In liver transplantation, a side-to-side anastomosis is one of the commonly performed techniques of the inferior vena cava reconstruction. The authors report a case of an application of an endoscopic vascular linear stapler for a side-to-side caval anastomosis during deceased-donor liver transplantation. The back table procedure was performed in a standard fashion for a side-to-side anastomosis. The linear vascular stapler was introduced during the temporary clamping of the recipient’s inferior vena cava and the anastomosis was created without problems. Suturing of the resulting defect completed the anastomosis. The use of the stapler resulted in a shortening of the anastomosis time. The staple line after the reperfusion of the graft was completely sealed. The patient’s postoperative course was uncomplicated and post-operative ultrasound and computed tomography confirmed the patency of the anastomosis. This case demonstrates a novel approach to a side-to-side caval reconstruction during liver transplantation that enables a shortening of the implantation time and may improve the quality of anastomoses.

Background/Objectives: Liver transplantation is a life-saving procedure for patients with end-stage liver disease. In recent years, the demand for liver transplantation has surpassed the supply of available donor organs. Utilizing extended-criteria donors (ECDs) alleviates the scarcity of suitable donor livers for transplantation. One of the ECD was donors with a history of alcohol abuse. Liver grafts from donors with a history of chronic and active alcohol abuse are typically promptly excluded, diminishing the available organ pool. This highlights the need to re-evaluate the donor exclusion criteria and expand the organ pool to address the ongoing shortage. Methods: We examined adult (>18 years) liver transplant recipients who received deceased donor livers and had a documented history of alcohol abuse between 2011 and 2024. Liver transplant indications were conventional and included hepatitis C virus (HCV), non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, alcoholic liver disease, alcoholic liver disease coexisting with HCV, cryptogenic cirrhosis, chronic cholestatic liver disease, primary biliary cholangitis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, metabolic liver disease, hepatocellular carcinoma, and alcoholic hepatitis. We compared the 1-year, 5-year, and 9-year survival rates with those of liver recipients from non-alcohol-consuming donors. Results: In total, 370 liver recipients from deceased donors with a documented history of alcohol abuse were included. At 1 year post-transplant, survival was comparable between the two groups. Conclusions: Liver transplantation from deceased donors with a history of alcohol abuse yielded survival rates and liver function outcomes comparable to those from non-alcohol-using donors. By expanding the criteria to include carefully screened alcohol-using donors, transplant programs can improve access to life-saving transplantations.

Background/Objectives: Data regarding the outcomes of liver transplantation in disabled, highly dependent, and legally incapacitated adults are scarce, likely due to the infrequency of these procedures in such populations. Multicenter studies in adult transplant centers have shown that patients with coexisting intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDDs) may be denied transplantation because of their expected low longevity and the complexities associated with managing post-transplant care. We examined the long-term patient and graft outcomes in highly dependent, incapacitated patients with IDDs who underwent elective transplantation for chronic liver disease. Methods: Six adult patients who underwent liver transplantation for primary biliary cholangitis (n = 2), hepatitis C cirrhosis (n = 2), Wilson’s disease (n = 1), and autoimmune hepatitis (n = 1) were included. The main causes of their disability were infantile cerebral palsy, myotonia, and Niemann–Pick disease. Results: Four of the six patients were women, with a median age of 26 (range: 23–36) years. Only one patient died during follow-up. Their 1- and 5-year survival rates were 100 and 75%, respectively, which were not statistically different from those of the general cohort of electively transplanted patients (95.8 and 90.1%, respectively) (p = 0.35). Conclusions: Adult patients who are highly dependent, disabled, or legally incapable should not be denied liver transplantation because of poor long-term survival rates. Physiological disorders and psychiatric comorbidities should not prevent patients from receiving life-saving surgeries due to poor postoperative compliance or low quality of life.