Which types of graft to use in patients with acute liver failure? (A) Auxiliary liver transplant (B) Living donor liver transplantation (C) The whole liver. (C) I take the whole liver only

Acute Liver Failure in Children

Acute liver failure (ALF) in children, irrespective of cause, is a rapidly evolving catastrophic clinical condition that results in high mortality and morbidity without prompt identification and intervention. Massive hepatocyte necrosis impairs the synthetic, excretory, and detoxification abilities of the liver, with resultant coagulopathy, jaundice, metabolic disturbance, and encephalopathy. Extrahepatic organ damage, multiorgan failure, and death result from circulating inflammatory mediators released by the hepatocytes undergoing necrosis. There are yet no treatment options available for reversing or halting hepatocellular necrosis, thus current therapy focuses on supporting failing organs and preventing life threatening complications pending either spontaneous liver recovery or transplantation. The aims of this review are to define pediatric acute liver failure (PALF), understand the pathophysiologic processes that lead to multiorgan failure, to describe the consequences of a failing liver on extrahepatic organs, to enumerate the critical care challenges encountered during PALF management, and to describe pharmacologic and extracorporeal options available to support a critically ill child with ALF in the intensive care unit.

Predicting survival after living and deceased donor liver transplantation in adult patients with acute liver failure

BACKGROUND

Post-transplant outcomes for acute liver failure (ALF) are unsatisfactory, and there are debates about the most suitable type of graft. Given the critical shortage of donor organs, accurate assessment of post-transplant outcome in ALF patients is crucial to avoid a futile liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

A database of 160 consecutive adult ALF patients who underwent primary LT between 2000 and 2009 in a tertiary LT center was analyzed.

RESULTS

The most common causes of ALF were hepatitis B virus infection (30%) and herbal/folk medicine use (30%). Thirty-six (22.5%) and 124 (77.5%) patients underwent deceased-donor LT (DDLT) and adult-to-adult living-donor LT (LDLT), respectively. During a median follow-up period of 38 (range 1-132) months, the DDLT and LDLT groups showed similar patient (P = 0.99) and graft (P = 0.97) survival rates. The overall 1- and 3-year patient survival rates were 78.8 and 74.6%, respectively. Five predictors of patient survival were identified by bootstrapping and multivariate analysis: vasopressor requirement, estimated glomerular filtration rate, serum sodium concentration, recipient age, and donor age, at the time of transplant. By summing scores weighted in each of these predictor categories, we designed a prognostic scoring system (scores from -2 to 20) that estimated 1-year post-transplant mortality from 0 to 100% (c statistic 0.79).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term outcomes after LDLT and DDLT were comparable in adult patients with ALF. A simple prognostic scoring system that includes 5 predictive variables at the time of LT may help estimate post-transplant survival in ALF patients, regardless of the type of transplant.

An increase in deceased donor incidence alleviated the need for urgent adult living donor liver transplantation in a Korean high-volume center

PURPOSE

This study analyzed the effects of a recent increase in deceased donors on the pattern of adult liver transplantation (OLT) in a high-volume center in Korea.

METHODS

OLT patterns relative to pretransplant recipient status were analyzed for 112 deceased donor LTs (DDLT) and 743 living donor OLT (LDLT) in a single center as compared to nationwide Korean data over 3 years from 2006 to 2008.

RESULTS

During the study period, the annual proportion of institutional urgent OLT was relatively invariable (20% to 25.2%), but the annual proportion of DDLTs to all OLT increased from 8.9% to 19.9%, as did the annual rate of DDLTs among those undergoing urgent OLT, from 18.6% to 65.8%, with a reciprocal decrease in the proportion of urgent LDLTs. Korean nationwide data also showed a noticeable increase in deceased liver graft allocation for urgency from 39.8% to 62.2% over the same time period.

CONCLUSION

An increase in deceased donors up to 5 per million enabled an increase in urgent adult DDLTs, alleviating the need for urgent adult LDLTs in Korea.

Fulminant hepatic failure: when to transplant

Fulminant hepatic failure is a life-threatening condition that can lead to rapid deterioration and death if timely treatment is not instituted. Many patients recover with supportive care. Patients with deteriorating signs and laboratory parameters require prompt assessment and listing for liver transplantation. Outcome following transplantation is a function of severity of illness before transplantation, timeliness of liver transplantation and graft quality and function. With appropriate immunosuppression and close follow-up most patients can lead near normal lives following liver transplantation.

Continuous peritransplant assessment of consciousness using bispectral index monitoring for patients with fulminant hepatic failure undergoing urgent liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Rapid deterioration of consciousness is a critical situation for patients with fulminant hepatic failure (FHF). Bispectral (BIS) index was derived from electroencephalography parameters, primarily to monitor the depth of unconsciousness.

AIM

To assess the usability of peritransplant BIS monitoring in patients with FHF.

METHODS

A prospective study using peritransplant BIS monitoring was performed in 26 patients with FHF undergoing urgent liver transplantation (LT).

RESULTS

Pre-transplant Child-Pugh score was 12.2 +/- 1.0; model for end-stage liver disease score was 32.4 +/- 4.4; Glasgow coma score (GCS) was 9.9 +/- 1.3; and BIS index was 44.0 +/- 6.7. Pre-transplant sedation significantly decreased BIS index. After LT, all patients having endotracheal intubation recovered consciousness within one to three d and showed progressive increase in BIS index, which appeared slightly earlier and was more evident than the increase in derived GCS score. There was a significant correlation between BIS index and derived GCS scores (r(2) = 0.648). Timing of eye opening to voice was matched with BIS index of 66.3 +/- 10.4 and occurred 12.7 +/- 8.3 h after passing BIS index of 50.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that BIS monitoring is a non-invasive, simple, easy-to-interpret method, which is useful in assessing peritransplant state of consciousness. BIS monitoring may therefore be a useful tool during peritransplant intensive care for patients with FHF showing hepatic encephalopathy.