Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument.

BACKGROUND: ChatGPT-4 is the latest release of a novel artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot able to answer freely formulated and complex questions. In the near future, ChatGPT could become the new standard for health care professionals and patients to access medical information. However, little is known about the quality of medical information provided by the AI. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the reliability of medical information provided by ChatGPT. METHODS: Medical information provided by ChatGPT-4 on the 5 hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) conditions with the highest global disease burden was measured with the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool. The EQIP tool is used to measure the quality of internet-available information and consists of 36 items that are divided into 3 subsections. In addition, 5 guideline recommendations per analyzed condition were rephrased as questions and input to ChatGPT, and agreement between the guidelines and the AI answer was measured by 2 authors independently. All queries were repeated 3 times to measure the internal consistency of ChatGPT. RESULTS: Five conditions were identified (gallstone disease, pancreatitis, liver cirrhosis, pancreatic cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma). The median EQIP score across all conditions was 16 (IQR 14.5-18) for the total of 36 items. Divided by subsection, median scores for content, identification, and structure data were 10 (IQR 9.5-12.5), 1 (IQR 1-1), and 4 (IQR 4-5), respectively. Agreement between guideline recommendations and answers provided by ChatGPT was 60% (15/25). Interrater agreement as measured by the Fleiss κ was 0.78 (P<.001), indicating substantial agreement. Internal consistency of the answers provided by ChatGPT was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT provides medical information of comparable quality to available static internet information. Although currently of limited quality, large language models could become the future standard for patients and health care professionals to gather medical information.

Donor-Recipient Body Surface Area Mismatch and the Outcome of Liver Transplantation in the UK.

Introduction: Too small or too big liver grafts for recipient's size has detrimental effects on transplant outcomes. Research Questions: The purpose was to correlate donor-recipient body surface area ratio or body surface area index with recipient survival, graft survival, hepatic artery or portal vein, or vena cava thrombosis. High and low body surface area index cut-off points were determined. Design: There were 11,245 adult recipients of first deceased donor whole liver-only grafts performed in the UK from January 2000 until June 2020. The transplants were grouped according to the body surface area index and compared to complications, graft and recipient survival. Results: The body surface area index ranged from 0.491 to 1.691 with a median of 0.988. The body surface area index > 1.3 was associated with a higher rate of portal vein thrombosis within the first 3 months (5.5%). This risk was higher than size-matched transplants (OR: 2.878, 95% CI: 1.292-6.409, P = 0.01). Overall graft survival was worse in transplants with body surface area index ≤ 0.85 (HR: 1.254, 95% CI: 1.051-1.497, P = 0.012) or body surface area index > 1.4 (HR: 3.704, 95% CI: 2.029-6.762, P < 0.001) than those with intermediate values. The graft survival rates were reduced by 2% for cases with body surface area index ≤ 0.85 but were decreased by 20% for cases with body surface area index > 1.4. These findings were confirmed by bootstrap internal validation. No statistically significant differences were detected for hepatic artery thrombosis, occlusion of hepatic veins/inferior vena cava or recipient survival. Conclusions: Donor-recipient size mismatch affects the rates of portal vein thrombosis within the first 3 months and overall graft survival in deceased-donor liver transplants.

Are short-term complications associated with poor allograft and patient survival after liver transplantation? A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Maximizing patient and allograft survival after liver transplant (LT) is important from both a patient care and organ utilization perspective. Although individual studies have addressed the effects of short-term post-LT complications on a limited scale, there has not been a systematic review of the literature formally assessing the potential effects of early complications on long-term outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To identify whether short-term complications after LT affect allograft and overall survival, to identify short-term complications of particular clinical interest and significance, and to provide recommendations to improve post-LT graft and patient survival. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. RESULTS: The literature review and analysis provided show that short-term complications have a large impact on allograft and patient survival after LT. The complications with the strongest effect on survival are acute kidney injury (AKI), biliary complications, and early allograft dysfunction (EAD). CONCLUSION: This panel recommends taking measures to reduce the risk and incidence of short-term complications post-LT. Clinicians should pay particular attention to preventing or ameliorating AKI, biliary complications, and EAD (Quality of evidence; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

Uses of a dedicated 3D reconstruction software with augmented and mixed reality in planning and performing advanced liver surgery and living donor liver transplantation (with videos).

