Skip to content

Retrograde Reperfusion Versus Antegrade Liver Transplant Reperfusion

A Propensity Score Matched Pair Analysis of Retrograde Reperfusion Versus Antegrade Liver Transplant Reperfusion

Status
Withdrawn
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03846089
Enrollment
0
Registered
2019-02-19
Start date
2002-01-01
Completion date
2020-02-28
Last updated
2022-04-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Liver Transplant Failure

Brief summary

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed comparing patients that had intra operative antegrade liver reperfusions versus patients that had retrograde liver perfusion.

Detailed description

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed comparing patients that had intra operative antegrade liver reperfusions versus patients that had retrograde liver perfusion. Antegrade Reperfusion(ATR) group: after completing the caval replacement or piggy-back, for IVC anastomosis, Portal vein (PV) anastomosis was done with a running suture as normal fashion, then it was followed by the removal the clamps, starting by the supra hepatic VC, followed by the PV clamp and finally the infrahepatic VC. It was followed by arterial anastomosis and the biliary anastomosis (duct-to-duct if possible). Retrograde group (RETR): after completing the piggyback the IVC was declamped immediately and retrograde low pressure reperfusion of the graft with low oxygenated venous blood was established. Central venous pressure was intended to be higher than in 8 mmHg to enable appropriate retrograde reperfusion in the transplanted liver. Significant venous backflow via portal vein appears immediately after declamping. Venous bleeding from the liver except portal backflow was stopped immediately after declamping the venous anastomosis, as appropriate. Portal vein anastomosis was performed using running suture. It was followed by arterial anastomosis and the biliary anastomosis (duct-to-duct if possible). The endpoints are patient survival and graft survival at 1, 3,5, 10 years post liver transplantation in both groups. To adjust for a selection bias, we will perform a propensity score analysis.

Interventions

PROCEDUREGraft reperfusion

antegrade (forward) or retrograde (backward) blood reperfusion of the liver graft

Sponsors

London Health Sciences Centre
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_CONTROL
Time perspective
RETROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
16 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* all liver transplantations between 1 Jan 2002 and 31 Dec 2005

Exclusion criteria

* liver retransplantation * multiorgan transplantation * ABO incompatible transplantation

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Graft survivalFrom date of transplantation until the date of next transplantation or date of death from any cause, whichever came first, assessed up to 300 monthsAverage length of time the liver graft remains in a living recipient regardless of function

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Patient survivalFrom date of transplantation until the date of death from any cause assessed up to 300 monthsAverage length of time a recipient is alive regardless of presence of the second liver

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026