Con: venovenous bypass should not be used in orthotopic liver transplantation

Perioperative management of adult living donor liver transplantation: Part 1 - recipients

Living donor liver transplantation was first developed to mitigate the limited access to deceased donor organs in Asia in the 1990s. This alternative liver transplantation option has become an established and widely practiced transplantation method for adult patients suffering from end-stage liver disease. It has successfully addressed the shortage of deceased donors. The Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia and the Korean Society of Transplant Anesthesia jointly reviewed published studies on the perioperative management of live donor liver transplant recipients. The review aims to offer transplant anesthesiologists and critical care physicians a comprehensive overview of the perioperative management of adult live liver transplantation recipients. We feature the status, outcomes, surgical procedure, portal venous decompression, anesthetic management, prevention of acute kidney injury, avoidance of blood transfusion, monitoring and therapeutic strategies of hemodynamic derangements, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols for liver transplant recipients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Weaning of Veno-venous Bypass in Liver Transplantation: A Single Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Veno-venous bypass (VVB) has been used in liver transplantation (LT) to minimize hemodynamic instability during caval anastomosis of anhepatic phase. With the introduction of the piggyback (PB) technique, which is a caval-sparing technique, the use of VVB progressively decreased over the world. The aim of this study was to introduce our experience using VVB with the focus on its weaning process.

METHODS

A total of 300 consecutive LT cases from May 1996 to November 2003 were examined. Except for pediatric LT, 242 LT cases were investigated to evaluate the trends in VVB use, surgical technique, the amount of transfusion requirements, and durations of operation and anhepatic phase.

RESULTS

For the early 100 LT cases, VVB was used in 97.5% of recipients, especially in all the recipients of deceased donor LT (DDLT). Then, the frequency of VVB use was decreased, and VVB was not used after the 268th recipient. In DDLT, the PB technique was first introduced in the 58th recipient and became a routine procedure of the DDLT since the 191th recipient. Living donor LT was increased, and the amount of transfusion requirement, duration of operation, and duration of anhepatic phase was reduced over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing experience and sophisticated surgical and anesthetic techniques were important factors responsible for the weaning of VVB. The advancement of the PB technique used in living donor LT might be a main factor of its weaning.

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.

Pulmonary injury at the anhepatic phase without veno-venous bypass in portal hypertensive rats

OBJECTIVE

In order to understand the characterization and evolution of pulmonary injury, a portal hypertension rat model was used to imitate the anhepatic phase during standard orthotopic liver transplantation without veno-venous bypass.

METHODS

In this study, 135 healthy male Wistar rats were selected; in which 15 rats were assigned in the normal control (NC) group and the remaining 120 rats were used to establish a recoverable prehepatic portal hypertension model, which were further evenly divided into eight groups after ischemia-reperfusion: portal hypertensive control group (PHTC), R0h, R6h, R12h, R24h, R48h, R72h, and R7d groups. Meanwhile, arterial blood pressure, dry-to-wet weight ratios of the lung, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level in serum, arterial oxygen pressure (PaO₂), and myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity in lung tissue were measured. Morphology changes of the lung were observed using an optical microscope and a transmission electron microscope.

RESULTS

The portal hypertension rat model was successfully established three weeks after the first operation. These portal hypertensive rats could withstand 1 hour at the anhepatic phase. Pulmonary injury severity increased to the most at 12-24 hours, and decreased to normal at seven days after reperfusion.

CONCLUSION

Ischemia-reperfusion injury is an important mechanism that results in pulmonary injury after liver transplantation. It is safe for portal hypertensive rats to tolerate 1 hour at the anhepatic phase. Pulmonary injury was the most severe within 12-24 hours after ischemia-reperfusion.

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.

New model of veno-venous bypass for management of anhepatic phase in experimental study on dogs

Blood is shunted from the inferior vena cava and portal vein to the superior vena caval system to prevent congestion in the lower parts of the body during the anhepatic phase (AP) of liver transplantation. It leads to overload in the superior vena caval system retarding cranial outflow due to a nonphysiological blood redistribution. To overcome this problem, we developed a new bypass in dogs: blood is shunted from the inferior (caudal) vena cava and portal vein to the suprahepatic inferior (caudal) vena cava. This model was compared with traditional one with or without a pump. Blood pressure and flow parameters were estimated during 3 hours of AP in four groups of four dogs each. The current study showed that a nontraditional scheme of venous bypass reduced circulatory complications during AP, especially in the cranial vena caval system, although a low rate of congestion remains in the caudal vena cava and portal vein systems. Whereas the same scheme using a pump effectively prevented congestion in all of the systems: cranial, caudal, and portal. We concluded that application of a nontraditional bypass scheme, providing venous blood return into suprahepatic part of caudal vena cava, can be considered to be a method of choice for experimental liver transplantation.

