Search

OBJECTIVES Assessment of the transcaval venous pressure gradient, the central venous to inferior vena caval pressure, assists anesthetists and surgeons in management of liver transplant recipients. Traditionally, this entails insertion of a femoral central line with increased patient risk and health care cost. Here, we assessed the ability of a saphenous vein cannula to act as a surrogate for the femoral central line as a means to assess the transcaval pressure gradient in a safer and less invasive manner. MATERIALS AND METHODS A prospective cohort of 22 patients undergoing liver transplant underwent saphenous vein cannulation in addition to insertion of a femoral and internal jugular central venous catheter. Data were collected throughout each phase of surgery to assess the central, femoral, and saphenous vein pressures; results of a range of relevant physiological and ventilatory data were also collected. RESULTS The primary outcome, the correlation between saphenous and femoral venous pressure throughout surgery, was acceptable (r2 = 0.491, P < .001). During the anhepatic phase of surgery, this correlation improved (r2 = 0.912, P < .001). The correlation between the femoral to central venous pressure and saphenous to central venous pressure gradients was also reasonable throughout surgery (r2 = 0.386, P < .001), and this correlation was significantly stronger during the anhepatic phase (r2 = 0.935, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS Saphenous venous pressure, provided by peripheral cannulation, provided a reliable, less invasive, and safer alternative to femoral central line insertion for determination of the transcaval pressure gradient during the anhepatic phase of liver transplant.

Burnout (defined as a state of depersonalization, emotional exhaustion, and a sense of reduced achievement) is a risk to all health care workers. The transplantation workforce not only faces the same challenges but also many others linked to the unique work and setting in which they deliver health care. In the past, the mental health care of the transplantation workforce has been sidelined, rather than prioritized. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has not only compromised the safe delivery of transplant organs worldwide but has magnified the challenges for the transplantation workforce. especially with the high mortality in transplant patients who are infected with SARS-CoV-2. This review addresses the challenges to the mental well-being and psychological health of health care providers, both generally and within the sphere of transplantation, and not only highlights some of the inadequacies but also proposes strategies to establish psychological interventions that could benefit health care professionals within transplantation.

Few data are available on discharge criteria after living liver donation(LLD).To identify the features for fit for discharge checklist after LLD to prevent unnecessary re-hospitalizations and to provide international expert recommendations.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. The critical outcomes included were complications rates and liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR) (CRD42021260725).57/1710 studies were included in qualitative analysis and 28/57 on the final analysis. No randomized controlled trials were identified. The complicatios rate was reported in 20/28 studies and ranged from 7,8% to 71,2%. Post hepatectomy liver function was reported in 13 studies. The Quality of Evidence(QoE) was Low and Very-Low for complications rate and liver function test, respectively.Monitoring and prevention of donor complications should be crucial in decision making of discharge. Pain and diet control, removal of all drains and catheters, deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis and use routine imaging (CT scan or liver ultrasound) before discharge should be included as fit for discharge checklist(QoE; Low | GRADE of recommendation; Strong). Transient Impaired liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR), a prognostic marker of outcome after liver resection, usually occurs after donor right hepatectomy and should be monitored. Improving trends for bilirubin and INR value should be observed by day 5 post hepatectomy and be included in the fit for discharge checklist. (QoE; Very-Low | GRADE; Strong). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence supports the use of machine perfusion technologies (MP) for marginal liver grafts. Their effect on enhanced recovery, however, remains uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To identify areas in which MP might contribute to an ERAS program and to provide expert panel recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach. CRD42021237713 RESULTS: Both hypothermic (HMP) and normothermic (NMP) machine perfusion demonstrated significant benefits in preventing post-reperfusion syndrome (PRS) (HMP OR 0.33, 0.15-0.75 CI; NMP OR 0.51, 0.29-0.90 CI) and early allograft dysfunction (EAD) (HMP OR 0.51, 0.35-0.75 CI; NMP OR 0.66, 0.45-0.97 CI), while shortening LOS (HMP MD -3.9; NMP MD -12.41). Only NMP showed a significant decrease in the length of ICU stay (L-ICU) (MD -7.07, -8.76; -5.38 CI), while only HMP diminishes the likelihood of major complications. Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) reduces EAD (OR 0.52, 0.38-0.70 CI) and primary non-function (PNF) (OR 0.51, 0.27-0.98 CI) without effect on L-ICU and LOS. CONCLUSIONS: The use of HMP decreases PRS and EAD, specifically for marginal grafts. This is supported by a shorter LOS and a lower rate of major post-operative complications. (QOE; moderate | Recommendation; Strong). NMP reduces the incidence of PRS and EAD with associated shortening in L-ICU for both DBD and DCD grafts. (QOE; moderate | Recommendation; High) This technology also shortens the length of hospital stay (QOE; low | Recommendation; Strong) NRP decreases the likelihood of EAD (QOE; moderate) and the risk of PNF (QOE; low) when compared to both DBD and SRR-DCD grafts preserved in SCS. (Recommendation; Strong) This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Adequate pain control is essential for patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT). Multiple analgesic strategies have been implemented during the perioperative period. There is no consensus on the optimal perioperative analgesia management.To provide recommendations, on the optimal perioperative analgesia management for LT.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.A systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using GRADE. Studies describing outcomes, morbidity, mortality, pain scores, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay in patients that received different pain management techniques during and after LT were included (CRD42021243282).One thousand nine hundred ten articles were screened, but only two randomized controlled trials, one prospective and six retrospective studies were included. The opioid-avoidance protocols included, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA), Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) block, as well as other non-opioid analgesics, resulted in improved short-term outcomes. Mortality was reduced in this group versus control cohorts (OR = 0.51; CI 0.14, 1.83; P = 0.350), Time to extubation, and intensive care unit LOS were shorter; pain scores after surgery were lower in opioid-avoidance group (percentage decrease, 35%, 12%, and 55%, respectively). However, hospital LOS was longer (percentage increase 8%).Opioid-avoidance analgesia management for LT results in improved short-term outcomes. (Quality of Evidence; Moderate to low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak). Medications such as acetaminophen(paracetamol), gabapentin, ketamine, tramadol and local anesthesia may be used instead of, or as adjuncts to opioids for postoperative analgesia. Overall evidence remains weak and more robust studies are required.

