Randomized controlled trial to evaluate flush and reperfusion techniques in liver transplantation. Sequential versus contemporaneous portal and arterial reperfusion during liver transplantation. Comparison of RBCs and FFP with whole blood during liver transplant surgery. Vasopressor administration during liver transplant surgery and its effect on endotracheal reintubation rate in the postoperative period: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Effects of low central venous pressure during preanhepatic phase on blood loss and liver and renal function in liver transplantation. A randomized trial of solvent/detergent-treated and standard fresh-frozen plasma in the coagulopathy of liver disease and liver transplantation.
To determine the impact of different flush and reperfusion techniques on postreperfusion syndrome (PRS) and postoperative graft function, 100 transplants were randomly assigned into four groups as follows: group 1 (n=31), portal vein flush, no vena caval venting; group 2 (n=21), hepatic arterial flush, no vena caval venting; group 3 (n=29), portal vein flush with vena caval venting; and group 4 (n=19), hepatic artery flush with vena caval venting. Donor and recipient characteristics were similar. Extensive intraoperative and postoperative monitoring was performed and measurements were documented immediately before reperfusion and at 1, 5, 15, and 30 min after reperfusion. PRS was defined by three criteria: mean arterial pressure (MAP) <60 mmHg at 1 min after reperfusion, MAP <60 mmHg at 5 min after reperfusion, and a decrease of 30% or more for the MAP percent area under the curve during the initial 5 min after reperfusion (%AUC). Using these definitions, the overall incidence of PRS was 21%, 8%, and 43%, respectively. Group 1 was the most hemodynamically stable; the incidence of PRS in group 1 was 2/31 (7%) at 1 min and 8/31 (25%) using %AUC criteria compared with 7/21 (33%) at 1 min and 12/21 (57%) using %AUC criteria for group 2 (P<0.05). The patients in groups 3 and 4 (vena caval venting) demonstrated smaller percentage increases in serum potassium levels (as determined by %AUC; 4.3+/-6.8 and 0.3+/-5.4, vs. 15.1+/-8.1 for group 1 and 22.9+/-8.2 for group 2). The difference between group 4 and group 2 was statistically significant (P<0.05). The increases in serum potassium did not translate into increased cardiac or hemodynamic instability. Combining all data obtained over the first 30 min after reperfusion, there was no statistically significant difference in hemodynamic or biochemical changes noted among the four groups. Postoperative liver function was similar among the four groups. We conclude that portal vein flush without vena caval venting provided a lower incidence of PRS than any other technique. Vena caval venting decreased the release of potassium into the circulation. Postoperative graft function was not significantly affected by flush and reperfusion techniques. Although sequential portal and arterial revascularization (SPAr) is the most common method of graft reperfusion at liver transplantation (OLT), contemporaneous portal and hepatic artery revascularization (CPAr) has been used to reduce arterial ischemia to the bile ducts. The aim of this study was to prospectively compare SPAr (group 1; n=19) versus CPAr (group 2; n=21) among 40 consecutive OLT from heart-beating donors. There were no differences in the demographics characteristics, Model for End-stage Liver Disease scores, indication for OLT and donor parameters between the groups. OLT was performed using the piggyback technique. The biliary anastomosis was performed in all cases by a duct-to-duct technique with a T-tube in 32% versus 29% of cases without a T tube (P=.83). In the CPAr group, the liver was reperfused simultaneously via the portal vein and hepatic artery. CPAr showed a longer warm ischemia (66 ± 8 vs 37 ± 7 minutes; P<.001), while SPAr had a longer arterial ischemia 103 ± 42 vs 66 ± 8 minutes (P=.0004). Recovery of graft function was similar. There was no primary nonfunction and delayed graft function occurred among 10% versus 9%. Liver function tests were similar between the two groups up to 90 days case of follow-up- One-year graft and patient survivals were, respectively, 89% and 95% versus 94% and 100% (P=.29). At a median follow-up of 13 ± 6 versus 14 ± 7 months, biliary complications included anastomotic stenoses in 15% versus 19% (P=.78) and intrahepatic non-anastomotic biliary strictures in 26% versus none (P=.01) for SPAr and CPAr, respectively. CPAr was safe and feasible, reducing the incidence of intrahepatic biliary strictures by decreasing the duration of arterial ischemia to the intrahepatic bile ducts.
                Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Component therapy has become the accepted standard of care in transfusion medicine. In instances of large blood loss, the transfusion of whole blood rather than the combination of RBCs and FFP is rational and may be preferred.
                In a controlled, prospective, randomized study of 33 patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation, the effectiveness of component therapy (RBCs and FFP) was compared with the use of whole blood. Coagulation tests (prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time), clotting factor levels (FV, FVIII, fibrinogen), platelet counts, the number of donor exposures, and the total volume of blood transfused for the whole-blood group and the component-therapy group were compared at designated times before surgery, during surgery, and 24 hours after surgery.
                There was a significant difference (p=0.015) in the median number of donor exposures for RBCs and FFP, with fewer occurring in the whole-blood group (n=14.5) compared with the component group (n=25). There was no significant difference between groups in coagulation profiles during any of the phases of surgery except for a mild decrease in fibrinogen levels in the whole-blood group at the conclusion of surgery. There were no differences between the groups in the median volume of blood component replacement, the median age of blood components, the patients' Hct or the number of RBC-containing components transfused.
