RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Venous thromboembolism is a potentially fatal complication of superficial endovenous treatment. Proper risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis could mitigate this hazard; however, there are currently no evidence-based or consensus guidelines. This study surveyed UK and Republic of Ireland vascular consultants to determine areas of consensus. METHODS: A 32-item survey was sent to vascular consultants via the Vascular and Endovascular Research Network (phase 1). These results generated 10 consensus statements which were redistributed (phase 2). 'Good' and 'very good' consensus were defined as endorsement/rejection of statements by >67% and >85% of respondents, respectively. RESULTS: Forty-two consultants completed phase 1. This generated seven statements regarding risk factors mandating peri-procedural pharmacoprophylaxis and three statements regarding specific pharmacoprophylaxis regimes. Forty-seven consultants completed phase 2. Regarding venous thromboembolism risk factors mandating pharmacoprophylaxis, 'good' and 'very good' consensus was achieved for 5/7 and 2/7 statements, respectively. Regarding specific regimens, 'very good' consensus was achieved for 3/3 statements. CONCLUSIONS: The main findings from this study were that there was 'good' or 'very good' consensus that patients with any of the seven surveyed risk factors should be given pharmacoprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin. High-risk patients should receive one to two weeks of pharmacoprophylaxis rather than a single dose.
Asunto(s)
Tromboembolia Venosa , Anticoagulantes , Heparina de Bajo-Peso-Molecular/efectos adversos , Humanos , Irlanda/epidemiología , Factores de Riesgo , Reino Unido , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiología , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiología , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevención & controlRESUMEN
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) in the UK has tripled in the last decade. However, outcomes following DCD liver transplantation are worse than for donation after brainstem death (DBD) liver transplants. This study examines whether a recipient should accept a "poorer quality" DCD organ or wait longer for a "better" DBD organ. METHODS: Data were collected on 5,825 patients who were registered on the elective waiting list for a first adult liver-only transplant and 3,949 patients who received a liver-only transplant in the UK between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2015. Survival following deceased donor liver transplantation performed between 2008 and 2015 was compared by Cox regression modelling to assess the impact on patient survival of accepting a DCD liver compared to deferring for a potential DBD transplant. RESULTS: A total of 953 (23%) of the 3,949 liver transplantations performed utilised DCD donors. Five-year post-transplant survival was worse following DCD than DBD transplantation (69.1% [DCD] vs. 78.3% [DBD]; p <0.0001: adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.65; 95% CI 1.40-1.94). Of the 5,798 patients registered on the transplant list, 1,325 (23%) died or were removed from the list without receiving a transplant. Patients who received DCD livers had a lower risk-adjusted hazard of death than those who remained on the waiting list for a potential DBD organ (adjusted HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.47-0.65). The greatest survival benefit was in those with the most advanced liver disease (adjusted HR 0.19; 95% CI 0.07-0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Although DCD liver transplantation leads to worse transplant outcomes than DBD transplantation, the individual's survival is enhanced by accepting a DCD offer, particularly for patients with more severe liver disease. DCD liver transplantation improves overall survival for UK listed patients and should be encouraged. LAY SUMMARY: This study looks at patients who require a liver transplant to save their lives; this liver can be donated by a person who has died either after their heart has stopped (donation after cardiac death [DCD]) or after the brain has been injured and can no longer support life (donation after brainstem death [DBD]). We know that livers donated after brainstem death function better than those after cardiac death, but there are not enough of these livers for everyone, so we wished to help patients decide whether it was better for them to accept an early offer of a DCD liver than waiting longer to receive a "better" liver from a DBD donor. We found that patients were more likely to survive if they accepted the offer of a liver transplant as soon as possible (DCD or DBD), especially if their liver disease was very severe.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Hígado/mortalidad , Obtención de Tejidos y Órganos , Adulto , Muerte Encefálica , Muerte , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
PURPOSE: For the majority of patients with end-stage renal failure, renal replacement therapy in the form of dialysis offers the only means of life prolongation. Survival times on haemodialysis have improved, and consequently, patent vascular access is required for an increasing period of time. Upper extremity options for arteriovenous placement are increasingly being exhausted, leading to creation of fistulae in the lower extremities. METHODS: We describe the management of a patient with superior vena cava obstruction requiring haemodialysis in whom venous access options were becoming very limited. An ankle fistula was formed by anastomosing great saphenous vein (GSV) to dorsalis pedis. CONCLUSION: The long-term patency of lower limb fistulae remains unclear. An ankle fistula preserves precious venous capital in patients who have no remaining options in the upper extremities for haemodialysis access. Furthermore, it allows for proximal revision if necessary. This serves to prolong the time spent dialysing through native fistulae, with their reduced complications and greater cost-effectiveness.