Advertisement
Review article|Articles in Press

Comparison of the modified piggyback with standard piggyback and conventional orthotopic liver transplantation techniques: a network meta-analysis

Published:March 13, 2023DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2023.02.017

      Abstract

      Background

      In conventional orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), the recipient's retrohepatic inferior vena cava (IVC) is completely clamped and replaced with the donor IVC. The piggyback technique has been used to preserve venous return, either via an end-to-side or standard piggyback (SPB), or via a side-to-side or modified piggyback (MPB) anastomosis, using a venous cuff from the recipient hepatic veins with partially clamping and preserves the recipient's inferior vena cava. However, whether these piggyback techniques improve the efficacy of OLT is unclear. To address the low quality of the available evidence, we performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of conventional, MPB, and SPB techniques.

      Methods

      Literature was searched in Medline and Web of Science databases for relevant articles published until 2021 without any time restriction. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to compare the intra- and postoperative outcomes of conventional OLT, MPB, and SPB techniques.

      Results

      Forty studies were included, comprising 10,238 patients. MPB and SPB had significantly shorter operation times and fewer transfusions of red blood cell and fresh frozen plasma than conventional techniques. However, there were no differences between MPB and SPB in operation time and blood product transfusion. There were also no differences in primary non-function, retransplantation, portal vein thrombosis, acute kidney injury, renal dysfunction, venous outflow complications, length of hospital and intensive care unit stay, 90-day mortality rate, and graft survival between the three techniques.

