Anti-HBs re-seroconversion after liver transplantation in a patient with past HBV infection receiving a HBsAg positive graft

n/

Interrogating colorectal cancer metastasis to liver: a search for clinically viable compounds and mechanistic insights in colorectal cancer Patient Derived Organoids

Approximately 20-50% of patients presenting with localized colorectal cancer progress to stage IV metastatic disease (mCRC) following initial treatment and this is a major prognostic determinant. Here, we have interrogated a heterogeneous set of primary colorectal cancer (CRC), liver CRC metastases and adjacent liver tissue to identify molecular determinants of the colon to liver spreading. Screening Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drugs for their ability to interfere with an identified colon to liver metastasis signature may help filling an unmet therapeutic need

Comparison of percutaneous radiofrequency thermal ablation and surgical resection for small hepatocellular carcinoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this investigation was to compare the outcome of percutaneous radiofrequency thermal ablation therapy (PRFA) with surgical resection (SR) in the treatment of single and small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a retrospective cohort study on 231 treatment naive patients with a single HCC ≤ 3 cm who had received either curative PRFA (162 patients) or curative SR (69 patients). All patients were regularly followed up after treatment at our department with blood and radiologic tests.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates after PRFA and SR were 95.4%, 79.6% and 63.1%, respectively in the PRFA group and 100%, 81.4% and 74.6%, respectively in the SR group. The corresponding recurrence free survival rates at 1, 3 and 5 years after PRFA and SR were 82.0%, 38.3% and 18.0%, respectively in the PRFA group and 86.0%, 47.2% and 26.0%, respectively in the SR group. In terms of overall survival and recurrence free survival, there were no significant differences between these two groups. In comparison of PRFA group patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) (n = 127) and SR group patients with LC (n = 50) and in comparison of PRFA group patients without LC (n = 35) and SR group patients without LC (n = 19), there were also no significant differences between two groups in terms of overall survival and recurrence free survival. In the multivariate analysis of the risk factors contributing to overall survival, serum albumin level was the sole significant factor. In the multivariate analysis of the risk factors contributing to recurrence free survival, presence of LC was the sole significant factor. The rate of serious adverse events in the SR group was significantly higher than that in the PRFA group (P = 0.023). Hospitalization length in the SR group was significantly longer than in the PRFA group (P = 0.013).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>PRFA is as effective as SR in the treatment of single and small HCC, and is less invasive than SR. Therefore, PRFA could be a first choice for the treatment of single and small HCC.</p

Liver surgery in the presence of cirrhosis or steatosis: Is morbidity increased?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background data</p> <p>The prevalence of steatosis and hepatitis-related liver cirrhosis is dramatically increasing together worldwide. Cirrhosis and, more recently, steatosis are recognized as a clinically important feature that influences patient morbidity and mortality after hepatic resection when compared with patients with healthy liver.</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>To review present knowledge regarding how the presence of cirrhosis or steatosis can influence postoperative outcome after liver resection.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A critical review of the English literature was performed to provide data concerning postoperative outcome of patients presenting injured livers who required hepatectomy.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In clinical studies, the presence of steatosis impaired postoperative outcome regardless the severity and quality of the hepatic fat. A great improvement in postoperative outcome has been achieved using modern and multidisciplinary preoperative workup in cirrhotic patients. Due to the lack of a proper classification for morbidity and a clear definition of hepatic failure in the literature, the comparison between different studies is very limited. Although, many surgical strategies have been developed to protect injured liver surgery, no one have gained worldwide acceptance.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Surgeons should take the presence of underlying injured livers into account when planning the extent and type of hepatic surgery. Preoperative and perioperative interventions should be considered to minimize the additional damage. Further randomized trials should focus on the evaluation of novel preoperative strategies to minimize risk in these patients. Each referral liver center should have the commitment to report all deaths related to postoperative hepatic failure and to use a common classification system for postoperative complications.</p

Right Hepatectomy in Patients over 70 Years of Age: An Analysis of Liver Function and Outcome.

BACKGROUND: As a consequence of the increase in life expectancy, hepatobiliary surgeons have to deal with an emerging aged population. We aimed to analyze the liver function and outcome after right hepatectomy (RH) in patients over 70 years of age. METHODS: From January 2006 to December 2009, we prospectively collected data of 207 consecutive elective hepatectomies. In patients who had RH, cardiac risk was assessed by a dedicated preoperative workup. Liver failure (LF) was defined by the "fifty-fifty" criteria at postoperative day 5 (POD) and morbidity by the Clavien-Dindo classification. Liver function tests (LFTs) and short-term outcome were retrospectively analyzed in patients over (elderly group, EG) and younger (young group, YG) than 70 years of age. RESULTS: Eighty-seven consecutive RH were performed during the study period. Indication for surgery included 90 % malignancy in 47 % of patients requiring preoperative chemotherapy. ASA grade &gt; 2 (44 vs. 16 %, p = 0.027), ischemic heart disease (17 vs. 5 %, p = 0.076), and preoperative cardiac failure (26 vs. 2 %, p &lt; 0.001) were more frequent in the EG (n = 23) than in the YG (n = 64). Both groups were similar regarding rates of normal liver parenchyma, chemotherapy and intraoperative parameters. The overall morbidity rates were comparable, but the serious complication (grades III-V) rate was relatively higher in the EG (39 vs. 25 %, p = 0.199), particularly in patients with diabetes mellitus (100 vs. 29 %, p = 0.04) and those who had additional nonhepatic surgery (67 vs. 35 %, p = 0.110) and transfusions (44 vs. 30 %, p = 0.523). The 90-day mortality rate was similar (9 % in the EG vs. 3 % in the YG, p = 0.28) and was related to heart failure in the EG. LFTs showed a similar trend from POD 1 to 8, and patients ≥70 years of age had no liver failure. CONCLUSIONS: Age ≥70 years alone is not a contraindication to RH. However, major morbidity is particularly higher in the elderly with diabetes. This high-risk group should be closely monitored in the postoperative course. Liver function is not altered in the elderly patient after RH

Intraperitoneal drain placement and outcomes after elective colorectal surgery: international matched, prospective, cohort study

Despite current guidelines, intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery remains widespread. Drains were not associated with earlier detection of intraperitoneal collections, but were associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased risk of surgical-site infections.Background Many surgeons routinely place intraperitoneal drains after elective colorectal surgery. However, enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines recommend against their routine use owing to a lack of clear clinical benefit. This study aimed to describe international variation in intraperitoneal drain placement and the safety of this practice. Methods COMPASS (COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery) was a prospective, international, cohort study which enrolled consecutive adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery (February to March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included: rate and time to diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections; rate of surgical site infections (SSIs); time to discharge; and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade at least III). After propensity score matching, multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to estimate the independent association of the secondary outcomes with drain placement. Results Overall, 1805 patients from 22 countries were included (798 women, 44.2 per cent; median age 67.0 years). The drain insertion rate was 51.9 per cent (937 patients). After matching, drains were not associated with reduced rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 2.23; P = 0.287) or earlier detection (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 0.33 to 2.31; P = 0.780) of collections. Although not associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR 1.09, 0.68 to 1.75; P = 0.709), drains were associated with delayed hospital discharge (HR 0.58, 0.52 to 0.66; P &lt; 0.001) and an increased risk of SSIs (OR 2.47, 1.50 to 4.05; P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion Intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery is not associated with earlier detection of postoperative collections, but prolongs hospital stay and increases SSI risk