Antifibrinolytics in liver transplantation: they are effective, but what about the risk-benefit ratio?

Risk Factors Associated with Reoperation for Bleeding following Liver Transplantation

Introduction. This study's objective was to identify risk factors associated with reoperation for bleeding following liver transplantation (LTx). Methods. A retrospective study was performed at a single institution between 2001 and 2012. Operative reports were used to identify patients who underwent reoperation for bleeding within 2 weeks following LTx (operations for nonbleeding etiologies were excluded). Results. Reoperation for bleeding was observed in 101/928 (10.8%) of LTx patients. The following characteristics were associated with reoperation on multivariable analysis: recipient MELD score (OR 1.06/MELD unit, 95% CI 1.03, 1.09), number of platelets transfused (OR 0.73/platelet unit, 95% CI 0.58, 0.91), and aminocaproic acid utilization (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27, 0.80). LTx patients who underwent reoperation for bleeding had a longer ICU stay (5 days ± 7 versus 2 days ± 3, P < 0.001) and hospitalization (18 days ± 9 versus 10 days ± 18, P < 0.001). The risk of death increased in patients who underwent reoperation for bleeding (HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.26, 2.85). Conclusion. Reoperation for bleeding following LTx was associated with increased resource utilization and recipient mortality. A lower threshold for intraoperative platelet transfusion and antifibrinolytics, especially in patients with high lab-MELD score, may decrease the incidence of reoperation for bleeding following LTx.

