Pioneered by Thomas Starzl in the early 1970s, liver transplant (LT) is nowadays often considered a final intervention and standard of care to cure many forms of acute and chronic end-stage liver diseases. Started in recipients younger than 60 years old, LT indications are now much broader, and at least, one-fifth of the candidates are older than 65 years. Problems associated with ageing and frailty in LT recipients and their impact on the entire perioperative course are discussed according to a modern anesthesiological perspective and the anesthesiologist covering the role of the perioperative (transplant) physician.

Since the first liver transplant was performed over six decades ago, the landscape of liver transplantation in the US has seen dramatic evolution. Numerous advancements in perioperative and operative techniques have resulted in major improvements in graft and patient survival rates. Despite the increase in transplants performed over the years, the waitlist mortality rate continues to remain high. The obesity epidemic and the resultant metabolic sequelae continue to result in more marginal donors and challenging recipients. In this review, we aim to highlight the changing characteristics of liver transplant recipients and liver allograft donors. We focus on issues relevant in successfully transplanting a high model for end stage liver disease recipient. We provide insights into the current use of terms and definitions utilized to discuss marginal allografts, discuss the need to look into more consistent ways to describe these organs and propose two new concepts we coin as "Liver Allograft Variables" (LAV) and "Liver Allograft Composite Score" (LACS) for this. We discuss the development of spectrum of risk indexes as a dynamic tool to characterize an allograft in real time. We believe that this concept has the potential to optimize the way we allocate, utilize and transplant livers across the US.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Liver transplantation continues to provide life-saving treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease. Advances in the field of transplant anesthesia continue to support the care of more complex patients. The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has been described in critical care settings and cardiac surgery but may be a valuable option for specific conditions for patients undergoing liver transplantation. Changes to the allocation process for liver grafts now focus on acuity circles to reduce regional disparities. As the number of life-saving transplant surgeries increases, so does the need for specialty knowledge in the anesthetic considerations of these procedures. The specialty of transplant anesthesia continues to grow and develop to meet the demands of complex patients and the increased number of transplants performed. Liver transplantation can be a resource-demanding procedure, and predicting the need for massive transfusion can aid in planning and preparing for significant blood loss.

Although transfusion management has improved during the last decade, orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has been associated with considerable blood transfusion requirements which poses some challenges in securing blood bank inventories. Defining the predictors of massive blood transfusion before surgery will allow the blood bank to better manage patients' needs without delays. We evaluated the predictors of intraoperative massive transfusion in OLT.

Data were collected on patients who underwent OLT between 2007 and 2017. Repeat OLTs were excluded. Analyzed variables included recipients' demographic and pretransplant laboratory variables, donors' data, and intraoperative variables. Massive transfusion was defined as intraoperative transfusion of ≥10 units of packed red blood cells (RBCs). Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 17.0.

The study included 970 OLT patients. The median age of patients was 57 (range: 16-74) years; 609 (62.7%) were male. RBCs, thawed plasma, and platelets were transfused intraoperatively to 782 (80.6%) patients, 831 (85.7%) patients, and 422 (43.5%) patients, respectively. Massive transfusion was documented in 119 (12.3%) patients. In multivariate analysis, previous right abdominal surgery, the recipient's hemoglobin, Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, cold ischemia time, warm ischemia time, and operation time were predictive of massive transfusion. There was a direct significant correlation between the number of RBC units transfused and plasma (Pearson correlation coefficient r = .794) and platelets (r = .65).

Previous abdominal surgery, the recipient's hemoglobin, MELD score, cold ischemia time, warm ischemia time, and operation time were predictive of intraoperative massive transfusion in OLT.

Pioneered by Thomas Starzl in the early 1970s, liver transplant (LT) is nowadays often considered a final intervention and standard of care to cure many forms of acute and chronic end-stage liver diseases. Started in recipients younger than 60 years old, LT indications are now much broader, and at least, one-fifth of the candidates are older than 65 years. Problems associated with ageing and frailty in LT recipients and their impact on the entire perioperative course are discussed according to a modern anesthesiological perspective and the anesthesiologist covering the role of the perioperative (transplant) physician.

