Single center experience of 39 patients with preoperative portal vein thrombosis among 404 adult living donor liver transplantations

Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines on liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is a highly complex and challenging field of clinical practice. Although it was originally developed in western countries, it has been further advanced in Asian countries through the use of living donor liver transplantation. This method of transplantation is the only available option in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region due to the lack of deceased organ donation. As a result of this clinical situation, there is a growing need for guidelines that are specific to the Asia-Pacific region. These guidelines provide comprehensive recommendations for evidence-based management throughout the entire process of liver transplantation, covering both deceased and living donor liver transplantation. In addition, the development of these guidelines has been a collaborative effort between medical professionals from various countries in the region. This has allowed for the inclusion of diverse perspectives and experiences, leading to a more comprehensive and effective set of guidelines.

Liver Transplantation for Porto-sinusoidal Vascular Liver Disorder: Long-term Outcome

BACKGROUND

Porto-sinusoidal vascular liver disorder (PSVD) is a rare disease that occasionally requires liver transplantation (LT), despite usually presenting preserved liver function. There remains a paucity of data pertaining to LT in PSVD. The aim was to identify features associated with post-LT outcomes in PSVD.

METHODS

Retrospective multicentre study of 79 patients who received LT for PSVD.

RESULTS

Median post-LT follow-up was 37 (range 1-261) mo. Refractory ascites 24 (30%), hepatic encephalopathy 16 (20%), and hepatopulmonary syndrome 13 (16.3%) were the most frequent indications for LT. Hepatocellular carcinoma was the indication in only 2 patients. Twenty-four patients died, 7 due to liver and 17 to non-liver related causes. Post-LT survival was 82.2%, 80.7%, and 68.6% at 1, 2, and 5 y, respectively. Post-LT survival was significantly better in patients without (n = 58) than in those with a persistent severe PSVD-associated condition (n = 21). Pre-LT hyperbilirubinemia levels and creatinine >100 µmol/L were also independently associated with poor survival. Six patients (7.6%) required a second LT. Recurrence of PSVD was confirmed by liver biopsy in only 1 patient and in 3 further patients it was likely.

CONCLUSIONS

LT in PSVD is associated with an acceptable outcome in the absence of associated severe conditions. However, persistence of a severe associated condition, pre-LT high bilirubin levels, or creatinine >100 µmol/L impact outcome, and these are features that should be considered when evaluating PSVD patients for LT. PSVD recurrence is possible after LT and needs to be explored, at least, in cases of posttransplant portal hypertension.

Preoperative successful thrombectomy and thrombolysis of acute extensive splanchnic venous system and TIPSS thrombosis in a child with Budd-Chiari syndrome-Creating a window to enable living donor liver transplantation

Preoperative extensive PV thrombosis can pose a technical challenge during liver transplantation surgery. Several strategies adopted to mitigate this problem include creation of a superior mesenteric vein-PV jump graft, use of a polytetrafluoroethylene graft, renoportal anastomosis, or cavoportal hemitransposition. Extensive and diffuse thrombosis of the splanchnic venous system may even necessitate multivisceral transplantation. We describe the case of a pediatric patient with Budd-Chiari syndrome and decompensated cirrhosis, who developed extensive thrombosis of the porto-spleno-mesenteric venous system prior to liver transplantation. We used a combination technique of thrombus aspiration by a novel trans-TIPPS approach followed by thrombolysis. Complete preoperative resolution of the extensive thrombosis was achieved. This allowed the creation of a brief window to enable planned LDLT. In prudently selected patients, performing an early mechanical and chemical thrombolysis of an extensive acute splanchnic venous thrombosis can thus help expedite a planned LDLT.

Risk Factors and Outcome of Portal Vein Thrombosis After Laparoscopic and Open Hepatectomy for Primary Liver Cancer: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Post-hepatectomy portal vein thrombosis (PH-PVT) is a severe complication. The risk factors of PH-PVT after laparoscopic and open hepatectomy have not been clarified yet. We aimed to retrospectively investigate the risk factors and outcome of PH-PVT in patients with primary liver cancer.

METHODS

We enrolled 622 consecutive patients who underwent hepatectomy in our hospital between January 2006 and August 2016.

RESULTS

Of 21 patients (3.4%) with PH-PVT, 7 had grade I; 13, grade II; and 1, grade III. The patients with PH-PVT were significantly older than those without PH-PVT. Of the 413 patients who underwent open hepatectomy, those who underwent a major right hepatectomy (4.1%) had a slightly higher incidence of PH-PVT. Of the 209 patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy, those who underwent a left lateral sectionectomy (21.2%) and major right hepatectomy (16.7%) had high incidence rates of PH-PVT. The treatment was only observation in five patients, medication with an antithrombotic drug in 15 patients, and reoperation in one patient. PH-PVT diminished in 17 patients. Cavernous transformation and/or stenosis of the portal vein developed in three patients. The patient with grade III PH-PVT after open right hemihepatectomy underwent reoperation but died of hepatic failure.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that patient age, left lateral sectionectomy were risk factors of PH-PVT. Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy and major right hepatectomy might bring about relatively higher risk of PH-PVT. Major right hepatectomy tends to lead to severe PH-PVT. Careful handling of the PV during hepatectomy and early treatment of PH-PVT are necessary.

Current management of portal vein thrombosis in liver transplantation

Nontumoral portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is present at liver transplantation (LT) in 5-26% of cirrhotic patients, and is known to affect post LT outcomes. Up to 31% of patients who are found to have PVT at the time of LT, would have had PVT at the time of initial listing, but others develop PVT during the waiting period. Adequate screening and treatment of the PVT on the waiting list for LT is thus essential so that a portoportal anastomoses can be performed at the time of LT. Early PVT (Yerdel Grade I/II) can be usually managed by thrombectomy, whereas Grade III PVT may require a jump graft from the superior mesenteric vein to the graft PV. Complete portomesenteric thrombosis is a huge challenge, and sometimes a cause for denying a LT in these patients, with multivisceral transplant being the only alternative. The presence of spontaneous, or previously surgically created portosytemic shunts like the leinorenal shunt, may serve as a good inflow option (renoportal anastomosis) in these patients to establish a physiological reconstruction. Although challenging, good outcomes are possible in patients with complex PVT if the appropriate surgical technique is chosen to ensure portal inflow and resolution of PHT post LT.

