BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Transplant. Dec 18, 2025; 15(4): 104675
Published online Dec 18, 2025. doi: 10.5500/wjt.v15.i4.104675
Table 1 Risk of bias assessment (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale)
Ref.
Year
Design
Selection
Comparability
Reliability
Total
Hummel et al[11]2014Retrospective 4127
Livingston et al[18]2019Retrospective4239
Vivarelli et al[19]2020Retrospective4239
Oberkofler et al[21]2021Retrospective4228
Table 2 Demographic characteristics of included studies
Ref.
Year
Country
Study period
Study design
Conduit material
Total No. of LT
Aorto-hepatic conduits
Supra-coeliac/infra-renal
Median follow up (months)
Hummel et al[11]2014Germany2005-2008RetrospectiveIA114158/7NA
Denecke et al[12]2016Austria1990-2012RetrospectiveIA947431/42NA
Li et al[13]2017Taiwan2002-2015Retrospective GSVNA 1111/0NA
Kazemi et al[14]2017Iran2011-2016RetrospectiveIA2135760/76NA
Jung et al[15]2018Korea2011-2016RetrospectiveIA1928250/253
Oberkofler et al[16]2018Switzerland2007-2016RetrospectiveIA361292/2746
Bhatti et al[17]2019Pakistan2012-2017RetrospectiveGSV452193/1618
Livingston et al[18]2019United States2000-2016RetrospectiveIA312510422/8252.8
Vivarelli et al[19]2020Italy (multicentre)2003-2018RetrospectiveIA/Axillary425512064/56SC: 47.5; IR: 62.5
Devcic et al[20]2020USA2000-2016RetrospectiveIA3125104NANA
Oberkofler et al[21]2021International multicentre
(14 centres)
2007-2016RetrospectiveIA/Prosthetic11133565111/42 (Iliac = 14)36.5
Beaurepaire et al[8]2022France2002-2017RetrospectiveIA/Prosthetic167768Iliac artery: SC + IR = 50, Iliac = 6. Prosthesis: SC = 1, IR = 6, Iliac = 561
Bhatti et al[22]2023Pakistan2017-2020RetrospectiveGSV498144/1034.9
Sohrabi et al[23]2024Iran2009-2020RetrospectiveIA4010160/1635
Table 3 Recipient characteristics of studies included for meta-analysis, n (%)
Ref.
Year
No. of Patients
Recipient age, median (SD)
Recipient gender (male%)
Recipient BMI (kg/m2)
Redo transplant
Indications for Transplant (V-Viral, A- Alcohol, M-MASLD, O-Other, NA-not available)
MELD
Previous TACE
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
Hummel et al[11]20148750.9 (12.2)46.6 (14.3)6 (75)7 (100)23.5 (3)27.4 (3.7)3 (37.5)3 (42.9)NANA22.7
(11.7)
16.5(9.5)NANA
Livingston et al[18]2019228251.5 (13.3)52.7 (10.7)14 (63.6)57 (69.5)25.7 (5.5)26.3 (5.2)10 (45.5)45 (54.9)NANA19.6
(9.7)
19.0 (10.4)NANA
Vivarelli et al[19]2020645649.5 (14.4)49.5 (11.8)45 (70.3)41 (73.2)24.2(3.6)25.5 (4.9)16 (25.0)14 (25.0)V-32 (50.0%) A-8 (12.5%) M-8 (12.5%) O-3 (4.7%)V-30 (53.6%) A-6 (10.7%),M-2 (3.6%),O-4 (7.1%)22.7 (10.7)18.7 (7.8)13 (20.3)12 (21.4)
Oberkofler et al[21]202111142852.5 (11.9)53.2 (4.9)65 (59.0)261 (61.0)    25.1(1.4)25.5 (2.0)54 (49.0)147 (34.0)NANA25.0 (5.2)22.7 (6.3)20.0 (20.0)61 (15.0)
Table 4 Details of aorto-hepatic conduits in the included studies, n (%)
Ref.YearNumber of patients
Early occlusions
Late occlusion
Bile duct complications
Graft survival 1-year
Graft survival 5-year
Patient survival 1-year
Patient survival 5-year
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
Hummel et al[11]20148700004 (50.0)3 (42.9)NANANANA57.1%85.7%NANA
Livingston et al[18]201922820005NANA85.1%79.1%53.9%56.0%85.1%88.3%67.8%64.9%
Vivarelli et al[19]202064564 (6.2)6 (10.7)3 (4.7)11 (19.6)20 (31.2)22 (39.3)77.0%66.0%67.0%50.0%80.0%73.0%74.0%56.0%
Oberkofler et al[21]20211114289 (8.1) 31 (7.2) 9 (8.0)41 (9.8)21 (19.0) 61 (14.0) NANANANANANANANA
Table 5 Complications related to aorto-hepatic conduits in the included studies, n (%)
Ref.
Year
No. of AHCs
Total occlusions
Surgical interventions for oocclusions
Endovascular intervensions for occlusions
Success rate of surgery without retransplantation
Success rate of endovascular
Re-anastomosis
Re-conduit formation
Retransplants
Stent
PTA
Stent/PTA
CDTL
Hummel et al[11]20141500000000NANA
Livingston et al[18]2019104NANANANANANANANANANA
Vivarelli et al[19]202012024 (20.0)3 (12.5)NA8 (33.0)8 (33.0)NANANANA
Oberkofler et al[21]202156596 (17.0)8 (8.3) 4 (4.2) 22 (23.0) 4 (4.2)12 (13.0) 7 (7.3) 6 (11.0) 7 (27.0) 18 (82.0)
Sohrabi et al[23]2024162 (12.5)002
(100)
0000NANA
Devcic et al[20]20201047 (6.7.0)00007 (100)00NANA
Table 6 Other complications in patients receiving aorto-hepatic conduits, n (%)
Ref.YearNumber of patients
Pre-Cr at LT (mg/dL)
Post-Cr maximum (mg/dL)
Post-transplant CRRT
Early allograft dysfunction
Major surgical interventions (Clavien 3b>0)
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR
SC
IR

Hummel et al[11]2014870.56 (0.33)0.97 (0.37)0.81.47NANA001 (12.5)1 (14.3)
Livingston et al[18]201922821.15 (0.71) 1.20 (0.72) 1.17 (0.22) 1.2 (0.26) 2 (10.5) 10 (12.2) 4 (18.2) 24
(29.3)
NANA
Vivarelli et al[19]202064561.35 (0.79) 1.82
(1.1)
NANANANA4 (6.2)6 (10.7)NANA
Oberkofler et al[21]2021111428NANANANA35 (32.0) 122 (29.0) 9 (8.1) 31 (7.2) 66 (60.0) 248 (58.0)
Table 7 Summary table aorto-hepatic conduits
Aorto-hepatic conduit details
Number of studies that have reported (n = 14)
Infow sites14
Conduit material14
Second party vs third party donor 1
Storage of the conduits0
Reason for conduit9
Choice of inflow site12
Post-operative doppler monitoring12
Post-operative anticoagulation9
Early occlusions 8
Late occlusions8
Endovascular Interventions for occlusions3
Surgical interventions (revisions/reconduits/retransplants)4