Intraoperative blood transfusion requirement is the main determinant of early surgical re-intervention after orthotopic liver transplantation

Benefit of living donor liver transplantation in graft survival for extremely high model for end-stage liver disease score ≥35

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Living liver donation with high model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was discouraged despite organ shortage. This study aimed to compare graft survival between living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) recipients with extremely high-MELD (score of ≥35).

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2018, 359 patients who underwent liver transplantation with a MELD score ≥35 were enrolled. We compared graft survival between LDLT and DDLT after propensity score matching (PSM) and performed subgroup analysis according to donor type.

RESULTS

After PSM, there was no statistical difference in graft survival between the LDLT and DDLT groups (p = .466). Old age, acute on chronic liver failure, re-transplantation, preoperative intensive care unit stay and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion during the operation were risk factors for graft failure (p = .046, .005, .032, .015 and .001, respectively). Biliary complications were more common in the LDLT group (p = .021), while viral infection, postoperative uncontrolled ascites, and postoperative hemodialysis were more common in the DDLT group (p = .002, .018, and .027, respectively). In the LDLT group, acute chronic liver failure, intraoperative RBC transfusion, and early postoperative complications were risk factors for graft failure (p = .007, <.001, and .001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that LDLT is not inferior to DDLT in graft survival if appropriate risk evaluation is performed in cases of extremely high-MELD scores. This result will help overcome organ shortages in high-MELD liver transplantation.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Liver Transplantation Recipients after Tranexamic Acid Treatment and Platelet Transfusion: A Retrospective Single-Centre Experience

Background and Objectives: Patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) often require increased blood product transfusion due to pre-existing coagulopathy and intraoperative fibrinolysis. Strategies to minimise intraoperative bleeding and subsequent blood product requirements include platelet transfusion and tranexamic acid (TXA). Prophylactic TXA administration has been shown to reduce bleeding and blood product requirements intraoperatively. However, its clinical use is still debated. The aim of this study was to report on a single-centre practice and analyse clinical characteristics and outcomes of LT recipients according to intraoperative treatment of TXA or platelet transfusion. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective observational cohort study in which we reviewed 162 patients' records. Characteristics, intraoperative requirement of blood products, postoperative development of thrombosis and outcomes were compared between patients without or with intraoperative TXA treatment and without or with platelet transfusion. Results: Intraoperative treatment of TXA and platelets was 53% and 57.40%, respectively. Patients who required intraoperative administration of TXA or platelet transfusion also required more transfusion of blood products. Neither TXA nor platelet transfusion were associated with increased postoperative development of hepatic artery and portal vein thrombosis, 90-day mortality or graft loss. There was a significant increase in the median length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay in those who received platelet transfusion only (2.00 vs. 3.00 days; p = 0.021). Time to extubate was significantly different in both those who required TXA and platelet transfusion intraoperatively. Conclusions: Our analysis indicates that LT recipients still required copious intraoperative transfusion of blood products, despite the use of intraoperative TXA and platelets. Our findings have important implications for current transfusion practice in LT recipients and may guide clinicians to act upon these findings, which will support global efforts to encourage a wider use of TXA to reduce transfusion requirements, including platelets.

Perceptions of post-transplant recidivism in liver transplantation for alcoholic liver disease

Although alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is regarded as a common indication for liver transplantation (LT), debatable issues exist on the requirement for preceding alcoholic abstinence, appropriate indication criteria, predictive factors for alcoholic recidivism, and outcomes following living-donor LT. In most institutions, an abstinence period of six months before LT has been adopted as a mandatory selection criterion. Data indicating that pre-transplant abstinence is an associated predictive factor for alcoholic recidivism supports the reasoning behind this. However, conclusive evidence about the benefit of adopting an abstinence period is yet to be established. On the other hand, a limited number of reports available on living-donor LT experiences for ALD patients suggest that organ donations from relatives have no suppressive effect on alcoholic recidivism. Prevention of alcoholic recidivism has proved to be the most important treatment after LT based on the resultant inferior long-term outcome of patients. Further evaluations are still needed to establish strategies before and after LT for ALD.

Transfusion and coagulation management in liver transplantation

There is wide variation in the management of coagulation and blood transfusion practice in liver transplantation. The use of blood products intraoperatively is declining and transfusion free transplantations take place ever more frequently. Allogenic blood products have been shown to increase morbidity and mortality. Primary haemostasis, coagulation and fibrinolysis are altered by liver disease. This, combined with intraoperative disturbances of coagulation, increases the risk of bleeding. Meanwhile, the rebalancing of coagulation homeostasis can put patients at risk of hypercoagulability and thrombosis. The application of the principles of patient blood management to transplantation can reduce the risk of transfusion. This includes: preoperative recognition and treatment of anaemia, reduction of perioperative blood loss and the use of restrictive haemoglobin based transfusion triggers. The use of point of care coagulation monitoring using whole blood viscoelastic testing provides a picture of the complete coagulation process by which to guide and direct coagulation management. Pharmacological methods to reduce blood loss include the use of anti-fibrinolytic drugs to reduce fibrinolysis, and rarely, the use of recombinant factor VIIa. Factor concentrates are increasingly used; fibrinogen concentrates to improve clot strength and stability, and prothrombin complex concentrates to improve thrombin generation. Non-pharmacological methods to reduce blood loss include surgical utilisation of the piggyback technique and maintenance of a low central venous pressure. The use of intraoperative cell salvage and normovolaemic haemodilution reduces allogenic blood transfusion. Further research into methods of decreasing blood loss and alternatives to blood transfusion remains necessary to continue to improve outcomes after transplantation.

Blood loss, predictors of bleeding, transfusion practice and strategies of blood cell salvaging during liver transplantation

Blood loss during liver transplantation (OLTx) is a common consequence of pre-existing abnormalities of the hemostatic system, portal hypertension with multiple collateral vessels, portal vein thrombosis, previous abdominal surgery, splenomegaly, and poor “functional” recovery of the new liver. The intrinsic coagulopathic features of end stage cirrhosis along with surgical technical difficulties make transfusion-free liver transplantation a major challenge, and, despite the improvements in understanding of intraoperative coagulation profiles and strategies to control blood loss, the requirements for blood or blood products remains high. The impact of blood transfusion has been shown to be significant and independent of other well-known predictors of posttransplant-outcome. Negative effects on immunomodulation and an increased risk of postoperative complications and mortality have been repeatedly demonstrated. Isovolemic hemodilution, the extensive utilization of thromboelastogram and the use of autotransfusion devices are among the commonly adopted procedures to limit the amount of blood transfusion. The use of intraoperative blood salvage and autologous blood transfusion should still be considered an important method to reduce the need for allogenic blood and the associated complications. In this article we report on the common preoperative and intraoperative factors contributing to blood loss, intraoperative transfusion practices, anesthesiologic and surgical strategies to prevent blood loss, and on intraoperative blood salvaging techniques and autologous blood transfusion. Even though the advances in surgical technique and anesthetic management, as well as a better understanding of the risk factors, have resulted in a steady decrease in intraoperative bleeding, most patients still bleed extensively. Blood transfusion therapy is still a critical feature during OLTx and various studies have shown a large variability in the use of blood products among different centers and even among individual anesthesiologists within the same center. Unfortunately, despite the large number of OLTx performed each year, there is still paucity of large randomized, multicentre, and controlled studies which indicate how to prevent bleeding, the transfusion needs and thresholds, and the “evidence based” perioperative strategies to reduce the amount of transfusion.