Cavoportal Hemitransposition in Liver Transplantation: Toward a More Safe and Efficient Technique

Extended splanchnic venous thrombosis represents a challenge for the liver transplantation (LT) surgeon. In the absence of large venous tributaries, the cavoportal hemitransposition (CPHTr) and the combined liver-intestinal or multivisceral transplantation are the only technical solutions. Because of the reported high morbidity and mortality rates due to infrequent use and a lack of standardization, the former technique has been almost abandoned by the transplant community. A newly designed technique of CPHTr is presented that is based on the combination of an inferior vena cava (IVC)-sparing hepatectomy and large laterolateral cavocaval and end-to-side cavoportal anastomoses separated only by a double vascular stapler line. This technique allows the splanchnic blood to be completely diverted toward the allograft and to eliminate low-flow IVC areas, which possibly lead to complications. The modified CPHTr technique proposed here offers a valuable alternative to much more complex and invasive intestinal transplantation procedures.

Extensive Thrombectomy as a Legitimate Strategy in Living Donor Liver Transplantation With Advanced Portal Vein Thrombosis

Management of portal vein thrombosis (PVT), especially advanced PVT involving the superior mesenteric vein (SMV), in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is challenging. There were 514 adults who underwent LDLT between 2005 and 2018 included in this retrospective study, and PVT was observed in 67 (13.0%) patients. The LDLT recipients with PVT were characterized by increased portal pressure at laparotomy (26.1 ± 6.0 versus 24.3 ± 5.9 mm Hg; P = 0.03) and at closure (16.8 ± 3.9 versus 15.6 ± 3.6 mm Hg; P = 0.02), increased operative blood loss (14.6 ± 29.7 versus 5.7 ± 6.3 L; P < 0.01), and decreased 1-year graft survival (83.5% versus 92.8%; P = 0.04). Among the 18 patients with atrophic or vanished portal vein on pre-LDLT computed tomography, significant portal atrophy was actually observed only in 1 (5.6%) patient during LDLT surgery. For advanced PVT (n = 7) involving SMV in era 1, we performed nonanatomical inflow reconstruction using interposition grafts, resulting in significant inflow problems in 4 (57.1%) patients. Thus, for the patients with advanced PVT (n = 4) in era 2, we abandoned nonanatomical reconstruction and applied extensive thrombectomy under ultrasound guidance with secure shunt ligation, resulting in no inflow problems and no graft loss. In conclusion, even for advanced PVT involving SMV, extensive thrombectomy under sonogram guidance followed by anatomical inflow reconstruction and shunt ligation is a legitimate strategy in adult LDLT with PVT.

Novel classification of non-malignant portal vein thrombosis: A guide to surgical decision-making during liver transplantation

Non-tumoral portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is present at liver transplantation in 5% to 26% of cirrhotic patients, and the prevalence of complex PVT as defined here (grade 4 Yerdel, and grade 3,4 Jamieson and Charco) has been reported in 0% to 2.2%. Adequate portal inflow is mandatory to ensure graft and patient survival after liver transplantation. With time, the proposed classifications of non-tumoral chronic PVT have evolved from being anatomy-based, to also incorporating functional parameters. However, none of the currently proposed classifications are directed towards decision-making, regarding the choice of inflow to the graft during transplantation and the outcomes thereof. The present scoping review i) addresses the limits of the currently available classifications in terms of surgical decisiveness, ii) clarifies the concept of physiological or non-physiological portal inflow reconstruction, and subsequently, iii) proposes a new classification of non-tumoral PVT in candidates for liver transplantation; to help tailor the surgical strategy to an individual patient, in order to provide portal inflow to the graft together with control of prehepatic portal hypertension whenever feasible.

Successful Living-Donor Liver Transplantation With Intraoperative Endovascular Recanalization via Transsplenic Access in a Recipient With Grade III Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Case Report

Extensive portosplenomesenteric thrombosis is regarded as a relative contraindication to liver transplantation because of the complexity of the surgical procedure. This report describes a case of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for a patient with extensive portosplenomesenteric thrombosis, in whom portal flow was successfully restored by intraoperative transplenic portal vein and superior mesenteric vein stenting after surgical thrombectomy. The patient's liver function remained normal with a patent portal vein stent 6 months after LDLT, and Doppler ultrasonography demonstrated a normal wave form for portal flow. To the best of our knowledge, this is the world's first case of endovascular management of the portal vein via percutaneous transsplenic access during LDLT, demonstrating that transsplenic access can be an alternative approach without liver graft injury when the superior mesenteric vein branch and inferior mesenteric vein cannot be used as access routes.

Liver Transplant in Patients With Portal Vein Thrombosis: The Experience of 55 Patients

OBJECTIVES

Portal vein thrombosis is no longer a contraindication for liver transplantation. However, varied outcomes are still reported with regard to patients with complete portal vein thrombosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed data of 505 patients who underwent liver transplant between January 2014 and June 2017. Of 505 patients, 55 (10.9%) had portal vein thrombosis, which included 37 patients (67%) who had living-donor and 18 patients (33%) who had deceased-donor liver transplant. According to Yerdel classification, 5 (9%), 28 (51%), 12 (22%), and 10 patients (18%) had grade I, II, III, and IV portal vein thrombosis, respectively.

RESULTS

Thrombectomy was successful in 46 patients (84%). Forty-three patients had patent portal inflow (93.5%), but 3 patients (6.5%) required a second thrombectomy on day 1 posttransplant. Of 10 patients with grade IV portal vein thrombosis, 9 (16%) underwent extra-anatomic portal vein anastomosis. Of these 9 patients, 7 (77.7%) showed patent portal inflow during the early postoperative period. Median follow-up time was 15.5 ± 13.1 months. During this time, portal vein stenosis was detected in 5 patients. Risk of repeat thrombosis was not significantly different between patients with deceased-donor and patients with living-donor liver transplant. Overall patient survival rates for patients with and without portal vein thrombosis were 73% (40/55) and 84% (376/450), respectively, which showed significant difference (P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to early-grade portal vein thrombosis, complete portal vein thrombosis still provides a treatment challenge with high risk of morbidity and poor early outcomes in liver transplant recipients.

