That report is based on some old data regarding "Piggy-Back" transplants where they would keep the original liver in the patient in order to minimize the level of trauma the body would go through... For some patients, the risk of removing the original organ was too great to avoid because of the possibility of the body reacting poorly to such trauma being induced...

Instead, the "Piggy-Back" technique would be performed so that the patient still receives a donated organ to take over most of the original organ's functions while keeping the original one intact so that the patient isn't subjected to such a level of trauma...

If the decision to removing the original organ were to be carried out as it is done in a normal liver transplant, the patient would not survive the time period when the body is without a liver at all during the transplant for a variety of reasons including: Catastrophic cascading organ failure which would in effect result in most of the other organs simultaneously to fail one right after the other in very rare cases

It is quite logical for the original organ to regenerate if it's left in the body even after a liver transplant... The new organ takes over almost all of the functions that the original organ can no longer control...

And yet, because the original liver is still attached naturally to the patient's body, the original liver can focus on regenerating itself without having to perform any of the strenuous functions that under normal circumstances, could not be possible by the original liver if it were also attempting to repair itself...

However, there's no guarantees that this type of transplant would always be successful, and was once considered an option of last result...

This procedure was performed more often before the advent of better organ assist machines becoming available to keep the patient alive temporarily until the donated organ could be attached and proven working inside the recipient's body which would then enable the surgeons the ability to remove the original organ prior to attaching the transplanted one to the patient....

Extremely rare are the patients who for whatever reason cannot accept a foreign organ immediately after the original one is removed even when attached to a functioning temporary liver assist machine...

Therefore, the procedure is used in order to avoid catastrophic organ rejection which can also influence and trigger catastrophic cascading organ failure also. This condition is dangerously close to repeatedly causing the death of the patient.

I'm not saying that it's no longer performed... I'm just adding that the procedure is an older one originally... Thanks Kramer! ;>)

Respectfully,
HANK

You've peaked my curiosity. One of the important challenges we faced in transplants was assuring the donor teams included enough plumbing for anastomosis. So if the plumbing is hooked up to the new liver, the ole one can't be doing doodly -squat. How was the old one being nourished? Obviously the biliary ducts are busy with the new liver. Hank, do you know?

Its good news - with new manufactured livers or temporary devices, the liver could get a rest & heal & back in service.

Oh and realistically, it's only a hypothesis based on a theory that the original organ can recover enough by itself without the need of a temporary transplant...

The benefits however, are enticing in regards to being able to avoid a lifetime of ant-rejection drugs which will cause long term damage as I can personally attest to this!!!

Once they confirm these theories with pre-clinical studies on animals, we might see some clinical trials that will develop this hypothesis into an actual working solution to a small yet, important segment of the liver transplant community as a whole.

Now, if we're able to once and for all eradicate HCV, a large segment of the liver transplant community will no longer keep growing and will eventually become extinct... The world will certainly celebrate that day!!! ;>) ;>) ;>)

And once organs can be made artificially, the need for organ donation will no longer be required and the need for transplant anti-rejection/immuno-suppressants would be eliminated!
That will also be a great day indeed! ;>) ;>) ;>0~

Respectfully,
Henry

Yes, I am looking forward to the day when donors are not needed. The anti rejection routine is brutal.

Hi Ptriss!

I don't know enough of this procedure to be able to accurately answer your first question but, I'll certainly find out for you from one of the only doctor/surgeons that actually performed these types of transplants over this side of the pond and is the head honcho @ the Cleveland Clinic who also used to be the Director of transplantation @ The University of Pittsburgh's Thomas E. Starzyl Transplantation Institute over here here near my neck of the woods!

BTW, Thomas E. Starzyl is the "Father" of Liver Transplantation (Yes! He's still alive!)... He performed the very first one in Denver, Colorado and then closed the program because of early failures due to inadequate anti-rejection medicine which both he and Dr. John Fung developed @ the University of Pittsburgh's Montefiore Hospital...

The anti-rejection drug they developed enabled transplant recipient to live long and productive lives that just weren't possible with the early drugs used and these drugs are still the dominant anti-rejection drug being used today! It's called "ProGraf" or FK-506...

So if anybody knows how to answer your question based on actual experience, it would be my friend and once my transplant surgeon, Dr. John Fung Okay? I'll get an answer in a day or two since he's kind of busy these days. ;>)

The temporary liver assist machines are a reality but, the manufactured livers aren't yet available... However, they will be in - I believe a very short time from now. ;>)

Fascinating indeed Ptriss!!!

Respectfully,
HANK