Effect of venovenous bypass on perioperative renal function in liver transplantation: results of a randomized, controlled trial

The effects of venovenous bypass use in liver transplantation with piggyback technique: a propensity score-weighted analysis

Venovenous bypass (VVB) use during liver transplantation (LT) is notably variable among the centres and it is actually restricted to surgically complex cases, severely unstable recipients or grafts from high-risk donors. Historically, VVB was associated with the classical LT with caval cross clamping, while not much is known about the safety of this technique applied to piggyback LT. This retrospective observational study evaluated the effects of VVB applied to piggyback LT on mortality, hospital outcomes, postoperative graft and other organ dysfunction. We retrospectively collected data about recipient status, surgical complexity and graft quality of all the piggyback LTs performed at the Transplant Unit of IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Italy, from January 2012 to December 2022. A propensity score (PS) was built taking into account the variables possibly associated with either VVB choice and the investigated outcomes with the average treatment overlap method. PS-weighted general linear models (GLMs) were developed to investigate the adjusted effect of VVB use on the selected outcomes. The final analysis included 874 LT cases, of whom 74 (8.5%) underwent VVB. The effective sample sizes after PS-weighting were 280.2 and 64.3 patients in the no-VVB and VVB groups, respectively. PS-weighted GLMs did not show any differences regarding hospital and graft-related outcomes. However, significantly higher odds ratios for serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL and AKIN stage 2 or 3 during the first 24 h after ICU admission together with a higher renal replacement therapy need during ICU stay were reported for VVB exposure in the weighted analyses. This study suggests similar mortality and length of stay but a higher risk for postoperative acute kidney injury in patients undergoing piggyback LT with VVB.

Development and validation of a nomogram model for predicting chronic kidney disease after liver transplantation: a multi-center retrospective study

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a frequent complication after liver transplantation (LT) and associated with poor prognosis. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed 515 adult patients who underwent LT in our center. They were randomly divided into a training set (n = 360) and an internal test set (n = 155). Another 118 recipients in other centers served as external validation set. Univariate and multivariate COX regression analysis were used to determine risk factors. A nomogram model was developed to predict post-LT CKD. The incidence of post-LT CKD in our center was 16.9% (87/515) during a median follow-up time of 22.73 months. The overall survival of recipients with severe CKD (stage IV and V) were significantly lower than those with non or mild CKD (stage III) (p = 0.0015). A nomogram model was established based on recipient's age, anhepatic phase, estimated glomerular filtration rate and triglyceride levels at 30 days after LT. The calibration curves for post-LT CKD prediction in the nomogram were consistent with the actual observation in both the internal and external validation set. In conclusion, severe post-LT CKD resulted in a significantly reduced survival in liver recipient. The newly established nomogram model had good predictive ability for post-LT CKD.

Comparison of the modified piggyback with standard piggyback and conventional orthotopic liver transplantation techniques: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In conventional orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), the recipient's retrohepatic inferior vena cava (IVC) is completely clamped and replaced with the donor IVC. The piggyback technique has been used to preserve venous return, either via an end-to-side or standard piggyback (SPB), or via a side-to-side or modified piggyback (MPB) anastomosis, using a venous cuff from the recipient hepatic veins with partially clamping and preserves the recipient's inferior vena cava. However, whether these piggyback techniques improve the efficacy of OLT is unclear. To address the low quality of the available evidence, we performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of conventional, MPB, and SPB techniques.

METHODS

Literature was searched in Medline and Web of Science databases for relevant articles published until 2021 without any time restriction. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to compare the intra- and postoperative outcomes of conventional OLT, MPB, and SPB techniques.

RESULTS

Forty studies were included, comprising 10,238 patients. MPB and SPB had significantly shorter operation times and fewer transfusions of red blood cell and fresh frozen plasma than conventional techniques. However, there were no differences between MPB and SPB in operation time and blood product transfusion. There were also no differences in primary non-function, retransplantation, portal vein thrombosis, acute kidney injury, renal dysfunction, venous outflow complications, length of hospital and intensive care unit stay, 90-day mortality rate, and graft survival between the three techniques.

CONCLUSION

MBP and SBP techniques reduce the operation time and need for blood transfusion compared with conventional OLT, but postoperative outcomes are similar. This indicates that all techniques can be implemented based on the experience and policy of the transplant center.

Which cava anastomotic techniques are optimal regarding immediate and short-term outcomes after liver transplantation: A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations

BACKGROUND

It has long been debated whether cava anastomosis should be performed with the piggyback technique or cava replacement, with or without veno-venous bypass (VVB), with or without temporary portocaval shunt (PCS) in the setting of liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To identify whether different cava anastomotic techniques and other maneuvers benefit the recipient regarding short-term outcomes and to provide international expert panel recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.

METHODS

A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel (CRD42021240979).

RESULTS

Of 3205 records screened, 307 publications underwent full-text assessment for eligibility and 47 were included in qualitative synthesis. Four studies were randomized control trials. Eighteen studies were comparative. The remaining 25 were single-center retrospective noncomparative studies.

CONCLUSION

Based on existing data and expert opinion, the panel cannot recommend one cava reconstruction technique over another, rather the surgical approach should be based on surgeon preference and center dependent, with special consideration toward patient circumstances (Quality of evidence: Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong). The panel recommends against routine use of vevo-venous bypass (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong) and against the routine use of temporary porto-caval shunt (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong).

Use of an intraoperative veno-venous bypass during liver transplantation: an observational, single center, cohort study

BACKGROUND

As previous studies demonstrated conflicting results, we investigated the hemodynamic and renal outcomes of the intra-operative use of a veno-venous bypass during liver transplantation.

METHODS

The intraoperative levels of mean artery pressure, cardiac index, inferior vena cava and renal perfusion pressures were compared in liver transplant patients receiving or not the bypass.

RESULTS

We enrolled 38 patients: 20 with the bypass and 18 without. No differences characterized the two groups regarding gender (p=0.95), age (p=0.32), BMI (p=0.09), liver disease indicating LT and preoperative serum creatinine levels. Patients with the bypass received more intraoperative fluids (crystalloids and colloids) but with no difference in terms of intraoperative blood products and vasopressors requirements (p= 0.33). After clamping of the inferior vena cava, patients with the bypass showed higher mean artery pressure. Simultaneously, pressure in the inferior vena cava below the clamp level sharply increased Vs baseline (p<0.0001) independently of the use of the bypass and remained high until clamp release. Consequently, renal perfusion pressure dropped abruptly (p <0.0001) after vena cava clamping and returned to baseline only upon clamp removal. Overall, 18 subjects developed post-operative acute kidney injury which was equally distributed between patients with (n=9) or without (n =8) the bypass.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that the use of a veno-venous bypass fails to release the increased renal venous backflow from inferior vena cava clamping resulting in renal congestion with reduced renal perfusion pressure.

