Best practices during COVID-19 pandemic in solid organ transplant programs in Spain.

Clinical management of transplant patients abruptly changed during the first months of COVID-19 pandemic (March to May 2020). The new situation led to very significant challenges, such as new forms of relationship between healthcare providers and patients and other professionals, design of protocols to prevent disease transmission and treatment of infected patients, management of waiting lists and of transplant programs during state/city lockdown, relevant reduction of medical training and educational activities, halt or delays of ongoing research, etc. The two main objectives of the current report are: 1) to promote a project of best practices in transplantation taking advantage of the knowledge and experience acquired by professionals during the evolving situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, both in performing their usual care activity, as well as in the adjustments taken to adapt to the clinical context, and 2) to create a document that collects these best practices, thus allowing the creation of a useful compendium for the exchange of knowledge between different Transplant Units. The scientific committee and expert panel finally standardized 30 best practices, including for the pretransplant period (n = 9), peritransplant period (n = 7), postransplant period (n = 8) and training and communication (n = 6). Many aspects of hospitals and units networking, telematic approaches, patient care, value-based medicine, hospitalization, and outpatient visit strategies, training for novelties and communication skills were covered. Massive vaccination has greatly improved the outcomes of the pandemic, with a decrease in severe cases requiring intensive care and a reduction in mortality. However, suboptimal responses to vaccines have been observed in transplant recipients, and health care strategic plans are necessary in these vulnerable populations. The best practices contained in this expert panel report may aid to their broader implementation.

Textbook outcome among patients undergoing enhanced recovery after liver transplantation stratified by risk. A single-center retrospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Liver transplantation (LT) is one of the most complex surgical procedures. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) aims to reduce the risk of postoperative complications. When patients achieve all desirable outcomes after a procedure, they are considered to have experienced a textbook outcome (TO). METHODS: Two cohorts of patients undergoing low (n = 101) or medium risk (n = 15) LT were identified. The remaining patients (n = 65) were grouped separately. The ERAS protocol included pre-, intra-, and post-operative steps. TO was defined as the absence of complications, prolonged length of hospital stays, readmission and mortality during the first 90 days. RESULTS: One third of patients who underwent ERAS after LT experienced a TO. On multivariable analysis, age (OR, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.01-1.09]; P = .02), and having hepatocellular carcinoma (OR, 2.83 [95% CI, 1.37-6.03]; P = .005) were individually associated with a greater probability of achieving a TO. Belonging to the cohorts of medium risk or outside the selection criteria was associated with a lower probability of achieving a TO (OR, 0.46 [96% CI, 0.22-0.93]; P = .03). Patients less likely to experience TO required more hospital resources. Patients who achieved TO were more likely to remain free of chronic kidney disease (achieved TO, 83.8% [82.7-85.6]; failed TO, 67.9% [66.9-70.2]; P < .05). Tacrolimus dose and trough levels were similar. CONCLUSIONS: A novel finding of our study is that short and medium-term kidney function is better preserved in patients who experience a TO. Better kidney function of patients who achieve TO is not due to lower tacrolimus dosage.

Adenosquamous cancer of the pancreas: A multicenter retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Adenosquamous cancer of the pancreas (ASCP) is an aggressive, infrequent subtype of pancreatic cancer that combines a glandular and squamous component and is associated with poor survival. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective observational study carried out at three Spanish hospitals. The study period was: January 2010-August 2020. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed, as well as an analysis of global and disease-free survival using the Kaplan-Meier statistic. RESULTS: Of a total of 668 pancreatic cancers treated surgically, twelve were ASCP (1.8%). Patient mean age was 69.2±7.4 years. Male/female ratio was 1:1. The main symptom was jaundice (seven patients). Correct preoperative diagnosis was obtained in only two patients. Nine pancreatoduodenectomies and three distal pancreatosplenectomies were performed. 25% had major complications. Mean tumor size was 48.6±19.4mm. Nine patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. Median survival time was 5.9 months, and median disease-free survival was 4.6 months. 90% of patients presented recurrence. Ten of the twelve patients in the study (83.3%) died, with disease progression being the cause in eight. Of the two surviving patients, one is disease-free and the other has liver metastases. CONCLUSION: ASCP is a very rare pancreatic tumor with aggressive behavior. It is rarely diagnosed preoperatively. The best treatment, if feasible, is surgery followed by the standard chemotherapy regimens for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Fast-Track Liver Transplantation: Six-year Prospective Cohort Study with an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been shown to facilitate discharge, decrease length of stay, improve outcomes and reduce costs. We used this concept to design a comprehensive fast-track pathway (OR-to-discharge) before starting our liver transplant activity and then applied this protocol prospectively to every patient undergoing liver transplantation at our institution, monitoring the results periodically. We now report our first six years results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective cohort study of all the liver transplants performed at our institution for the first six years. Balanced general anesthesia, fluid restriction, thromboelastometry, inferior vena cava preservation and temporary portocaval shunt were strategies common to all cases. Standard immunosuppression administered included steroids, tacrolimus (delayed in the setting of renal impairment, with basiliximab induction added) and mycophenolate mofetil. Tacrolimus dosing was adjusted using a Bayesian estimation methodology. Oral intake and ambulation were started early. RESULTS: A total of 240 transplants were performed in 236 patients (191♂/45♀) over 74 months, mean age 56.3±9.6 years, raw MELD score 15.5±7.7. Predominant etiologies were alcohol (n = 136) and HCV (n = 82), with hepatocellular carcinoma present in 129 (54.7%). Nine patients received combined liver and kidney transplants. The mean operating time was 315±64 min with cold ischemia times of 279±88 min. Thirty-one patients (13.1%) were transfused in the OR (2.4±1.2 units of PRBC). Extubation was immediate (< 30 min) in all but four patients. Median ICU length of stay was 12.7 hours, and median post-transplant hospital stay was 4 days (2-76) with 30 patients (13.8%) going home by day 2, 87 (39.9%) by day 3, and 133 (61%) by day 4, defining our fast-track group. Thirty-day-readmission rate (34.9%) was significantly lower (28.6% vs. 44.7% p=0.015) in the fast-track group. Patient survival was 86.8% at 1 year and 78.6% at five years. CONCLUSION: Fast-Tracking of Liver Transplant patients is feasible and can be applied as the standard of care.