Psychosocial disorders ranging from anxiety to severe psychiatric diseases and active alcohol/substance abuse are frequent in liver transplant candidates and potentially associated with worse post- transplant outcomes. Therefore, psychosocial evaluation is mandatory to optimize success after liver transplantation. However, how to carry out this evaluation, the type of intervention needed and its potential impact on patient outcome remain unclear.To investigate whether psychosocial assessment may help in predicting risks of poor outcome; and to investigate whether psychosocial interventions may mitigate these risks and improve posttransplant outcomes, in particular compliance and speed of recovery.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO CRD42021238361. Main outcomes assessed were mortality, alcohol relapse, rejection, and medication compliance.Fifteen studies were analyzed including five observational comparative and ten observational noncomparative studies. Preoperative psychosocial evaluation of LT candidates was associated with higher concordance with the treatment plan (i.e., higher adherence to treatment and lower alcohol relapse) and lower rates of rejection. Psychosocial assessment tools were used in some studies to guide the evaluation, but their predictive ability remains debated, and they should not be used in isolation. Most of the interventions were studied in patients with alcohol related issues. In this context, support by specialized teams was associated with better posttransplant outcome, especially through a decrease in post-transplant alcohol relapse.Preoperative psychosocial assessment should be provided in order to detect patients at increased risk of poorer post-transplant outcome, in particular in terms of concordance to the treatment plan (Quality of Evidence; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong/For). The experts suggest that, when possible, provision of preoperative psychological assessment and concomitant interventions aimed at improving the concordance to treatment plans will positively impact the success of liver transplantation. (Quality of Evidence; Very Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong/For].

This systematic review and expert panel recommendation aims to answer the question regarding the routine use of T-tubes or abdominal drains to better manage complications and thereby improve outcomes after liver transplantation.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel to assess the potential risks and benefits of T-tubes and intra-abdominal drainage in liver transplantation (CRD42021243036).Of the 2996 screened records, 33 studies were included in the systematic review, of which 29 (6 RCT) assessed the use of T-tubes and 4 regarding surgical drains. Although some studies reported less strictures when using a T-tube, there was a trend towards more biliary complications with T-tubes, mainly related to biliary leakage. Due to the small number of studies, there was a paucity of evidence on the effect of abdominal drains with no clear benefit for or against the use of drainage. However, one study investigating the open vs. closed circuit drains found a significantly higher incidence of intra-abdominal infections when open-circuit drains were used.Due to the potential risk of biliary leakage and infections, the routine intraoperative insertion of T-tubes is not recommended (Level of Evidence moderate - very low; grade of recommendation strong). However, a T-tube can be considered in cases at risk for biliary stenosis. Due to the scant evidence on abdominal drainage, no change in clinical practice in individual centers is recommended. (Level of Evidence very low; weak recommendation). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

There are currently no guidelines pertaining to ERAS pathways in living donor hepatectomy.To identify whether surgical technique influences immediate and short-term outcomes after living liver donation surgery DATA SOURCES: : Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel (CRD42021260707). Endpoints were mortality, overall complications, serious complications, bile eaks, pulmonary complications, estimated blood loss and length of stay.Of the 2410 screened articles, 21 articles were included for final analysis; 3 observational, 13 retrospective cohort, 4 prospective cohort studies and 1 randomized trial. Overall complications were higher with right versus left hepatectomy (26.8 vs 20.8%; OR 1.4, p = 0.010). Donors after left hepatectomy had shorter length of stay (MD 1.4 days) compared to right hepatectomy. There was no difference in outcomes after right donor hepatectomy with versus without middle hepatic vein. We had limited data on the influence of incision type and minimally-invasive approaches on living donor outcomes, and no data on the effect of operative time on donor outcomes.Left donor hepatectomy should be preferred over right hepatectomy as it is related to improved donor short-term outcomes (QOE; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Right donor hepatectomy with or without MHV has equivalent outcomes (QOE; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong); no preference is recommended, decision should be based on program's experience and expertise. No difference in outcomes was observed related to incision type, minimally invasive vs open (QOE; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak); no preference can be recommended. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Several factors associated with prolonged hospital stay have been described. A recent study demonstrated that hospital length of stay (LOS) is directly associated with an increased cost for liver transplantation (LT) and may be associated with greater mortality; however, the factors associated with post-LT mortality are also related to a prolonged hospital stay, that is, those factors are confounders. Thus, the actual impact of the length of post-LT hospital stay on both short-term and long-term patient and graft survival remains uncertain.To identify the optimal time to discharge patients after LT with respect to short-term outcomes; readmission rate, 30-90-mortality and morbidity.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Initial search keywords for screening were as follows; ((discharge AND (time OR "time point" OR "time-point")) OR "length of hospital stay" OR "length of stay") AND ((liver OR hepatic) AND (transplant OR transplantation)).CRD42021245598 RESULTS: The strength of recommendation was rated as Weak, and we did not identify the direction of recommendations regarding the optimal timing after LT concerning short-term outcomes, including "Readmission rate," six studies on 30- and/or 90-day mortality, and five studies on "30- and/or 90-day morbidity rate."Evidence is scarce to judge the optimal timing to discharge patients after LT with respect to short-term outcomes. In centers with robust outpatient follow-up, discharge can occur safely as early as post-transplant 6-8 days (Quality of Evidence [QOE]; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak).