Outcomes of Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Patients with Preoperative Portal Vein Problems

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication for patients with end-stage liver disease. The presence of PVT used to be a contraindication to living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of preoperative PVT on perioperative and long-term outcomes of the recipients after LDLT.

METHODS

We reviewed the data of patients who underwent LDLT during the period between 2004 till 2017.

RESULTS

During the study period, 500 cases underwent LDLT. Patients were divided into three groups. Group I included non-PVT, 446 patients (89.2%); group II included attenuated PV, 26 patients (5.2%); and group III included PVT, 28 patients (5.6%). Higher incidence of hematemesis and encephalopathy was detected in PVT (p = 0.001). Longer anhepatic phase was found in PVT (p = 0.013). There were no significant differences between regarding operation time, blood loss, transfusion requirements, ICU, and hospital stay. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of non-PVT were 80.5%, 77.7%, and 75%, and for attenuated PV were 84.6%, 79.6%, and 73.5%, and for PVT were 88.3%, 64.4%, and 64.4%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding OS rates (logrank 0.793).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative PVT increases the complexity of LDLT operation, but it does not reduce the OS rates of such patients.

Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Patients With Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Single-center Experience

Background

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is associated with several technical challenges for its complicated procedures and poor outcomes. Some institutions still consider preexisting PVT as a relatively contraindication for LDLT.

Methods

Between April 2010 and May 2016, 129 adults underwent LDLT at our institution, and 28 (21.7%) of whom had preexisting PVT. Portal vein thrombosis was diagnosed using preoperative imaging techniques and intraoperative findings. The characteristics and outcomes of the cases were retrospectively evaluated.

Results

The type of PVT included Yerdel grade 1 in 21 (75.0%) cases, grade 2 in 3 (10.7%) cases, and grade 3 in 4 (14.3%) cases. There were no cases of Yerdel grade 4 PVT. After removing thrombus inside the vessel, we performed simple portal vein anastomosis in 25 (89.3%) cases, patch technique with vascular graft in 1 case (3.6%), and an interposition technique with vascular graft in 2 cases (7.1%). Compared with the non-PVT group, cold ischemic time was longer (P = 0.012) and the rate of postoperative PVT was higher (P = 0.001) in PVT group. In the comparison between the recipient without and with postoperative PVT, the existence of preoperative PVT was the independent risk factor in the multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 7.511; 95% confidence interval 1.382-40.820; P = 0.020).

Conclusions

Although it had a technically complicated operation, LDLT could be safely performed in the patients with PVT in our institution.

Portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: diagnosis, natural history, and therapeutic challenges

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a frequent complication in cirrhosis and its prevalence increases with disease severity. Several factors are involved in the development and progression of PVT. The challenge for the management of PVT is the precise evaluation of the bleeding risk as opposed to life-threatening extension of thrombosis. Nevertheless, the impact on the progression and outcome of liver disease is unclear. A critical evaluation of the available data discloses that treating PVT in cirrhotics is safe and effective. However, there are open issues, such as which anticoagulant could represent a safer therapeutic option, and when and for how long this treatment should be administered to cirrhotic patients with PVT.

Significance of measured intraoperative portal vein flows after thrombendvenectomy in deceased donor liver transplantations with portal vein thrombosis

Adequate portal vein (PV) flow in liver transplantation is essential for a good outcome, and it may be compromised in patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). This study evaluated the impact of intraoperatively measured PV flow after PV thrombendvenectomy on outcomes after deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The study included 77 patients over a 16-year period who underwent PV thrombendvenectomy with complete flow data. Patients were classified into 2 groups: high PV flow (>1300 mL/minute; n = 55) and low PV flow (≤1300 mL/minute; n = 22). Postoperative complications and graft survival were analyzed according to the PV flow. The 2 groups were similar in demographic characteristics. Low PV flow was associated with higher cumulative rates of biliary strictures (P = 0.02) and lower 1-, 2-, and 5-year graft survival (89%, 85%, and 68% versus 64%, 55%, and 38%, respectively; P = 0.002). There was no difference in the incidence of postoperative PVT between the groups (1.8% versus 9.1%; P = 0.19). No biliary leaks or hepatic artery thromboses were reported in either group. By multivariate analyses, age >60 years (hazard ratio [HR], 3.04, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-6.82; P = 0.007) and low portal flow (HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.15-4.65; P = 0.02) were associated with worse survival. In conclusion, PV flow <1300 mL/minute after PV thrombendvenectomy for PVT during DDLT was associated with higher rates of biliary strictures and worse graft survival. Consideration should be given to identifying reasons for low flow and performing maneuvers to increase PV flow when intraoperative PV flows are <1300 mL/minute. Liver Transplantation 23 1032-1039 2017 AASLD.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation in a Patient With Extensive Portomesenteric Venous Thrombosis: Case Report

Extensive portomesenteric venous thrombus preventing restoration of adequate portal venous flow used to be considered a contraindication to liver transplantation. The subject was a 49-year-old male with hepatitis B cirrhosis and extensive thrombosis of portal, splenic, and superior mesenteric veins, and two large collateral vessels; one dilated and tortuous inferior to the pancreaticoduodenal vein and relevant to splanchnic venous return and the other a dilated coronary vein relevant to splenic venous return. During operation, the portal vein was anastomosed to these large collateral vessels using cryopreserved iliac vein. In conclusion, portal reconstruction with large collateral vessels in living-donor liver transplantation could be used selectively for patients with extensive portomesenteric venous thrombosis.

Single-center experience of living donor liver transplantation in patients with portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a relative contraindication in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We investigated the long-term outcome of adult patients with PVT in LDLT.

