Real-World Evidence of the Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody Sotrovimab for Preventing Hospitalization and Mortality in COVID-19 Outpatients.

BACKGROUND: It is not known whether sotrovimab, a neutralizing monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment authorized for early symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, is also effective in preventing the progression of severe disease and mortality following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Delta variant infection. METHODS: In an observational cohort study of nonhospitalized adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 1 October 2021-11 December 2021, using electronic health records from a statewide health system plus state-level vaccine and mortality data, we used propensity matching to select 3 patients not receiving mAbs for each patient who received outpatient sotrovimab treatment. The primary outcome was 28-day hospitalization; secondary outcomes included mortality and severity of hospitalization. RESULTS: Of 10 036 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 522 receiving sotrovimab were matched to 1563 not receiving mAbs. Compared to mAb-untreated patients, sotrovimab treatment was associated with a 63% decrease in the odds of all-cause hospitalization (raw rate 2.1% vs 5.7%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], .19-.66) and an 89% decrease in the odds of all-cause 28-day mortality (raw rate 0% vs 1.0%; aOR, 0.11; 95% CI, .0-.79), and may reduce respiratory disease severity among those hospitalized. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world evidence demonstrated sotrovimab effectiveness in reducing hospitalization and all-cause 28-day mortality among COVID-19 outpatients during the Delta variant phase.

Association between treatment failure and hospitalization after receipt of neutralizing monoclonal antibody treatment for COVID-19 outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are highly effective in reducing hospitalization and mortality among early symptomatic COVID-19 patients in clinical trials and real-world data. While resistance to some mAbs has since emerged among new variants, characteristics associated with treatment failure of mAbs remain unknown. METHODS: This multicenter, observational cohort study included patients with COVID-19 who received mAb treatment between November 20, 2020, and December 9, 2021. We utilized electronic health records from a statewide health system plus state-level vaccine and mortality data. The primary outcome was mAb treatment failure, defined as hospitalization or death within 28 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. RESULTS: COVID-19 mAb was administered to 7406 patients. Hospitalization within 28 days of positive SARS-CoV-2 test occurred in 258 (3.5%) of all patients who received mAb treatment. Ten patients (0.1%) died within 28 days, and all but one were hospitalized prior to death. Characteristics associated with treatment failure included having two or more comorbidities excluding obesity and immunocompromised status (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.52-5.56), lack of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (OR 2.73, 95% CI 2.01-3.77), non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.20-3.82), obesity (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.36-2.34), one comorbidity (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.11-2.57), age ≥ 65 years (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.13-2.35), and male sex (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.21-2.02). Immunocompromised status (none, mild, or moderate/severe), pandemic phase, and type of mAb received were not associated with treatment failure (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities, lack of prior SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity, obesity, age ≥ 65 years, and male sex are associated with treatment failure of mAbs.

Effectiveness of subcutaneous monoclonal antibody treatment in emergency department outpatients with COVID-19.

Objectives: To evaluate whether subcutaneous neutralizing monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment given in the emergency department (ED) setting was associated with reduced hospitalizations, mortality, and severity of disease when compared to nontreatment among mAb-eligible patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study of ED patients utilized a propensity score-matched analysis to compare patients who received subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab mAb to nontreated COVID-19 control patients in November-December 2021. The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization within 28 days, and secondary outcomes were 90-day hospitalization, 28- and 90-day mortality, and ED length of stay (LOS). Results: Of 1340 patients included in the analysis, 490 received subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab, and 850 did not received them. There was no difference observed for 28-day hospitalization (8.4% vs. 10.6%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.79, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.53-1.17) or 90-day hospitalization (11.6% vs. 12.5%; aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65-1.31). However, mortality at both the 28-day and 90-day timepoints was substantially lower in the treated group (28-day 0.6% vs. 3.1%; aOR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08-0.41; 90-day 0.6% vs. 3.9%; aOR 0.14, 95% CI 0.06-0.36). Among hospitalized patients, treated patients had shorter hospital LOS (5.7 vs. 11.4 days; adjusted rate ratio [aRR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.33-0.69), shorter intensive care unit LOS (3.8 vs. 10.2 days; aRR 0.22, 95% CI 0.14-0.35), and the severity of hospitalization was lower (aOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.21-0.97) compared to untreated. Conclusions: Among ED patients who presented for symptomatic COVID-19 during the Delta variant phase, ED subcutaneous casirivimab/imdevimab treatment was not associated with a decrease in hospitalizations. However, treatment was associated with lower mortality at 28 and 90 days, hospital LOS, and overall severity of illness.

