A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison of Three Inferior Vena Cava Reconstruction Techniques in Adult Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: Result From King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thailand. | LitMetric

Comparison of Three Inferior Vena Cava Reconstruction Techniques in Adult Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: Result From King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thailand.

Transplant Proc

Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand; Excellence Center for Organ Transplantation, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. Electronic address:

Published: October 2022

Background: In orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), 3 caval reconstruction techniques are being performed worldwide. These are conventional, piggyback technique, and side-to-side cavocaval anastomosis (CCA). Each has its own advantages and drawbacks. Herein we report the result from our hospital comparing the 3 techniques.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the detail of OLT performed from January 2008 to March 2020. Data being collected included type of caval reconstruction, blood loss, operative time, ischemic time, length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and total hospital stay, and several postoperative complications.

Results: In the given period, 11 conventional, 90 piggyback, and 113 CCA caval reconstruction were done. There were no statistically significant differences in blood loss, operative time, cold ischemic time, and length of ICU and hospital stay. The CCA group had the lowest warm ischemic time (40 minutes) followed by the piggyback technique (43 minutes) and the conventional technique (47 minutes; P < .001). Regarding postoperative complications, there were no statistically significant differences in rate of primary nonfunction, early allograft dysfunction, hepatic artery/portal vein/biliary complication, or rate of acute kidney injury. The hepatic venous outflow complication rate was indifferent between 3 groups.

Conclusions: The present study showed no difference in outflow obstruction rate among the 3 techniques. The choice for reconstruction should rely on the preference of each institute and the suitability of each patient. The CCA technique may provide the lowest warm ischemic time.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2022.06.006DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

ischemic time
16
caval reconstruction
12
reconstruction techniques
8
orthotopic liver
8
liver transplantation
8
conventional piggyback
8
piggyback technique
8
blood loss
8
loss operative
8
operative time
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!