Not All Piggybacks Are Equal: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Variation in Anhepatic Transcaval Pressure Gradient and Acute Kidney Injury During Liver Transplant

OBJECTIVES

Complete inferior vena cava clamping in cavalreplacement during livertransplantis associated with substantial physiological derangement and postoperative morbidity. Partial clamping in the piggyback technique may be relatively protective, but evidence is lacking. Having observed substantial variation in transhepatic inferior vena cava pressure gradient with piggyback, we hypothesized that the causative mechanism is the extent of caval clamping rather than the surgical approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used internal jugular and femoral catheters to estimate suprahepatic and infrahepatic inferior vena cava pressures during clamping. Pressure gradients were calculated, and distributions were compared by surgical technique. We estimated adjusted odds ratios for pressure gradient on acute kidney injury at 72 hours.

RESULTS

In 115 case records, we observed substantial variation in maximum pressure gradient; median values were 18.0 mm Hg(interquartile range, 8.0-25.0 mm Hg) with the piggyback technique and 24.0 mm Hg (interquartile range, 19.5-27.0 mm Hg) with caval replacement. Incidence of acute kidney injury was 25% (29 patients). Pressure gradient was linearly associated with probability of acute kidney injury (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.13).

CONCLUSIONS

We report 2 novel findings. (1) Anhepatic inferior vena cavapressuregradient variedsubstantially in individuals undergoing piggyback, and (2) gradient was positively associatedwith early acute kidney injury. We hypothesize that this (unmeasured) variation explains the conflictingfindings ofprevious studies that compared surgical techniques. Also, we propose that caval pressure gradient could be routinely assessed to optimize real-time piggyback clamp position during livertransplant surgery.

Piggyback or Cava Replacement: Which Implantation Technique Protects Liver Recipients From Acute Kidney Injury and Complications?

The cava-preserving piggyback (PB) technique requires only partial cava clamping during the anhepatic phase in liver transplantation (LT) and, therefore, maintains venous return and may hemodynamically stabilize the recipient. Hence, it is an ongoing debate whether PB implantation is more protective from acute kidney injury (AKI) after LT when compared with a classic cava replacement (CR) technique. The aim of this study was to assess the rate of AKI and other complications after LT comparing both transplant techniques without the use of venovenous bypass. We retrospectively analyzed the adult donation after brain death LT cohort between 2008 and 2016 at our center. Liver and kidney function and general outcomes including complications were assessed. Overall 378 transplantations were analyzed, of which 177 (46.8%) were performed as PB and 201 (53.2%) as CR technique. AKI occurred equally often in both groups. Transient renal replacement therapy was required in 22.6% and 22.4% comparing the PB and CR techniques (P = 0.81). Further outcome parameters including the complication rate were similar in both cohorts. Five-year graft and patient survival were comparable between the groups with 81% and 85%, respectively (P = 0.48; P = 0.58). In conclusion, both liver implantation techniques are equal in terms of kidney function and overall complications following LT.

Prediction of postoperative outcomes using intraoperative hemodynamic monitoring data

Major surgeries can result in high rates of adverse postoperative events. Reliable prediction of which patient might be at risk for such events may help guide peri- and postoperative care. We show how archiving and mining of intraoperative hemodynamic data in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) can aid in the prediction of postoperative 180-day mortality and acute renal failure (ARF), improving upon predictions that rely on preoperative information only. From 101 patient records, we extracted 15 preoperative features from clinical records and 41 features from intraoperative hemodynamic signals. We used logistic regression with leave-one-out cross-validation to predict outcomes, and incorporated methods to limit potential model instabilities from feature multicollinearity. Using only preoperative features, mortality prediction achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.53 (95% CI: 0.44–0.78). By using intraoperative features, performance improved significantly to 0.82 (95% CI: 0.56–0.91, P = 0.001). Similarly, including intraoperative features (AUC = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.66–0.94) in ARF prediction improved performance over preoperative features (AUC = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.50–0.85), though not significantly (P = 0.32). We conclude that inclusion of intraoperative hemodynamic features significantly improves prediction of postoperative events in OLT. Features strongly associated with occurrence of both outcomes included greater intraoperative central venous pressure and greater transfusion volumes.

Acute kidney injury after liver transplantation: Recent insights and future perspectives

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common postoperative complication after liver transplantation (LT). The occurrence of postoperative AKI after LT (Post-LT AKI) is associated with inferior patient and graft outcomes. Post-LT AKI is multifactorial in origin and has been related to the severity of liver disease, pre-LT renal dysfunction, graft quality, perioperative events and toxicity of immunosuppressive therapy. Furthermore it is thought that hepatic ischaemia reperfusion injury might be a driving force in the aetiology of post-LT AKI. Novel biomarkers for AKI are emerging and can be useful for early identification and characterization of AKI. There is a clear need for strategies aimed at preventing or treating post-LT AKI. Several pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions have been studied, but so far failed to show any benefit in the prevention of post-LT AKI. Further studies are needed to develop and evaluate new interventions aimed at preventing post-LT AKI and improve patient outcomes.

Incidence and outcomes of acute kidney injury in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation

PURPOSE

To describe the incidence and outcomes linked with acute kidney injury (AKI) after liver transplantation (LT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients.

METHODS

From January 2003 to February 2011, HCC patients undergoing LT were retrospectively enrolled. Patient with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m² was excluded. AKI was defined and classified according to the AKIN criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 566 eligible patients, AKI was found in 109 (19.26%) patients (stage I, 66 cases; stage II, 15 cases; and stage III, 28 cases). Risk factors for AKI were the long anhepatic time (OR = 3.59, P = 0.009) and prolonged duration of systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 90 mmHg (OR = 1.07, P < 0.0001). Post-LT AKI was an independent risk factor associated with 30-day mortality (HR = 4.05, P = 0.047). Complete recovery occurred in 84 (77.06%) of all AKI episodes within 1 month after operation, while 25 patients (22.94%) suffered from prolonged AKI. Patients with prolonged AKI had a poorer 1-year survival than those with transient AKI (40 vs 86.90%; P < 0.0001). Patients with severe AKI more often developed prolonged AKI. 13 patients (52%) of the prolonged AKI progressed to chronic kidney disease (CKD) defined as eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m² after 1 year post-operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-LT AKI is not an uncommon complication. Intra-operative hemodynamic instability is crucial in the development of post-LT AKI and deserves more attention. Most post-LT AKI is transient and reversible, while the prolonged form may predict a decrease survival.

