section [27].
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:
Data were analyzed with the SPSS software (version 22; SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL). Data were presented as mean±standard deviation or as number and percentage. Continuous variables were compared using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test, whereas categorical variables were compared using Fisher’s exact test. A
Results
:
In analysis 1, there were 65 donors whose BMI were <30 kg/m2 who underwent PLDRH (control 1). Graft weight was significantly heavier in the 7 donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 than in control 1 (935.7 vs. 775.2 g; P=0.012). The lowest hemoglobin (Hb) value was higher (13.4 vs. 12.4 g/dL; P=0.014) and ΔHb%, which was calculated as ΔHb%=[(preoperative Hb–postoperative Hb)/preoperative Hb]×100, was lower (11.1% vs. 17.6%; P=0.005) in donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 than in control 1. No significant differences in age, estimated remnant volume, preoperative blood tests, operative time, fatty change, real GRWR, hospital stay, and postoperative complications between the 2 groups were found (Table 1). Similarly, there were no significant differences in characteristics and postoperative outcomes of the 2 groups of recipients (Table 2).
:
In analysis 2, 8 donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 underwent CDRH (control 2). There were more female donors in control 2 (7: 0 vs. 3: 5; P=0.026). The lowest hemoglobin (Hb) value was higher (13.4 vs. 10.7 g/dL; P=0.021) and ΔHb% was lower (11.1% vs. 24.1%; P<0.001) in PLDRH donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 than in control 2. The peak alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (242.9 vs. 140.0 IU/L; P=0.029) and ΔALT% (1045.7% vs. 597.7%; P=0.029), which was calculated as ΔALT%=[(peak ALT–preoperative ALT)/preoperative ALT]×100, were higher in PLDRH donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 than in control 2. There were no significant differences in the other characteristics and surgical outcomes between the 2 groups (Table 1). Similarly, there were no significant differences in characteristics and surgical outcomes between the 2 groups of recipients (Table 2).
Discussion
The prevalence of obesity is increasing worldwide [28]. Obesity is known to be associated with serious health risks [29]; can increase the risk of postoperative complications in general surgery, including pulmonary infection, wound problem, and thrombotic events; and can prolong the length of hospital stay [30–33]. Currently, we are in the minimally invasive surgery era, and laparoscopic procedures in gastric and colorectal surgeries are sufficiently feasible in obese patients, albeit considered to be difficult [18,19]. However, little is known about laparoscopic hepatectomy, especially in obese donors. Nevertheless, there are 2 factors to be considered in obese live donors: one is the safety of using a liver graft from an obese donor in LDLT and the other is the feasibility of pure laparoscopic hepatectomy. To address these 2 factors, analyses 1 and 2 were performed in this study.
Previous studies reported that grafts from obese donors, in the absence of graft steatosis, could be safely transplanted [22,23]. Consistent with the finding of the previous studies, our results in analysis 2 showed that all 15 donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 (7 PLDRH and 8 CDRH) safely underwent right hepatectomy. All the grafts from the 15 donors were successfully transplanted, and all recipients survived until the last follow-up, except one who died 1 month after liver transplantation because of intracerebral hemorrhage. Macrovesicular and microvesicular steatoses were evaluated microscopically by liver biopsy, which was performed during donor hepatectomy. Mean macrovesicular steatosis was 2.9%, with a maximum value of 7.0%.
Analysis 1 showed that the graft was heavier and larger, the lowest Hb level was higher, and ΔHb% was lower in PLDRH donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 than PLDRH donors whose BMI were <30 kg/m2. However, no significant difference in operative time between PLDRH BMI ≥30 and PLDRH BMI <30 groups was found. A large liver did not always provide a large cut surface. Moreover, there are other factors that affect operative time other than the liver size. Anatomical variation in portal vein, hepatic vein, or bile duct may also prolong operative time [34,35] Abdominal muscularity or abdominal shape can also affect operative time [36]. Abdominal muscularity in donors with a low BMI could make abdominal inflation difficult, thereby providing a small working space. Thus, a high BMI itself is not significantly associated with a longer operative time. In this study, the lowest Hb level and ΔHb% were assessed to determine the actual blood loss instead of estimated blood loss. The total amount of fluid in the suction bottles were measured, which was used to estimate the total intra-operative blood loss. However, this may include the irrigation fluid, thereby introducing bias. The higher lowest Hb level and lower ΔHb% could be explained by the lower actual blood loss in PLDRH donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 than in PLDRH donors whose BMI were <30 kg/m2 or could be because the effect of bleeding on total Hb, which is related to volume, was less in the former because of a higher BMI.
