Sin-Ei Juang

Retrospective Cohort Study to Compare Anesthesia in Living Donor Liver Transplantation Recipients Who Received Single and Dual Liver Grafts

OBJECTIVE Dual graft living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an alternative way to overcome small-for-size syndrome in LDLT. Surgical technique and outcome of using dual grafts have been reported, but there are no reports regarding anesthetic management. The aim of the current study is to compare the anesthetic management of single graft and dual graft liver transplantation. METHODS AND PATIENTS Anesthesia records of 24 single graft liver transplantation recipients (GI) and 6 dual graft recipients (GII) were reviewed, analyzed, and compared retrospectively. Patient characteristics and intraoperative data between groups were compared with Mann-Whitney t test and Fishers exact test where appropriate. P value less than .05 was regarded as significant. RESULTS Patient characteristics and most of the intraoperative data were similar between groups. Significant difference was noted in the total anesthesia time and the anhepatic time. Both times were significantly longer in GII compared to GI. CONCLUSION Dual graft living donor liver transplantation is surely a technically more challenging and demanding procedure. Therefore the total anesthesia time is longer, especially the anhepatic phase, because there are more graft vessels to be reconstructed before reperfusion. Overall the anesthetic management in terms of blood transfusion, fluid administration, sodium bicarbonate, calcium supplement, and the number of patients requiring fractional diluted noradrenaline support for maintenance of acceptable hemodynamic were not much different between the 2 groups.

Impact of Early Release of the IVC Clamp from Different IVC Clamping Maneuvers on Changes in Hemodynamic Parameters in Living Donor Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of different methods of inferior vena cava (IVC) clamping and release of the cross clamp on hemodynamic parameters of recipients during living donor liver transplantation. MATERIAL AND METHODS Ninety-six adult living donor liver transplantation patients were divided into 3 groups according to cross-clamp of the IVC for all the hepatic vein and portal vein reconstruction (G1), cross-clamp of the IVC only for hepatic vein reconstruction (G2), and side-clamp of the IVC for hepatic vein reconstruction (G3). In G2 and G2, the reconstructed hepatic vein was clamped instead of the IVC for portal vein reconstruction. The hemodynamic parameters among groups were compared by 1-way ANOVA and the complications in each group were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS Changes in percentage of MAP and CO in G3 were significantly less than that of G1 and G2 for hepatic vein reconstruction. Hemodynamic parameters of G2 and G3 normalized to pre-clamped values during portal vein reconstruction, while the hemodynamics of G1 remained unstable. CONCLUSIONS Hemodynamic changes were less pronounced in LT with side-clamp of the inferior cava vein versus total cross-clamp. Early release of the IVC clamp minimized the hemodynamic changes. There were no differences in terms of outcome (morbidity and mortality).

Anesthesia management and fluid therapy in right and left lobe living donor hepatectomy

OBJECTIVE Right lobe living donor hepatectomy poses a greater risk for the donor in relation to blood loss. The aims of this study were to compare anesthetic and intraoperative fluid management in right and left lateral segment living donor hepatectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS The anesthesia records of living donor hepatectomy patients were retrospectively reviewed. Donor age and weight, anesthesia time, central venous pressure, blood loss, blood product transfusion, intravenous fluids used, doses of furosemide, and urine output were compared and analyzed between groups using the Mann Whitney U test. RESULTS Forty-six patients underwent living donor left lateral segment hepatectomy (Group I); while 31 patients underwent right lobe hepatectomy (Group II). The mean blood loss in Group II was significantly higher compared to Group I (118 ± 81 mL vs 68 ± 64 mL), but clinically such amount of blood loss was not high enough to affect the hemodynamics. The fluid management was therefore not meaningfully different between the two groups. No blood transfusions or colloid infusions were required for either group. Urine output, hemoglobin changes, blood urea nitrogen, and serum creatinine pre- and postoperatively were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS As long as blood loss is minimal, we found no difference in the anesthetic management and fluid replacements between right and left lateral segment living donor hepatectomy.

