| 1. |
- Tabiri, S, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Bravo, L, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
- de Rojas, I., et al.
(författare)
-
Common variants in Alzheimer’s disease and risk stratification by polygenic risk scores
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Nature Communications. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-1723. ; 12:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Genetic discoveries of Alzheimer’s disease are the drivers of our understanding, and together with polygenetic risk stratification can contribute towards planning of feasible and efficient preventive and curative clinical trials. We first perform a large genetic association study by merging all available case-control datasets and by-proxy study results (discovery n = 409,435 and validation size n = 58,190). Here, we add six variants associated with Alzheimer’s disease risk (near APP, CHRNE, PRKD3/NDUFAF7, PLCG2 and two exonic variants in the SHARPIN gene). Assessment of the polygenic risk score and stratifying by APOE reveal a 4 to 5.5 years difference in median age at onset of Alzheimer’s disease patients in APOE ɛ4 carriers. Because of this study, the underlying mechanisms of APP can be studied to refine the amyloid cascade and the polygenic risk score provides a tool to select individuals at high risk of Alzheimer’s disease. © 2021, The Author(s).
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Belli, LS, et al.
(författare)
-
COVID-19 in liver transplant candidates: pretransplant and post-transplant outcomes - an ELITA/ELTR multicentre cohort study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Gut. - : BMJ. - 1468-3288 .- 0017-5749. ; 70:10, s. 1914-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Explore the impact of COVID-19 on patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation (LT) and on their post-LT course.DesignData from consecutive adult LT candidates with COVID-19 were collected across Europe in a dedicated registry and were analysed.ResultsFrom 21 February to 20 November 2020, 136 adult cases with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from 33 centres in 11 European countries were collected, with 113 having COVID-19. Thirty-seven (37/113, 32.7%) patients died after a median of 18 (10–30) days, with respiratory failure being the major cause (33/37, 89.2%). The 60-day mortality risk did not significantly change between first (35.3%, 95% CI 23.9% to 50.0%) and second (26.0%, 95% CI 16.2% to 40.2%) waves. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed Laboratory Model for End-stage Liver Disease (Lab-MELD) score of ≥15 (Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score 15–19, HR 5.46, 95% CI 1.81 to 16.50; MELD score≥20, HR 5.24, 95% CI 1.77 to 15.55) and dyspnoea on presentation (HR 3.89, 95% CI 2.02 to 7.51) being the two negative independent factors for mortality. Twenty-six patients underwent an LT after a median time of 78.5 (IQR 44–102) days, and 25 (96%) were alive after a median follow-up of 118 days (IQR 31–170).ConclusionsIncreased mortality in LT candidates with COVID-19 (32.7%), reaching 45% in those with decompensated cirrhosis (DC) and Lab-MELD score of ≥15, was observed, with no significant difference between first and second waves of the pandemic. Respiratory failure was the major cause of death. The dismal prognosis of patients with DC supports the adoption of strict preventative measures and the urgent testing of vaccination efficacy in this population. Prior SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic infection did not affect early post-transplant survival (96%).
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Beumer, B. R., et al.
(författare)
-
Impact of muscle mass on survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation beyond the Milan criteria
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle. - : Wiley. - 2190-5991 .- 2190-6009. ; 13:5, s. 2373-2382
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Access to the liver transplant waitlist for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) depends on tumour presentation, biology, and response to treatments. The Milan Criteria (MC) represent the benchmark for expanded criteria that incorporate additional prognostic factors. The purpose of this study was to determine the added value of skeletal muscle index (SMI) in HCC patients beyond the MC. Method: Patients with HCC that were transplanted beyond the MC were included in this retrospective multicentre study. SMI was quantified using the Computed Tomography (CT) within 3 months prior to transplantation. Cox regression models were used to identify predictors of overall survival (OS). The discriminative performance of SMI extended Metroticket 2.0 and AFP models was also assessed. Results: Out of 889 patients transplanted outside the MC, 528 had a CT scan within 3 months prior to liver transplantation (LT), of whom 176 (33%) were classified as sarcopenic. The median time between assessment of the SMI and LT was 1.8 months (IQR: 0.77–2.67). The median follow-up period was 5.1 95% CI [4.7–5.5] years, with a total of 177 recorded deaths from any cause. In a linear regression model with SMI as the dependent variable, only male gender (8.55 95% CI [6.51–10.59], P < 0.001) and body mass index (0.74 95% CI [0.59–0.89], P < 0.001) were significant. Univariable survival analysis of patients with sarcopenia versus patients without sarcopenia showed a significant difference in OS (HR 1.44 95% CI [1.07 − 1.94], P = 0.018). Also the SMI was significant (HR 0.98 95% CI [0.96–0.99], P = 0.014). The survival difference between the lowest SMI quartile versus the highest SMI quartile was significant (log-rank: P = 0.005) with 5 year OS of 57% and 71%, respectively. Data from 423 patients, describing 139 deaths, was used for multivariate analysis. Both sarcopenia (HR 1.45 95% CI [1.02 − 2.05], P = 0.036) and SMI were (HR 0.98 95% CI [0.95–0.99], P = 0.035) significant. On the survival scale this translates to a 5 year OS difference of 11% between sarcopenia and no sarcopenia. Whereas for SMI, this translates to a survival difference of 8% between first and third quartiles for both genders. Conclusions: Overall, we can conclude that higher muscle mass contributes to a better long-term survival. However, for individual patients, low muscle mass should not be considered an absolute contra-indication for LT as its discriminatory performance was limited.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- 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.
|
|