The development of digital intelligent diagnostic and treatment technology has opened countless new opportunities for liver surgery from the era of digital anatomy to a new era of digital diagnostics, virtual surgery simulation and using the created scenarios in real-time surgery using mixed reality. In this article, we described our experience on developing a dedicated 3 dimensional visualization and reconstruction software for surgeons to be used in advanced liver surgery and living donor liver transplantation. Furthermore, we shared the recent developments in the field by explaining the outreach of the software from virtual reality to augmented reality and mixed reality.

The role of acute in-patient rehabilitation on short-term outcomes after liver transplantation: A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The indication and surgical complexity of orthotopic liver transplantation underscore the need for strategies to optimize the recovery for transplant recipients. We conducted a systematic review aimed at identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the evidence examining the effect of in-patient rehabilitation for liver transplant recipients and provide related practice recommendations. METHODS: Health research databases were systematically reviewed for studies that included adults who received liver transplantation and participated in acute, post-transplant rehabilitation. Postoperative morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay, and other markers of surgical recovery were extracted. Practice recommendations are provided by an international panel using GRADE. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included in the review (including 3901 participants). Rehabilitation interventions varied widely in design and composition; however, details regarding intervention delivery were poorly described in general. The quality of evidence was rated as very low largely owing to "very serious" imprecision, poor reporting, and limited data from comparative studies. Overall, the studies suggest that in-patient rehabilitation for recipients of liver transplantation is safe, tolerable, and feasible, and may benefit functional outcomes. CONCLUSION: Two practice recommendations related to in-patient rehabilitation following LT were yielded from this review: (1) it is safe, tolerable, and feasible; and (2) it improves postoperative functional outcomes. Each of the recommendations are weak and supported by low quality of evidence. No recommendation could be made related to benefits or harms for clinical, physiological, and other outcomes. Adequately powered and high quality randomized controlled trials are urgently needed in this area.

Which cava anastomotic techniques are optimal regarding immediate and short-term outcomes after liver transplantation: A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: It has long been debated whether cava anastomosis should be performed with the piggyback technique or cava replacement, with or without veno-venous bypass (VVB), with or without temporary portocaval shunt (PCS) in the setting of liver transplantation. OBJECTIVES: To identify whether different cava anastomotic techniques and other maneuvers benefit the recipient regarding short-term outcomes and to provide international expert panel recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel (CRD42021240979). RESULTS: Of 3205 records screened, 307 publications underwent full-text assessment for eligibility and 47 were included in qualitative synthesis. Four studies were randomized control trials. Eighteen studies were comparative. The remaining 25 were single-center retrospective noncomparative studies. CONCLUSION: Based on existing data and expert opinion, the panel cannot recommend one cava reconstruction technique over another, rather the surgical approach should be based on surgeon preference and center dependent, with special consideration toward patient circumstances (Quality of evidence: Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong). The panel recommends against routine use of vevo-venous bypass (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong) and against the routine use of temporary porto-caval shunt (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong).

Influence of surgical technique in donor hepatectomy on immediate and short-term living donor outcomes - A systematic review of the literature, meta-analysis, and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: There are currently no guidelines pertaining to ERAS pathways in living donor hepatectomy. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify whether surgical technique influences immediate and short-term outcomes after living liver donation surgery. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel (CRD42021260707). Endpoints were mortality, overall complications, serious complications, bile eaks, pulmonary complications, estimated blood loss and length of stay. RESULTS: Of the 2410 screened articles, 21 articles were included for final analysis; three observational, 13 retrospective cohort, four prospective cohort studies, and one randomized trial. Overall complications were higher with right versus left hepatectomy (26.8% vs. 20.8%; OR 1.4, P = .010). Donors after left hepatectomy had shorter length of stay (MD 1.4 days) compared to right hepatectomy. There was no difference in outcomes after right donor hepatectomy with versus without middle hepatic vein. We had limited data on the influence of incision type and minimally invasive approaches on living donor outcomes, and no data on the effect of operative time on donor outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Left donor hepatectomy should be preferred over right hepatectomy, as it is related to improved donor short-term outcomes (QOE; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Right donor hepatectomy with or without MHV has equivalent outcomes (QOE; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong); no preference is recommended, decision should be based on program's experience and expertise. No difference in outcomes was observed related to incision type, minimally invasive vs. open (QOE; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak); no preference can be recommended.

