Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in a patient with previous history of simultaneous orthotopic liver kidney transplantation

Simple Separate Sutures Versus Continuous Sutures on Hepatic Artery Anastomosis in Liver Transplant: A Prospective Study

OBJECTIVES

Liver transplant is the definitive treatment for liver failure of various causes. There are various operation methods, of which the conventional approach is most frequently performed. In the conventional technique, 4 anastomoses are required, and different subtleties in these techniques are known to cause different rates of complications. We assessed the outcome of a simple separate (ie, interrupted) suture technique compared with a the continuous suture technique in 194 patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

There were 194 patients included in this single-center, controlled study. The exclusion criteria were patients who died during the surgical procedure and patients with incomplete medical records. The data recorded were age, sex, past medical history of liver disease, tobacco use, comorbidities, and whetherthe livertransplant was for the first time or retransplant. All patients included in this study were recipients of liver transplants from deceased donors. The patients were categorized as those who received either simple sutures (n = 16) or continuous sutures (n = 178). The continuous suture operations were performed first, and the simple suture operations were performed at a later time (ie, the 2 groups were temporally separated). The results included the duration of surgery, hepatic artery thrombosis rate, hepatic artery stenosis rate, 2-year survival, and further complications.

RESULTS

No evidence of hepatic artery thrombosis or hepatic artery stenosis was observed in the study groups. The duration of surgery was equal in both groups. The 2-year mortality rate was significantly higher in the simple suture group.

CONCLUSIONS

The continuous suture method seems to be accompanied by a similar duration of operation and rate of complications compared with the simple suture process.

Immunosuppressive drugs for nontransplant comorbidities are not associated with abdominal aortic aneurysm growth

Background

In the present study, we examined the association of immunosuppressant drug prescriptions with the growth of small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

Methods

Participants with an AAA measuring between 30 and 50 mm were recruited from four Australian centers. AAA growth was monitored by ultrasound. The immunosuppressant drugs included conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (eg, methotrexate, sulfasalazine, leflunomide), steroids, hydroxychloroquine, other immunosuppressant drugs (eg, cyclosporine, azacitidine), or a combination of these drugs. Linear mixed effects modeling was performed to examine the independent association of an immunosuppressant prescription with AAA growth. A subanalysis examined the association of steroids with AAA growth.

Results

Of the 621 patients, 34 (5.3%) had been prescribed at least one (n = 26) or more (n = 8) immunosuppressant drug and had been followed up for a median period of 2.1 years (interquartile range, 1.1-3.5 years), with a median of three ultrasound scans (interquartile range, two to five ultrasound scans). No significant difference was found in AAA growth when stratified by a prescription of immunosuppressant drugs on either unadjusted (mean difference, 0.2 mm/y; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.4 to 0.7; P = .589) or risk factor-adjusted (mean difference, 0.2 mm/y; 95% CI, -0.3 to 0.7; P = .369) analyses. The findings were similar for the unadjusted (mean difference, 0.0 mm/y; 95% CI, -0.7 to 0.7; P = .980) and risk factor-adjusted (mean difference, 0.1 mm/y; 95% CI, -0.6 to 0.7; P = .886) subanalyses focused on steroid use.

Conclusions

The results from this study suggest that AAA growth is not affected by immunosuppressant drug prescription. Studies with larger sample sizes are needed before reliable conclusions can be drawn.