Indications and efficacy of apheresis for liver transplant recipients: experience of 16 cases in 34 living-related liver transplants

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Pediatric Liver Transplantation: A Multicenter Linked Database Analysis and Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) can be used to maintain oxygen delivery and provide hemodynamic support in case of circulatory and respiratory failure. Although the role of ECMO has emerged in the setting of adult liver transplantation (LT), data in children are limited. We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of children receiving ECMO support at the time of or following LT.

METHODS

All pediatric LT recipients (≤20 y) requiring ECMO support peri-/post-LT were identified from a linked Pediatric Health Information System/Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients dataset (2002-2018). The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to assess post-ECMO survival. A systematic literature review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement.

RESULTS

Thirty-four children required ECMO peri-/post-LT. The median time from LT to ECMO was 5 d (interquartile range, 0.0-12.3), and the median ECMO duration was 1 d (interquartile range, 1.0-6.3). Children started on ECMO within 1 d of LT exhibited superior survival compared with those started on ECMO later (P = 0.03). When adjusting for recipient weight, increasing time from LT to ECMO initiation was associated with increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.06; P = 0.049). Overall, 55.9% (n = 19 of 34) of the patients survived. Twenty-two children receiving ECMO in the peri-/post-LT period were systematically reviewed, and 15 of them survived (68.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

With an encouraging >55% patient survival at 6 mo, ECMO should be considered as a viable option in pediatric LT recipients with potentially reversible severe respiratory or cardiovascular failure refractory to conventional treatment.

Role of apheresis and dialysis in pediatric living donor liver transplantation: a single center retrospective study

In the field of pediatric living donor liver transplantation, the indications for apheresis and dialysis, and its efficacy and safety are still a matter of debate. In this study, we performed a retrospective investigation of these aspects, and considered its roles. Between January 2008 and December 2010, 73 living donor liver transplantations were performed in our department. Twenty seven courses of apheresis and dialysis were performed for 19 of those patients (19/73; 26.0%). The indications were ABO incompatible-liver transplantation in 11 courses, fluid management in seven, acute liver failure in three, renal replacement therapy in two, endotoxin removal in two, cytokine removal in one, and liver allograft dysfunction in one. Sixteen courses of apheresis and dialysis were performed prior to liver transplantation for 14 patients. The median IgM antibody titers before and after apheresis for ABO blood type-incompatible liver transplantation was 128 and eight, respectively (P < 0.05). Eleven courses of apheresis and dialysis were performed post liver transplantation for 10 patients. The median PaO2/FiO2 ratio before and after dialysis for fluid overload was 159 and 339, respectively (P < 0.05). No bleeding or technical complications attributable to apheresis and dialysis occurred. The 1-year survival rate of the patients was 100%. Apheresis and dialysis in pediatric living donor liver transplantation are effective for antibody removal in ABO-incompatible liver transplantation, and fluid management for acute respiratory failure.

Comparison of the molecular adsorbent recirculating system and plasmapheresis for patients with graft dysfunction after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Graft dysfunction after liver transplantation (OLT) is a life- threatening condition. Molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS) or plasmapheresis (PLP) may be effective supportive therapy of graft dysfunction for patients who cannot undergo retransplantation. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of MARS and PLP in patients with graft dysfunction after OLT.

METHODS

Between January 2002 and July 2007, 31 OLT recipients who experienced graft dysfunction, defined as hyperbilirubinemia (>10 mg/dL) without bile duct obstruction and/or presence of hepatic encephalopathy, were treated with MARS or PLP. Biochemical and hemodynamic data and survival were compared in MARS and PLP groups.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were treated with 41 MARS sessions and 16 with 105 PLP sessions. After a single MARS session, patients showed significant reductions in creatinine, urea nitrogen, bilirubin, and ammonia. After a single PLP session, patients showed significant improvements in prothrombin time, bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, and albumin. After the completion of treatment, Both MARS and PLP significantly improved bilirubin values. at 90 days there were no differences in overall survival rates; 53% in MARS versus 56% in PLP.

CONCLUSION

Both MARS and PLP are alternative supportive treatments for graft dysfunction after OLT.

Management of Anti-allogeneic Antibody Elimination by Apheresis in Living Donor Liver Transplantation

In this study, we report on the indications and efficacy of the elimination of antiallogeneic antibodies in living donor liver transplant recipients. Seven patients incompatible with the ABO-blood type were subjected to apheresis before transplantation. The procedure resulted in titers being decreased to less than a score of 8. After transplantation, apheresis was also performed in 6 cases and continuous hemodiafiltration in 1 case. In addition, three out of 11 ABO-blood type incompatible recipients were administered anti-CD20 antibody (rituximab). Two crossmatch positive patients were subjected to apheresis before transplantation, and in these cases the titers were reduced to less than a score of 2. Moreover, these two patients had no acute rejections after transplantation. We concluded that apheresis is effective for preventing acute rejection induced by pre-existing anti-A and/or anti-B antibodies, as well as antidonor specific antibodies, but is not effective in some patients who had accelerated humoral rejection.

