End-to-side caval anastomosis in adult piggyback liver transplantation.

No consensus exists regarding the optimal reconstruction of the cavo-caval anastomosis in piggyback orthotopic liver transplantation (PB-LT). The aim of this study was to analyze our experience with end-to-side (ES) cavo-cavostomy. Outcome parameters were patient and graft survival and surgical complications. During the period 1995-2002 146 full-size PB-LT in 137 adult patients were performed with ES cavo-cavostomy without the routine use of temporary portocaval shunt (TPCS). In 12 patients (8%) this technique was used for implantation of second or third grafts. Veno-venous bypass was not used in any case and TPCS was performed only in eight patients (6%). One-, three- and five-yr patient and graft survival were 84%, 79% and 75%, and 81%, 74% and 69%, respectively. The median number of intraoperative transfusion of packed red blood cells (RBC) was 2.0 (range 0-33) and 30% of the patients (n = 43) did not require any RBC transfusion. Surgical complications of various types were observed after 49 LT (34%) and none of the complications was specifically related to the technique of ES cavo-cavostomy. Our experience indicates that PB-LT with ES cavo-cavostomy is a safe procedure, can safely be performed without the routine use of a TPCS, has a very low risk of venous outflow obstruction and can also be used effectively during retransplantations.

Sequential and simultaneous revascularization in adult orthotopic piggyback liver transplantation.

The aim of the study was to assess whether there is a difference in outcome after sequential or simultaneous revascularization during orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) in terms of patient and graft survival, mortality, morbidity, and liver function. The study population consisted of 102 adult patients with primary full-size piggyback OLT transplanted between January 1998 and December 2001. In 71 patients (70%) the grafts were sequentially reperfused after completion of the portal vein anastomosis and subsequent arterial reconstruction was performed (sequential reperfusion [SeqR] group). In 31 patients (30%) the graft was reperfused simultaneously via the portal vein and hepatic artery (simultaneous reperfusion [SimR] group). Patient and graft survival at 1, 3, and 6 months and at 1 year did not differ between the SeqR group and the SimR group. The red blood cell (RBC) requirements were significantly higher in the SimR group (5.5 units; range 0-20) in comparison to the SeqR group (2 units; range 0-19) (P = 0.02). Apart from a higher number of biliary anastomotic complications and abdominal bleeding complications in the SimR group in comparison to the SeqR group (13% vs. 2% and 19% vs. 6%, respectively; P = 0.06), morbidity was not different between the groups. No differences between the groups were observed regarding the incidence of primary nonfunction (PNF), intensive care unit stay, and acute rejection. This was also true for the severity of rejections. Postoperative recuperation of liver function was not different between the groups. In conclusion, no advantage of either of the 2 reperfusion protocols could be observed in this analysis, especially with respect to the incidence of ischemic type biliary lesions (ITBL).