Report of the 22nd Annual Congress of the International Liver Transplantation Society

The 2016 Annual Congress of the International Liver Transplantation Society was held in Seoul, South Korea in May. The 22nd Congress marked the largest multidisciplinary liver transplantation meeting in Asia since 2010. The principal themes were living donation, allocation, immunosuppression, machine preservation, novel treatment of hepatitis C, and expansion of the deceased-donor allograft pool. This report presents select abstracts from the scientific sessions within the context of the published literature to serve as a quick reference.

Protecting the Kidney in Liver Transplant Recipients: Practice-Based Recommendations From the American Society of Transplantation Liver and Intestine Community of Practice

Both acute and chronic kidney disease are common after liver transplantation and result in significant morbidity and mortality. The introduction of the Model for End-stage Liver Disease score has directly correlated with an increased prevalence of perioperative renal dysfunction and the number of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantations performed. Kidney dysfunction in this population is typically multifactorial and related to preexisting conditions, pretransplantation renal injury, perioperative events, and posttransplantation nephrotoxic immunosuppressive therapies. The management of kidney disease after liver transplantation is challenging, as by the time the serum creatinine level is significantly elevated, few interventions affect the course of progression. Also, immunological factors such as antibody-mediated kidney rejection have become of greater interest given the rising liver-kidney transplant population. Therefore, this review, assembled by experts in the field and endorsed by the American Society of Transplantation Liver and Intestine Community of Practice, provides a critical assessment of measures of renal function and interventions aimed at preserving renal function early and late after liver and simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation. Key points and practice-based recommendations for the prevention and management of kidney injury in this population are provided to offer guidance for clinicians and identify gaps in knowledge for future investigations.

Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Hepatic Venous Outflow and Renal Function after Conventional versus Piggyback Liver Transplantation

Background

This randomized prospective clinical trial compared the hepatic venous outflow drainage and renal function after conventional with venovenous bypass (n = 15) or piggyback (n = 17) liver transplantation.

Methods

Free hepatic vein pressure (FHVP) and central venous pressure (CVP) measurements were performed after graft reperfusion. Postoperative serum creatinine (Cr) was measured daily on the first week and on the 14^th, 21^st and 28^th postoperative days (PO). The prevalence of acute renal failure (ARF) up to the 28th PO was analyzed by RIFLE-AKIN criteria. A Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) approach was used for comparison of longitudinal measurements of renal function.

Results

FHVP-CVP gradient > 3 mm Hg was observed in 26.7% (4/15) of the patients in the conventional group and in 17.6% (3/17) in the piggyback group (p = 0.68). Median FHVP-CVP gradient was 2 mm Hg (0–8 mmHg) vs. 3 mm Hg (0–7 mm Hg) in conventional and piggyback groups, respectively (p = 0.73). There is no statistically significant difference between the conventional (1/15) and the piggyback (2/17) groups regarding massive ascites development (p = 1.00). GEE estimated marginal mean for Cr was significantly higher in conventional than in piggyback group (2.14 ± 0.26 vs. 1.47 ± 0.15 mg/dL; p = 0.02). The conventional method presented a higher prevalence of severe ARF during the first 28 PO days (OR = 3.207; 95% CI, 1.010 to 10.179; p = 0.048).

Conclusion

Patients submitted to liver transplantation using conventional or piggyback methods present similar results regarding venous outflow drainage of the graft. Conventional with venovenous bypass technique significantly increases the harm of postoperative renal dysfunction.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01707810

Caval reconstruction techniques in orthotopic liver transplantation

There are several caval reconstruction techniques currently in use for orthotopic liver transplantation. These include caval replacement or the conventional technique, performed with or without venovenous bypass, piggyback technique with anastomosis with two or three hepatic veins with or without cavotomy and modifications of the piggyback technique including end-to-side and side-to-side cavocaval anastomosis. There are few randomized controlled trials comparing the use of these techniques and our knowledge of their comparability is based on a few multi- and many single-center retrospective and prospective reviews. Although there are advantages and disadvantages for each technique, it is advisable that the surgeon perform the technique with which they have the most the experience and at which they are the most skilled as excellent outcomes can be obtained with any of the caval reconstruction options discussed.

Different cava reconstruction techniques in liver transplantation: piggyback versus cava resection

BACKGROUND

Originally, cava reconstruction (CR) in liver transplantation meant complete resection and reinsertion of the donor cava. Alternatively, preservation of the recipients inferior vena cava (IVC) with side-to-side anastomosis (known as "piggyback") can be performed. Here, partial clamping maintains blood flow of the IVC, which may improve cardiovascular stability, reduce blood loss and stabilize kidney function. The aim of this study was to compare both techniques with particular focus on kidney function.

METHODS

A series of 414 patients who had had adult liver transplantations (2006-2009) were included. Among them, 176 (42.5%) patients had piggyback and 238 had classical CR operation, 112 (27.1%) of the patients underwent CR accompanied with veno-venous bypass (CR-B) and 126 (30.4%) without a bypass. The choice of either technique was based on the surgeons' individual preference. Kidney function [serum creatinine, calculated glomerular filtration rate (GFR), RIFLE stages] was assessed over 14 days.

RESULTS

Lab-MELD scores were significantly higher in CR-B (22.5+/-11.0) than in CR (17.3+/-9.0) and piggyback (18.8+/-10.0) (P=0.008). Unexpectedly, the incidences of arterial stenoses (P=0.045) and biliary leaks (P=0.042) were significantly increased in piggyback. Preoperative serum creatinine levels were the highest in CR-B [1.45+/-1.17 vs 1.25+/-0.85 (piggyback) and 1.13+/-0.60 mg/dL (CR); P=0.033]. Although a worsening of postoperative kidney function was observed among all groups, this was most pronounced in CR-B [creatinine day 14: 1.67+/-1.40 vs 1.35+/-0.96 (piggyback) and 1.45+/-1.03 mg/dL (CR); P=0.102]. Accordingly, the proportion of patients displaying RIFLE stages ≥2 was the highest in CR/CR-B (26%/19%) when compared to piggyback (18%).

CONCLUSIONS

Piggyback revealed a shorter warm ischemic time, a reduced blood loss, and a decreased risk of acute kidney failure. Thus, piggyback is a useful technique, which should be applied in standard procedures. When piggyback is unfeasible, cava replacement, which displayed a lower incidence of vascular and biliary complications in our study, remains as a safe alternative.

Orthotopic liver transplantation without venovenous bypass: 125 cases from a single center

AIM

This study analyzed a 10-year single-center experience in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) without venovenous bypass (VVB).

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed a nonrandomized series (1999-2008) of 125 adult OLT patients without VVB.