                Whole blood, when compared with component therapy, is associated with fewer donor exposures yet provided equally effective replacement therapy for blood loss in liver transplantation patients. End-stage liver disease (ESLD) is associated with a low systemic vascular resistance due to peripheral vasodilatation. This phenomenon is aggravated by general anesthesia (GA) administered during liver transplantation, resulting in precipitous decreases in blood pressure. The excessive amounts (>3 mL/1 mL blood loss) of IV fluid administered to maintain hemodynamic stability during surgery promotes a fluid shift in the lung, which may lead to hypoxia in the immediate postoperative period. This pathophysiologic state may necessitate endotracheal reintubation and mechanical ventilation of the lungs, thus exposing the patient to a risk for morbidities related to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation, including deleterious cardiovascular responses to laryngoscopy, endotracheal damage due to laryngoscopic instrumentation, alteration in pulmonary mechanics secondary to controlled mechanical ventilation of the lungs, and delayed recovery associated with the sedation needed to perform these maneuvers.
                The aim of this study was to determine whether the use of a vasopressor to antagonize the vasodilatory effect of GA would reduce the amount of IV fluids administered during liver transplantation, and whether the subsequent amelioration of fluid shift in the postoperative period would reduce the need for ventilatory support and endotracheal reintubation.
                This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey. Patients aged > or =18 years scheduled to undergo orthotopic liver transplantation for ESLD were enrolled. The effect of use of an adjuvant vasopressor, together with controlled fluid administration (ie, the volume of IV fluid needed to maintain hemodynamic parameters at > or =80% of preoperative levels) (vasopressor group), was compared with that of fluid administration only (placebo group). We determined various postoperative outcome measures, primarily the amount of fluid administered and the need for endotracheal reintubation.
                Sixty-five patients were enrolled (44 men, 21 women; vasopressor, 33 patients; placebo, 32 patients). Sex distribution showed 19 men and 14 women in the vasopressor group and 25 men and 7 women in the placebo group (both, P < 0.05). The 2 treatment groups were statistically similar with regard to the rest of the baseline demographic and clinical characteristics and duration of surgery. The vasopressor group had a significantly lower prevalence of endotracheal reintubation compared with the placebo group (RR, 1:6; P < 0.05). The other postoperative parameters were statistically similar between the 2 groups.
                In this study of adults undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation for ESLD, use of an adjuvant vasopressor, together with controlled fluid administration, to maintain a stable hemodynamic status during GA reduced the need for endotracheal reintubation and its associated morbidities in the postoperative period compared with placebo. Although the low central venous pressure (LCVP) technique is used to decrease blood loss during liver resection, its efficacy and safety during transplant procedures are still debatable. Our study aimed to assess the effects of this technique and its clinical safety for recipients undergoing liver transplantation.
                Eighty-six adult patients were randomly divided into a LCVP group and a control group. In the LCVP group, CVP was maintained below 5 mmHg or 40% lower than baseline during the preanhepatic phase by limiting infusion volume, manipulating the patient's posture, and administration of somatostatin and nitroglycerine. Recipients in the control group received standard care. Hemodynamics, blood loss, liver function, and renal function of the two groups were compared perioperatively.
                A lower CVP was maintained in the LCVP group during the preanhepatic phase, resulting in a significant decrease in blood loss (1922 +/- 1429 vs. 3111 +/- 1833 ml, P < 0.05) and transfusion volume (1200 +/- 800 vs. 2400 +/- 1200 ml, P < 0.05) intraoperatively. Compared with the control group, the LCVP group had a significantly lower mean arterial pressure at 2 h after the start of the operation (74 +/- 11 vs. 84 +/- 14 mmHg, P < 0.05), a lower lactate value at the end of the operation (5.9 +/- 3.0 vs. 7.2 +/- 3.0 mmol/l, P < 0.05), and a better preservation of liver function after the declamping of the portal vein. There were no significant differences in perioperative renal function and postoperative complications between the groups.
                The LCVP technique during the preanhepatic phase reduced intraoperative blood loss, protected liver function, and had no detrimental effects on renal function in LT. Virus inactivation of pooled fresh-frozen plasma (FFP) by the solvent/detergent (SD) method results in a loss of approximately 20 percent of factor VIII. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of SD-treated plasma in correcting the coagulopathy associated with liver disease and liver transplantation.
                Forty-nine patients with coagulation deficits due to liver disease, who required FFP for invasive procedures or liver transplantation, were randomly assigned to receive either FFP or SD-treated plasma. Patients were assessed for side effects, correction of coagulopathy over 24 hours, and seroconversion for viral markers 6 to 18 months after treatment.
                In the liver disease group, equal correction of clotting factors and partial thromboplastin time was seen with FFP and SD-treated plasma, with a similar return to baseline values over 24 hours. There was greater correction of the International Normalised Ratio in patients receiving SD-treated plasma (p = 0.037), but this patient group had higher baseline values than recipients of FFP (p = 0.024). Liver transplant patients also showed equivalent correction of coagulopathy with the same dose of FFP and SD-treated plasma. The use of other blood components during transplantation was identical in the two treatment groups. No seroconversions were seen for HIV or hepatitis B or C virus. One patient who had received FFP seroconverted for human parvovirus B19. Apparent seroconversion for hepatitis A virus seen at 9 to 13 months in four other patients was probably due to detection of passively transferred antibodies, as later testing of these patients gave negative results. Minor side effects were rare in both groups.
                SD-treated plasma is an efficacious source of coagulation factors for patients with liver disease who are undergoing biopsy or transplantation. Assessment of seroconversion for viral markers in recipients of plasma-derived products and plasma components should include consideration of the possibility that passively transferred antibodies were detected.
There is currently no evidence to support or refute the use of any specific technique of flushing or reperfusion during liver transplantation. Due to the paucity of data, absence of evidence should not be confused with evidence of absence of any differences. Further well designed trials with low risk of systematic error and low risk of random errors are necessary.