METHODS

Between 2004 and 2009, 471 cases of adult LDLT were performed and 56 patients had PVT (11.8%). Thrombectomy was attempted using a modified eversion technique. We evaluated the outcome of patients with PVT according to grade and compared with no-PVT patients.

RESULTS

There was no difference in terms of age, gender, Child-Pugh score, MELD score, proportion of malignance, operation time, and total amount of transfused blood. Complete thrombectomy was successful in 73.2% (41/56), partial thrombectomy in 26.8% (15/56), and one case needed jump graft for portal vein reconstruction. Among patients with partial thrombectomy, when the PV velocity was above 20 cm/s, the remnant thrombus disappeared in 46%. The rate of PV complication was statistically not different (8.9% vs 3.4%, P=.062). Five-year survival of mild PVT was 69.3%, 60.6% for severe PVT, and 80.4% for no-PVT (P=.059).

CONCLUSIONS

Eversion thrombectomy by modified technique is feasible in most cases of PVT. Good long-term outcome may be expected in LDLT with PVT.

A review of current status of living donor liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become an inevitable procedure in Asia due to its shortage of deceased donor under the influence of the religion and native cultures. Through a broad variety of experience, LDLT has been evolved and extended its indication. Although there have been many surgical and ethical efforts to prevent donor risk, concerns of donor's safety still are remaining questions due to its strict selection criteria. Therefore, dual grafts LDLT or ABO incompatible (ABO-I) LDLT may be effective means in its application and safety aspect. Many Asian LDLT centers have pointed out the useful extended criteria of LDLT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the applicability of extended criteria should be validated and standardized by worldwide prospective studies based on the Milan criteria. Recent struggling efforts have been reported to surmount extensive portal vein thrombosis and Budd-Chiari syndrome which were previously contraindicated to LDLT. There is no doubt that LDLT is a surely complicated therapy to be performed successfully and requires devoted efforts by surgeons and co-workers. Nonetheless, comprehensive increasing understandings of partial graft LT and improvements of surgical techniques with challenges to obstacles in LDLT will make its prosperity with satisfactory outcomes.

Vascular complications after adult living donor liver transplantation: Evaluation with ultrasonography

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been widely used to treat end-stage liver disease with improvement in surgical technology and the application of new immunosuppressants. Vascular complications after liver transplantation remain a major threat to the survival of recipients. LDLT recipients are more likely to develop vascular complications because of their complex vascular reconstruction and the slender vessels. Early diagnosis and treatment are critical for the survival of graft and recipients. As a non-invasive, cost-effective and non-radioactive method with bedside availability, conventional gray-scale and Doppler ultrasonography play important roles in identifying vascular complications in the early postoperative period and during the follow-up. Recently, with the detailed vascular tracing and perfusion visualization, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has significantly improved the diagnosis of postoperative vascular complications. This review focuses on the role of conventional gray-scale ultrasound, Doppler ultrasound and CEUS for early diagnosis of vascular complications after adult LDLT.

[Portal perfusion with right gastroepiploic vein flow in liver transplant]

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation in patients with liver cirrhosis, portal vein thrombosis, and cavernous transformation of the portal vein, is a complex procedure with high possibility of liver graft dysfunction. It is performed in 2-19% of all liver transplants, and has a significantly high mortality rate in the post-operative period. Other procedures to maintain portal perfusion have been described, however there are no reports of liver graft perfusion using right gastroepiploic vein.

CLINICAL CASE

A 20 year-old female diagnosed with cryptogenic cirrhosis, with a Child-Pugh score of 7 points (class "B"), and MELD score of 14 points, with thrombosis and cavernous transformation of the portal vein, severe portal hypertension, splenomegaly, a history of upper gastrointestinal bleeding due to oesophageal varices, and left renal agenesis. The preoperative evaluation for liver transplantation was completed, and the right gastroepiploic vein of 1-cm diameter was observed draining to the infrahepatic inferior vena cava and right suprarenal vein. An orthotopic liver transplantation was performed from a non-living donor (deceased on January 30, 2005) using the Piggy-Back technique. Portal vein perfusion was maintained using the right gastroepiploic vein, and the outcome was satisfactory. The patient was discharged 13 days after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Liver transplantation was performed satisfactorily, obtaining an acceptable outcome. In this case, the portal perfusion had adequate blood flow through the right gastroepiploic vein.

Portal vein aneurysm: What to know

Portal vein aneurysm is an unusual vascular dilatation of the portal vein, which was first described by Barzilai and Kleckner in 1956 and since then less than 200 cases have been reported. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the international literature to better clarify various aspects of this rare nosological entity and provide clear evidence-based summary, when available, of the clinical and surgical management. A systematic literature search of the Pubmed database was performed for all articles related to portal vein aneurysm. All articles published from 1956 to 2014 were examined for a total of 96 reports, including 190 patients. Portal vein aneurysm is defined as a portal vein diameter exceeding 1.9 cm in cirrhotic patients and 1.5 cm in normal livers. It can be congenital or acquired and portal hypertension represents the main cause of the acquired version. Surgical indication is considered in case of rupture, thrombosis or symptomatic aneurysms. Aneurysmectomy and aneurysmorrhaphy are considered in patients with normal liver, while shunt procedures or liver transplantation are the treatment of choice in case of portal hypertension. Being such a rare vascular entity its management should be reserved to high-volume tertiary hepato-biliary centres.

Therapy Algorithm for Portal Vein Thrombosis in Liver Cirrhosis: The Internist's Point of View

BACKGROUND

Treatment of non-malignant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with cirrhosis has been neglected in the past because of the fear of bleeding complications when using anticoagulation and due to the technical difficulties associated with the implantation of the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). However, PVT has a negative impact on outcome and compromises liver transplantation, warranting treatment by using anticoagulation and TIPS.

METHODS

This review considers studies on the treatment of PVT in cirrhosis published in the last 10 years. Unfortunately, many of these studies are limited by their retrospective design and a small sample size.

