• Paola Aceto, Giovanni Punzo, Valeria Di Franco, Luciana Teofili, Rita Gaspari, AvolioAlfonso WolfangoAW, Filippo Del Tedesco, Domenico Posa, Carlo Lai, and Liliana Sollazzi.
• From the Dipartimento di Scienze dell'emergenza, anestesiologiche e della rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS (PA, GP, VDF, RG, FDT, DP, LS), Dipartimento di Scienze Biotecnologiche di Base, Cliniche Intensivologiche e Perioperatorie, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (PA, RG, LS), Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS (LT), Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche ed Ematologiche, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (LT), Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche e Chirurgiche, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS (AWA), Dipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia Traslazionale, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (AA) and Department of Dynamic and Clinical Psychology, and Health Studies, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy (CL).
• Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2023 Jan 1; 40 (1): 395339-53.

BackgroundRecent literature suggests viscoelastic test (VET)-guided transfusion management could be associated with reduced blood product administration in patients undergoing liver transplantation.ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of coagulation management guided by VETs compared with conventional coagulation tests (CCTs) in reducing blood product transfusion in patients undergoing liver transplantation.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised (RCTs) and nonrandomised clinical trials performed according to PRISMA guidelines. The protocol was previously published (PROSPERO: CRD42021230213).Data SourcesThe Cochrane Central Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and the Transfusion Evidence Library were searched up to 30 th January 2022.Eligibility CriteriaSetting: operating room. Patients: liver transplantation recipients. Intervention: use of VETs versus CCTs. Main outcome measures: the primary outcome was the mean number of transfused units for each blood product including red blood cells (RBCs), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), platelets (PLTs) and cryoprecipitate. Secondary outcomes included mortality rate, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS).ResultsSeventeen studies ( n  = 5345 patients), 15 observational and two RCTs, were included in this review. There was a mean difference reduction in RBCs [mean difference: -1.40, 95% confidence interval (95% CI), -1.87 to -0.92; P  < 0.001, I2  = 61%) and FFP units (mean difference: -2.98, 95% CI, -4.61 to -1.35; P  =  < 0.001; I2  = 98%) transfused in the VETs group compared with the CCTs one. A greater amount of cryoprecipitate was administered in the VETs group (mean difference: 2.71, 95% CI, 0.84 to 4.58; P  = 0.005; I2  = 91%). There was no significant difference in the mean number of PLT units, mortality, hospital and ICU-LOS.ConclusionOur meta-analysis demonstrated that VETs implementation was associated with reduced RBC and FFP consumption in liver transplantation patients without effects on mortality and hospital and ICU-LOS. The certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low. Further well conducted RCTs are needed to improve the certainty of evidence.Copyright © 2022 European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

18 keywords...

hide…