| 1. |
- Friman, Styrbjörn, 1948, et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term, Prolonged-release Tacrolimus-based Immunosuppression in De Novo Liver Transplant Recipients: 5-year Prospective Follow-up of Patients in the DIAMOND Study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Transplantation Direct. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 2373-8731. ; 7:8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background. Immunosuppression with calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) is reportedly associated with risk of renal impairment in liver transplant recipients. It is believed that this can be mitigated by decreasing initial exposure to CNIs or delaying CNI introduction until 3-4 d posttransplantation. The ADVAGRAF studied in combination with mycophenolate mofetil and basili ximab in liver transplantation (DIAMOND) trial evaluated different administration strategies for prolonged-release tacrolimus (PR-T). Methods. DIAMOND was a 24-wk, open-label, phase 3b trial in de novo liver transplant recipients randomized to: PR-T 0.2 mg/kg/d (Arm 1); PR-T 0.15-0.175 mg/kg/d plus basiliximab (Arm 2); or PR-T 0.2 mg/kg/d delayed until day 5 posttransplant plus basiliximab (Arm 3). In a 5-y follow-up, patients were maintained on an immunosuppressive regimen according to standard clinical practice (NCT02057484). Primary endpoint: graft survival (Kaplan-Meier analysis). Results. Follow-up study included 856 patients. Overall graft survival was 84.6% and 73.5% at 1 and 5 y post transplant, respectively. Five-year rates for Arms 1, 2, and 3 were 74.7%, 71.5%, and 74.5%, respectively. At 5 y, death-censored graft survival in the entire cohort was 74,7%. Overall graft survival in patients remaining on PR-T for z30 d was 79.1%. Graft survival in patients who remained on PR-T at 5 y was 87.3%. Patient survival was 86.6% at 1 y and 76.3% at 5 y, with survival rates similar in the 3 treatment arms at 5 y. Estimated glomerular filtration rate at the end of the 24-wk initial study and 5 y posttransplant was 62.1 and 61.5 mi./min/1.73 m(2), respectively, and was similar between the 3 treatment arms at 5 y. Overall, 18 (2.9%) patients had z1 adverse drug reaction, considered possibly related to PR-T in 6 patients. Conclusions. In the DIAMOND study patient cohort, renal function, graft survival, and patient survival were similar between treatment arms at 5 y posttransplant.
|
|
| 2. |
- Krawczyk, M., et al.
(författare)
-
Liver Transplantation for Hepatic Trauma: A Study From the European Liver Transplant Registry
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Transplantation. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0041-1337. ; 100:11, s. 2372-2381
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background. Liver transplantation is the most extreme form of surgical management of patients with hepatic trauma, with very limited literature data supporting its use. The aim of this study was to assess the results of liver transplantation for hepatic trauma. Methods. This retrospective analysis based on European Liver Transplant Registry comprised data of 73 recipients of liver transplantation for hepatic trauma performed in 37 centers in the period between 1987 and 2013. Mortality and graft loss rates at 90 days were set as primary and secondary outcome measures, respectively. Results. Mortality and graft loss rates at 90 days were 42.5% and 46.6%, respectively. Regarding general variables, cross-clamping without extracorporeal veno-venous bypass was the only independent risk factor for both mortality (P = 0.031) and graft loss (P = 0.034). Regarding more detailed factors, grade of liver trauma exceeding IV increased the risk ofmortality (P = 0.005) and graft loss (P = 0.018). Moreover, a tendency above the level of significance was observed for the negative impact of injury severity score (ISS) onmortality (P = 0.071). The optimal cutoff for ISS was 33, with sensitivity of 60.0%, specificity of 80.0%, positive predictive value of 75.0%, and negative predictive value of 66.7%. Conclusions. Liver transplantation seems to be justified in selected patients with otherwise fatal severe liver injuries, particularly in whom cross-clamping without extracorporeal bypass can be omitted. The ISS cutoff less than 33 may be useful in the selection process.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Heil, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Preoperative portal vein or portal and hepatic vein embolization: DRAGON collaborative group analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Surgery. - : OXFORD UNIV PRESS. - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 108:7, s. 834-842
