Objectives: In right lobe living donor liver transplant, proper reconstruction of the segment 5 vein and segment 8 vein is essential. Herein, we compared 2 different techniques for segment 5 vein reconstruction.
Materials and methods: This prospective nonrandomized study included all recipients of modified right lobe living donor liver transplant who had reconstruction of the segment 5 vein, with or without segment 8 veins, from October 2018 to October 2021. Patients were grouped into group A (classical technique) and group B (modified technique). For group A, the segment 5 (and segment 8, if present) vein was anastomosed in an end-to-side fashion to a polytetrafluoroethylene synthetic graft positioned parallel to the cut surface of the liver graft; then, during implant, its proximal end was anastomosed to recipient's middle hepatic or middle-left hepatic veins unified orifice. In group B (modified technique), the stumps of segment 5 (and segment 8 if present) were anastomosed in an end-to-end fashion to 2 different polytetrafluoroethylene grafts; then during implant, the other ends of the segment 5 grafts were anastomosed directly to the inferior vena cava. Postoperative segment 5 vein patency and graft recovery were compared.
Results: Forty patients were included: 22 in group A and 18 group B. There were no significant differences in the demographic data or characteristics of donors, grafts, and recipients between the groups. There was better patency in segment 5 synthetic grafts in group A at all time points compared with group B, but this difference was statistically significant only at 1 month (18 [81.8%] vs 9 [50%, respectively; P = .046).There was no statistically significant difference in the markers of graft recovery in both groups.
Conclusions: Reconstruction of the segment 5 vein by polytetrafluoroethylene synthetic graft in a fashion to resemble the native middle hepatic vein in modified right lobe living donor liver transplant has better patency than anastomosis of the segment 5 vein in an end-to-end fashion to the synthetic graft and then to the inferior vena cava. Both techniques did not affect graft recovery.