Caval reconstruction techniques in orthotopic liver transplantation

Table 5 Comparing standard technique with venovenous bypass to side-to-side cavocaval anastomosis

Ref.	Anastomosis	Conclusion
Zieniewicz et al[42]	STSCCA vs conventional with VVB	Reduction in warm ischemia time (P < 0.001) and blood loss in the STSCCA group (P < 0.001)
Remiszewski et al[43]	STSCCA vs conventional with VVB	Reduced complication rate (36% vs 30%) and reduced cost (P-value not reported) in STSCCA group
Khan et al[44]	STSCCA vs conventional with VVB	Reduced FFP (P = 0.03) and platelets (P = 0.04) transfused, shorter ICU stay (P = 0.005), less patients requiring ventilation after POD1 (P = 0.03) and less total days on the ventilator (P = 0.04) in STSCCA group. Comparable operating time, warm ischemia time, length of stay (P-value not reported). Outflow obstruction in 1.2% of STSCCA patients. Report hematoma formation as complication associated with VVB
Schmitz et al[45]	STSCCA vs conventional with VVB	Shorter warm ischemia times, reduced red blood cell (P = 0.000) and platelet transfusion (P = 0.002) in STSCCA group. Increased risk of hepatic artery stenosis (P = 0.045) and biliary leaks (P = 0.042) in the STSCCA group

STSCCA: Side-to-side cavocaval anastomosis; VVB: Venovenous bypass; ICU: Intensive care unit; FFP: Fresh frozen plasma.