Percutaneous Preoperative Biliary Drainage for Resectable Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: No Association with Survival and No Increase in Seeding Metastases

Background: Endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) are both used to resolve jaundice before surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC). PTBD has been associated with seeding metastases. The aim of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) and the incidence of initial seeding metastases that potentially influence survival in patients with preoperative PTBD versus EBD. Methods: Between 1991 and 2012, a total of 278 patients underwent preoperative biliary drainage and resection of PHC at 2 institutions in the Netherlands and the United States. Of these, 33 patients were excluded for postoperative mortality. Among the 245 included patients, 88 patients who underwent preoperative PTBD (with or without previous EBD) were compared to 157 patients who underwent EBD only. Survival analysis was done with Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression with propensity score adjustment. Results: Unadjusted median OS was comparable between the PTBD group (35 months) and EBD-only group (41 months; P = 0.26). After adjustment for propensity score, OS between the PTBD group and EBD-only group was similar (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95 % confidence interval, 0.74–1.49; P = 0.80). Seeding metastases in the laparotomy scar occurred as initial recurrence in 7 patients, including 3 patients (3.4 %) in the PTBD group and 4 patients (2.7 %) in the EBD-only group (P = 0.71). No patient had an initial recurrence in percutaneous catheter tracts. Conclusions: The present study found no effect of PTBD on survival compared to patients with EBD and no increase in seeding metastases that developed as initial recurrence. These data suggest that PTBD can safely be used in preoperative management of PHC

Recurrence After Liver Resection of Colorectal Liver Metastases: Repeat Resection or Ablation Followed by Hepatic Arterial Infusion Pump Chemotherapy

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of adjuvant hepatic arterial infusion pump (HAIP) chemotherapy after complete resection or ablation of recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients from two centers who were treated with resection and/or ablation of recurrent CRLM only between 1992 and 2018. Overall survival (OS) and hepatic disease-free survival (hDFS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. The Cox regression method was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Of 374 eligible patients, 81 (22%) were treated with adjuvant HAIP chemotherapy. The median follow-up for survivors was 65 months (IQR 32–118 months). Patients receiving adjuvant HAIP were more likely to have multifocal disease and receive perioperative systemic chemotherapy at time of resection for recurrence. A median hDFS of 46 months (95% CI 29–81 months) was found in patients treated with adjuvant HAIP compared with 18 months (95% CI 15–26 months) in patients treated with resection and/or ablation alone (p = 0.001). The median OS and 5-year OS were 89 months (95% CI 52–126 months) and 66%, respectively, in patients treated with adjuvant HAIP compared with 57 months (95% CI 47–67 months) and 47%, respectively, in patients treated with resection and/or ablation only (p = 0.002). Adjuvant HAIP was associated with superior hDFS (adjusted HR 0.599, 95% CI 0.38–0.93, p = 0.02) and OS (adjusted HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38–0.92, p = 0.02) in multivariable analysis. Conclusion: Adjuvant HAIP chemotherapy after resection and/or ablation of recurrent CRLM is associated with superior hDFS and OS

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study

Introduction: The multiorgan impact of moderate to severe coronavirus infections in the post-acute phase is still poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities after hospitalisation with COVID-19, evaluate their determinants, and explore associations with patient-related outcome measures. Methods: In a prospective, UK-wide, multicentre MRI follow-up study (C-MORE), adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital following COVID-19 who were included in Tier 2 of the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) and contemporary controls with no evidence of previous COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody negative) underwent multiorgan MRI (lungs, heart, brain, liver, and kidneys) with quantitative and qualitative assessment of images and clinical adjudication when relevant. Individuals with end-stage renal failure or contraindications to MRI were excluded. Participants also underwent detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical tests. The primary outcome was the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities (two or more organs) relative to controls, with further adjustments for potential confounders. The C-MORE study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510025. Findings: Of 2710 participants in Tier 2 of PHOSP-COVID, 531 were recruited across 13 UK-wide C-MORE sites. After exclusions, 259 C-MORE patients (mean age 57 years [SD 12]; 158 [61%] male and 101 [39%] female) who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and Nov 1, 2021, and 52 non-COVID-19 controls from the community (mean age 49 years [SD 14]; 30 [58%] male and 22 [42%] female) were included in the analysis. Patients were assessed at a median of 5·0 months (IQR 4·2–6·3) after hospital discharge. Compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity, and had more comorbidities. Multiorgan abnormalities on MRI were more frequent in patients than in controls (157 [61%] of 259 vs 14 [27%] of 52; p<0·0001) and independently associated with COVID-19 status (odds ratio [OR] 2·9 [95% CI 1·5–5·8]; padjusted=0·0023) after adjusting for relevant confounders. Compared with controls, patients were more likely to have MRI evidence of lung abnormalities (p=0·0001; parenchymal abnormalities), brain abnormalities (p<0·0001; more white matter hyperintensities and regional brain volume reduction), and kidney abnormalities (p=0·014; lower medullary T1 and loss of corticomedullary differentiation), whereas cardiac and liver MRI abnormalities were similar between patients and controls. Patients with multiorgan abnormalities were older (difference in mean age 7 years [95% CI 4–10]; mean age of 59·8 years [SD 11·7] with multiorgan abnormalities vs mean age of 52·8 years [11·9] without multiorgan abnormalities; p<0·0001), more likely to have three or more comorbidities (OR 2·47 [1·32–4·82]; padjusted=0·0059), and more likely to have a more severe acute infection (acute CRP >5mg/L, OR 3·55 [1·23–11·88]; padjusted=0·025) than those without multiorgan abnormalities. Presence of lung MRI abnormalities was associated with a two-fold higher risk of chest tightness, and multiorgan MRI abnormalities were associated with severe and very severe persistent physical and mental health impairment (PHOSP-COVID symptom clusters) after hospitalisation. Interpretation: After hospitalisation for COVID-19, people are at risk of multiorgan abnormalities in the medium term. Our findings emphasise the need for proactive multidisciplinary care pathways, with the potential for imaging to guide surveillance frequency and therapeutic stratification