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.

Consensus was achieved via a modified Delphi methodology, surveying 15 identified international experts in the fields of LT anesthesia and critical care.

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.

This article provides an essential guide to competency-based training of an LT anesthesiologist.

Anesthetic and surgical techniques for the liver transplantation have progressed considerably over the past sixty years; however, this procedure is still fraught with substantial morbidity. To increase the safety culture associated with the liver transplantation, we detail nine error traps associated with anesthesia for pediatric liver transplantation. These potential pitfalls are divided into the operative phases: pre-operative preparation (Failure to have a dedicated anesthesia team for pediatric liver transplantation); pre-anhepatic (Failure to prepare for massive blood loss, Failure to monitor for coagulation abnormalities); anhepatic including reperfusion (Failure to prepare for clamping of the inferior vena cava, Failure to recognize metabolic changes, Failure to maintain homeostasis for reperfusion, Failure to prepare for Post-reperfusion syndrome); and post-anhepatic (Failure to optimize liver perfusion, Failure to maintain hemostatic balance). By offering practical advice on the preparation and treatment of these error traps, we aim to better prepare anesthesiologists to take care of pediatric patients undergoing the liver transplantation.

In this review, we describe the major milestones in the development of organ transplantation with a specific focus on hepatic transplantation. For many years, the barriers preventing successful organ transplantation in humans seemed insurmountable. Although advances in surgical technique provided the technical ability to perform organ transplantation, limited understanding of immunology prevented successful organ transplantation. The breakthrough to success was the result of several significant discoveries between 1950 and 1980 involving improved surgical techniques, the development of effective preservative solutions, and the suppression of cellular immunity to prevent graft rejection. After that, technical innovations and laboratory and clinical research developed rapidly. However, these advances alone could not have led to improved transplant outcomes without parallel advances in anesthesia and critical care. With increasing organ demand, it proved necessary to expand the donor pool, which has been achieved with the use of living donors, split grafts, extended criteria organs, and organs obtained through donation after cardiac death. Given this increased access to organs and organ resources, the number of transplantations performed every year has increased dramatically. New regulatory organizations and transplant societies provide critical oversight to ensure equitable organ distribution and a high standard of care and also perform outcome analyses. Establishing dedicated transplant anesthesia teams results in improved organ transplantation outcomes and provides a foundation for developing new standards for other subspecialties in anesthesiology, critical care, and medicine overall. Through a century of discovery, the success we enjoy at the present time is the result of the work of well-organized multidisciplinary teams following standardized protocols and thereby saving thousands of lives worldwide each year. With continuing innovation, the future is bright.

Organ Procurement and Transplant Network (OPTN) pediatric policies on knowledge and skill requirements for key personnel failed to address the Director of Anesthesia for Pediatric Liver Transplantation. A Joint Committee representing the Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia and Society for Pediatric Anesthesia (SPA) surveyed all pediatric anesthesia liver transplant practices to determine if practices were aligned with policies and what changes would be needed for compliance.

A survey of the Director or equivalent at each program collected data about specialized knowledge and skill sets. Questions focused on (1) skill and knowledge of the Director and team, (2) requirements for appointment, (3) experience in pediatrics, and (4) characteristics of the program including the availability of pediatric resources.

Response rate was 73% (n = 63). Most responding programs had a Director (67%) with certification, selection committee, and continuing education credits outlined in existing policies. Team members met similar requirements. Alternate pathways for acquiring knowledge and skill sets were identified between programs.

Pediatric liver transplant anesthesiologists use knowledge and skill pathways that align with the new pediatric policies. We suggest that collaborative work with oversight agencies is needed to resolve high case volume requirements originally designed for adult programs.

