Impact of differential glycemic management goals in pre-anhepatic and anhepatic phase on early grafted liver function after liver transplantation: An open-label, randomized, controlled study
Yi Duan MD , Lei Cui MD , Zuozhi Li MD, PhD , Zhifeng Gao MD , Fulei Gu MD , Huan Zhang MD
{"title":"Impact of differential glycemic management goals in pre-anhepatic and anhepatic phase on early grafted liver function after liver transplantation: An open-label, randomized, controlled study","authors":"Yi Duan MD , Lei Cui MD , Zuozhi Li MD, PhD , Zhifeng Gao MD , Fulei Gu MD , Huan Zhang MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinane.2025.111807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Liver graft function is related to the quality of liver transplantation (LT). High-quality perioperative glycemic management is considered hepatoprotective. However, no studies have explored the effects of specialized and staged blood glucose management target ranges on reducing glycemic variability (GV) and early allograft dysfunction (EAD) after LT.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In this prospective randomized controlled trial, a total of 188 LT recipients were randomly assigned 1:1 to the less intensive glucose management (LIGM) group and the more intensive glucose management (MIGM) group. They followed goals of 7.8–10.0 mmol/L and 4.5–6.7 mmol/L in the pre-anhepatic and anhepatic phases, respectively, and the goals of 4.1–10.0 mmol/L in the neohepatic phase and postoperatively. The primary outcome was EAD, and the secondary outcomes were GV, incidence of hyperglycemia/hypoglycemia, postoperative liver enzyme levels, 30-day postoperative infection rate, one-year survival rate, and TNF-α, IL-6 and C-reactive protein levels.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 182 adult patients (89 in the LIGM group and 93 in the MIGM group) completed the study. The mean age of the recipients was 51.46 ± 10.79 years, and the median MELD score before surgery was 16. The incidence of EAD was significantly lower in the LIGM group than in the MIGM group (10.11 % vs 31.18 %, P < 0.001), with a relative risk (RR) of 0.32 (2-sided 95 % CI 0.110–0.562). There was no statistical difference in the 30-day postoperative infection rate between the two groups (<em>P</em> > 0.05). The one-year survival rate of the LIGM group was higher than that of the MIGM group (92.13 % vs 82.02 %, <em>P</em> = 0.044).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Adopting LIGM (7.8–10.0 mmol/L) during the pre-anhepatic and anhepatic phases helps to reduce the incidence of EAD after LT and promotes the recovery of liver function, but does not increase the incidence of postoperative infections.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15506,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","volume":"103 ","pages":"Article 111807"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952818025000674","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Liver graft function is related to the quality of liver transplantation (LT). High-quality perioperative glycemic management is considered hepatoprotective. However, no studies have explored the effects of specialized and staged blood glucose management target ranges on reducing glycemic variability (GV) and early allograft dysfunction (EAD) after LT.
Methods
In this prospective randomized controlled trial, a total of 188 LT recipients were randomly assigned 1:1 to the less intensive glucose management (LIGM) group and the more intensive glucose management (MIGM) group. They followed goals of 7.8–10.0 mmol/L and 4.5–6.7 mmol/L in the pre-anhepatic and anhepatic phases, respectively, and the goals of 4.1–10.0 mmol/L in the neohepatic phase and postoperatively. The primary outcome was EAD, and the secondary outcomes were GV, incidence of hyperglycemia/hypoglycemia, postoperative liver enzyme levels, 30-day postoperative infection rate, one-year survival rate, and TNF-α, IL-6 and C-reactive protein levels.
Results
A total of 182 adult patients (89 in the LIGM group and 93 in the MIGM group) completed the study. The mean age of the recipients was 51.46 ± 10.79 years, and the median MELD score before surgery was 16. The incidence of EAD was significantly lower in the LIGM group than in the MIGM group (10.11 % vs 31.18 %, P < 0.001), with a relative risk (RR) of 0.32 (2-sided 95 % CI 0.110–0.562). There was no statistical difference in the 30-day postoperative infection rate between the two groups (P > 0.05). The one-year survival rate of the LIGM group was higher than that of the MIGM group (92.13 % vs 82.02 %, P = 0.044).
Conclusions
Adopting LIGM (7.8–10.0 mmol/L) during the pre-anhepatic and anhepatic phases helps to reduce the incidence of EAD after LT and promotes the recovery of liver function, but does not increase the incidence of postoperative infections.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Anesthesia (JCA) addresses all aspects of anesthesia practice, including anesthetic administration, pharmacokinetics, preoperative and postoperative considerations, coexisting disease and other complicating factors, cost issues, and similar concerns anesthesiologists contend with daily. Exceptionally high standards of presentation and accuracy are maintained.
The core of the journal is original contributions on subjects relevant to clinical practice, and rigorously peer-reviewed. Highly respected international experts have joined together to form the Editorial Board, sharing their years of experience and clinical expertise. Specialized section editors cover the various subspecialties within the field. To keep your practical clinical skills current, the journal bridges the gap between the laboratory and the clinical practice of anesthesiology and critical care to clarify how new insights can improve daily practice.