Incidence and risk factors for Chyle leak after pancreatic surgery for cancer: A comprehensive systematic review

International audienceBackground: Chyle leak (CL) is a clinically relevant complication after pancreatectomy. Its incidence and the associated risk factors are ill defined, and various treatments options have been described. There is no consensus, however, regarding optimal management. The present study aims to systematically review the literature on CL after pancreatectomy. Methods: A systematic review from PubMed, Scopus and Embase database was performed. Studies using a clear definition for CL and published from January 2000 to January 2021 were included. The PRISMA guidelines were followed during all stages of this systematic review. The MINORS score was used to assess methodological quality. Results: Literature search found 361 reports, 99 of which were duplicates. The titles and abstracts of 262 articles were finally screened. The references from the remaining 181 articles were manually assessed. After the exclusions, 43 articles were thoroughly assessed. A total of 23 articles were ultimately included for this review. The number of patients varied from 54 to 3532. Incidence of post pancreatectomy CL varied from 1.3% to 22.1%. Main risk factors were the extent of the surgery and early oral or enteral feeding. CL dried up spontaneously or after conservative management within 14 days in 53% to 100% of the cases. Conclusions: The extent of surgery is the most common predictor of risk of CL. Conservative treatment has been shown to be effective in most cases and can be considered the treatment of choice. We propose a management algorithm based on the current available evidence

Developing a Technology Acceptability and Usage Survey (TAUS) for mHealth Intervention Planning and Evaluation in Nigeria: Pilot Study

BackgroundTechnology acceptability and usage surveys (TAUS) are brief questionnaires that measure technology comfort, typical daily use, and access in a population. However, current measures are not adapted to low- and middle-income country (LMIC) contexts. ObjectiveThe objective of this pilot study was to develop a TAUS that could be used to inform the implementation of a mobile health (mHealth) intervention in Nigeria. MethodsA literature review of validated technology comfort and usage scales was conducted to identify candidate items. The draft measure was reviewed for face validity by an expert panel comprised of clinicians and researchers with cultural, methodological, and clinical expertise. The measure was piloted by radiologists at an oncology symposium in Nigeria. ResultsAfter expert review, the final measure included 18 items organized into 3 domains: (1) comfort with using mobile applications, (2) reliability of internet or electricity, and (3) attitudes toward using computers or mobile applications in clinical practice. The pilot sample (n=16) reported high levels of comfort and acceptability toward using mHealth applications in the clinical setting but faced numerous infrastructure challenges. ConclusionsPilot results indicate that the TAUS may be a feasible and appropriate measure for assessing technology usage and acceptability in LMIC clinical contexts. Dedicating a domain to technology infrastructure and access yielded valuable insights for program implementation

Robotic Versus Open Minor Liver Resections of the Posterosuperior Segments : A Multinational, Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND: Minor liver resections of posterosuperior segments (1, 4A, 7, 8) are challenging to perform laparoscopically and are mainly performed using an open approach. We determined the feasibility of robotic resections of posterosuperior segments and compared short-term outcomes with the open approach. METHODS: Data on open and robotic minor (≤ 3 segments) liver resections including the posterosuperior segments, performed between 2009 and 2016, were collected retrospectively from four hospitals. Robotic and open liver resections were compared, before and after propensity score matching. RESULTS: In total, 51 robotic and 145 open resections were included. After matching, 31 robotic resections were compared with 31 open resections. Median hospital stay was 4 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3-7) for the robotic group, versus 8 days (IQR 6-10) for the open group (p  0.99). There was no mortality in either group. CONCLUSION: Minor robotic liver resections of the posterosuperior segments are safe and feasible and display a shorter length of stay than open resections in selected patients at expert centers

American Joint Committee on Cancer staging for resected perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a comparison of the 6th and 7th editions

This study was conducted to evaluate the prognostic value of, respectively, the 6th and 7th editions of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for patients with resected perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC). Patients who underwent resection of PHC between 1991 and 2012 were identified from prospective databases at two centres. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared across stage groups with the log-rank test. The concordance index and Brier score were used to compare the prognostic accuracy of the staging systems. Data for a total of 306 patients were analysed. Staging according to the 7th edition upstaged 63% of patients in comparison with staging by the 6th edition. The log-rank P-value for both staging systems was highly statistically significant (P < 0.001). Staging according to the 6th edition categorized 93% of patients as having stage I or II disease, whereas staging according to the 7th edition distributed patients more equally across stages. Prognostic accuracy was similar between the staging systems: the concordance index was 0.59 and the Brier score 0.17 for both the 6th and 7th editions. The same prognostic accuracy was achieved using an alternative tumour-node-metastasis (TNM) stage grouping simplified to four rather than six stage groups. The 6th and 7th editions of the AJCC staging system for PHC have similar prognostic accuracy. Other prognostic factors can potentially improve individual patient prognosticatio