Most pediatric liver transplant anesthesiologists in the US have specialized knowledge and skills for expert care consistent with current oversight policies. Differences in pathways to acquire knowledge and skill sets were still aligned with the new policies for pediatric transplant surgeons and bylaws for the Director of Transplant Anesthesia. We conclude that minimal changes in case volume requirements to the existing Pediatric Transplant Anesthesiology Directorship criteria that authenticates the pediatric anesthesia Director's position would improve the safety of care without limiting access to transplantation.

Patients with acute and chronic liver disease present with a wide range of disease states and severity that may require liver transplantation (LT). Physiologic alterations occur that are dynamic throughout all phases of perioperative care, creating complex management scenarios that necessitate multidisciplinary clinical care. Specifically, alterations in hemostasis in liver disease can be pronounced and evolve with disease progression over time. Recent studies and society guidance address this emerging paradigm and offer recommendations to assist with hemostatic management in patients with liver disease. However, patients undergoing LT are unique and diverse, often with unstable disease that requires specialized approaches. Our aim is to provide a focused review of hemostatic management of the LT patient, distinguish unique aspects of the three main phases of care (before LT, perioperative, and after LT), and identify knowledge gaps and critical areas of future research.

Given the complex nature of liver transplant surgery, adult centers typically use a dedicated liver transplant anesthesia team, which has improved patient outcomes.

Our goal was to determine whether a dedicated pediatric liver transplant anesthesia team was associated with improved patient outcomes.

This retrospective cohort study analyzed patients who underwent liver transplantation from April 2013 to September 2020 at St. Louis Children's Hospital. The general group (April 2013-December 2016) was compared with the liver group (January 2017-September 2020). Outcomes measured included cases per anesthesiologist, early extubation, ventilator days, fluid and blood administration, postoperative events, and intensive care unit and hospital length of stay (LOS).

Patients in both groups had similar demographics. The average number of cases/anesthesiologist/year was 2.9 times higher in the liver group (mean (SD) general 0.7 (0.5), liver 2.0 (0.6), and difference in mean [95% CI] 1.3 [0.8, 1.8]). The rate of extubation in the operating room was higher for patients in the liver group (general 56%, liver 80%, and difference in proportion [95% CI] 24.7 [7.0, 42.4]), while the number of ventilator days was lower (mean (SD) general 2.1 (4.4), liver 1.1 (3.6), and difference in proportion [95%CI] -0.9 [-2.6, 0.7]). Colloid administration was higher in the liver group (mean (SD) general 23.9 (14.5) ml/kg, liver 48.4 (37.7) ml/kg, and difference in mean [95% CI] 24.6 [12.7, 36.4]), while fresh frozen plasma administration was lower in the liver group (mean (SD) general 15.3 (23.9) ml/kg, liver 6.2 (14) ml/kg, and difference in mean [95% CI] -9.0 [-16.8, -1.3]). There were no significant differences between the groups in postoperative events including blood product transfusions, vasopressor use, and thromboses, or in the intensive care unit and hospital LOS.

The liver group was associated with increased early extubations, decreased ventilator days, and decreased fresh frozen plasma use.

Liver transplant anesthesiology is an evolving and expanding subspecialty, and programs have, in the past, exhibited significant variations of practice at transplant centers across the United States. In order to explore current practice patterns, the Quality & Standards Committee from the Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia (SATA) undertook a survey of liver transplant anesthesiology program directors.

Program directors were invited to participate in an online questionnaire. A total of 110 program directors were identified from the 2018 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) database. Replies were received from 65 programs (response rate of 59%).

Our results indicate an increase in transplant anesthesia fellowship training and advanced training in transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). We also find that the use of intraoperative TEE and viscoelastic testing is more common. However, there has been a reduction in the use of veno-venous bypass, routine placement of pulmonary artery catheters and the intraoperative use of anti-fibrinolytics when compared to prior surveys.