Real-world use of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in COVID-19 outpatients during BQ.1, BQ.1.1., and XBB.1.5 predominant omicron variants in three U.S. health systems: a retrospective cohort study.

Background: Ritonavir-boosted Nirmatrelvir (NMV-r), a protease inhibitor with in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, can reduce risk of progression to severe COVID-19 among high-risk individuals infected with earlier variants, but less is known about its effectiveness against omicron variants BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5. We sought to evaluate effectiveness of NMV-r in BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5 omicron variants by comparing hospitalisation rates to NMV-r treated patients during a previous omicron phase and to contemporaneous untreated patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of non-hospitalised adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection using real-world data from three health systems in Colorado and Utah, and compared hospitalisation rates in NMV-r-treated patients in a BA.2/BA.2.12.1/BA.4/BA.5 variant-predominant (first) phase (April 3, 2022-November 12, 2022), with a BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5 variant-predominant (second) phase (November 13, 2022-March 7, 2023). In the primary analysis, we used Firth logistic regression with a two-segment (phase) linear time model, and pre-specified non-inferiority bounds for the mean change between segments. In a pre-specified secondary analysis, we inferred NMV-r effectiveness in a cohort of treated and untreated patients infected during the second phase. For both analyses, the primary outcome was 28-day all-cause hospitalisation. Subgroup analyses assessed treatment effect heterogeneity. Findings: In the primary analysis, 28-day all-cause hospitalisation rates in NMV-r treated patients in the second phase (n = 12,061) were non-inferior compared to the first phase (n = 25,075) (198 [1.6%] vs. 345 [1.4%], adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.76 [95% CI 0.54-1.06]), with consistent results among secondary endpoints and key subgroups. Secondary cohort analyses revealed additional evidence for NMV-r effectiveness, with reduced 28-day hospitalisation rates among treated patients compared to untreated patients during a BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5 predominant phase (198/12,061 [1.6%] vs. 376/10,031 [3.7%], aOR 0.34 [95% CI 0.30-0.38), findings robust to additional sensitivity analyses. Interpretation: Real-world evidence from major US healthcare systems suggests ongoing NMV-r effectiveness in preventing hospitalisation during a BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5-predominant phase in the U.S, supporting its continued use in similar patient populations. Funding: U.S. National Institutes of Health.

Real-world use of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in outpatients with COVID-19 during the era of omicron variants including BA.4 and BA.5 in Colorado, USA: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Nirmatrelvir is a protease inhibitor with in-vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, and ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir can reduce the risk of progression to severe COVID-19 among individuals at high risk infected with delta and early omicron variants. However, less is known about the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir during more recent BA.2, BA2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5 omicron variant surges. We used our real-world data platform to evaluate the effect of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment on 28-day hospitalisation, mortality, and emergency department visits among outpatients with early symptomatic COVID-19 during a SARS-CoV-2 omicron (BA.2, BA2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5) predominant period in Colorado, USA. METHODS: We did a propensity-matched, retrospective, observational cohort study of non-hospitalised adult patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 between March 26 and Aug 25, 2022, using records from a statewide health system in Colorado. We obtained data from the electronic health records of University of Colorado Health, the largest health system in Colorado, with 13 hospitals and 141 000 annual hospital admissions, and with numerous ambulatory sites and affiliated pharmacies around the state. Included patients had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir medication order. Exclusion criteria were an order for or administration of other SARS-CoV-2 treatments within 10 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, hospitalisation at the time of positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and positive SARS-CoV-2 test more than 10 days before a nirmatrelvir-ritonavir order. We propensity score matched patients treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir with untreated patients. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause hospitalisation. FINDINGS: Among 28 167 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 between March 26 and Aug 25, 2022, 21 493 met the study inclusion criteria. 9881 patients received treatment with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and 11 612 were untreated. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment was associated with reduced 28-day all-cause hospitalisation compared with no antiviral treatment (61 [0·9%] of 7168 patients vs 135 [1·4%] of 9361 patients, adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0·45 [95% CI 0·33-0·62]; p<0·0001). Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment was also associated with reduced 28-day all-cause mortality (two [<0·1%] of 7168 patients vs 15 [0·2%] of 9361 patients; adjusted OR 0·15 [95% CI 0·03-0·50]; p=0·0010). Using subsequent emergency department visits as a surrogate for clinically significant relapse, we observed a decrease after nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment (283 [3·9%] of 7168 patients vs 437 [4·7%] of 9361 patients; adjusted OR 0·74 [95% CI 0·63-0·87]; p=0·0002). INTERPRETATION: Real-world evidence reported during a BA.2, BA2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5 omicron surge showed an association between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment and reduced 28-day all-cause hospitalisation, all-cause mortality, and visits to the emergency department. With results that are among the first to suggest effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for non-hospitalised patients during an omicron period inclusive of BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants, these data support nirmatrelvir-ritonavir as an ongoing first-line treatment for adults acutely infected with SARS-CoV-2. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.

