Blasi, Annabel

Background. Anesthesiologists frequently use intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) to aid in the diagnosis and management of hemodynamic problems during liver transplantation (LT). Although the use of TEE in US centers continues to increase, data regarding international use are lacking. Methods. This prospective, global, survey-based study evaluates international experience with TEE for LT. Responses from 252 LT (105 US and 147 non-US) centers representing 1789 anesthesiologists were analyzed. Results. Routine use of TEE in the United States has increased in the last 5 y (from 37% to 47%), but only 21% of non-US LT anesthesiologists use TEE routinely. Lack of training (44% US versus 70% non-US) and equipment (9% non-US versus 34% US) were cited as obstacles. Most survey participants preferred not to perform a complete cardiac examination but rather use only 6 of 11 basic views. Although non-US LT anesthesiologists more frequently had additional clinical training than their US counterparts, they had less TEE experience (13% versus 44%) and less frequently, TEE certification (22% versus 35%). Most LT anesthesiologists agreed that TEE certification is essential for proficiency. Of all respondents, 89% agreed or strongly agreed that TEE provides valuable information needed for immediate clinical decision-making, and >86% agreed or strongly agreed that that information could not be derived from other sources. Conclusions. The use of TEE for LT surgery in the US LT centers is currently higher compared with non-US LT centers. This may become a standard monitoring modality during LT in the near future.

Background. We sought to establish consensus on the essential skills, knowledge, and attributes that a liver transplant (LT) anesthesiologist should possess in a bid to help guide the further training process. Methods. Consensus was achieved via a modified Delphi methodology, surveying 15 identified international experts in the fields of LT anesthesia and critical care. Results. Key competencies were identified in preoperative management and optimization of a potential LT recipient; intraoperative management, including hemodynamic monitoring; coagulation and potential crisis management; and postoperative intensive and enhanced recovery care. Conclusions. This article provides an essential guide to competency-based training of an LT anesthesiologist.

AbstractBackgroundIn the era of enhanced recovery after surgery, there is significant discussion regarding the impact of intraoperative anesthetic management on short‐term outcomes following liver transplantation (LT), with no clear consensus in the literature.ObjectivesTo identify whether or not intraoperative anesthetic management affects short‐term outcomes after liver transplantation.Data SourcesOvid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.MethodsA systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was undertaken. The systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021239758). An international expert panel made recommendations for clinical practice using the GRADE approach.ResultsAfter screening, 14 studies were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review. Six were prospective randomized clinical trials, three were prospective nonrandomized clinical trials, and five were retrospective studies. These manuscripts were reviewed to look at five questions regarding anesthetic care and its impact on short term outcomes following liver transplant. After review of the literature, the quality of evidence according to the following outcomes was as follows: intraoperative and postoperative morbidity and mortality (low), early allograft dysfunction (low), and hospital and ICU length of stay (moderate).ConclusionsFor optimal short term outcomes after liver transplantation, the panel recommends the use of volatile anesthetics in preference to total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) (Level of Evidence: Very low; Strength of Recommendation: Weak) and minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) versus bispectral index (BIS) for depth of anesthesia monitoring (Level of Evidence: Very low; Strength of Recommendation: Weak). Regarding ventilation and oxygenation, the panel recommends a restrictive oxygenation strategy targeting a PaO2 of 70–120 mmHg (10–14 kPa), a tidal volume of 6–8 ml/kg ideal body weight (IBW), administration of positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) tailored to patient intraoperative physiology, and recruitment maneuvers. (Level of evidence: Very low; Strength of Recommendation: Strong). Finally, the panel recommends the routine use of antiemetic prophylaxis. (Level of evidence: low; Strength of Recommendation: Strong).

Background. Critically ill cirrhotic patients are increasingly transplanted, but there is no consensus about futile liver transplantation (LT). Therefore, the decision to delay or deny LT is often extensively debated. These debates arise from different opinions of futility among transplant team members. This study aims to achieve a multinational and multidisciplinary consensus on the definition of futility in LT and to develop well-articulated criteria for not proceeding with LT due to futility. Methods. Thirty-five international experts from anesthesiology/intensive care, hepatology, and transplant surgery were surveyed using the Delphi method. More than 70% of similar answers to a question were necessary to define agreement. Results. The panel recommended patient and graft survival at 1 year after LT to define futility. Severe frailty and persistent fever or <72 hours of appropriate antimicrobial therapy in case of ongoing sepsis were considered reasons to delay LT. A simple assessment of the number of organs failing was considered the most appropriate way to decide whether LT should be delayed or denied, with respiratory, circulatory and metabolic failures having the most influence in this decision. The thresholds of severity of organ failures contraindicating LT for which a consensus was achieved were a Pa o 2 /FiO2 ratio<150 mm Hg, a norepinephrine dose >1 μg/kg per minute and a serum lactate level >9 mmol/L. Conclusions. Our expert panel provides a consensus on the definition of futile LT and on specific criteria for postponing or denying LT. A framework that may facilitate the decision if a patient is too sick for transplant is presented.