Background Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is no longer a contraindication for liver transplantation (LT). While therapeutic anticoagulation (tAC) is recommended during the waiting period, there is no evidence for its usefulness in the prevention of PVT recurrence after LT. Objectives The aim of our study was to evaluate the role of tAC post‐LT in the prevention of PVT recurrence. Patients/methods All adult LTs performed in two high‐volume centers between 2003 and 2018 were retrospectively analysed. Only patients with PVT classified as Yerdel grade I or II and with standard portal reconstruction were included. PVT recurrence and tAC‐associated morbidity within 1 year were compared between patients receiving tAC or not. Results During the study period, of 2612 LTs performed, 235 (9%) patients with PVT were included; 113 patients (48.1%) received post‐LT tAC (tAC group) while 122 (51.9%) did not (non‐tAC group). The incidence of bleeding events was significantly higher in the tAC group (26 [23%] vs. 5 [4.1%], P < .01) and the initial hospitalization duration was longer (21 vs. 17.5 days, P < .01). Within the first year, PVT recurrence was observed for 9 (3.8%) patients without any difference between the tAC and non‐tAC groups (6 [5.1%] vs. 3 [2.5%], P = .39). The only identified risk factor for PVT recurrence was the recipients’ age (odds ratio= 0.94, P = .03). Graft (P = .11) and patient (P = .44) survival were similar between the two groups. Conclusion Therapeutic anticoagulation is not necessary in the prevention of grade I/II PVT recurrence and is associated with higher morbidity and longer hospital stay.

Variations in graft arterial anatomy can increase the risk of postoperative hepatic arterial thrombosis (HAT), especially in presence of a replaced or accessory right hepatic artery (RHA). We retrospectively analyzed 223 cases of liver transplantations with the presence of an RHA on the graft. Patient outcomes were compared according to the four different reconstruction methods used: (i) the re‐implantation of the RHA into the splenic or gastroduodenal artery (n = 106); (ii) the interposition of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) (n = 83); (iii) dual anastomosis (n = 24); (iv) use of an aortic patch including the origins of both the SMA and the coeliac trunk (n = 10). A competing risk analysis and Inverse Probability Weighting (IPW) were used. We found that the interposition of the SMA method was associated with a significantly lower incidence of HAT, at 4.8% compared to the re‐implantation method at 17.9%, dual anastomosis at 12.5%, and aortic patch at 20%, p = .03. In the competing risk analysis with IPW, the only risk factor for RHA thrombosis was the type of reconstruction. Taking the SMA interposition group as the reference, the sub‐hazard ratio (sHR) was 5.05 (CI 95 [1.72; 14.78], p < .01) for the re‐implantation group, sHR = 2.37 (CI 95 [0.51; 11.09], p = .27) for the dual anastomosis group and sHR = 2.24 (CI 95 [0.35; 14.33], p = .40) for the aortic patch group. There were no differences for intraoperative transfusion, hospitalization duration (p = .37) or incidence of severe complications (p = .1). The long‐term graft (p = .69) and patient (p = .52) survival was not different. In conclusion, the SMA interposition method was associated with a lower incidence of RHA thrombosis.