Abu Bakar Hafeez Bhatti1, Faisal Saud Dar2, Ammal Imran Qureshi2, Siraj Haider2, Nasir Ayub Khan3. 1. Department of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Shifa International Hospital, Sector H-8/4 Pitras Bukhari Road, Islamabad, Pakistan. abubakar.hafeez@yahoo.com. 2. Department of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Shifa International Hospital, Sector H-8/4 Pitras Bukhari Road, Islamabad, Pakistan. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, Shifa International Hospital, Sector H-8/4 Pitras Bukhari Road, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Occasionally, a recipient's native hepatic arteries are not suitable for reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). The use of the great saphenous vein (GSV) conduits in such patients is seldom practiced since arterial conduits from deceased donors are available. Here, we share our experience with a significantly large group of LDLT recipients who underwent arterial reconstruction with GSV conduits. METHODS: We reviewed patients who underwent LDLT between 2012 and 2017. Patients who had arterial reconstruction using native hepatic arteries (group 1)(n = 452) were compared with those who had GSV interposition conduits for reconstruction (group 2)(n = 21). We compared hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) rate, allograft dysfunction, morbidity, mortality, and actuarial 5-year survival in the two groups. RESULTS: HAT was seen in 0/452 (0%) versus 1/21(4.7%) patients (P = 0.04). Allograft dysfunction was seen in 89/423 (21%) versus 6/19(31.5%) (P = 0.2) patients. Overall mortality was 81/452 (17.9%) versus 8/21(38%) (P = 0.02). Death after a biliary complication was seen in 24/452 (5.3%) versus 4/21 (19%) patients (P = 0.02). Actuarial 1- and 5-year overall survival was 85% versus 67% and 79% versus 58% (P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: GSV conduits are a suboptimal alternative for establishing hepatic arterial inflow in LDLT, but remain valuable in ominous situations.
PURPOSE: Occasionally, a recipient's native hepatic arteries are not suitable for reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). The use of the great saphenous vein (GSV) conduits in such patients is seldom practiced since arterial conduits from deceased donors are available. Here, we share our experience with a significantly large group of LDLT recipients who underwent arterial reconstruction with GSV conduits. METHODS: We reviewed patients who underwent LDLT between 2012 and 2017. Patients who had arterial reconstruction using native hepatic arteries (group 1)(n = 452) were compared with those who had GSV interposition conduits for reconstruction (group 2)(n = 21). We compared hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) rate, allograft dysfunction, morbidity, mortality, and actuarial 5-year survival in the two groups. RESULTS: HAT was seen in 0/452 (0%) versus 1/21(4.7%) patients (P = 0.04). Allograft dysfunction was seen in 89/423 (21%) versus 6/19(31.5%) (P = 0.2) patients. Overall mortality was 81/452 (17.9%) versus 8/21(38%) (P = 0.02). Death after a biliary complication was seen in 24/452 (5.3%) versus 4/21 (19%) patients (P = 0.02). Actuarial 1- and 5-year overall survival was 85% versus 67% and 79% versus 58% (P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: GSV conduits are a suboptimal alternative for establishing hepatic arterial inflow in LDLT, but remain valuable in ominous situations.