RESULTS

The main causes of liver failure were viral hepatitis (n = 39), alcoholic liver disease (n = 22), and liver cancer (n = 17). One-year survival was 76.4%. The most common postoperative complications were bile duct stenosis (n = 12), postoperative bleeding (n = 8), hepatic artery thrombosis (n = 7), and primary liver failure (n = 6). Twelve patients required hemodialysis and four underwent retransplantations of the liver. Fourteen patients died before postoperative day 30(th). Univariate analysis showed significant differences between patients who did and did not survive 30 days among donor death diagnoses (P = .05), red blood cell units transfused (P = .03), aspartate aminotranferase on the first postoperative day (P = .002), ABO type (P = .04), time of orotracheal intubation (P = .001), hemodialysis (P = .001), and period of postoperative vasoactive drug use (P = .006). The total length of orotracheal tube intubation showed a significant independent association with mortality before 30 days (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

OLT without VVB can be safely performed even in severe cases of chronic liver failure.

Optimizing cost-effectiveness in perioperative care for liver transplantation: a model for low- to medium-income countries

Although liver transplantation (LT) is a highly effective treatment, it has been considered too costly for publicly funded health systems in many countries with low to medium average incomes. However, with economic growth and improving results, some governments are reconsidering this position. Cost-effectiveness data for LT are limited, especially in perioperative care, and the techniques and costs vary widely between centers without overt differences in outcomes. Anesthesiologists working in new programs find it difficult to determine which modalities are essential, which are needed only in exceptional circumstances, and which may be omitted without effects on outcomes. We investigated key elements of preoperative evaluations, intraoperative management, and early postoperative care that might significantly affect costs in order to develop a best-value approach for new programs in resource-limited health systems. We identified all modalities of care commonly used in anesthesia and perioperative care for adult LT along with their costs. Those considered to be universally accepted as minimum requirements for safe care were excluded from the analysis, and so were those considered to be safe and low-cost, even when evidence of efficacy was lacking. The remaining items were, therefore, those with uncertain or context-restricted value and significant costs. A systematic review of the published evidence, practice surveys, and institutional guidelines was performed, and the evidence was graded and summarized. With respect to costs and benefits, each modality was then cited as strongly recommended, recommended or optional, or no recommendation was made because of insufficient evidence. Sixteen modalities, which included preoperative cardiovascular imaging, venovenous bypass, pulmonary artery catheterization, high-flow fluid warming devices, drug therapies for hemostasis, albumin, cell salvage, anesthetic drugs, personnel (staffing) requirements, and early extubation, were assessed. Only high-flow fluid warming was strongly recommended. The recommended modalities included preoperative echocardiography, cell salvage, tranexamic acid and early extubation. Six others were rated optional, and there was insufficient evidence for 5 modalities. We conclude that some costly techniques and treatments can be omitted without adverse effects on outcomes.

Orthotopic liver transplantation without venovenous bypass using the conventional and piggyback techniques

INTRODUCTION

Orthotopic liver transplantation is a widely used procedure for the treatment of irreversible liver diseases for which there is no possibility of medical treatment. When this procedure is performed by the conventional technique, the retrohepatic vena cava is removed along with the native liver. The inferior vena cava (IVC) remains clamped until the revascularization of the graft, and in this period there is a reduction in the venous return, which may induce a fall by up to 50% in the cardiac output with hemodynamic instability and a fall in renal perfusion pressure. The use of a portal-femoral-axillary venovenous bypass system, in which the blood from the femoral and portal veins returns to the heart via the axillary vein propelled by a centrifugal pump, is intended to minimize the effects of the IVC clamping. In the piggyback (PB) technique, the native liver is removed and the IVC of the recipient is preserved and only partially clamped. We have employed both techniques without the use of venovenous bypass for 10 years. The objective of this study was to compare the results obtained from the use of the two techniques.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of 195 patients transplanted between 1999 and 2008: 125 by the conventional technique and 70, the PB technique. The intraoperative parameters were analyzed (surgical time, ischemia time, use of blood products, and diuresis), as well as intensive care support (duration of stay in intensive care unit and use of vasoactive drugs), period of intubation, length of hospital stay, renal function, graft function, postoperative complications, retransplantation, and patient survival.

RESULTS

The PB group showed a reduction in surgical time, warm ischemia time, the use of packed red blood cells concentrates, and fresh frozen plasma, as well as mortality at 30 days (P<.05). There were no differences in relation to cold ischemia time, intraoperative diuresis; length of stay and use of vasoactive drugs in the intensive care unit; the period of intubation; the duration of hospital stay; the renal function; the graft function; the need for reoperation; the incidence of sepsis, biliary complications, vascular complications; need for retransplantation; and 1-year mortality. The cumulative survival rate at 1 year was significantly better among the PB patients.

CONCLUSION

Orthotopic liver transplantation can be performed without venovenous bypass with good results, using either the conventional technique or the PB technique. Provided that there is no technical contraindication and a long ischemia period is not foreseen, the PB technique should be the technique of choice.

Critical care issues in patients after liver transplantation

The majority of patients who undergo liver transplantation (LT) spend some time in the intensive care unit during the postoperative period. For some, this is an expected part of the immediate posttransplant recovery period, whereas for others, the stay is more prolonged because of preexisting conditions, intraoperative events, or postoperative complications. In this review, 4 topics that are particularly relevant to the postoperative intensive care of LT recipients are discussed, with an emphasis on current knowledge specific to this patient group. Infectious complications are the most common causes of early posttransplant morbidity and mortality. The common patterns of infection seen in patients after LT and their management are discussed. Acute kidney injury and renal failure are common in post-LT patients. Kidney injury identification, etiologies, and risk factors and approaches to management are reviewed. The majority of patients will require weaning from mechanical ventilation in the immediate postoperative period; the approach to this is discussed along with the approach for those patients who require a prolonged period of mechanical ventilation. A poorly functioning graft requires prompt identification and appropriate management if the outcomes are to be optimized. The causes of poor graft function are systematically reviewed, and the management of these grafts is discussed.

Veno-venous bypass versus none for liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Veno-venous bypass is used to overcome the effects of clamping of the inferior vena cava and portal vein during liver transplanation. The routine use of veno-venous bypass is, however, controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of veno-venous bypass (irrespective of open or percutaneous technique; heparin-coated or no heparin-coating) versus no veno-venous bypass during liver transplantation. To compare the benefits and harms of the different techniques of veno-venous bypass during liver transplantation.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until December 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials comparing veno-venous bypass during liver transplantation (irrespective of language or publication status).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and independently extracted data. We analysed the data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models using RevMan Analysis. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on intention-to-treat or available case analysis. For binary outcomes, we used the Fisher's exact test since none of the comparisons of binary outcomes included more than one trial.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three trials with high risk of bias which compared veno-venous bypass (n = 65) versus no veno-venous bypass (n = 66). None of the trials reported patient or graft survival. There were no significant differences regarding renal failure or blood transfusion requirements between the two groups. None of the trials reported on the morbidity related to veno-venous bypass or the requirement of veno-venous bypass in the control group.We identified one trial with high risk of bias which compared percutaneous (n = 20) versus open technique (n =19) of veno-venous bypass. The patient or graft survival was not reported. There was no difference in veno-venous bypass related morbidity between the two groups. The operating time was significantly shorter in the percutaneous technique group (MD -59 minutes; 95% CI -102 to -16).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to support or refute the use of veno-venous bypass in liver transplantation. There is no evidence to prefer any particular technique of veno-venous bypass in liver transplantation.

