Article

An early single-center experience of portal vein thrombosis in living donor liver transplantation: clinical feature, management and outcome.

Division of Hepatobiliary and Transplantation Surgery, Department of Surgery, Catholic University of Daegu School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Journal of the Korean Surgical Society 07/2011; 81(1):35-42. DOI:10.4174/jkss.2011.81.1.35
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) has been considered a relative contraindication for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). However, it is no longer a contraindication of LDLT due to improvement in surgical techniques and approaches to PVT. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of PVT on outcomes in LDLT patients.
We retrospectively analyzed the data from 97 adult patients undergoing LDLT in our center from July 2008 to June 2010. Intraoperative findings and preoperative imaging results were reviewed for PVT grading (Yerdel grading). We analyzed the technical aspects and comparisons of risk factors, perioperative variables, and survivals between patients with and without PVT based on the grades.
In the 97 LDLT patients, 18 patients were confirmed to have PVT (18.5%) including grade I cases (n = 8), grade II (n = 7), and grade III (n = 3). Prior treatment of portal hypertension was found to be an independent risk factor for PVT (P = 0.001). The comparisons between PVT and no PVT groups showed no significant difference in intraoperative and postoperative variables except for postoperative bleeding (P = 0.036). The short-term portal vein patency, in-hospital mortality and survival rates were not significantly different between the PVT and control groups.
The outcomes are similar to non-PVT group in terms of in-hospital mortality, survival rates, and postoperative complications. Therefore, our study suggests that PVT cannot be considered to be a contraindication for LDLT and LDLT could be undertaken without increased morbidity and mortality in patients with PVT, in spite of operative complexity.

0 0
 · 
0 Bookmarks
 · 
80 Views
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) used to be a contraindication for liver transplantation (LT). This obstacle has been delt with following the improvement of LT-related techniques and therapeutic approaches to thrombosis. But the effect of PVT on LT outcomes is still controversial. We reviewed retrospectively the outcome of LT patients with PVT as well as risk factors and surgical management according to PVT grades. A total of 465 adult LTs were performed from December 2002 through December 2006. Operative findings and the result of preoperative ultrasonography and imaging were reviewed for PVT grading (Yerdel grading). Comparison of risk factors, variables associated with perioperative period and prognosis between recipients with and without PVT is based on the grades. In the 465 LTs, 42 were operatively confirmed to have PVT (9.0%) (19 recipients with grade 1, 14 with grade 2, 7 with grade 3, and 2 with grade 4). Increased age and treatment of portal hypertension were associated with PVT. Grade 1 or 2 PVT was treated by direct anastomosis or single thrombectomy. In grade 3 PVT patients, the donor PV was directly anastomosed to the dilated branch of the recipient portal venous system or to the distal open superior mesenteric vein through an interposition vein graft if needed. Grade 4 PVT was managed by our modified cavoportal hemitransposition technique. The comparison between PVT patients and controls showed no significant difference in operative duration and blood transfusion (P>0.05). The flow rate of the PV was lower in the PVT patients (48.881+/-12.788 cm/s) than in the controls (57.172+/-21.715 cm/s, P<0.05). The PVT patients had such postoperative complications as renal failure and PV rethrombosis (P<0.05). The 1-year survival rates in PVT and non-PVT patients were 78.6% and 76.4% respectively (P>0.05); the 3-year survival rates were 58.8% and 56.4% respectively (P>0.05). PVT is not contraindicated for LT if it is graded. PVT recipients may have post-transplantation complications like renal failure and PV rethrombosis, and operative difficulty and patient survival are similar to those in recipients without PVT. Development of therapeutic approaches and accumulation of experience in dealing with PVT further improve the outcomes of LT in PVT recipients.
    Hepatobiliary & pancreatic diseases international: HBPD INT 02/2009; 8(1):34-9. · 1.26 Impact Factor
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We sought to review the etiopathogenesis, diagnosis, and surgical options for 253 patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) to assess the the impact of PVT on outcomes. We retrospectively analyzed the data from 2508 adult patients undergoing 2614 OLTs in our center from September 1998 to July 2007. PVT was scored according to the operative findings and Yerdel grading of PVT. No prisoners were used as donors for this study. Two hundred fifty-three patients were diagnosed with PVT (10.09%): there were 104 grade I; 114, grade II; 29, grade III; and 6, grade IV PVT. Sex and previous splenectomy increased the risk for PVT. In grade I and II cases, we performed simple thrombectomy, eversion thrombectomy, or improved eversion thrombectomy (IET, innovated by our center), producing smooth postoperative recoveries with a 0% in-hospitality mortality. In grade III cases, 18 underwent successful IET. Of 11 subjects who had eversion thrombectomy, six failed, and the distal superior mesentery vein or dilated splanchnic collateral tributary had to be used as the inflow vessel in four patients, and portal vein arterialization were performed in the other two patients, all of whom experienced a smooth postoperative recovery except one who died of hepatic failure and pulmonary infection 2 weeks after the operation. The in-hospitality mortality was 3.45%. In grade IV cases, three underwent successful IET, but another three cases failed, with two of them requiring a renal vein as the inflow vessel, and other one undergoing portocaval hemitransposition, with one postoperative death due to hepatic failure and another of cancer recurrence, an in-hospitality mortality rate of 33.33%. The transfusion requirement among PVT patients was significantly higher than that in non-PVT patients (9.32 +/- 3.12 U vs 6.02 +/- 2.40 U; P < .01). Blood loss in PVT patients who underwent the IET technique was significantly lower than that for an eversion thrombectomy (2800.36 +/- 930.52 mL vs 5700.21 +/- 162.50 mL P < .05). The overall actuarial 1-year survival rate in PVT patients was similar to the controls (86.56% vs 89.40%; P > .05). OLT was successfully performed for PVT patients. The grade of PVT decided the surgical strategy. Similar 1-year survival rates were attained between PVT patients and controls undergoing OLT.
    Transplantation Proceedings 11/2009; 41(9):3761-5. · 0.95 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Hepatology 2(5):637-40. · 12.00 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
0 Downloads
Available from

Joo Dong Kim