The essential premise of living donor liver transplantation is the assurance that the donors will have a complication-free perioperative course and a prompt recovery. Selection of appropriate donors is the first step to support this premise and is based on tests that constitute the donor workup. The exclusion of liver pathologies and assessment of liver anatomy and volume in the donor candidate are the most important elements in the selection of the appropriate candidate.To determine whether there is evidence to define an optimal donor surgical workup that would improve short-term outcomes of the donor after living liver donation.Ovid Medline, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel.Although a liver biopsy remains the only method to exactly determine the percentage and type of steatosis and to detect other liver pathologies, its routine use is not supported. Both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) appear to be adequate for quantifying liver volume; the preference for one or the other is often based on center expertise. MRI is clearly a better technique to assess biliary anatomy, although aberrant biliary anatomy may not be clearly detected. MRI is also more accurate than CT in determining low grades of steatosis. CT angiography is the imaging test of choice to assess the vascular anatomy. There is no evidence of the need for catheter angiography in the modern evaluation of a living liver donor.A donor liver biopsy is indicated if abnormalities are present in serological or imaging tests. Both MRI and CT imaging appear to be adequate methodologies. The routine use of catheter angiography is not supported in view of the adequacy of CT angiography in delineating liver vascular anatomy. No imaging modality available to quantify liver volume is superior to another. Biliary anatomy is better defined with MRI, although poor definition can be expected, particularly for abnormal ducts.

Varied access to deceased donors across the globe has resulted in differential living donor liver transplant (LDLT) practices and lack of consensus over the influence of models for end stage liver disease (MELD), renal function, sarcopenia, or recent infection on short-term outcomes.Consider these risk factors in relation to patient selection and provide recommendations.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central.PRIMSA systematic review and GRADE.RD42021260809 RESULTS: MELD25-30 alone is not a contraindication to LDLT, and multiple studies found no increase in short term mortality in high MELD patients. Contributing factors such as muscle mass, acute physiologic assessment and chronic health evaluation score, donor age, graft weight/recipient weight ratio, and inclusion of the middle hepatic vein in a right lobe graft influence morbidity and mortality in high MELD patients. Higher mortality is observed with pretransplant renal dysfunction, but short-term mortality is rare. Sarcopenia and recent infection are not contraindications to LDLT. Morbidity and prolonged LOS are common, and more frequent in patients with renal dysfunction, nutritional deficiency or recent infection.When individual risk factors are studied mortality is low and graft loss is infrequent, but morbidity is common. MELD, especially with concomitant risk factors, had the greatest influence on short term outcome, and recent infection had the least. A multidisciplinary team of experts should carefully assess patients with multiple risk factors, and an optimal graft is recommended.

The indication and surgical complexity of orthotopic liver transplantation underscore the need for strategies to optimize the recovery for transplant recipients. We conducted a systematic review aimed at identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the evidence examining the effect of in-patient rehabilitation for liver transplant recipients and provide related practice recommendations.Health research databases were systematically reviewed for studies that included adults who received liver transplantation and participated in acute, post-transplant rehabilitation. Postoperative morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay, and other markers of surgical recovery were extracted. Practice recommendations are provided by an international panel using GRADE.Twelve studies were included in the review (including 3901 participants). Rehabilitation interventions varied widely in design and composition; however, details regarding intervention delivery were poorly described in general. The quality of evidence was rated as very low largely owing to "very serious" imprecision, poor reporting, and limited data from comparative studies. Overall, the studies suggest that in-patient rehabilitation for recipients of liver transplantation is safe, tolerable, and feasible, and may benefit functional outcomes.Two practice recommendations related to in-patient rehabilitation following LT were yielded from this review: (1) it is safe, tolerable, and feasible; and (2) it improves postoperative functional outcomes. Each of the recommendations are weak and supported by low quality of evidence. No recommendation could be made related to benefits or harms for clinical, physiological, and other outcomes. Adequately powered and high quality randomized controlled trials are urgently needed in this area.

There is much controversy regarding enhanced recovery for recipients of liver transplants from deceased and living donors. The objectives of this Review were to summarise current knowledge on individual enhanced recovery elements on short-term outcomes, identify key components for comprehensive pathways, and create internationally accepted guidelines on enhanced recovery for liver-transplant recipients. The ERAS4OLT.org collaborative partnered by the International Liver Transplantation Society performed systematic literature reviews on the effect of 32 relevant enhanced perioperative recovery elements on short-term outcomes, and global specialists prepared expert statements on deceased and living donor liver transplantation. The Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach was used for rating of quality of evidence and grading of recommendations. A virtual international consensus conference was held in January, 2022, in which results were presented, voted on by the audience, and discussed by an independent international jury of eight members, applying the Danish model of consensus. 273 liver transplantation specialists from 30 countries prepared expert statements on elements of enhanced recovery for liver transplantation based on the systematic literature reviews. The consensus conference yielded 80 final recommendations, covering aspects of enhanced recovery for preoperative assessment and optimisation, intraoperative surgical and anaesthetic conduct, and postoperative management for the recipients of liver transplants from both deceased and living donors, and for the living donor. The recommendations represent a comprehensive overview of the relevant elements and areas of enhanced recovery for liver transplantation. These internationally established guidelines could direct the development of enhanced recovery programmes worldwide, allowing adjustments according to local resources and practices.

The 25th Annual Congress of the International Liver Transplantation Society was held in Toronto, Canada, from May 15 to 18, 2019. Surgeons, hepatologists, anesthesiologists, critical care intensivists, radiologists, pathologists, and research scientists from all over the world came together with the common aim of improving care and outcomes for liver transplant recipients and living donors. Some of the featured topics at this year's conference included multidisciplinary perioperative care in liver transplantation, worldwide approaches to organ allocation, donor steatosis, and updates in pediatrics, immunology, and radiology. This report presents excerpts and highlights from invited lectures and select abstracts, reviewed and compiled by the Vanguard Committee of International Liver Transplantation Society. This will hopefully contribute to further advances in clinical practice and research in liver transplantation.