Optimizing pre-donation physiologic evaluation for enhanced recovery after living liver donation - Systematic review and multidisciplinary expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: While preoperative physiologic evaluation of live liver donors is routinely performed to ensure donor safety and minimize complications, the optimal approach to this evaluation is unknown. OBJECTIVES: We aim to identify predonation physiologic evaluation strategies to improve postoperative short-term outcomes, enhance donor's recovery, and reduce length of stay. We also aim to provide multidisciplinary expert panel recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: The systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines, and the recommendations were formulated using GRADE approach and experts' opinion. The search included retrospective or prospective studies, describing outcomes of physiologic evaluation predonation. The outcomes of interest were length of stay, postoperative complications (POC), recovery after donation, and mortality. PROSERO protocol ID CRD42021260662. RESULTS: Of 1386 articles screened, only three retrospective cohort studies met eligibility criteria. Two studies demonstrated no impact of age (< 70 years) on POC. Increased body mass index's (BMI) association with POC was present in one study (23.8 vs 21.7 kg/m2 , OR 1.67 (1.14-2.48), P = .01) and absent in another (< 30 vs 30-35 kg/m2 , P = .61). One study demonstrated decreased risk for postdonation subclinical hepatic dysfunction in donors with higher normal platelet count (PLT). None of the studies noted donor death. Given the scarce data on predonation physiologic testing, the expert panel recommended a battery of tests to guide clinical practice and future investigations. CONCLUSION: Advancing age (60-69 years) is not a contraindication for liver donation. There is insufficient evidence for a specific predonation BMI cut-off. Abbreviated predonation physiologic testing is recommended in all candidates. Comprehensive testing is recommended in high-risk candidates while considering the pretest probability in various populations (Quality of evidence; Low to Very Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

The role of T-tubes and abdominal drains on short-term outcomes in liver transplantation - A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and expert panel recommendation aims to answer the question regarding the routine use of T-tubes or abdominal drains to better manage complications and thereby improve outcomes after liver transplantation. METHODS: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel to assess the potential risks and benefits of T-tubes and intra-abdominal drainage in liver transplantation (CRD42021243036). RESULTS: Of the 2996 screened records, 33 studies were included in the systematic review, of which 29 (six RCTs) assessed the use of T-tubes and four regarding surgical drains. Although some studies reported less strictures when using a T-tube, there was a trend toward more biliary complications with T-tubes, mainly related to biliary leakage. Due to the small number of studies, there was a paucity of evidence on the effect of abdominal drains with no clear benefit for or against the use of drainage. However, one study investigating the open vs. closed circuit drains found a significantly higher incidence of intra-abdominal infections when open-circuit drains were used. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the potential risk of biliary leakage and infections, the routine intraoperative insertion of T-tubes is not recommended (Level of Evidence moderate - very low; grade of recommendation strong). However, a T-tube can be considered in cases at risk for biliary stenosis. Due to the scant evidence on abdominal drainage, no change in clinical practice in individual centers is recommended. (Level of Evidence very low; weak recommendation).

Early removal of drains and lines after liver transplantation to reduce the length of hospital stay and enhance recovery - A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The timing of removing abdominal drains, central venous catheters (CVC), and urinary catheters (UC) on post liver transplantation (LT) outcomes is not well elucidated. OBJECTIVES: To provide international expert panel recommendations and guidelines on time of drain and catheter removal as a part of an ERAS protocol to reduce the length of hospital stay and enhance recovery. METHODS: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Papers considered were those reporting one or more outcomes of interest related to drainage and line removal in the setting of LT. POSPERO Protocol ID: CRD42021238349 RESULTS: On analyzing five relevant studies pertaining to drains in patients undergoing LT (four retrospectives and one prospective), the length of hospital and/or ICU stay was similar or shorter, and postoperative morbidity and mortality were lower in those without drains. No studies pertaining specifically to the time of removal of drains, CVC's, or UC's in LT were found. Studies in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery or hepatectomies recommend early removal of CVC and UC to reduce catheter-associated infections. CONCLUSIONS: Based more on expert recommendation, we propose that abdominal drains, if placed during LT, should be removed by postoperative day 5 after LT, based on quantity and fluid characteristics (Quality of Evidence; Low to Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Larger studies are needed to more reliably determine indications for early drain and line removal in an ERAS protocol setting.