Moreover, analysis 2 showed that the lowest Hb level was higher, ΔHb% was lower, and peak ALT level and ΔALT% were higher in PLDRH donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 than in CDRH donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2. The higher lowest Hb level and lower ΔHb% reflect less actual blood loss; the higher peak ALT level and ΔALT%, hepatocyte injury. ALT is one of the markers of liver injury [37]. Limited feedback in pure laparoscopic procedure during liver mobilization and transection may cause hepatocyte injury. The force of the surgeon’s hand is transmitted through the long surgical laparoscopic instrument. The distribution area to which force is transmitted through this laparoscopic instrument is focal and narrow. Thus, laparoscopic procedure may exert excessive force on a particular area. Similar findings were shown in our previous reports comparing PLDRH with CDRH without limiting to high BMI donors [11,13]. The length of hospital stay tended to be shorter in PLDRH donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 than in CDRH donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2; however, the difference is not statistically significant. We previously reported that the operative time and hospital stay in PLDRH are shorter recently than when it was first performed [13]. Thus, considering the initial learning curve of PLDRH, the length of stay may be significantly shorter in PLDRH donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 than in CDRH whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 after the accumulation of experience.
No donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2 experienced postoperative complications, and no significant differences in postoperative complications between the 2 groups of recipients were found based on analyses 1 and 2. The results from analyses 1 and 2 indicate the safety of using a liver graft from an obese donor in LDLT and performing pure laparoscopic hepatectomy in obese donors.
Our study has some limitations. The retrospective study design, small sample size, and possible selection bias possibly result in confounding factors that favor the outcomes in obese donors. Furthermore, this study was performed in a single center and was based on a single surgeon’s experience; thus, generalizing the findings to other centers is difficult. In addition, difference in the prevalence of obesity by race or ethnicity was not considered. In 2016, the prevalence of obesity among adults was 4.7% in Korea, 36.2% in the United States, and >20.0% in most European countries [38]. Further evaluation by multicenter studies is needed. Nevertheless, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first report showing the influence of a high BMI on PLDRH outcomes.
Conclusions
Right grafts from obese donors whose BMI were ≥30 kg/m2, in the absence of marked graft steatosis, can be safely transplanted under a pure laparoscopic method. Nonetheless, careful donor selection and evaluation are required before transplantation.
References
1. Cherqui D, Soubrane O, Husson E, Laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy for liver transplantation in children: Lancet, 2002; 359; 392-96, pmid: 11844509
2. Soubrane O, Cherqui D, Scatton O, Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy in living donors: Safety and reproducibility of the technique in a single center: Ann Surg, 2006; 244; 815-20, pmid: 17060776
3. Samstein B, Griesemer A, Cherqui D, Fully laparoscopic left-sided donor hepatectomy is safe and associated with shorter hospital stay and earlier return to work: A comparative study: Liver Transpl, 2015; 21; 768-73, pmid: 25789460
4. Kim KH, Jung DH, Park KM, Comparison of open and laparoscopic live donor left lateral sectionectomy: Br J Surg, 2011; 98; 1302-8, pmid: 21717424
