77.06 Outcome Analysis of Intraoperative Hemodialysis in the Highest Acuity Liver Transplant Recipients

M. Selim1, M. Zimmerman1, J. Kim1, K. Regner2, D. C. Cronin1, K. Saeian3, L. A. Connolly4, K. K. Lauer4, H. J. Woehlck4, J. C. Hong1 1Medical College Of Wisconsin,Division Of Transplant Surgery/Department Of Surgery,Milwaukee, WI, USA 2Medical College Of Wisconsin,Division Of Nephrology/Department Of Medicine,Milwaukee, WI, USA 3Medical College Of Wisconsin,Division Of Gastroenterology And Hepatology/Department Of Medicine,Milwaukee, WI, USA 4Medical College Of Wisconsin,Department Of Anesthesiology,Milwaukee, WI, USA

Introduction: The Model of End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scoring system (ranges between 6 to > 40) is an accurate predictor of pretransplant mortality. Liver transplantation (LT) in critically ill patients with end-stage liver disease (MELD > 35) and concomitant renal failure carries a high intraoperative and immediate post-transplant risk. Intraoperative hemodialysis (IOHD) has been utilized to aid these patients undergoing LT. We sought to analyze outcomes after LT for patients requiring IOHD.

Methods: A retrospective analysis from our prospective database of 82 adult LTs between October 2012 and August 2015. The median follow up was 12 months.

Results: Among those 82 LTs, 37 (45.1%) patients had a MELD score > 35. Thirty-three patients had pre-LT renal dysfunction: 25 (76%) underwent IOHD (Grp I) and 8 (24%) did not (Grp II). Hepatitis C and alcohol were the commonest etiologies for liver failure. While the mean MELD scores were comparable between groups I (43 + 5) and II (41 + 5), patients in Grp I were acutely ill compared to Grp II: there was a higher need for ICU management and urgent HD prior to LT (96% in Grp I versus 50% in Grp II, p=0.002), and an increased requirement for immediate post-transplant HD (92% in Grp I versus 50% in Grp II, p=0.007). In Grp I, 48% received a combined liver-kidney transplant (CLK) compared to 87.5% in Grp II, p=0.04. Among those who are alive at 3 months posttransplant, the HD-free recovery of renal function was 100% in Grp I and 75% in Grp II, p= 0.018. The organ preservation ischemic times and intraoperative blood transfusion requirement were comparable for both groups. There was a trend towards a lower intraoperative post-liver reperfusion hemodynamic instability in Grp I (16%) versus Grp II (37.5%), p=0.19. Post LT patient and graft survival rates were comparable for Grp I and Grp II at 30 days (88% vs. 100%) and at 6 months (84% vs. 100%), p=0.14.

Conclusions: IOHD is a safe therapeutic adjunct during LT of patients with the highest acuity. Identifying patients who require IOHD would improve intraoperative and post-LT survival outcomes and may facilitate recovery of post-LT renal function.