Impact of blood salvage during liver transplantation on reduction in transfusion requirements

Efficacy of intraoperative blood salvage and autotransfusion in living-donor liver transplantation: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) may be associated with massive blood loss and the need for allogeneic blood transfusion. Intraoperative blood salvage autotransfusion (IBSA) can reduce the need for allogeneic blood transfusion. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of blood salvage in LT.

METHODS

Among 355 adult patients who underwent elective living-donor LT between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2022, 59 recipients without advanced hepatocellular carcinoma received IBSA using Cell Saver (CS group). Based on sex, age, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, preoperative laboratory results, and other factors, 118 of the 296 recipients who did not undergo IBSA were matched using propensity score (non-CS group). The primary outcome was the amount of intraoperative allogenic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. Comparisons were made between the two groups regarding the amount of other blood components transfused and postoperative laboratory findings.

RESULTS

The transfused allogeneic RBC for the CS group was significantly lower than that of the non-CS group (1,506.0 vs. 1,957.5 ml, P = 0.026). No significant differences in the transfused total fresh frozen plasma, platelets, cryoprecipitate, and estimated blood loss were observed between the two groups. The postoperative allogeneic RBC transfusion was significantly lower in the CS group than in the non-CS group (1,500.0 vs. 2,100.0 ml, P = 0.039). No significant differences in postoperative laboratory findings were observed at postoperative day 1 and discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Using IBSA during LT can effectively reduce the need for perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions without causing subsequent coagulopathy.

Should Cell Salvage Be Used in Liver Resection and Transplantation? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of intraoperative blood cell salvage and autotransfusion (IBSA) use on red blood cell (RBC) transfusion and postoperative outcomes in liver surgery.

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative RBC transfusions are common in liver surgery and associated with increased morbidity. IBSA can be utilized to minimize allogeneic transfusion. A theoretical risk of cancer dissemination has limited IBSA adoption in oncologic surgery.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched from inception until May 2021. All studies comparing IBSA use with control in liver surgery were included. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently, in duplicate. The primary outcome was intraoperative allogeneic RBC transfusion (proportion of patients and volume of blood transfused). Core secondary outcomes included: overall survival and disease-free survival, transfusion-related complications, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs. Data from transplant and resection studies were analyzed separately. Random effects models were used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-one observational studies were included (16 transplant, 5 resection, n=3433 patients). Seventeen studies incorporated oncologic indications. In transplant, IBSA was associated with decreased allogeneic RBC transfusion [mean difference -1.81, 95% confidence interval (-3.22, -0.40), P =0.01, I 2 =86%, very-low certainty]. Few resection studies reported on transfusion for meta-analysis. No significant difference existed in overall survival or disease-free survival in liver transplant [hazard ratio (HR)=1.12 (0.75, 1.68), P =0.59, I 2 =0%; HR=0.93 (0.57, 1.48), P =0.75, I 2 =0%] and liver resection [HR=0.69 (0.45, 1.05), P =0.08, I 2 =0%; HR=0.93 (0.59, 1.45), P =0.74, I 2 =0%].

CONCLUSION

IBSA may reduce intraoperative allogeneic RBC transfusion without compromising oncologic outcomes. The current evidence base is limited in size and quality, and high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed.

The Coagulation Profile of End-Stage Liver Disease and Considerations for Intraoperative Management

The coagulopathy of end-stage liver disease results from a complex derangement in both anticoagulant and procoagulant processes. With even minor insults, cirrhotic patients experience either inappropriate bleeding or clotting, or even both simultaneously. The various phases of liver transplantation along with fluid and blood product administration may contribute to additional disturbances in coagulation. Thus, anesthetic management of patients undergoing liver transplantation to improve hemostasis and avoid inappropriate thrombosis in the perioperative environment can be challenging. To add to this challenge, traditional laboratory tests of coagulation are difficult to interpret in patients with end-stage liver disease. Viscoelastic coagulation tests such as thromboelastography (Haemonetics Corporation, Braintree, MA) and rotational thromboelastometry (TEM International, Munich, Germany) have helped to reduce transfusion of allogeneic blood products, especially fresh frozen plasma, but have also lead to the increased use of fibrinogen-containing products. In general, advancements in surgical techniques and anesthetic management have led to significant reduction in blood transfusion requirements during liver transplantation. Targeted transfusion protocols and pharmacologic prevention of fibrinolysis may further aid in the management of the complex coagulopathy of end-stage liver disease.

