Impact of terlipressin on renal graft function

Vasopressin Use in the Support of Organ Donors: Physiological Rationale and Review of the Literature

The objective of this review was to depict the physiological and clinical rationale for the use of vasopressin in hemodynamic support of organ donors. After summarizing the physiological, pharmacological concepts and preclinical findings, regarding vasopressin's pathophysiological impacts, we will present the available clinical data.

DATA SOURCES

Detailed search strategies in PubMed, OVID Medline, and EMBASE were undertaken using Medical Subject Headings and Key Words.

STUDY SELECTION

Physiological articles regarding brain death, and preclinical animal and human studies about the use of vasopressin or analogs, as an intervention in organ support for donation, were considered.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full text of articles to determine eligibility. Data encompassing models, population, methodology, outcomes, and relevant concepts were extracted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Following brain death, profound reduction in sympathetic outflow is associated with reduced cardiac output, vascular tone, and hemodynamic instability in donors. In addition to reducing catecholamine needs and reversing diabetes insipidus, vasopressin has been shown to limit pulmonary injury and decrease systemic inflammatory response in animals. Several observational studies show the benefit of vasopressin on hemodynamic parameters and catecholamine sparing in donors. Small trials suggest that vasopressin increase organ procurement and have some survival benefit for recipients. However, the risk of bias is overall concerning, and therefore the quality of the evidence is deemed low.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite potential impact on graft outcome and a protective effect through catecholamine support sparing, the benefit of vasopressin use in organ donors is based on low evidence. Well-designed observational and randomized controlled trials are warranted.

Effects of Terlipressin on Management of Hypotensive Brain-Dead Patients Who are Potential Organ Donors: A Retrospective Study

Background: Administration of terlipressin can reverse hypotension in potential organ donors with norepinephrine-resistance. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of terlipressin on the hemodynamics, liver function, and renal function of hypotensive brain-dead patients who were potential organ donors.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted by using the ICU database of one hospital. 18 patients in a total of 294 brain-dead cases were enrolled and administered terlipressin intravenously. All physiological parameters of recruited patients were obtained at baseline, 24 and 72 h after administration, and immediately before organ procurement.

Results: Terlipressin induced significant increases in mean arterial pressure (MAP) from 69.56 ± 10.68 mm Hg (baseline) to 101.82 ± 19.27 mm Hg (immediately before organ procurement) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) from 89.78 ± 8.53 mm Hg (baseline) to 133.42 ± 26.11 mm Hg (immediately before organ procurement) in all patients. The increases in MAP were accompanied by significant decreases in heart rate (HR) from 113.56 ± 28.43 bpm (baseline) to 83.89 ± 11.70 bpm (immediately before organ procurement), which resulted in the decrease of norepinephrine dose over time from 0.8 ± 0.2 μg/kg/min (baseline) to 0.09 ± 0.02 μg/kg/min (immediately before organ procurement). There were no changes in central venous pressure, liver function including aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and bilirubin. Renal function, assessed by serum creatinine (SCr), urine output (UOP), creatinine clearance rate (CCr), and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), improved significantly.

Conclusion: Our analysis of brain-dead patients with hypotension indicates that administration of terlipressin can significantly increases MAP, SBP, UOP, CCr, and eGFR, while decreases HR and Scr. Terlipressin appears to help maintain hemodynamic stability, reduce vasoactive support, and improve renal function.

Novel Vasopressors in the Treatment of Vasodilatory Shock: A Systematic Review of Angiotensin II, Selepressin, and Terlipressin

Study Objective:

Vasodilatory shock is the most common type of shock. Catecholamine vasopressors are the cornerstone of hemodynamic therapy but carry risks. Angiotensin II (AT2) was recently approved, and other novel agents (selepressin and terlipressin) are under investigation and used outside the United States (terlipressin). We performed a systematic review to summarize the efficacy and safety of these novel vasopressors and to offer guidance on their appropriate use.

Design:

Systematic review of controlled trials.

Methods:

Numerous databases were searched using terms related to angiotensin II, selepressin, terlipressin, vasopressor, and shock. Twenty-one citations, including 16 prospective comparative trials and 5 post hoc analyses reporting effects of AT2, selepressin, and terlipressin, were reviewed for data on outcomes related to hemodynamic measures, mortality, severity and duration of illness, concomitant vasopressor utilization, and adverse effects. Findings from eligible literature are described qualitatively using Cochrane methods.