Change in effectiveness of sotrovimab for preventing hospitalization and mortality for at-risk COVID-19 outpatients during an Omicron BA.1 and BA.1.1-predominant phase.

OBJECTIVES: Sotrovimab effectively prevented progression to severe disease and mortality following infection with pre-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants. We sought to determine whether sotrovimab is similarly effective against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection. METHODS: Observational cohort study of non-hospitalized adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from December 26, 2021, to March 10, 2022, using electronic health records from a statewide health system. We propensity-matched patients not receiving authorized treatment for each patient treated with sotrovimab. The primary outcome was 28-day hospitalization; secondary outcomes included mortality. We also propensity-matched sotrovimab-treated patients from the Omicron and Delta phases. Logistic regression was used to determine sotrovimab effectiveness during Omicron and between variant phases. RESULTS: Of 30,247 SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infected outpatients, we matched 1542 receiving sotrovimab to 3663 not receiving treatment. Sotrovimab treatment was not associated with reduced odds of 28-day hospitalization (2.5% vs 3.2%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.82, 95% CI 0.55, 1.19) or mortality (0.1% vs 0.2%; adjusted OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.07, 2.78). Between phases, the observed treatment OR was higher during Omicron than during Delta (OR 0.85 vs 0.39, respectively; interaction P-value = 0.053). CONCLUSION: Real-world evidence demonstrated that sotrovimab was not associated with reduced 28-day hospitalization or mortality among COVID-19 outpatients during the Omicron BA.1 phase.

Real-world evaluation of bebtelovimab effectiveness during the period of COVID-19 Omicron variants, including BA.4/BA.5.

OBJECTIVES: Bebtelovimab is an anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody active against Omicron lineage variants authorized to treat high-risk outpatients with COVID-19. We sought to determine the real-world effectiveness of bebtelovimab during the Omicron phases BA.2/BA2.12.1/BA4/BA5. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection between April 6 and October 11, 2022, using health records linked to vaccine and mortality data. We used propensity scores to match of bebtelovimab-treated with untreated outpatients. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause hospitalization. The secondary outcomes were 28-day COVID-19-related hospitalization, 28-day all-cause mortality, 28-day emergency department visits, maximum respiratory support level, intensive care unit admission, and in-hospital mortality among hospitalized patients. We used logistic regression to determine bebtelovimab treatment effectiveness. RESULTS: Among 22,720 patients with SARS-COV-2 infection, 3739 bebtelovimab-treated patients were matched to 5423 untreated patients. Compared with no treatment, bebtelovimab was associated with lower odds of 28-day all-cause hospitalization (1.3% vs 2.1%, adjusted odds ratio: 0.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.37-0.74, P <0.001), as well as COVID-19-related hospitalization (1.0% vs 2.0%, adjusted odds ratio: 0.44 [95% confidence interval: 0.30-0.64], P <0.001). Bebtelovimab appeared to be more beneficial in lowering the odds of hospitalization among patients with two or more comorbidities (interaction P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: During the Omicron BA.2/BA.2.12.1/BA.4/BA.5 variant phase, bebtelovimab was associated with lower hospitalization.

