Identifying the Superior Reperfusion Technique in Liver Transplantation: A Network Meta-Analysis

Table 1

Characteristics of included trails.

Author	Year	Region	Study arm	Sample size	Surgical technique	Interventional technique	Parameters
Adani et al.	2011	Italy	2	40	Piggyback technique	PV+HA (PV initialize) vs. PV+HA (SR initialize)	DFR; ICU stay; BC; GS; PS
Baccarani et al.	2012	Italy	2	80	Piggyback technique with outflow anastomosis done on three hepatic veins	PV+HA (PV initialize) vs. PV+HA (SR initialize)	DFR; ICU stay; BC; GS; PS
Ducerf et al.	2000	France	2	59	Piggyback technique with outflow anastomosis at the level of the left and median hepatic veins	PV vs. HA	BC
Heidenhain et al.	2006	Germany	2	131	Orthotopic liver transplantation with supra and infrahepatic end`-to-end cava anastomosis	PV+HA (SR initialize) vs. RVC	DFR; ICU stay; BC; GS; PS
Millis et al.	1997	USA	2	100	Orthotopic liver transplantation with venovenous bypass	PV vs. HA	BC; GS
Moreno et al.	2006	Spain	2	60	Piggyback technique	PV+HA (PV initialize) vs. PV+HA (HA initialize)	ICU stay; BC;
Pamecha et al.	2018	India	2	80	Piggyback technique with end-to-side single anastomosis of right hepatic vein and neo middle hepatic vein to the inferior vena cava	PV vs. PV+HA (PV initialize)	DFR; ICU stay; BC; GS; PS

PV: portal vein; HA: hepatic artery; RVC: retrograde vena cava; SR: simultaneous reperfusion; DFR: dysfunction rate; ICU: intensive care unit; BC: biliary complications; GS: graft survival; PS: patient survival.