Prospective comparative study of the efficacy of Celsior solution for preservation in clinical liver transplant

Preservation solutions for liver transplantation in adults: celsior versus custodiol: a systematic review and meta-analysis with an indirect comparison of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

The University of Wisconsin (UW) solution has been recognized as the gold standard for liver preservation; however, it possesses some limitations, and other solutions exist for organ preservation. The aim of this study was to compare the liver functions of transplanted grafts that had been stored in Celsior and Custodiol solutions.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and SCIELO databases. We included randomized and quasi-randomized, controlled trials that compared the efficacy and safety of Celsior and Custodiol with UW solution for liver preservation in adults. The factors that were considered for analysis were their impacts on primary dysfunction (primary nonfunction and initial poor function), ischemic-type biliary lesions, and patient and graft survival rates. Because of the lack of direct evidence, an indirect comparison of Celsior and Custodiol was calculated.

RESULTS

We identified 3 randomized controlled trials and 1 quasi-randomized, controlled trial to pool in a meta-analysis of Celsior versus UW solutions. The number of episodes of primary dysfunction was lower in the Celsior group (7.4%) than in the UW group (9.8%), but the difference was not significant (relative risk [RR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-1.97). Two randomized controlled trials compared Custodiol and Wisconsin solutions were identified. The number of episodes of primary dysfunction was also lower in the Custodiol group (3.0%) compared with the Wisconsin group (8.4%), but the difference was not significant (RR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.08-1.70). An indirect comparison using data from the main analysis revealed no difference between the Celsior and Custodiol solutions (RR, 1.88; 95% CI, 0.57-6.16).

CONCLUSION

The Celsior and Custodiol solutions performed similarly to UW solution as preservation solutions in liver transplantation clinical settings.

Efficacy and safety of Celsior preservation fluid in liver transplantation: one-year follow up of a prospective, multicenter, non-randomized study

The purpose of this prospective, nine-center, non-randomized study was to assess the efficacy and safety of Celsior preservation fluid in liver transplantation using unselected donors. As data comparing allograft outcomes following liver transplantation using Celsior and University of Wisconsin (UW) preservation fluids are limited, we also compared our cohort with matched controls selected from the European Liver Transplant Registry (ELTR) who received total liver grafts preserved with UW solution during the same period. One hundred and forty patients who received livers preserved with Celsior were included. The primary endpoint, graft loss at one-yr post-transplantation, was observed in 24 patients (17.1%) which was not significantly different from the 20.0% pre-defined threshold rate (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.9, 23.4; p=0.398). Predictive factors for graft loss on univariate analysis were moderate-to-severe steatosis on the donor graft (5/22 patients with graft loss vs. 8/107 patients without, p=0.046) and duration of warm ischemia (1.4±1.1 h in patients with graft loss vs. 0.9±0.5 h in patients without, p=0.034). Hepatic artery thrombosis and stenosis occurred in seven (5.0%) and six (4.3%) patients, respectively. The comparison of our patients to 420 ELTR controls showed that one-yr graft survival rates (Celsior: 82.9%, 95% CI 75.8, 88.2; UW: 78.6%, 95% CI 74.4, 82.2) and Kaplan-Meier one-yr graft survival distributions (p=0.285) were similar. Within the cold ischemia time achieved in our study, liver preservation with Celsior appeared efficient and safe. Comparison with ELTR patients suggested that liver allograft survival was similar using Celsior or UW solution for preservation of unselected donor grafts.

Comparative prospective study of two liver graft preservation solutions: University of Wisconsin and Celsior