Methods to decrease blood loss and transfusion requirements for liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Excessive blood loss and increased blood transfusion requirements may have significant impact on the short-term and long-term outcomes after liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the potential benefits and harms of different methods of decreasing blood loss and blood transfusion requirements during liver transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and metaRegister of Controlled Trials until September 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials that were performed to compare various methods of decreasing blood loss and blood transfusion requirements during liver transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified the trials and extracted the data. We analysed the data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects model using RevMan Analysis. For each outcome we calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on available data analysis. We also conducted network meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 trials involving 1913 patients. The sample size in the trials varied from 8 to 209 participants. The interventions included pharmacological interventions (aprotinin, tranexamic acid, epsilon amino caproic acid, antithrombin 3, recombinant factor (rFvIIa), oestrogen, prostaglandin, epinephrine), blood substitutes (blood components rather than whole blood, hydroxy-ethyl starch, thromboelastography), and cardiovascular interventions (low central venous pressure). All the trials were of high risk of bias. Primary outcomes were reported in at least two trials for the following comparisons: aprotinin versus control, tranexamic acid versus control, recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) versus control, and tranexamic acid versus aprotinin. There were no significant differences in the 60-day mortality (3 trials; 6/161 (3.7%) in the aprotinin group versus 8/119 (6.7%) in the control group; RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.18 to 1.45), primary graft non-function (2 trials; 0/128 (0.0%) in the aprotinin group versus 4/89 (4.5%) in the control group; RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.25), retransplantation (3 trials; 2/256 (0.8%) in the aprotinin group versus 12/178 (6.7%) in the control group; RR 0.21; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.79), or thromboembolic episodes (3 trials; 4/161 (2.5%) in the aprotinin group versus 5/119 (4.2%) in the control group; RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.19 to 1.84) between the aprotinin and control groups. There were no significant differences in the 60-day mortality (3 trials; 4/83 (4.8%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 5/56 (8.9%) in the control group; RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.17 to 1.76), retransplantation (2 trials; 3/41 (7.3%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 3/36 (8.3%) in the control group; RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.18 to 3.48), or thromboembolic episodes (5 trials; 5/103 (4.9%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 1/76 (1.3%) in the control group; RR 2.20; 95% CI 0.38 to 12.64) between the tranexamic acid and control groups. There were no significant differences in the 60-day mortality (3 trials; 8/195 (4.1%) in the recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) group versus 2/91 (2.2%) in the control group; RR 1.51; 95% CI 0.33 to 6.95), thromboembolic episodes (2 trials; 24/185 (13.0%) in the rFVIIa group versus 8/81 (9.9%) in the control group; RR 1.38; 95% CI 0.65 to 2.91), or serious adverse events (2 trials; 90/185 (48.6%) in the rFVIIa group versus 30/81 (37.0%) in the control group; RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.78) between the rFVIIa and control groups. There were no significant differences in the 60-day mortality (2 trials; 6/91 (6.6%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 1/87 (1.1%) in the aprotinin group; RR 4.12; 95% CI 0.71 to 23.76) or thromboembolic episodes (2 trials; 4/91 (4.4%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 2/87 (2.3%) in the aprotinin group; RR 1.97; 95% CI 0.37 to 10.37) between the tranexamic acid and aprotinin groups. The remaining outcomes in the above comparisons and the remaining comparisons included only only trial under the primary outcome or the outcome was not reported at all in the trials. There were no significant differences in the mortality, primary graft non-function, graft failure, retransplantation, thromboembolic episodes, or serious adverse events in any of these comparisons. However, the confidence intervals were wide, and it is not possible to reach any conclusion on the safety of the interventions. None of the trials reported the quality of life in patients.Secondary outcomes were reported in at least two trials for the following comparisons - aprotinin versus control, tranexamic acid versus control, rFVIIa versus control, thromboelastography versus control, and tranexamic acid versus aprotinin. There was significantly lower allogeneic blood transfusion requirements in the aprotinin group than the control group (8 trials; 185 patients in aprotinin group and 190 patients in control group; SMD -0.61; 95% CI -0.82 to -0.40). There were no significant differences in the allogeneic blood transfusion requirements between the tranexamic acid and control groups (4 trials; 93 patients in tranexamic acid group and 66 patients in control group; SMD -0.27; 95% CI -0.59 to 0.06); rFVIIa and control groups (2 trials; 141 patients in rFVIIa group and 80 patients in control group; SMD -0.05; 95% CI -0.32 to 0.23); thromboelastography and control groups (2 trials; 31 patients in thromboelastography group and 31 patients in control group; SMD -0.73; 95% CI -1.69 to 0.24); or between the tranexamic acid and aprotinin groups (3 trials; 101 patients in tranexamic acid group and 97 patients in aprotinin group; SMD -0.09; 95% CI -0.36 to 0.19). The remaining outcomes in the above comparisons and the remaining comparisons included only only trial under the primary outcome or the outcome was not reported at all in the trials. There were no significant differences in the blood loss, transfusion requirements, hospital stay, or intensive care unit stay in most of the comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Aprotinin, recombinant factor VIIa, and thromboelastography groups may potentially reduce blood loss and transfusion requirements. However, risks of systematic errors (bias) and risks of random errors (play of chance) hamper the confidence in this conclusion. We need further well-designed randomised trials with low risk of systematic error and low risk of random errors before these interventions can be supported or refuted.

Effect of antifibrinolytic drugs on transfusion requirement and blood loss during orthotopic liver transplantation: Results from a single center

BACKGROUND

During orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), activation of the fibrinolytic system can contribute significantly to perioperative bleeding. Prophylactic administration of antifibrinolytic agents has been shown to reduce blood loss and the need for allogenic transfusion.

