Evidence-Based Medicine in Daily Surgical Decision Making: A Survey-Based Comparison between the UK and Germany

Background: Evidence-based medicine (EbM) is a vital part of reasonable and conclusive decision making for clinicians in daily clinical work. To analyze the knowledge and the attitude of surgeons towards EbM, a survey was performed in the UK and Germany. Methods: A web-based questionnaire was distributed via mailing lists from the Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSE) and the Berufsverband Deutscher Chirurgen (BDC). Our primary aim was to get information about knowledge of EbM amongst German and British surgeons. Results: A total of 549 individuals opened the questionnaire, but only 198 questionnaires were complete and valid for analysis. In total, 40,000 recipients were approached via the mailing lists of the BDC and RCSE. The response rate was equally low in both countries. On a scale from 1 (unimportant) to 10 (very important), all participants rated EbM as very important for daily clinical decision making (7.3 ± 1.9) as well as for patients (7.8 ± 1.9) and the national health system (7.8 ± 1.9). On a scale from 1 (unimportant) to 5 (very important), systematic reviews (4.6 ± 0.6) and randomized controlled trials (4.6 ± 0.6) were identified as the highest levels of study designs to enhance evidence in medicine. British surgeons considered EbM to be more important in daily clinical work when compared to data from German surgeons (7.9 ± 1.6 vs. 6.7 ± 2.1, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed different results in some categories; however, a pattern to explain the differences was not evident. Personal requirements expressed in a free text field emphasized the results and reflected concerns such as broad unwillingness and lack of interdisciplinary approaches for patients (n = 59: 25 in the UK and 34 in Germany). Conclusion: The overall results show that EbM is believed to be important by surgeons in the UK and Germany. However, perception of EbM in the respective health system (UK vs. Germany) may be different. Nonetheless, EbM is an important tool to navigate through daily clinical problems although a discrepancy between the knowledge of theoretical abstract terms and difficulties in implementing EbM in daily clinical work has been detected. The provision of infrastructure, courses and structured education as a permanent instrument will advance the knowledge, application and improvement of EbM in the future

Safety and feasibility of third-party multipotent adult progenitor cells for immunomodulation therapy after liver transplantation--a phase I study (MISOT-I)

BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation is the definitive treatment for many end-stage liver diseases. However, the life-long immunosuppression needed to prevent graft rejection causes clinically significant side effects. Cellular immunomodulatory therapies may allow the dose of immunosuppressive drugs to be reduced. In the current protocol, we propose to complement immunosuppressive pharmacotherapy with third-party multipotent adult progenitor cells (MAPCs), a culture-selected population of adult adherent stem cells derived from bone marrow that has been shown to display potent immunomodulatory and regenerative properties. In animal models, MAPCs reduce the need for pharmacological immunosuppression after experimental solid organ transplantation and regenerate damaged organs. METHODS: Patients enrolled in this phase I, single-arm, single-center safety and feasibility study (n=3-24) will receive 2 doses of third-party MAPCs after liver transplantation, on days 1 and 3, in addition to a calcineurin-inhibitor-free "bottom-up" immunosuppressive regimen with Basiliximab, mycophenolic acid, and steroids. The study objective is to evaluate the safety and clinical feasibility of MAPC administration in this patient cohort. The primary endpoint of the study is safety, assessed by standardized dose-limiting toxicity events. One secondary endpoint is the time until first biopsy-proven acute rejection, in order to collect first evidence of efficacy. Dose escalation (150, 300, 450, and 600 million MAPCs) will be done according to a 3 + 3 classical escalation design (4 groups of 3-6 patients each). DISCUSSION: If MAPCs are safe for patients undergoing liver transplantation in this study, a phase II/III trial will be conducted to assess their clinical efficacy

Sarcopenia predicts reduced liver growth and reduced resectability in patients undergoing portal vein embolization before liver resection - A DRAGON collaborative analysis of 306 patients

