Le « patrimoine martyr »

La restauration des monuments historiques après 1945 s’appuie sur l’acceptation ou le refus du drame de la perte. En Europe elle se développe selon trois grandes périodes que j’ai identifiées (1945-1972 ; 1973-1989 ; 1990-2015). En France, contrairement à l’Allemagne ou à l’Italie, l’historiographie en architecture s’est encore peu occupée de l’histoire de la restauration post-bellica : les monuments historiques détruits par la guerre et ensuite progressivement restaurés. Il s’agit d’étudier dans divers contextes (Allemagne, France, Italie, ex-Yougoslavie...) les pratiques de restauration lorsque la paix revient. Si, les ferments de la restauration (œuvres d’art et d’architecture), au sens actuel et « moderne » du terme sont identifiables dès les années 1930, c’est bien l’immense chantier de la restauration post-bellica qui va faire avancer considérablement la discipline. C’est alors que sont élaborées des méthodes, des techniques et des théories toujours valides aujourd’hui. Je soutiens l’idée que ce chantier est un laboratoire européen au sein duquel travaille une forme de « collège invisible », centré autour de quelques grands experts internationaux. Les acteurs de ce chantier confrontent leurs expériences et leurs points de vue (architectes, historiens de l’art, archéologues, scientifiques, laboratoires de recherche, universités, pouvoirs politiques, musées, surintendances, églises, organisations internationales...). L’Italie est alors au centre de ce « collège invisible ».Restoration of historical monuments after 1945 is based on the acceptance or the acceptance or the rejection of the drama of loss. 1 identified three major periods of restoration in Europe after WWII: 1945-1972; 1973-1989; 1990-2015. ln France, as opposed to Germany or ltaly, historiography in architecture still does not deal much with the history of restoration post-bellica, ie with historical monuments destroyed during WWII and progressively restored afterwards. The historiographical task at hand is to study within different contexts (Germany, France, ltaly, ex-Yugoslavia, etc) the practices of restoration once peace is back. Although ferments of restora­tion (for both works of art and architec­ture) can be identified, in the current sense of the term, as early as the 1930’s, the discipline is going to mature under the impetus of the immense workshop of post-bellica restoration. Methods, tech­niques and theories, still valid today, are then produced and applied. My sugges­tion is that such a workshop can be consi­dered as an European lab within which a kind of “invisible college” is at work, centered around a few major international experts. Architects, historians of art, super­intendents, archeologists, natural and social scientists share their experiences and points of view

Ileo-caecal actinomycosis: Report of a case simulating complicated inflammatory bowel disease

peer reviewedAbdominal actinomycosis is a rare infectious disease caused by Actinomyces israelii, a gram-positive anaerobic saprophyte germ that is a normal inhabitant of the upper intestinal tract in humans. Actinomyces israelii rarely cause abdominal infections or actinomycosis. Abdominal actinomysosis is characterised by fistulae and abscesses and may mimic cancer or inflammatory bowel disease. Abdominal actinomycosis is difficult to diagnose preoperatively, and often require surgical removal of the diseased tissue, allowing pathologists for giving the definitive diagnosis, revealed by characteristic "sulfur granules". The authors report herein the case of a 47-year-old man who presented with diarrhoea and abdominal pain. Abdominal computed tomography evoked complicated inflammatory bowel disease and surgical procedure was decided. Laparoscopic exploration did not provide further significant information, and laparotomy with diseased bowel resection was performed. Pathology demonstrated "sulfur granules" and allowed the diagnosis of abdominal actinomycosis. This case demonstrated that abdominal actinomycosis should be included in the differential diagnosis when computed tomography shows an infiltrative and inflammatory mass

Misdiagnosed malignancy in transplanted organs

peer reviewe

Impact of donor age over 70 years in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation: a 15 years of experience

peer reviewedBackground: Advanced donor age has been identified as a risk factor in donation after circulatory death (DCD 3) liver transplantation (LT), associated with poor graft function and development of ischemic cholangiopathy. In this study, we evaluated the results after DCD 3 LT using grafts from donors over 70 years compared to younger grafts (<70 years). Methods: We retrospectively analysed outcome after DCD 3 LT (n=228), comparing donors 70 years (n=53) and <70 years (n=175) from our center between 2003 and 2020. The two age groups were compared in terms of graft and patient survivals at 1, 3 and 5 years, in terms of donor and recipient demographics, transplant conditions and labora- tory values. Results: The overall graft survivals at 1, 3 and 5 years were 88, 75, 70 per cent respectively. Graft survival rates were not significantly diffe- rent at 5 years between the two groups (P = 0,536). No difference was noted in incidence of acute rejection, biliary strictures, hepatic artery thrombosis or retransplantation rates between the two groups. The time of cold ischemia was significatively lower in the older group (mean 235 min; SD 72) than in younger donor (mean 258 min; SD 72) (p=0.012). The posttransplant AST peak was significatively higher in the advanced age donor group than the second group with 2201±2703 U/L vs 1561U/L (SD 2151±2151 U/L), respectively (p= 0.04).Conclusions: Results for DCD LT from 70-yr-old grafts were similar to those from younger donors. Advanced donors should not be discarded for liver donation if other donor risk factors (such as cold ischemia time and graft quality) are limited

