ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a common complication in liver transplant(LT) recipients. Lack of pediatric prophylaxis guidelines results in variation in preventative antibiotic regimens. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational study of LT recipients under 18 years using a merged dataset that included data from PHIS and UNOS between 2006 and 2017. The exposure was defined as the antibiotic(s) received within 24â hours of LT; with 6 categories, ranging from narrow (category 1: cefazolin), to broad). The primary outcome was presence or absence of SSI in the index admission. Mixed-effects logistic regression compared the effectiveness of each category relative to category 1 in preventing SSI. RESULTS: Of the 2586 LT, 284 (11%) met SSI criteria. SSI rate was higher (16.2%) in the younger sub-cohort compared to older (8.6%), necessitating a stratified analysis. Antibiotics from category 5 were most commonly used. In the younger sub-cohort, the adjusted risk was increased in all categories compared to the reference, most notably in category 3 (OR 2.58; 0.69-9.59) and category 6 (OR 2.76; 0.66-11.56). In the older sub-cohort, estimated ORs were also increased for each category, most notably in category 4 (2.49; 0.99-6.27). None of the ORs suggested benefit from broader-spectrum prophylaxis. Our E value assessment suggests it's unlikely there is unmeasured confounding by indication to the degree necessary to revert ORs to protective. CONCLUSION: There was wide variation in antibiotic prophylaxis. Adjusted analyses did not reveal a protective benefit of broader-spectrum prophylaxis in either sub-cohort, suggesting that narrower regimens may be adequate.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Since the change in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) policy excluding patients with very early stage hepatocellular carcinoma (veHCC, single tumor nodule <2 cm) from receiving Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception points, patients eligible to receive liver transplantation (LT) who fall in this category are commonly treated with locoregional therapy (LRT) after progression to UNOS T2 stage (1 nodule of 2-5 cm or up to 3 nodules, none above 3 cm). The aim of the current study is to compare the outcomes of patients treated with bridging LRT and LT with wait-and-not-treat approach with patients treated with definitive LRT. METHODS: A retrospective study has been performed on patients with veHCC evaluated in multidisciplinary liver tumor clinic of a large academic center between 2004-2011. Patients eligible for LT were assigned to the wait-and-not-treat group while patients who were not eligible were assigned to the definitive LRT group. Tumor size, time to treatment, severity of liver disease, recurrence and survival from time of detection were reviewed and recorded. RESULTS: A total of 19 patients were identified and treated with definitive LRT while 57 patients were treated with bridging LRT prior to LT after disease progression to T2 stage. Patients in the definitive LRT group were older (70.4±10.2 years vs. 58.7±5.9 years, P < 0.001) and had more comorbid conditions compared with the wait-and-not-treat group. Mean survival for definitive LRT group at the end of 5 years was 34.3±6.0 months with a median of 30.3 months (95% CI, 5.7-55.0 months) compared with 48.7±2.6 months for the wait-and-not-treat group, respectively (median not reached). The 3- and 5-year survival rates were 53.3% and 33.3% for the definitive LRT group compared with 78.9% and 68.4% for the patients in the wait-and-not-treat group. Survival rate at the end of 5 years was significantly better for the wait-and-not-treat group (P = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of current retrospective study, treating veHCC (UNOS T1 stage) patients listed for LT with bridging LRT after disease progression to T2 stage appears to be safe and effective with high 5-year survival rates.