Cargando…

Application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND: Surgical techniques of liver transplantation have continually evolved and have been modified. We retrospectively analyzed a single-center case series and compared the advantages and disadvantages of each method. METHODS: Six-hundred and seventy-four recipients’ perioperative data were as...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Zhitao, Ju, Weiqiang, Chen, Chuanbao, Wang, Tielong, Yu, Jia, Hong, Xitao, Dong, Yuqi, Chen, Maogen, He, Xiaoshun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8506559/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34733919
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-1945
_version_ 1784581726905827328
author Chen, Zhitao
Ju, Weiqiang
Chen, Chuanbao
Wang, Tielong
Yu, Jia
Hong, Xitao
Dong, Yuqi
Chen, Maogen
He, Xiaoshun
author_facet Chen, Zhitao
Ju, Weiqiang
Chen, Chuanbao
Wang, Tielong
Yu, Jia
Hong, Xitao
Dong, Yuqi
Chen, Maogen
He, Xiaoshun
author_sort Chen, Zhitao
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Surgical techniques of liver transplantation have continually evolved and have been modified. We retrospectively analyzed a single-center case series and compared the advantages and disadvantages of each method. METHODS: Six-hundred and seventy-four recipients’ perioperative data were assessed and analyzed stratified by different surgical technics [modified classic (MC), modified piggyback (MPB) and classic piggyback (CPB)]. RESULTS: MELD score and Child-Pugh scores was significantly higher in CPB groups (P=0.008 and 0.003, respectively). Anhepatic time in MPB group was longer than those in CPB group (P<0.05). The operation duration in MPB group was significantly longer than those in MC group and CPB group (P=0.003). Three patients had outflow obstruction (P=0.035). The overall survival in MPB group were better than those in MC group and CPB group in general comparison (P<0.001). In patients with preoperative creatine >120 µmol/L, the overall survival in MC group was worst (P<0.001). In patients with a high MELD score (>24), the overall survival in MPB group tended to be the best (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The advantages and disadvantages are different for these three surgical techniques. A reasonable operation technique should be adopted considering the patient's unique condition to ensure the stability of hemodynamics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8506559
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85065592021-11-02 Application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study Chen, Zhitao Ju, Weiqiang Chen, Chuanbao Wang, Tielong Yu, Jia Hong, Xitao Dong, Yuqi Chen, Maogen He, Xiaoshun Ann Transl Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Surgical techniques of liver transplantation have continually evolved and have been modified. We retrospectively analyzed a single-center case series and compared the advantages and disadvantages of each method. METHODS: Six-hundred and seventy-four recipients’ perioperative data were assessed and analyzed stratified by different surgical technics [modified classic (MC), modified piggyback (MPB) and classic piggyback (CPB)]. RESULTS: MELD score and Child-Pugh scores was significantly higher in CPB groups (P=0.008 and 0.003, respectively). Anhepatic time in MPB group was longer than those in CPB group (P<0.05). The operation duration in MPB group was significantly longer than those in MC group and CPB group (P=0.003). Three patients had outflow obstruction (P=0.035). The overall survival in MPB group were better than those in MC group and CPB group in general comparison (P<0.001). In patients with preoperative creatine >120 µmol/L, the overall survival in MC group was worst (P<0.001). In patients with a high MELD score (>24), the overall survival in MPB group tended to be the best (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The advantages and disadvantages are different for these three surgical techniques. A reasonable operation technique should be adopted considering the patient's unique condition to ensure the stability of hemodynamics. AME Publishing Company 2021-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8506559/ /pubmed/34733919 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-1945 Text en 2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Chen, Zhitao
Ju, Weiqiang
Chen, Chuanbao
Wang, Tielong
Yu, Jia
Hong, Xitao
Dong, Yuqi
Chen, Maogen
He, Xiaoshun
Application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study
title Application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study
title_full Application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study
title_fullStr Application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study
title_short Application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study
title_sort application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8506559/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34733919
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-1945
work_keys_str_mv AT chenzhitao applicationofvarioussurgicaltechniquesinlivertransplantationaretrospectivestudy
AT juweiqiang applicationofvarioussurgicaltechniquesinlivertransplantationaretrospectivestudy
AT chenchuanbao applicationofvarioussurgicaltechniquesinlivertransplantationaretrospectivestudy
AT wangtielong applicationofvarioussurgicaltechniquesinlivertransplantationaretrospectivestudy
AT yujia applicationofvarioussurgicaltechniquesinlivertransplantationaretrospectivestudy
AT hongxitao applicationofvarioussurgicaltechniquesinlivertransplantationaretrospectivestudy
AT dongyuqi applicationofvarioussurgicaltechniquesinlivertransplantationaretrospectivestudy
AT chenmaogen applicationofvarioussurgicaltechniquesinlivertransplantationaretrospectivestudy
AT hexiaoshun applicationofvarioussurgicaltechniquesinlivertransplantationaretrospectivestudy