Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42166494›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Effects of massive transfusion (10-20 litres) versus ultramassive transfusion (≥20 litres) on mortality in adult liver transplant recipients: A propensity-score matched study.

Zac Tran, Nattaya Raykateeraroj, Jemin Suh, Jordan Ismail, Michael Fink, Rebecca Caragata, Marcos V Perini, Anoop N Koshy, Dong-Kyu Lee, Laurence Weinberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Zac TranDepartment of Anaesthesia, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
Nattaya RaykateerarojDepartment of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok Noi, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1212-2115
Jemin SuhDepartment of Anaesthesia, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
Jordan IsmailDepartment of Anaesthesia, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
Michael FinkDepartment of Surgery (Austin Precinct), The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Rebecca CaragataDepartment of Anaesthesia, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
Marcos V PeriniDepartment of Surgery (Austin Precinct), The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0165-1564
Anoop N KoshyDepartment of Cardiology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
Dong-Kyu LeeDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, the Republic of Korea.
Laurence WeinbergDepartment of Anaesthesia, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7403-7680

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUltramassive perioperative fluid transfusion during orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) identifies a high-risk recipient phenotype and is associated with substantially increased mortality compared with conventional massive transfusion. OLT frequently necessitates high-volume fluid resuscitation, yet the prognostic implications of ultramassive perioperative transfusion in this setting remain uncertain. We evaluated whether ultramassive transfusion (≥20 L total perioperative fluid) is independently associated with worse survival than massive transfusion (10- < 20 L) in adult OLT recipients.

methodsIn this single-centre retrospective cohort (2009-2023), we included adults undergoing primary OLT who received ≥10 L of total perioperative fluid (crystalloids, colloids, blood, and blood products administered intraoperatively and within 24 hours postoperatively). Propensity score matching was used to compare recipients receiving ultramassive (≥20 L) versus massive (10- < 20 L) transfusion, balancing recipient, donor, and intraoperative characteristics. Primary outcomes were 90-day, 3-year, and overall all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes included graft failure, graft and patient survival time, primary non-function, early allograft dysfunction, thrombotic complications, acute kidney injury, and hospital length of stay.

resultsOf 993 OLT recipients, 306 (30.8%) received ≥10 L perioperative fluid and comprised the unmatched cohort. In the propensity-matched cohort (n = 188), ultramassive transfusion was associated with significantly higher 90-day, 3-year and overall mortality compared with massive transfusion, with consistent effect estimates across multiple matching strategies and sensitivity analyses. In contrast, ultramassive transfusion showed no robust or consistent association with early allograft dysfunction, thrombotic complications, graft loss, or other secondary endpoints, likely reflecting low event rates and limited power.

conclusionsAmong adult OLT recipients exposed to high-volume perioperative resuscitation, ultramassive transfusion delineates a distinct high-risk phenotype characterised by substantially increased short- and long-term mortality. Although causal inference is precluded by the observational design, these findings suggest that reaching an ultramassive transfusion threshold may mark a particularly vulnerable subgroup that warrants intensified intraoperative optimisation strategies and tailored long-term surveillance.

Indexed as

Blood TransfusionLiver TransplantationAdultFemaleFluid TherapyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID42166494
PMCPMC13193539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.