Information asymmetries and the agency relationship are two defining features of the healthcare system. These market failures are often used as a rationale for government intervention. Many countries have government financing and provision of healthcare in order to correct for this, while health technology agencies also exist to improve efficiency. However, informational asymmetries and the resulting principal-agent problem still persist, and one example is the lack of cost awareness amongst clinicians. This study explores the cost awareness of clinicians across different settings.We targeted four clinical cohorts: medical students, Senior House Officers/Interns, Mid-grade Senior Registrar/Residents, and Consultant/Attending Physicians, in six hospitals in the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Spain. The survey asked respondents to report the cost (as they recalled) of different types of scans, visits, medications and tests. Our analysis focused on the differential between the perceived/recalled cost and the actual cost. We explored variation across speciality, country and other potential confounders. Cost-awareness levels were estimated based on the cost estimates within 25% of the actual cost.We received 705 complete responses from six sites across five countries. Our analysis found that respondents often overestimated the cost of common tests while underestimating high-cost tests. The mean cost-awareness levels varied between 4 and 23% for different items. Respondents acknowledged that they did not feel they had received adequate training in cost awareness.The current financial climate means that cost awareness and the appropriate use of scarce healthcare resources is more paramount than perhaps ever before. Much of the focus of health economics research is on high-cost innovative technologies, yet there is considerable waste in the system with respect to overtreatment and overdiagnosis. Common reasons put forward for this include defensive medicine, poor education, clinical uncertainty and the institution of protocols.Given the role of clinicians in the healthcare system, as agents both for patients and for providers, more needs to be done to remove informational asymmetries and improve clinician cost awareness.

While preoperative physiologic evaluation of live liver donors is routinely performed to ensure donor safety and minimize complications, the optimal approach to this evaluation is unknown.We aim to identify predonation physiologic evaluation strategies to improve postoperative short-term outcomes, enhance donor's recovery, and reduce length of stay. We also aim to provide multidisciplinary expert panel recommendations.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.The systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines, and the recommendations were formulated using GRADE approach and experts' opinion. The search included retrospective or prospective studies, describing outcomes of physiologic evaluation predonation. The outcomes of interest were length of stay, postoperative complications (POC), recovery after donation, and mortality. PROSERO protocol ID CRD42021260662.Of 1386 articles screened, only three retrospective cohort studies met eligibility criteria. Two studies demonstrated no impact of age ( 70 years) on POC. Increased body mass index's (BMI) association with POC was present in one study (23.8 vs 21.7 kg/mAdvancing age (60-69 years) is not a contraindication for liver donation. There is insufficient evidence for a specific predonation BMI cut-off. Abbreviated predonation physiologic testing is recommended in all candidates. Comprehensive testing is recommended in high-risk candidates while considering the pretest probability in various populations (Quality of evidence; Low to Very Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

In 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.To identify whether or not intraoperative anesthetic management affects short-term outcomes after liver transplantation.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.A 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.After 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).For 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 PaO

Background: Fluid management practices during and after liver transplantation vary widely among centers despite better understanding of the pathophysiology of end-stage liver disease and of the effects of commonly used fluids. This reflects a lack of high quality trials in this setting, but also provides a rationale for both systematic review of all relevant studies in liver recipients and evaluation of new evidence from closely related domains, including hepatology, non-transplant abdominal surgery and critical care.Objectives: To develop evidence-based recommendations for perioperative fluid management to optimize immediate and short-term outcomes following liver transplantation.Data sources: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.Methods: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Studies included those evaluating the following postoperative outcomes: acute kidney injury, respiratory complications, operative blood loss/red cell units required and intensive care length of stay.PROSPERO protocol ID: CRD42021241392.Results: Following expert panel review, 18 of 1624 screened studies met eligibility criteria for inclusion in the final quantitative synthesis. These included six single center RCTs, 11 single center observational studies, and one observational study comparing centers with different fluid management techniques. Definitions of interventions and outcomes varied between studies. Recommendations are therefore based substantially on expert opinion and evidence from other clinical settings.Conclusions: A moderately restrictive or 'replacement only' fluid regime is recommended, especially during the dissection phase of the transplant procedure. Sustained hypervolemia, based on absence of fluid responsiveness, elevated filling pressures and/or echocardiographic findings, should be avoided. (Quality of Evidence: Moderate | Grade of Recommendation: Weak for restrictive fluid regime. Strong for avoidance of hypervolemia). Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) should be maintained at >60-65 mmHg in all cases. (Quality of Evidence: Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong). There is insufficient evidence in this population to support preferential use of any specific colloid or crystalloid for routine volume replacement. However, we recommend against the use of 130/.4 HES given the high incidence of AKI in this population.

There are parallels between the history of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) and liver transplantation. Both have been established and advanced by innovative individuals, often going against perceived wisdom and convention. Liver transplantation has traditionally been considered too complex for ERAS pathways, despite a small number of trials showing them to be both safe and of benefit. To date, there are very few randomized controlled trials and cohort studies publishing outcomes on liver transplant patients enrolled in comprehensive ERAS pathways. To progress our field, the 2022 International Liver Transplantation Society's Consensus Conference has created expert panels to analyze the evidence in 32 domains of the liver transplantation pathway using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to generate expert recommendations. These recommendations will be voted on by the international community to gain consensus using the Danish model, and create the ERAS4OLT.org Enhanced Recovery after Liver Transplantation Pathway.

The timing of removing abdominal drains, central venous catheters (CVC), and urinary catheters (UC) on post liver transplantation (LT) outcomes is not well elucidated.To provide international expert panel recommendations and guidelines on time of drain and catheter removal as a part of an ERAS protocol to reduce the length of hospital stay and enhance recovery.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Papers considered were those reporting one or more outcomes of interest related to drainage and line removal in the setting of LT. POSPERO Protocol ID: CRD42021238349 RESULTS: On analyzing five relevant studies pertaining to drains in patients undergoing LT (four retrospectives and one prospective), the length of hospital and/or ICU stay was similar or shorter, and postoperative morbidity and mortality were lower in those without drains. No studies pertaining specifically to the time of removal of drains, CVC's, or UC's in LT were found. Studies in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery or hepatectomies recommend early removal of CVC and UC to reduce catheter-associated infections.Based more on expert recommendation, we propose that abdominal drains, if placed during LT, should be removed by postoperative day 5 after LT, based on quantity and fluid characteristics (Quality of Evidence; Low to Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Larger studies are needed to more reliably determine indications for early drain and line removal in an ERAS protocol setting.

