Blood Markers of Portal Hypertension Are Associated with Blood Loss and Transfusion Requirements during Orthotopic Liver Transplantation

Management of severe peri-operative bleeding: Guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care: Second update 2022

BACKGROUND

Management of peri-operative bleeding is complex and involves multiple assessment tools and strategies to ensure optimal patient care with the goal of reducing morbidity and mortality. These updated guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) aim to provide an evidence-based set of recommendations for healthcare professionals to help ensure improved clinical management.

DESIGN

A systematic literature search from 2015 to 2021 of several electronic databases was performed without language restrictions. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies and to formulate recommendations. A Delphi methodology was used to prepare a clinical practice guideline.

RESULTS

These searches identified 137 999 articles. All articles were assessed, and the existing 2017 guidelines were revised to incorporate new evidence. Sixteen recommendations derived from the systematic literature search, and four clinical guidances retained from previous ESAIC guidelines were formulated. Using the Delphi process on 253 sentences of guidance, strong consensus (>90% agreement) was achieved in 97% and consensus (75 to 90% agreement) in 3%.

DISCUSSION

Peri-operative bleeding management encompasses the patient's journey from the pre-operative state through the postoperative period. Along this journey, many features of the patient's pre-operative coagulation status, underlying comorbidities, general health and the procedures that they are undergoing need to be taken into account. Due to the many important aspects in peri-operative nontrauma bleeding management, guidance as to how best approach and treat each individual patient are key. Understanding which therapeutic approaches are most valuable at each timepoint can only enhance patient care, ensuring the best outcomes by reducing blood loss and, therefore, overall morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSION

All healthcare professionals involved in the management of patients at risk for surgical bleeding should be aware of the current therapeutic options and approaches that are available to them. These guidelines aim to provide specific guidance for bleeding management in a variety of clinical situations.

Portal hypertension has no role in perioperative bleeding during liver transplantation with systematic porto-caval shunt

BACKGROUND

More than a half of patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) receive intraoperative transfusion. Portal hypertension (PHT) may contribute to perioperative blood loss. We study the relationship between preoperative hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) values and intraoperative transfusion requirements in adult patients undergoing LT.

METHODS

160 cirrhotic patients undergoing first elective LT (2009-2019) with an HVPG measurement within the previous 6 months were included. Surgical technique was piggyback with portocaval shunt (PCS). The association of HVPG and other variables with transfusion requirements and blood loss were studied.

RESULTS

Blood loss (ml/kg) was positively correlated with HVPG, among other variables, but at multivariable analysis it only remained associated with MELD-Na and HCC indication. Regarding RBC transfusion, MELD-Na and hemoglobin were independently associated with the need and magnitude of RBC transfusion. Subanalysis by surgical stage (hepatectomy, anhepatic, neohepatic) and by serial HVPG cut-offs found no clear associations with either bleeding or transfusion.

DISCUSSION

The severity of PHT plays a minor role on bleeding and transfusion during LT in a contemporary cohort with systematic PCS. Main determinants of transfusion are liver function and baseline hemoglobin, which would seem the suitable goal to optimize transfusion in LT.

Prognostic Analysis of Liver Cirrhosis Patients with Cerebral Infarction and/or Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

To explore the risk factors of gastrointestinal hemorrhage and/or cerebral infarction complications in liver cirrhosis and provide evidence for early prevention, clinical diagnosis, and treatment of liver cirrhosis.

Methods

200 liver cirrhosis patients were analyzed: liver cirrhosis (n = 78), liver cirrhosis complicated with cerebral infarction (n = 43), liver cirrhosis complicated with gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n = 57), and liver cirrhosis complicated with gastrointestinal hemorrhage and cerebral infarction (n = 22). The incidence of disease in each group of patients at different times was calculated. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the risk factors of liver cirrhosis patients with gastrointestinal hemorrhage and cerebral infarction. After 12 months of follow-up, the mortality rate of each group was calculated.

Results

The incidences of gastrointestinal hemorrhage, cerebral infarction, and gastrointestinal hemorrhage combined with cerebral infarction in patients with liver cirrhosis were 21.5%, 28.5%, and 11%, respectively. The width of the portal vein, D-2 polymer, albumin (ALB), and hemoglobin (Hb) were predictors of gastrointestinal hemorrhage and cerebral infarction in patients with liver cirrhosis. Age, hypertension, bleeding history, infection, portal vein width, and D-2 polymer were confirmed as risk factors for gastrointestinal hemorrhage and cerebral infarction in patients with liver cirrhosis. ALB and Hb were independent protective factors. Patients with liver cirrhosis and gastrointestinal hemorrhage with cerebral infarction had the worst survival.

Conclusion

Age, hypertension, bleeding history, infection, portal vein width, and D-2 polymer are all independent risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding and cerebral infarction, while ALB and Hb are independent protective factors.

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.

Machine Learning for the Prediction of Red Blood Cell Transfusion in Patients During or After Liver Transplantation Surgery

Aim: This study aimed to use machine learning algorithms to identify critical preoperative variables and predict the red blood cell (RBC) transfusion during or after liver transplantation surgery. Study Design and Methods: A total of 1,193 patients undergoing liver transplantation in three large tertiary hospitals in China were examined. Twenty-four preoperative variables were collected, including essential population characteristics, diagnosis, symptoms, and laboratory parameters. The cohort was randomly split into a train set (70%) and a validation set (30%). The Recursive Feature Elimination and eXtreme Gradient Boosting algorithms (XGBOOST) were used to select variables and build machine learning prediction models, respectively. Besides, seven other machine learning models and logistic regression were developed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) was used to compare the prediction performance of different models. The SHapley Additive exPlanations package was applied to interpret the XGBOOST model. Data from 31 patients at one of the hospitals were prospectively collected for model validation. Results: In this study, 72.1% of patients in the training set and 73.2% in the validation set underwent RBC transfusion during or after the surgery. Nine vital preoperative variables were finally selected, including the presence of portal hypertension, age, hemoglobin, diagnosis, direct bilirubin, activated partial thromboplastin time, globulin, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase. The XGBOOST model presented significantly better predictive performance (AUROC: 0.813) than other models and also performed well in the prospective dataset (accuracy: 76.9%). Discussion: A model for predicting RBC transfusion during or after liver transplantation was successfully developed using a machine learning algorithm based on nine preoperative variables, which could guide high-risk patients to take appropriate preventive measures.