Long-term outcome of liver transplantation for unresectable liver metastases from neuroendocrine neoplasms: a Belgian retrospective multi-centre study

peer reviewedBackground: Liver transplantation (LT) is the only curative treatment for unresectable liver metastases from neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN-Liver-Mets). While recurrence is frequent after LT, there is limited data available in the literature on the outcome of recurrent patients. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent LT by NEN-Mets at the six LT centres in Belgium from 1986 to 2020. Patient and tumour characteristics, indication for transplantation, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and tumour recurrence and outcomes were analysed. Results: Forty patients underwent a LT for NEN-Liver-Mets in Belgium. Twenty-nine patients were male (74.2%) with a mean age of 41.9 and 47.1 years at the time of NEN diagnosis and LT, respectively. WHO classification was available for 32 patients and changed over time (see table below). OS post-LT at 1-, 5-, and 10-years are: 84,3%, 65,0% and 54,6% respectively, while the overall DFS are: 76.3%, 44.5% and 38.2% in the same intervals. Patients transplanted after 2010 showed better OS at 5-and 10-years (74.8% and 74.8%) when compared with patients transplanted before (60,0% and 49.5%). Twenty patients (50%) presented a NEN recurrence, of this, 14 (70%) were transplanted before 2010 and only 6 (30%) were transplanted afterwards (p=0.03). The median time for recurrence diagnosis was 12.3 months (range: 5.1 to 69.2). The most frequent recurrence treatments were surgical resection, somatostatin analogs, chemotherapy, and sunitinib therapy (8, 6, 6, and 4 patients, respectively). Survival rates were 89.5% and 56.1% at 1- and 5-years after recurrence diagnosis.Conclusions: Patients transplanted for unresectable NEN-Liver metastases had good long-term survival. Although the total recurrence rate is high, it decreased dramatically after 2010, probably due to better patient selection. Furthermore, recurrence treatment should be recommended as it may prolong patient survival

A multicentre outcome analysis to define global benchmarks for donation after circulatory death liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: To identify the best possible outcomes in liver transplantation from donation after circulatory death donors (DCD) and to propose outcome values, which serve as reference for individual liver recipients or patient groups. METHODS: Based on 2219 controlled DCD liver transplantations, collected from 17 centres in North America and Europe, we identified 1012 low-risk, primary, adult liver transplantations with a laboratory MELD of ≤20points, receiving a DCD liver with a total donor warm ischemia time of ≤30minutes and asystolic donor warm ischemia time of ≤15minutes. Clinically relevant outcomes were selected and complications were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo-Grading and the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). Corresponding benchmark cut-offs were based on median values of each centre, where the 75(th)-percentile was considered. RESULTS: Benchmark cases represented between 19.7% and 75% of DCD transplantations in participating centers. The one-year retransplant and mortality rate was 5.23% and 9.01%, respectively. Within the first year of follow-up, 51.1% of recipients developed at least one major complication (≥Clavien-Dindo-Grade-III). Benchmark cut-offs were ≤3days and ≤16days for ICU and hospital stay, ≤66% for severe recipient complications (≥Grade-III), ≤16.8% for ischemic cholangiopathy, and ≤38.9CCI points at one-year posttransplant. Comparisons with higher risk groups showed more complications and impaired graft survival, outside the benchmark cut-offs. Organ perfusion techniques reduced the complications to values below benchmark cut-offs, despite higher graft risk. CONCLUSIONS: Despite excellent 1-year survival, morbidity in benchmark cases remains high with more than half of recipients developing severe complications during 1-year follow-up. Benchmark cut-offs targeting morbidity parameters offer a valid tool to assess the protective value of new preservation technologies in higher risk groups, and provide a valid comparator cohort for future clinical trials. LAY SUMMARY: The best possible outcomes after liver transplantation of grafts donated after circulatory death (DCD) were defined using the concept of benchmarking. These were based on 2219 liver transplantations following controlled DCD donation in 17 centres worldwide. The following benchmark cut-offs for the most relevant outcome parameters were developed: ICU and hospital stay: ≤3 and ≤16 days; primary non function: ≤2.5%; renal replacement therapy: ≤9.6%; ischemic cholangiopathy: ≤16.8% and anastomotic strictures ≤28.4%. One-year graft loss and mortality were defined as ≤14.4% and 9.6%, respectively. Donor and recipient combinations with higher risk had significantly worse outcomes. The use of novel organ perfusion technology achieved similar, good results in this high-risk group with prolonged donor warm ischemia time, when compared to the benchmark cohort

Expert consensus document: A 'diamond' approach to personalized treatment of angina.