OBJECTIVE

To study the effect of antifibrinolytics on requirement of blood components, blood loss and operative time during OLT in patients with end stage liver disease, reporting to a single centre.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent OLT at this centre during the period February 2003-October 2007 were the subjects of this study. Based on the individual anesthesiologist's preference, patients were assigned to receive either two million units of aprotinin (AP) as a bolus followed by 5,00,000 units/hour or 10 mg/kg tranexamic acid (TA) as a bolus followed by 10 mg/kg every six to eight hours, administered from the induction till the end of the surgery. Transfusion policy was standardized in all patients. Intraoperative red cell salvage was done wherever possible. The effect of these two antifibrinolytic drugs on transfusion requirement was evaluated as a whole and in a sub group of patients from each treatment group and compared with a concurrent control group that did not receive antifibrinolytic drugs.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (40 M / 10 F, 44 adults, 6 pediatric patients) underwent OLT in the study period. Fourteen patients were given AP, 25 patients were given TA and 11 patients did not receive any of the agents(control group). The median volume of total blood components transfused in antifibrinolytic group (n = 39) was 4540 ml(0-19,200ml), blood loss 5 l(0.7-35l) and operative time 9h (4.5-17h) and that of control group(n = 11) was 5700 ml(0-15,500ml), 10 l(0.6-25 l) and 9h (6.4-15.8h) respectively. The median volume of blood transfusions, blood loss and operative time was lesser in AP group(n = 14) than that of TA group(n = 25).

CONCLUSION

There is definite decrease in transfusion requirement, blood loss and operative time in the patients who received antifibrinolytic drugs than that of patients who did not receive. Because of the small sample size, comparisons carried between different groups did not show statistical significance. Prophylactic use of antifibrinolytics during OLT, possibly helps in blood conservation.

Efficacy and safety of antifibrinolytic drugs in liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Although several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown the efficacy of antifibrinolytic drugs in liver transplantation, their use remains debated due to concern for thromboembolic complications. None of the reported RCTs has shown a higher incidence of these complications in treated patients; however, none of the individual studies has been large enough to elucidate this issue completely. We therefore performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety endpoints in all published controlled clinical trials on the use of antifibrinolytic drugs in liver transplantation. Studies were included if antifibrinolytic drugs (epsilon-aminocaproic acid, tranexamic acid (TA) or aprotinin) were compared with each other or with controls/placebo. Intraoperative red blood cell and fresh frozen plasma requirements, the perioperative incidence of hepatic artery thrombosis, venous thromboembolic events and mortality were analyzed. We identified 23 studies with a total of 1407 patients which met the inclusion criteria. Aprotinin and TA both reduced transfusion requirements compared with controls. No increased risk for hepatic artery thrombosis, venous thromboembolic events or perioperative mortality was observed for any of the investigated drugs. This systematic review and meta-analysis does not provide evidence for an increased risk of thromboembolic events associated with antifibrinolytic drugs in liver transplantation.

Derivation of a risk index for the prediction of massive blood transfusion in liver transplantation

Massive blood transfusion (MBT) remains a serious and common occurrence in liver transplantation surgery. This retrospective cohort study was undertaken to identify preoperative predictors of MBT and to develop a risk index for MBT in liver transplantation. Data were retrospectively collected on all liver transplantations carried out at a single institution between January 1998 and March 2004. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictor variables of MBT, defined as >/=6 units of red blood cell concentrate (RBC) in the first 24 hours of surgery. The model was internally validated by bootstrapping. Of the 460 liver transplant recipients, 193 (42%) received >/=6 units of RBC within 24 hours of surgery. Unadjusted analyses identified 12 preoperative predictors of MBT: age, height, gender, repeat transplantation, etiology of liver failure, and preoperative laboratory values (hemoglobin concentration, platelet count, international normalized ratio for prothrombin activity [INR], albumin, total bilirubin, and creatinine). In multivariable logistic regression, 7 independent predictors of MBT were identified: age (>40 years), hemoglobin concentration (</=10.0 g/dL), INR (1.2-1.99, and >2.0), platelet count (</=70 x 10(9)/L), creatinine (>/=110 micromol/L for female subjects and >/=120 micromol/L for male subjects), albumin (< 28 g/L), and repeat transplantation. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC) for the model was 0.82. By using the regression beta coefficients to derive weights for each of these predictors, a risk index was developed that assigned each patient a score between 0 and 8. The ROC for this risk index was 0.79. MBT in liver transplantation surgery can be accurately predicted by 7 readily available preoperative predictors.

