Literature DB >> 15004772

Randomized trial comparing pulmonary alterations after conventional with venovenous bypass versus piggyback liver transplantation.

Maria Rita Montenegro Isern1, Paulo Celso Bosco Massarollo, Eliane Maria de Carvalho, Carlos Eduardo Sandoli Baía, Jorge Kavakama, Poliana de Andrade Lima, Sérgio Mies.   

Abstract

During the anhepatic phase of conventional liver transplantation (LT), the inferior vena cava (IVC) is cross-clamped and venovenous bypass (VVB) is usually indicated for diversion of IVC and portal blood flow. VVB can theoretically lead to pulmonary complications due to the contact of the blood with the surfaces of the circuit. In the piggyback method, preservation of the IVC avoids VVB. The aim of this study is to compare pulmonary alterations after conventional with VVB versus piggyback LT. Sixty-seven patients were randomized for conventional VVB (n = 34) or piggyback (n = 33) LT. Pulmonary static compliance (C(st)) and Pa(O2)/F(IO2) ratio were measured pre- and post-LT. Chest X-rays were obtained daily from the 1st to the 5th postoperative day. Pre- and post-LT C(st) were 73.4 +/- 36.0 mL/cm H(2)O and 59.7 +/- 22.0 mL/cm H(2)O in the conventional group and 69.1 +/- 20.0 mL/cm H(2)O and 58.7 +/- 27.1 mL/cmH(2)O in the piggyback group. The difference between the two groups was not significant (P =.702). C(st) significantly decreased after LT (P =.008). The pre- and post-LT Pa(O2)/F(IO2) were 455.6 +/- 126.6 mm Hg and 463.1 +/- 105.9 mm Hg in the conventional group and 468.9 +/- 114.1 mm Hg and 483.3 +/- 119.8 mm Hg in the piggyback group. The difference among the two groups was not significant (P = 0.331). There was no significant difference after LT (P =.382). Upon the radiological evaluation, piggyback group presented a higher frequency of pulmonary infiltrates (80.6% vs. 50.0%; P =.025). In conclusion, piggyback LT recipients have a higher rate of pulmonary infiltrates when compared to those operated upon using the conventional VVB method.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15004772     DOI: 10.1002/lt.20067

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Liver Transpl        ISSN: 1527-6465            Impact factor:   5.799


  4 in total

1.  The need for venovenous bypass in liver transplantation.

Authors:  Hamidreza Fonouni; Arianeb Mehrabi; Mehrdad Soleimani; Sascha A Müller; Markus W Büchler; Jan Schmidt
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.647

2.  Intereukin-10 and Kupffer cells protect steatotic mice livers from ischemia-reperfusion injury.

Authors:  Alton G Sutter; Arun P Palanisamy; Justin D Ellet; Michael G Schmidt; Rick G Schnellmann; Kenneth D Chavin
Journal:  Eur Cytokine Netw       Date:  2014 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.737

3.  Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Hepatic Venous Outflow and Renal Function after Conventional versus Piggyback Liver Transplantation.

Authors:  Marília D'Elboux Guimarães Brescia; Paulo Celso Bosco Massarollo; Ernesto Sasaki Imakuma; Sérgio Mies
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation.

Authors:  Saman Nikeghbalian; Mohammad Naser Toutouni; Heshmatollah Salahi; Mohsen Aliakbarian; Seyed Ali Malekhosseini
Journal:  Electron Physician       Date:  2014-02-01
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.