University of Wisconsin solution (UWS) is the gold standard for graft preservation. Celsior solution (CS) is a new solution not as yet widely used in liver grafts. The aim of this study was to compare the liver function of transplanted grafts stored in these 2 preservation solutions. The primary endpoints were the rates of primary nonfunction (PNF) and primary dysfunction (PDF). We performed a prospective and pseudorandomized study that included 196 patients (representing 104 and 92 livers preserved in UWS and CS, respectively) at La Fe University Hospital (Valencia, Spain) between March 2003 and May 2005. PNF and PDF rates, liver function laboratory parameters, postoperative bleeding, vascular and biliary complications, and patient and graft survival at 3 years were compared for the 2 groups. The 2 groups were similar in terms of donor variables, recipient variables, and surgical techniques. The PNF rates were 2.2% and 1.9% in the CS and UWS groups, respectively (P = not significant), and the PDF rates were 15.2% and 15.5% in the CS and UWS groups, respectively (P = not significant). There were no significant differences in the laboratory parameters for the 2 groups, except for alanine aminotransferase levels in month 3, which were lower in the CS group (P = 0.01). No significant differences were observed in terms of complications. Three-year patient and graft survival rates were as follows for years 1, 2, and 3: 83%, 80%, and 76% (patient) and 80%, 77%, and 73% (graft) for the UWS group and 83%, 77%, and 70% (patient) and 81%, 73%, and 67% (graft) for the CS group (P = not significant). In conclusion, this study shows that CS is as effective as UWS in liver preservation.

Pancreas preservation for pancreas and islet transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize advances and limitations in pancreas procurement and preservation for pancreas and islet transplantation, and review advances in islet protection and preservation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Pancreases procured after cardiac death, with in-situ regional organ cooling, have been successfully used for islet transplantation. Colloid-free Celsior and histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate preservation solutions are comparable to University of Wisconsin solution when used for cold storage before pancreas transplantation. Colloid-free preservation solutions are inferior to University of Wisconsin solution for pancreas preservation prior to islet isolation and transplantation. Clinical reports on pancreas transplants suggest that the two-layer method may not offer significant benefits over cold storage with the University of Wisconsin solution: improved oxygenation may depend on the graft size; benefits in experimental models may not translate to human organs. Improvements in islet yield and quality occurred from pancreases treated with inhibitors of stress-induced apoptosis during procurement, storage, isolation or culture desirable before islet isolation and transplantation and may improve islet yield and quality. Methods for real-time, noninvasive assessment of pancreas quality during preservation have been implemented and objective islet-potency assays have been developed and validated. These innovations should contribute to objective evaluation and establishment of improved pancreas-preservation and islet-isolation strategies.

SUMMARY

Cold storage may be adequate for preservation before pancreas transplants, but insufficient when pancreases are processed for islets or when expanded donors are used. Supplementation of cold-storage solutions with cytoprotective agents and perfusion may improve pancreas and islet transplant outcomes.

Pancreas preservation for pancreas and islet transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize advances and limitations in pancreas procurement and preservation for pancreas and islet transplantation, and review advances in islet protection and preservation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Pancreases procured after cardiac death, with in-situ regional organ cooling, have been successfully used for islet transplantation. Colloid-free Celsior and histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate preservation solutions are comparable to University of Wisconsin solution when used for cold storage before pancreas transplantation. Colloid-free preservation solutions are inferior to University of Wisconsin solution for pancreas preservation prior to islet isolation and transplantation. Clinical reports on pancreas and islet transplants suggest that the two-layer method may not offer significant benefits over cold storage with the University of Wisconsin solution: improved oxygenation may depend on the graft size; benefits in experimental models may not translate to human organs. Improvements in islet yield and quality occurred from pancreases treated with inhibitors of stress-induced apoptosis during procurement, storage, isolation or culture. Pancreas perfusion may be desirable before islet isolation and transplantation and may improve islet yields and quality. Methods for real-time, noninvasive assessment of pancreas quality during preservation have been implemented and objective islet potency assays have been developed and validated. These innovations should contribute to objective evaluation and establishment of improved pancreas preservation and islet isolation strategies.

SUMMARY

Cold storage may be adequate for preservation before pancreas transplants, but insufficient when pancreases are processed for islets or when expanded donors are used. Supplementation of cold storage solutions with cytoprotective agents and perfusion may improve pancreas and islet transplant outcomes.

Preservation of liver grafts

How to reduce liver graft ischemia-reperfusion injury is one of the unresolved problems in the field of liver transplantation. In this paper the results achieved with different preservation solutions in preservation solutions, preservative-related complications and factors affecting preservation are reviewed by analyzing the pertinent literature. Methods that reduce liver graft ischemia-reperfusion injury by improving the preservation of liver grafts are explored.