Real-World Evidence of Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibodies for Preventing Hospitalization and Mortality in COVID-19 Outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were authorized for the treatment of COVID-19 outpatients based on clinical trials completed early in the pandemic, which were underpowered for mortality and subgroup analyses. Real-world data studies are promising for further assessing rapidly deployed therapeutics. RESEARCH QUESTION: Did mAb treatment prevent progression to severe disease and death across pandemic phases and based on risk factors, including prior vaccination status? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This observational cohort study included nonhospitalized adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from November 2020 to October 2021 using electronic health records from a statewide health system plus state-level vaccine and mortality data. Using propensity matching, we selected approximately 2.5 patients not receiving mAbs for each patient who received mAb treatment under emergency use authorization. The primary outcome was 28-day hospitalization; secondary outcomes included mortality and hospitalization severity. RESULTS: Of 36,077 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2,675 receiving mAbs were matched to 6,677 patients not receiving mAbs. Compared with mAb-untreated patients, mAb-treated patients had lower all-cause hospitalization (4.0% vs 7.7%; adjusted OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.38-0.60) and all-cause mortality (0.1% vs 0.9%; adjusted OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03-0.29) to day 28; differences persisted to day 90. Among hospitalized patients, mAb-treated patients had shorter hospital length of stay (5.8 vs 8.5 days) and lower risk of mechanical ventilation (4.6% vs 16.6%). Results were similar for preventing hospitalizations during the Delta variant phase (adjusted OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.25-0.50) and across subgroups. Number-needed-to-treat (NNT) to prevent hospitalization was lower for subgroups with higher baseline risk of hospitalization; for example, multiple comorbidities (NNT = 17) and not fully vaccinated (NNT = 24) vs no comorbidities (NNT = 88) and fully vaccinated (NNT = 81). INTERPRETATION: Real-world data revealed a strong association between receipt of mAbs and reduced hospitalization and deaths among COVID-19 outpatients across pandemic phases. Real-world data studies should be used to guide practice and policy decisions, including allocation of scarce resources.

ReviewR: a light-weight and extensible tool for manual review of clinical records.

Objectives: Manual record review is a crucial step for electronic health record (EHR)-based research, but it has poor workflows and is error prone. We sought to build a tool that provides a unified environment for data review and chart abstraction data entry. Materials and Methods: ReviewR is an open-source R Shiny application that can be deployed on a single machine or made available to multiple users. It supports multiple data models and database systems, and integrates with the REDCap API for storing abstraction results. Results: We describe 2 real-world uses and extensions of ReviewR. Since its release in April 2021 as a package on CRAN it has been downloaded 2204 times. Discussion and Conclusion: ReviewR provides an easily accessible review interface for clinical data warehouses. Its modular, extensible, and open source nature afford future expansion by other researchers.

Real World Evidence of the Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody Sotrovimab for Preventing Hospitalization and Mortality in COVID-19 Outpatients.

Background: It is not known whether sotrovimab, a neutralizing monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment authorized for early symptomatic COVID-19 patients, is effective against the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant to prevent progression to severe disease and mortality. Methods: Observational cohort study of non-hospitalized adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from October 1 st 2021 - December 11 th 2021, using electronic health records from a statewide health system plus state-level vaccine and mortality data. We used propensity matching to select 3 patients not receiving mAbs for each patient who received outpatient sotrovimab treatment. The primary outcome was 28-day hospitalization; secondary outcomes included mortality and severity of hospitalization. Results: Of 10,036 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 522 receiving sotrovimab were matched to 1,563 not receiving mAbs. Compared to mAb-untreated patients, sotrovimab treatment was associated with a 63% decrease in the odds of all-cause hospitalization (raw rate 2.1% versus 5.7%; adjusted OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.19-0.66) and an 89% decrease in the odds of all-cause 28-day mortality (raw rate 0% versus 1.0%; adjusted OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.0-0.79), and may reduce respiratory disease severity among those hospitalized. Conclusion: Real-world evidence demonstrated sotrovimab effectiveness in reducing hospitalization and all-cause 28-day mortality among COVID-19 outpatients during the Delta variant phase.

