Liver transplantation with preservation of the recipient vena cava (the 'piggy-back' technique) has been proposed as an alternative to the traditional method. We performed a randomized study on 39 cirrhotic patients, 20 who underwent the piggy-back technique (group 1) and 19 the traditional method using venovenous bypass (group 2) to evaluate the feasibility and true advantages of the piggyback technique compared to the traditional method. Two patients were switched to the conventional technique due to the presence of a caudate lobe embracing the vena cava in one patient and a caval lesion in the other. Statistically significant differences between the two groups were only found for the warm ischemia time (48.5 ± 13 min for piggy-back vs 60 ± 12 min for the conventional method) and for renal failure (zero cases in group 1 vs four cases in group 2). We therefore believe that liver transplantation with the piggy-back technique can easily be performed in almost all cases, and that only a few, specific situations, such as a very enlarged caudate lobe, do not justify its routine use.

Jovine E., Mazziotti A., Grazi G.L., Ercolani G., Masetti M., Morganti M., et al. (1997). Piggy-back versus conventional technique in liver transplantation: Report of a randomized trial. TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL, 10(2), 109-112 [10.1007/PL00003824].

Piggy-back versus conventional technique in liver transplantation: Report of a randomized trial

Jovine E.;Mazziotti A.;Grazi G. L.;Ercolani G.;Pierangeli F.;Cavallari A.
1997

Abstract

Liver transplantation with preservation of the recipient vena cava (the 'piggy-back' technique) has been proposed as an alternative to the traditional method. We performed a randomized study on 39 cirrhotic patients, 20 who underwent the piggy-back technique (group 1) and 19 the traditional method using venovenous bypass (group 2) to evaluate the feasibility and true advantages of the piggyback technique compared to the traditional method. Two patients were switched to the conventional technique due to the presence of a caudate lobe embracing the vena cava in one patient and a caval lesion in the other. Statistically significant differences between the two groups were only found for the warm ischemia time (48.5 ± 13 min for piggy-back vs 60 ± 12 min for the conventional method) and for renal failure (zero cases in group 1 vs four cases in group 2). We therefore believe that liver transplantation with the piggy-back technique can easily be performed in almost all cases, and that only a few, specific situations, such as a very enlarged caudate lobe, do not justify its routine use.
1997
Jovine E., Mazziotti A., Grazi G.L., Ercolani G., Masetti M., Morganti M., et al. (1997). Piggy-back versus conventional technique in liver transplantation: Report of a randomized trial. TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL, 10(2), 109-112 [10.1007/PL00003824].
Jovine E.; Mazziotti A.; Grazi G.L.; Ercolani G.; Masetti M.; Morganti M.; Pierangeli F.; Begliomini B.; Mazzetti P.G.; Rossi R.; Paladini R.; Cavalla...espandi
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/916338
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 130
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 115
social impact