Objective:By systematically evaluate the implementation of GBZ 2.1, so as to provide technical basis for the future revisions of this standard.Methods:From May to October 2023, Based on the pre survey questionnaire, the semi-structured interview method was used to interviews with experts from CDC, Occupational disease prevention and control hospital institutes, employers, occupational hygiene technical service intermediaries and universities, and the inductive method was used to extract the topics and relevant suggestions.Results:Generally, GBZ 2.1 is scientific, practical, progressiveness and operable. There are still some issues such as OELs overlapping and the correspondence between Chinese and English names. The outstanding problem is the coordination with other standard contents.Conclusion:The technical indicators in GBZ 2.1 could adapt to the needs of current practical work. The coordination between standards needs to be clarified, and the new recommended content needs further promotion and exploration on how to implement it.

Objective To explore the feasibility and clinical experience of the middle hepatic vein splitting-reconstruction technique in split liver transplantation from low-age donor livers. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the cases of two low-age donor livers that underwent middle hepatic vein splitting-reconstruction, which were transplanted into four child recipients at the Liver Transplantation Center of the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from January 2017 to July 2023. The surgical and postoperative conditions were summarized and analyzed. Results Donor 1 was a 6-year-old and 4-month-old girl with a body weight of 21 kg, and the obtained donor liver weighed 496 g. After splitting, the left and right liver weights were 201 g and 280 g, and transplanted into a 9-month-old boy weighing 6.5 kg and a 9-month-old boy weighing 7.5 kg, respectively. The graft to recipient weight ratio (GRWR) was 3.09% and 3.73%, respectively. Donor 2 was a 5-year-old and 8-month-old boy with a body weight of 19 kg, and the donor liver weighed 673 g. After splitting, the left and right liver weights were 230 g and 400 g, and transplanted into a 13-month-old girl weighing 9.5 kg and a 15-month-old boy weighing 12 kg. The GRWR was 2.42% and 3.33%, respectively. Both donor livers were split ex vivo, with the middle hepatic vein being completely split in the middle and reconstructed using allogeneic iliac vein and iliac artery vascular patches. According to GRWR, none of the 4 transplant livers were reduced in volume. Among the 4 recipients, one died due to postoperative portal vein thrombosis and non-function of the transplant liver, while the other three cases recovered smoothly without early or late complications. Regular follow-up was conducted until July 31, 2023, and liver function recovered well. Conclusions Under the premise of detailed assessment of the donor liver and meticulous intraoperative operation, as well as matching with suitable child recipients, low-age donor livers may be selected for splitting. The complete splitting and reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein in the middle may effectively ensure the adequate venous return of the left and right liver and provide sufficient functional liver volume.

Objective To explore the technical process and clinical application of laparoscopic combined upper midline incision minimally invasive liver transplantation. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 30 cases of laparoscopic combined upper midline incision minimally invasive liver transplantation. The cases were divided into cirrhosis group (15 cases) and liver failure group (15 cases) based on the primary disease. The surgical and postoperative conditions of the two groups were compared. Results All patients successfully underwent laparoscopic "clockwise" liver resection, with no cases of passive conversion to open surgery or intolerance to pneumoperitoneum. In 6 cases, the right lobe was relatively large, and the right hepatic ligaments could not be completely mobilized. One case required an additional reverse "L" incision during open surgery. All patients successfully completed the liver transplantation, with no major intraoperative bleeding, cardiovascular events, or other occurrences in the 30 patients. The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score in the cirrhosis group was lower than that in the liver failure group (P<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, surgical time, blood loss, anhepatic phase, or cold ischemia time (all P>0.05). During the perioperative period, there was 1 case of hepatic artery embolism, 1 case of portal vein anastomotic stenosis, no complications of hepatic vein and inferior vena cava, and 3 cases of biliary anastomotic stenosis, all of which occurred in the liver failure group. Conclusions In strictly selected cases, the minimally invasive liver transplantation technique combining laparoscopic hepatectomy with upper midline incision for graft implantation has the advantages of smaller incisions, less bleeding, relatively easier operation, and faster postoperative recovery, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.