RESULTS

Anticoagulation using low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or vitamin K antagonists is effective in the treatment of patients with limited and recent PVT, resulting in a recanalization in up to 50% of the patients. TIPS (plus local measures) results in a recanalization of up to 100% and reduces the rebleeding rate considerably in patients with recent or chronic PVT.

CONCLUSION

Based on the presently limited knowledge, a therapy algorithm is suggested favouring the TIPS as a first-line treatment for PVT in patients with symptomatic portal hypertension. Patients with thus far asymptomatic portal hypertension may first receive anticoagulation, preferably using LMWH. If these patients have a condition where anticoagulation is not promising (complete, extended, chronic PVT) or ineffective, or if they are candidates for liver transplantation, the TIPS may be implanted without delay.

Spontaneous bleeding or thrombosis in cirrhosis: What should be feared the most?

The more modern and accurate concept of a rebalanced hemostatic status in cirrhosis is slowly replacing the traditional belief of patients with cirrhosis being “auto-anticoagulated”, prone only to bleeding complications, and protected from thrombotic events. With greater attention to clinical thrombotic events, their impact on the natural history of cirrhosis, and with the emergence and increased use of point-of-care and global assays, it is now understood that cirrhosis results in profound hemostatic alterations that can lead to thrombosis as well as to bleeding complications. Although many clinical decisions are still based on traditional coagulation parameters such as prothrombin (PT), PT, and international normalized ratio, it is increasingly recognized that these tests do not adequately predict the risk of bleeding, nor they should guide pre-emptive interventions. Moreover, altered coagulation tests should not be considered as a contraindication to the use of anticoagulation, although this therapeutic or prophylactic approach is not at present routinely undertaken. Gastroesophageal variceal bleeding continues to be one of the most feared and deadly complications of cirrhosis and portal hypertension, but great progresses have been made in prevention and treatment strategies. Other bleeding sites that are frequently part of end-stage liver disease are similar to clinical manifestations of thrombocytopenia, with gum bleeding and epistaxis being very common but fortunately only rarely a cause of life-threatening bleeding. On the contrary, manifestations of coagulation factor deficiencies like soft tissue bleeding and hemartrosis are rare in patients with cirrhosis. As far as thrombotic complications are concerned, portal vein thrombosis is the most common event in patients with cirrhosis, but venous thromboembolism is not infrequent, and results in important morbidity and mortality in patients with cirrhosis, especially those with decompensated disease. Future studies and the more widespread use of point-of-care tests in evaluating hemostasis will aid the clinician in decision making when facing the patient with bleeding or with thrombotic complications, with both ends of a continuum being potentially fatal.

The friendly incidental portal vein thrombus in liver transplantation

Improved outcomes have been shown in liver transplantation (LT) with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). However, PVT is still discovered incidentally during surgery despite careful preoperative imaging. Data are limited comparing the outcomes of incidental PVT with PVT diagnosed via preoperative imaging before LT. This study aims to compare the overall outcomes of patients with PVT. From 2008 to 2012, 369 patients had LT, and 58 patients with PVT were identified. They were divided into those with non-PVT (group 0; n = 311), preoperatively identified PVT (group 1; n = 28), and incidental PVT (group 2; n = 30). The demographics, characteristics, preoperative assessment, and postoperative outcomes were compared. A survival analysis was also performed. Baseline characteristics and preoperative evaluations of all 3 groups were comparable (P > 0.05) except for Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, tumor status, platelet levels, and serum bilirubin. A multivariate analysis only showed a high serum bilirubin level to be a predictor of PVT (P = 0.004; odds ratio, 3.395; 95% confidence interval, 1.467-7.861). Postoperative outcomes were also comparable (P > 0.05). Compared to group 2, group 1 had more patients with a Yerdel classification of 3 or 4 with more extensive surgical intervention required (P = 0.02). The survival analysis in all 3 groups was comparable with 5-year survival rate of 87.4%, 84.6%, and 91.8% in group 0, 1, and 2, respectively (P = 0.66). In conclusion, recipients with PVT undergoing LT can have similar outcomes as the non-PVT patients even if PVTs were discovered incidentally. Discovery of incidental PVT only requires thrombectomy with no substantial change of treatment strategy, and the outcome is not adversely affected because most incidental PVTs are of a lower Yerdel grade. Preoperative imaging is useful to identify those with a higher Yerdel grade to allow planning of surgical strategy during transplantation.

Portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: Controversies and latest developments

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is encountered in liver cirrhosis, particularly in advanced disease. It has been a feared complication of cirrhosis, attributed to significant worsening of liver disease, poorer clinical outcomes and potential inoperability at liver transplantation; also catastrophic events such as acute intestinal ischaemia. Optimal management of PVT has not yet been addressed in any consensus publication. We review current literature on PVT in cirrhosis; its prevalence, pathophysiology, diagnosis, impact on the natural history of cirrhosis and liver transplantation, and management. Studies were identified by a search strategy using MEDLINE and Google Scholar. The incidence of PVT increases with increasing severity of liver disease: less than 1% in well-compensated cirrhosis, 7.4%-16% in advanced cirrhosis. Prevalence in patients undergoing liver transplantation is 5%-16%. PVT frequently regresses instead of uniform thrombus progression. PVT is not associated with increased risk of mortality. Optimal management has not been addressed in any consensus publication. We propose areas for future research to address unresolved clinical questions.

Portal vein reconstruction in adult living donor liver transplantation for patients with portal vein thrombosis in single center experience

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) used to be contraindicated in patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). In comparison to deceased donor LT, living donor LT (LDLT) still presents additional difficulties in determining appropriate vein grafts and overcoming small-for-size syndrome. Here, we introduce our LDLT strategies and assess their outcomes in adult patients with pre-existing PVT.

METHODS

We performed 282 consecutive adult LDLTs between April 2006 and December 2011. Forty-eight patients (17%) had pre-existing PVT (grade I; 15, II; 20, III; 12, IV; 1).

