Objective: To determine whether autotransfusion of red blood cells (RBCs) salvaged during liver transplantation is associated with the recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Background: Blood salvage is widely used during liver transplantation to reinfuse salvaged autologous RBCs and reduce allogeneic transfusion. However, the reintroduction of cancer cells via autotransfusion is a major concern in HCC patients. Methods: Among 397 patients who underwent living-donor liver transplantation for HCC, 97 of 114 recipients without intraoperative autotransfusion were matched with 222 of 283 recipients with intraoperative autotransfusion with unfixed matching ratio using the propensity score based on age, sex, allogeneic transfusion, immunosuppression, tumor biology, and others. Competing risks Cox regression was used to compare HCC recurrence risk of the 2 paired groups. Results: Recipients in autotransfusion group received 1177 ± 1318 mL of salvaged RBCs during surgery. A leukocyte depletion filter was used for all autotransfused RBCs. Cumulative HCC recurrence rate at 1, 2, and 5 years after transplantation were 10.4% (5.3%–17.6%), 19.1% (11.6%–28.0%), and 24.1% (15.2%–34.0%) for nonautotransfusion group and 10.8% (7.2%–15.4%), 14.9% (10.5%–20.0%), and 20.3% (14.9%–26.4%) for autotransfusion group, respectively. Autotransfusion versus nonautotransfusion group was not significantly different in overall recurrence [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47–1.53, P = 0.579] and intrahepatic recurrence (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.36–1.56) or extrahepatic recurrence (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.49–2.04). Conclusions: We found no evidence of a significant impact of autotransfusion on posttransplant HCC recurrence. Thus, salvaged and filtered RBCs could be used in HCC patients undergoing liver transplantation with potential benefits from avoiding allogeneic RBCs transfusion and its complications.

To evaluate the association between anesthetic management before and after graft reperfusion and early graft regeneration in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Sufficient graft regeneration is essential for the success of LDLT. Diverse signals start to trigger liver regeneration immediately after graft reperfusion. Graft volume at 14 ± 2 days after LDLT was measured in 379 consecutive recipients using computed tomography images with 3-dimensional reconstruction. The association between anesthetic variables and the degree of graft regeneration for 2 weeks was analyzed using simple and multiple linear regressions. The anesthetic variables included hemodynamics, laboratory measurements, vasoactive drugs, and blood products transfusion. The degree of graft regeneration for 2 weeks was 52% in median and ranged from 5% to 123%. Platelet transfusion was identified as the sole independent anesthetic factor contributing to graft regeneration. Platelet concentrate transfusion of 1 to 6 units vs none was correlated with a 6.5% increase in graft regeneration (P = 0.012). Platelet concentrate transfusion of more than 6 units vs none was further correlated with an 18.4% increase in regeneration (P < 0.001). In the subgroup of recipients without intraoperative platelet transfusion, mean platelet count measured during the intraoperative reperfusion phase was positively associated with graft regeneration (P = 0.033). Graft regeneration after LDLT increased in relation to a graded increase in the amount of transfused platelets and higher postreperfusion platelet counts during surgery. These results offer additional evidence regarding the important role of platelets in initiating liver regeneration and, furthermore, the indications for and the benefits vs risks of platelet transfusion during LDLT.