The results show considerable heterogeneity in practice patterns across the country that continues to evolve. However, there appears to be a movement towards the adoption of specific structural and clinical practices.

Liver transplantation is a complex surgical procedure. The experience of the anesthesiologist, and its potential relationship to patient morbidity and mortality, is yet to be determined. We sought to explore this possible association using our institutional training patterns as the subject of study.

This is a single center retrospective analysis investigating the association of an anesthesiologist's experience with liver transplantation and its potential effect on early patient outcomes in adult liver transplant recipients from January 2010 to September 2016. Training of team members consisted of a 6-month period of clinical shadowing with a senior anesthesiologist and co-staffing 8 liver transplant procedures before solo staffing a liver transplant. Specifically, patient outcomes for the first 5 transplants after this training were investigated.

The only independent risk factor for early death or early graft loss was the amount of packed red blood cells administered during transplantation. With respect to secondary outcomes, the amount of packed red blood cells and hospitalization at the time of transplant were associated with the number of days on a ventilator, length of intensive care unit stay, and overall hospital length of stay.

The results of this study conclude that the training model currently in place for our new team members has no negative impact on patient outcomes after liver transplantation.

There are disparities in liver transplant anesthesia team (LTAT) care across the United States. However, no policies address essential resources for liver transplant anesthesia services similar to other specialists. In response, the Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia appointed a task force to develop national recommendations. The Conditions of Transplant Center Participation were adapted to anesthesia team care and used to develop Delphi statements. A Delphi panel was put together by enlisting 21 experts from the fields of liver transplant anesthesiology and surgery, hepatology, critical care, and transplant nursing. Each panelist rated their agreement with and the importance of 17 statements. Strong support for the necessity and importance of 13 final items were as follows: resources, including preprocedure anesthesia assessment, advanced monitoring, immediate availability of consultants, and the presence of a documented expert in liver transplant anesthesia credentialed at the site of practice; call coverage, including schedules to assure uninterrupted coverage and methods to communicate availability; and characteristics of the team, including membership criteria, credentials at the site of practice, and identification of who supervises patient care. Unstructured comments identified competing time obligations for anesthesia and transplant services as the principle reason that the remaining recommendations to attend integrative patient selection and quality review committees were reduced to a suggestion rather than being a requirement. This has important consequences because deficits in team integration cause higher failure rates in service quality, timeliness, and efficiency. Solutions are needed that remove the time-related financial constraints of competing service requirements for anesthesiologists. In conclusion, using a modified Delphi technique, 13 recommendations for the structure of LTATs were agreed upon by a multidisciplinary group of experts.

Liver grafts from donation after circulatory death (DCD) are a source of organs to decrease wait-list mortality. While there have been lower rates of graft loss, there are concerns of an increased incidence of intraoperative events in recipients of DCD grafts. We aim to look at the incidence of intraoperative events between recipients of livers from DCD and donation after brain death (DBD) donors. We collected data for 235 DCD liver recipients between 2006 and 2017. We performed a 1:1 propensity match between these patients and patients with DBD donors. Variables included recipient age, liver disease etiology, biological Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, allocation MELD score, diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, and year of transplantation. DCD and DBD groups had no significant differences in incidence of postreperfusion syndrome (P = 0.75), arrhythmia requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation (P = 0.66), and treatments for hyperkalemia (P = 0.84). In the DCD group, there was a significant increase in amount of total intraoperative and postreperfusion blood products (with exception of postreperfusion packed red blood cells) utilized (P < 0.05 for all products), significant differences in postreperfusion thromboelastography parameters, as well as inotropes and vasopressors used (P < 0.05 for all infusions). There was no difference in patient (P = 0.49) and graft survival (P = 0.10) at 1, 3, and 5 years. In conclusion, DCD grafts compared with a cohort of DBD grafts have a similar low incidence of major intraoperative events, but increased incidence of transient vasopressor/inotropic usage and increased blood transfusion requirements. This does not result in differences in longterm outcomes. While centers should continue to look at DCD liver donors, they should be cognizant regarding intraoperative care to prevent adverse outcomes.