Real World Evidence of Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibodies for Preventing Hospitalization and Mortality in COVID-19 Outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are authorized for early symptomatic COVID-19 patients. Whether mAbs are effective against the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant, among vaccinated patients, or for prevention of mortality remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of mAb treatment in preventing progression to severe disease during the Delta phase of the pandemic and based on key baseline risk factors. DESIGN SETTING AND PATIENTS: Observational cohort study of non-hospitalized adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from November 2020-October 2021, using electronic health records from a statewide health system plus state-level vaccine and mortality data. Using propensity matching, we selected approximately 2.5 patients not receiving mAbs for each patient who received mAbs. EXPOSURE: Neutralizing mAb treatment under emergency use authorization. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was 28-day hospitalization; secondary outcomes included mortality and severity of hospitalization. RESULTS: Of 36,077 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2,675 receiving mAbs were matched to 6,677 not receiving mAbs. Compared to mAb-untreated patients, mAb-treated patients had lower all-cause hospitalization (4.0% vs 7.7%; adjusted OR 0.48, 95%CI 0.38-0.60) and all-cause mortality (0.1% vs. 0.9%; adjusted OR 0.11, 95%CI 0.03-0.29) to day 28; differences persisted to day 90. Among hospitalized patients, mAb-treated patients had shorter hospital length of stay (5.8 vs. 8.5 days) and lower risk of mechanical ventilation (4.6% vs. 16.6%). Relative effectiveness was similar in preventing hospitalizations during the Delta variant phase (adjusted OR 0.35, 95%CI 0.25-0.50) and across subgroups. Lower number-needed-to-treat (NNT) to prevent hospitalization were observed for subgroups with higher baseline risk of hospitalization (e.g., multiple comorbidities (NNT=17) and not fully vaccinated (NNT=24) vs. no comorbidities (NNT=88) and fully vaccinated (NNT=81). CONCLUSION: Real-world evidence demonstrated mAb effectiveness in reducing hospitalization among COVID-19 outpatients, including during the Delta variant phase, and conferred an overall 89% reduction in 28-day mortality. Early outpatient treatment with mAbs should be prioritized, especially for individuals with highest risk for hospitalization.

ABO-incompatible pediatric liver transplantation in very small recipients: Birmingham's experience.

Liver transplantation (LT) for very small recipients is challenging but in experienced centres, good results can be achieved. Despite the risk of antibody-mediated acute rejection, some studies have demonstrated the safety of ABO incompatible liver transplantation (ILT) in children and particularly in infants. The aim of our study was to describe the outcome of liver transplantation in infants <5 kg and the safety of using ILT in this group. All LT performed between 1991 and 2010 in children <5 kg were reviewed. Twenty-nine patients were included, five of whom had an ILT. Acute liver failure was encountered in 20 cases. The recipient age and weight at transplantation were respectively 63 days (range: 14-268 days) and 4 kg (range: 2.4-5 kg). The graft-to-recipient ratio was 6.1% (range 2.3-9%). An aortic conduit and delayed abdominal closure were used respectively in 76% and 81% of the procedures. The ABO compatible liver transplantation (CLT) and ILT groups were similar regarding recipient's demographics, graft types or technical transplantation data. The one- and five-yr patient and graft survival were respectively 62%, 62% and 62%, 57.9% with a median follow-up of 95 months. Vascular complications occurred in six cases (21.4%) and biliary complications were encountered in five patients (17%). Acute and chronic rejection developed respectively in 37% and 26% of the recipients. The five patients undergoing ILT are all alive without graft lost after a median follow-up of 34 months (range 7-55 months). When compared with the CLT group, no significant differences were found regarding patient or graft survival, vascular or biliary complications and rejection rates. In our experience, ILT in small infants has short and long term outcomes comparable to ABO-compatible grafts and excellent results can be achieved with a standard immunosuppressive protocol. To avoid mortality on the waiting list for neonatal recipients, ABO-incompatible liver grafts can be used safely.

Web-based image transmission: a novel approach to aid communication in split liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Split liver transplantation (SLT) is technically demanding and requires good communication between transplant centers. The recipient surgeon receiving a shipped split liver needs detailed information on allocation of inflow and outflow vessels. We describe the first use of an image transmission system to facilitate SLT. METHODS: Twenty cadaver livers undergoing ex situ splitting were studied. Fifteen were shared between the geographically separate Birmingham adult and pediatric centers and five were shared with other UK centers. RESULTS: A total of six to eight images of each split graft were taken with a camera at standardized settings using the National Organ Retrieval Imaging System (NORIS), showing details of appearance, size, and anatomy of allocated inflow and outflow vessels. These were uploaded using a personal digital assistant to a secure website (http://www.noris.org.uk). The remote recipient surgeon then viewed these images by logging onto the password-protected website. Minimum time interval between division of the hilar vessels and completion of the split procedure was two h, allowing remote surgeon to view their allocated "shipped" graft in advance of commencing surgery. CONCLUSION: This advanced yet simple image transmission system has the potential for routine application in transplant surgery, not only for splitting but also for reporting injuries and graft steatosis.

