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.

Fast-Track Liver Transplantation: Six-year Prospective Cohort Study with an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been shown to facilitate discharge, decrease length of stay, improve outcomes and reduce costs. We used this concept to design a comprehensive fast-track pathway (OR-to-discharge) before starting our liver transplant activity and then applied this protocol prospectively to every patient undergoing liver transplantation at our institution, monitoring the results periodically. We now report our first six years results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective cohort study of all the liver transplants performed at our institution for the first six years. Balanced general anesthesia, fluid restriction, thromboelastometry, inferior vena cava preservation and temporary portocaval shunt were strategies common to all cases. Standard immunosuppression administered included steroids, tacrolimus (delayed in the setting of renal impairment, with basiliximab induction added) and mycophenolate mofetil. Tacrolimus dosing was adjusted using a Bayesian estimation methodology. Oral intake and ambulation were started early. RESULTS: A total of 240 transplants were performed in 236 patients (191♂/45♀) over 74 months, mean age 56.3±9.6 years, raw MELD score 15.5±7.7. Predominant etiologies were alcohol (n = 136) and HCV (n = 82), with hepatocellular carcinoma present in 129 (54.7%). Nine patients received combined liver and kidney transplants. The mean operating time was 315±64 min with cold ischemia times of 279±88 min. Thirty-one patients (13.1%) were transfused in the OR (2.4±1.2 units of PRBC). Extubation was immediate (< 30 min) in all but four patients. Median ICU length of stay was 12.7 hours, and median post-transplant hospital stay was 4 days (2-76) with 30 patients (13.8%) going home by day 2, 87 (39.9%) by day 3, and 133 (61%) by day 4, defining our fast-track group. Thirty-day-readmission rate (34.9%) was significantly lower (28.6% vs. 44.7% p=0.015) in the fast-track group. Patient survival was 86.8% at 1 year and 78.6% at five years. CONCLUSION: Fast-Tracking of Liver Transplant patients is feasible and can be applied as the standard of care.

Enhanced recovery after low- and medium-risk liver transplantation. A single-center prospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Few studies have fully applied an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol to liver transplantation (LT). Our aim was to assess the effects of a comprehensive ERAS protocol in our cohort of low- and medium-risk LT patients. METHODS: The ERAS protocol included pre-, intra-, and post-operative steps. During the five-year study period, 181 LT were performed in our institution. Two cohorts were identified: low risk patients (n = 101) had a laboratory model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score of 20 points or less at the time of LT, received a liver from a donor after brain death, and had a balance of risk score of 9 points or less; medium-risk patients (n = 15) had identical characteristics except for a higher MELD score (21-30 points). In addition, we analyzed the remaining patients (n = 65) who were transplanted over the same study period separately using the ERAS protocol. RESULTS: The low-risk cohort showed a low need for packed red blood cells transfusion (median: 0 units) and renal replacement therapy (1%), as well as a short length of stay both in the intensive care unit (13 h) and in the hospital (4 days); morbidity during one-year follow-up, and probability of surviving to one year (89.30%) and five years (76.99%) were in line with well-established reference data. Similar findings were observed in the medium-risk cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This single-center prospective observational cohort study provides evidence that ERAS is feasible and safe for low- and medium-risk LT.