When is the optimal time to discharge patients after liver transplantation with respect to short-term outcomes? A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Several factors associated with prolonged hospital stay have been described. A recent study demonstrated that hospital length of stay (LOS) is directly associated with an increased cost for liver transplantation (LT) and may be associated with greater mortality; however, the factors associated with post-LT mortality are also related to a prolonged hospital stay, that is, those factors are confounders. Thus, the actual impact of the length of post-LT hospital stay on both short-term and long-term patient and graft survival remains uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To identify the optimal time to discharge patients after LT with respect to short-term outcomes; readmission rate, 30-90-mortality and morbidity. METHODS: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Initial search keywords for screening were as follows; ((discharge AND (time OR "time point" OR "time-point")) OR "length of hospital stay" OR "length of stay") AND ((liver OR hepatic) AND (transplant OR transplantation)). PROSPERO ID: CRD42021245598 RESULTS: The strength of recommendation was rated as Weak, and we did not identify the direction of recommendations regarding the optimal timing after LT concerning short-term outcomes, including "Readmission rate," six studies on 30- and/or 90-day mortality, and five studies on "30- and/or 90-day morbidity rate." CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is scarce to judge the optimal timing to discharge patients after LT with respect to short-term outcomes. In centers with robust outpatient follow-up, discharge can occur safely as early as post-transplant 6-8 days (Quality of Evidence [QOE]; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak).

When is it safe for the liver donor to be discharged home and prevent unnecessary re-hospitalizations? - A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available on discharge criteria after living liver donation (LLD). OBJECTIVES: To identify the features for fit for discharge checklist after LLD to prevent unnecessary re-hospitalizations and to provide international expert recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. The critical outcomes included were complications rates and liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR) (CRD42021260725). RESULTS: Total 57/1710 studies were included in qualitative analysis and 28/57 on the final analysis. No randomized controlled trials were identified. The complications rate was reported in 20/28 studies and ranged from 7.8% to 71.2%. Post hepatectomy liver function was reported in 13 studies. The Quality of Evidence (QoE) was Low and Very-Low for complications rate and liver function test, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring and prevention of donor complications should be crucial in decision making of discharge. Pain and diet control, removal of all drains and catheters, deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis, and use routine imaging (CT scan or liver ultrasound) before discharge should be included as fit for discharge checklist (QoE; Low | GRADE of recommendation; Strong). Transient Impaired liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR), a prognostic marker of outcome after liver resection, usually occurs after donor right hepatectomy and should be monitored. Improving trends for bilirubin and INR value should be observed by day 5 post hepatectomy and be included in the fit for discharge checklist. (QoE; Very-Low | GRADE; Strong).

The role of preoperative psychosocial counseling on the improvement of the recipient compliance and speed of recovery after liver transplantation - A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial disorders ranging from anxiety to severe psychiatric diseases and active alcohol/substance abuse are frequent in liver transplant candidates and potentially associated with worse post- transplant outcomes. Therefore, psychosocial evaluation is mandatory to optimize success after liver transplantation. However, how to carry out this evaluation, the type of intervention needed and its potential impact on patient outcome remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether psychosocial assessment may help in predicting risks of poor outcome; and to investigate whether psychosocial interventions may mitigate these risks and improve posttransplant outcomes, in particular compliance and speed of recovery. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO CRD42021238361. Main outcomes assessed were mortality, alcohol relapse, rejection, and medication compliance. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were analyzed including five observational comparative and ten observational noncomparative studies. Preoperative psychosocial evaluation of LT candidates was associated with higher concordance with the treatment plan (i.e., higher adherence to treatment and lower alcohol relapse) and lower rates of rejection. Psychosocial assessment tools were used in some studies to guide the evaluation, but their predictive ability remains debated, and they should not be used in isolation. Most of the interventions were studied in patients with alcohol related issues. In this context, support by specialized teams was associated with better posttransplant outcome, especially through a decrease in post-transplant alcohol relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative psychosocial assessment should be provided in order to detect patients at increased risk of poorer post-transplant outcome, in particular in terms of concordance to the treatment plan (Quality of Evidence; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong/For). The experts suggest that, when possible, provision of preoperative psychological assessment and concomitant interventions aimed at improving the concordance to treatment plans will positively impact the success of liver transplantation. (Quality of Evidence; Very Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong/For].

