Randomized controlled trial to evaluate flush and reperfusion techniques in liver transplantation
To determine the impact of different flush and reperfusion techniques on postreperfusion syndrome (PRS) and postoperative graft function, 100 transplants were randomly assigned into four groups as follows: group 1 (n=31), portal vein flush, no vena caval venting; group 2 (n=21), hepatic arterial flu...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Transplantation 1997-02, Vol.63 (3), p.397-403 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | To determine the impact of different flush and reperfusion techniques on postreperfusion syndrome (PRS) and postoperative graft function, 100 transplants were randomly assigned into four groups as follows: group 1 (n=31), portal vein flush, no vena caval venting; group 2 (n=21), hepatic arterial flush, no vena caval venting; group 3 (n=29), portal vein flush with vena caval venting; and group 4 (n=19), hepatic artery flush with vena caval venting. Donor and recipient characteristics were similar. Extensive intraoperative and postoperative monitoring was performed and measurements were documented immediately before reperfusion and at 1, 5, 15, and 30 min after reperfusion. PRS was defined by three criteria: mean arterial pressure (MAP) |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0041-1337 1534-6080 |
DOI: | 10.1097/00007890-199702150-00012 |