Cargando…

A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: The classic technique of hepatectomy with venovenous bypass may cause a longer anhepatic phase and increase the rate of some complications, such as post-operative renal failure and thromboembolic events. But, in some cases, such as tumors and anatomic difficulties, the surgeon is obligat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nikeghbalian, Saman, Toutouni, Mohammad Naser, Salahi, Heshmatollah, Aliakbarian, Mohsen, Malekhosseini, Seyed Ali
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Electronic physician 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4324279/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25763139
http://dx.doi.org/10.14661/2014.741-746
_version_ 1782356668003123200
author Nikeghbalian, Saman
Toutouni, Mohammad Naser
Salahi, Heshmatollah
Aliakbarian, Mohsen
Malekhosseini, Seyed Ali
author_facet Nikeghbalian, Saman
Toutouni, Mohammad Naser
Salahi, Heshmatollah
Aliakbarian, Mohsen
Malekhosseini, Seyed Ali
author_sort Nikeghbalian, Saman
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The classic technique of hepatectomy with venovenous bypass may cause a longer anhepatic phase and increase the rate of some complications, such as post-operative renal failure and thromboembolic events. But, in some cases, such as tumors and anatomic difficulties, the surgeon is obligated to use the classic technique even though there is some controversy about the safety of this technique without venovenous bypass in liver transplantation. The aim of this study was to compare the results of using the classic technique without venovenous bypass and the piggyback technique for liver transplantation. METHODS: A retrospective case-series study was conducted on 227 consecutive successful liver transplants, including 55 cases in which the classic technique was used and 172 cases in which the piggyback technique was used. The transplants were performed from March 2010 through June 2011 in the Visceral Transplantation Ward at Namazi Hospital in Shiraz, Iran. The piggyback method was the preferred approach for hepatectomy, but the classic technique without venovenous bypass was performed in cirrhotic cases with anatomic difficulties, when there was a tumor, or when the surgeon preferred it. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in post-operative rise in creatinine, decreases in intraoperative blood pressure, transfused packed red blood cells (RBC), or survival rates between the groups. Warm ischemic time (duration that donor liver is out of ice until it’s blood reperfusion in the recipient) was approximately seven minutes longer in the classic group (P = 0), but it was less than 52 minutes, which is an acceptable time for this phase. Hospital stays were shorter in the classic group than in the piggyback group (P = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Although the piggyback technique is the preferred technique for hepatectomy in liver transplantation, the classic technique without venovenous bypass can be used safely in cirrhotic livers when necessary or if the physician prefers it.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4324279
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Electronic physician
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43242792015-03-11 A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation Nikeghbalian, Saman Toutouni, Mohammad Naser Salahi, Heshmatollah Aliakbarian, Mohsen Malekhosseini, Seyed Ali Electron Physician Articles BACKGROUND: The classic technique of hepatectomy with venovenous bypass may cause a longer anhepatic phase and increase the rate of some complications, such as post-operative renal failure and thromboembolic events. But, in some cases, such as tumors and anatomic difficulties, the surgeon is obligated to use the classic technique even though there is some controversy about the safety of this technique without venovenous bypass in liver transplantation. The aim of this study was to compare the results of using the classic technique without venovenous bypass and the piggyback technique for liver transplantation. METHODS: A retrospective case-series study was conducted on 227 consecutive successful liver transplants, including 55 cases in which the classic technique was used and 172 cases in which the piggyback technique was used. The transplants were performed from March 2010 through June 2011 in the Visceral Transplantation Ward at Namazi Hospital in Shiraz, Iran. The piggyback method was the preferred approach for hepatectomy, but the classic technique without venovenous bypass was performed in cirrhotic cases with anatomic difficulties, when there was a tumor, or when the surgeon preferred it. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in post-operative rise in creatinine, decreases in intraoperative blood pressure, transfused packed red blood cells (RBC), or survival rates between the groups. Warm ischemic time (duration that donor liver is out of ice until it’s blood reperfusion in the recipient) was approximately seven minutes longer in the classic group (P = 0), but it was less than 52 minutes, which is an acceptable time for this phase. Hospital stays were shorter in the classic group than in the piggyback group (P = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Although the piggyback technique is the preferred technique for hepatectomy in liver transplantation, the classic technique without venovenous bypass can be used safely in cirrhotic livers when necessary or if the physician prefers it. Electronic physician 2014-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4324279/ /pubmed/25763139 http://dx.doi.org/10.14661/2014.741-746 Text en © 2014 The Authors This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/) , which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Articles
Nikeghbalian, Saman
Toutouni, Mohammad Naser
Salahi, Heshmatollah
Aliakbarian, Mohsen
Malekhosseini, Seyed Ali
A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation
title A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation
title_full A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation
title_fullStr A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation
title_full_unstemmed A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation
title_short A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation
title_sort comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4324279/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25763139
http://dx.doi.org/10.14661/2014.741-746
work_keys_str_mv AT nikeghbaliansaman acomparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation
AT toutounimohammadnaser acomparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation
AT salahiheshmatollah acomparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation
AT aliakbarianmohsen acomparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation
AT malekhosseiniseyedali acomparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation
AT nikeghbaliansaman comparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation
AT toutounimohammadnaser comparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation
AT salahiheshmatollah comparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation
AT aliakbarianmohsen comparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation
AT malekhosseiniseyedali comparativestudyoftheclassicandpiggybacktechniquesfororthotopiclivertransplantation