      Conclusion

      MBP and SBP techniques reduce the operation time and need for blood transfusion compared with conventional OLT, but postoperative outcomes are similar. This indicates that all techniques can be implemented based on the experience and policy of the transplant center.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to HPB
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Mehrabi A.
        • Mood Z.A.
        • Fonouni H.
        • Kashfi A.
        • Hillebrand N.
        • Müller S.A.
        • et al.
        A single-center experience of 500 liver transplants using the modified piggyback technique by Belghiti.
        Liver Transplant. 2009; 15 (official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society): 466-474
        • Starzl T.E.
        • Marchioro T.L.
        • Vonkaulla K.N.
        • Hermann G.
        • Brittain R.S.
        • Waddell W.R.
        Homotransplantation of the liver in humans.
        Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1963; 117: 659-676
        • Mehrabi A.
        • Fonouni H.
        • Müller S.A.
        • Schmidt J.
        Current concepts in transplant surgery: liver transplantation today.
        Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 2008; 393: 245-260
        • Tzakis A.
        • Todo S.
        • Starzl T.E.
        Orthotopic liver transplantation with preservation of the inferior vena cava.
        Ann Surg. 1989; 210: 649-652
        • Miyamoto S.
        • Polak W.G.
        • Geuken E.
        • Peeters P.M.
        • de Jong K.P.
        • Porte R.J.
        • et al.
        Liver transplantation with preservation of the inferior vena cava. A comparison of conventional and piggyback techniques in adults.
        Clin Transplant. 2004; 18: 686-693
        • Ye Q.
        • Zeng C.
        • Wang Y.
        • Fang Z.
        • Hu X.
        • Xiong Y.
        • et al.
        Risk factors for hepatic venous outflow obstruction in piggyback liver transplantation: the role of recipient's pattern of hepatic veins drainage into the inferior vena cava.
        Ann Transplant. 2017; 22: 303-308
        • Belghiti J.
        • Panis Y.
        • Sauvanet A.
        • Gayet B.
        • Fékété F.
        A new technique of side to side caval anastomosis during orthotopic hepatic transplantation without inferior vena caval occlusion.
        Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1992; 175: 270-272
        • Doria C.
        • Goldstein S.
        • Marino I.R.
        Orthotopic liver transplantation: surgical techniques.
        in: Doria C. Contemporary liver transplantation: the successful liver transplant program. Springer International Publishing, Cham2017: 69-80
        • Chen Z.
        • Ju W.
        • Chen C.
        • Wang T.
        • Yu J.
        • Hong X.
        • et al.
        Application of various surgical techniques in liver transplantation: a retrospective study.
        Ann Transl Med. 2021; 9: 1367
        • Moher D.
        • Liberati A.
        • Tetzlaff J.
        • Altman D.G.
        Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
        Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151 (w64): 264-269
        • Kalkum E.
        • Klotz R.
        • Seide S.
        • Hüttner F.J.
        • Kowalewski K.F.
        • Nickel F.
        • et al.
        Systematic reviews in surgery-recommendations from the study center of the German Society of surgery.
        Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 2021; 406: 1723-1731
        • Slim K.
        • Nini E.
        • Forestier D.
        • Kwiatkowski F.
        • Panis Y.
        • Chipponi J.
        Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument.
        ANZ J Surg. 2003; 73: 712-716
        • Atkins D.
        • Best D.
        • Briss P.A.
        • Eccles M.
        • Falck-Ytter Y.
        • Flottorp S.
        • et al.
        Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.
        BMJ. 2004; 328: 1490
        • Pereira F.
        • Herrera J.
        • Mora N.P.
        • Nuño J.
        • Turrión V.S.
        • Vicente E.
        • et al.
        Preservation of the recipient inferior vena cava in liver transplantation.
        Transpl Int. 1994; 7 (official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation): S150-S151
        • Salizzoni M.
        • Andorno E.
        • Bossuto E.
        • Cerutti E.
        • Livigni S.
        • Lupo F.
        • et al.
        Piggyback techniques versus classical technique in orthotopic liver transplantation: a review of 75 cases.
        Transplant Proc. 1994; 26: 3552-3553
        • Stieber A.C.
        One surgeons experience with the piggyback versus the standard technique in orthotopic liver-transplantation - IS one better than the other.