Recombinant factor VIIa in patients with coagulopathy secondary to anticoagulant therapy, cirrhosis, or severe traumatic injury: review of safety profile

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the hemostatic agent recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) has emerged as a potentially new therapeutic agent for management of coagulopathy in patients with cirrhosis or following severe traumatic injury, a complex problem for clinicians in which standard treatment strategies are not always effective. As with other hemostatic agents, a primary safety concern of rFVIIa therapy is the theoretical possibility that systemic administration could confer an increased risk of thrombotic complications. So far, clinical experience indicates rFVIIa to be a safe treatment for currently approved indications within hemophilia. Little information is available, however, for patient populations outside this clinical setting.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This article reviews critical safety data obtained from 13 Novo Nordisk-sponsored clinical trials of rFVIIa in patients with coagulopathy secondary to anticoagulant therapy, cirrhosis, or severe traumatic injury.

RESULTS

Thrombotic adverse events were reported for 5.3 percent (23/430) of placebo-treated patients and 6.0 percent (45/748) of patients on active treatment. No significant difference was found between placebo-treated and rFVIIa-treated patients with respect to the incidence of thrombotic AEs, either on an individual trial basis or for these trial populations combined (p=0.57).

CONCLUSION

An important determinant for the safety profile reported here is likely to be the specific mechanism of action of rFVIIa, shown in experimental studies to be localized to the site of vascular injury where tissue factor is exposed.

Successful intraoperative use of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator during liver transplantation complicated by massive intracardiac/pulmonary thrombosis

During orthotopic liver transplantation a patient received epsilon-aminocaproic acid and clotting factors. Shortly after hepatic artery clamping the patient developed a massive intracardiac/intravascular thrombosis that resulted in cardiac arrest. After diagnosis by transesophageal echocardiography, the patient was treated with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator through a central venous catheter advanced into the right atrium. After treatment with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator, the patient's hemodynamic status improved, permitting the liver transplant to be completed. The patient was ultimately discharged to home. We report the successful intraoperative resuscitation of a patient with acute intracardiac/intravascular thrombosis during an orthotopic liver transplantation using thrombolytic therapy.

Four cases of cardiopulmonary thromboembolism during liver transplantation without the use of antifibrinolytic drugs

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is one of the most demanding surgical procedures performed. Intraoperative bleeding can be substantial and related to both surgical and nonsurgical causes. A less common but previously reported phenomenon is intraoperative cardiopulmonary thromboembolism precipitating major patient morbidity and mortality. In this paper, we present four cases of intraoperative thromboembolism during OLT. These cases were performed without the concomitant use of antifibrinolytic drugs. We performed a review and analysis of previously reported cases of intraoperative thromboembolism during OLT. Possible causes of thromboembolism, clinical management, use of thromboelastography, and the role of antifibrinolytic drugs are discussed.

Safety and efficacy of a single bolus administration of recombinant factor VIIa in liver transplantation due to chronic liver disease

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) can be associated with excessive blood loss. As a result, there may be increased risk of adverse outcomes. Activated recombinant factor VII (rFVIIa) has demonstrated the ability to improve hemostasis in a variety of disorders; however, there has been a limited amount of research into its use in OLT. The purpose of this dose-finding study was to examine the efficacy and safety of rFVIIa in the reduction of bleeding in patients undergoing OLT. In this double-blind trial, patients with end-stage liver disease scheduled for OLT were randomized to 1 of 4 parallel study groups. They received a single intravenous bolus of rFVIIa (20, 40, or 80 microg/kg) or placebo prior to surgery. The primary assessment endpoint was the total number of red blood cell (RBC) units transfused perioperatively. Safety was evaluated by adverse events reported. Eighty-three comparable patients were randomized to receive study product, with 82 ultimately undergoing OLT. There were no significant differences in required RBC units between the placebo and rFVIIa study groups. The number of adverse events was comparable between study groups. In conclusion, rFVIIa has a good safety profile in patients undergoing OLT. However, the doses studied did not have any effect on the number of RBC transfusions required.