Endovascular management of venous complications post liver transplantation: a retrospective analysis of technical and clinical success
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• A retrospective analysis of endovascular management for post-liver transplantation venous complications at a single quaternary referral center. • Demonstrates 100% technical success rate and 87.5% clinical success for percutaneous endovascular treatments including angioplasty and stenting. • Reports favorable outcomes with 81.3% target vessel patency and 93.8% organ preservation maintained at both 6 and 12 months. • Minimal procedure-related complications (2 patients) with all managed either endovascularly or conservatively, supporting safety profile. • Provides evidence for endovascular as a relatively safe and effective alternative approach to surgery in managing post-transplant venous complications. To evaluate the technical and clinical success of percutaneous endovascular management of venous complications post liver transplantation (LT). This single-center retrospective study analyzed 16 patients who underwent endovascular treatment for post-LT venous complications at a quaternary referral center between January 2019 and December 2023. The analysis evaluated technical success (<30% residual stenosis), clinical success (symptom resolution or improvement), target vessel patency and organ preservation (Olthoff criteria) at 6 and 12 months. The cohort included 16 patients (male:female ratio 9:7, median age 50 years), including 12 recipients from deceased donors and 4 from living donors. Technical success was achieved in 100% (16/16) of cases, with clinical success in 87.5% (14/16). Target vessel patency was maintained in 81.3% (13/16) at both 6 and 12 months. Organ preservation was achieved in 93.8% (15/16) at both 6 and 12 months. Procedure-related complications occurred in two patients: one managed endovascularly and one conservatively. One non-procedure-related complication was successfully managed endovascularly. Percutaneous endovascular treatment is a relatively safe and effective approach for post-LT venous complications, demonstrating high technical success rates and favorable clinical outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".