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.

Comparison of surgical methods in liver transplantation: retrohepatic caval resection with venovenous bypass (VVB) versus piggyback (PB) with VVB versus PB without VVB

Use of piggyback technique (PB) and elimination of venovenous bypass (VVB) have been advocated in adult liver transplantation (LT). However, individual contribution of these two modifications on clinical outcomes has not been fully investigated. We performed a retrospective review of 426 LTs within a 3-year period, when three different surgical techniques were employed per the surgeons' preference: retrohepatic caval resection with VVB (RCR+VVB) in 104 patients, PB with VVB (PB+VVB) in 148, and PB without VVB (PB-Only) in 174. The primary outcomes were intraoperative blood transfusion and the patient and graft survivals. Demographic profiles were similar, except younger recipient age in RCR+VVB and fewer number of grafts with cold ischemic time over 16 h in PB-Only. PB-Only required lesser intraoperative red blood cells (P=0.006), fresh frozen plasma (P=0.005), and cell saver return (P=0.007); had less incidence of acute renal failure (P=0.001), better patient survival (P=0.039), and graft survival (P=0.003). The benefits of PB+VVB were only found in shortened total surgical time (P=0.0001) and warm ischemic time (P=0.0001), and less incidence of acute renal failure (P=0.001) than RCR+VVB. PB-Only method seemed to provide the best clinical outcome. The benefit of PB was not fully achieved when it was used with VVB.

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.

Postreperfusion syndrome during liver transplantation for cirrhosis: outcome and predictors

During orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), a marked decrease in blood pressure following unclamping of the portal vein and liver reperfusion is frequently observed and is termed postreperfusion syndrome (PRS). The predictive factors and clinical consequences of PRS are not fully understood. The goal of this study was to identify predictors of PRS and morbidity/mortality associated with its occurrence during OLT in patients with cirrhosis. During a 3-year period, all consecutive OLT procedures performed in patients with cirrhosis were studied. Exclusion criteria were OLT for acute liver failure, early retransplantation, combined liver/kidney transplantation, and living-donor related transplantation. PRS was defined as a decrease in the mean arterial pressure of more than 30% of the value observed in the anhepatic stage, for more than 1 minute during the first 5 minutes after reperfusion of the graft. Transplantation was performed with preservation of the inferior vena cava with or without temporary portocaval shunt. Associations between PRS and donor and recipient demographic data, recipient operative and postoperative outcomes were tested with bivariate statistics. Independent predictors of PRS were determined in multivariable logistic regression analysis. Of the 75 patients included in the study, 20 patients (25%) developed PRS. In a multivariable analysis, absence of a portocaval shunt [odds ratio (95% confidence interval) = 4.42 (1.18-17.6)] and duration of cold ischemia [odds ratio (95% confidence interval) = 1.34 (1.07-1.72)] were independent predictors of PRS. Patients who experienced PRS displayed more postoperative renal failure and lower early (<15 days after OLT) survival (80% versus 96%; P = 0.04). In conclusion, the absence of portocaval shunt and the duration of cold ischemia were independent predictors of intraoperative PRS. PRS was associated with significant adverse postoperative outcome. These results provide realistic clinical targets to improve patient outcome after OLT for cirrhosis.

Anesthetic management of hepatic transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The present review describes new trends and ongoing controversies in the anesthetic care of liver transplant recipients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have improved our knowledge of conditions increasing perioperative risk, such as portopulmonary hypertension and renal failure. Improved surgical and anesthetic management has reduced intraoperative blood loss, as more studies identify an independent association between blood transfusion and poor outcome. New concepts in the coagulopathy of liver failure are emerging, with clear implications for clinical practice, including greater awareness of the risks of intraoperative thromboembolism. Less invasive intraoperative hemodynamic monitoring has been advocated, as has wider use of transoesophageal echocardiography. Early extubation is becoming more routinized.

SUMMARY

Anesthetic management still varies widely between liver transplant centers with little data to indicate best practice. Future research should focus on fluid replacement, prevention and treatment of coagulopathy, care of the acutely ill patient and the safety and benefits of early extubation.

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.