Patients with portal hypertension will increasingly present for nontransplant surgery because of the increasing incidence of, and improving long-term survival for, chronic liver disease. Such patients have increased perioperative morbidity and mortality caused by the systemic pathophysiology of liver disease. Preoperative assessment should identify modifiable causes of liver injury and distinguish between compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. Risk stratification, which is crucial to preparing patients and their families for surgery, relies on scores such as Child-Turcotte-Pugh and Model for End-stage Liver Disease to translate disease severity into quantified outcomes predictions. Risk factors for postoperative complications should also be recognized.

Transfusion management during liver transplantation (LT) is aimed at reducing blood loss and allogeneic transfusion requirements. Although prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) has been used satisfactorily in various bleeding disorders, studies on its safety, and efficacy during LT are limited.

A retrospective chart review of adult patients who underwent living donor LT at a single institute between October 2016 and January 2018 was carried out. The safety and efficacy of PCC in reducing transfusion requirements intraoperatively in patients who received PCC were compared with patients who did not receive PCC. A propensity score-matching technique was used, at a 1:1 ratio, to remove selection bias.

After completing the 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis, 60 pairs of patients were identified. The use of PCC was associated with significantly decreased red blood cell transfusion requirements (6.2 ± 4.1 vs 8.23 ± 5.18, P < 0.001) and fresh frozen plasma transfusion requirements (2.6 ± 2 vs 6.18 ± 4.1, P < 0.001). The number of patients developing postoperative hemorrhagic complications was higher in the non-PCC group.

During LT, the use of PCC led to decreased transfusion requirements. No thromboembolic complications related to PCC were noted in this series.

The coagulopathy of end-stage liver disease results from a complex derangement in both anticoagulant and procoagulant processes. With even minor insults, cirrhotic patients experience either inappropriate bleeding or clotting, or even both simultaneously. The various phases of liver transplantation along with fluid and blood product administration may contribute to additional disturbances in coagulation. Thus, anesthetic management of patients undergoing liver transplantation to improve hemostasis and avoid inappropriate thrombosis in the perioperative environment can be challenging. To add to this challenge, traditional laboratory tests of coagulation are difficult to interpret in patients with end-stage liver disease. Viscoelastic coagulation tests such as thromboelastography (Haemonetics Corporation, Braintree, MA) and rotational thromboelastometry (TEM International, Munich, Germany) have helped to reduce transfusion of allogeneic blood products, especially fresh frozen plasma, but have also lead to the increased use of fibrinogen-containing products. In general, advancements in surgical techniques and anesthetic management have led to significant reduction in blood transfusion requirements during liver transplantation. Targeted transfusion protocols and pharmacologic prevention of fibrinolysis may further aid in the management of the complex coagulopathy of end-stage liver disease.

Given potential disparity and limited allocation of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation, a new federal kidney allocation system was implemented in 2014. Donor organ function and estimated recipient survival in this system has implications for perioperative management of kidney transplant recipients. Early analysis suggests that many of the anticipated goals are being attained. For anesthesiologists, implications of increased dialysis duration and burdens of end-stage renal disease include increased cardiopulmonary disease, challenging fluid, hemodynamic management, and central vein access. With no recent evidence to guide anesthesia care within this new system, we describe the kidney allocation system, summarize initial data, and briefly review organ systems of interest to anesthesiologists. As additional invasive and echocardiographic monitoring may be indicated, one consideration may be development of a dedicated anesthesiology team experienced in management and monitoring of complex patients, in a similar manner as has been done for liver transplant recipients.

