The impact of transarterial chemoembolization induced complications on outcomes after liver transplantation: A propensity-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Loco-regional complications of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) may adversely affect technical aspects of the liver transplantation (LT). This study reviewed the impact of those complications on postoperative outcomes encompassing implications on graft selection. METHODS: A retrospective, propensity score matching (1:1) analysis accounting for donor and recipient confounders was performed on a dataset of patients undergoing LT for hepatocellular carcinoma. Outcomes of patients who had TACE (TACE-group) were compared with those who did not (NoTACE-group). RESULTS: A total of 57 matched pairs were analyzed. TACE achieved effective tumor control (Pre-TACE vs Post-TACE; Median: 44 mm [interquartile range: 43-50] vs 17 mm [0-36]; P = .002) on imaging follow-up. TACE group had, at the hepatectomy, higher incidence of ischemia-related complications (adhesions of the necrotic tumor, cholecystitis, and/or bile duct necrosis) (40.4% vs 10.5%; P = .001). Overall major post-LT complications rate (Dindo-Clavien ≥3) were similar (P = .134). Those in the TACE group with donors after circulatory death (DCD) had 4.6% 90-day mortality and 54.3% major complication rate compared to 6.9% and 77.3% (P = .380 and P = .112, respectively). CONCLUSION: TACE was an effective bridging procedure that may complicate LT inducing ischemic-related complications; nevertheless, it has not shown repercussions on mortality or morbidity after the procedure, even using donors after circulatory death.

Incidentally discovered pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia: what is its clinical significance?

PURPOSE: Pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) is a presumed precursor of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We assessed the relationship between incidental PanIN after resection of non-adenocarcinoma lesions and the development of metachronous PDAC in the remnant. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinicopathologic data of patients who underwent pancreatectomy for non-PDAC from January 2000 to January 2010. Intraductal papillary mucinous lesions were excluded. All available postoperative imaging and clinical follow-up data were reviewed; the risk of developing PDAC was assessed in patients with a minimum follow-up time of 6 months and with imaging studies available for review. RESULTS: A total of 584 patients were analyzed. Median age was 59 years (range 10-85 years), and 338 (58 %) were female. The most common lesions for which resection was performed were serous cystic neoplasms (17 %), pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (38 %), metastatic tumors (9 %), and mucinous cystic neoplasms (7 %). PanIN was identified in 153 (26 %) patients. The majority of these patients had PanIN-1 or -2 (50 and 41 %, respectively), whereas 13 (8 %) had PanIN-3. Of the 506 (87 %) patients with adequate follow-up (median 3.7 years, range 0.5-12.6 years), 1 patient (0.2 %) with PanIN identified at the time of initial resection developed cancer in the remnant. This occurred 4.4 years after a distal pancreatectomy in the setting of PanIN-1B. No patient with PanIN-3 developed cancer during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: PanIN was identified in 26 % of patients who underwent resection for histopathology other than PDAC. The presence of PanIN of any grade did not result in an appreciable cancer risk in the pancreatic remnant after short-term follow-up.

Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and high-quality nonrandomized studies.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis of high-quality published trials, randomized and observational, comparing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for gastric cancer. BACKGROUND: Controversy persists about the clinical utility of minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of gastric cancer. Prospective data is limited to a few small randomized trails. METHODS: : Studies published from January 1992 to March 2010 that compare LDG and ODG were identified. No restrictions in pathologic stage were applied. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Selection of high-quality, nonrandomized comparative studies (NRCTs) was based on a validated tool (Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies). Mortality, complications, harvested lymph nodes, operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay were compared using weighted mean differences (WMDs) and odds ratios (ORs). RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included in the analyses, 6 RCTs and 19 NRCTs, compromising 3055 patients (1658 LDG, 1397 ODG). LDG was associated with longer operative times (WMD 48.3 minutes; P < 0.001) and lower overall complications (OR 0.59; P < 0.001), medical complications (OR 0.49; P = 0.002), minor surgical complications (OR 0.62; P = 0.001), estimated blood loss (WMD -118.9 mL; P < 0.001), and hospital stay (WMD -3.6 days; P < 0.001). Mortality and major complications were similar. Patients in the ODG group had a significantly higher number of lymph nodes harvested (WMD 3.9 nodes; P < 0.001), although the estimated proportion of patients with less than 15 retrieved nodes was similar (OR 1.26, P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: LDG can be performed safely with a shorter hospital stay and fewer complications than open surgery. The long-term significance of a difference of less than 5 nodes in the number of harvested lymph nodes remains unclear. Lymph node staging appears to be unaffected. These results need to be validated in Western patients with advanced gastric cancer.