Article

Portocaval hemitransposition in pediatric liver transplant recipients: a single-center experience.

Dumont-UCLA Liver Transplant Center, Department of Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Liver Transplantation (Impact Factor: 3.94). 08/2006; 12(7):1097-103. DOI: 10.1002/lt.20770
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Few studies have reported a series of patients who have undergone portocaval hemitransposition at the time of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Furthermore, no series report the outcome of pediatric patients who required the procedure. This work analyzes the experience with portocaval hemitransposition in the pediatric liver transplant population at a single center since the initial description of the procedure. We carried out a retrospective analysis of all pediatric liver transplants performed in our institution during the 8-year period from January 1, 1997, to December 31, 2004. Of 320 pediatric patients who received OLT during the study period, 7 underwent portocaval hemitransposition (2.2%). Five of the patients had biliary atresia. Four grafts were whole cadaveric livers, while the remaining 4 were left lateral segments from either in situ cadaveric split (n = 3) or living donation (n = 1). One patient received a whole cadaveric allograft and was retransplanted with a segment 2/3 graft; in both cases portocaval hemitransposition was utilized. Average warm ischemia time was 54 +/- 16 minutes. Three patients had primary nonfunction of the allograft; 2 were retransplanted with successful outcome, and the remaining patient died before retransplantation. Another patient died from recurrent disease. Four of 7 are long-term survivors and demonstrate good liver function as long as 8 years posttransplant. In conclusions, long-term survival is possible following OLT with portocaval hemitransposition in pediatric patients. However, rates of primary graft nonfunction can be high. Appropriate selection of recipient and type of donor graft are essential for good outcomes. Portocaval hemitransposition should be used cautiously and as a last resort to establish portovenous inflow.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
66 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Porto-caval hemitransposition (PCH) in liver transplantation allows revascularization of the liver when the porto-mesenteric axis is thrombosed. We, here, review our experience over an 11-year period. A total of 23 patients underwent liver transplantation using PCH. Immunosuppression was based on tacrolimus, with sirolimus used in case of renal insufficiency. Most common diagnoses were hepatitis C, Laennec's, Budd-Chiari and cryptogenic cirrhosis. Six patients needed splenectomy prior to transplant, 5 during transplant, 1 post-transplant, 11 had no splenectomy. Overall survival was 60% at 1 year and 38% at 3 years, with 10 of 23 patients currently alive and the longest survivor at 9.3 years. Most common cause of death was sepsis/multisystem organ failure, followed by pulmonary embolism. A total of 7/23 patients experienced post-operative gastrointestinal bleeding episodes, 6/23 patients developed thrombosis of the vena cava (median 162 days post-op). Post-operative ascites was noted in almost all patients. Renal dysfunction was commonly seen even after the first month post-transplant. PCH offers a feasible option for liver transplantation in those patients with complex thrombosis of the mesenteric and portal circulation.
    American Journal of Transplantation 03/2007; 7(2):454-60. · 6.19 Impact Factor
  • [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