The role of early extubation on short-term outcomes after liver transplantation - A systematic review, meta-analysis and expert recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Early extubation in liver transplantation (LT) and its potential benefits such as reduction in pulmonary complications and enhanced postoperative recovery have been described. The extent of the effect of early extubation on short-term outcomes after LT across the published literature is to the best of our knowledge unknown. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine whether early extubation improves immediate and short-term outcomes after LT and to provide expert recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis on short-term outcomes after early extubation in LT was performed (CRD42021241402), following PRISMA guidelines and quality of evidence (QOE) and recommendations grading using the GRADE approach, derived from an international experts panel. Endpoints were reintubation rates, pulmonary and other complications/organ dysfunction, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: Of 831 screened articles, 20 observational studies with a total of 3573 patients addressing early extubation protocols were included, of which 12 studies compared results after early versus deferred extubation. Reintubation and pulmonary complication rates were lower in the early versus deferred extubation groups (OR 0.29, CI 0.22-0.39; OR 0.17, CI 0.09-0.33, respectively). ICU and hospital LOS were shorter in eight out of eight and seven out of eight comparative studies, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Early extubation after LT is associated with improved short-term outcomes after LT and should be performed in the majority of patients (QOE; Moderate to low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Randomized controlled trials using standardized definitions of early extubation and short-term outcomes are needed to demonstrate causality, validate and allow comparability of the results.

Optimal management of perioperative analgesia regarding immediate and short-term outcomes after liver transplantation - A systematic review, meta-analysis and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Adequate pain control is essential for patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT). Multiple analgesic strategies have been implemented during the perioperative period. There is no consensus on the optimal perioperative analgesia management. OBJECTIVES: To provide recommendations, on the optimal perioperative analgesia management for LT. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using GRADE. Studies describing outcomes, morbidity, mortality, pain scores, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay in patients that received different pain management techniques during and after LT were included (CRD42021243282). RESULTS: One thousand nine hundred ten articles were screened, but only two randomized controlled trials, one prospective and six retrospective studies were included. The opioid-avoidance protocols included, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA), Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) block, as well as other non-opioid analgesics, resulted in improved short-term outcomes. Mortality was reduced in this group versus control cohorts (OR = 0.51; CI 0.14, 1.83; P = 0.350), Time to extubation, and intensive care unit LOS were shorter; pain scores after surgery were lower in opioid-avoidance group (percentage decrease, 35%, 12%, and 55%, respectively). However, hospital LOS was longer (percentage increase 8%). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid-avoidance analgesia management for LT results in improved short-term outcomes. (Quality of Evidence; Moderate to low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak). Medications such as acetaminophen(paracetamol), gabapentin, ketamine, tramadol and local anesthesia may be used instead of, or as adjuncts to opioids for postoperative analgesia. Overall evidence remains weak and more robust studies are required.

Which preoperative assessment modalities best identify patients who are suitable for enhanced recovery after liver transplantation? A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: To implement Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols for liver transplant (LT) candidates, it is essential to identify tools that can help risk stratify patients by their risk of early adverse post-LT outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify pre-LT tools that assess functional capacity, frailty, and muscle mass that can best risk stratify patients by their risk of adverse post-LT outcomes. METHODS: We first conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, expert panel review and recommendations using the GRADE approach (PROSPERO ID CRD42021237434). After confirming there are no studies evaluating assessment modalities for ERAS protocols for LT recipients specifically, the approach of the review focused on pre-LT modalities that identify LT recipients at higher risk of worse early post-LT outcomes (≤90 days), considering that this is particularly pertinent when evaluating candidates for ERAS. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included in the review, encompassing three different types of pre-LT modalities: evaluation of physical function (including frailty and general physical scores like the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), assessment of cardiopulmonary capacity, and estimation of muscle mass and composition. The majority of studies evaluated frailty assessment and muscle mass. Most studies, except for liver frailty index (LFI), were retrospective and single-center. All assessment modalities could identify, in different grade, LT recipients with higher risk of early post-LT mortality, length of stay or postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: We identified four pre-LT assessment tools that could be used to identify patients who are suitable for ERAS protocols: (1) KPS (quality of evidence moderate, grade of recommendation strong); (2) LFI (quality of evidence moderate, grade of recommendation strong); (3) abdominal muscle mass by CT (quality of evidence moderate, grade of recommendation strong); and (4) cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) (quality of evidence moderate, grade of recommendation weak). We recommend that selection of the appropriate tool depends on the specific clinical setting and available resources to administer the tool, and that use of a tool be incorporated into the routine preoperative assessment when considering implementation of ERAS protocols for LT.