A reaudit of specialist-managed liver trauma after establishment of regional referral and management guidelines.

BACKGROUND: An earlier liver trauma audit (52 patients) noted that 50% were surgically managed at referring hospitals with a high morbidity and mortality, after which a regional referral and management algorithm was implemented in 2001. This study aims to reaudit specialist-managed liver trauma outcomes. METHODS: Prospective analysis of 99 patients (68 male) treated for liver injury (LI) between 2001 and 2008. Patient characteristics, management, and outcome results of these were compared with the results of previous audit. LI severity was determined by computed tomography, operative findings, and classified according to liver Organ Injury Scale. RESULTS: As implementation of guidelines, referrals increased from 5.2 patients/yr to 14.1 patients/yr, while LI profile was unchanged. Fewer patients were managed surgically with lower surgical intervention at referring hospitals (26 of 52 [50%] vs. 29 of 77 [38%]; p = 0.2). There has been a decrease in liver resection rates (14 of 26 [54%] vs. 3 of 37 [8%]; p = 0.0001]), overall mortality rate (12 of 52 [23%] vs. 11 of 99 [11%]; p = 0.059), and postoperative deaths. CONCLUSION: This reaudit confirms the role of nonoperative management of liver trauma. Early use of computed tomography scan with specialist discussion, selective use of perihepatic packing, and transfer to a specialist unit should be standard practice in the management of complex liver trauma.

Application of Portsmouth modification of physiological and operative severity scoring system for enumeration of morbidity and mortality (P-POSSUM) in pancreatic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is associated with high incidence of morbidity and mortality. We have applied P-POSSUM in predicting the incidence of outcome after PD to identify those who are at the highest risk of developing complications. METHOD: A prospective database of 241 consecutive patients who had PD from January 2002 to September 2005 was retrospectively updated and analysed. P-POSSUM score was calculated for each patient and correlated with observed morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: 30 days mortality was 7.8% and morbidity was 44.8%. Mean physiological score was 16.07 +/- 3.30. Mean operative score was 13.67 +/- 3.42. Mean operative score rose to 20.28 +/- 2.52 for the complex major operation (p < 0.001) with 2 fold increase in morbidity and 3.5 fold increase in mortality. For groups of patients with a physiological score of (less than or equal to) 18, the O:P (observed to Predicted) morbidity ratio was 1.3-1.4 and, with a physiological score of >18, the O:P ratio was nearer to 1. Physiological score and white cell count were significant in a multivariate model. CONCLUSION: P-POSSUM underestimated the mortality rate. While P-POSSUM analysis gave a truer prediction of morbidity, underestimation of morbidity and potential for systematic inaccuracy in prediction of complications at lower risk levels is a significant issue for pancreatic surgery.

The role of helminth infections in carcinogenesis.

This review examines the significant literature on the role of helminth infections in carcinogenesis. Both parasitic infections and cancer have complex natural histories and long latent periods during which numerous exogenous and endogenous factors interact to obfuscate causality. Although only two helminths, Schistosoma haematobium and Opisthorchis viverrini, have been proven to be definitely carcinogenic to humans, others have been implicated in facilitating malignant transformation. The known mechanisms of helminth-induced cancer include chronic inflammation, modulation of the host immune system, inhibition of intracellular communication, disruption of proliferation-antiproliferation pathways, induction of genomic instability and stimulation of malignant stem cell progeny. Approximately 16% of all cancer cases worldwide are attributable to pathogenic agents, including schistosomes and liver flukes. This equates to 1,375,000 preventable cancer deaths per year. Means to reduce the incidence of helminth-associated malignancies are discussed.

Aspects of human parasites in which surgical intervention may be important.