Liver transplant centers vary in approach to intraoperative vascular accesses, monitoring of cardiac function and temperature management. Evidence is limited regarding impact of selected modalities on postoperative outcomes.To review the literature and provide expert panel recommendations on optimal intraoperative arterial blood pressure (BP), central venous pressure (CVP), and vascular accesses, monitoring of cardiac function and intraoperative temperature management regarding immediate and short-term outcomes after orthotopic liver transplant (OLT).Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Recommendations made for: (1) Vascular accesses, arterial BP and CVP monitoring, (2) cardiac function monitoring, and (3) Intraoperative temperature management (CRD42021239908).Of 2619 articles screened 16 were included. Studies were small, retrospective, and observational. Vascular access studies demonstrated low rates of insertion complications. TEE studies demonstrated low rates of esophageal hemorrhage. One study found lower hospital-LOS and 30-day mortality in patients monitored with both PAC and TEE. Other monitoring studies were heterogenous in design and outcomes. Temperature studies showed increased blood transfusion and ventilation times in hypothermic groups.Recommendations were made for; routine arterial and CVP monitoring as a minimum standard of practice, consideration of discrepancy between peripheral and central arterial BP in patients with hemodynamic instability and high vasopressor requirements, and routine use of high flow cannulae while monitoring for extravasation and hematoma formation. Availability and expertise in PAC and/or TEE monitoring is strongly recommended particularly in hemodynamic instability, portopulmonary HT and/or cardiac dysfunction. TEE use is recommended as an acceptable risk in patients with treated esophageal varices and is an effective diagnostic tool for emergency cardiovascular collapse. Maintenance of intraoperative normothermia is strongly recommended.

Liver transplantation (LT) is frequently complicated by coagulopathy associated with end-stage liver disease (ESLD), that is, often multifactorial.The objective of this systematic review was to identify evidence based intraoperative transfusion and coagulation management strategies that improve immediate and short-term outcomes after LT.PRISMA-guidelines and GRADE-approach were followed. Three subquestions were formulated. (Q); Q1: transfusion management; Q2: antifibrinolytic therapy; and Q3: coagulation monitoring.Sixteen studies were included for Q1, six for Q2, and 10 for Q3. Q1: PRBC and platelet transfusions were associated with higher mortality. The use of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) and fibrinogen concentrate (FC) were not associated with reductions in intraoperative transfusion or increased thrombotic events. The use of cell salvage was not associated with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence or mortality. Cell salvage and transfusion education significantly decreased blood product transfusions. Q2: Epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA) and tranexamic acid (TXA) were not associated with decreased blood product transfusion, improvements in patient or graft survival, or increases in thrombotic events. Q3: Viscoelastic testing (VET) was associated with decreased allogeneic blood product transfusion compared to conventional coagulation tests (CCT) and is likely to be cost-effective. Coagulation management guided by VET may be associated with increases in FC and PCC use.Q1: A specific blood product transfusion practice is not recommended (QOE; low | Recommendation; weak). Cell salvage and educational interventions are recommended (QOE: low | Grade of Recommendation: moderate). Q2: The routine use of antifibrinolytics is not recommended (QOE; low | Recommendation; weak). Q3: The use of VET is recommended (QOE; low-moderate | Recommendation; strong).

A key tenet of clinical management of patients post liver transplantation (LT) is the prevention of thrombotic and bleeding complications. This systematic review investigated the optimal management of thromboprophylaxis after LT regarding portal vein thrombosis (PVT) or hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) and prevention of bleeding.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Seven databases were used to conduct extensive literature searches focusing on the use of anticoagulation in LT and its impact on the following outcomes: PVT, HAT, and bleeding. (CRD42021244288) RESULTS: Of the 2,478 articles/abstracts screened, 16 studies were included in the final review. All articles were critically appraised by a panel of independent reviewers. There was wide variation regarding the anticoagulation protocols used. Thromboprophylaxis with therapeutic doses of heparin/Vitamin K antagonist combination did not decrease the risk of de novo or the recurrence of PVT but was associated with an increased risk of bleeding in some studies. Only the use of aspirin resulted in a small but significant decrease in the incidence of HAT post-LT, yet it did not increase the risk of bleeding.Based on existing data and expert opinion, thromboprophylaxis at therapeutic or prophylactic dose is not recommended for prevention of de novo PVT following LT in patients not at high risk. Aspirin should be considered as the standard of care following LT to prevent HAT. Thromboprophylaxis should be strongly considered in recipients at risk of HAT and PVT following LT. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis is well-accepted in the liver transplant (LT) setting. Nevertheless, optimal regimens to prevent bacterial, viral, and fungal infections are not defined.To identify the optimal antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent post-LT bacterial, fungal, and cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections, to improve short-term outcomes, and to provide international expert panel recommendations.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel.CRD42021244976.Of 1853 studies screened, 34 were included for this review. Bacterial, CMV, and fungal antimicrobial prophylaxis were evaluated separately. Pneumocystis jiroveccii pneumonia (PJP) antimicrobial prophylaxis was analyzed separately from other fungal infections. Overall, eight randomized controlled trials, 21 comparative studies, and five observational noncomparative studies were included.Antimicrobial prophylaxis is recommended to prevent bacterial, CMV, and fungal infection to improve outcomes after LT. Universal antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended to prevent postoperative bacterial infections. The choice of antibiotics should be individualized and length of therapy should not exceed 24 hours (Quality of Evidence; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Both universal prophylaxis and preemptive therapy are strongly recommended for CMV prevention following LT. The choice of one or the other strategy will depend on individual program resources and experiences, as well as donor and recipient serostatus. (Quality of Evidence; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Antifungal prophylaxis is strongly recommended for LT recipients at high risk of developing invasive fungal infections. The drug of choice remains controversial. (Quality of Evidence; High | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). PJP prophylaxis is strongly recommended. Length of prophylaxis remains controversial. (Quality of Evidence; Very Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