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) remains a potentially hemorrhagic procedure. Rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) is a point-of-care device used to monitor coagulation during OLT. Whether it allows blood loss and transfusions to be reduced during OLT remains controversial. Excellent correlations and predictive values have been found between ROTEM parameters and fibrinogen. We hypothesized that the use of a ROTEM-based transfusion algorithm during OLT would lead to more fibrinogen transfusion and decreased bleeding and blood transfusion. Sixty adult patients were consecutively included in a prospective, without-versus-with study: 30 in the group without ROTEM results and 30 in the group with the ROTEM-based algorithm. A small and nonsignificant increase in median fibrinogen transfusions was found for the with group (6.0 g versus 4.5 g, P = 0.50). It was not associated with a decrease in blood transfusions or in the number of patients exposed to blood products.

Introduction. This study's objective was to identify risk factors associated with reoperation for bleeding following liver transplantation (LTx). Methods. A retrospective study was performed at a single institution between 2001 and 2012. Operative reports were used to identify patients who underwent reoperation for bleeding within 2 weeks following LTx (operations for nonbleeding etiologies were excluded). Results. Reoperation for bleeding was observed in 101/928 (10.8%) of LTx patients. The following characteristics were associated with reoperation on multivariable analysis: recipient MELD score (OR 1.06/MELD unit, 95% CI 1.03, 1.09), number of platelets transfused (OR 0.73/platelet unit, 95% CI 0.58, 0.91), and aminocaproic acid utilization (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27, 0.80). LTx patients who underwent reoperation for bleeding had a longer ICU stay (5 days ± 7 versus 2 days ± 3, P < 0.001) and hospitalization (18 days ± 9 versus 10 days ± 18, P < 0.001). The risk of death increased in patients who underwent reoperation for bleeding (HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.26, 2.85). Conclusion. Reoperation for bleeding following LTx was associated with increased resource utilization and recipient mortality. A lower threshold for intraoperative platelet transfusion and antifibrinolytics, especially in patients with high lab-MELD score, may decrease the incidence of reoperation for bleeding following LTx.

Patients with liver disease and portal hypertension are at increased risk of complications from surgery. Recent advances have allowed better optimization of patients with cirrhosis before surgery and a reduction in postoperative complications. Despite this progress, the estimation of surgical risk in a patient with cirrhosis is challenging. The MELD score has shown promise in predicting postoperative mortality compared with the Child-Turcotte-Pugh score. This article addresses current concepts in the perioperative evaluation of patients with liver disease and portal tension, including a preoperative liver assessment (POLA) checklist that may be useful towards mitigating perioperative complications.

Predicting blood product transfusion requirements during orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) remains difficult. Our primary aim in this study was to determine which patient variables best predict recipient risk for large blood transfusion requirements during OLT. The secondary aim was to determine whether the amount of blood products transfused during OLT impacted patient survival.

Eight hundred four primary adult OLTs performed during a 9-year period were retrospectively analyzed, and predictive models were developed for blood product usage, usage >20 and usage >30 units of red blood cells (RBCs) plus cell salvage (CS). For survival analysis, potential predictors included all blood products administered during OLT.

For analyses of RBC + CS usage, we used several statistical techniques: regression analysis, logistic regression, and classification and regression tree analysis. Several preoperative factors were highly statistically significant predictors of intraoperative blood product usage in each of the analyses, namely lower platelet count and higher Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score or one or more of its components (creatinine, total bilirubin, international normalized ratio). Despite these highly significant associations, the models were unable to predict reliably that patients might require the largest amount of blood products during OLT. For example, the classification and regression tree analyses were able to predict only 32% and 11% of patients requiring >20 and >30 units of RBC + CS, respectively. Survival analysis demonstrated poorer survival among patients receiving larger amounts of RBC + CS during OLT.

Prediction of intraoperative blood product requirements based on preoperatively available variables is unreliable; however, there is a strong measurable association between transfusion and postoperative mortality.

