BACKGROUND: Living donor hepatectomy (LDH) is a technically demanding procedure that is an alternative for providing livers for transplantation. Unlike liver resections for other pathology, LDH requires preservation of the major vessels and biliary tree. This study was performed to determine if current technology can be integrated to perform laparoscopic LDH. METHODS: Six adult sheep underwent laparoscopic LDH of the left lateral segment under general anesthesia. Instruments utilized included standard dissecting instruments, ultrasound, ultrasonic dissectors, CUSA, the TissueLink Floating Ball, and endoscopic staplers. RESULTS: LDH-harvested liver grafts were 44% of whole liver weight. Estimated blood loss was 300 cc. Warm ischemia time was 5-7 min. Grafts were delivered through 18-cm abdominal wounds. Major vessels and biliary anatomy were positively identified in the grafts. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic LDH can be performed with available technology. Theoretical advantages include reduced liver manipulation and smaller wound size.
BACKGROUND: Living donor hepatectomy (LDH) is a technically demanding procedure that is an alternative for providing livers for transplantation. Unlike liver resections for other pathology, LDH requires preservation of the major vessels and biliary tree. This study was performed to determine if current technology can be integrated to perform laparoscopic LDH. METHODS: Six adult sheep underwent laparoscopic LDH of the left lateral segment under general anesthesia. Instruments utilized included standard dissecting instruments, ultrasound, ultrasonic dissectors, CUSA, the TissueLink Floating Ball, and endoscopic staplers. RESULTS: LDH-harvested liver grafts were 44% of whole liver weight. Estimated blood loss was 300 cc. Warm ischemia time was 5-7 min. Grafts were delivered through 18-cm abdominal wounds. Major vessels and biliary anatomy were positively identified in the grafts. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic LDH can be performed with available technology. Theoretical advantages include reduced liver manipulation and smaller wound size.
Authors: P Schemmer; N Enomoto; B U Bradford; H Bunzendahl; J A Raleigh; J J Lemasters; R G Thurman Journal: Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 4.052
Authors: D G Farmer; H Yersiz; R M Ghobrial; S V McDiarmid; J Gornbein; H Le; A Schlifke; F Amersi; A Maxfield; N Amos; G C Restrepo; P Chen; S Dawson; R W Busuttil Journal: Transplantation Date: 2001-12-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: C M Miller; G E Gondolesi; S Florman; C Matsumoto; L Muñoz; T Yoshizumi; T Artis; T M Fishbein; P A Sheiner; L Kim-Schluger; T Schiano; B L Shneider; S Emre; M E Schwartz Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: D Eguchi; T Nishizaki; M Ohta; Y Ishizaki; N Hanaki; K Okita; T Ohga; I Takahashi; Y Ojima; H Wada; S Tsutsui Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2006-06-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: R Santambrogio; E Opocher; A Pisani Ceretti; M Barabino; M Costa; S Leone; M Montorsi Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2006-11-21 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: R Santambrogio; L Aldrighetti; M Barabino; C Pulitanò; M Costa; M Montorsi; G Ferla; E Opocher Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2008-06-14 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Quirino Lai; Rafael S Pinheiro; Giovanni B Levi Sandri; Gabriele Spoletini; Fabio Melandro; Nicola Guglielmo; Marco Di Laudo; Fabrizio M Frattaroli; Pasquale B Berloco; Massimo Rossi Journal: HPB Surg Date: 2012-08-07