RESULTS

Our preferred treatments for PVT were thrombectomies/thromboendovenectomies in 30 patients, replaced grafts in seven, jump grafts in seven, renoportal anastomosis in one and no surgical intervention owing to minimal thrombosis in three. Post-transplant portal vein complications occurred in eight of 48 (17%) cases, which were treated by surgery, anticoagulation therapy, and/or interventional radiology. Post-transplant survival rates of patients with preexisting PVT at 1 year and 5 years were comparable to a PVT-free cohort (1 year; 81% vs. 77%, 5 years; 81% vs. 73%).

CONCLUSIONS

The excellent survival rates in patients with PVT who underwent LDLT could be attributed to our strategies, which included surgical techniques and timely treatment of postoperative complications.

Living donor liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) continues to evolve, generating interesting issues on the applicability and safety of new techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

Specific selection criteria and standardized surgical techniques with high ethical and medical standards are needed to minimize donor risk. In this aspect, minimally invasive donor hepatectomy has caused controversies. The reproducibility and safety of pure laparoscopic major hepatectomy in LDLT remains uncertain. Therefore, a stepwise approach is needed to avoid unnecessary donor risk. To expand the living donor pool, dual graft and ABO-incompatible LDLT have emerged as well tolerated and effective methods. The extended selection criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma in LDLT appear acceptable to balance donor risk and recipient outcome. However, these criteria should be validated based on the risk-benefit ratio. Despite technical advances, technical challenges persist such as Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis. To address these issues, several innovative surgical techniques have been proposed and have shown promising results.

SUMMARY

LDLT is associated with donor safety concerns, technical complexity, and small-for-size issues. Nonetheless, accumulated experience and technical know-how from large-volume Asian LDLT centers have led to progress in LDLT. Further technical refinement and investigation to overcome the disadvantages of partial grafts will broaden the applicability of LDLT.

Portal vein thrombosis and liver transplantation: implications for waiting list period, surgical approach, early and late follow-up

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a well-known and relatively common complication of liver cirrhosis. In the past, PVT was considered as a contraindication for liver transplantation (LT). To characterize prevalence, risk factors, perioperative management and outcome of PVT in the setting of LT, the English literature published between 1991 and 2011 was reviewed. Of 6807 articles, 280 were selected, and 39 experiences were analyzed in detail (methodology, type and duration of treatments, peri-operative management, strategy to avoid recurrence, strengths and weaknesses, Oxford evidence level, citations). 3/39 studies were prospective; 9/39 were based on prospectively recorded databases; no studies of 1, 2a, 3a level of evidence were present; 5/39 were recognized as level 2b, 23/39 as level 3b, and 8/39 as level 4. High complication rate has been reported with consequent effect on graft and patient survival. Overall, PVT presents today good results similar to those obtained in patients without PVT undergoing LT even if they require a higher transfusion number and a longer ICU/hospital stay. Reported cases were retrospectively stratified according to Yerdel classification. Grade 1-2 patients (76%) do well with eversion thromboendovenectomy, resection of damaged vein and porto-portal anastomosis. Results of patients with grade 3-4 (24%) are inferior, however data on outcome in this subsets are fragmented and do not allow a reliable analysis. Moreover, results obtained in grade 3-4 cases are better in transplant centers with large specific experience. The small number of reports suggests caution. The role of anticoagulant treatment is still debated. Although in cirrhotics with PVT LT remains a demanding procedure, PVT should not be considered a contraindication anymore.

Living donor liver transplantation with alternative porto-left gastric vein anastomosis in patients with post-Kasai extrahepatic portal vein obstruction

EPVO is a common cause of prehepatic portal hypertension in pediatric patients and sometimes results in cavernous transformation of the PV. We herein present the cases of two patients who underwent LDLT for EPVO with post-Kasai biliary atresia. PV reconstruction was performed with a porto-left gastric vein anastomosis. The patient who underwent PV reconstruction using an interposition vein graft is doing well without surgical complications, whereas PV anastomotic stenosis was detected three months after LDLT in the patient who did not receive an interposition vein graft. The availability of vein grafts is limited in the LDLT setting. In such cases, performing PV reconstruction with varicose veins using interposition vein grafts is a feasible and valuable alternative option for obtaining a sufficient portal blood flow. Our experiences suggest that using interposition vein grafts may be appropriate for preventing the anastomotic stenosis caused by the fragility of varicose veins.

Management of nonneoplastic portal vein thrombosis in the setting of liver transplantation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Nonneoplastic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is frequent in patients with cirrhosis who undergo liver transplantation (LT); however, data on its impact on outcome and strategies of management are sparse.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed by analyzing studies that report on PVT in LT recipients and were published between January 1986 and January 2012.

RESULTS

Of 25,753 liver transplants, 2004 were performed in patients with PVT (7.78%), and approximately half presented complete thrombosis. Thrombectomy/thromboendovenectomy was employed in 75% of patients; other techniques included venous graft interposition and portocaval hemitransposition. Overall, the presence of PVT significantly increased 30-day (10.5%) and 1-year (18.8%) post-LT mortality when compared to patients without PVT (7.7% and 15.4%, respectively). However, only complete PVT accounted for this increased mortality. Rethrombosis occurred in up to 13% of patients with complete PVT and in whom no preventative strategies were used, and was associated with increased morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

PVT is common in patients with cirrhosis undergoing LT, and it affects survival when it is complete, at least in the short term after transplant. Therefore, screening for this condition is essential, alongside adequate treatment strategies to attempt repermeation of the PV and prevent thrombosis extension.

Anticoagulation for the treatment of thrombotic complications in patients with cirrhosis

Cirrhotic patients can develop thrombotic complications, which in this group of patients occur with a greater frequency than in the general population. Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is the most common thrombotic phenomenon, although deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism can also occur. Risk factors for thrombosis include inherited and acquired deficiency of factors involved in anticoagulation mechanisms, venous stasis of the portal vein owing to architectural derangement of the liver and possibly local factors related to the endothelium. Clinical manifestations of PVT range from asymptomatic disease to a life-threatening complication, and although it is no longer considered an absolute contraindication for liver transplant, its presence may require challenging surgical techniques, which entail greater morbidity. Anticoagulation therapy is henceforth an important strategy to treat cirrhotic patients with PVT, although experience in this group of patients is limited. Vitamin K antagonists and low-molecular-weight heparin have been used successfully, achieving recanalization of the thrombosed vessel in patients with cirrhosis; however, the precise drug regimen management and monitoring has not be fully explored in this group of patients.