        Hepato-Gastroenterology. 1995; 42: 403-405
        • Hesse U.J.
        • Defreyne L.
        • Pattyn P.
        • Kerremans I.
        • Berrevoet F.
        • de Hemptinne B.
        Hepato-venous outflow complications following orthotopic liver transplantation with various techniques for hepato-venous reconstruction in adults and children.
        Transpl Int. 1996; 9 (official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation): S182-S184
        • Lerut J.P.
        • Molle G.
        • Donataccio M.
        • DeKock M.
        • Ciccarelli O.
        • Laterre P.F.
        • et al.
        Cavocaval liver transplantation without venovenous bypass and without temporary portocaval shunting: the ideal technique for adult liver grafting?.
        Transpl Int. 1997; 10: 171-179
        • Busque S.
        • Esquivel C.O.
        • Concepcion W.
        • So S.K.S.
        Experience with the piggyback technique without caval occlusion in adult orthotopic liver transplantation.
        Transplantation. 1998; 65: 77-82
        • González F.X.
        • García-Valdecasas J.C.
        • Grande L.
        • Pacheco J.L.
        • Cugat E.
        • Fuster J.
        • et al.
        Vena cava vascular reconstruction during orthotopic liver transplantation: a comparative study.
        Liver Transplant Surg. 1998; 4 (official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society): 133-140
        • Carvalho E.M.
        • Massarollo P.C.B.
        • Isern M.R.M.
        • Toledo N.S.
        • Kawacama J.
        • Mies S.
        • et al.
        Pulmonary evolution in conventional liver transplantation with venovenous bypass and the piggyback method.
        Transplant Proc. 1999; 31: 3064-3066
        • Gerber D.A.
        • Passannante A.
        • Zacks S.
        • Johnson M.W.
        • Shrestha R.
        • Fried M.
        • et al.
        Modified piggyback technique for adult orthotopic liver transplantation.
        J Am Coll Surg. 2000; 191: 585-589
        • Golfieri R.
        • Giampalma E.
        • Labate A.M.M.
        • d'Arienzo P.
        • Jovine E.
        • Grazi G.L.
        • et al.
        Pulmonary complications of liver transplantation: radiological appearance and statistical evaluation of risk factors in 300 cases.
        Eur Radiol. 2000; 10: 1169-1183
        • Hesse U.J.
        • Berrevoet F.
        • Troisi R.
        • Pattyn P.
        • Mortier E.
        • Decruyenaere J.
        • et al.
        Hepato-venous reconstruction in orthotopic liver transplantation with preservation of the recipients' inferior vena cava and veno-venous bypass.
        Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 2000; 385: 350-356
        • Reddy K.S.
        • Johnston T.D.
        • Putnam L.A.
        • Isley M.
        • Ranjan D.
        Piggyback technique and selective use of veno-venous bypass in adult orthotopic liver transplantation.
        Clin Transplant. 2000; 14: 370-374
        • Shokouh-Amiri M.H.
        • Gaber A.O.
        • Bagous V.A.
        • Grewal H.P.
        • Hathaway D.K.
        • Vera S.R.
        • et al.
        Choice of surgical technique influences perioperative outcomes in liver transplantation.
        Ann Surg. 2000; 231: 814-821
        • Gerunda G.E.
        • Merenda R.
        • Neri D.
        • Barbazza F.
        • Di Marzio E.
        • Zangrandi F.
        • et al.
        Liver transplantation with vena cava in situ and selective use of temporary portacaval shunt or portal clamping.
        Hepato-Gastroenterology. 2001; 48: 486-492
        • Leonardi L.S.
        • Boin I.
        • Leonardi M.I.
        • Tercioti V.
        Ascites after liver transplantation and inferior vena cava reconstruction in the piggyback technique.
        Transplant Proc. 2002; 34: 3336-3338
        • Zieniewicz K.
        • Krawczyk M.
        • Nyckowski P.
        • Pawlak J.
        • Michalowicz B.
        • Paluszkiewicz R.
        • et al.
        Liver transplantation: comparison of the classical orthotopic and piggyback techniques.
        Transplant Proc. 2002; 34: 625-627
        • Cabezuelo J.B.
        • Ramirez P.
        • Acosta F.
        • Torres D.
        • Sansano T.
        • Pons J.A.
        • et al.
        Does the standard vs piggyback surgical technique affect the development of early acute renal failure after orthotopic liver transplantation?.
        Transplant Proc. 2003; 35: 1913-1914
        • Moreno-Gonzalez E.
        • Meneu-Diaz J.G.
        • Fundora Y.
        • Ortega P.
        • Elola-Olaso A.M.
        • Garcia I.G.
        • et al.
        Advantages of the piggy back technique on intraoperative transfusion, fluid compsumption, and vasoactive drugs requirements in liver transplantation: a comparative study.
