ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is a nationwide shortage of organs available for liver transplantation. Living donors help meet this growing demand. Not uncommonly, donors will have positive autoantibodies. However, it is unclear whether donor positive autoantibodies are correlated with worse outcomes following living liver donor transplantations. AIM: To analyze the significance of positive autoantibodies in donors on post-transplant outcomes in recipients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of living liver donors who had undergone liver transplantation between January 1, 2012 and August 31, 2021. Demographic characteristics and pre-transplant data including antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and anti-smooth muscle antibody titers were collected in donors. Outcomes of interest were post-transplantation complications including mortality, biliary strictures, biliary leaks, infection, and rejection. Pediatric recipients and donors without measured pre-transplant autoantibody serologies were excluded from this study. RESULTS: 172 living donor liver transplantations were performed during the study period, of which 115 patients met inclusion criteria. 37 (32%) living donors were autoantibody-positive with a median ANA titer of 1:160 (range 1:80 to 1:1280) and median anti-SMA titer of 1:40 (range 1:20 to 1:160). There were no significant differences in baseline demographics between the autoantibody positive and negative donors. Post-transplantation rates of death (P value = 1), infections (P value = 0.66), and overall rates of complications (P value = 0.52) were similar between the autoantibody positive and negative groups. Higher incidences of anastomotic strictures and rejection were observed in the autoantibody positive group; however, these differences were not statistically significant (P value = 0.07 and P value = 0.30 respectively). CONCLUSION: Isolated pre-transplant autoantibody positivity is not correlated to worse post-transplant outcomes in living liver donor transplants.
ABSTRACT
Variability persists in intraoperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion rates, despite evidence supporting associated adverse sequelae. We evaluated whether beliefs concerning transfusion risk and safety are independently associated with the inclination to transfuse. We surveyed intraoperative transfusion decision-makers from 33 cardiac surgery programs in Michigan. The primary outcome was a provider's reported inclination to transfuse (via a six-point Likert Scale) averaged across 10 clinical vignettes based on Class IIA or IIB blood management guideline recommendations. Survey questions assessed hematocrit threshold for transfusion ("hematocrit trigger"), demographic and practice characteristics, years and case-volume of practice, knowledge of transfusion guidelines, and provider attitude regarding perceived risk and safety of blood transfusions. Linear regression models were used to estimate the effect of these variables on transfusion inclination. Mixed effect models were used to quantify the variation attributed to provider specialties and hematocrit triggers. The mean inclination to transfuse was 3.2 (might NOT transfuse) on the survey Likert scale (SD: .86) across vignettes among 202/413 (48.9%) returned surveys. Hematocrit triggers ranged from 15% to 30% (average: 20.4%; SE: .18%). The inclination to transfuse in situations with weak-to-moderate evidence for supporting transfusion was associated with a provider's hematocrit trigger (p < .01) and specialty. Providers believing in the safety of transfusions were significantly more likely to transfuse. Provider specialty and belief in transfusion safety were significantly associated with a provider's hematocrit trigger and likelihood for transfusion. Our findings suggest that blood management interventions should target these previously unaccounted for blood transfusion determinants.
