Open AccessIschemic Preconditioning for Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Author(s) -
Lina Jakubauskiene,
Matas Jakubauskas,
Philipp Stiegler,
Bettina Leber,
Peter Schemmer,
Kęstutis Strupas
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
visceral medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.598
H-Index - 17
eISSN - 2297-475X
pISSN - 2297-4725
DOI - 10.1159/000516608
Subject(s) - medicine , liver transplantation , ischemic preconditioning , randomized controlled trial , meta analysis , intensive care unit , transplantation , economic shortage , ischemia , surgery , linguistics , philosophy , government (linguistics)
Background: In recent decades, liver transplantation (LTx) has increased the survival and quality of life of patients with end-stage organ failure. Unfortunately, LTx is limited due to the shortage of donors. A lot of effort is put into finding new ways to reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) in liver grafts to increase the number of suitable organs procured from expanded-criteria donors (ECD). The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature reporting LTx outcomes when using ischemic preconditioning (IPC) or remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) to reduce IRI in liver grafts. Methods: A literature search was performed in the MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases. The following combination was used: “Liver” OR “Liver Transplantation” AND “Ischemic preconditioning” OR “occlusion” OR “clamping” OR “Pringle.” The following outcome data were retrieved: the rates of graft primary nonfunction (PNF), retransplantation, graft loss, and mortality; stay in hospital and the intensive care unit; and postoperative serum liver damage parameters. Results: The initial search retrieved 4,522 potentially relevant studies. After evaluating 17 full-text articles, a total of 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included (7 IPC and 2 RIPC studies) in the qualitative synthesis; the meta-analysis was only performed on the data from the IPC studies. RIPC studies had considerable methodological differences. The meta-analysis revealed the beneficial effect of IPC when comparing postoperative aspartate aminotransferase (AST) corresponding to a statistically lower mortality rate in the IPC group (odds ratio [OR] 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27–0.98; p = 0.04). Conclusion: IPC lowers postoperative AST levels and reduces the mortality rate; however, data on the benefits of RIPC are lacking.