The International Liver Transplantation Society held its annual meeting from June 12 to 15 in Sydney, Australia. More than 800 registrants attended the congress, which opened with a conference celebrating 50 years of liver transplantation (LT). The program included series of featured symposia, focused topic sessions, and oral and poster presentations. This report is by no means all-inclusive and focuses on specific abstracts on key topics in LT. Similarly to previous reports, this one presents data in the context of the published literature and highlights the current direction of LT.

The United States exhibits subpar health care outcomes compared with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development peer group. An urgent need exists to address the excessive cost and unsustainable trajectory of expenditures associated with US health care. Health care reform ideas based on the Health Maintenance Organization and Patient-Centered Medical Home concepts are a promising solution to address health care inefficiencies. Accountable Care Organizations seek to simultaneously improve quality of care and reduce expenditure.

A new Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing bylaw recommends that all centers appoint a director of liver transplant anesthesia with a uniform set of criteria. We obtained survey data from the Liver Transplant Anesthesia Consortium so that we could compare existing criteria for a director in the United States with the current recommendations. The data set included responses from adult academic liver transplant programs before the new bylaw. The respondent rates were within statistical limits to exclude sampling bias. All centers had a director of liver transplant anesthesia. The criteria varied between institutions, and the data suggest that the availability of resources influenced the choice of criteria. The information suggests that the criteria used in the new bylaw reflect existing practices. The bylaw plays an important role in supporting emerging leadership roles in liver transplant anesthesia and brings greater uniformity to the directorship position.

Investigators at a single institution have shown that the organization of the anesthesia team influences patient outcomes after liver transplant surgery. Little is known about how liver transplant anesthesiologists are organized to deliver care throughout the United States. Therefore, we collected quantitative survey data from adult liver transplant programs in good standing with national governing agencies so that we could describe team structure and duties. Information was collected from 2 surveys in a series of quantitative surveys conducted by the Liver Transplant Anesthesia Consortium. All data related to duties, criteria for team membership, interactions/communication with the multidisciplinary team, and service availability were collected and summarized. Thirty-four of 119 registered transplant centers were excluded (21 pediatric centers and 13 centers not certified by national governing agencies). Private practice sites (26) were later excluded because of a poor response rate. There were minimal changes in the compositions of the programs between the 2 surveys. All academic programs had distinct liver transplant anesthesia teams. Most had set criteria for membership and protocols outlining the preoperative evaluation, attended selection committees, and were always available for transplant surgery. Fewer were involved in postoperative care or were available for patients needing subsequent surgery. Most trends were associated with the center volume. In conclusion, some of the variance in team structure and responsibilities is probably related to resources available at the site of practice. However, similarities in specific duties across all teams suggest some degree of self-initiated specialization.

Although liver transplantation (LT) is a highly effective treatment, it has been considered too costly for publicly funded health systems in many countries with low to medium average incomes. However, with economic growth and improving results, some governments are reconsidering this position. Cost-effectiveness data for LT are limited, especially in perioperative care, and the techniques and costs vary widely between centers without overt differences in outcomes. Anesthesiologists working in new programs find it difficult to determine which modalities are essential, which are needed only in exceptional circumstances, and which may be omitted without effects on outcomes. We investigated key elements of preoperative evaluations, intraoperative management, and early postoperative care that might significantly affect costs in order to develop a best-value approach for new programs in resource-limited health systems. We identified all modalities of care commonly used in anesthesia and perioperative care for adult LT along with their costs. Those considered to be universally accepted as minimum requirements for safe care were excluded from the analysis, and so were those considered to be safe and low-cost, even when evidence of efficacy was lacking. The remaining items were, therefore, those with uncertain or context-restricted value and significant costs. A systematic review of the published evidence, practice surveys, and institutional guidelines was performed, and the evidence was graded and summarized. With respect to costs and benefits, each modality was then cited as strongly recommended, recommended or optional, or no recommendation was made because of insufficient evidence. Sixteen modalities, which included preoperative cardiovascular imaging, venovenous bypass, pulmonary artery catheterization, high-flow fluid warming devices, drug therapies for hemostasis, albumin, cell salvage, anesthetic drugs, personnel (staffing) requirements, and early extubation, were assessed. Only high-flow fluid warming was strongly recommended. The recommended modalities included preoperative echocardiography, cell salvage, tranexamic acid and early extubation. Six others were rated optional, and there was insufficient evidence for 5 modalities. We conclude that some costly techniques and treatments can be omitted without adverse effects on outcomes.