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Y Background: The extent of liver resection for tumours is limited by the expected functional reserve of the future liver remnant (FRL), so hypertrophy may be induced by portal vein embolization (PVE), taking 6 weeks or longer for growth. This study assessed the hypothesis that simultaneous embolization of portal and hepatic veins (PVE/HVE) accelerates hypertrophy and improves resectability. Methods: All centres of the international DRAGON trials study collaborative were asked to provide data on patients who had PVE/HVE or PVE on 2016-2019 (more than 5 PVE/HVE procedures was a requirement). Liver volumetry was performed using OsiriX MD software. Multivariable analysis was performed for the endpoints of resectability rate, FLR hypertrophy and major complications using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) statistics, regression, and Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: In total, 39 patients had undergone PVE/HVE and 160 had PVE alone. The PVE/HVE group had better hypertrophy than the PVE group (59 versus 48 per cent respectively; P=0.020) and resectability (90 versus 68 per cent; P=0.007). Major complications (26 versus 34 per cent; P=0.550) and 90-day mortality (3 versus 16 per cent respectively, P = 0.065) were comparable. Multivariable analysis confirmed that these effects were independent of confounders. Conclusion: PVE/HVE achieved better FLR hypertrophy and resectability than PVE in this collaborative experience.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
- Martin, David, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining Major Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Among European Surgical Association (ESA) Members
- 2020
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0364-2313 .- 1432-2323. ; 44:7, s. 2211-2219
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- © 2020, Société Internationale de Chirurgie. Background: Major surgery is a term frequently used but poorly defined. The aim of the present study was to reach a consensus in the definition of major surgery within a panel of expert surgeons from the European Surgical Association (ESA). Methods: A 3-round Delphi process was performed. All ESA members were invited to participate in the expert panel. In round 1, experts were inquired by open- and closed-ended questions on potential criteria to define major surgery. Results were analyzed and presented back anonymously to the panel within next rounds. Closed-ended questions in round 2 and 3 were either binary or statements to be rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement). Participants were sent 3 reminders at 2-week intervals for each round. 70% of agreement was considered to indicate consensus. Results: Out of 305 ESA members, 67 (22%) answered all the 3 rounds. Significant comorbidities were the only preoperative factor retained to define major surgery (78%). Vascular clampage or organ ischemia (92%), high intraoperative blood loss (90%), high noradrenalin requirements (77%), long operative time (73%) and perioperative blood transfusion (70%) were procedure-related factors that reached consensus. Regarding postoperative factors, systemic inflammatory response (76%) and the need for intensive or intermediate care (88%) reached consensus. Consequences of major surgery were high morbidity (>30% overall) and mortality (>2%). Conclusion: ESA experts defined major surgery according to extent and complexity of the procedure, its pathophysiological consequences and consecutive clinical outcomes.
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
- Nordlinger, Bernard, et al.
(författare)
-
Perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer (EORTC Intergroup trial 40983) : a randomised controlled trial.
