Hydatid cyst is a parasitic infection most commonly localized in the liver. They may not be diagnosed early because they remain asymptomatic at small sizes and may reach large sizes at the time of diagnosis. In this situation, compression symptoms may occur and they may present with serious complications such as rupture and anaphylactic shock, which are rare. Treatment methods are determined by classification according to the imaging techniques used in the diagnosis. In the present case, echinococcal cysts originating from segments 5, 6, and 7 in the right lobe of the liver, reaching 35 cm in diameter, caused compression symptoms. The diagnosis was made by abdominal tomography showing characteristic daughter vesicles and calcified cystic wall. The patient underwent pericystectomy and had an uneventful postoperative course with no recurrence in the 5-year follow-up.

Background: Inflammation and the associated immune pathways are among the most important factors in liver regeneration after living donor hepatectomy. Various biomarkers, especially liver function tests, are used to show liver regeneration. The aim of this study was to evaluate the course of liver regeneration following donor hepatectomy (LDH) by routine and regeneration-related biomarkers. Method: Data from 63 living liver donors (LLDs) who underwent LDH in Inonu University Liver Transplant Institute were prospectively analyzed. Serum samples were obtained on the preoperative day and postoperative days (POD) 1, 3, 5, 10, and 21. Regenerative markers including alfa-fetoprotein (AFP), des carboxy prothrombin (DCP), ornithine decarboxylase (ODC), retinol-binding protein 4 (RBP4), and angiotensin-converting enzyme isotype II (ACEII) and liver function tests including alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and total bilirubin levels were all analyzed. Results: The median age of the LLDs was 29.7 years and 28 LLDs were female. Eight LLDs developed postoperative complications requiring relaparotomy. The routine laboratory parameters including AST (<0.001), ALT (<0.001), ALP (<0.001), and total bilirubin (<0.001) showed a significant increase over time until postoperative day (POD) 3. For the regeneration-related parameters, except for the RBP4, all parameters including ACEII (p = 0.006), AFP (p = 0.002), DCP (p = 0.007), and ODC (p = 0.002) showed a significant increase in POD3. The regeneration parameters showed a different pattern of change. In right-lobe liver grafts, ACEII (p = 0.002), AFP (p = 0.035), and ODC (p = 0.001) showed a significant increase over time. DCP (p = 0.129) and RBP4 (p = 0.335) showed no significant changes in right-lobe liver grafts. Conclusions: Regenerative markers are increased in a sustained fashion following LDH. This is more prominent following right-lobe grafts which are indicative of progenitor-associated liver regeneration.

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical and laboratory changes of ischemia and reperfusion injury in the remnant livers of donors with and without Pringle maneuver. Furthermore, we evaluated the recipients who have been transplanted with liver grafts from these donors. Methods and Materials: A total of 108 patients (54 living liver donors and 54 liver recipients) who underwent donor hepatectomy and recipients who living donor liver transplantation, were included in this randomized double-blind study between February 2021 and June 2021. The donors were divided into two groups: Pringle maneuver applied (n = 27) and Pringle maneuver not applied (n = 27). Similarly, recipients with implanted liver obtained from these donors were divided into two groups as the Pringle maneuver was performed (n = 27) and not performed (n = 27). Blood samples from donors and recipients were obtained on pre-operative, post-operative 0 h day (day of surgery), post-operative 1st day, post-operative 2nd day, post-operative 3rd day, post-operative 4th day, post-operative 5th day, and liver tissue was taken from the graft during the back table procedures. Liver function tests and complete blood count, coagulation tests, IL-1, IL-2, IL-6, TNF-α, and β-galactosidase measurements, and histopathological findings were examined. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the parameters of biochemical analyses for ischemia-reperfusion injury at all periods in the donors with and without the Pringle maneuver. Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference between in the recipients in who received liver grafts harvested with and without the Pringle maneuver. There was no statistically significant difference between the two recipient groups in terms of perioperative bleeding and early bile duct complications (p = 0.685). In the histopathological examinations, hepatocyte damage was significantly higher in the Pringle maneuver group (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Although the histological scoring of hepatocyte damage was found to be higher in the Pringle maneuver group, the Pringle maneuver did not augment ischemia-reperfusion injury in donors and recipients that was evaluated by clinical and laboratory analyses.

