ITEM METADATA RECORD
Title: Reperfusion of liver graft during transplantation: techniques used in transplant centres within Eurotransplant and meta-analysis of the literature
Authors: Manzini, Giulia ×
Kremer, Michael
Houben, Philippe
Gondan, Matthias
Bechstein, Wolf O
Becker, Thomas
Berlakovich, Gabriela A
Friess, Helmut
Guba, Markus
Hohenberger, Werner
Ijzermans, Jan N M
Jonas, Sven
Kalff, Jörg C
Klar, Ernst
Klempnauer, Jürgen
Lerut, Jan
Lippert, Hans
Lorf, Thomas
Nadalin, Silvio
Nashan, Björn
Otto, Gerd
Paul, Andreas
Pirenne, Jacques
Pratschke, Johann
Ringers, Jan
Rogiers, Xavier
Schilling, Martin K
Seehofer, Daniel
Senninger, Norbert
Settmacher, Utz
Stippel, Dirk L
Tscheliessnigg, Karlheinz
Ysebaert, Dirk
Binder, Heidrun
Schemmer, Peter #
Issue Date: May-2013
Publisher: Springer International
Series Title: Transplant International vol:26 issue:5 pages:508-516
Article number: 10.1111/tri.12083
Abstract: It remains unclear which liver graft reperfusion technique leads to the best outcome following transplantation. An online survey was sent to all transplant centres (n = 37) within Eurotransplant (ET) to collect information on their technique used for reperfusion of liver grafts. Furthermore, a systematic review of all literature was performed and a meta-analysis was conducted based on patients' mortality, number of retransplantations and incidence of biliary complications, depending on the technique used. Of the 28 evaluated centres, 11 (39%) reported performing simultaneous reperfusion (SIMR), 13 (46%) perform initial portal vein reperfusion (IPR), 1 (4%) performs an initial hepatic artery reperfusion (IAR) and 3 (11%) perform retrograde reperfusion (RETR). In 21 centres (75%), one reperfusion technique is used as a standard, but in only one centre is this decision based on available literature. Twenty centres (71%) said they would agree to participate in randomized controlled trials (RCT) if required. For meta-analysis, IAR vs. IPR, SIMR vs. IPR and RETR vs. IPR were compared. There was no difference between any of the techniques compared. There is no consensus on a preferable reperfusion technique. Available evidence does not help in the decision-making process. There is thus an urgent need for multicentric RCTs.
ISSN: 0934-0874
Publication status: published
KU Leuven publication type: IT
Appears in Collections:Laboratory of Abdominal Transplantation
× corresponding author
# (joint) last author

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.

Request a copy

 




All items in Lirias are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

© Web of science