Pancreas preservation with the University of Wisconsin versus Celsior solutions

INTRODUCTION

The use of Celsior solution for organ preservation has not been thoroughly studied in pancreas transplantation. The aim of this study was to compare University of Wisconsin and Celsior solutions for preservation of pancreas grafts.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From March 1995 to December 2005, 72 patients with type 1 diabetes underwent pancreas transplantation. There were 42 men and 30 women, with a mean age at transplantation of 38.1 +/- 7.5 years (range: 27 to 55 years), and a mean duration of diabetes of 22.5 +/- 6.6 years. Recipients were classified into two groups according to the preservation solution: (A) Celsior (n = 28, 38.9%) and (B) Wisconsin (n = 44, 61.1%).

RESULTS

The donor and recipient characteristics were similar in both groups. There were five cases of venous thrombosis in the Wisconsin group and two in the Celsior group (P = NS). The venous drainage technique in the former group was portocaval in 19 patients and portoiliac in 25; in the Celsior group, portocaval in 23 patients and portoiliac in five (P = .001). Enteric drainage was used in 19 patients from the Celsior group and 17 patients from the Wisconsin group (P = .01). Actuarial 2-year graft survival was 74.6% in the Wisconsin group and 77.4% in the Celsior group (P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were observed in venous thrombosis between the two groups. The lower rate of venous thrombosis with the portocaval technique was related to the type of venous drainage rather than the type of preservation solution. Celsior solution may be considered as good as Wisconsin solution for pancreas transplantation.

A Comparison of Cold Storage Solutions for Pancreas Preservation Prior to Islet Isolation

BACKGROUND

Several solutions are used to preserve the pancreas prior to islet isolation. This study sought to assess whether the type of solution had an impact on the isolation outcome.

METHODS

We reviewed data from 125 islet isolation procedures performed from January 2002 to January 2005. Pancreata were preserved in University of Wisconsin (UW) (n = 101), Celsior (CS) (n = 19), or IGL-1 (n = 5) solutions. Islet isolation results and transplantation rates were compared between groups.

RESULTS

UW, CS, and IGL-1 groups were similar according to donor's age, weight, and body mass index. Weight of undigested pancreas was 20 +/- 13.1, 21.4 +/- 15.7, and 17.4 +/- 8.7 g for UW, CS, and IGL-1, respectively (P > .2). Final total number of IEQ was 267,000 +/- 132,000, 277,000 +/- 155,000, and 311,000 +/- 163,000, respectively (P > .4). Success rate (defined as >250,000 IEQ) was 55.5%, 52.9%, and 60% for UW, Celsior, and IGL-1 (P > .9); the transplantation rate was 42.2% for UW, 36.8% for Celsior, and 80% for IGL-1 preservation (P > .2).

CONCLUSIONS

In this preliminary study, UW, Celsior, and IGL-1 solutions demonstrated similar islet isolation results. The new IGL-1 solution appears promising.

University of Wisconsion Solution Versus Celsior Solution in Clinical Pancreas Transplantation

INTRODUCTION

This study compared the safety and efficacy of University of Wisconsin solution (UW) and Celsior solution (C) in pancreas transplantation (PTx).

METHODS

A retrospective review of 154 PTx performed over a 61-month period included 77 grafts preserved with UW and 77 with C. The two groups were comparable for both donor and recipient characteristics.

RESULTS

After a mean cold ischemia time of 624 minutes (range 360 to 945 minutes) for UW versus 672 minutes (range 415 to 1005 minutes) for C (P = NS), no primary endocrine nonfunction occurred. Delayed endocrine function was diagnosed in two grafts in the UW group (2.6%) versus none in the C group (P = NS). After a minimum follow-up of 4 months (mean 26.5 +/- 15.2 months), 22 recipients (UW = 11 vs C = 11; P = NS) required relaparotomy. Overall, 18 pancreata were lost due to either patient death with functioning graft (UW = 4 vs C = 1; P = NS) or graft loss due to other reasons (UW = 8 vs C = 5; P = NS). Actuarial 1- and 5-year patient survival rates were 93.5% and 86.8% for UW compared with 98.7% and 98.7% for C (P = .04). Actuarial graft survival rates at the same times were 88.3% and 75.0% for UW compared with 90.4% and 90.4% for C (P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the range of cold ischemia times reported in this study, UW and C show similar safety and efficacy profiles for PTx.

Pancreas preservation with University of Wisconsin and Celsior solutions

BACKGROUND

Although the use of Celsior has been recently described for heart, lung, liver, and kidney transplantation, no data are available on its use for clinical pancreas preservation.