Influence of autologous blood transfusion in liver transplantation in patients with hepatitis B on the function and hemorheology of red blood cells

The present study aimed to characterize the function and hemorheology of red blood cells (RBCs) recovered during liver transplantation surgery in patients with hepatitis B and decompensation. A total of 15 hepatitis B patients with decompensation who underwent liver transplantation surgery were included in the present study. Blood samples were recovered during the liver transplantation surgery using an Autologous Blood Recovery System. The morphology and structure of RBCs were characterized and compared between pre-operative and recovered blood samples. In addition, the physiological functions of RBCs were measured and compared between pre-operative and recovered blood samples. No significant differences in the morphological score, 2,3-diphosphoglycerate, Na+K+-ATPase, Ca2+-ATPase, Mg2+-ATPase, malondialdehyde and osmotic fragility were identified between RBCs in the pre-operative and recovered blood samples. The level of free hemoglobin in RBCs of the recovered blood samples was significantly higher than in the pre-operative blood samples (P<0.05). Medium- and high-shear blood viscosities in the recovered blood samples were significantly lower than those observed in the pre-operative blood samples (P<0.05). Casson viscosity in the recovered blood samples was significantly higher compared with the pre-operative blood samples. However, no significant differences (P>0.05) in the low-shear blood viscosity, plasma viscosity, relative blood viscosity, erythrocyte aggregation index or Casson yield stress were identified between recovered and pre-operative blood samples. These findings suggested that autologous blood transfusion in liver transplantation surgery in patients with hepatitis B and decompensation had no significant influence on the morphology, structure, function and hemorheology of RBCs.

Washed cell salvage in surgical patients: A review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized trials under PRISMA

BACKGROUND

Cell salvage is commonly used as part of a blood conservation strategy. However concerns among clinicians exist about the efficacy of transfusion of washed cell salvage.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in which patients, scheduled for all types of surgery, were randomized to washed cell salvage or to a control group with no cell salvage. Data were independently extracted, risk ratio (RR), and weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Data were pooled using a random effects model. The primary endpoint was the number of patients exposed to allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion.

RESULTS

Out of 1140 search results, a total of 47 trials were included. Overall, the use of washed cell salvage reduced the rate of exposure to allogeneic RBC transfusion by a relative 39% (RR = 0.61; 95% CI 0.57 to 0.65; P < 0.001), resulting in an average saving of 0.20 units of allogeneic RBC per patient (weighted mean differences [WMD] = -0.20; 95% CI -0.22 to -0.18; P < 0.001), reduced risk of infection by 28% (RR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.97; P = 0.03), reduced length of hospital stay by 2.31 days (WMD = -2.31; 95% CI -2.50 to -2.11; P < 0.001), but did not significantly affect risk of mortality (RR = 0.92; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.34; P = 0.66). No statistical difference could be observed in the number of patients exposed to re-operation, plasma, platelets, or rate of myocardial infarction and stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Washed cell salvage is efficacious in reducing the need for allogeneic RBC transfusion and risk of infection in surgery.

Review of anesthesia in liver transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) is a well-accepted treatment modality of many end-stage liver diseases. The main issue in LT is the shortage of deceased donors to accommodate the needs of patients waiting for such transplants. Live donors have tremendously increased the pool of available liver grafts, especially in countries where deceased donors are not common. The main ethical concern of this procedure is the safety of healthy donors, who undergo a major abdominal surgery not for their own health, but to help cure others. The first part of the review concentrates on live donor selection, preanesthetic evaluation, and intraoperative anesthetic care for living liver donors. The second part reviews patient evaluation, intraoperative anesthesia monitoring, and fluid management of the recipient. This review provides up-to-date information to help improve the quality of anesthesia, and contribute to the success of LT and increase the long-term survival of the recipients.

