Outflow reconstruction for right liver allograft with multiple hepatic veins: “V‐plasty” of hepatic veins to form a common outflow channel versus 2 or more hepatic vein–to–inferior vena cava anastomoses in limited retrohepatic space

Outflow reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is certainly difficult in limited retrohepatic space with using right liver grafts with venous anomalies. Venoplasty of the inferior right hepatic veins (IRHVs) and middle hepatic vein (MHV) reconstruction using synthetic grafts to form a common outflow channel or a second venocaval anastomosis are available options. We aim to compare outcomes of LDLT recipients who underwent outflow reconstruction with a “V‐Plasty” technique and outcomes of patients who underwent a second venocaval anastomosis. Out of 325 recipients who underwent LDLT from March 2011 to September 2014, 45 received right liver allografts that were devoid of MHV with multiple draining IRHVs (2 or more). Group A (n = 16) comprised the recipients with outflow reconstruction with a V‐Plasty, and group B (n = 29) included the recipients with a second venocaval anastomosis. Group A recipients (male:female, 10:6; median age, 50.5 years) had a mean Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease score of 14.7, whereas for group B recipients (male:female, 20:9; median age, 52.0 years) it was 17.2. The mean IRHV diameter for group A and B grafts was 8.3 mm each. Mean warm ischemia time for group A was significantly lower (25.2 minutes) as compared to group B recipients (34.6 minutes) with P < 0.001. The 2‐month patency rates of vascular grafts were 100% for group A recipients with no evidence of thrombosis. In conclusion, the V‐Plasty technique of MHV and IRHV reconstruction to form a common outflow is a new concept that proves to be a safe and feasible alternative for second venocaval anastomosis. Liver Transpl 22:192‐200, 2016. © 2015 AASLD.