Background: After portal vein embolization (PVE) 30% fail to achieve liver resection. Malnutrition is a modifiable risk factor and can be assessed by radiological indices. This study investigates, if sarcopenia affects resectability and kinetic growth rate (KGR) after PVE. Methods: A retrospective study was performed of the outcome of PVE at 8 centres of the DRAGON collaborative from 2010 to 2019. All malignant tumour types were included. Sarcopenia was defined using gender, body mass and skeletal muscle index. First imaging after PVE was used for liver volumetry. Primary and secondary endpoints were resectability and KGR. Risk factors impacting liver growth were assessed in a multivariable analysis. Results: Eight centres identified 368 patients undergoing PVE. 62 patients (17%) had to be excluded due to unavailability of data. Among the 306 included patients, 112 (37%) were non-sarcopenic and 194 (63%) were sarcopenic. Sarcopenic patients had a 21% lower resectability rate (87% vs. 66%, p &lt; 0.001) and a 23% reduced KGR (p = 0.02) after PVE. In a multivariable model dichotomized for KGR ≥2.3% standardized FLR (sFLR)/week, only sarcopenia and sFLR before embolization correlated with KGR. Conclusion: In this largest study of risk factors, sarcopenia was associated with reduced resectability and KGR in patients undergoing PVE.</p

HCC recurrence in HCV‐infected patients after liver transplantation: SiLVER Study reveals benefits of sirolimus in combination with CNIs – a post‐hoc analysis

Factors affecting outcomes in liver transplant (LTx) recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection include the choice of immunosuppression. Here, we analyzed the HCV+ subgroup of patients from the randomized controlled, international SiLVER Study. We performed a post hoc analysis of 166 HCV+ SiLVER Study patients regarding HCC outcome after LTx. Control patients (group A: n = 88) received mTOR inhibitor (mTORi)-free, calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-based versus sirolimus-based immunosuppression (group B: n = 78). We found no significant difference regarding HCV-RNA titers between group A and B. Since no effect in group B could be due to variable sirolimus dosing, we split group B into patients receiving sirolimus-based immunosuppression + CNIs for >50% (B1; n = 44) or <50% (B2; n = 34) of the time. While there remained no difference in HCV-RNA titer between groups, HCC recurrence-free survival in group B1 (81.8%) was markedly better versus both group A (62.7%; P = 0.0136) and group B2 (64.7%; P = 0.0326); Interestingly, further subgroup analysis revealed an increase (P = 0.0012) in liver enzyme values in group B2. Taken together, in HCV-infected patients with HCC and LTx, mTORi immunosuppression + CNIs yields excellent outcomes. Unexpectedly, higher levels of liver inflammation and poorer outcomes occur with mTORi monotherapy in the HCV+ subgroup

A toolbox for a structured risk-based prehabilitation program in major surgical oncology

Prehabilitation is a multimodal concept to improve functional capability prior to surgery, so that the patients’ resilience is strengthened to withstand any peri- and postoperative comorbidity. It covers physical activities, nutrition, and psychosocial wellbeing. The literature is heterogeneous in outcomes and definitions. In this scoping review, class 1 and 2 evidence was included to identify seven main aspects of prehabilitation for the treatment pathway: (i) risk assessment, (ii) FITT (frequency, interventions, time, type of exercise) principles of prehabilitation exercise, (iii) outcome measures, (iv) nutrition, (v) patient blood management, (vi) mental wellbeing, and (vii) economic potential. Recommendations include the risk of tumor progression due to delay of surgery. Patients undergoing prehabilitation should perceive risk assessment by structured, quantifiable, and validated tools like Risk Analysis Index, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), American Society of Anesthesiology Score, or Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group scoring. Assessments should be repeated to quantify its effects. The most common types of exercise include breathing exercises and moderate- to high-intensity interval protocols. The program should have a duration of 3–6 weeks with 3–4 exercises per week that take 30–60 min. The 6-Minute Walking Testing is a valid and resource-saving tool to assess changes in aerobic capacity. Long-term assessment should include standardized outcome measurements (overall survival, 90-day survival, Dindo–Clavien/CCI®) to monitor the potential of up to 50% less morbidity. Finally, individual cost-revenue assessment can help assess health economics, confirming the hypothetic saving of $8 for treatment for$1 spent for prehabilitation. These recommendations should serve as a toolbox to generate hypotheses, discussion, and systematic approaches to develop clinical prehabilitation standards