Effect of autotransfusion system on tumor recurrence and survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

AIM: To investigate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of continuous autotransfusion system (CATS) during liver transplantation of hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

METHODS: Eighty-three hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who underwent liver transplantation with intraoperative CATS (n = 24, CATS group) and without (n = 59, non-CATS group) between April 2006 and November 2011 at the Liver Transplant Institute of Inonu University were analyzed retrospectively. Postoperative HCC recurrence was monitored by measuring alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels at 3-mo intervals and performing imaging analysis by thoracoabdominal multidetector computed tomography at 6-month intervals. Inter-group differences in recurrence and correlations between demographic, clinical, and pathological data were assessed by ANOVA and χ² tests. Overall and disease-free survivals were calculated by the univariate Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS: Of the 83 liver transplanted HCC patients, 89.2% were male and the overall mean age was 51.3 ± 8.9 years (range: 18-69 years). The CATS and non-CATS groups showed no statistically significant differences in age, sex ratio, body mass index, underlying disease, donor type, graft-to-recipient weight ratio, Child-Pugh and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores, number of tumors, tumor size, AFP level, Milan and University of California San Francisco selection criteria, tumor differentiation, macrovascular invasion, median hospital stay, recurrence rate, recurrence site, or mortality rate. The mean follow-up time of the non-CATS group was 17.9 ± 12.8 mo, during which systemic metastasis and/or locoregional recurrence developed in 25.4% of the patients. The mean follow-up time for the CATS group was 25.8 ± 15.1 mo, during which systemic metastasis and/or locoregional recurrence was detected in 29.2% of the patients. There was no significant difference between the CATS and non-CATS groups in recurrence rate or site. Additionally, no significant differences existed between the groups in overall or disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION: CATS is a safe procedure and may decrease the risk of tumor recurrence in HCC patients.

Liver transplantation: Advances and perioperative care

Liver transplantation is one of the treatments for many-life threatening liver diseases. Numerous advances in liver transplant surgery, anaesthesia and perioperative care have allowed for an increasing number of these procedures. The purpose of this review is to consider some of the important advances in perioperative care of liver transplant patients such as pre-operative evaluation, intraoperative monitoring and management and early extubation. A PubMed and EMBASE search of terms “Anaesthesia” and “Liver Transplantation” were performed with filters of articles in “English”, “Adult” and relevant recent publications of randomised control trial, editorial, systemic review and non-systemic review were selected and synthesized according to the author's personal and professional perspective in the field of liver transplantation and anaesthesia. The article outlines strategies in organ preservation, training and transplant database for further research.