Prompt identification of early allograft dysfunction (EAD) is critical to reduce morbidity and mortality in liver transplant (LT) recipients.Evaluate the evidence supporting biomarkers that can provide diagnostic and predictive value for EAD.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach was derived from an international expert panel. Studies that investigated biomarkers or models for predicting EAD in adult LT recipients were included for in-depth evaluation and meta-analysis. Olthoff's criteria were used as the standard reference for the diagnostic accuracy evaluation.CRD42021293838 RESULTS: Ten studies were included for the systematic review. Lactate, lactate clearance, uric acid, Factor V, HMGB-1, CRP to ALB ratio, phosphocholine, total cholesterol, and metabolomic predictive model were identified as potential early EAD predictive biomarkers. The sensitivity ranged between .39 and .92, while the specificity ranged from .63 to .90. Elevated lactate level was most indicative of EAD after adult LT (pooled diagnostic odds ratio of 7.15 (95%CI: 2.38-21.46)). The quality of evidence (QOE) for lactate as indicator was moderate according to the GRADE approach, whereas the QOE for other biomarkers was very low to low likely as consequence of study design characteristics such as single study, small sample size, and large ranges of sensitivity or specificity.Lactate is an early indicator to predict EAD after LT (Quality of Evidence: Moderate | Grade of Recommendation: Strong). Further multicenter studies and the use of machine perfusion setting should be implemented for validation.

There continues to be debate about the lower limit of graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) for living donor liver transplant (LDLT).To identify the lower limit of GRWR compatible with enhanced recovery after living donor liver transplant and to provide international expert panel recommendations.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Studies assessing how GRWR affects recipient outcomes such as small for size syndrome, other complications, patient and graft survival, and length of stay were included.CRD42021260794.Twenty articles were included in the qualitative synthesis, and all were retrospective observational studies. There was heterogeneity in the definition of study cohorts and key outcome measures such as small-for-size syndrome. Most studies lacked risk adjustment given limited single-center sample size. GRWR of ≥ .8% is associated with enhanced recovery. Recipients of grafts with GRWR .8%, however, were found to have similar outcomes as those with ≥ .8% when appropriate consideration is made for portal flow modulation and recipient illness severity.GRWR ≥ .8% is often compatible with enhanced recovery, but grafts .8% can be used in selected LDLT recipients with optimal donor-recipient selection, surgical technique, and perioperative management (Quality of Evidence; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis is often employed to prevent the potentially serious complication of pulmonary embolism (PE). However, little data exist regarding the optimal DVT prophylaxis strategy for living donors undergoing hepatectomy for living donor liver transplantation. Here we present our consensus statement on DVT prophylaxis for living donors undergoing hepatectomy.To identify the optimal DVT prophylaxis strategy, which reduces, risk of complications in living liver donors, and enhances recovery.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Of interest was the impact of DVT prophylaxis or lack of prophylaxis on living donors undergoing hepatectomy and subsequent rates of DVT, PE, and hemorrhagic complications.CRD42021260720 RESULTS: The review of the literature identified three studies, which directly addressed thrombogenesis following living donor hepatectomy. All studies were observational in nature without randomization into treatments. The rate of DVT-PE in unscreened living donors with chemoprophylaxis was 5%. Furthermore, thromboelastography of living donors demonstrated sustained hypercoagulability for 50% of donors 10 days postoperatively. In line with CHEST (The American College of Chest Physicians) guidelines of chemoprophylaxis for surgical procedures with 3% or greater risk of DVT-PE, we conclude that a minimum of 10 days of postoperative chemoprophylaxis with unfractionated heparin or low-molecular weight heparin is recommended for patients undergoing living donor hepatectomy. The quality of evidence (QOE) for these recommendations based on the GRADE criteria is low, with a Grade of Recommendation of Strong.Chemoprophylaxis for DVT following living donor hepatectomy is associated with reduced adverse thrombotic events, (Quality of Evidence; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

There is some evidence in the literature to suggest that pre-operative counselling improves pain scores postoperatively. However, it is unclear whether pre-operative counselling of the donor improves immediate and short-term outcomes after living liver donation.This systematic review aimed to investigate the available quality of evidence (QOE) of pre-operative counselling for living donors on short term outcomes, provide expert opinion, grade recommendations and identify relevant components for Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Endpoints were defined by the WHOQOL-BREF scale: physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment.CRD42021260677.Screening of 452 records and full texts led to 12 articles matching inclusion criteria, of which one was a randomized controlled trial (RCT), and 11 were observational retrospective cohort studies. A total of 933 individuals undergoing donor hepatectomy were included, of whom only 90 received dedicated perioperative ERAS protocols. Donors that received pre-operative counselling had fewer physical symptoms post donation, lower rates of fatigue, lower rates of pain, shorter recovery times and fewer unexpected medical problems, and less anxiety post donation. Female donors had higher affective and adverse effects scores, and 50% of donors reported adverse effects to analgesia that interfered with functional activity. Receiving information about analgesic options increased perception of care among donors.Providing comprehensive pre-operative counselling to living liver donors is associated with improved short-term outcomes after donation (QOE; moderate to low I Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

Maximizing patient and allograft survival after liver transplant (LT) is important from both a patient care and organ utilization perspective. Although individual studies have addressed the effects of short-term post-LT complications on a limited scale, there has not been a systematic review of the literature formally assessing the potential effects of early complications on long-term outcomes.To identify whether short-term complications after LT affect allograft and overall survival, to identify short-term complications of particular clinical interest and significance, and to provide recommendations to improve post-LT graft and patient survival.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel.The literature review and analysis provided show that short-term complications have a large impact on allograft and patient survival after LT. The complications with the strongest effect on survival are acute kidney injury (AKI), biliary complications, and early allograft dysfunction (EAD).This panel recommends taking measures to reduce the risk and incidence of short-term complications post-LT. Clinicians should pay particular attention to preventing or ameliorating AKI, biliary complications, and EAD (Quality of evidence; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

