| 1. |
- Abbassi, Fariba, et al.
(author)
-
Novel Benchmark Values for Redo Liver Transplantation Does the Outcome Justify the Effort?
- 2022
-
In: Annals of Surgery. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0003-4932 .- 1528-1140. ; 276:5, s. 860-867
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: To define benchmark cutoffs for redo liver transplantation (redo-LT). Background: In the era of organ shortage, redo-LT is frequently discussed in terms of expected poor outcome and wasteful resources. However, there is a lack of benchmark data to reliably evaluate outcomes after redo-LT. Methods: We collected data on redo-LT between January 2010 and December 2018 from 22 high-volume transplant centers. Benchmark cases were defined as recipients with model of end stage liver disease (MELD) score <= 25, absence of portal vein thrombosis, no mechanical ventilation at the time of surgery, receiving a graft from a donor after brain death. Also, high-urgent priority and early redo-LT including those for primary nonfunction (PNF) or hepatic artery thrombosis were excluded. Benchmark cutoffs were derived from the 75th percentile of the medians of all benchmark centers. Results: Of 1110 redo-LT, 373 (34%) cases qualified as benchmark cases. Among these cases, the rate of postoperative complications until discharge was 76%, and increased up to 87% at 1-year, respectively. One-year overall survival rate was excellent with 90%. Benchmark cutoffs included Comprehensive Complication Index CCI (R) at 1-year of <= 72, and in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates of <= 13% and <= 15%, respectively. In contrast, patients who received a redo-LT for PNF showed worse outcomes with some values dramatically outside the redoLT benchmarks. Conclusion: This study shows that redo-LT achieves good outcome when looking at benchmark scenarios. However, this figure changes in high-risk redo-LT, as for example in PNF. This analysis objectifies for the first-time results and efforts for redo-LT and can serve as a basis for discussion about the use of scarce resources.
|
|
| 2. |
- Balakrishnan, Anita, et al.
(author)
-
Delivery of hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic : an European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA) cross-sectional survey
- 2020
-
In: HPB. - : Elsevier BV. - 1365-182X. ; 22:8, s. 1128-1134
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The extent of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting response has varied globally. The European and African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA), the premier representative body for practicing HPB surgeons in Europe and Africa, conducted this survey to assess the impact of COVID-19 on HPB surgery. Methods: An online survey was disseminated to all E-AHPBA members to assess the effects of the pandemic on unit capacity, management of HPB cancers, use of COVID-19 screening and other aspects of service delivery. Results: Overall, 145 (25%) members responded. Most units, particularly in COVID-high countries (>100,000 cases) reported insufficient critical care capacity and reduced HPB operating sessions compared to COVID-low countries. Delayed access to cancer surgery necessitated alternatives including increased neoadjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer and colorectal liver metastases, and locoregional treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma. Other aspects of service delivery including COVID-19 screening and personal protective equipment varied between units and countries. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound adverse impact on the delivery of HPB cancer care across the continents of Europe and Africa. The findings illustrate the need for safe resumption of cancer surgery in a “new” normal world with screening of patients and staff for COVID-19.
|
|
| 3. |
- Carbone, Marco, et al.
(author)
-
European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT) Consensus Statement on Outcome Measures in Liver Transplantation According to Value-Based Health Care
- 2023
-
In: Transplant International. - 0934-0874. ; 36, s. 12190-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Liver transplantation is a highly complex, life-saving, treatment for many patients with advanced liver disease. Liver transplantation requires multidisciplinary teams, system-wide adaptations and significant investment, as well as being an expensive treatment. Several metrics have been proposed to monitor processes and outcomes, however these lack patient focus and do not capture all aspects of the process. Most of the reported outcomes do not capture those outcomes that matter to the patients. Adopting the principles of Value-Based Health Care (VBHC), may provide an opportunity to develop those metrics that matter to patients. In this article, we present a Consensus Statement on Outcome Measures in Liver Transplantation following the principles of VBHC, developed by a dedicated panel of experts under the auspices of the European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) Guidelines’ Taskforce. The overarching goal is to provide a framework to facilitate the development of outcome measures as an initial step to apply the VMC paradigm to liver transplantation.
|
|
| 4. |
- Claasen, Marco P. A. W., et al.
(author)
-
An international multicentre evaluation of treatment strategies for combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma
- 2023
-
In: JHEP Reports. - : Elsevier. - 2589-5559. ; 5:6
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background & Aims: Management of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) is not well-defined. Therefore, we evaluated the management of cHCC-CCA using an online hospital-wide multicentre survey sent to expert centres.Methods: A survey was sent to members of the European Network for the Study of Cholangiocarcinoma (ENS-CCA) and the International Cholangiocarcinoma Research Network (ICRN), in July 2021. To capture the respondents' contemporary decision making process, a hypothetical case study with different tumour size and number combinations was embedded.Results: Of 155 surveys obtained, 87 (56%) were completed in full and included for analysis. Respondents represented Europe (68%), North America (20%), Asia (11%), and South America (1%) and included surgeons (46%), oncologists (29%), and hepatologists/gastroenterologists (25%). Two-thirds of the respondents included at least one new patient with cHCC-CCA per year. Liver resection was reported as the most likely treatment for a single cHCC-CCA lesion of 2.0-6.0 cm (range: 73-93%) and for two lesions, one up to 6 cm and a second well-defined lesion of 2.0 cm (range: 60-66%). Nonetheless, marked interdisciplinary differences were noted. Surgeons mainly adhered to resection if technically feasible, whereas up to half of the hepatologists/gastroenterologists and oncologists switched to alternative treatment options with increasing tumour burden. Fifty-one (59%) clinicians considered liver transplantation as an option for patients with cHCC-CCA, with the Milan criteria defining the upper limit of inclusion. Overall, well-defined cHCC-CCA treatment policies were lacking and management was most often dependent on local expertise.Conclusions: Liver resection is considered the first-line treatment of cHCC-CCA, with many clinicians supporting liver transplantation within limits. Marked interdisciplinary differences were reported, depending on local expertise. These findings stress the need for a well-defined multicentre prospective trial comparing treatments, including liver transplantation, to optimise the therapeutic management of cHCC-CCA.Impact and implications: Because the treatment of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA), a rare form of liver cancer, is currently not well-defined, we evaluated the contemporary treatment of this rare tumour type through an online survey sent to expert centres around the world. Based on the responses from 87 clinicians (46% surgeons, 29% oncologists, 25% hepatologists/gastroenterologists), representing four continents and 25 different countries, we found that liver resection is considered the first-line treatment of cHCC-CCA, with many clinicians supporting liver transplantation within limits. Nonetheless, marked differences in treatment decisions were reported among the different specialties (surgeon vs. oncologist vs. hepatologist/ gastroenterologist), highlighting the urgent need for a standardisation of therapeutic strategies for patients with cHCC-CCA.
|
|