Methods to decrease blood loss and transfusion requirements for liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Excessive blood loss and increased blood transfusion requirements may have significant impact on the short-term and long-term outcomes after liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the potential benefits and harms of different methods of decreasing blood loss and blood transfusion requirements during liver transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and metaRegister of Controlled Trials until September 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials that were performed to compare various methods of decreasing blood loss and blood transfusion requirements during liver transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified the trials and extracted the data. We analysed the data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects model using RevMan Analysis. For each outcome we calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on available data analysis. We also conducted network meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 trials involving 1913 patients. The sample size in the trials varied from 8 to 209 participants. The interventions included pharmacological interventions (aprotinin, tranexamic acid, epsilon amino caproic acid, antithrombin 3, recombinant factor (rFvIIa), oestrogen, prostaglandin, epinephrine), blood substitutes (blood components rather than whole blood, hydroxy-ethyl starch, thromboelastography), and cardiovascular interventions (low central venous pressure). All the trials were of high risk of bias. Primary outcomes were reported in at least two trials for the following comparisons: aprotinin versus control, tranexamic acid versus control, recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) versus control, and tranexamic acid versus aprotinin. There were no significant differences in the 60-day mortality (3 trials; 6/161 (3.7%) in the aprotinin group versus 8/119 (6.7%) in the control group; RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.18 to 1.45), primary graft non-function (2 trials; 0/128 (0.0%) in the aprotinin group versus 4/89 (4.5%) in the control group; RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.25), retransplantation (3 trials; 2/256 (0.8%) in the aprotinin group versus 12/178 (6.7%) in the control group; RR 0.21; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.79), or thromboembolic episodes (3 trials; 4/161 (2.5%) in the aprotinin group versus 5/119 (4.2%) in the control group; RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.19 to 1.84) between the aprotinin and control groups. There were no significant differences in the 60-day mortality (3 trials; 4/83 (4.8%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 5/56 (8.9%) in the control group; RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.17 to 1.76), retransplantation (2 trials; 3/41 (7.3%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 3/36 (8.3%) in the control group; RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.18 to 3.48), or thromboembolic episodes (5 trials; 5/103 (4.9%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 1/76 (1.3%) in the control group; RR 2.20; 95% CI 0.38 to 12.64) between the tranexamic acid and control groups. There were no significant differences in the 60-day mortality (3 trials; 8/195 (4.1%) in the recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) group versus 2/91 (2.2%) in the control group; RR 1.51; 95% CI 0.33 to 6.95), thromboembolic episodes (2 trials; 24/185 (13.0%) in the rFVIIa group versus 8/81 (9.9%) in the control group; RR 1.38; 95% CI 0.65 to 2.91), or serious adverse events (2 trials; 90/185 (48.6%) in the rFVIIa group versus 30/81 (37.0%) in the control group; RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.78) between the rFVIIa and control groups. There were no significant differences in the 60-day mortality (2 trials; 6/91 (6.6%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 1/87 (1.1%) in the aprotinin group; RR 4.12; 95% CI 0.71 to 23.76) or thromboembolic episodes (2 trials; 4/91 (4.4%) in the tranexamic acid group versus 2/87 (2.3%) in the aprotinin group; RR 1.97; 95% CI 0.37 to 10.37) between the tranexamic acid and aprotinin groups. The remaining outcomes in the above comparisons and the remaining comparisons included only only trial under the primary outcome or the outcome was not reported at all in the trials. There were no significant differences in the mortality, primary graft non-function, graft failure, retransplantation, thromboembolic episodes, or serious adverse events in any of these comparisons. However, the confidence intervals were wide, and it is not possible to reach any conclusion on the safety of the interventions. None of the trials reported the quality of life in patients.Secondary outcomes were reported in at least two trials for the following comparisons - aprotinin versus control, tranexamic acid versus control, rFVIIa versus control, thromboelastography versus control, and tranexamic acid versus aprotinin. There was significantly lower allogeneic blood transfusion requirements in the aprotinin group than the control group (8 trials; 185 patients in aprotinin group and 190 patients in control group; SMD -0.61; 95% CI -0.82 to -0.40). There were no significant differences in the allogeneic blood transfusion requirements between the tranexamic acid and control groups (4 trials; 93 patients in tranexamic acid group and 66 patients in control group; SMD -0.27; 95% CI -0.59 to 0.06); rFVIIa and control groups (2 trials; 141 patients in rFVIIa group and 80 patients in control group; SMD -0.05; 95% CI -0.32 to 0.23); thromboelastography and control groups (2 trials; 31 patients in thromboelastography group and 31 patients in control group; SMD -0.73; 95% CI -1.69 to 0.24); or between the tranexamic acid and aprotinin groups (3 trials; 101 patients in tranexamic acid group and 97 patients in aprotinin group; SMD -0.09; 95% CI -0.36 to 0.19). The remaining outcomes in the above comparisons and the remaining comparisons included only only trial under the primary outcome or the outcome was not reported at all in the trials. There were no significant differences in the blood loss, transfusion requirements, hospital stay, or intensive care unit stay in most of the comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Aprotinin, recombinant factor VIIa, and thromboelastography groups may potentially reduce blood loss and transfusion requirements. However, risks of systematic errors (bias) and risks of random errors (play of chance) hamper the confidence in this conclusion. We need further well-designed randomised trials with low risk of systematic error and low risk of random errors before these interventions can be supported or refuted.