RESUMEN
Background/Aims: Acute liver failure (ALF) is associated with fatal outcomes without liver transplantation. Two randomized studies reported standard volume (SV) and high volume (HV) plasma exchange (PLEX) as effective therapeutic modalities for patients with ALF. However, no studies have compared the safety and efficacy of SV with HV PLEX, which we aimed to assess. Methods: This retrospective study included patients with ALF admitted between March 2021 and March 2023 who underwent PLEX. All patients underwent HV PLEX until May 2022, and then thereafter, SV PLEX was performed. The objectives of the study were to compare transplant-free survival (TFS) at 30 days, efficacy in reducing severity scores, biochemical variables, and adverse events between SV (total plasma volume x 1) and HV (total plasma volume x 1.5-2) PLEX. Results: Forty two ALF patients (median age: 23.5 years; females: 57.1%; MELD Na: 34.67 ± 6.07; SOFA score- 5.24 ± 1.42) underwent PLEX. Of these, 22 patients underwent SV-PLEX, and 20 underwent HV-PLEX. The mean age, sex, etiology distribution, and severity scores were similar between the groups. The median number of PLEX sessions (2) was similar in both groups. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, TFS was 45.5% in SV group and 45% in HV group (P = 0.76). A comparable decline in total bilirubin, PT/INR, ammonia, and MELD Na scores was noted in both groups. The cumulative number of adverse events was similar between the HV group (77.3%) and SV group (54.5%; P = 0.12). Conclusions: SV PLEX is safe and as effective as HV PLEX in patients with ALF. Further randomized controlled trials with a larger sample size are needed to validate these findings.
RESUMEN
Background/aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is generally diagnosed at an advanced stage, which limits curative treatment options for these patients. Locoregional therapy (LRT) is the standard approach to bridge and downstage unresectable HCC (uHCC) for liver transplantation (LT). Atezolizumab-bevacizumab (atezo-bev) can induce objective responses in nearly one-third of patients; however, the role and outcomes of downstaging using atezobev remains unknown. Methods: In this retrospective single-center study, we included consecutive patients between November 2020 and August 2023, who received atezo-bev with or without LRT and were subsequently considered for resection/LT after downstaging. Results: Of the 115 patients who received atezo-bev, 12 patients (10.4%) achieved complete or partial response and were willing to undergo LT; they (age: 58.5 years; women-17%; Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage System B/C:5/7) had received 3-12 cycles of atezo-bev, and 4 of them had received prior LRT. Three patients died before LT, while three were awaiting LT. Six patients underwent curative therapies: four underwent living donor LT after a median of 79.5 (54-114) days following the last atezo-bev dose, one underwent deceased donor LT 38 days after the last dose, and one underwent resection. All but one patient had complete pathologic response with no viable HCC. Three patients experienced wound healing complications, and one required re-exploration and succumbed to sepsis. After a median follow-up of 10 (4-30) months, none of the alive patients developed HCC recurrence or graft rejection. Conclusions: Surgical therapy, including LT, is possible after atezo-bev therapy in wellselected patients after downstaging.