Does surgical technique matter? Comparing intraoperative outcomes and hemodynamic stability between classical and piggyback liver transplantation

: Classical and piggyback techniques had their own advantages and disadvantages. With some technique modifications, we would like to assess its impact during the operation. : To compare the impact of surgical techniques on Post-reperfusion Syndrome (PRS) and blood loss, ischemic time between our modified classical and piggyback techniques in deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). : A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 40 patients undergoing DDLT at Viet Duc university hospital from January 2024 to June 2025. Patients were categorized into two groups: Modified classical technique without veno-veno bypass (n=21) and Piggyback technique (n=19). Key outcomes included the incidence of PRS and intraoperative factors such as ischemia times, blood loss and transfusion requirements. : Post-reperfusion hemodynamic disturbances were observed in 60% of the total patients. In the classical group, though higher MELD scores (21.43 ± 12.37 vs. 13.58 ± 9.58, p = 0.032), the operation time and anhepatic time were shorter respectively (360.0 ± 59.3 vs 433.2 ± 66.2 mins, and 21.5 ± 2.4 vs. 37.2 ± 9.7 mins, p < 0.001). 55% of patients experienced significant hypotension, 42.5% developed bradycardia, and 12.5% asystole. The modified classical group exhibited a significantly higher rate of hemodynamic disturbances compared to the piggyback group (90.5% vs. 26.3%, p < 0.001). Notably, 100% of Child-Pugh C patients experienced PRS, regardless of techniques. MELD score, anhepatic time, blood loss, Child-Pugh and technique was correlated with hemodynamic disturbance (p<0.05). : The modified classical technique optimizes surgical efficiency by reducing operative time, anhepatic time, and blood loss compared to the piggyback approach. However, these benefits are offset by a significantly higher incidence of severe hemodynamic instability and post-reperfusion syndrome. Consequently, further technical refinements and enhanced anesthetic strategies are imperative to balance procedural advantages with cardiovascular safety.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Liver Transplantation
Published
2026-02-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.liver.2026.100334
Primary Topic
Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does surgical technique matter? Comparing intraoperative outcomes and hemodynamic stability between classical and piggyback liver transplantation

Khai Ninh Viet, Phuong Tran Ha, Nghia Nguyen Quang, Nguyen Duc Thien et al.
Journal of Liver Transplantation
Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
article

Does surgical technique matter? Comparing intraoperative outcomes and hemodynamic stability between classical and piggyback liver transplantation

Khai Ninh Viet, Phuong Tran Ha, Nghia Nguyen Quang, Nguyen Duc Thien, Tuan Hoang, Hung Duong Duc, Thao Ngo Van, Nuong Tran Thi, Dinh Ngo Manh, Dung Tran Dinh, Dang Do Hai, Quang Dang Tuan, Dung Dao Thi Kim
article en

Abstract

: Classical and piggyback techniques had their own advantages and disadvantages. With some technique modifications, we would like to assess its impact during the operation. : To compare the impact of surgical techniques on Post-reperfusion Syndrome (PRS) and blood loss, ischemic time between our modified classical and piggyback techniques in deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). : A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 40 patients undergoing DDLT at Viet Duc university hospital from January 2024 to June 2025. Patients were categorized into two groups: Modified classical technique without veno-veno bypass (n=21) and Piggyback technique (n=19). Key outcomes included the incidence of PRS and intraoperative factors such as ischemia times, blood loss and transfusion requirements. : Post-reperfusion hemodynamic disturbances were observed in 60% of the total patients. In the classical group, though higher MELD scores (21.43 ± 12.37 vs. 13.58 ± 9.58, p = 0.032), the operation time and anhepatic time were shorter respectively (360.0 ± 59.3 vs 433.2 ± 66.2 mins, and 21.5 ± 2.4 vs. 37.2 ± 9.7 mins, p < 0.001). 55% of patients experienced significant hypotension, 42.5% developed bradycardia, and 12.5% asystole. The modified classical group exhibited a significantly higher rate of hemodynamic disturbances compared to the piggyback group (90.5% vs. 26.3%, p < 0.001). Notably, 100% of Child-Pugh C patients experienced PRS, regardless of techniques. MELD score, anhepatic time, blood loss, Child-Pugh and technique was correlated with hemodynamic disturbance (p<0.05). : The modified classical technique optimizes surgical efficiency by reducing operative time, anhepatic time, and blood loss compared to the piggyback approach. However, these benefits are offset by a significantly higher incidence of severe hemodynamic instability and post-reperfusion syndrome. Consequently, further technical refinements and enhanced anesthetic strategies are imperative to balance procedural advantages with cardiovascular safety.

Journal of Liver TransplantationVol. 22
Viet Duc Hospital (VN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 47%
Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.