N-acetylcysteine and Reduction of Ischemia-reperfusion Injury in Liver Transplantation.

Abstract

In the current issue of Transplantation, Jia et al perform a systemic review and meta-analysis looking at the utilization of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in the donor and recipient in liver transplantation.1,2 It has been suggested that NAC may have a role in mitigating ischemia-reperfusion injury that occurs during the various stages of organ donation. The pathophysiology of ischemia-reperfusion injury is mainly due to the oxidative stress and cytotoxicity arising from the imbalance between oxidants and antioxidants. NAC is a rich source of sulfhydryl groups, which are important for replenishing glutathione (GSH) stores. GSH acts as a free radical scavenger to decrease damage caused by the toxic free radicals. GSH is the main endogenous antioxidant, and the liver is the main organ producing GSH under normal conditions.2 The present meta-analysis demonstrates a lower incidence of primary nonfunction, a reduction in posttransplant peak aspartate transaminase and alanine transaminase, and reduced postoperative complications in the NAC treatment groups compared with the control groups. As a long-time proponent of the use of NAC in the transplant setting, the overall results of this meta-analysis are encouraging. At Mayo Clinic Florida, we routinely use a NAC infusion for donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplant recipients. Our protocol involves a bolus of 150 mg/kg given over 1 h before reperfusion followed by an infusion of 150 mg/kg given for 72 h. Our current rate of ischemic cholangiopathy is <4%; however, whether NAC provides any direct benefit in the reduction of ischemic cholangiopathy remains unproven.3 More recently, we have also started using NAC in the perfusate when performing abdominal normothermic regional perfusion in DCD donors ([6 g/30 mL] × 3 vials). Negative effects of NAC administration are minimal. Although the meta-analysis demonstrated a slightly increased need for packed red blood cells and cryoprecipitate in NAC treatment groups, the magnitude of difference was <1 unit. This may imply that although a statistically significant difference was seen, such a small difference may not be clinically significant. There are some limitations to the present study that should be mentioned. One of the challenges with combining the data from the different studies in the present analysis is that some of the studies gave NAC to the donors at the time of donor procurement, some gave NAC to the recipients at the time of transplant, and others gave NAC to both the donor and recipient. Dosing and timing of dosing was also very heterogeneous between the different studies. Given this heterogeneity, developing a comprehensive protocol utilizing NAC is problematic. In the subanalysis, the authors did suggest that NAC administration to the recipient appeared to produce better clinical effects than administration to the donor. Another unanswered question based on the present analysis is how the benefits of NAC may vary by donor type? Some of the studies looked at living donors while others looked at donation after brain death donors and others looked at DCD donors. Could there be a more significant effect in marginal liver grafts with a suspected higher degree of ischemia-reperfusion injury or should NAC be utilized in all cases? Finally postoperative complications were treated as a binary variable (yes/no) for the analysis. Given the vastly different implications of complications based on their severity, using a classification system such as Clavien-Dindo would be more meaningful when comparing study groups. Despite the limitations of the present meta-analysis, the results are encouraging and suggest that NAC does have some potentially beneficial effects in reducing ischemia-reperfusion injury when used in the setting of liver transplantation. The adequate safety of NAC, in addition to its low costs, makes it an appealing intervention. Further studies are needed before evidence is strong enough to recommend a specific protocol describing both optimal timing and dosage for administration. Moreover, the donor type that may achieve the greatest benefit remains unknown.