To propose and evaluate the use of a porcine model for training in how to manage and improve the quality of anesthesia during liver transplantation.

Five trained anesthesiologists who had no previous experience in managing anesthesia during liver transplantation and who did not work in hospitals where the procedure was performed volunteered for the training course and evaluated it. Each trainee anesthetized 5 animals. Surgery was performed under total balanced anesthesia with monitoring of hemodynamics, ventilation, biochemistry, arterial blood gases, and coagulation. Previously set criteria were used to evaluate the trainees' skill in maintaining patient stability. Their work was assessed 7 times: at baseline, 15 minutes into the preanhepatic phase, at the end of the preanhepatic stage, 15 minutes into the anhepatic phase, at the end of the anhepatic phase, 15 minutes into the postanhepatic phase, and at the end of the postanhepatic phase. After completing the course, the trainees filled in a questionnaire to evaluate its usefulness. Analysis of variance was applied to score changes in anesthetic quality criteria.

After implantation, changes in metabolic (acidosis) and cardiac (hypotension and bradycardia) status were the most critical abnormalities the trainees faced. Their skill in coping with hemodynamic and metabolic changes improved significantly (P<.05). All participants expressed a preference for receiving training in a porcine model before providing anesthesia in this surgical setting.

Under this training model, the anesthesiologists understood and were able to manage the hemodynamic and physiologic changes that develop during a liver transplant procedure. We believe that training using a porcine model allows an anesthesiologist to acquire experience and skill in this setting.

Liver transplantation for end-stage liver disease results in excellent outcomes. Patient and graft outcome is closely monitored on a national level, and 1-year survival is between 80% and 95%. Liver transplantation relies on a multidisciplinary approach, with close involvement of anesthesiologists and intensivists. However, intraoperative care of these patients remains inconsistent and is highly institution dependent. This brief-review article will focus on controversial topics of intraoperative care. Existing evidence on intraoperative monitoring, intraoperative fluid and transfusion management, electrolyte and glucose management, postoperative patient disposition, and, lastly, anesthesia team management will be reviewed.

Intraoperative transfusion practices for liver transplantation have evolved dramatically since the first transplants of the 1960s. It is important for today's clinicians to be current in their understanding of how transplant patients should be managed with regard to their coagulation profile, volume status, and general hemodynamic state. The anesthesia team is presented with the unique task of manipulating this tenuous balance in a rapid and precise manner when managing patients undergoing liver transplantation. Although significant progress has been made in reducing blood product administration, it is still common to encounter large volume blood loss in these cases. Increasingly, clinicians are challenged to justify transfusion practices with a stronger evidentiary base. The current state of the literature for transfusion guidelines and blood product management in this particular patient subset will be discussed, as well as a variety of means (both pharmacologic and otherwise) used to reduce the need for transfusion. The aim was to review the latest evidence on these topics, as well as to highlight areas that need further clarification regarding their role in the optimal care of these patients.

Quality improvement efforts are increasingly applied in transplant medicine and are related to graft/patient outcomes and reimbursement from third-party insures. Perioperative care of transplant patients has only recently attracted attention and quality improvement efforts are not well established.

Research investigations in perioperative care of transplant patients frequently focus on only one variable (i.e., transfusion rate) and, therefore, are of limited significance.

In order to improve perioperative care of transplant patients, perioperative quality improvement protocols have to be established at transplant centers. These protocols need to include a comprehensive electronic database that can be easily queried, a periodic review of practice pattern based on existing data, and a well established mechanism for necessary practice adjustments.