Until recently, physicians and surgeons in developed countries only occasionally encountered patients with parasitic protozoan and helminthic infections. High-speed travel, immigration and the popularity of the tropics as vacation areas have increased the number of people at risk for parasitic disease. This chapter examines the significant literature on a select number of protozoan and helminthic parasites for which surgical intervention is important in the diagnosis, treatment or cure of the disease. Although traditional surgical approaches are covered, emphasis is placed on recent advances in the areas of transplantation and minimally invasive surgery. Combining the disciplines of parasitology and surgery, this chapter covers three protozoan and seven helminthic parasites for which surgery is a valid treatment option based on the frequency of cases reported in the literature. Following coverage of the selected parasites, a table is included listing additional helminths for which surgery contributes to patient management. Physicians in the USA, UK, and Europe need to be more aware of the presentation and treatment of parasitic infections. It is our sincere hope that this review accomplishes that goal, and ultimately benefits the patients we serve.

Hepatic vein reconstruction in ex situ split-liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Anatomy of the left hepatic vein (LHV) was studied in a series of 53 consecutive cadaveric liver grafts that were divided for transplantation. METHODS: All divisions were performed ex situ and provided a left split graft with only the LHV as the hepatic outflow. The anatomy was categorized into three types: (A) single LHV trunk, (B) two veins closely merging toward the median hepatic vein, or (C) a double outflow. RESULTS: Direct implantation of the graft was performed in type A and was possible in type B after simple plasty of the ostia to create a single orifice. In type C, a venous jump graft could be interposed at bench work to allow direct anastomosis into the recipient. There were no related complications, except one type A case with late outflow obstruction. CONCLUSION: Liver division can be performed safely in liver grafts with variant LHV anatomy, if appropriate techniques for reconstruction are used. Also ex situ liver division has the advantage of allowing a detailed anatomic evaluation before dividing LHV: reconstruction can be performed ex situ, allowing a single-step direct anastomosis in the recipient, thus shortening suturing time.

Ex situ preparation of left split-liver grafts with left vascular pedicle only: is it safe? A comparative single-center study.

The procurement of left-lateral-segment grafts from living donors for transplantation in children is performed by retaining only the left branches of the artery and veins. New techniques and the implementation of microsurgery in the transplant operation made this procedure a successful approach. However, controversy persists about using such an approach for division of liver grafts from cadaveric donors, and many teams prefer retaining the main arterial trunk with the left split graft, with or without the main portal vein trunk. Since 1998, in our center, when a donor-liver graft is divided we prefer retaining the main vessels with the right split graft if graft vascular anatomy is favorable. After 1998, 40 liver grafts from cadaveric donors were divided, and all divisions were performed ex situ. This experience was retrospectively reviewed to compare the outcome of left split grafts prepared for implantation with the left vasculature only (group A), or with the main arterial supply (group B). A single vascular complication occurred (one hepatic artery thrombosis in group B). Three patients died (one in group A and two in group B) and three other grafts were lost (one in group A and two in group B). One-year and 3-year graft survival rates were 94% and 86% in group A, and 83% and 83% in group B, respectively (not significantly [NS] different). We conclude that left split grafts can be safely transplanted with the left vascular supply only, provided that division is guided by careful anatomical evaluation and that vascular reconstructions are adequate.

Combined liver-intestine grafts compared with isolated intestinal transplantation in children: a single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Intestinal transplantation is known to be associated with a high risk of early complications and mortality. METHODS: We analyzed prospective data of 51 primary small bowel transplantations from December 1999 to August 2009 and identified perioperative factors that impact on early mortality (≤6 months after transplantation) after isolated intestinal (IITx; n=12) and combined liver-intestinal transplantation (CLITx group; n=39). RESULTS: Ten patients died during the first 6 months after transplantation, all of them in CLITx group (n=10/51, 19%). Multivariate analyses demonstrated intraoperative red blood cell transfusion greater than 70 mL/kg (P=0.019, odds ratio [OR]=13.79) and base excess 30-min after reperfusion less than -16 (P=0.001, OR=14.05), thrombocytopenia (<50,000 per dL) between day 1 and day 15 after transplantation (P=0.047, OR=5.22), and occurrence of vascular complications (P=0.003, OR=8.96) during the posttransplantation period as predictors of early mortality in CLITx group. CONCLUSION: Risk of mortality at 6 months after intestinal transplantation increased when the liver is included as combined graft. Strategies to reduce mortality such as refining selection for transplantation and early referral before the development of liver failure should be a priority.