Split liver transplantation(SLT)has become an indispensable method for expanding the donor liver pool.However,advanced age in recipients can have significant adverse effects on prognosis.We report the case of an 82-year-old man with chronic liver failure and polycystic liver disease who underwent in vivo split right triple lobe donor liver transplantation on October 29,2021.The patient made a remarkable recovery and was discharged 1 month after surgery.To date,he has been followed up for 32 months,with favorable laboratory and imaging test results,and no significant abnormalities or complications.Currently,this patient may be the oldest SLT recipient in the world.With comprehensive preoperative evaluation,optimized surgical techniques,and individually tailored postoperative care,older adults can safely undergo SLT.Therefore,advanced age should not be considered an absolute contraindication for this procedure.

Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures(OVCFs)are common orthopedic conditions that can lead to spinal pain and deformity,which greatly affects the quality of life of patients.Currently,there are various treatment methods for OVCFs,but there is still a lack of standards for optimal treatment modalities.Therefore,this article introduces the current treatment methods and character-istics of epidemiology for OVCFs,in order to improve the awareness of this disease among clinicians and provide a reference for select-ing more appropriate treatment regimens.Conservative treatment measures,such as bracing and analgesia,are the basic treatment mea-sures for OVCFs,and anti-osteoporosis drugs play a crucial role in management.Minimally invasive procedures,including percutane-ous vertebroplasty and percutaneous balloon kyphoplasty,remain the primary surgical interventions,and traditional open surgeries are also an important part of treatment,such as anterior spinal fusion,combined anterior and posterior spinal fusion,posterior spinal fusion with three-column osteotomy,and posterior spinal fusion with vertebroplasty.Furthermore,surgeons should focus on the accumulation of related surgical techniques and skills during surgery to effectively address the challenges and complications associated with surgical interventions.Finally,scientific and appropriate treatment methods should be selected for patients,in order to improve long-term treat-ment outcomes and increase the degree of satisfaction among pa-tients.

Objective:By systematically evaluate the implementation of GBZ 2.1, so as to provide technical basis for the future revisions of this standard.Methods:From May to October 2023, Based on the pre survey questionnaire, the semi-structured interview method was used to interviews with experts from CDC, Occupational disease prevention and control hospital institutes, employers, occupational hygiene technical service intermediaries and universities, and the inductive method was used to extract the topics and relevant suggestions.Results:Generally, GBZ 2.1 is scientific, practical, progressiveness and operable. There are still some issues such as OELs overlapping and the correspondence between Chinese and English names. The outstanding problem is the coordination with other standard contents.Conclusion:The technical indicators in GBZ 2.1 could adapt to the needs of current practical work. The coordination between standards needs to be clarified, and the new recommended content needs further promotion and exploration on how to implement it.

Objective:To investigate the safety and therapeutic effect of split liver transplantation (SLT) in clinical application.Methods:This is a retrospective case-series study. The clinical data of 203 consecutive SLT, 79 living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and 1 298 whole liver transplantation (WLT) performed at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from July 2014 to July 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Two hundred and three SLT liver grafts were obtained from 109 donors. One hundred and twenty-seven grafts were generated by in vitro splitting and 76 grafts were generated by in vivo splitting. There were 90 adult recipients and 113 pediatric recipients. According to time, SLT patients were divided into two groups: the early SLT group (40 cases, from July 2014 to December 2017) and the mature SLT technology group (163 cases, from January 2018 to July 2023). The survival of each group was analyzed and the main factors affecting the survival rate of SLT were analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test were used for survival analysis.Results:The cumulative survival rates at 1-, 3-, and 5-year were 74.58%, 71.47%, and 71.47% in the early SLT group, and 88.03%, 87.23%, and 87.23% in the mature SLT group, respectively. Survival rates in the mature SLT group were significantly higher than those in the early SLT group ( χ2=5.560, P=0.018). The cumulative survival rates at 1-, 3- and 5-year were 93.41%, 93.41%, 89.95% in the LDLT group and 87.38%, 81.98%, 77.04% in the WLT group, respectively. There was no significant difference among the mature SLT group, the LDLT group and the WLT group ( χ2=4.016, P=0.134). Abdominal hemorrhage, infection, primary liver graft nonfunction,and portal vein thrombosis were the main causes of early postoperative death. Conclusion:SLT can achieve results comparable to those of WLT and LDLT in mature technology liver transplant centers, but it needs to go through a certain time learning curve.