Study Protocol: A Pilot Study to Determine the Safety and Efficacy of Induction-Therapy, De Novo MPA and Delayed mTOR-Inhibition in Liver Transplant Recipients with Impaired Renal Function. PATRON-Study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patients undergoing liver transplantation with preexisting renal dysfunction are prone to further renal impairment with the early postoperative use of Calcineurin-inhibitors. However, there is only little scientific evidence for the safety and efficacy of de novo CNI free "bottom-up" regimens in patients with impaired renal function undergoing liver transplantation. This is a single-center study pilot-study (<b>PATRON07</b>) investigating safety and efficacy of CNI-free, "bottom-up" immunosuppressive (IS) strategy in patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) with renal impairment prior to LT.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Patients older than 18 years with renal impairment at the time of liver transplantation eGFR < 50 ml/min and/or serum creatinine levels > 1.5 mg/dL will be included. Patients in will receive a CNI-free combination therapy (basiliximab, MMF, steroids and delayed Sirolimus). Primary endpoint is the incidence of steroid resistant acute rejection within the first 30 days after LT. The study is designed as prospective two-step trial requiring a maximum of 29 patients. In the first step, 9 patients will be included. If 8 or more patients show no signs of biopsy proven steroid resistant rejection, additional 20 patients will be included. If in the second step a total of 27 or more patients reach the primary endpoint the regimen is regarded to be safe and efficient.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>If a CNI-free-"bottom-up" IS strategy is safe and effective, this may be an innovative concept in contrast to classic top-down strategies that could improve the patient short and long-time renal function as well as overall complications and survival after LT. The results of <b>PATRON07 </b>may be the basis for a large multicenter RCT investigating the new "bottom-up" immunosuppressive strategy in patients with poor renal function prior to LT.</p> <p><url>http://www.clinicaltrials.gov</url>-identifier: NCT00604357</p

Higher Postoperative Mortality and Inferior Survival After Right-Sided Liver Resection for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma:Left-Sided Resection is Preferred When Possible

BACKGROUND: A right- or left-sided liver resection can be considered in about half of patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA), depending on tumor location and vascular involvement. This study compared postoperative mortality and long-term survival of right- versus left-sided liver resections for pCCA.METHODS: Patients who underwent major liver resection for pCCA at 25 Western centers were stratified according to the type of hepatectomy-left, extended left, right, and extended right. The primary outcomes were 90-day mortality and overall survival (OS).RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2022, 1701 patients underwent major liver resection for pCCA. The 90-day mortality was 9% after left-sided and 18% after right-sided liver resection (p &lt; 0.001). The 90-day mortality rates were 8% (44/540) after left, 11% (29/276) after extended left, 17% (51/309) after right, and 19% (108/576) after extended right hepatectomy (p &lt; 0.001). Median OS was 30 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 27-34) after left and 23 months (95% CI 20-25) after right liver resection (p &lt; 0.001), and 33 months (95% CI 28-38), 27 months (95% CI 23-32), 25 months (95% CI 21-30), and 21 months (95% CI 18-24) after left, extended left, right, and extended right hepatectomy, respectively (p &lt; 0.001). A left-sided resection was an independent favorable prognostic factor for both 90-day mortality and OS compared with right-sided resection, with similar results after excluding 90-day fatalities.CONCLUSIONS: A left or extended left hepatectomy is associated with a lower 90-day mortality and superior OS compared with an (extended) right hepatectomy for pCCA. When both a left and right liver resection are feasible, a left-sided liver resection is preferred.</p

E-AHPBA-ESSO-ESSR Innsbruck consensus guidelines for preoperative liver function assessment before hepatectomy

Background Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality after liver surgery. Standardized assessment of preoperative liver function is crucial to identify patients at risk. These European consensus guidelines provide guidance for preoperative patient assessment. Methods A modified Delphi approach was used to achieve consensus. The expert panel consisted of hepatobiliary surgeons, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and hepatologists. The guideline process was supervised by a methodologist and reviewed by a patient representative. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. Evidence assessment and statement development followed Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. Results Based on 271 publications covering 4 key areas, 21 statements (at least 85 per cent agreement) were produced (median level of evidence 2− to 2+). Only a few systematic reviews (2++) and one RCT (1+) were identified. Preoperative liver function assessment should be considered before complex resections, and in patients with suspected or known underlying liver disease, or chemotherapy-associated or drug-induced liver injury. Clinical assessment and blood-based scores reflecting liver function or portal hypertension (for example albumin/bilirubin, platelet count) aid in identifying risk of PHLF. Volumetry of the future liver remnant represents the foundation for assessment, and can be combined with indocyanine green clearance or LiMAx® according to local expertise and availability. Functional MRI and liver scintigraphy are alternatives, combining FLR volume and function in one examination. Conclusion These guidelines reflect established methods to assess preoperative liver function and PHLF risk, and have uncovered evidence gaps of interest for future research.publishedVersio