The influence of the explant technique on the hemodynamic profile during sequential domino liver transplantation in familial amyloid polyneuropathy patients

Familial amyloidotic polyneuropathy (FAP) patients present adrenergic cardiac input blockade secondary to amyloid deposits and sympathetic neuropathy. Consequently, their capacity to compensate for hemodynamic changes is limited. To avoid hemodynamic disturbances in sequential liver transplants, a standard procedure with venovenous bypass or inferior vena cava preservation is contemplated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of both techniques on the hemodynamic management and outcome of patients affected by FAP and scheduled for a domino liver transplantation program. We evaluated 36 FAP patients. Venovenous bypass was performed for 20 patients (the venovenous bypass group), whereas the vena cava preservation technique was used for the remaining 16 patients (the cava preservation group). The time that elapsed from FAP diagnosis to liver transplantation was 3.2 +/- 2.7 years. Peripheral neuropathy was present in all patients, autonomic dysfunction was present in 71%, and cardiac involvement was present in 69%. Renal and gastrointestinal manifestations were reported in 19% and 53% of patients, respectively. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 97%, 93%, and 93%, respectively. Intraoperative hemodynamic and cardiac disorders, need for vasoactive drugs, blood loss, and transfusion requirements were recorded. Postoperative outcome and cardiac and renal complications were also recorded. No significant differences in disease severity or demographic characteristics were observed. Among all the variables studied, only the total ischemia time and time in surgery were significantly longer in the venovenous bypass group patients (P < or = 0.05). During the postoperative period, the incidence of minor cardiovascular events, incidence of acute renal dysfunction, and outcomes were similar in the 2 groups. In conclusion, either preservation of the vena cava or the standard technique with venovenous bypass can be safely used in FAP patients during liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 15:869-875, 2009. (c) 2009 AASLD.

Development of a risk stratification model for predicting acute renal failure in orthotopic liver transplantation recipients

The purpose of this prospective observation cohort study was to develop and validate a risk stratification model for prediction of acute renal failure after liver transplantation. Data from 71 orthotopic liver transplantation recipients were used to develop a risk stratification model by binary logistic regression analysis containing the following variables: pretransplant hepatitis B and/or C infection; arterial hypertension; intra-operative mean arterial blood pressure before induction of anaesthesia; units of packed red blood cells required; hypotension (mean arterial blood pressure <or=50 mmHg); and maximum lactate concentration. Validation of the model on 167 consecutive patients revealed a sensitivity of 0.78, a specifity of 0.92, a negative predictive value of 0.96 and a positive predictive value of 0.62. This risk stratification model enables identification of orthotopic liver transplantation recipients with no or low risk for acute renal failure directly at the end of the transplantation procedure.

Temporary porto-caval shunt utility during orthotopic liver transplantation

INTRODUCTION

In liver transplantation (OLT) a porto-caval shunt is a well-defined technique practiced by many surgeons in several centers.

METHODS

We considered 186 cadaveric OLT patients who underwent a cavo-cavostomy-type reconstruction; they were divided into two groups: those in whom we performed a porto-caval shunt (group A) and those in whose we did not (group B). We evaluated several variables: warm and total ischemia time, intraoperative blood and fresh frozen plasma transfusions, crystalloid and colloid requirements, blood loss, operative duration, hemodynamic intraoperative changes and diuresis, length of hospital stay, and creatinine values at days 1 and 2, and at discharge day.

RESULTS

Total and warm ischemic time differed significantly between the two groups. Infusion of blood, fresh frozen plasma, colloid, and crystalloid did not significantly differ. Blood loss was lower, and intraoperative diuresis was not significantly increased in group A subjects. Postoperative hospitalizations were 16.5 and 17.8 days and operative times, 504 and 611 minutes in the two groups. Both cardiac index and ejection fraction values during the anhepatic phase were significantly greater among group A than group B patients. PAD at the two phases was greater in group B. The PAS was significantly different only at reperfusion time. Creatinine values were significantly different at discharge. Better survival was shown for group A patients over group B subjects.

CONCLUSION

The results presented herein confirmed that a porto-caval shunt during OLT was a safe, useful expedient contributing to an improved hemodynamic status and a better time distribution in the various phases of liver transplantation.

The need for venovenous bypass in liver transplantation

Since introduction of the conventional liver transplantation (CLTx) by Starzl, which was based on the resection of recipient inferior vena cava (IVC) along the liver, the procedure has undergone several refinements. Successful use of venovenous bypass (VVB) was first introduced by Shaw et al., although in recent decades there has been controversy regarding the routine use of VVB during CLTx. With development of piggyback liver transplantation (PLTx), the use of caval clamping and VVB is avoided, leading to fewer complications related to VVB. However, some authors still advocate VVB in PLTx. The great diversity among centers in their use of VVB during CLTx, or even along the PLTx technique, has led to confusion regarding the indication setting for VVB. For this reason, we present an overview of the use of VVB in CLTx, the target of patients for whom VVB could be beneficial, and the needs assessment of VVB for patients undergoing PLTx. Recent studies have shown that with the advancement of surgical skills, refinement of surgical techniques, and improvements in anesthesiology, there are only limited indications for doing CLTx with VVB routinely. PLTx with preservation of IVC can be performed in almost all primary transplants and in the majority of re-transplantations without the need for VVB. Nevertheless, in a few selective cases with severe intra-operative hemodynamic instability, or with a failed test of transient IVC occlusion, the application of VVB is still justifiable. These indications should be judged intra-operatively and the decision is based on each center's preference.