Objective:To investigate the safety and therapeutic effect of split liver transplantation (SLT) in clinical application.Methods:This is a retrospective case-series study. The clinical data of 203 consecutive SLT, 79 living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and 1 298 whole liver transplantation (WLT) performed at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from July 2014 to July 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Two hundred and three SLT liver grafts were obtained from 109 donors. One hundred and twenty-seven grafts were generated by in vitro splitting and 76 grafts were generated by in vivo splitting. There were 90 adult recipients and 113 pediatric recipients. According to time, SLT patients were divided into two groups: the early SLT group (40 cases, from July 2014 to December 2017) and the mature SLT technology group (163 cases, from January 2018 to July 2023). The survival of each group was analyzed and the main factors affecting the survival rate of SLT were analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test were used for survival analysis.Results:The cumulative survival rates at 1-, 3-, and 5-year were 74.58%, 71.47%, and 71.47% in the early SLT group, and 88.03%, 87.23%, and 87.23% in the mature SLT group, respectively. Survival rates in the mature SLT group were significantly higher than those in the early SLT group ( χ2=5.560, P=0.018). The cumulative survival rates at 1-, 3- and 5-year were 93.41%, 93.41%, 89.95% in the LDLT group and 87.38%, 81.98%, 77.04% in the WLT group, respectively. There was no significant difference among the mature SLT group, the LDLT group and the WLT group ( χ2=4.016, P=0.134). Abdominal hemorrhage, infection, primary liver graft nonfunction,and portal vein thrombosis were the main causes of early postoperative death. Conclusion:SLT can achieve results comparable to those of WLT and LDLT in mature technology liver transplant centers, but it needs to go through a certain time learning curve.

Objective To investigate the diagnosis and treatment strategy of the portal vein complications in children undergoing split liver transplantation. Methods The clinical data of 88 pediatric recipients who underwent split liver transplantation were retrospectively analyzed. Intraoperative anastomosis at the bifurcating site of the portal vein or donor iliac vein bypass anastomosis was performed depending on the internal diameter and development of the recipient's portal vein. A normalized portal venous blood stream monitoring was performed during the perioperative stage. After operation, heparin sodium was used to bridge warfarin for anticoagulation therapy. After portal vein stenosis or thrombosis was identified with enhanced CT or portography, managements including embolectomy, systemic anticoagulation, interventional thrombus removal, balloon dilatation and/or stenting were performed. Results Among the 88 recipients, a total of 10 children were diagnosed with portal vein complications, of which 4 cases were diagnosed with portal vein stenosis at 1 d, 2 months, 8 months, and 11 months after surgery, and 6 cases were diagnosed with portal vein thrombosis at intraoperative, 2 d, 3 d (n=2), 6 d, and 11 months after surgery, respectively. One patient with portal vein stenosis and one patient with portal vein thrombosis died perioperatively. The fatality related to portal vein complications was 2% (2/88). Of the remaining 8 patients, 1 underwent systemic anticoagulation, 2 underwent portal venous embolectomy, 1 underwent interventional balloon dilatation, and 4 underwent interventional balloon dilatation plus stenting. No portal venous related symptoms were detected during postoperative long term follow up, and the retested portal venous blood stream parameters were normal. Conclusions The normalized intra- and post-operative portal venous blood stream monitoring is a useful tool for the early detection of portal vein complications, the early utilization of useful managements such as intraoperative portal venous embolectomy, interventional balloon dilatation and stenting may effectively treat the portal vein complications, thus minimizing the portal vein complication related graft loss and recipient death.