Early extubation in liver transplantation (LT) and its potential benefits such as reduction in pulmonary complications and enhanced postoperative recovery have been described. The extent of the effect of early extubation on short-term outcomes after LT across the published literature is to the best of our knowledge unknown.The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine whether early extubation improves immediate and short-term outcomes after LT and to provide expert recommendations.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.A systematic review and meta-analysis on short-term outcomes after early extubation in LT was performed (CRD42021241402), following PRISMA guidelines and quality of evidence (QOE) and recommendations grading using the GRADE approach, derived from an international experts panel. Endpoints were reintubation rates, pulmonary and other complications/organ dysfunction, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS).Of 831 screened articles, 20 observational studies with a total of 3573 patients addressing early extubation protocols were included, of which 12 studies compared results after early versus deferred extubation. Reintubation and pulmonary complication rates were lower in the early versus deferred extubation groups (OR 0.29, CI 0.22-0.39; OR 0.17, CI 0.09-0.33, respectively). ICU and hospital LOS were shorter in eight out of eight and seven out of eight comparative studies, respectively.Early extubation after LT is associated with improved short-term outcomes after LT and should be performed in the majority of patients (QOE; Moderate to low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Randomized controlled trials using standardized definitions of early extubation and short-term outcomes are needed to demonstrate causality, validate and allow comparability of the results.

IntroductionLiver transplantation is a complex operation that can provide significant improvements in quality of life and survival to the recipients. However, serious complications are common and include major haemorrhage, hypotension and renal failure. Blood transfusion and the development of acute kidney injury lead to both short-term and long-term poor patient outcomes, including an increased risk of death, graft failure, length of stay and reduced quality of life. Octreotide may reduce the incidence of renal dysfunction, perioperative haemorrhage and enhance intraoperative blood pressure. However, octreotide does have risks, including resistant bradycardia, hyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia and QT prolongation. Hence, a randomised controlled trial of octreotide during liver transplantation is needed to determine the cost-efficacy and safety of its use; this study represents a feasibility study prior to this trial.Methods and analysisWe describe a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled feasibility study of continuous infusion of octreotide during liver transplantation surgery. We will recruit 30 adult patients at two liver transplant centres. A blinded infusion during surgery will be administered in a 2:1 ratio of octreotide:placebo. The primary outcomes will determine the feasibility of this study design. These include the recruitment ratio, correct administration of blinded study intervention, adverse event rates, patient and clinician enrolment refusal and completion of data collection. Secondary outcome measures of efficacy and safety will help shape future trials by assessing potential primary outcome measures and monitoring safety end points. No formal statistical tests are planned. This manuscript represents study protocol number 1.3, dated 2 June 2021.Ethics and disseminationThis study has received Research Ethics Committee approval. The main study outcomes will be submitted to an open-access journal.Trial sponsorThe Joint Research Office, University College London, UK.Neither the sponsor nor the funder have any role in study design, collection, management, analysis and interpretation of data, writing of the study report or the decision to submit the report for publication.Trial registrationThe study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04941911) with recruitment due to start in August 2021 with anticipated completion in July 2022.Clinical trials unitSurgical and Interventional Group, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London.

Thromboembolic complications are associated with COVID-19 owing to the hypercoagulable nature of the disease. Although patients with COVID-19 often have higher levels of fibrinogen and D-dimers, hypercoagulability has been attributed to various other factors too. In this prospective observational study conducted between April 2020 and June 2020, we compared coagulation parameters using thromboelastography in COVID-19 patients to non-COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU with respiratory failure. This study demonstrated a significant difference between the cohorts in functional fibrinogen (CFF) progressively from third day of ICU admission whilst there was no difference in the Clauss fibrinogen levels. COVID-19 patients also demonstarted supranormal R time indicating hypocoagulability. These mixed coagulation changes suggest targeting fibrinogen or platelets may prevent thromboembolic complications in COVID-19.

This systematic review aimed to investigate the available quality of evidence (QOE) of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for liver transplantation (LT) on short-term outcomes, grade recommendations, and identify relevant components for ERAS protocols. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on short-term outcomes after LT when applying comprehensive ERAS protocols (> 1 ERAS component) versus control groups (CRD42021210374), following the GRADE approach for grading QOE and strength of recommendations. Endpoints were morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and readmission rates after ERAS for LT. Of 858 screened articles, two randomized controlled trials, two prospective, and one retrospective cohort studies were included (2002-2020). Frequent ERAS components were early extubation and postoperative antibiotic, fluid, and nutrition management. Overall complications were reduced in ERAS versus control cohorts (OR .4 (CI .2, .7), with no significant differences in mortality and hospital readmission rates. Intensive care unit and hospital length of stay were shorter in ERAS groups (percentage decrease, 55% and 29%, respectively). QOE for individual outcomes was rated moderate to low. ERAS protocols in LT are related to improved short-term outcomes after LT (QOE; Moderate to low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong), but currently lack standardization.

C-reactive protein (CRP) levels are elevated following bacterial infections but may be attenuated by the IL-6-receptor antagonist tocilizumab. In hospitalised COVID-19 patients, tocilizumab induced a transient (

Introduction Recruitment to perioperative randomised controlled trials is known to be challenging. Qualitative methods offer insight into barriers and enablers to participation. This is a substudy within a feasibility randomised controlled trial of octreotide infusion during liver transplantation at two National Health Service hospitals, which will evaluate patient and staff experiences of trial processes. By sharing formative understanding from these methods with the trials team we aim to improve staff–patient interactions and hence recruitment rates. Methods and analysis This prospective mixed-methods study will comprise two workstreams. First, after consent to the randomised controlled trial is sought, all patients will be invited to complete a questionnaire to explore their perceptions of the information given to them and motivating factors that influenced their decision to consent or not. Questionnaires will be analysed using descriptive statistics and framework analysis. If the recruitment:approach ratio drops below a predetermined ratio or if there are any specific recruitment concerns from the trials team, a second workstream involving mixed-methods fieldwork will be implemented. This will involve audiorecording of recruitment consultations and a follow-up semistructured interview to explore patients’ perception of their decision-making regarding recruitment. Semistructured interviews will also be conducted with the recruitment team to establish their views about the trial, barriers to recruitment and ways to overcome them. Recruitment consultations will be analysed using Q-QAT methodology and interviews will be analysed using framework analysis. Findings from both workstreams will be formatively fed back to the trials team to enable iterative improvement to recruitment processes. Ethics and dissemination Approval has been granted by Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (ref 20/NW/0071), the Health Research Authority and the local Research and Development offices. A manuscript detailing the summative findings will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number NCT04941911.