        Transplant Proc. 2003; 35: 1918-1919
        • Barshes N.R.
        • Lee T.
        • Kiliç M.
        • Goss J.A.
        Reconstruction of the hepatic venous outflow in piggyback liver transplantation.
        Exp Clin Transpl. 2004; 2 (official journal of the Middle East Society for Organ Transplantation): 189-195
        • Khan S.
        • Silva M.A.
        • Tan Y.M.
        • John A.
        • Gunson B.
        • Buckels J.A.C.
        • et al.
        Conventional versus piggyback technique of caval implantation; without extra-corporeal veno-venous bypass. A comparative study.
        Transpl Int. 2006; 19: 795-801
        • Mangus R.S.
        • Fridell J.A.
        • Vianna R.M.
        • Matos J.
        • Jones D.
        • Tector A.J.
        Use of the piggyback hepatectomy technique in liver transplant recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
        Hepatology. 2006; 44 (397A-A)
        • Remiszewski P.
        • Zieniewicz K.
        • Krawczyk M.
        Early results of orthotopic liver transplantations using the technique of inferior vena cava anastomosis.
        Transplant Proc. 2006; 38: 237-239
        • Khanmoradi K.
        • Defaria W.
        • Nishida S.
        • Levi D.
        • Kato T.
        • Moon J.
        • et al.
        Infrahepatic vena cavocavostomy, a modification of the piggyback technique for liver transplantation.
        Am Surg. 2009; 75: 421-425
        • Sakai T.
        • Matsusaki T.
        • Marsh J.W.
        • Hilmi I.A.
        • Planinsic R.M.
        Comparison of surgical methods in liver transplantation: retrohepatic caval resection withTransplant Dir venovenous bypass (VVB) versus piggyback (PB) with VVB versus PB without VVB.
        Transpl Int. 2010; 23: 1247-1258
        • de Melo P.S.V.
        • Miranda L.E.C.
        • Batista L.L.
        • Neto O.
        • Amorim A.G.
        • Sabat B.D.
        • et al.
        Orthotopic liver transplantation without venovenous bypass using the conventional and piggyback techniques.
        Transplant Proc. 2011; 43: 1327-1333
        • Lai Q.
        • Nudo F.
        • Molinaro A.
        • Mennini G.
        • Spoletini G.
        • Melandro F.
        • et al.
        Does caval reconstruction technique affect early graft function after liver transplantation? A preliminary analysis.
        Transplant Proc. 2011; 43: 1103-1106
        • Grąt M.
        • Kornasiewicz O.
        • Lewandowski Z.
        • Skalski M.
        • Zieniewicz K.
        • Pączek L.
        • et al.
        The impact of surgical technique on the results of liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
        Ann Transplant. 2013; 18: 448-459
        • Ghazaly M.
        • Davidson B.R.
        Conventional versus piggyback techniques: do they have different outcomes?.
        Prog Transplant. 2014; 24: 51-55
        • Nikeghbalian S.
        • Toutouni M.N.
        • Salahi H.
        • Aliakbarian M.
        • Malekhosseini S.A.
        A comparative study of the classic and piggyback techniques for orthotopic liver transplantation.
        Electron Physician. 2014; 6: 741-746
        • Schmitz V.
        • Schoening W.
        • Jelkmann I.
        • Globke B.
        • Pascher A.
        • Bahra M.
        • et al.
        Different cava reconstruction techniques in liver transplantation: piggyback versus cava resection.
        Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2014; 13: 242-249
        • De la Serna S.
        • Llado L.
        • Ramos E.
        • Fabregat J.
        • Baliellas C.
        • Busquets J.
        • et al.
        Technical options for outflow reconstruction in domino liver transplantation: a single European center experience.
        Liver Transplant. 2015; 21: 1051-1055
        • Chan T.
        • DeGirolamo K.
        • Chartier-Plante S.
        • Buczkowski A.K.
        Comparison of three caval reconstruction techniques in orthotopic liver transplantation: a retrospective review.
        Am J Surg. 2017; 213: 943-949
        • Barbas A.S.
        • Levy J.
        • Mulvihill M.S.
        • Goldaracena N.
        • Dib M.J.
        • Al-Adra D.P.
        • et al.
        Liver transplantation without venovenous bypass: does surgical approach matter?.
        Transplantation direct. 2018; 4: e348
        • Widmer J.D.
        • Schlegel A.
        • Ghazaly M.
        • Davidson B.R.
        • Imber C.
        • Sharma D.
        • et al.
        Piggyback or cava replacement: which implantation technique protects liver recipients from acute kidney injury and complications?.
        Liver Transplant. 2018; 24: 1746-1756
        • Hannon V.
        • Kothari R.P.
        • Zhang L.
        • Bokoch M.P.
        • Hill R.
