11 research outputs found

    Pediatr Nephrol

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Hemolytic uremic syndrome due to Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC-HUS) is the main cause of acute kidney injury in young children. Most fully recover kidney function; however, some develop long-term sequelae. We aimed to determine whether kidney injury 1 year after HUS onset is associated with long-term kidney outcome in pediatric STEC-HUS. METHODS: A retrospective population-based study of children /= 1 signs of kidney injury. Data from 81 patients were collected after median follow-up of 8.7 (IQR 3.5-12.7) years. At last follow-up, 42 (44% of survivors) had >/= 1 signs of kidney injury including decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 90 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (n = 30), proteinuria (n = 17), or hypertension (n = 5). Among 42 patients with kidney injuries at 1-year follow-up, only 22 (52%) still had kidney disease at last follow-up. Conversely, of 33 patients without kidney injury at 1-year and available long-term outcome data, 11 (33%) had proteinuria or decreased GFR at last follow-up. There was no statistically significant association between kidney injury at 1 year and long-term kidney outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Since kidney sequelae may appear at variable time intervals after acute HUS, all patients need lifelong follow-up to detect early signs of chronic kidney disease and propose measures to slow progression

    Nephrol Dial Transplant

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Treatment with eculizumab in Shiga toxin-associated haemolytic and uraemic syndrome (STEC-HUS) remains controversial despite its increasing utilization. The aim of our study was to evaluate the outcomes of children treated with eculizumab for STEC-HUS in a single-centre matched cohort study. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from medical records of children diagnosed with STEC-HUS. The outcomes of patients treated with eculizumab for STEC-HUS were compared with those of a control group of untreated patients matched for age, sex and severity of acute kidney injury with a 1:2 matching scheme. RESULTS: Eighteen children (median age 40.6 months) with STEC-HUS treated with eculizumab were compared with 36 matched control patients (median age 36.4 months) who did not receive eculizumab. All patients survived in the two groups. Within 1 month of HUS onset, the evolution of haematological and renal parameters did not differ between the two groups. At 12 months of follow-up, renal outcome was not significantly different between the two groups. At the last follow-up, the prevalence of decreased glomerular filtration rate in the eculizumab group (27%) was not statistically different from that in controls (38%), as was the prevalence of proteinuria and high blood pressure. Children who received eculizumab more often had extrarenal sequelae during follow-up. Eculizumab treatment appeared to be safe in children with STEC-HUS. CONCLUSION: The benefit of eculizumab on renal and extrarenal outcomes in STEC-HUS could not be established based on our findings. However, efficacy and safety are not best assessed by the observational design and small sample size of our study. Randomized controlled trials are thus required to determine the efficacy of eculizumab in this indication

    Safety of primary anastomosis following emergency left sided colorectal resection: an international, multi-centre prospective audit.

    Get PDF
    This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: group, T. E. S. o. C. c. (2018). "Safety of primary anastomosis following emergency left sided colorectal resection: an international, multi-centre prospective audit." Colorectal Disease 20(S6): 47-57., which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.1437. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived VersionsINTRODUCTION: Some evidence suggests that primary anastomosis following left sided colorectal resection in the emergency setting may be safe in selected patients, and confer favourable outcomes to permanent enterostomy. The aim of this study was to compare the major postoperative complication rate in patients undergoing end stoma vs primary anastomosis following emergency left sided colorectal resection. METHODS: A pre-planned analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology 2017 audit. Adult patients (> 16 years) who underwent emergency (unplanned, within 24 h of hospital admission) left sided colonic or rectal resection were included. The primary endpoint was the 30-day major complication rate (Clavien-Dindo grade 3 to 5). RESULTS: From 591 patients, 455 (77%) received an end stoma, 103 a primary anastomosis (17%) and 33 primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma (6%). In multivariable models, anastomosis was associated with a similar major complication rate to end stoma (adjusted odds ratio for end stoma 1.52, 95%CI 0.83-2.79, P = 0.173). Although a defunctioning stoma was not associated with reduced anastomotic leak (12% defunctioned [4/33] vs 13% not defunctioned [13/97], adjusted odds ratio 2.19, 95%CI 0.43-11.02, P = 0.343), it was associated with less severe complications (75% [3/4] with defunctioning stoma, 86.7% anastomosis only [13/15]), a lower mortality rate (0% [0/4] vs 20% [3/15]), and fewer reoperations (50% [2/4] vs 73% [11/15]) when a leak did occur. CONCLUSIONS: Primary anastomosis in selected patients appears safe after left sided emergency colorectal resection. A defunctioning stoma might mitigate against risk of subsequent complications

    The impact of conversion on the risk of major complication following laparoscopic colonic surgery: an international, multicentre prospective audit.

