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.

  • Source
    • "Even though liver transplantation became the standard treatment for ESLD and early-stage HCC and the number of liver transplant programs is rapidly increasing all over the world, there are a limited number of recent publications about outcomes from new liver transplant programs [9,10,11]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose To evaluate patient triage pattern and outcomes according to types of liver transplantation as part of a new liver transplant program developed in an East Asian country with a limited number of deceased donors. Methods Medical records of initial 50 liver transplantations were reviewed retrospectively. Results Twenty-nine patients underwent deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) and 21 patients underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Mean model for end-stage liver disease scores of recipients of DDLT and LDLT were 24.9 ± 11.6 and 13.1 ± 5.4, respectively (P < 0.0001). Twenty-eight patients had HCCs and 17 of them (60.7%) underwent LDLT, which was 80.9% of LDLTs. There were 2 cases of perioperative mortality; each was from DDLT and LDLT, respectively. Median follow-up was 18 months. Overall patient and graft survival rates at 6 months, 1 and 2 years were 95.7%, 93.4%, and 89.8%, respectively. There was no significant difference in survival between DDLT and LDLT. Overall recurrence-free survival rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients at 6 month, 1, and 2 years were 96.3%, 96.3%, and 90.3%, respectively. There was no significant difference in recurrence-free survival between DDLT and LDLT. Conclusion As a new liver transplant program with limited resource and waiting list, patients with critical condition could undergo DDLT whereas relatively stable patients with HCCs were mostly directed to LDLT. We recommend a balanced approach between DDLT and LDLT for initiating liver transplant programs.
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 07/2014; 87(1):22-7. DOI:10.4174/astr.2014.87.1.22

Preview (2 Sources)

Available from