Top

Published in:

08-08-2022 | Liver Transplantation | Review Article

Management of spontaneous portosystemic shunts at the time of liver transplantation: treatment or observation? Results of a systematic review

Authors: Caterina Cusumano, Stefano Gussago, Martina Guerra, Chloe Paul, François Faitot, Philippe Bachellier, Pietro Addeo

Published in: Hepatology International | Issue 5/2022

Abstract

Background

Optimal treatment of spontaneous portosystemic shunts (SPSS) during liver transplantation (LT) remains debated. We systematically reviewed the literature on definitions, treatment and outcomes of patients presenting SPSS undergoing LT.

Methods

According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we used PubMed to retrieve all studies dealing with SPSS and LT between January 1987 and January 2020. The primary endpoints were definitions and outcomes according to the management of SPSS (treatment vs observation).

Results

Thirteen studies detailing the management of 962 SPSS were retrieved. Hemodynamically significant SPSS were defined as those having diameter ≥ 10 mm in 41% (n = 395) of patients. SPSS were splenorenal (42%), cavo-gastric (15.2%), umbilical (7.4%), mesenterico-caval (n = 31; 3.2%), mesenterico-renal (0.1%) and unreported (31.9%), respectively. At the time of LT 372 shunts (38.7%) were treated while 590 were observed (61.3%). During a follow-up time ranging from 4 months to 5 years, the reported overall survival (OS) at 1 year was not significantly different except for one study. Portal vein anastomosis complications (i.e. reduced flow, stenosis or thrombosis) were similarly reported in observed [n = 26 (4%)] and ligated SPSS [n = 10 (2%)] (p = 0.22) but the rate of relaparotomy was significantly higher in observed SPPS (16 vs 2; p = 0.01) to rescue post LT portal vein thrombosis (n = 6) and reduced portal flow and graft dysfunction (n = 10).

Conclusions

There was a heterogeneous management of SPSS during LT in the literature. Ligation of SPPS did not reduce vascular complications neither improved survival. A randomized prospective study might contribute to identify best management of SPSS at time of LT.

Zhou H-Y, Chen T-W, Zhang X-M, Jing Z-L, Zeng N-L, Zhai Z-H. Patterns of portosystemic collaterals and diameters of portal venous system in cirrhotic patients with hepatitis B on magnetic resonance imaging: association with Child-Pugh classifications. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2015;39(3):351–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinre.2014.09.012CrossRefPubMed

Vidal-González J, Quiroga S, Simón-Talero M, Genescà J. Spontaneous portosystemic shunts in liver cirrhosis: new approaches to an old problem. Ther Adv Gastroenterol. 2020;13:1756284820961287. https://doi.org/10.1177/1756284820961287CrossRef

Rodriguez EA, Perez R, Zhang N, et al. Clinical outcomes of portosystemic shunts on the outcome of liver transplantation. Liver Transplant. 2020;26(5):693–701. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.25710CrossRef

Zardi EM, Uwechie V, Caccavo D, et al. Portosystemic shunts in a large cohort of patients with liver cirrhosis: detection rate and clinical relevance. J Gastroenterol. 2009;44(1):76–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-008-2279-1CrossRefPubMed

Chikamori F, Nishida S, Selvaggi G, et al. Effect of liver transplantation on spleen size, collateral veins, and platelet counts. World J Surg. 2010;34(2):320–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-009-0314-xCrossRefPubMed

Kim H, Yoon KC, Lee K-W, et al. Tips and pitfalls in direct ligation of large spontaneous splenorenal shunt during liver transplantation. Liver Transplant. 2017;23(7):899–906. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.24783CrossRef

De Carlis L, Del Favero E, Rondinara G, et al. The role of spontaneous portosystemic shunts in the course of orthotopic liver transplantation. Transpl Int. 1992;5(1):9–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00337182CrossRefPubMed

Sanada Y, Mizuta K, Urahashi T, et al. Impact of posttransplant portosystemic shunts on liver transplantation. World J Surg. 2012;36(10):2449–2454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1692-zCrossRefPubMed

Esquivel CO, Klintmalm G, Iwatsuki S, et al. Liver transplantation in patients with patent splenorenal shunts. Surgery. 1987;101(4):430–432PubMed

10.

Saks K, Jensen KK, McLouth J, et al. Influence of spontaneous splenorenal shunts on clinical outcomes in decompensated cirrhosis and after liver transplantation. Hepatol Commun. 2018;2(4):437–444. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep4.1157CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Gomez Gavara C, Bhangui P, Salloum C, et al. Ligation versus no ligation of spontaneous portosystemic shunts during liver transplantation: audit of a prospective series of 66 consecutive patients. Liver Transplant. 2018;24(4):505–515. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.24999CrossRef

12.

Olthoff KM, Kulik L, Samstein B, et al. Validation of a current definition of early allograft dysfunction in liver transplant recipients and analysis of risk factors. Liver Transpl. 2010;16(8):943–949. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.22091CrossRefPubMed

13.

Castillo-Suescun F, Oniscu GC, Hidalgo E. Hemodynamic consequences of spontaneous splenorenal shunts in deceased donor liver transplantation. Liver Transpl. 2011;17(8):891–895. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.22304CrossRefPubMed

14.

