4.6 Article

Safety of duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction in right-lobe live-donor liver transplantation without biliary drainage

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION
卷 77, 期 5, 页码 726-732

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.TP.0000116604.89083.2F

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction is frequently used in right-lobe live-donor liver transplantation (RLDLT), and routine biliary drainage has been recommended. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and operative outcomes of duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction after RLDLT without biliary drainage. Methods. The study comprised 41 RLDLT recipients who had duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction. During donor and recipient operations, precautions were taken to preserve blood supply to the bile duct. Biliary anastomosis was performed with fine Prolene sutures without stents or drainage tubes. The operative outcomes were prospectively evaluated. Results. The median postoperative intensive care unit and hospital stay were 3 days (range, 1-47 days) and 19 days (range, 8-114 days), respectively. There was no hospital mortality. At a median follow-up of 13.3 months (range, 4.0-26.8 months), the graft and patient survival rates were 95% and 98%, respectively. Three (7%) patients had biliary leakage. These three patients and the other seven patients developed late biliary stricture. The overall biliary complication rate was 24%. On multivariate analysis, preoperative Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score of greater than or equal to 35 was the risk factor associated with biliary complication (P=0.032; risk ratio, 4.58). Conclusions. Duct-to-duct anastomosis without biliary drainage is safe in RLDLT. Patients with a high preoperative MELD score were associated with an increased incidence of biliary complications. Further studies are required to investigate the hemodynamic changes and modulation of blood flow of liver grafts in patients with chronic liver disease, which may significantly affect the incidence of biliary complications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据