BACKGROUND:

Propofol is an anaesthetic that resembles α-tocopherol and it has been suggested that it protects against ischaemia-reperfusion injury in liver transplantation. Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) presents an opportunity to test this hypothesis in both donors and recipients.

OBJECTIVES:

We compared clinical outcomes after LDLT following anaesthesia with propofol and desflurane against desflurane alone.

DESIGN:

A randomised, parallel study.

SETTING:

Single-centre trial, study period June 2014 and May 2017.

PATIENTS:

Sixty-two pairs of adult donors and recipients who underwent LDLT.

INTERVENTION:

Patients were randomised to receive either desflurane balanced anaesthesia or propofol total intravenous anaesthesia combined with desflurane anaesthesia.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

The primary outcome was peak liver transaminase levels during the first 7 days after surgery. Liver function was assessed at 10 different time-points (before surgery, 1 h after reperfusion, upon arrival in the ICU, and daily until postoperative day 7). Creatinine was measured to evaluate the incidence of acute kidney injury. TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6 and TGF-β1 were assessed in 31 donors after induction, at hepatectomy and at the end of surgery and in 52 recipients after induction, and 1, 3 and 24 h after reperfusion.

RESULTS:

Peak liver transaminase levels were not significantly different between the two groups. Liver function tests and creatinine were also similar between groups at all time-points. There was no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications, including acute kidney injury. With the exception of higher TNF-α in donors of the Propofol group at hepatectomy (0.60 ± 0.29 vs. 1.03 ± 0.53, P = 0.01) cytokine results were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION:

Despite the simultaneous administration of propofol infusion in both donors and recipients, no improvement in laboratory or surgical outcome was observed after LDLT compared with patients who received desflurane anaesthesia alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION:

NCT02504138 at clinicaltrials.gov.

In a multicenter, open-label, study, 284 living-donor liver transplant patients were randomized at 30 ± 5 days posttransplant to start everolimus+reduced tacrolimus (EVR+rTAC) or continue standard tacrolimus (TAC Control). EVR+rTAC was non-inferior to TAC Control for the primary efficacy endpoint of treated BPAR, graft loss or death at 12 months posttransplant: difference -0.7% (90% CI -5.2%, 3.7%); P < .001 for non-inferiority. Treated BPAR occurred in 2.2% and 3.6% of patients, respectively. The key secondary endpoint, change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) from randomization to month 12, achieved non-inferiority (P < .001 for non-inferiority), but not superiority and was similar between groups overall (mean -8.0 vs. -12.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 , P = .108), and in patients continuing randomized treatment (-8.0 vs. -13.3 mL/min/1.73 m2 , P = .046). In the EVR+rTAC and TAC control groups, study drug was discontinued in 15.5% and 17.6% of patients, adverse events with suspected relation to study drug occurred in 57.0% and 40.4%, and proteinuria ≥1 g/24 h in 9.3% and 0%, respectively. Everolimus did not negatively affect liver regeneration. At 12 months, hepatocellular recurrence was only seen in the standard TAC-treated patients (5/62; 8.1%). In conclusion, early introduction of EVR+rTAC was non-inferior to standard tacrolimus in terms of efficacy and renal function at 12 months, with hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence only in TAC Control patients. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01888432.

17th Congress of the European Society for Organ Transplantation, Brussels, Belgium. 13 -16 September 2015.

The present study compared the efficacy and safety of mizoribine (MZR) with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in kidney transplantation. This multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Employed doses of study drug tailored to the immunosuppressive need. The primary efficacy outcome was the incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection episodes (BPAR). The safety of the study drug was assessed using the incidences of adverse events, drug discontinuations, and abnormal laboratory results. The 7 (6.4%) BPARs above grade II were observed in the MZR group noninferior to the 2 (1.8%) in the MMF group (95% confidence interval, -0.007-0.097 > noninferiority limit [-0.2]). BPAR was significantly decreased in the MZR group after the dose change (17/41 [41.4%] vs 8/69 [11.6%]; P < .0001) and the incidence of BPAR was similar between the MZR and MMF groups after the dose change (P = .592). The uric acid level was significantly elevated in the MZR group (P = .002). In conclusion, the efficacy and safety of MZR were similar and statistically noninferior to MMF in combination therapy with tacrolimus.