Trial reportPloS one2015
Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Hepatic Venous Outflow and Renal Function after Conventional versus Piggyback Liver Transplantation.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01707810 (Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing the Clinical Efficiency of Conventional Versus Piggyback Method in Venous Drainage of the Transplanted Liver), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing the Clinical Efficiency of Conventional Versus Piggyback Method in Venous Drainage of the Transplanted Liver
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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.Clinical transplantation · 2022Pooled it
- Can Intraoperative Anesthesiological Management Reduce the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury After Liver Transplantation? A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Influence of portal hypertension-associated upper gastrointestinal bleeding and acute kidney injury on liver transplantation prognosis.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2025Article
- The effects of venovenous bypass use in liver transplantation with piggyback technique: a propensity score-weighted analysis.Internal and emergency medicine · 2024Observational
- Risk Factors for the Incidence and Severity of Acute Kidney Injury After Liver Transplantation.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Technical Aspects of Orthotopic Liver Transplantation-a Survey-Based Study Within the Eurotransplant, Swisstransplant, Scandiatransplant, and British Transplantation Society Networks.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019Article
- Intraoperative Hepatic Blood Inflow Can Predict Early Acute Kidney Injury following DCD Liver Transplantation: A Retrospective Observational Study.BioMed research international · 2019Observational
- Liver Transplantation Without Venovenous Bypass: Does Surgical Approach Matter?Transplantation direct · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis randomized prospective clinical trial compared the hepatic venous outflow drainage and renal function after conventional with venovenous bypass (n = 15) or piggyback (n = 17) liver transplantation.
methodsFree hepatic vein pressure (FHVP) and central venous pressure (CVP) measurements were performed after graft reperfusion. Postoperative serum creatinine (Cr) was measured daily on the first week and on the 14th, 21st and 28th postoperative days (PO). The prevalence of acute renal failure (ARF) up to the 28th PO was analyzed by RIFLE-AKIN criteria. A Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) approach was used for comparison of longitudinal measurements of renal function.
resultsFHVP-CVP gradient > 3 mm Hg was observed in 26.7% (4/15) of the patients in the conventional group and in 17.6% (3/17) in the piggyback group (p = 0.68). Median FHVP-CVP gradient was 2 mm Hg (0-8 mmHg) vs. 3 mm Hg (0-7 mm Hg) in conventional and piggyback groups, respectively (p = 0.73). There is no statistically significant difference between the conventional (1/15) and the piggyback (2/17) groups regarding massive ascites development (p = 1.00). GEE estimated marginal mean for Cr was significantly higher in conventional than in piggyback group (2.14 ± 0.26 vs. 1.47 ± 0.15 mg/dL; p = 0.02). The conventional method presented a higher prevalence of severe ARF during the first 28 PO days (OR = 3.207; 95% CI, 1.010 to 10.179; p = 0.048).
conclusionPatients submitted to liver transplantation using conventional or piggyback methods present similar results regarding venous outflow drainage of the graft. Conventional with venovenous bypass technique significantly increases the harm of postoperative renal dysfunction.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01707810.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.