Eye Protection in Liver Transplantation Patients under General Anesthesia

BACKGROUND Opsite (Smith & Nephew, Hull, UK) is widely used in wound care but its use in eye protection against corneal abrasion during major surgery is rarely reported. The purpose of the current study is to compare the effectiveness of using Opsite in eye protection with either wet gauze alone or with wet gauze following application of eye ointment in patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). METHODS This is a prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Forty-one patients undergoing liver transplantation were enrolled. One eye of each patient was protected with sterile gauze soaked with normal saline solution and covered with Opsite. Duratears (ALCON, Fort Worth, Tex, United States) ointment was applied to the other eye before covering it with sterile wet gauze and Opsite (ointment group). The corneal examination was carried out after fluorescein staining before and at the end of surgery by the same doctor. A Student t-test and a χ2 test were used for the statistical analyses. RESULTS Forty-one patients with 82 eyes were observed in this study. No corneal epithelial defects were found in either the normal saline group or the ointment group. CONCLUSION Opsite combined with wet gauze with or without additional eye ointment provided 100% protection against corneal abrasion in patients undergoing LDLT.

Clinical Beneficial Effects of Using Crystalloid only in Recipients of Living Donor Liver Transplantation

Objective: Liver transplantation (LT) is a major surgery associated with intraoperative massive fluid shift, which is usually replaced by crystalloid, 5% albumin (colloid) and blood products. We studied 15 patients from 477 consecutive recipients of adult living donor liver transplantation. Each patient received crystalloid only during LT. Whether LT provides any clinical benefit is not clear and must be determined. Methods and Patients: The anesthesia records of 477 adult LDLT were reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into three groups according to the fluids received. Group I (GI) had received blood products, 5% albumin and crystalloid, group II (GII) received 5% albumin and crystalloid, and group III (GIII) received crystalloid only. The characteristic intraoperative variable and postoperative acute rejection and survival rate were compared amongst groups by using One Way ANOVA post hoc with Bonferroni and by Ficher’s Exact test and Chi-square χ2 test. Results and Conclusions: GIII had less intraoperative ascites and blood loss; they also had more stable hemodynamics. Furthermore, they could be extubated significantly earlier than GI, and the one- and three-year survival rates were excellent, with 100% in GIII, while that of GI and GII were 94.1%, 90.5% and 98.6%, 94.5%, respectively.

Effect and Outcome of Intraoperative Fluid Restriction in Living Liver Donor Hepatectomy

Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect and outcome of intraoperative fluid restriction in living liver donor hepatectomy, regarding changes in intraoperative CVP levels, blood loss, and postoperative renal function. Material/Methods The charts of 167 patients were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively. Intraoperative central venous pressure levels, blood loss, fluids infused, and urine output per hour, before and after the liver allograft procurement, were calculated. Perioperative renal functions were also analyzed. Results Fluid infused before and after liver allograft procurement was 3.21±1.5 and 9.0±3.9 mL/Kg/h and urine output was 1.5±0.7 and 1.8±1.4 mL/Kg/h, respectively. Intraoperative estimated blood loss was 91.3±78.9 mL. No patients required blood transfusion. Their preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin were 12.3±2.7 and 11.7±1.7 g/dL. CVP levels decreased gradually from 10.4±3.0 to a low of 8.1±1.9 mmHg at the time of transection of the liver parenchyma. Renal functions were not significantly affected based on the determination of BUN and creatinine levels. Conclusions The methods used to lower CVP are moderate and slow, with 2 main goals achieved: minimal blood loss (91.3±78.9 ml) and no blood transfusion. Furthermore, it did not have any negative effect on renal function.

Two Cases of Massive Plural Effusion Noted Only After Induction of Anesthesia in Living Donor Liver Transplantation

Two adult patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation and had an acute accumulation of right-sided pleural effusion were studied. The chest x-ray (CXR) of patient 1 revealed no specific finding 3 days before surgery. Patient 2 was known to have a pleural effusion and underwent pigtail drainage before transplant. After anesthesia was induced and venous catheters were inserted, a portable chest radiograph was taken to confirm the positions of the central venous catheters and the endotracheal tube. A massive right-sided pleural effusion was observed unexpectedly in both patients. Approximately 2000 mL of transudative fluid was surgically drained through the right diaphragm in patient 1 when the abdominal cavity was opened. The acute accumulation of massive pleural fluid in patient 2 was the result of clamping of the pigtail drainage tube while the patient was being transferred to the operating room. When the tube was unclamped, 2000 mL of fluid was drained. The intraoperative and postoperative transplant courses of both patients unfolded without incident, and both were discharged from the hospital in stable condition. These cases suggest that CXR after induction of anesthesia and before liver transplantation surgery is recommended, not only to document the positions of the central venous catheters and endotracheal tube but also to detect a potentially life-threatening pleural effusion that requires appropriate management.