Abstract:DEAR EDITOR: We read with great interest the article by Rhu et al recently published in Transplantation. The authors proposed a method to classify hepatic artery reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) into extraanatomical reconstruction (EAR) and AR according to anatomical path and found that EAR was an alternative to AR and would not be a risk factor for biliary stricture, graft failure, and overall survival. However, we have reservations about this classification. Successful revascularization of LDLT with suboptimal options such as right gastroepiploic artery (RGEA) or jejunal artery has been described separately in previously published articles. Rhu et al categorized the use of RGEA, jejunal artery, gastroduodenal artery (GDA), and interposition graft from aorta as the EAR. However, GDA and RGEA have anatomical continuity, while jejunal artery and interposition graft from aorta have completely different starting positions, diameters, and hemodynamics. They are independent of each other and have their own pros and cons. Therefore, roughly arranging them into a group for analyses may lead to bias in research results. As an alternative, it has been mentioned that the so-called EAR group (80% RGEA) does not act as well as the AR group because surgeons were often forced to perform suboptimal anastomoses, making the conclusions of the study less innovative. To the best of our knowledge, adequate biliary blood supply is essential for the reduction of biliary complications in patients undergoing LDLT. Blood supplies to the supraduodenal bile duct (chiefly from the GDA) and even the upper bile ducts (chiefly from the left hepatic artery, middle hepatic artery, right hepatic artery, and proper hepatic artery) of LDLT are particularly important since the bile duct of the graft is relatively short and the recipient often needs to leave a longer bile duct. Therefore, we should pay more attention to the advantages and disadvantages of arteries that supply the biliary tract, namely GDA, left hepatic artery, middle hepatic artery, right hepatic artery, and proper hepatic artery, rather than RGEA and other alternatives in revascularization of LDLT. Besides, some issues regarding the study by Rhu et al come to mind. The team mentioned that the adjustment to the differences in background parameters between EAR and AR groups were appropriately made in the analyses. However, the author did not use any other methods other than the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. We recommend the use of propensity score matching to eliminate disparities between the groups to obtain more accurate results. Perfusion and preservation with University of Wisconsin solution results in a higher incidence of biliary complications in the graft compared with histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate solution. However, the authors did not mention whether University of Wisconsin or histidinetryptophan-ketoglutarate solution was used. In all, this study by Rhu et al still requires further improvement and expansion.

Are the Classifications Used to Determine Hepatic Artery Variations in Liver Donors Sufficient?

Donor bile duct evaluation with magnetic resonance cholangiography in living-donor liver transplantation: a novel anatomical classification for predicting surgical techniques

Hilar Anatomy in 3035 Living Liver Donors: A Novel Classification for Donor Surgery and Suitability, Hepatic Surgeries, and Hepatobiliary Interventions

Anatomical Variation of the Donor Hepatic Arteries: Analysis of 843 Cases

Multidetector Computed Tomography Angiography in the Evaluation of Potential Living Donors for Liver Transplantation: Single-Center Experience in China

Experience of repair and reconstruction to 127 cases hepatic artery with anatomical variation in liver transplantation

Tactics in the Management of the Variation of the Donor Hepatic Arteries

Anatomical and Extra-Anatomical Hepatic Artery Reconstruction During Living Donor Liver Transplantation: is It Reasonable to Classify This Way?

Hepatic artery classification based on three-dimensional CT.

Characterization of the Middle Hepatic Artery and Its Relevance to Living Donor Liver Transplantation

A rare hepatic artery variant reporting and a new classification

Clinical Consideration of Anatomical Variations in the Common Hepatic Arteries: An Analysis Using MDCT Angiography

Complications of Laparoscopic and Open Donor Hepatectomy for Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Single Center Experience

Donor Hepatic Arterial Variation,accidental Injury and Reconstruction Prior to Orthotopic Liver Transplantation:80 Cases Report

[The analysis for the variation of hepatic arteries of the donor livers].

Pre-operative assessment of living liver donors' liver anatomy and volumes

Using the Clavien grading system to classify the complications of right hepatectomy in living donors.

Exploring Anatomical Variations of Abdominal Arteries Through Computed Tomography: Classification, Prevalence and Implications

Clinical Significance of Detailed Preoperative Evaluation on Donors in Right Lobe Living Donor Liver Transplantation.

Variation of the hepatic arteries of donor livers and arterial reconstruction prior to liver transplantation

[The Diagnosis and Treatment of Hepatic Artery Complications in 107 Cases of Orthotopic Liver Transplantation].