5. Scatton O, Katsanos G, Boillot O, Pure laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy in living donors: From innovation to development in France: Ann Surg, 2015; 261; 506-12, pmid: 24646560
6. Samstein B, Cherqui D, Rotellar F, Totally laparoscopic full left hepatectomy for living donor liver transplantation in adolescents and adults: Am J Transplant, 2013; 13; 2462-66, pmid: 24034709
7. Troisi RI, Wojcicki M, Tomassini F, Pure laparoscopic full-left living donor hepatectomy for calculated small-for-size LDLT in adults: Proof of concept: Am J Transplant, 2013; 13; 2472-78, pmid: 23914734
8. Soubrane O, Perdigao Cotta F, Scatton O, Pure laparoscopic right hepatectomy in a living donor: Am J Transplant, 2013; 13; 2467-71, pmid: 23865716
9. Rotellar F, Pardo F, Benito A, Totally laparoscopic right-lobe hepatectomy for adult living donor liver transplantation: Useful strategies to enhance safety: Am J Transplant, 2013; 13; 3269-73, pmid: 24266975
10. Han HS, Cho JY, Yoon YS, Total laparoscopic living donor right hepatectomy: Surg Endosc, 2015; 29; 184, pmid: 24993170
11. Suh KS, Hong SK, Lee KW, Pure laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy: Focus on 55 donors undergoing right hepatectomy: Am J Transplant, 2018; 18; 434-43
12. Hong SK, Lee KW, Choi Y, Initial experience with purely laparoscopic living-donor right hepatectomy: Br J Surg, 2018; 105; 751-59, pmid: 29579333
13. Lee KW, Hong SK, Suh KS, One hundred and fifteen cases of pure laparoscopic living donor right hepatectomy at a single center: Transplantation, 2018; 102; 1878-84, pmid: 29684001
14. Rotellar F, Pardo F, Benito A, Totally laparoscopic right hepatectomy for living donor liver transplantation: Analysis of a preliminary experience on 5 consecutive cases: Transplantation, 2017; 101; 548-54, pmid: 27755505
15. Kim KH, Kang SH, Jung DH, Initial outcomes of pure laparoscopic living donor right hepatectomy in an experienced adult living donor liver transplant center: Transplantation, 2017; 101; 1106-10, pmid: 28072754
16. Kwon CHD, Choi GS, Joh JW, Laparoscopic right hepatectomy for living donor: Curr Opin Organ Transplant, 2019; 24; 167-74, pmid: 30676401
17. Kwon CHD, Choi GS, Kim JM, Laparoscopic donor hepatectomy for adult living donor liver transplantation recipients: Liver Transpl, 2018; 24; 1545-53, pmid: 30021060
18. Wang Z, Zhang X, Liang J, Short-term outcomes for laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for body mass index ≥30 patients with gastric cancer: J Surg Res, 2015; 195; 83-88, pmid: 25617970
19. He Y, Wang J, Bian H, BMI as a predictor for perioperative outcome of laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A pooled analysis of comparative studies: Dis Colon Rectum, 2017; 60; 433-45, pmid: 28267012
20. Pikarsky AJ, Saida Y, Yamaguchi T, Is obesity a high-risk factor for laparoscopic colorectal surgery?: Surg Endosc, 2002; 16; 855-58, pmid: 11997837
21. Hotouras A, Ribas Y, Zakeri SA, The influence of obesity and body mass index on the outcome of laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A systematic literature review: Colorectal Dis, 2016; 18; O337-66, pmid: 27254110
22. Knaak M, Goldaracena N, Doyle A, Donor BMI >30 is not a contraindication for live liver donation: Am J Transplant, 2017; 17; 754-60, pmid: 27545327
23. Andert A, Becker N, Ulmer F, Liver transplantation and donor body mass index >30: Use or refuse?: Ann Transplant, 2016; 2(1); 185-93
24. Suh KS, Suh SW, Lee JM, Recent advancements in and views on the donor operation in living donor liver transplantation: A single-center study of 886 patients over 13 years: Liver Transpl, 2015; 21; 329-38, pmid: 25488794
25. Nugroho A, Kim OK, Lee KW, Evaluation of donor workups and exclusions in a single-center experience of living donor liver transplantation: Liver Transpl, 2017; 23; 614-24, pmid: 28294533
26. Suh KS, Hong SK, Yi NJ, Pure 3-dimensional laparoscopic extended right hepatectomy in a living donor: Liver Transpl, 2016; 22; 1431-36, pmid: 27347847