In clinical guidelines, drugs for symptomatic angina are classified as being first choice (β-blockers, calcium-channel blockers, short-acting nitrates) or second choice (ivabradine, nicorandil, ranolazine, trimetazidine), with the recommendation to reserve second-choice medications for patients who have contraindications to first-choice agents, do not tolerate them, or remain symptomatic. No direct comparisons between first-choice and second-choice treatments have demonstrated the superiority of one group of drugs over the other. Meta-analyses show that all antianginal drugs have similar efficacy in reducing symptoms, but provide no evidence for improvement in survival. The newer, second-choice drugs have more evidence-based clinical data that are more contemporary than is available for traditional first-choice drugs. Considering some drugs, but not others, to be first choice is, therefore, difficult. Moreover, double or triple therapy is often needed to control angina. Patients with angina can have several comorbidities, and symptoms can result from various underlying pathophysiologies. Some agents, in addition to having antianginal effects, have properties that could be useful depending on the comorbidities present and the mechanisms of angina, but the guidelines do not provide recommendations on the optimal combinations of drugs. In this Consensus Statement, we propose an individualized approach to angina treatment, which takes into consideration the patient, their comorbidities, and the underlying mechanism of disease

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Early liver transplantation for severe alcohol-related hepatitis not responding to medical treatment: a prospective controlled study

peer reviewedBackground: Early liver transplantation for severe alcohol-related hepatitis is an emerging treatment option. We aimed to assess the risk of alcohol relapse 2 years after early liver transplantation for alcohol-related hepatitis compared with liver transplantation for alcohol-related cirrhosis after at least 6 months of abstinence. Methods: We conducted a multicentre, non-randomised, non-inferiority, controlled study in 19 French and Belgian hospitals. All participants were aged 18 years or older. There were three groups of patients recruited prospectively: patients with severe alcohol-related hepatitis who did not respond to medical treatment and were eligible for early liver transplantation according to a new selection scoring system based on social and addiction items that can be quantified in points (early transplantation group); patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis listed for liver transplantation after at least 6 months of abstinence (standard transplantation group); patients with severe alcohol-related hepatitis not responding to medical treatment not eligible for early liver transplantation according to the selection score (not eligible for early transplantation group), this group did not enter any further liver transplantation processes. We also defined a historical control group of patients with severe alcohol-related hepatitis unresponsive to medical therapy and non-transplanted. The primary outcome was the non-inferiority of 2-year rate of alcohol relapse after transplantation in the early transplantation group compared with the standard transplantation group using the alcohol timeline follow back (TLFB) method and a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10%. Secondary outcomes were the pattern of alcohol relapse, 2-year survival rate post-transplant in the early transplantation group compared with the standard transplantation group, and 2-year overall survival in the early transplantation group compared with patients in the not eligible for early transplantation group and historical controls. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01756794. Findings: Between Dec 5, 2012, and June 30, 2016, we included 149 patients with severe alcohol-related hepatitis: 102 in the early transplantation group and 47 in the not eligible for early transplantation group. 129 patients were included in the standard transplantation group. 68 patients in the early transplantation group and 93 patients in the standard transplantation group received a liver transplant. 23 (34%) patients relapsed in the early transplantation group, and 23 (25%) patients relapsed in the standard transplantation group; therefore, the non-inferiority of early transplantation versus standard transplantation was not demonstrated (absolute difference 9·1% [95% CI –∞ to 21·1]; p=0·45). The 2-year rate of high alcohol intake was greater in the early transplantation group than the standard transplantation group (absolute difference 16·7% [95% CI 5·8–27·6]) The time spent drinking alcohol was not different between the two groups (standardised difference 0·24 [95% CI −0·07 to 0·55]), but the time spent drinking a large quantity of alcohol was higher in the early transplantation group than the standard transplantation group (standardised difference 0·50 [95% CI 0·17–0·82]). 2-year post-transplant survival was similar between the early transplantation group and the standard transplantation group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·87 [95% CI 0·33–2·26]); 2-year overall survival was higher in the early transplantation group than the not eligible for early transplantation group and historical controls (HR 0·27 [95% CI 0·16–0·47] and 0·21 [0·13–0·32]). Interpretation: We cannot conclude non-inferiority in terms of rate of alcohol relapse post-transplant between early liver transplantation and standard transplantation. High alcohol intake is more frequent after early liver transplantation. This prospective controlled study confirms the important survival benefit related to early liver transplantation for severe alcohol-related hepatitis; and this study provides objective data on survival and alcohol relapse to tailor the management of patients with severe alcohol-related hepatitis. Funding: The present study has been granted by the French Ministry of Health—Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique 2010