Plasma transfusion in liver transplantation: a randomized, double‐blind, multicenter clinical comparison of three virally secured plasmas

Abstract

The clinical equivalence of plasma treated to reduce pathogen transmission and untreated plasma has not been extensively studied. A clinical trial was conducted in liver transplant recipients to compare the efficacy of three plasmas. A randomized, equivalence, blinded trial was performed in four French liver transplantation centers. The three studied (fresh-frozen) plasmas were quarantine (Q-FFP), methylene blue (MB-FFP), and solvent/detergent (S/D-FFP) plasmas. The primary outcome was the volume of plasma transfused during transplantation. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative blood loss, hemostasis variables corrections, and adverse events. One-hundred patients were randomly assigned in the MB-FFP, 96 in the S/D-FFP, and 97 in the Q-FFP groups, respectively. The median volumes of plasma transfused were 2254, 1905, and 1798 mL with MB-FFP, S/D-FFP, and Q-FFP, respectively. The three plasmas were not equivalent. MB-FFP was not equivalent to the two other plasmas, but S/D-FFP and Q-FFP were equivalent. The median numbers of transfused plasma units were 10, 10, and 8 units with MB-FFP, S/D-FFP, and Q-FFP, respectively. Adjustment on bleeding risk factors diminished the difference between groups: the excess plasma volume transfused with MB-FFP compared to Q-FFP was reduced from 24% to 14%. Blood loss and coagulation factors corrections were not significantly different between the three arms. Compared to both Q-FFP and S/D-FFP, use of MB-FFP was associated with a moderate increase in volume transfused, partly explained by a difference in unit volume and bleeding risk factors. Q-FFP was associated with fewer units transfused than either S/D-FFP or MB-FFP.