| Literature DB >> 32533269 |
Teruo Komokata1, Maki Inoue2, Bibek Aryal2, Hiroto Yasumura2, Chinami Mori3, Mituharu Nomoto3, Mamoru Kaieda2, Shuichi Hanada4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anti-Gerbich (Ge) alloantibody against high-frequency erythrocyte antigen is extremely rare. Owing to incomplete evidence regarding the degree and severity of adverse events induced by hemolytic transfusion reactions, the transfusion management often remains cumbersome in these patients. We report an anti-Ge alloantibody positive patient with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who underwent central hepatectomy (CH) without the need for an allogeneic blood transfusion. CASEEntities:
Keywords: Acute normovolemic hemodilution; Anti-Gerbich Antibody; Central hepatectomy; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Preoperative autologous donation
Year: 2020 PMID: 32533269 PMCID: PMC7292842 DOI: 10.1186/s40792-020-00898-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Surg Case Rep ISSN: 2198-7793
Fig. 1Computed tomography (CT) demonstrating a large tumor (9.5 cm in diameter) in the medial and anterior segments of the liver
Result of antibody screening
| Rh-hr | KELL | DUFFY | KIDD | Xg | LEWIS | MNS | P | Lutheran | Results | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cell # | Rh-hr | D | C | E | c | e | f | CW | V | K | k | Kpa | Kpb | Jsa | Jsb | Fya | Fyb | Jka | Jkb | Xga | Lea | Leb | S | s | M | N | P1 | Lua | Lub | PEG/ |
| 1 | R1wR1 | + | + | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 2 | R1R1 | + | + | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | nt | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 3 | R2R2 | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | nt | + | + | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 4 | R0r | + | 0 | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 5 | r’r | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 6 | r”r | 0 | 0 | + | + | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 7 | rr | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | 0 | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 8 | rr | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | nt | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 9 | rr | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | nt | + | + | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 10 | rr | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | + | 3+ |
| 11 | R1R1 | + | + | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | + | nt | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | + | 3+ |
| Autocontrol | 0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nt not tested, PEG polyethylene glycol
Fig. 2Intra-operative finding. a An elastic hard expanding tumor in the segments 4, 5, and ventral site of the segment 8. b Hepatic hilum dissection and encircling of the infra-hepatic IVC with a tape. RHA: right hepatic artery; LHA: left hepatic artery; CHD: common hepatic duct; PV: portal vein; IVC: inferior vena cava. c Completion of the central hepatectomy without the caudate lobectomy of the liver
Fig. 3Peri- and intra-operative course of Hb and Ht values with description of PAD and ANH under erythropoietin therapy. Hb: hemoglobin; Ht: hematocrit; PAD: preoperative autologous donation; ANH: acute normovolemic hemodilution; Pre: preoperative day; DOS: day of surgery; Nadir: intraoperative hemoglobin nadir; Recovery: in recovery room
Fig. 4Pathological finding of the specimen. a The tumor macroscopically showed a confluent multinodular type. b The tumor was moderately differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma (Hematoxylin and eosin staining)