    Get PDF
    This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: The and E. S. o. C. c. groups (2018). "The impact of conversion on the risk of major complication following laparoscopic colonic surgery: an international, multicentre prospective audit." Colorectal Disease 20(S6): 69-89., which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.14371. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions.BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy has now been implemented as a standard of care for elective colonic resection around the world. During the adoption period, studies showed that conversion may be detrimental to patients, with poorer outcomes than both laparoscopic completed or planned open surgery. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether laparoscopic conversion was associated with a higher major complication rate than planned open surgery in contemporary, international practice. METHODS: Combined analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology 2017 and 2015 audits. Patients were included if they underwent elective resection of a colonic segment from the caecum to the rectosigmoid junction with primary anastomosis. The primary outcome measure was the 30-day major complication rate, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade III-V. RESULTS: Of 3980 patients, 64% (2561/3980) underwent laparoscopic surgery and a laparoscopic conversion rate of 14% (359/2561). The major complication rate was highest after open surgery (laparoscopic 7.4%, converted 9.7%, open 11.6%, P < 0.001). After case mix adjustment in a multilevel model, only planned open (and not laparoscopic converted) surgery was associated with increased major complications in comparison to laparoscopic surgery (OR 1.64, 1.27-2.11, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate laparoscopic conversion should not be considered a treatment failure in modern practice. Conversion does not appear to place patients at increased risk of complications vs planned open surgery, supporting broadening of selection criteria for attempted laparoscopy in elective colonic resection

    An international multicentre prospective audit of elective rectal cancer surgery; operative approach versus outcome, including transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME)

    Get PDF
    IntroductionTransanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has rapidly emerged as a novel approach for rectal cancer surgery. Safety profiles are still emerging and more comparative data is urgently needed. This study aimed to compare indications and short-term outcomes of TaTME, open, laparoscopic, and robotic TME internationally.MethodsA pre-planned analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) 2017 audit was performed. Patients undergoing elective total mesorectal excision (TME) for malignancy between 1 January 2017 and 15 March 2017 by any operative approach were included. The primary outcome measure was anastomotic leak.ResultsOf 2579 included patients, 76.2% (1966/2579) underwent TME with restorative anastomosis of which 19.9% (312/1966) had a minimally invasive approach (laparoscopic or robotic) which included a transanal component (TaTME). Overall, 9.0% (175/1951, 15 missing outcome data) of patients suffered an anastomotic leak. On univariate analysis both laparoscopic TaTME (OR 1.61, 1.02-2.48, P=0.04) and robotic TaTME (OR 3.05, 1.10-7.34, P=0.02) were associated with a higher risk of anastomotic leak than non-transanal laparoscopic TME. However this association was lost in the mixed-effects model controlling for patient and disease factors (OR 1.23, 0.77-1.97, P=0.39 and OR 2.11, 0.79-5.62, P=0.14 respectively), whilst low rectal anastomosis (OR 2.72, 1.55-4.77, P<0.001) and male gender (OR 2.29, 1.52-3.44, P<0.001) remained strongly associated. The overall positive circumferential margin resection rate was 4.0%, which varied between operative approaches: laparoscopic 3.2%, transanal 3.8%, open 4.7%, robotic 1%.ConclusionThis contemporaneous international snapshot shows that uptake of the TaTME approach is widespread and is associated with surgically and pathologically acceptable results

    Evaluating the incidence of pathological complete response in current international rectal cancer practice: the barriers to widespread safe deferral of surgery

    Get PDF
    This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: , which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.14361. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions."Colorectal Disease © 2018 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Introduction: The mainstay of management for locally advanced rectal cancer is chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection. Following chemoradiotherapy, a complete response may be detected clinically and radiologically (cCR) prior to surgery or pathologically after surgery (pCR). We aim to report the overall complete pathological response (pCR) rate and the reliability of detecting a cCR by conventional pre-operative imaging. Methods: A pre-planned analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) 2017 audit was performed. Patients treated by elective rectal resection were included. A pCR was defined as a ypT0 N0 EMVI negative primary tumour; a partial response represented any regression from baseline staging following chemoradiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the pCR rate. The secondary endpoint was agreement between post-treatment MRI restaging (yMRI) and final pathological staging. Results: Of 2572 patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in 277 participating centres across 44 countries, 673 (26.2%) underwent chemoradiotherapy and surgery. The pCR rate was 10.3% (67/649), with a partial response in 35.9% (233/649) patients. Comparison of AJCC stage determined by post-treatment yMRI with final pathology showed understaging in 13% (55/429) and overstaging in 34% (148/429). Agreement between yMRI and final pathology for T-stage, N-stage, or AJCC status were each graded as ‘fair’ only (n = 429, Kappa 0.25, 0.26 and 0.35 respectively). Conclusion: The reported pCR rate of 10% highlights the potential for non-operative management in selected cases. The limited strength of agreement between basic conventional post-chemoradiotherapy imaging assessment techniques and pathology suggest alternative markers of response should be considered, in the context of controlled clinical trials
    corecore