        • Roll G.R.
        • et al.
        The association between vena cava implantation technique and acute kidney injury after liver transplantation.
        Transplantation. 2020; 104: E308-E316
        • Lee T.C.
        • Dhar V.K.
        • Cortez A.R.
        • Morris M.C.
        • Winer L.K.
        • Silski L.S.
        • et al.
        Impact of side-to-side cavocavostomy versus traditional piggyback implantation in liver transplantation.
        Surgery. 2020; 168: 1060-1065
        • Massarollo P.C.B.
        • Coelho F.F.
        • Brescia M.D.G.
        • Baia C.E.S.
        • Lallee M.P.
        • de Almeida M.D.
        • et al.
        Long-term outcome of a modified piggyback liver transplantation technique using the Recipient?s right and middle hepatic veins.
        Transplant Proc. 2020; 52: 1308-1311
        • Shaw Jr., B.W.
        • Martin D.J.
        • Marquez J.M.
        • Kang Y.G.
        • Bugbee Jr., A.C.
        • Iwatsuki S.
        • et al.
        Venous bypass in clinical liver transplantation.
        Ann Surg. 1984; 200: 524-534
        • Tayar C.
        • Kluger M.D.
        • Laurent A.
        • Cherqui D.
        Optimizing outflow in piggyback liver transplantation without caval occlusion: the three-vein technique.
        Liver Transplant. 2011; 17 (official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society): 88-92
        • Cherqui D.
        • Lauzet J.Y.
        • Rotman N.
        • Duvoux C.
        • Dhumeaux D.
        • Julien M.
        • et al.
        Orthotopic liver transplantation with preservation of the caval and portal flows. Technique and results in 62 cases.
        Transplantation. 1994; 58: 793-796
        • Czigany Z.
        • Scherer M.N.
        • Pratschke J.
        • Guba M.
        • Nadalin S.
        • Mehrabi A.
        • et al.
        Technical aspects of orthotopic liver transplantation-a Survey-based study within the Eurotransplant, Swisstransplant, Scandiatransplant, and British transplantation Society networks.
        J Gastrointest Surg. 2019; 23 (official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract): 529-537
        • Donohue C.I.
        • Mallett S.V.
        Reducing transfusion requirements in liver transplantation.
        World J Transplant. 2015; 5: 165-182
        • Rana A.
        • Petrowsky H.
        • Kaplan B.
        • Jie T.
        • Porubsky M.
        • Habib S.
        • et al.
        Early liver retransplantation in adults.
        Transpl Int. 2014; 27 (official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation): 141-151
        • Moon H.H.
        • Kim T.S.
        • Song S.
        • Shin M.
        • Chung Y.J.
        • Lee S.
        • et al.
        Early Vs late liver retransplantation: different characteristics and prognostic factors.
        Transplant Proc. 2018; 50: 2668-2674
        • Piardi T.
        • Lhuaire M.
        • Bruno O.
        • Memeo R.
        • Pessaux P.
        • Kianmanesh R.
        • et al.
        Vascular complications following liver transplantation: a literature review of advances in 2015.
        World J Hepatol. 2016; 8: 36-57
        • Hampe T.
        • Dogan A.
        • Encke J.
        • Mehrabi A.
        • Schemmer P.
        • Schmidt J.
        • et al.
        Biliary complications after liver transplantation.
        Clin Transplant. 2006; 20: 93-96
        • Kochhar G.
        • Parungao J.M.
        • Hanouneh I.A.
        • Parsi M.A.
        Biliary complications following liver transplantation.
        World J Gastroenterol. 2013; 19: 2841-2846
        • Niewińsk G.
        • Raszeja-Wyszomirska J.
        • Główczyńska R.
        • Figiel W.
        • Zając K.
        • Kornasiewicz O.
        • et al.
        Risk factors of prolonged ICU stay in liver transplant recipients in a single-center experience.
        Transplant Proc. 2018; 50: 2014-2017
        • Kitano Y.
        • Pietrasz D.
        • Fernandez-Sevilla E.
        • Golse N.
        • Vibert E.
        • Sa Cunha A.
        • et al.
        Subjective difficulty Scale in liver transplantation: a prospective observational study.
        Transpl Int. 2022; 35 (official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation)10308
        • Panaro F.
        • Boisset G.
        • Chanques G.
        • Guiu B.
        • Herrero A.
        • Bouyabrine H.
        • et al.
        Vena cava encirclement predicts difficult native hepatectomy.
        Liver Transplant. 2016; 22 (official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society): 906-913
        • Lee L.Y.
        • Foley D.P.
        Technical aspects of orthotopic liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma.
        Surg Clin. 2016; 96: 269-281
        • Levesque E.
