• Transplant. Proc. · Aug 2003

    Comparative Study

    Advantages of the piggy back technique on intraoperative transfusion, fluid compsumption, and vasoactive drugs requirements in liver transplantation: a comparative study.

    • E Moreno-Gonzalez, J G Meneu-Diaz, Y Fundora, P Ortega, A Moreno Elola-Olaso, I García García, C Jimenez Romero, C Loinaz, R Gomez Sanz, and M Abradelo.
    • Service of General, Digestive and Abdominal Organs Transplantation, University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
    • Transplant. Proc. 2003 Aug 1;35(5):1918-9.

    IntroductionThe piggyback technique was first described in adult liver transplantation in 1989, although it has been used in conjunction with venous bypass, with cross-clamping the vena cava, or both. In this study, the inferior vena cava was not occluded at any time during the liver transplant.ObjectiveWe compared the use of intraoperative blood products, fluid requirements, and vasoactive drugs among patients managed with bypass, without bypass, and with the piggyback technique.Material And MethodsBetween May 1986 and October 2002, 875 liver transplants included 50 patients divided into three groups (cases considered to be the preliminary series on each group): group A/piggyback (17 patients:34%), group B/ bypass (16 patients: 32%), and group C/no bypass (17 patients:34%). There were no differences in mean age, gender, UNOS or Child-Pugh score, and indications for liver transplantation.ResultsMean follow up was 134.63+/-32.19 months. At the end of the study, 91.3% of the patients are alive with no operative mortality. There were no differences in postoperative complications, postreperfusion syndrome rate, and postoperative renal failure. However, the number of packed red blood cell units consumed intraoperatively (12+/-7.43 vs 18.03+/-11.46 vs 17.59 +/- 23.8; P =.043), the need for intraoperative crystaloids (3.1 L+/-1.6 vs 6.8+/-4.8 vs 9.1 L+/-3.6; P=.001) and the requirement for vasoactive drugs (18% vs 38% vs 24%; P=.043) was notably lower in group A vs group B vs group C. Operative time was longer in group A (121.54+/-37.77 vs 78.73+/-11.89 vs 87.07+/-14.33 minutes).ConclusionsThe piggyback technique requires a longer operative time but offers the advantages of reducing the red blood cell requirements and preventing severe hemodynamic instability by virtue of reducing the need for vasoactive drugs and for a larger volume of intraoperative fluids.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.