Results:

Fourteen controlled trials were assessed after exclusion of 2 dated trials of a distinct AT2 formulation. Trials are limited for AT2 (n = 2) and selepressin (n = 1), while terlipressin was investigated in 11 small trials. Overall, the trials have an unclear risk of bias. Most report mean arterial pressure (MAP) as primary end point, and all indicate novel vasopressors increase MAP compared to placebo and to a similar degree as with catecholamine vasopressors. Mortality findings are preliminary, as they have been limited to specific subgroups in trials of terlipressin and post hoc analyses of one trial of AT2. Trials reported safety concerns for each agent including thromboembolism with AT2 and ischemia with terlipressin/selepressin.

Conclusion:

In this systematic review, controlled trials of novel vasopressors in treatment of vasodilatory shock were limited and of low quality. Angiotensin II, selepressin, and terlipressin appear to significantly increase MAP, but further study is required, particularly for selepressin, to determine their safety, efficacy, and role in treatment of vasodilatory shock.

The effect of arginine vasopressin on organ donor procurement and lung function

BACKGROUND

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is becoming more common when managing brain-dead donors. Arginine vasopressin (AVP) is associated with benefits but is not consistently used. We hypothesize that AVP is associated with the maintenance of lung function and successful recovery in donors and enhanced lung graft performance in recipients.

METHODS

The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database was used. Study donors were those treated with HRT and procured from January 1, 2009 to June 30, 2011. AVP (+) and AVP (-) donors were compared. Donor lung function, the rate of successful lung procurement, and the incidence of graft failure in recipients were studied.

RESULTS

There were 12,322 donors included, of which 7686 received AVP (62.4%). Cerebrovascular accident (4722 [38.3%]) was the most common cause of donor death. There was a significant increase in high yield (≥4 organs) (51.0% versus 39.3%, <0.001), mean number of organs (3.75 versus 3.33, <0.001), and rate of successful lung recovery (26.3% versus 20.5%, <0.001) with AVP. Lung function was preserved to a greater degree in donors receiving AVP. Adjusting the significant factors, AVP was independently associated with lung procurement (1.220 [1.114-1.336], <0.001). The incidence of early graft failure was not changed.

CONCLUSIONS

AVP with HRT is associated with the maintenance of lung function and a significant increase in successful organ recovery in donors without untoward effects in the recipient. AVP should be universally adopted as a component of HRT in the management of donors with neurologic death.

Arginine vasopressin significantly increases the rate of successful organ procurement in potential donors

BACKGROUND

Hormone replacement therapy increases the number and quality of grafts recovered from brain-dead organ donors. Arginine vasopressin (AVP) has also been shown to have beneficial effects. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of AVP on recovery rates.

METHODS

The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database was used. Donors treated with hormone replacement therapy and vasopressor agents who were successfully procured between January 1, 2009, and June 30, 2011, were studied. AVP-positive and AVP-negative donors were compared. The primary study end point was the rate of high-yield procurement (≥4 organs).

RESULTS

A total of 10,431 donors were included. AVP was infused in 7,873 (75.5%) and was associated with an increased rate of high-yield procurement (50.5% vs 35.6%, P < .001). There was less overall graft refusal due to poor function (38.9% vs 45.6%, P < .001). AVP independently predicted high yield procurement.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of AVP with hormone replacement therapy is independently associated with an increased rate of organ recovery. This strategy should be universally adopted in the management of donors progressing to neurologic death.

Management of the heartbeating brain-dead organ donor

The main factor limiting organ donation is the availability of suitable donors and organs. Currently, most transplants follow multiple organ retrieval from heartbeating brain-dead organ donors. However, brain death is often associated with marked physiological instability, which, if not managed, can lead to deterioration in organ function before retrieval. In some cases, this prevents successful donation. There is increasing evidence that moderation of these pathophysiological changes by active management in Intensive Care maintains organ function, thereby increasing the number and functional quality of organs available for transplantation. This strategy of active donor management requires an alteration of philosophy and therapy on the part of the intensive care unit clinicians and has significant resource implications if it is to be delivered reliably and safely. Despite increasing consensus over donor management protocols, many of their components have not yet been subjected to controlled evaluation. Hence the optimal combinations of treatment goals, monitoring, and specific therapies have not yet been fully defined. More research into the component techniques is needed.