Does machine perfusion improve immediate and short-term outcomes by enhancing graft function and recipient recovery after liver transplantation? A systematic review of the literature, meta-analysis and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence supports the use of machine perfusion technologies (MP) for marginal liver grafts. Their effect on enhanced recovery, however, remains uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To identify areas in which MP might contribute to an ERAS program and to provide expert panel recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach. CRD42021237713 RESULTS: Both hypothermic (HMP) and normothermic (NMP) machine perfusion demonstrated significant benefits in preventing postreperfusion syndrome (PRS) (HMP OR .33, .15-.75 CI; NMP OR .51, .29-.90 CI) and early allograft dysfunction (EAD) (HMP OR .51, .35-.75 CI; NMP OR .66, .45-.97 CI), while shortening LOS (HMP MD -3.9; NMP MD -12.41). Only NMP showed a significant decrease in the length of ICU stay (L-ICU) (MD -7.07, -8.76; -5.38 CI), while only HMP diminishes the likelihood of major complications. Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) reduces EAD (OR .52, .38-.70 CI) and primary nonfunction (PNF) (OR .51, .27-.98 CI) without effect on L-ICU and LOS. CONCLUSIONS: The use of HMP decreases PRS and EAD, specifically for marginal grafts. This is supported by a shorter LOS and a lower rate of major postoperative complications (QOE; moderate | Recommendation; Strong). NMP reduces the incidence of PRS and EAD with associated shortening in L-ICU for both DBD and DCD grafts (QOE; moderate | Recommendation; High) This technology also shortens the length of hospital stay (QOE; low | Recommendation; Strong). NRP decreases the likelihood of EAD (QOE; moderate) and the risk of PNF (QOE; low) when compared to both DBD and SRR-DCD grafts preserved in SCS. (Recommendation; Strong).

Does pre-operative counselling of the donor improve immediate and short-term outcomes after living liver donation? - A review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: There is some evidence in the literature to suggest that pre-operative counselling improves pain scores postoperatively. However, it is unclear whether pre-operative counselling of the donor improves immediate and short-term outcomes after living liver donation. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to investigate the available quality of evidence (QOE) of pre-operative counselling for living donors on short term outcomes, provide expert opinion, grade recommendations and identify relevant components for Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Endpoints were defined by the WHOQOL-BREF scale: physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment. PROSPERO ID: CRD42021260677. RESULTS: Screening of 452 records and full texts led to 12 articles matching inclusion criteria, of which one was a randomized controlled trial (RCT), and 11 were observational retrospective cohort studies. A total of 933 individuals undergoing donor hepatectomy were included, of whom only 90 received dedicated perioperative ERAS protocols. Donors that received pre-operative counselling had fewer physical symptoms post donation, lower rates of fatigue, lower rates of pain, shorter recovery times and fewer unexpected medical problems, and less anxiety post donation. Female donors had higher affective and adverse effects scores, and 50% of donors reported adverse effects to analgesia that interfered with functional activity. Receiving information about analgesic options increased perception of care among donors. CONCLUSIONS: Providing comprehensive pre-operative counselling to living liver donors is associated with improved short-term outcomes after donation (QOE; moderate to low I Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

Which recipient pretransplant factors, such as MELD, renal function, sarcopenia, and recent sepsis influence suitability for and outcome after living donor liver transplantation? A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Varied access to deceased donors across the globe has resulted in differential living donor liver transplant (LDLT) practices and lack of consensus over the influence of models for end stage liver disease (MELD), renal function, sarcopenia, or recent infection on short-term outcomes. OBJECTIVES: Consider these risk factors in relation to patient selection and provide recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central. METHODS: PRIMSA systematic review and GRADE. PROSPERO ID: RD42021260809 RESULTS: MELD >25-30 alone is not a contraindication to LDLT, and multiple studies found no increase in short term mortality in high MELD patients. Contributing factors such as muscle mass, acute physiologic assessment and chronic health evaluation score, donor age, graft weight/recipient weight ratio, and inclusion of the middle hepatic vein in a right lobe graft influence morbidity and mortality in high MELD patients. Higher mortality is observed with pretransplant renal dysfunction, but short-term mortality is rare. Sarcopenia and recent infection are not contraindications to LDLT. Morbidity and prolonged LOS are common, and more frequent in patients with renal dysfunction, nutritional deficiency or recent infection. CONCLUSIONS: When individual risk factors are studied mortality is low and graft loss is infrequent, but morbidity is common. MELD, especially with concomitant risk factors, had the greatest influence on short term outcome, and recent infection had the least. A multidisciplinary team of experts should carefully assess patients with multiple risk factors, and an optimal graft is recommended.