Objective:To investigate the anatomic classification and reconstruction of right intrahepatic bile duct in the donor liver of split liver transplantation (SLT).Methods:The retrospective and descriptive study was constructed. The clinical data of 85 patients who underwent SLT in the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from July 2014 to January 2022 were collected. There were 65 males and 20 females, aged 45(range, 1-82)years. Observation indicators: (1) surgical conditions; (2) anatomy of right intrahepatic bile duct; (3) bile duct reconstruction; (4) postoperative biliary complications; (5) follow-up. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M(range) or M( Q1, Q3).Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability. Results:(1) Surgical conditions. Of the 85 donor livers, 11 donor livers were split between the left and right hemilivers, and 74 donor livers were split between the classic right trilobe and left lateral lobe. The cold ischemia time of 85 donor livers was 291(273, 354)minutes, and the operation time, anhepatic phase time and volume of intraoperative blood transfusion of 85 recipients were (497±97)minutes, 51(40, 80)minutes and 8(7, 12)U. (2) Anatomy of right intrahepatic bile duct. Of the 85 donor livers, there were 47 donor livers with classic bile duct anatomical model (type 1), of the ratio as 55.3%(47/85), and 38 donor livers with anatomical variants, of the ratio as 44.7%(38/85). Of the 38 donor livers with anatomical variants, 7 donor livers were type 2, 16 donor livers were type 3a, 2 donor livers were type 3b, 2 donor livers were type 3c, 1 donor liver was type 4, 3 donor livers were type 5a, 4 donor livers were type 5b, 3 donor livers were type 6. For bile duct splitting patterns of the 85 donor livers, 84 donor livers were split with the main trunk of common hepatic duct preserving in the right hemiliver or right trilobe, and 1 donor liver were treated with complete left and right hemiliver splitting to preserve the main trunk of the common hepatic duct in the left hemiliver and the right hemiliver in the right hepatic duct (type 1 bile duct anatomical model). There were 84 donor livers with only one bile duct opening, and 1 donor liver with two bile duct openings (type 3c bile duct anatomical model). (3) Bile duct reconstruction. Of the 85 recipients, there were 69 recipients with common bile duct end-to-end anastomosis to common bile duct of donor liver (38 donor livers with type 1 bile duct anatomical model, 5 donor livers with type 2 bile duct anatomical model, 14 donor livers with type 3a bile duct anatomical model, 2 donor livers with type 3b bile duct anatomical model, 1 donor liver with type 4 bile duct anatomical model, 3 donor livers with type 5a bile duct anatomical model, 4 donor livers with type 5b bile duct anatomical model, 2 donor livers with type 6 bile duct anatomical model), 11 recipients with jejunum anastomosis to common bile duct of donor liver (7 donor livers with type 1 bile duct anatomical model, 2 donor livers with type 2 bile duct anatomical model, 1 donor liver with type 3c bile duct anatomical model, 1 donor liver with type 6 bile duct anatomical model), 3 recipients with jejunum anastomosis to common hepatic duct of donor liver (1 donor liver with type 1 bile duct anatomical model, 2 donor livers with type 3a bile duct anatomical model), 1 recipient with jejunum anastomosis to right hepatic duct of donor liver (type 1 bile duct anatomical model), 1 recipient with common hepatic duct end-to-end anastomosis to right posterior branch of donor liver combined with jejunum of the recipient Roux-en-y anastomosis to common hepatic duct of donor liver (type 3c bile duct anatomical model). (4) Postoperative biliary complications. Of the 85 recipients, 6 cases had postoperative biliary complications, with an incidence of 7.1% (6/85). Of the 6 recipients with postoperative biliary complications, there were 5 recipients with donor liver with type 1 bile duct anatomical model, including 3 cases undergoing postoperative biliary stricture with biliary leakage and 2 cases undergoing postoperative biliary anastomotic stricture, 1 recipient with donor liver with type 3b bile duct anatomical model and undergoing postoperative biliary anastomotic stricture and bile leakage in the liver section. Cases with biliary complications were 5 in the 47 recipients with donor liver with classic bile duct anatomical model and 1 in the 38 recipients with donor liver with anato-mical variants, showing no significant difference between them ( P>0.05). (5) Follow-up. There were 83 recipients receiving followed up for 52(12,96)months. During the follow-up period, 2 recipients died due to non-biliary complication factors (1 donor liver with type 1 bile duct anatomical model and 1 donor liver with 3a bile duct anatomical model). Conclusion:The anatomical classification of right intrahepatic bile duct of donor liver in SLT is mainly classical bile duct anatomical model, and the bile duct reconstruction scheme is mainly common bile duct of donor liver end-to-end anasto-mosis to common bile duct of recipient.