- 2008
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 371:9617, s. 1007-1016
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Surgical resection alone is regarded as the standard of care for patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer, but relapse is common. We assessed the combination of perioperative chemotherapy and surgery compared with surgery alone for patients with initially resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Methods This parallel-group study reports the trial's final data for progression-free survival for a protocol unspecified interim time-point, while overall survival is still being monitored. 364 patients with histologically proven colorectal cancer and up to four liver metastases were randomly assigned to either six cycles of FOLFOX4 before and six cycles after surgery or to surgery alone (182 in perioperative chemotherapy group vs 182 in surgery group). Patients were centrally randomised by minimisation, adjusting for Centre and risk score. The primary objective was to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 or less for progression-free survival. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. Analyses were repeated for all eligible (171 vs 171) and resected patients (151 vs 152). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00006479. Findings In the perioperative chemotherapy group, 151 (83%) patients were resected after a median of six (range 1-6) preoperative cycles and 115 (63%) patients received a median six (1-8) postoperative cycles. 152 (84%) patients were resected in the surgery group. The absolute increase in rate of progression-free survival at 3 years was 7.3% (from 28.1% [95-66% CI 21.3-35.51 to 35.4% [28.1-42.7]; HR 0 . 79 [0.62-1.02]; p=0.058) in randomised patients; 8 . 1% (from 28.1% [21.2-36.6] to 36.2% [28.7-43.8]; HR 0 . 77 [0-60-1 . 001; p=0 . 041) in eligible patients; and 9.2% (from 33.2% [25.3-41.2] to 42.4% [34.0-50.5]; HR 0.73 [0.55-0.97]; p=0.025) in patients undergoing resection. 139 patients died (64 in perioperative chemotherapy group vs 75 in surgery group). Reversible postoperative complications occurred more often after chemotherapy than after surgery (40/159 [25%] vs 27/170 [16%]; p=0.04). After surgery we recorded two deaths in the surgery alone group and one in the perioperative chemotherapy group. Interpretation Perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 is compatible with major liver surgery and reduces the risk of events of progression-free survival in eligible and resected. patients. Funding Swedish Cancer Society, Cancer Research UK, Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, US National Cancer Institute, Sanofi-Aventis.
|
|
| 17. |
- Nordlinger, Bernard, et al.
(författare)
-
Perioperative FOLFOX4 chemotherapy and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer (EORTC 40983) : long-term results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial
- 2013
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 14:12, s. 1208-1215
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Previous results of the EORTC intergroup trial 40983 showed that perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) increases progression-free survival (PFS) compared with surgery alone for patients with initially resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Here we present overall survival data after long-term follow-up. Methods This randomised, controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 study recruited patients from 78 hospitals across Europe, Australia, and Hong Kong. Eligible patients aged 18-80 years who had histologically proven colorectal cancer and up to four liver metastases were randomly assigned (1:1) to either perioperative FOLFOX4 or surgery alone. Perioperative FOLFOX4 consisted of six 14-day cycles of oxaliplatin 85mg/m(2), folinic acid 200 mg/m(2) (DL form) or 100 mg/m2 (L form) on days 1-2 plus bolus, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) (bolus) and 600 mg/m(2) (continuous 22 h infusion), before and after surgery. Patients were centrally randomised by minimisation, adjusting for centre and risk score and previous adjuvant chemotherapy to primary surgery for colorectal cancer, and the trial was open label. Analysis of overall survival was by intention to treat in all randomly assigned patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00006479. Findings Between Oct 10, 2000, and July 5, 2004, 364 patients were randomly assigned to a treatment group (182 patients in each group, of which 171 per group were eligible and 152 per group underwent resection). At a median follow-up of 8.5 years (IQR 7.6-9.5), 107 (59%) patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group had died versus 114 (63%) in the surgery-only group (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.68-1.14; p=0.34). In all randomly assigned patients, median overall survival was 61.3 months (95% CI 51.0-83.4) in the perioperative chemotherapy group and 54.3 months (41.9-79.4) in the surgery alone group. 5-year overall survival was 51.2% (95% CI 43.6-58.3) in the perioperative chemotherapy group versus 47.8% (40.3-55.0) in the surgery-only group. Two patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group and three in the surgery-only group died from complications of protocol surgery, and one patient in the perioperative chemotherapy group died possibly as a result of toxicity of protocol treatment. Interpretation We found no difference in overall survival with the addition of perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 compared with surgery alone for patients with resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer. However, the previously observed benefit in PFS means that perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 should remain the reference treatment for this population of patients.
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