Preserving renal function in liver transplant recipients with rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin and delayed initiation of calcineurin inhibitors

Early renal dysfunction following liver transplantation is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. To evaluate the impact of delayed initiation of calcineurin inhibitor on renal function, we conducted a retrospective study comparing 118 liver transplant recipients who received rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin and delayed initiation of calcineurin inhibitor with 80 liver transplant recipients who received no antibody and early initiation of calcineurin inhibitor (control group). All patients received mycophenolate mofetil and steroids. Delayed calcineurin inhibitor initiation with anti-thymocyte globulin was associated with significant improvement in renal function throughout the first year post-transplant. At 12 months post-transplant, patients treated with this regimen experienced lower serum creatinine (1.4 +/- 0.5 versus 1.7 +/- 0.5 mg/dL, P < 0.001), a higher estimated glomerular filtration rate (57.4 +/- 20.5 versus 43.7 +/- 14.4 mL/min/1.73 m(2), P < 0.001), and less dependence on dialysis (0.8% versus 13%, P < 0.001) in comparison with no antibody and early calcineurin inhibitor initiation. Patient survival and graft survival were similar between groups; however, there was a trend of a lower incidence of early biopsy-proven acute rejection with anti-thymocyte globulin. Overall infection and cytomegalovirus infection were significantly lower in anti-thymocyte globulin-treated patients, and there was no increased incidence of hepatitis C recurrence in comparison with controls. In conclusion, delayed initiation of calcineurin inhibitor with anti-thymocyte globulin in liver transplant recipients is safe and is associated with improvements in renal function and a lower incidence of early acute rejection in comparison with no antibody and early initiation of calcineurin inhibitor.

The Effect of Clamping of Inferior Vena Cava and Portal Vein on Urine Output During Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative hypotension, massive transfusion, liver disease, coexistent renal dysfunction, and decreased glomerular filtration rate during the anhepatic phase are major hazards for kidney function. We undertook this study to determine the change in urine output during clamping.

METHOD

Twenty-four patients without preexistent renal disease, who were undergoing liver transplantation using the piggyback method, were enrolled in this study. Patients with a serum creatinine level >1.2 mg/dL were excluded. Urine output was monitored over 30 minutes before inferior vena cava and portal vein clamping, during clamping, and for 30 minutes after declamping. None of the patients had a clamping time >70 minutes. Our goal was to maintain mean arterial blood pressure and heart rate just by fluid administration diuretics were avoided.

RESULTS

Participants had a mean age of 39.12 +/- 13.52 years (range, 15-67 years) with a male to female ratio of 1:4. Urine output 30 minutes before clamping was 3.64 +/- 3.58 (range, 1.25-15.18) mL/kg/h, decreased to 1.28 +/- 2.58 (range, 0-11.39) mL/kg/h during clamping (P=.00), and increased to 3.56 +/- 3.64 (range, 0.51-15.18) mL/kg/h 30 minutes after declamping (P=.00).

CONCLUSION

Urine output was significantly reduced in all patients after clamping of the IVC and portal veins. This observation may be explained by increased venous pressure leading to decreased renal perfusion pressure. It has been stated that one of the advantages of veno-veno bypass (VVB) is increased renal perfusion pressure. However, if the clamping time in the piggyback method is <70 minutes and patients have normal preoperative renal function, the decreased renal perfusion pressure will not cause postoperative kidney dysfunction.

Risk factors of acute renal failure after liver transplantation

The objective of this study was to determine the risk factors of postoperative acute renal failure (ARF) in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). We reviewed 184 consecutive OLT. Postoperative ARF was defined as a persistent rise of 50% increase or more of the S-creatinine (S-Cr). The patients were classified as early postoperative ARF (E-ARF) (first week) and late postoperative ARF (L-ARF) (second to fourth week). Preoperative variables were age, sex, comorbidity, indication for OLT, Child-Pugh stage, united network for organ sharing status, analysis of the blood and urine, and donor's data. Intraoperative variables were systolic arterial pressure, mean arterial pressure, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, cardiac index, and systemic vascular resistance index. Surgical technique, number of blood products transfused, need for adrenergic agonist drugs, and intraoperative complications were also important. Postoperative variables were duration of stay in the intensive care unit, time on mechanic ventilation, liver graft dysfunction, need for adrenergic agonist drugs, units of blood products infused, episodes of acute rejection, re-operations, and bacterial infections. Firstly we carried out a univariate statistical analysis, and secondly a logistic regression analysis. The risk factors for E-ARF were: pretransplant ARF (odds ratio (OR)=10.2, P=0.025), S-albumin (OR=0.3, P=0.001), duration of treatment with dopamine (OR=1.6, P=0.001), and grade II-IV dysfunction of the liver graft (OR=5.6, P=0.002). The risk factors for L-ARF were: re-operation (OR=3.1, P=0.013) and bacterial infection (OR=2.9, P=0.017). The development of E-ARF is influenced by preoperative factors such as ARF and hypoalbuminemia, as well as postoperative factors such as liver dysfunction and prolonged treatment with dopamine. The predicting factors of L-ARF differ from E-ARF and correspond to postoperative causes such as bacterial infection and surgical re-operation.

Mil trasplantes hepáticos en el Hospital Clínic i Provincial de Barcelona

The aim of this study was to evaluate a consecutive series of 1000 liver transplants performed in our institution and to evaluate changes over time in donors and recipients, as well as results.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

To clearly evaluate the differences between the initial transplantation period and the present period, the first 100 consecutive liver transplantations performed (June 1988-June 1990) and the last 200 consecutive liver transplantations performed (January 2001-June 2003) were compared.

RESULTS

Donor age increased (23+/-10 vs. 45+/-19), the etiology of brain death changed (severe head injury: 78% vs. 23.5%; stroke: 17% vs. 52.5%) and the percentage of donors from alternative methods to cadaveric donors increased (living donors: 12.5%) in the second period. Regarding recipients, the piggy-back technique and biliary anastomosis without T-tube were introduced in the second period. Actuarial 1-year survival was higher in the second period than in the first (84% vs. 91.3%). The need for retrasplantation in the entire series was 9.5%, with actuarial survival at 1, 5 and 10 years of 67.7%, 51.3% and 39.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Because of the lack of donors and the greater number of patients on the waiting list, poorer quality donors and more critical recipients have been accepted and alternative and innovative programs have been started. Nevertheless, due to improvement in patient management before, during and after transplantation, the previous good results have been maintained.

Vasopressor agents without volume expansion as a safe alternative to venovenous bypass during cavaplasty liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Cavaplasty orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) offers advantages for hepatectomy and implantation and eliminates the risk of outflow obstruction. However, it does require clamping of the cava. This study describes the use of a vasopressor without fluid expansion or venovenous bypass (VB) for hemodynamic control during the anhepatic phase.

METHODS

The cavaplasty OLT technique was used routinely. A vasopressor was administered if the mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) was less than 60 mm Hg after clamping of the cava. If the MAP did not reach 60 mm Hg after adjusting the dosage of the vasopressor, femoro-axillary VB would be used. VB was also indicated for preexisting cardiac disease or for massive hemorrhage from severe portal hypertension and extensive adhesions.