A safe use of intermittent hepatic inflow occlusion (IHIO) has been reported for living donor hepatectomy. However, it remains unclear whether the maneuver is safe in steatotic donors. In addition, the respective importance of macrosteatosis (MaS) and microsteatosis (MiS) is an important issue. Thus, we compared MiS and MaS with respect to the tolerance of hepatic ischemia/reperfusion (IR) injury induced by IHIO. One hundred forty-four donors who underwent a right hepatectomy were grouped according to the presence of MaS and MiS: a non-MaS group (n = 68) versus an MaS group (n = 76) and a non-MiS group (n = 51) versus an MiS group (n = 93). The coefficients of the regression lines between the cumulative IHIO time and the peak postoperative transaminase concentrations were used as surrogate parameters indicating the tolerance of hepatic IR injury. The coefficients were significantly greater for the MaS group versus the non-MaS group (4.12 ± 0.59 versus 2.22 ± 0.46 for alanine aminotransferase, P = 0.01). Conversely, the MiS and non-MiS groups were comparable. A subgroup analysis of donors who underwent IHIO for >30 minutes showed that MaS significantly increased the transaminase concentrations, whereas MiS had no impact. Also, IHIO for >30 minutes significantly increased the biliary complication rate for MaS donors (12.1% for ≤ 30 minutes versus 32.6% for >30 minutes, P = 0.04), whereas MiS donors were not affected. In conclusion, the tolerance of hepatic IR injury might differ between MaS livers and MiS livers. It would be rational to assign more clinical importance to MaS versus MiS. We further recommend limiting the cumulative IHIO time to 30 minutes or less for MaS donors undergoing right hepatectomy. Liver Transpl 20:775–783, 2014. © 2014 AASLD.

Liver steatosis mostly exists in a mixed form of macrosteatosis (MaS) and microsteatosis (MiS). This coexistence is responsible for previous conflicting results regarding the importance of MiS in liver transplantation. We aimed to evaluate the independent effect of MiS on posttransplant outcomes with the exclusion of the confounding effect of MaS. Seventy-one living donors who had pure MiS (defined as an MiS degree > 5% without MaS) were matched 1:1 with control donors, and 66 recipients who received pure MiS grafts were matched 1:1 with control recipients on the basis of propensity scores. Matched variables included the donor age, remnant liver volume, cold ischemia time, graft-to-recipient weight ratio and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score. The degree of pure MiS ranged from 5% to 50%. Donors in the control and pure MiS groups were comparable with respect to peak postoperative transaminase concentrations [alanine aminotransferase (ALT): 194 versus 176 IU/L, P = 0.61] and postoperative complications. Recipients in the control and pure MiS groups were comparable with respect to recipient (P = 0.15) and graft survival rates (P = 0.56) as well as peak postoperative transaminase concentrations (ALT: 266 versus 281 IU/L, P = 0.88), and graft regeneration rates at 2 weeks (61% versus 59%, P = 0.73). The 2 groups were also comparable with respect to major complications, primary graft dysfunction/nonfunction, intensive care unit/hospital stays, and metabolic diseases. In conclusion, MiS alone does not seem to impair the posttransplant outcomes of living donors and their recipients. The interaction between MiS and MaS, and the effect of a greater degree of MiS are the next important topics to be further evaluated in the mixed steatosis population. Liver Transpl 20:473–482, 2014. © 2014 AASLD.

To evaluate the association between sarcopenia and tumor recurrence after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), we analyzed 92 males who underwent LDLT for treating HCC beyond the Milan criteria. Sarcopenia was defined when the height-normalized psoas muscle thickness was <15.5 mm/m at the L3 vertebra level on computed tomography based on an optimum stratification method using the Gray’s test statistic. Survival analysis was performed with death as a competing risk event. The primary outcome was post-transplant HCC recurrence. The median follow-up time was 36 months. There was a 9% increase in recurrence risk per unit decrease in height-normalized psoas muscle thickness. Twenty-six (36.1%) of 72 sarcopenic recipients developed HCC recurrence, whereas only one (5.0%) of 20 non-sarcopenic recipients developed HCC recurrence. Recurrence risk was greater in sarcopenic patients in univariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR] = 8.06 [1.06–16.70], p = 0.044) and in multivariable analysis (HR = 9.49 [1.18–76.32], p = 0.034). Greater alpha-fetoprotein and microvascular invasion were also identified as independent risk factors. Incorporation of sarcopenia improved the model fitness and prediction power of the estimation model. In conclusion, sarcopenia appears to be one of the important host factors modulating tumor recurrence risk after LDLT for advanced HCC.