Current Pattern of Use and Impact of Pringle Maneuver in Liver Resections in the United States

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

10 Scopus citations


Background: Pringle maneuver (PM) is used for inflow vascular control during hepatectomy, but its use remains controversial. We aimed to report its pattern of use and association with postoperative outcomes. Methods: We identified hepatectomy patients using the liver-targeted National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2014-2016). Associations between PM and posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), receipt of blood transfusion, and total hospital length of stay (LOS) were evaluated. Results: We identified 7870 patients (74.9%) with no Pringle maneuver and 2632 (25.1%) with PM. PM patients were older (median age 61 versus 60 y, P = 0.002) and had higher ASA scores (76.1% versus 71.4% were ASA 3-4, P < 0.001). PM had more malignancy (83.0% versus 73.0%, P < 0.001), neoadjuvant therapy (37.7% versus 28.8%, P < 0.001), total lobectomy (30.6% versus 23.2%, P < 0.001), open resection (90.8% versus 74.9%, P < 0.001), and longer operations (246 min versus 212 min, P < 0.001). PM was associated with longer LOS (0.36 d, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.11-0.60) and increased risk of PHLF (odds ratio [OR] 1.36, 95% CI 1.11-1.66), although not clinically significant grade B/C PHLF (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57-1.19), but was not associated with receipt of perioperative blood transfusions (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.69-1.64). Conclusions: PM is associated with similar clinically significant PHLF and transfusion requirements but longer LOS compared with no Pringle maneuver.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)253-260
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Surgical Research
StatePublished - Jul 2019


  • Hepatectomy
  • Inflow vascular occlusion
  • Liver resection
  • Pringle maneuver
  • Surgical outcomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery


Dive into the research topics of 'Current Pattern of Use and Impact of Pringle Maneuver in Liver Resections in the United States'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this