Enhanced recovery after low- and medium-risk liver transplantation. A single-center prospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Few studies have fully applied an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol to liver transplantation (LT). Our aim was to assess the effects of a comprehensive ERAS protocol in our cohort of low- and medium-risk LT patients. METHODS: The ERAS protocol included pre-, intra-, and post-operative steps. During the five-year study period, 181 LT were performed in our institution. Two cohorts were identified: low risk patients (n = 101) had a laboratory model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score of 20 points or less at the time of LT, received a liver from a donor after brain death, and had a balance of risk score of 9 points or less; medium-risk patients (n = 15) had identical characteristics except for a higher MELD score (21-30 points). In addition, we analyzed the remaining patients (n = 65) who were transplanted over the same study period separately using the ERAS protocol. RESULTS: The low-risk cohort showed a low need for packed red blood cells transfusion (median: 0 units) and renal replacement therapy (1%), as well as a short length of stay both in the intensive care unit (13 h) and in the hospital (4 days); morbidity during one-year follow-up, and probability of surviving to one year (89.30%) and five years (76.99%) were in line with well-established reference data. Similar findings were observed in the medium-risk cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This single-center prospective observational cohort study provides evidence that ERAS is feasible and safe for low- and medium-risk LT.

Bacterial DNA translocation contributes to systemic inflammation and to minor changes in the clinical outcome of liver transplantation.

Bacterial (bact)DNA is an immunogenic product that frequently translocates into the blood in cirrhosis. We evaluated bactDNA clearance in patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) and its association with inflammation and clinically relevant complications. We prospectively included patients consecutively admitted for LT in a one-year follow-up study. We evaluated bactDNA before and during the first month after LT, quantifying cytokine response at 30 days. One hundred patients were included. BactDNA was present in the blood of twenty-six patients undergoing LT. Twenty-four of these showed bactDNA in the portal vein, matching peripheral blood-identified bactDNA in 18 cases. Thirty-four patients showed bactDNA in blood during the first month after LT. Median TNF-α and IL-6 levels one month after LT were significantly increased in patients with versus without bactDNA. Serum TNF-α at baseline was an independent risk factor for bactDNA translocation during the first month after LT in the multivariate analysis (Odds ratio (OR) 1.14 [1.04 to 1.29], P = 0.015). One-year readmission was independently associated with the presence of bactDNA during the first month after LT (Hazard ratio (HR) 2.75 [1.39 to 5.45], P = 0.004). The presence of bactDNA in the blood of LT recipients was not shown to have any impact on complications such as death, graft rejection, bacterial or CMV infections. The rate of bactDNA translocation persists during the first month after LT and contributes to sustained inflammation. This is associated with an increased rate of readmissions in the one-year clinical outcome after LT.

[Liver enzymes elevation: etiologic study and efficiency of a single-act office visit]. / Elevación de las enzimas de función hepática en nuestro medio: estudio etiológico y de la eficacia de una consulta de acto único.

BACKGROUND: Liver enzyme (LE) elevation is a common finding in routine blood analysis. There is very little information on the most prevalent causes of these alterations in our population. In addition, a number of tests and several visits to the specialist are required to reach a diagnosis. For these reasons, we designed a protocol to streamline the evaluation of patients with LE elevations in a single-act office visit. METHODS: From March 2008 until June 2010, we studied all patients with incidental LE elevation (isolated transaminase elevation, combined elevation of alkaline phosphatase [FA] and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase [GGT], or isolated elevation of GGT) who were referred by their primary care physicians. At the time of referral, a complete biochemistry analysis was performed (LE, viral serology, autoantibodies, ceruloplasmin, iron metabolism, alpha-1-antitrypsin and thyroid hormones) and the patients underwent an abdominal ultrasound scan on the day of the office evaluation by the hepatologist. RESULTS: A total of 427 patients were included in our study. The most common cause of transaminase elevation was non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) (40%), followed by alcohol intake (17%), and hepatitis C virus infection (13%). Elevated GGT levels were most commonly related to NAFLD (30%), closely followed by alcohol intake (27%), and hepatotoxicity (8%). Combined elevation of GGT and FA was associated with NAFLD (21%), alcohol (17%), and hepatotoxicity (11%). Self-limited elevation was seen in 9% of the patients and we could not identify a definite cause in 11%. A definitive diagnosis was reached in 79% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: The single-act office visit has proven to be efficient, yielding a diagnosis in most of the patients. The most common cause of elevated LE was NAFLD. Transaminase elevation must be confirmed before a more thorough work-up is started.