Portal vein thrombosis, cirrhosis, and liver transplantation

Portal vein thrombosis is not uncommon in candidates for transplantation. Partial thrombosis is more common than complete thrombosis. Despite careful screening at evaluation, a number of patients are still found with previously unrecognized thrombosis per-operatively. The objective is to recanalize the portal vein or, if recanalization is not achievable, to prevent the extension of the thrombus so that a splanchnic vein can be used as the inflow vessel to restore physiological blood flow to the allograft. Anticoagulation during waiting time and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) are two options to achieve these goals. TIPS may achieve recanalization in patients with complete portal vein thrombosis. However, a marked impairment in liver function, which is a characteristic feature of most candidates for transplantation, may be a contraindication for TIPS. Importantly, the MELD score is artificially increased by the administration of vitamin K antagonists due to prolonged INR. When patency of the portal vein and/or superior mesenteric vein is not achieved, only non-anatomical techniques (renoportal anastomosis or cavoportal hemitransposition) can be performed. These techniques, which do not fully reverse portal hypertension, are associated with higher morbidity and mortality risks. Multivisceral transplantation including the liver and small bowel needs to be evaluated. In the absence of prothrombotic states that may persist after transplantation, there is no evidence that pre-transplant portal vein thrombosis justifies long term anticoagulation post-transplantation, provided portal flow has been restored through conventional end-to-end portal anastomosis.

Portal vein thrombosis after restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis and sigmoid cancer

Postoperative portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is rare, but has been described after various open as well as minimal access abdominal operations, especially splenectomy and colorectal surgical procedures. We report the case of a 39-year-old female who underwent restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis with sigmoid cancer. She presented 14 days later with vague upper abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting and high output stoma. Doppler ultrasonography confirmed PVT and therefore anticoagulant therapy was started. Her condition improved dramatically and she underwent closure of ileostomy after finishing adjuvant chemotherapy. She remained well at 3-year follow-up with good pouch function and no local or distant recurrence. A high index of suspicion is essential for early diagnosis and prompt treatment of postoperative PVT after restorative proctocolectomy. Early anticoagulation is essential to avoid subsequent complications.

Caval inflow to the graft for liver transplantation in patients with diffuse portal vein thrombosis: a 12-year experience

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the short- and long-term results of cavoportal anastomosis (CPA) and renoportal anastomosis (RPA) in 20 consecutive liver transplantation (LT) candidates with diffuse portal vein thrombosis (PVT).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Caval inflow to the graft (CIG) by CPA or RPA has been the most commonly used salvage technique to overcome the absolute contraindication for LT in case of diffuse PVT.

METHODS

From 1996 to 2009, 3 patients (15%) underwent CPA and 17 patients (85%) had an RPA during LT. In addition to routine follow-up, patients were specifically evaluated for signs of portal hypertension (PHT) and for patency of the anastomoses. The follow-up ranged from 3 months to 12 years (median of 4.5 years).

RESULTS

: Caval inflow to the graft was feasible in all attempted cases. In the short term (<6 months), 35% of patients had residual PHT-related complications (massive ascites and variceal bleeding). These resolved spontaneously or with endoscopic management. Three deaths occurred; none was related to PHT or shunt thrombosis. In the long term (>6 months), 1 death occurred because of recurrent variceal bleeding after RPA thrombosis. At last follow-up, all living patients [n = 13 (65%)] had normal liver function, no signs of PHT and patent anastomoses. There were no retransplantations. Graft and patient survival at 1, 3, and 5 years were 83%, 75%, and 60%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Caval inflow to the graft is an efficacious salvage technique with satisfactory long-term results, considering the spontaneous outcome in patients denied LT because of diffuse PVT. Adequate preoperative management of PHT and its associated complications is vital in obtaining good results. In the long term, residual PHT resolves and the liver function returns to normal.

Portal vein thrombosis and outcomes for pediatric liver transplant candidates and recipients in the United States

The effect of occlusive portal vein thrombosis (PVT) on the mortality of pediatric liver transplant candidates and recipients is poorly defined. Using standard multivariate techniques, we studied the relationship between PVT and waiting-list and posttransplant survival rates with data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (September 2001 to December 2007). In all, 5087 liver transplant candidates and 3630 liver transplant recipients were evaluated during the period. PVT was found in 1.4% of the liver transplant candidates (n = 70) and in 3.7% of the liver transplant recipients (n = 136). PVT was not associated with increased wait-list mortality [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.5-2.4, P = 0.77]. Conversely, PVT patients had a significantly lower unadjusted survival rate in the posttransplant period (P = 0.01). PVT was independently associated with increased posttransplant mortality in multivariate models (30-day survival: HR = 2.9, 95% CI = 1.6-5.3, P = 0.001; overall survival: HR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.1-2.4, P = 0.01). The presence of PVT in pediatric liver candidates was not associated with increased wait-list mortality but was clearly associated with posttransplant mortality, especially in the immediate postoperative period.

An early single-center experience of portal vein thrombosis in living donor liver transplantation: clinical feature, management and outcome

PURPOSE

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) has been considered a relative contraindication for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). However, it is no longer a contraindication of LDLT due to improvement in surgical techniques and approaches to PVT. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of PVT on outcomes in LDLT patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data from 97 adult patients undergoing LDLT in our center from July 2008 to June 2010. Intraoperative findings and preoperative imaging results were reviewed for PVT grading (Yerdel grading). We analyzed the technical aspects and comparisons of risk factors, perioperative variables, and survivals between patients with and without PVT based on the grades.