        • Duclos J.
        • Ciacio O.
        • Adam R.
        • Castaing D.
        • Vibert E.
        Influence of larger graft weight to recipient weight on the post-liver transplantation course.
        Clin Transplant. 2013; 27: 239-247
        • Allard M.A.
        • Lopes F.
        • Frosio F.
        • Golse N.
        • Sa Cunha A.
        • Cherqui D.
        • et al.
        Extreme large-for-size syndrome after adult liver transplantation: a model for predicting a potentially lethal complication.
        Liver Transplant. 2017; 23 (official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society): 1294-1304
        • Miarka M.
        • Gibiński K.
        • Kotulski M.
        • Zając K.
        • Chmielewska M.
        • Wardeńska B.
        • et al.
        Liver volume: a point of no return in liver transplantation?.
        Pol Arch Intern Med. 2020; 130: 622-628
        • Khoshpouri P.
        • Habibabadi R.R.
        • Hazhirkarzar B.
        • Ameli S.
        • Ghadimi M.
        • Ghasabeh M.A.
        • et al.
        Imaging features of primary sclerosing cholangitis: from diagnosis to liver transplant follow-up.
        Radiographics. 2019; 39 (a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc): 1938-1964
        • Addeo P.
        • Schaaf C.
        • Noblet V.
        • Faitot F.
        • Lebas B.
        • Mahoudeau G.
        • et al.
        The learning curve for piggyback liver transplantation: identifying factors challenging surgery.
        Surgery. 2021; 169: 974-982
        • Mehta R.I.
        • Mitchell D.G.
        • Kayler L.
        • Doria C.
        • Bergin D.
        • Parker L.
        Inferior vena cava encirclement by caudate lobe hypertrophy: evaluation by MRI and CT and its impact on caval preservation during orthotopic liver transplantation.
        Abdom Imag. 2010; 35: 322-327
        • Polak W.G.
        • Nemes B.A.
        • Miyamoto S.
        • Peeters P.M.
        • de Jong K.P.
        • Porte R.J.
        • et al.
        End-to-side caval anastomosis in adult piggyback liver transplantation.
        Clin Transplant. 2006; 20: 609-616
        • Belghiti J.
        • Ettorre G.M.
        • Durand F.
        • Sommacale D.
        • Sauvanet A.
        • Jerius J.T.
        • et al.
        Feasibility and limits of caval-flow preservation during liver transplantation.
        Liver Transplant. 2001; 7 (official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society): 983-987
        • Lerut J.
        • Ciccarelli O.
        • Roggen F.
        • Laterre P.F.
        • Danse E.
        • Goffette P.
        • et al.
        Cavocaval adult liver transplantation and retransplantation without venovenous bypass and without portocaval shunting: a prospective feasibility study in adult liver transplantation.
        Transplantation. 2003; 75: 1740-1745
        • Laroche S.
        • Maulat C.
        • Kitano Y.
        • Golse N.
        • Azoulay D.
        • Sa Cunha A.
        • et al.
        Initial piggyback technique facilitates late liver retransplantation - a retrospective monocentric study.
        Transpl Int. 2021; 34 (official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation): 835-843
        • Gurusamy K.S.
        • Koti R.
        • Pamecha V.
        • Davidson B.R.
        Veno-venous bypass versus none for liver transplantation.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; Cd007712
        • Shaker T.M.
        • Eason J.D.
        • Davidson B.R.
        • Barth R.N.
        • Pirenne J.
        • Imventarza O.
        • et al.
        Which cava anastomotic techniques are optimal regarding immediate and short- term outcomes after liver transplantation - a systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.
        Clin Transplant. 2022; e14681
        • Sun K.
        • Hong F.
        • Wang Y.
        • Agopian V.G.
        • Yan M.
        • Busuttil R.W.
        • et al.
        Venovenous bypass is associated with a lower incidence of acute kidney injury after liver transplantation in patients with compromised pretransplant renal function.
        Anesth Analg. 2017; 125: 1463-1470
        • Fonouni H.
        • Mehrabi A.
        • Soleimani M.
        • Müller S.A.
        • Büchler M.W.
        • Schmidt J.
        The need for venovenous bypass in liver transplantation.
        HPB. 2008; 10 (the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association): 196-203
        • Grande L.
        • Rimola A.
        • Cugat E.
        • Alvarez L.
        • García-Valdecasas J.C.
        • Taurá P.
        • et al.
        Effect of venovenous bypass on perioperative renal function in liver transplantation: results of a randomized, controlled trial.
        Hepatology. 1996; 23: 1418-1428