Background: Liver transplantation is a life-saving procedure for patients with end-stage liver disease, yet the immunological consequences of surgical trauma in these patients are not fully understood. The liver plays a central role in immune regulation, and its dysfunction in HBV-related chronic liver disease may alter the systemic stress response to surgery. Aim: This study aims to evaluate the stress response to surgical trauma of patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for HBV-related chronic liver disease in comparison to living liver donors (LLDs). Methods: This prospective study included 20 LDLT recipients with HBV infection and 20 LLDs who underwent living donor hepatectomy between August 2020 and February 2021. Specific biochemical markers (IL-1, IL-4, IL-6, IL-22, IFN-γ, TNF-α, TGF-β, GM-CSF, GLDH, and GalactB) were measured at designated intervals: preoperative day 0 (Preop), immediately after incision (Incision), post-hepatectomy (Hepatectomy), postoperative day 0 (POD0), POD1, and POD3 using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Routine hematological and biochemical parameters (WBC, HGB, PLT, RDW, MPV, PDW, AST, ALT, ALP, GGT, albumin, total bilirubin, plateletcrit, phosphorus, fibrinogen, and INR) were measured regularly at five predetermined times: Preop, POD0, POD1, POD2, and POD3. Results: Prior to LDLT, LDLT recipients had significantly lower levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1, IL-6, TNF-α, IFN-γ) compared to LLDs (p < 0.05). However, following liver implantation, these cytokine levels increased significantly at POD0, POD1, and POD3 (p < 0.001). Specifically, IL-1 levels elevated from 0 in the preop period to 21.5 (97.5) in POD3, and IL-6 elevated from 0 in the preop period to 28.3 at POD3 (p = 0.056). Similarly, TNF-α and IFN-γ levels exhibited significant upward trends (p < 0.05). In contrast, cytokine levels in LLDs remained stable throughout the perioperative period, revealing no statistically significant variations (p > 0.05). Routine hematological and biochemical parameters demonstrated significant postoperative fluctuations in LDLT recipients, reflecting the metabolic and immune restoration process. Conclusions: These findings indicate that patients with HBV-related chronic liver disease exhibit a diminished stress response to trauma due to underlying immune dysregulation caused by chronic hepatic dysfunction. However, after LDLT, the stress response gradually normalizes, suggesting that liver transplantation not only restores hepatic function but also reestablishes immune homeostasis, potentially reducing infection risks and improving postoperative recovery. These findings emphasize the crucial role of the liver in regulating the body’s stress response to trauma and highlight the immunological benefits of LDLT in restoring immune homeostasis.

Background and Aim: Liver resection (LR) and liver transplantation (LT) are curative treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The main pur-pose of this study was to compare the survival of LR and LDLT in patients with HCC within the Milan criteria. Materials and Methods: The results of the LR (n=67) and LDLT (n=391) groups were compared for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Twenty-six of the HCCs in the LRs met the Milan and Child A cri-teria. Also, 200 of the HCC patients in the LDLTs met the Milan criteria, of which 70 also met the Child A criteria. Results: Early mortality was higher in the LDLT group (13.9% vs 1.47%; p=0.003). The 5-year OS was higher in the LDLTs than the LRs, but not statistically significant (84.6% vs 74.2%; p=0.287). However, 5-year DFS was better in the LDLT group (96.8% vs 64.3%; p

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected breast cancer patients by causing delays in diagnosis and treatment processes. This study aims to investigate the effects of the pandemic on the treatment process and short-term outcomes of breast cancer patients. Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional, single-center study included 414 patients who underwent surgery for breast cancer at the Inonu University General Surgery Clinic between March 2018 and June 2021. The patients were divided into two groups: pre-pandemic (Pre-COVID-19; n = 240) and pandemic (COVID-19 Era; n = 174) periods. The groups were compared in terms of demographic, clinical, and histopathological variables. Results: During the pandemic period, the use of neoadjuvant therapy (from 21.3% to 34.5%) and preoperative PET-CT imaging (from 80.4% to 90.8%) rates increased, while breast-conserving surgery (from 27.9% to 19.0%) and the presence of comorbid diseases (from 45.0% to 29.9%) decreased significantly. While there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the time from diagnosis to surgery (25 vs. 28.5 days, p = 0.121), the time to report the pathology result after surgery decreased during the pandemic period (28 vs. 23 days, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of immunohistochemical (ER, PR, Ki-67, E-cadherin, and c-erbB2), histopathological (lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, comedo necrosis, modified Bloom–Richardson grade, and TNM classification), and clinical (recurrence, metastasis, and axillary lymph node metastasis) features of the tumor. The mortality rate in the Pre-COVID-19 group (7.1%) was significantly higher than in the COVID-19 Era group (2.3%) (p = 0.049). Finally, in terms of the survival analysis, a statistically significant difference was found between the Pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 Era groups in terms of the mean follow-up duration of the patients (p = 0.044). Conclusions: The study results show that the use of neoadjuvant therapy and radical surgery preference increased in breast cancer treatment during the pandemic period, but there was no significant change in tumor biology and histopathological features. Breast-conserving surgery rates, comorbidity rates, and pathology reporting times were significantly shortened. Long-term follow-up periods of 3 and 5 years are needed to see the impact of the pandemic on breast cancer patients.