| Literature DB >> 31844037 |
Gil-Chun Park1, Shin Hwang1, Tae-Yong Ha1, Gi-Won Song1, Dong-Hwan Jung1, Chul-Soo Ahn1, Deok-Bog Moon2, Ki-Hun Kim1, Young-In Yoon1, Hui-Dong Cho1, Jae-Hyun Kwon1, Yong-Kyu Chung1, Sang-Hyun Kang1, I-Ji Jung1, Jin-Uk Choi1, Sung-Gyu Lee1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Because of the supply shortage for homologous vein allografts, we previously used ringed Gore-Tex vascular grafts for middle hepatic vein (MHV) reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation. However, owing to the subsequent unavailability of ringed Gore-Tex grafts, we replaced them with Hemashield vascular grafts. This study aimed to compare the patency of Hemashield grafts with that of ringed Gore-Tex grafts. MATERIAL AND METHODS This was a retrospective double-arm study between the study group that used Hemashield grafts (n=63) and the historical control group that used ringed Gore-Tex grafts (n=126). RESULTS In the Gore-Tex and Hemashield groups, mean age was 53.1±6.2 and 54.3±10.4 years; model for end-stage liver disease score was 16.5±8.3 and 17.5±9.9; and graft-recipient weight ratio was 1.11±0.23 and 1.12±0.25, respectively. In the Gore-Tex graft group, V5 reconstruction was done in single (n=107, 84.9%), double (n=17, 13.5%), and none (n=2, 1.6%). V8 reconstruction was done in single (n=95, 75.4%), double (n=1, 0.8%), and none (n=30, 23.8%). In the Hemashield group, V5 reconstruction was done in single (n=43, 68.3%), double (n=19, 30.2%), and triple (n=1, 1.6%). V8 reconstruction was done in single (n=45, 71.4%), double (n=9, 14.3%), and none (n=9, 14.3%). One-year conduit patency rates in the Gore-Tex and Hemashield groups were 54.8% and 71.6%, respectively (p=0.048). CONCLUSIONS MHV reconstruction using Hemashield vascular grafts demonstrated higher short-term patency rates than those associated with ringed Gore-Tex vascular grafts. We suggest that the Hemashield vascular graft is one of the best prosthetic materials for MHV reconstruction.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31844037 PMCID: PMC6936210 DOI: 10.12659/AOT.919780
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transplant ISSN: 1425-9524 Impact factor: 1.530
Figure 1Intraoperative photographs showing the standardized techniques of middle hepatic vein reconstruction using a Hemashield vascular graft and a cryopreserved iliac artery patch. (A) A middle hepatic vein branch orifice at the liver cut surface was widened by making a ventral cut, and the arterial patch was sutured. (B) A 12-mm Hemashield graft was prepared and a hole was excised to match with the size of the arterial patches.(C, D) An end-to-side anastomosis was performed between the Hemashield graft and the arterial patch, showing a funnel-shaped intervening arterial patch. (E) Two middle hepatic vein branches were anastomosed with the Hemashield graft by end-to-side method. (F) Anastomosis of the Hemashield graft to the recipient middle-left hepatic vein stump in a side-to-side method was followed by closing of the distal end with a running suture using 5-0 Prolene.
Figure 2A dynamic computed tomography image of the patient, shown in Figure 1, taken on the 7th day after transplantation. The internal lumen of the Hemashield conduit used for middle hepatic vein reconstruction was patent without any thrombus formation. The arrow head indicates the anastomosis site to the segment V hepatic vein, while the arrow indicates the anastomosis between Hemashield graft conduit and recipient middle-left hepatic vein stump.
Clinical profiles of patients who underwent middle hepatic vein reconstruction using Goretex or Hemashield vascular grafts.
| Goretex group | Hemashield group | p-Value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case number | 126 | 63 | |
| Age (years) | 53.1±6.2 | 54.3±10.4 | 0.36 |
| Sex (n) | 0.91 | ||
| Male | 91 (72.2%) | 45 (71.4%) | |
| Female | 35 (27.8%) | 18 (28.6%) | |
| MELD score | 16.5±8.3 | 17.5±9.9 | 0.47 |
| Primary disease (n) | <0.001 | ||
| HBV-associated cirrhosis | 88 (69.8%) | 26 (41.3%) | |
| HCV-associated cirrhosis | 4 (3.2%) | 1 (1.6%) | |
| Alcoholic liver disease | 18 (14.3%) | 21 (33.3%) | |
| Cryptogenic cirrhosis | 8 (6.3%) | 7 (11.1%) | |
| Acute liver failure | 4 (3.2%) | 2 (3.2%) | |
| Polycystic liver disease | 2 (1.6%) | 0 | |
| Wilson disease | 2 (1.6%) | 2 (3.2%) | |
| Autoimmune hepatitis | 0 | 3 (4.8%) | |
| Primary sclerosing cholangitis | 0 | 1 (1.6%) | |
| Concurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (n) | 67 (53.2%) | 28 (44.4%) | 0.26 |
| ABO-incompatible transplantation (n) | 19 (15.1%) | 17 (27.0%) | 0.049 |
| Graft-recipient weight ratio | 1.11±0.23 | 1.12±0.25 | 0.67 |
MELD – model for end-stage liver disease; HBV – hepatitis B virus; HCV – hepatitis C virus.
Comparison between HBV infection cases and others.
Configuration of middle hepatic vein reconstruction performed using ringed Goretex or Hemashield vascular grafts.
| Goretex group | Hemashield group | |
|---|---|---|
| V5 reconstruction (n) | ||
| No reconstruction | 2 (1.6%) | 0 |
| Single anastomosis | 107 (84.9%) | 43 (68.3%) |
| Double anastomoses | 17 (13.5%) | 19 (30.2%) |
| Triple anastomoses | 0 | 1 (91.6%) |
| V8 reconstruction (n) | ||
| No reconstruction | 30 (23.8%) | 9 (14.3%) |
| Single anastomosis | 95 (75.4%) | 45 (71.4%) |
| Double anastomoses | 1 (0.8%) | 9 (14.3%) |
| Triple anastomoses | 0 | 0 |
Figure 3Serial computed tomography images showing progressive occlusion of the lumen within the interposed Hemashield vascular graft, taken at 1 week (A), 1 month (B), 6 months (C), and 18 months (D) after transplantation. Despite deprivation of middle hepatic vein blood outflow, no hepatic venous congestion was noted owing to the development of intrahepatic venous collaterals. In this patient, the middle hepatic vein conduit created using a Hemashield vascular graft was patent until 18 months of transplantation. Arrows indicate luminal blood flow within the interposed Hemashield graft.
Figure 4Comparison of the luminal patency of the interposed middle hepatic vein conduit relative to the prosthetic vascular graft materials.