EnGraft: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, two-arm, superiority study protocol to assess bioavailability and practicability of Envarsus® versus Advagraf™ in liver transplant recipients

Background Graft rejection and chronic CNI toxicity remain obstacles to organ transplant success. Current formulations of tacrolimus, such as Prograf® and Advagraf™, exhibit limitations in terms of pharmacokinetics and tolerability, related in part to suboptimal bioavailability. As dosing non-compliance can result in graft rejection, the once daily formulation of tacrolimus, Advagraf™, was developed (vs 2x/day Prograf®). Benefits of Advagraf™ are counterbalanced by delayed achievement of therapeutic trough levels and need for up to 50% higher doses to maintain Prograf®-equivalent troughs. Envarsus® is also a prolonged-release once-daily tacrolimus formulation, developed using MeltDose™ drug-delivery technology to increase drug bioavailability; improved bioavailability results in low patient drug absorption variability and less pronounced peak-to-trough fluctuations. In phase III de novo kidney transplant studies, Envarsus® proved non-inferior to twice-daily tacrolimus; however, no phase IV studies show superiority of Envarsus® vs Advagraf™ in de novo liver transplant (LTx) recipients. Methods The EnGraft compares bioavailability and tests superiority of Envarsus® (test arm) versus Advagraf™ (comparator arm) in de novo LTx recipients. A total of 268 patients from 15 German transplant centres will be randomised 1:1 within 14 days post-LTx. The primary endpoint is dose-normalised trough level (C/D ratio) measured 12 weeks after randomisation. Secondary endpoints include the number of dose adjustments, time to reach first defined trough level and incidence of graft rejections. Additionally, clinical and laboratory parameters will be assessed over a 3-year period. Discussion C/D ratio is an estimate for tacrolimus bioavailability. Improving bioavailability and increasing C/D ratio using Envarsus could reduce renal dysfunction and other tacrolimus-related toxicities; previous trials have shown that a higher C/D ratio (i.e. slower tacrolimus metabolism) is not only associated with improved renal function but also linked to reduced neurotoxic side effects. A higher C/D ratio could improve clinical outcomes for LTx recipients; EnGraft has begun, with one third of patients recruited by January 2022

A prospective randomised, open-labeled, trial comparing sirolimus-containing versus mTOR-inhibitor-free immunosuppression in patients undergoing liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The potential anti-cancer effects of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are being intensively studied. To date, however, few randomised clinical trials (RCT) have been performed to demonstrate anti-neoplastic effects in the pure oncology setting, and at present, no oncology endpoint-directed RCT has been reported in the high-malignancy risk population of immunosuppressed transplant recipients. Interestingly, since mTOR inhibitors have both immunosuppressive and anti-cancer effects, they have the potential to simultaneously protect against immunologic graft loss and tumour development. Therefore, we designed a prospective RCT to determine if the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus can improve hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)-free patient survival in liver transplant (LT) recipients with a pre-transplant diagnosis of HCC.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The study is an open-labelled, randomised, RCT comparing sirolimus-containing versus mTOR-inhibitor-free immunosuppression in patients undergoing LT for HCC. Patients with a histologically confirmed HCC diagnosis are randomised into 2 groups within 4-6 weeks after LT; one arm is maintained on a centre-specific mTOR-inhibitor-free immunosuppressive protocol and the second arm is maintained on a centre-specific mTOR-inhibitor-free immunosuppressive protocol for the first 4-6 weeks, at which time sirolimus is initiated. A 2^1/2 -year recruitment phase is planned with a 5-year follow-up, testing HCC-free survival as the primary endpoint. Our hypothesis is that sirolimus use in the second arm of the study will improve HCC-free survival. The study is a non-commercial investigator-initiated trial (IIT) sponsored by the University Hospital Regensburg and is endorsed by the European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association; 13 countries within Europe, Canada and Australia are participating.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>If our hypothesis is correct that mTOR inhibition can reduce HCC tumour growth while simultaneously providing immunosuppression to protect the liver allograft from rejection, patients should experience less post-transplant problems with HCC recurrence, and therefore could expect a longer and better quality of life. A positive outcome will likely change the standard of posttransplant immunosuppressive care for LT patients with HCC.</p> <p>Trial Register</p> <p>Trial registered at <url>http://www.clinicaltrials.gov</url>: NCT00355862</p> <p>(EudraCT Number: 2005-005362-36)</p