27. Suh KS, Kim HS, Yi NJ, Living donor liver transplantation using a right anterior section of the liver: Liver Transpl, 2017; 23; 1077-80, pmid: 28027616
28. NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC), Worldwide trends in body-mass index, underweight, overweight, and obesity from 1975 to 2016: A pooled analysis of 2416 population-based measurement studies in 128.9 million children, adolescents, and adults: Lancet, 2017; 390; 2627-42, pmid: 29029897
29. Hales CM, Carroll MD, Fryar CD, Ogden CL, Prevalence of obesity among adults and youth: United States, 2015–2016: NCHS Data Brief, 2017(288); 1-8
30. Tjeertes EK, Hoeks SE, Beks SB, Obesity – a risk factor for postoperative complications in general surgery?: BMC Anesthesiol, 2015; 15; 112, pmid: 26228844
31. Kornblith LZ, Howard B, Kunitake R, Obesity and clotting: Body mass index independently contributes to hypercoagulability after injury: J Trauma Acute Care Surg, 2015; 78; 30-36, pmid: 25539200
32. Healy P, Clarke C, Reynolds I, Complications of bariatric surgery – What the general surgeon needs to know: Surgeon, 2016; 14; 91-98, pmid: 26344739
33. Desciak MC, Martin DE, Perioperative pulmonary embolism: Diagnosis and anesthetic management: J Clin Anesth, 2011; 23; 153-65, pmid: 21377083
34. Hong SK, Suh KS, Yoon KC, The learning curve in pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy: A cumulative sum analysis: Surg Endosc, 2019; 33; 3741-48, pmid: 30771071
35. Hong SK, Suh KS, Kim HS, Pure 3D laparoscopic living donor right hemihepatectomy in a donor with separate right posterior and right anterior hepatic ducts and portal veins: Surg Endosc, 2017; 31; 4834-35, pmid: 28411347
36. Safwan M, Nagai S, Collins K, Impact of abdominal shape on living liver donor outcomes in mini-incision right hepatic lobectomy: Comparison among 3 techniques: Liver Transpl, 2018; 24; 516-27, pmid: 29281863
37. Choukér A, Martignoni A, Schauer RJ, Alpha-gluthathione S-transferase as an early marker of hepatic ischemia/reperfusion injury after liver resection: World J Surg, 2005; 29; 528-34, pmid: 15776301
38. WHO: Overweight and obesity https://www.who.int/gho/ncd/risk_factors/overweight_obesity/obesity_adults/en/
In Press
Original article
Diagnostic Utility of FAR1 Methylation Levels in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Undergoing Liver Transpl...Ann Transplant In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AOT.951568
Original article
Inferior Long-Term Outcome of Fatty Liver Allografts After Orthotopic Liver TransplantationAnn Transplant In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AOT.950589
Database Analysis
Identification and Validation of Liver Transplantation-Induced Acute Lung Injury Biomarkers Using a Bioinfo...Ann Transplant In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AOT.950289
Original article
Survival and Recurrence in Liver Transplant Patients With Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma and Hepatocellula...Ann Transplant In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AOT.950997
Most Viewed Current Articles
24 Aug 2021 : Review article 18,372
Normothermic Machine Perfusion (NMP) of the Liver – Current Status and Future PerspectivesDOI :10.12659/AOT.931664
Ann Transplant 2021; 26:e931664
05 Apr 2022 : Original article 14,731
Impact of Statins on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence After Living-Donor Liver TransplantationDOI :10.12659/AOT.935604
Ann Transplant 2022; 27:e935604
22 Nov 2022 : Original article 14,244
Long-Term Effects of Everolimus-Facilitated Tacrolimus Reduction in Living-Donor Liver Transplant Recipient...DOI :10.12659/AOT.937988
Ann Transplant 2022; 27:e937988
29 Dec 2021 : Original article 13,752
Efficacy and Safety of Tacrolimus-Based Maintenance Regimens in De Novo Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Sys...DOI :10.12659/AOT.933588
Ann Transplant 2021; 26:e933588






