BACKGROUND: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) or stenosis (PVS) often requires challenging techniques for reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 57 LDLTs were performed between October 1996 and December 2010. There were 16 cases (28%) with PVT/PVS that underwent modified portal vein anastomosis (m-PVa). The m-PVa techniques were classified into 3 groups: patch graft (Type-1), interposition graft (Type-2), and using huge shunt vessels (Type-3). The reconstruction patterns were evaluated with regard to age, graft vessels, PV flow, and complication rate. RESULTS: The m-PVas were Type-1 in 10 cases, Type-2 in 3 cases, and Type-3 in 3 cases. The vessel graft in Type-1 was the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) in 8 and the jugular vein in 2 cases, whereas the vessel graft in Type-2 was IMV in 2 and the saphenous vein in 1 case; in Type-3, the vessel grafts were renoportal, gonadal-portal, and coronary-portal anastomoses, respectively. The postoperative PV flow was sufficient in all types and slightly higher in Type-3. The postoperative complications occurred in 20% of the patients who underwent Type-1, in 33% who underwent Type-2, and in 0% who underwent Type-3. CONCLUSION: The m-PVa was effective to overcome the surgical difficulty during transplantation. Pretransplant planning for the selection of the type of reconstruction is important for recipients with PVT/PVS.
BACKGROUND: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) or stenosis (PVS) often requires challenging techniques for reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 57 LDLTs were performed between October 1996 and December 2010. There were 16 cases (28%) with PVT/PVS that underwent modified portal vein anastomosis (m-PVa). The m-PVa techniques were classified into 3 groups: patch graft (Type-1), interposition graft (Type-2), and using huge shunt vessels (Type-3). The reconstruction patterns were evaluated with regard to age, graft vessels, PV flow, and complication rate. RESULTS: The m-PVas were Type-1 in 10 cases, Type-2 in 3 cases, and Type-3 in 3 cases. The vessel graft in Type-1 was the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) in 8 and the jugular vein in 2 cases, whereas the vessel graft in Type-2 was IMV in 2 and the saphenous vein in 1 case; in Type-3, the vessel grafts were renoportal, gonadal-portal, and coronary-portal anastomoses, respectively. The postoperative PV flow was sufficient in all types and slightly higher in Type-3. The postoperative complications occurred in 20% of the patients who underwent Type-1, in 33% who underwent Type-2, and in 0% who underwent Type-3. CONCLUSION: The m-PVa was effective to overcome the surgical difficulty during transplantation. Pretransplant planning for the selection of the type of reconstruction is important for recipients with PVT/PVS.