Multiple organ failure caused by end-stage liver disease successfully treated with living donor liver transplantation using perioperative percutaneous cardiopulmonary support: a case report

A 54-year-old female diagnosed with primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) 10 years earlier was referred for a living donor liver transplant (LDLT). During her workup, she developed pulmonary edema and respiratory failure due to aspiration pneumonia, which required artificial ventilation. The PaO2/FiO2 (P/F) ratio at that time was 60. Although continuous hemodiafiltration (CHDF) and plasma exchange (PE) were initiated, improvement in the P/F ratio was limited to 133. As transplantation was the only approach to save this patient, we performed LDLT using a right lobe graft aided by percutaneous cardiopulmonary support (PCPS). The graft weight was 650 g and the graft weight/recipient weight ratio was 1.6%. During LDLT, the patient's cardiopulmonary function was stable with PCPS, and the surgical procedure was completed without complications. Following the surgery, she continued to have high-end inspiratory pressure and progressed to the chronic phase of adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We treated her with low-dose steroid therapy and she improved gradually. The patient was weaned off mechanical ventilation and was discharged approximately 25 weeks after LDLT. In the condition of cardiac or respiratory failure, cadaveric liver transplantation using plasmapheresis is contraindicated because of the associated high mortality rate. Our case suggests that if infections are controlled, a patient with multiple organ failure (MOF) due to end-stage liver disease might be successfully treated with LDLT aided by plasmapheresis and PCPS.

Combined twice-daily plasma exchange and continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration for bridging severe acute liver failure

Aiming to remove the toxins produced during the course of severe hepatic failure, we combined hemodiafiltration and plasma exchange (patient plasma replaced by fresh frozen plasma in a twice-daily regimen) for treatment of five patients: two affected by primary nonfunction of a liver graft and three by fulminant hepatic failure. The simultaneous use of the two extracorporeal techniques allowed a rapid reduction in the administration of vasoactive drugs and a rapid, significant decrease in the indices of liver necrosis. Native liver functional recovery occurred in one case, and the wait for a second graft was made possible in the other four. Although it has been reported that the detoxifying efficacy of plasma exchange is optimal when the replaced volume of plasma is high, such a technique requires both long treatment times and high blood flows in the extracorporeal circuit, making it often hemodynamically intolerable. Our approach leads to replacement of smaller volumes, allowing lower blood flows that are better tolerated despite the often unstable hemodynamics of these patients. Liver transplantation and retransplantation remains the definite therapy for severe liver failure or primary nonfunction. However, the organ waiting time is unpredictable and often does not coincide with the patients' clinical needs. Thus alternative strategies must be developed until a suitable donor is found or there is spontaneous recovery. From this point of view, in our albeit limited experience, twice-daily plasma exchange combined with hemodiafiltration has proved to be an effective therapeutic approach.

Influence of continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration on the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus in liver transplant recipients with small-for-size grafts

In adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), the graft volume is inevitably much smaller than the ideal liver mass (standard liver volume) for the recipient's metabolic demand. Patients with small-for-size grafts are treated with continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration (CVVHD) for the artificial liver support. However, little is known about the influence of CVVHD on the elimination of tacrolimus. The objective of this study was to elucidate the effect of CVVHD on the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus in recipients of LDLT with small-for-size grafts. Three liver transplant recipients (one male and two females) and donors (two males and one female) were enrolled in this study. Blood samples from inflow port and outflow port were obtained on the first day at the start of CVVHD. Whole-blood concentrations of tacrolimus were measured immediately using the microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA; Abbott Laboratories). There was no significant difference between concentrations of tacrolimus in blood sampled at inflow port and outflow port sites and t(1/2)-values of tacrolimus in the three recipients were 29.9, 63.6 and 28.8 h. CVVHD did not cause a decrease in the blood tacrolimus concentration. Adjustment to the dose or dosing interval is not required for patients treated with tacrolimus during CVVHD.

Antibody elimination by apheresis in living donor liver transplant recipients

In the present study, we investigated retrospectively the indications and the efficacy of the elimination of preexisting antiallogeneic antibodies in liver transplant recipients. Three patients who were ABO blood type incompatible were subjected to plasmapheresis and double filtration plasmapheresis before the living donor liver transplantation (LDLTx), and the titers decreased to less than 8. After transplantation, plasmapheresis was also performed in 3 cases, and continuous hemodiafiltration in 1 case, and in 2 out of these 3 patients acute rejection was recognized. Two patients who were crossmatch positive were subjected to plasmapheresis before transplantation, and the T warm titers were reduced to less than Score 2. These 2 patients had no acute rejections after transplantation. We conclude that in liver transplant patients apheresis is effective to prevent acute rejection induced by preexisting anti-A and/or anti-B antibodies and anti-donor specific antibodies before transplantation, but it is not effective in a patient with accelerated humoral rejection occurring after transplantation.