RESULTS

In the 97 LDLT patients, 18 patients were confirmed to have PVT (18.5%) including grade I cases (n = 8), grade II (n = 7), and grade III (n = 3). Prior treatment of portal hypertension was found to be an independent risk factor for PVT (P = 0.001). The comparisons between PVT and no PVT groups showed no significant difference in intraoperative and postoperative variables except for postoperative bleeding (P = 0.036). The short-term portal vein patency, in-hospital mortality and survival rates were not significantly different between the PVT and control groups.

CONCLUSION

The outcomes are similar to non-PVT group in terms of in-hospital mortality, survival rates, and postoperative complications. Therefore, our study suggests that PVT cannot be considered to be a contraindication for LDLT and LDLT could be undertaken without increased morbidity and mortality in patients with PVT, in spite of operative complexity.

High incidence of hepatitis B infection-associated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma in the Southeast Asian patients with portal vein thrombosis

Background

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a rare condition associated with serious morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency, clinical presentations, and risk factors of PVT from the set of data firstly collected among the Southeast Asian population.

Methods

A retrospective study was undertaken to identify patients diagnosed with thrombosis of the portal system and other abdominal veins. The hospital medical records were retrieved based on the selected ICD-10 codes. Clinical presentations were collected and risk factors determined.

Results

From 2000-2009, 467 hospital charts with designated ICD-10 codes of I81, I82.2, I82.3, I82.8, I82.9, or K55.0 were identified. PVT (I81) was the most common thrombosis (194 cases, 41.54%). The majority of PVT patients were males (65%), older than 40 years (75%), and presented with abdominal distension/ascites (69%), splenomegaly (54.6%), and abdominal pain (50.5%). Overall, the predominant risk factor was hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (52.5%), followed by liver cirrhosis without cancer (9.3%), abdominal infection/inflammation (9.3%), cholangiocarcinoma (8.2%), and abdominal intervention (7.7%). In young patients, abdominal interventions including umbilical catheterization (23.1%) and hepatectomy (7.7%) were the most frequent risks whereas in older cases, primary hepatobiliary cancer and cirrhosis (78%) were the major risks. Liver metastases from other organs were infrequently found. Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection was the main etiology associated with cirrhosis/HCC leading to PVT in this cohort. A third of the older PVT patients (age >40) had HBV and very few carried hepatitis C virus (HCV) whereas none of the young PVT patients (age <20) had HBV or HCV. A variety of abdominal infections/inflammations were also found including liver abscess, splenic abscess, cholangitis, cholecystitis, pancreatitis, omphalitis, and abdominal tuberculosis. Single cases of systemic lymphangiomatosis and Klippel-Trénaunay vascular malformation syndrome were also identified. Other thrombophilic conditions such as myeloproliferative neoplasms, paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, protein S deficiency, and anti-phospholipid syndrome were rarely encountered.

Conclusion

HBV is the major risk of PVT in the Southeast Asian population. Several risk factors identified in this population have rarely been described and some are remarkably different from those reported in the West. Host and environmental factors may play a causal role in the initiation and development of PVT in various ethnicities and geographic locations.

Clinical analysis of living donor liver transplantation in patients with portal vein thrombosis

The aim of this study was to improve outcomes in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). Of 246 adult patients who underwent LDLT with a right lobe graft between January 2000 and May 2007, PVT was diagnosed in 50 patients (20.3%), who were further subdivided into partial (n = 39, 78%) and complete (n = 11, 22%) types. Patients with PVT, especially complete PVT, showed high incidences of variceal bleeding (p = 0.021), operative RBC transfusion (p < 0.046) and a post-transplantation complications related to bleeding (p = 0.058). We also classified PVT according to its location and the presence of collaterals: type I (n = 41, 82%): PVT localized above the confluence of the splenic and superior mesenteric veins (SMV); type II (n = 7, 14%): PVT extending below the confluence with a patent distal SMV; type III (n = 2, 4%): complete portal vein and SMV thrombosis except for a coronary vein. LDLT could be safely undertaken in patients with PVT without increased mortality. In our type II and III PVT, when thrombectomy fails, jump grafting using a cryopreserved vessel may serve as a reliable alternative method to restore portal flow.

Liver Transplantation in Liver Cirrhosis Patients Accompanied by Portal Vein Thrombosis

Benign portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a challenging complication of an otherwise successful liver transplantation. PVT is caused by various conditions and results in pathologic hemodynamics of hepatofugal diversion of porto-mesenteric blood flow. Thus, adequate restoration of portal blood flow to the liver graft is a major concern when trying to achieve successful liver transplantation in patients with PVT. This letter describes the surgical view point of PVT in liver transplantation.

Successful living donor liver transplantation in portomesenteric thrombosis

Chronic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is often considered a relative contraindication for living donor liver transplantation due to the risks involved and higher morbidity. In this report, we describe a surgical strategy for living donor liver transplant in patient with complete PVT using venovenous bypass from the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) and then using a jump graft from the IMV for portal inflow into the graft. IMV is a potential source for portal inflow in orthotopic liver transplant.

Survival among children with portal vein thrombosis and end-stage liver disease

Occlusive PVT concurrent with chronic liver disease is a common clinical entity among pediatric patients referred for transplantation. The natural history of PVT is unknown. Our aim was to determine, using a retrospective cohort design, if children under 13 yr with chronic liver disease and concomitant PVT have an increased mortality risk prior to and after transplantation. A total of 203 patients were included in the study. Nearly 10% of the population had PVT (n = 19); 63.2% of PVT patients (5.9% of total cohort) underwent liver transplantation (n = 12). PVT patients tended to be younger than non-PVT patients at evaluation (1.94 +/- 3.51 vs. 3.79 +/- 4.11, p = 0.059). Clinical and demographic factors were similar between the two groups. Regarding survival, four PVT patients died, of which two had undergone transplantation. Kaplan-Meier analyses indicated that PVT and non-PVT patients had similar survival from the time of evaluation, on the waiting list, and after transplant. Although limited by sample size, our study suggests that a diagnosis of PVT does not increase the mortality risk for children waiting for a liver transplant. Further study is needed to discern variations in mortality risk that may occur in the pediatric chronic liver disease population with PVT.