Allard M, Akamatsu N, Kokudo T, et al. Clinical significance of spontaneous portosystemic shunts in living donor liver transplantation. Liver Transpl. 2021;27(1):77–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.25798CrossRefPubMed

15.

Ikegami T, Shirabe K, Nakagawara H, et al. Obstructing spontaneous major shunt vessels is mandatory to keep adequate portal inflow in living-donor liver transplantation. Transplantation. 2013;95(10):1270–1277. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0b013e318288cadcCrossRefPubMed

16.

Takatsuki M, Baimakhanov Z, Soyama A, et al. Obstructing spontaneous major shunt vessels might not be mandatory to maintain adequate portal inflow in living donor liver transplantation. Transplantation. 2014;97(9):e52-53. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000000092CrossRefPubMed

17.

Kisaoglu A, Dandin O, Demiryilmaz I, et al. A single-center experience in portal flow augmentation in liver transplantation with prior large spontaneous splenorenal shunt. Transplant Proc. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2020.05.015CrossRefPubMed

18.

Golse N, Bucur PO, Faitot F, et al. Spontaneous splenorenal shunt in liver transplantation: results of left renal vein ligation versus renoportal anastomosis. Transplantation. 2015;99(12):2576–2585. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000000766CrossRefPubMed

19.

Golse N, Mohkam K, Rode A, et al. Surgical management of large spontaneous portosystemic splenorenal shunts during liver transplantation: splenectomy or left renal vein ligation? Transplant Proc. 2015;47(6):1866–1876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2015.06.019CrossRefPubMed

20.

Lee S-G, Moon D-B, Ahn C-S, et al. Ligation of left renal vein for large spontaneous splenorenal shunt to prevent portal flow steal in adult living donor liver transplantation. Transplant Int. 2007;20(1):45–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1432-2277.2006.00392.xCrossRef

21.

Wang Q, Lv Y, Bai M, et al. Eight millimetre covered TIPS does not compromise shunt function but reduces hepatic encephalopathy in preventing variceal rebleeding. J Hepatol. 2017;67(3):508–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2017.05.006CrossRefPubMed

22.

Brems JJ, Hiatt JR, Klein AS, et al. Effect of a prior portasystemic shunt on subsequent liver transplantation. Ann Surg 1989;209(1):51–56. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1493874/. Accessed 5 Jan 2021.

23.

de Franchis R, Baveno VI. Faculty expanding consensus in portal hypertension: report of the Baveno VI Consensus Workshop: stratifying risk and individualizing care for portal hypertension. J Hepatol. 2015;63(3):743–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2015.05.022CrossRefPubMed

24.

Ito K, Akamatsu N, Ichida A, et al. Splenectomy is not indicated in living donor liver transplantation. Liver Transplant. 2016;22(11):1526–1535. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.24489CrossRef

25.

Linares I, Goldaracena N, Rosales R, et al. Splenectomy as flow modulation strategy and risk factors of de novo portal vein thrombosis in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation. Liver Transplant. 2018;24(9):1209–1220. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.25212CrossRef

26.

Nagao Y, Akahoshi T, Uehara H, et al. Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration is feasible for prolonged portosystemic shunts after living donor liver transplantation. Surg Today. 2014;44(4):633–639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-013-0535-3CrossRefPubMed

27.

Shigeta T, Kasahara M, Sakamoto S, et al. Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration for a portosystemic shunt after pediatric living-donor liver transplantation. J Pediatr Surg. 2011;46(6):e19-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2011.03.077CrossRefPubMed

28.

Kim JH, Ko G-Y, Sung K-B, et al. Transvenous variceal embolization during or after living-donor liver transplantation to improve portal venous flow. J Vasc Intervent Radiol. 2009;20(11):6CrossRef

Title: Management of spontaneous portosystemic shunts at the time of liver transplantation: treatment or observation? Results of a systematic review
Authors: Caterina Cusumano
Stefano Gussago
Martina Guerra
Chloe Paul
François Faitot
Philippe Bachellier
Pietro Addeo
Publication date: 08-08-2022
Publisher: Springer India
Keywords: Liver Transplantation
Relaparotomy
Splenectomy
Splenectomy
Liver Transplantation
Liver Transplantation
Liver Transplantation
Liver Transplantation
Hypertension
Portal Hypertension
Portal Hypertension
Published in: Hepatology International / Issue 5/2022
Print ISSN: 1936-0533
Electronic ISSN: 1936-0541
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12072-022-10377-w

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Heart Failure Video

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Management of spontaneous portosystemic shunts at the time of liver transplantation: treatment or observation? Results of a systematic review

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

Incentivised to exercise

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2022

CT-based visual grading system for assessment of hepatic steatosis: diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement

Multiple cycles of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in decompensated cirrhosis: a double-blind RCT

Acute variceal bleeding portends poor outcomes in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure: a propensity score matched study from the APASL ACLF Research Consortium (AARC)

Prognostic impact of C-reactive protein and alpha-fetoprotein in immunotherapy score in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab: a multicenter retrospective study

G-CSF treatment in decompensated liver disease: a double-edged sword?

Pan-genotypic direct-acting antivirals for patients with hepatitis C virus infection and chronic kidney disease stage 4 or 5

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

Incentivised to exercise

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page