RESULTS

Among all the 121 adult cavaplasty OLTs, 33 were supported with VB and 50 received a vasopressor. The remaining 38 were excluded. However, baseline variables were well matched, except that preexisting cardiac disease was more frequent in the VB group. The median dosage of epinephrine was 0.07 microg/kg/min (range 0.01-0.6). The VB and vasopressor groups were similar in the reduction in mean MAP and the accumulation in arterial lactate upon clamping as well as in the central venous pressure upon unclamping. Postreperfusion hypotension was more frequent in the VB than in the vasopressor group (27.3% vs. 4.0%, P=0.006). There was no primary graft nonfunction or intraoperative right heart failure. One patient in the vasopressor group required postoperative temporary dialysis. Ninety-day patient and graft survival for the VB and vasopressor groups were 97.0% vs. 98.0% and 97.0% vs. 94.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Modest doses of vasopressor without volume expansion or VB can maintain hemodynamic stability during the anhepatic phase of cavaplasty OLT.

Perioperative cytokines during orthotopic liver transplantation without venovenous bypass

Since most of studies investigating cytokine levels during human orthotopic liver transplantation used venovenous bypass (VVB), it may be difficult to distinguish between the increase in proinflammatory mediators induced by VVB, by ischemia-reperfusion injury or by splanchnic venous congestion in the anhepatic phase. The goal of this investigation was to assess the levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and soluble interleukin-2 receptors (sIL-2r) during OLT procedures routinely performed without VVB.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-one consecutive patients underwent OLT with cross clamping of the inferior caval vein without VVB. Soluble IL-2r concentrations were measured by means of luminescence enzyme immunometric assay and IL-6 by means of a sequential immunometric assay. Time points (TP) of sampling were before induction of anesthesia (TP1), after cross-clamping of the inferior vena cava (TP2), 15 minutes after reperfusion (TP3), and 24 hours after the transplant procedure (TP4).

RESULTS

Soluble IL-2r increased significantly 24 hours after transplantation (P =.02) compared to TP1, TP2, and TP3. IL-6 increased significantly during the anhepatic period (TP2 vs TP1, P =.003) and again in the reperfusion period (TP2 vs TP3, P =.002). Twenty-four hours after surgery IL-6 declined significantly (TP3 vs TP4, P =.001), but remained significantly higher (P = 0.04) compared to TP1. Furthermore, we examined the relative changes (DeltaTP %) in perioperative levels of cytokines compared with those previously published in studies using VVB. We observed higher values of DeltaTP % of IL-6 in TP2 and TP4 among our group of patient without VVB. The data on sIL-2r were similar, suggesting no major effects of the operative technique on sIL-2r levels.

CONCLUSION

The two interleukins showed different perioperative trends. Our data suggest that cross clamping contributes more to cell activation, namely, increased release of IL-6 in the anhepatic phase than the use of VVB. However, no major differences were observed during the reperfusion period. The extent of clinical effect on graft function of higher IL-6 levels in the anhepatic period among recipients not supported with VVB remains to be clarified.

Does the standard vs piggyback surgical technique affect the development of early acute renal failure after orthotopic liver transplantation?

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of the surgical technique on postoperative renal function during the first week after liver transplantation (OLT). We performed a retrospective study of 184 consecutive OLT. Criteria for acute renal failure were: serum creatinine >1.5 mg/dL, an increase by 50% in the baseline serum creatinine, or oliguria requiring renal replacement therapy. The distribution of patients according to the surgical technique was: standard (n=84), venovenous bypass (n=20), and piggyback (n=80). Other variables analyzed were: intraoperative requirement for blood products, treatment with adrenergic agonists, intraoperative complications, and postreperfusion syndrome. Univariate analysis showed the following parameters to be significantly related to postoperative renal failure: intraoperative fresh frozen plasma and cryoprecipitate requirements, intraoperative complications, postreperfusion syndrome, need for noradrenaline or dobutamine, standard surgical technique versus piggyback (39% vs 18%, P<.01) and venovenous vs piggyback (50% vs 18%, P<.01). Logistic regression analysis identified the following variables as having independent prognostic value: (1) Standard surgical technique vs piggyback (OR=3.3, P=.01); (2) venovenous vs piggyback (OR=4.7, P=.02); and (3) >20 U cryoprecipitate requirement (OR=1.04, P=.01). In conclusion, compared with the piggyback technique, the standard surgical technique appears to be an independent risk factor for postoperative acute renal failure. When venovenous bypass is used in patients who do not tolerate trial clamping of inferior vena cava, it does not reduce the incidence of postoperative renal failure. Finally, the piggyback technique significantly reduces the probability of acute renal failure after liver transplantation.

Risk factors for development of acute renal failure after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Acute renal failure (ARF) is a common complication after liver transplantation (LTx). Identification of risk factors may prevent the development and attenuate the impact of ARF on patients outcome after LTX.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of variables in the pre, intra, and postoperative periods of 92 patients submitted to LTx was performed in order to identify risk factors for development of ARF after LTx. ARF was defined as serum creatinine > or = 2.0 mg/dL in the first 30 days after LTx. Univariate and multivariate analysis by logistic regression were performed.

RESULTS

ARF group comprised 56 patients (61%). Preoperative serum creatinine was higher in ARF group. During the intraoperative period, ARF group required more blood transfusions, developed more episodes of hypotension and presented longer anesthesia time. In the postoperative period, ARF group presented higher serum bilirubin and more episodes of hypotension. Dialysis was required in 10 patients (11%). The identifled risk factors for development of ARF were: preoperative serum creatinine > 1.0 mg/dL. more than five blood transfusions in the intraoperative period, hypotension during intra and postoperative periods. The identified mortality risk factors were hypotension in the postoperative period and no recovery of renal function after 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Several factors are involved in the pathogenesis of ARF after LTx and may influence patients outcome and mortality. Pretransplant renal function and hemodynamic conditions in the operative and postoperative periods were identified as risk factors for development of ARF after LTx. Nonrenal function recovery and postoperative hypotension were identified as mortality risk factors after LTx.

Right lobe living donor liver transplantation with or without venovenous bypass

BACKGROUND

Venovenous bypass was considered necessary to maintain haemodynamic stability and avoid splanchnic and retroperitoneal congestion during the anhepatic phase of liver transplantation. It was essential for right lobe living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in which the inferior vena cava needed to be cross-clamped to construct wide and short hepatic vein anastomoses. However, many complications related to venovenous bypass have been reported. This study aimed to determine whether venovenous bypass was necessary for right lobe LDLT.

METHODS

Between June 1996 and June 2001, 72 patients underwent right lobe LDLT. The outcomes for the first 29 patients who had venovenous bypass during the operation were compared with those of the remaining 43 patients who did not have venovenous bypass. In patients without bypass, blood pressure was maintained during the anhepatic phase by boluses of fluid infusion and vasopressors.