Background Dengue fever is an arthropod-borne flavivirus infection that is highly prevalent in the tropics. A proportion of clinical cases develop severe dengue, defined by life-threatening complications including haemorrhage, capillary leak and multi-organ failure. Recently there has been increasing recognition that some cases of severe dengue may be a consequence of HLH. To our knowledge, this is the first report of treatment with Anakinra for dengue-induced HLH. Case report We report a case of Dengue fever triggering HLH in an eighteen-year-old female returning traveller from India, diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) two months prior to presentation. The patient initially presented to a district general hospital emergency department (ED) with a three-day history of flu-like symptoms, fever, erythematous rash, widespread joint pain, nausea and chills. Acute Dengue virus infection was confirmed with serum polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. On day two, she was admitted to intensive care for multi-organ support necessitated by refractory hypotension, oligo-anuric severe acute kidney injury (AKI), acute liver failure with lactataemia and type one respiratory failure. The possibility of Dengue-induced HLH was considered early with multiple criteria for diagnosis met including hyperferritinaemia, pancytopenia, lipaemia and a marked transaminitis. HLH-directed therapy was commenced with intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP) and Anakinra. Subsequent bone marrow biopsy analysis demonstrated clear evidence of HLH, in the context of a persistent and marked Dengue viraemia. We observed resolution of HLH markers as well as reducing requirements for multi-organ support after initiation of Anakinra therapy. During her recovery, the patient unexpectedly developed focal neurology; intracranial imaging demonstrated widespread, discreet parenchymal lesions thought to be haemorrhagic in nature, which were deemed too severe an insult to recover from. On day 19, the difficult decision of withdrawing care after deep discussion with the family was reached, soon after which the patient passed away. A post-mortem examination was not arranged.

Introduction Pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum have both been noted to complicate cases of COVID-19 requiring hospital admission. We report the largest case series yet described of patients with both these pathologies that includes non-ventilated patients. Methods Cases were collected retrospectively from UK hospitals with inclusion criteria limited to a diagnosis of COVID-19 and the presence of either pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum. Patients included in the study presented between March and June 2020. Details obtained from the medical record included demographics, radiology, laboratory investigations, clinical management and survival. Results Seventy-one patients from 16 centres were included in the study, of whom 60 patients had pneumothoraces (six also with pneumomediastinum), whilst 11 patients had pneumomediastinum alone. Two of these patients had two distinct episodes of pneumothorax, occurring bilaterally in sequential fashion, bringing the total number of pneumothoraces included to 62. Clinical scenarios included patients who had presented to hospital with pneumothorax, patients who had developed pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum during their inpatient admission with COVID-19 and patients who developed their complication whilst intubated and ventilated, either with or without concurrent extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Survival at 28 days was not significantly different following pneumothorax (63.1%±6.5%) or isolated pneumomediastinum (53.0%±18.7%; p=0.854). The incidence of pneumothorax was higher in males. The 28-day survival was not different between the sexes (males 62.5%±7.7% versus females 68.4%±10.7%; p=0.619). Patients above the age of 70 had a significantly lower 28-day survival than younger individuals (≥70 years 41.7%±13.5% survival versus, Roughly 1% of patients admitted with COVID-19 develop pneumothorax. This can occur without pre-existing lung disease or mechanical ventilation. Two thirds of patients survive, but age >70 years and acidosis are associated with poor prognosis.

The 25th Annual Congress of the International Liver Transplantation Society was held in Toronto, Canada, from May 15 to 18, 2019. Surgeons, hepatologists, anesthesiologists, critical care intensivists, radiologists, pathologists, and research scientists from all over the world came together with the common aim of improving care and outcomes for liver transplant recipients and living donors. Some of the featured topics at this year's conference included multidisciplinary perioperative care in liver transplantation, worldwide approaches to organ allocation, donor steatosis, and updates in pediatrics, immunology, and radiology. This report presents excerpts and highlights from invited lectures and select abstracts, reviewed and compiled by the Vanguard Committee of International Liver Transplantation Society. This will hopefully contribute to further advances in clinical practice and research in liver transplantation.

In the absence of separate guidelines for critically unwell ventilated patients in the intensive care unit who are undergoing surgery, questions arise about whether patients in intensive care should be starved preoperatively, despite already having a protected airway.

Perioperative risk for patients undergoing liver transplantation is influenced by the severity of their liver disease as well as by extrahepatic complications including frailty, sarcopenia, poor exercise tolerance and cardiorespiratory pathology. Safe intraoperative care depends upon an understanding of the surgical procedure and an appreciation of the physiological changes which occur during the anhepatic stage and at reperfusion of the donor graft. Cardiovascular and respiratory dysfunction, acute kidney injury, and severe bleeding due to the surgery, portal hypertension and coagulopathy are common in the perioperative period. Robust strategies for detecting and correcting coagulopathy, as well as meticulous attention to fluid balance and electrolytes, are essential. Live donors are extensively screened and in good general health. Their intraoperative management is similar to that of patients undergoing liver resection.

The severely burned patient represents one of the most complex scenarios to manage in clinical practice. A major burn sets in motion a cascade of events which will result in catastrophic end-organ dysfunction if appropriate treatment is not commenced in a timely manner. Outside of a regional burns center, accurate clinical assessment of a burn is difficult. Clinicians must be judicious in administering treatment as both under- and over-resuscitation can be harmful. Further complicating the picture, the hypermetabolic state induced in the burned patient makes difficult the diagnosis of additional co-morbidities such as sepsis. In this review, we examine the common difficulties encountered in the resuscitation and intensive care of the severely burned patient. Additionally, we review the current and emerging evidence that guides our day-to-day management of extensive burns.