METHODS

We herein describe the results of 112 pancreas transplants preserved with either University of Wisconsin (UW; (n = 56) or Celsior (n = 56) solution at two Italian transplant centers. The groups were comparable with regard to all donor and recipient characteristics.

RESULTS

Mean cold and warm ischemia times were 10.1 +/- 2.2 hours and 37.2 +/- 8.2 minutes for UW compared to 10.8 +/- 2.4 hours and 38.3 +/- 6.7 minutes for Celsior (P = NS). Delayed endocrine pancreas function was recorded in two UW-preserved grafts (3.6%). Actuarial 1-year patient survival was 94.6% for UW as compared with 100% for Celsior (P = NS). Equivalent graft survival figures were 91.0% for UW as compared with 96.4% for Celsior (P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the range of cold ischemia times reported in this study, UW and Celsior solutions have similar safety profiles for pancreas transplantation.

A comparative prospective study of two available solutions for kidney and liver preservation

BACKGROUND

Viaspan (University of Wisconsin [UW]) solution is the gold standard for abdominal organ preservation. Celsior (CEL) is an extracellular-type, low-potassium, low-viscosity solution, initially used for heart and lung preservation. We have performed a prospective multicenter study to compare the role of these cold-storage solutions on kidney and liver recovery after transplantation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From March 15, 2000 to December 31, 2001, 441 (172 CEL and 269 UW) renal transplants (RT) and 175 (79 CEL and 96 UW) liver transplants (LT) were included in the study.

RESULTS

Perfusate volume used was significantly lower in the UW group, being 4,732 +/- 796 mL versus 5,826 + 834 mL in the CEL group (P < 0.001). In LT, median total bilirubin serum levels were significantly higher at 5 and 7 posttransplant days in the UW group (90.6 and 92.3 micromol/L, respectively) as compared with CEL (51.3 and 63.4 micromol/L, respectively). After LT, primary nonfunction (PNF) rates in the CEL and UW groups were 3.8% and 4.2% (P = NS) respectively, with 1-year graft and patient survival being 83.3% versus 85.4% (P = NS) and 89.9% versus 90.6% (P = NS). After RT, delayed graft function (DGF) rates were 23.2% and 22.7% (P = NS), respectively; PNF rates were 1.9% and 1.7% (P = NS) respectively, with 1-year graft and patient survival being 92.3% versus 94.2% (P = NS) and 99.4% versus 97.7% (P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

CEL solution was shown to be as effective as UW in both liver and kidney preservation. In LT patients, biliary function recovery is significantly better in the CEL group. CEL solution represents an efficacious option in multiorgan harvesting.

Pancreas preservation with University of Wisconsin and Celsior solutions: a single-center, prospective, randomized pilot study

BACKGROUND

Celsior is an extracellular-type, low-viscosity, preservation solution already used for heart, lung, liver, and kidney transplantation. We report the results of a single-center, prospective, randomized pilot study specifically designed to compare the safety profile of Celsior solution with University of Wisconsin (UW) solution in clinical pancreas transplantation.

METHODS

A total of 105 consecutive procurements were randomized to graft preservation with UW (n=53) solution or Celsior (n=52) solution. The groups were comparable with regard to all donor and recipient characteristics.

RESULTS

Five grafts were discarded and 100 grafts (50 UW vs. 50 Celsior) were transplanted. Mean cold and warm ischemia times were 11.0 +/- 2.1 hr and 37.2 +/- 6.0 min for UW compared with 10.8 +/- 1.8 hr and 38.1 +/- 5.9 min for Celsior (P =not significant). Delayed endocrine pancreas function was recorded in one graft preserved with UW solution. Eleven recipients (UW 12% vs. Celsior 10%, P =not significant) required a relaparotomy. The mean serum levels of glucose, amylase, and lipase remained comparable between the study arms at equivalent intervals after transplantation. One recipient died with functioning grafts in each study arm; two further grafts were lost to arterial thrombosis (Celsior) and chronic rejection (UW), respectively. Actuarial 1-year patient and graft survival rates overlapped in the two study arms (98% and 96%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the range of cold ischemia time reported in this study, UW and Celsior solutions have similar safety profiles for pancreas preservation.