Abstract

BackgroundIn orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), 3 caval reconstruction techniques are being performed worldwide. These are conventional, piggyback technique, and side-to-side cavocaval anastomosis (CCA). Each has its own advantages and drawbacks. Herein we report the result from our hospital comparing the 3 techniques. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the detail of OLT performed from January 2008 to March 2020. Data being collected included type of caval reconstruction, blood loss, operative time, ischemic time, length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and total hospital stay, and several postoperative complications. ResultsIn the given period, 11 conventional, 90 piggyback, and 113 CCA caval reconstruction were done. There were no statistically significant differences in blood loss, operative time, cold ischemic time, and length of ICU and hospital stay. The CCA group had the lowest warm ischemic time (40 minutes) followed by the piggyback technique (43 minutes) and the conventional technique (47 minutes; P < .001). Regarding postoperative complications, there were no statistically significant differences in rate of primary nonfunction, early allograft dysfunction, hepatic artery/portal vein/biliary complication, or rate of acute kidney injury. The hepatic venous outflow complication rate was indifferent between 3 groups. ConclusionsThe present study showed no difference in outflow obstruction rate among the 3 techniques. The choice for reconstruction should rely on the preference of each institute and the suitability of each patient. The CCA technique may provide the lowest warm ischemic time.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call