Normothermic Regional Perfusion in Controlled Donation After Circulatory Death and its Impact on Postreperfusion Syndrome in Liver Transplantation Compared With Brain-dead Donors: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

IF 2.2 Q3 TRANSPLANTATION
Transplantation Direct Pub Date : 2026-06-18 eCollection Date: 2026-07-01 DOI:10.1097/TXD.0000000000001965
Hélène Platteeuw, Alexandre Bourgeois, Cédric Cirenei, Charlotte Geay, Anne Bignon, Maxime Leroy, Hélène Béhal, Sébastien Dharancy, Emmanuel Boleslawski, Gilles Lebuffe, Damien Rousseleau
{"title":"Normothermic Regional Perfusion in Controlled Donation After Circulatory Death and its Impact on Postreperfusion Syndrome in Liver Transplantation Compared With Brain-dead Donors: A Retrospective Comparative Study.","authors":"Hélène Platteeuw, Alexandre Bourgeois, Cédric Cirenei, Charlotte Geay, Anne Bignon, Maxime Leroy, Hélène Béhal, Sébastien Dharancy, Emmanuel Boleslawski, Gilles Lebuffe, Damien Rousseleau","doi":"10.1097/TXD.0000000000001965","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) increases graft availability but may carry higher perioperative risk, which in situ normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) may mitigate by reducing ischemia-reperfusion injury. Evidence remains limited regarding NRP impact on PRS during liver transplantation (LT). The objective of this study was to compare the incidence of PRS and early postoperative outcomes between cDCD LT with NRP and donation after brain death (DBD) LT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective, single-center observational study comparing cDCD LT with NRP versus DBD LT. The primary endpoint was PRS (≥30% mean arterial pressure decrease for ≥1 min within 5 min of reperfusion). Secondary endpoints included early allograft dysfunction, acute kidney injury (AKI), rejection, biliary/vascular complications, and survival. Associations between graft type and outcomes were assessed using logistic regression (binary) and linear regression (continuous), and Cox models (time-to-event), with multivariable adjustment for clinically relevant covariates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 106 recipients (cDCD n = 47; DBD n = 59), PRS occurred 27 patients (25.5% versus 25.4%). Graft type was not associated with PRS after adjustment (odds ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-3.10; <i>P</i> = 0.81). No significant differences were observed in early allograft dysfunction, acute rejection, AKI, or biliary and vascular complications. There was 1 death in the cDCD group and 5 in the DBD group (2.1% versus 8.5%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a standardized program using routine NRP, cDCD LT did not increase PRS risk and achieved early outcomes comparable to DBD LT. These findings suggest clinical feasibility and short-term safety of Maastricht III protocols incorporating NRP.</p>","PeriodicalId":23225,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation Direct","volume":"12 7","pages":"e1965"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13282067/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation Direct","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001965","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TRANSPLANTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) increases graft availability but may carry higher perioperative risk, which in situ normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) may mitigate by reducing ischemia-reperfusion injury. Evidence remains limited regarding NRP impact on PRS during liver transplantation (LT). The objective of this study was to compare the incidence of PRS and early postoperative outcomes between cDCD LT with NRP and donation after brain death (DBD) LT.

Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center observational study comparing cDCD LT with NRP versus DBD LT. The primary endpoint was PRS (≥30% mean arterial pressure decrease for ≥1 min within 5 min of reperfusion). Secondary endpoints included early allograft dysfunction, acute kidney injury (AKI), rejection, biliary/vascular complications, and survival. Associations between graft type and outcomes were assessed using logistic regression (binary) and linear regression (continuous), and Cox models (time-to-event), with multivariable adjustment for clinically relevant covariates.

Results: Among 106 recipients (cDCD n = 47; DBD n = 59), PRS occurred 27 patients (25.5% versus 25.4%). Graft type was not associated with PRS after adjustment (odds ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-3.10; P = 0.81). No significant differences were observed in early allograft dysfunction, acute rejection, AKI, or biliary and vascular complications. There was 1 death in the cDCD group and 5 in the DBD group (2.1% versus 8.5%).

Conclusions: In a standardized program using routine NRP, cDCD LT did not increase PRS risk and achieved early outcomes comparable to DBD LT. These findings suggest clinical feasibility and short-term safety of Maastricht III protocols incorporating NRP.

与脑死亡供者相比,循环死亡后控制捐献的常温区域灌注及其对肝移植后灌注综合征的影响:一项回顾性比较研究
背景:循环死亡(cDCD)后的控制捐赠增加了移植物的可用性,但可能带来更高的围手术期风险,原位常温区域灌注(NRP)可通过减少缺血-再灌注损伤来减轻这种风险。关于NRP对肝移植(LT)期间PRS影响的证据仍然有限。本研究的目的是比较脑死亡(DBD) LT后cDCD + NRP和脑死亡(DBD) LT后捐赠的PRS发生率和术后早期结局。方法:这是一项回顾性、单中心观察性研究,比较cDCD + NRP和DBD LT。主要终点是PRS(再灌注后5分钟内平均动脉压下降≥30%,持续≥1分钟)。次要终点包括早期同种异体移植物功能障碍、急性肾损伤(AKI)、排斥反应、胆道/血管并发症和生存率。采用logistic回归(二元)、线性回归(连续)和Cox模型(事件时间)评估移植物类型与结局之间的关系,并对临床相关协变量进行多变量调整。结果:106例受体(cDCD 47例,DBD 59例)中,27例发生PRS (25.5% vs 25.4%)。调整后移植物类型与PRS无相关性(优势比1.13;95%可信区间0.41-3.10;P = 0.81)。在早期同种异体移植物功能障碍、急性排斥反应、AKI或胆道和血管并发症方面没有观察到显著差异。cDCD组死亡1例,DBD组死亡5例(2.1% vs 8.5%)。结论:在使用常规NRP的标准化方案中,cDCD LT不会增加PRS风险,并且取得了与DBD LT相当的早期结果。这些发现表明纳入NRP的马斯特里赫特III方案的临床可行性和短期安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Transplantation Direct
Transplantation Direct TRANSPLANTATION-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
193
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书