Not All Piggybacks Are Equal: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Variation in Anhepatic Transcaval Pressure Gradient and Acute Kidney Injury During Liver Transplant

Le résumé fourni par la source

OBJECTIVES: Complete inferior vena cava clamping in cavalreplacement during livertransplantis associated with substantial physiological derangement and postoperative morbidity. Partial clamping in the piggyback technique may be relatively protective, but evidence is lacking. Having observed substantial variation in transhepatic inferior vena cava pressure gradient with piggyback, we hypothesized that the causative mechanism is the extent of caval clamping rather than the surgical approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used internal jugular and femoral catheters to estimate suprahepatic and infrahepatic inferior vena cava pressures during clamping. Pressure gradients were calculated, and distributions were compared by surgical technique. We estimated adjusted odds ratios for pressure gradient on acute kidney injury at 72 hours. RESULTS: In 115 case records, we observed substantial variation in maximum pressure gradient; median values were 18.0 mm Hg(interquartile range, 8.0-25.0 mm Hg) with the piggyback technique and 24.0 mm Hg (interquartile range, 19.5-27.0 mm Hg) with caval replacement. Incidence of acute kidney injury was 25% (29 patients). Pressure gradient was linearly associated with probability of acute kidney injury (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.13). CONCLUSIONS: We report 2 novel findings. (1) Anhepatic inferior vena cavapressuregradient variedsubstantially in individuals undergoing piggyback, and (2) gradient was positively associatedwith early acute kidney injury. We hypothesize that this (unmeasured) variation explains the conflictingfindings ofprevious studies that compared surgical techniques. Also, we propose that caval pressure gradient could be routinely assessed to optimize real-time piggyback clamp position during livertransplant surgery.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.