RESULTS

Compared with patients undergoing operation without venovenous bypass, patients who had venovenous bypass required significantly more blood, fresh frozen plasma and platelet infusion, and had a lower body temperature; their postoperative hepatic and renal function in the first week was worse than that in patients who did not have a bypass. The time to tracheal extubation was longer and the incidence of reintubation for ventilatory support was higher with venovenous bypass. Six of the 29 patients with venovenous bypass died in hospital, compared with two of the 43 patients without a bypass (P = 0.05). By multivariate analysis, the lowest body temperature during the transplant operation was the most significant factor that determined hospital death.

CONCLUSION

Venovenous bypass is not necessary and is probably harmful to patients undergoing right lobe LDLT, and should therefore be avoided.

An epidemiologic study of early renal replacement therapy after orthotopic liver transplantation

The preoperative impairment of renal function is associated with the need for postoperative renal replacement therapy (RRT) in patients undergoing liver transplantation. The principal goal of this investigation was to identify other factors apparent before or during transplant that were independently associated with the need for RRT in the early posttransplant period. A total of 260 consecutive adult patients who received a primary liver transplant were studied. Twenty-eight patients required early RRT (RRT initiated within 1 wk of transplant); 23 for control of volume overload. Preoperative blood urea nitrogen (odds ratio [95% CI], 1.52 [1.15 to 2.01] per 10 mg/dl), serum creatinine (1.91 [1.06 to 3.44] per 1 mg/dl), and urine output (0.12 [0.03 to 0.44] L/d) were independently predictive of the need for early RRT and in combination formed a parsimonious model that discriminated well (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.877) and had excellent fit (P = 0.699 to reject model fit). No other potential predictors meaningfully improved predictions of which patients would require early RRT. Patients requiring early RRT consumed more healthcare resources than patients who did not require early RRT, spending more time in intensive care (15 +/- 13 d versus 7 +/- 11 d; P < 0.001) and in the hospital (34 +/- 27 d versus 19 +/- 20 d; P < 0.001). The need for early RRT was strongly associated with death before hospital discharge (29% mortality versus 4% mortality among all others; P < 0.001). The data demonstrate that dependency on RRT in the first week after orthotopic liver transplantation stems almost entirely from preoperative renal dysfunction.

Piggyback technique and selective use of veno-venous bypass in adult orthotopic liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

The piggyback technique (PT), with preservation of the cava, is being used more frequently in adult orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The advantages of PT include hemodynamic stability during the anhepatic phase without a large-volume fluid infusion and obviating the need for veno-venous bypass (VVB). At our center, we changed our practice in July 1997 from the standard technique (ST) of OLT with routine use of VVB to PT and selective use of VVB. The purpose of the present study was to analyze the results with the two different practices, ST-routine VVB versus PT-selective VVB.

METHODS

Forty OLTs were performed during the period July 1995 July 1997 using ST-routine VVB (group I) and 36 during August 1997-December 1998 using PT-selective VVB (group II). The etiology of liver disease was similar in the two groups, with hepatitis C and alcoholic liver disease accounting for half of the patients in each group. The UNOS status, age, sex, and percentage of patients with previous upper abdominal surgery were also similar between the two groups.

RESULTS

In the PT-selective VVB era (group II), 34/36 patients (94%) underwent OLT with PT and VVB was used for 8 (22%) patients. The decision to use VVB was elective for 3 patients (fulminant hepatic failure, 2; severe portal hypertension, 1) and urgent for 5 patients (hemodynamic instability during hepatectomy). The intraoperative use of packed red blood cells (PRBC) (mean +/- SD) was 15+/-12 units for group I and 9+/-8 units for group II (p = 0.023). Anastomosis time and total operating time (mean +/- SD) were 91 + 30 min and 9.5+/-3.2 h, respectively, for group I patients compared with 52+/-28 min and 7.6+/-1.6 h, respectively, for group II patients (p<0.0001 and 0.002, respectively). Median post-operative stays in the intensive care unit (ICU) and in the hospital were 5 and 17 d, respectively, for group I and 4 and 11 d, respectively, for group II (p = NS). Mean serum creatinine on day 3 was similar in the two groups. Median hospital charges for group I patients were $105439 compared with $91779 for group II patients (p = NS). The 1-year actuarial graft and patient survival rates were 78% and 82%, respectively, for group I, and 92% and 95%, respectively, for group II.

CONCLUSIONS

PT is safe and can be performed in the majority of adult patients (>90%) undergoing OLT. With the routine application of the piggyback procedure, the use of VVB has been reduced to 20% of OLTs at our center. The practice of piggyback technique with the selective use of VVB is associated with shorter anhepatic phase and total operating time, lower blood product use, a trend towards shorter hospital length of stay, and reduced hospital charges compared with standard technique of OLT with routine use of VVB.

The safety and efficacy of a two-dose daclizumab (zenapax) induction therapy in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Induction therapy with daclizumab has been shown to be efficacious in the prevention of acute rejection in kidney transplant patients. The routine use of antibody induction therapy in liver transplantation has not gained widespread acceptance, except in the cases of renal insufficiency. The recent approval of daclizumab prompted us to initiate this pilot study using induction therapy in those patients at risk for developing posttransplant renal insufficiency.

METHODS

This nonrandomized study examined the use of daclizumab in 39 of the last 97 liver transplants performed at the University of Alabama in Birmingham. The daclizumab group received 2 mg/kg intravenously before organ engraftment, and 38 of the 39 received 1 mg/kg intravenously on postoperative day 5. The control group consisted of the remaining 58 contemporary patients. Additional immunosuppression consisted of steroids, tacrolimus, or microemulsion cyclosporine in all patients and mycophenolate mofetil in selected patients.

RESULTS

Pretransplant demographics were not significantly different between the groups. In the induction group there were significantly fewer males, 14 (36%) vs. 34 (59%) (P=0.03). They had greater renal insufficiency at the time of transplant, serum creatine 1.9+/-0.37 mg/dl vs. 0.8+/-0.5; P=0.0009, and more patients were at higher acuity (status 1 and 2A): 12 (31%) vs. 3 (5%) P=0.0006 than in the noninduction group. By postoperative day 7, renal function improved in the induction group such that it was not significantly different from the noninduction group and remained similar throughout the rest of the follow-up. The induction group also experienced significantly less acute rejection, 7 (18%) vs. 23 (40%) (P=0.02) than in the noninduction group in the first 6 months. The 1-, 3-, and 6-month patient survival rates were similar in the induction group, 97.4%, 97.4%, and 97.4%, vs. non-induction 94.8%, 93.0%, and 93% (P=NS). The incidence of cytomegalovirus, in the first 6 months, in the induction group was four (10%) vs. five (9%) (P=NS) in the noninduction group.

CONCLUSION

In the pilot study, induction therapy with daclizumab was safe, facilitated improvement in renal function, and appeared to reduce the incidence of acute rejection. Combination therapy with daclizumab may be an important adjunct in immunosuppressive strategies for liver transplant recipients.