ArticleWorld journal of transplantation2025
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of aorto-hepatic conduits in liver transplant: Known knowns and known unknowns.
Article in World journal of transplantation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAorto-hepatic conduits (AHCs) are an effective revascularization method for liver allografts when the native hepatic artery is unusable. Various studies have confirmed that outcomes with AHCs are inferior to those with native hepatic artery inflow.
aimTo investigate the published evidence on the outcomes according to different inflow site for AHCs.
methodsA systematic search was conducted for studies reporting on AHCs in liver transplantation over the last 10 years (January 2014 onwards). Two independent reviewers selected articles, assessed quality, and evaluated bias in the included systematic reviews. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024545810). Review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement standards.
resultsFourteen studies identified a total of 32486 deceased donor liver transplants, of which 1136 (3.5%) required AHCs. The most frequent indications for AHC use included poor arterial flow, intimal dissections, and hepatic artery thrombosis. Among all AHCs, 207 (18.2%) were supra-coeliac (SC) AHCs, 738 (65.0%) infra-renal (IR) AHCs, 25 (2.2%) iliac artery conduits, and 166 (14.6%) had unspecified origins. Pooled analysis revealed comparable demographic characteristics. The median follow-up duration ranged from 18 to 52 months. There were no significant differences in early occlusions of AHCs [odds ratio (OR) = 0.94 (0.48, 1.84);
conclusionConsidering these findings, there is no significant difference in early and late outcomes between SC and IR AHCs, although there is a discernible tendency towards higher late occlusion rates in the IR group.
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.