Palliative long-term abdominal drains for the management of refractory ascites due to cirrhosis: a consensus document.

Palliative care remains suboptimal in advanced cirrhosis, in part relating to a lack of evidence-based interventions. Ascites remains the most common cirrhosis complication resulting in hospitalisation. Many patients with refractory ascites are not candidates for liver transplantation or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, and therefore, require recurrent palliative large volume paracentesis in hospital. We review the available evidence on use of palliative long-term abdominal drains in cirrhosis. Pending results of a national trial (REDUCe 2) and consistent with recently published national and American guidance, long-term abdominal drains cannot be regarded as standard of care in advanced cirrhosis. They should instead be considered only on a case-by-case basis, pending definitive evidence. This manuscript provides consensus to help standardise use of long-term abdominal drains in cirrhosis including patient selection and community management. Our ultimate aim remains to improve palliative care for this under researched and vulnerable cohort.

Endovascular versus open repair of asymptomatic popliteal artery aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: Popliteal artery aneurysm (PAA) is a focal dilatation and weakening of the popliteal artery. If left untreated, the aneurysm may thrombose, rupture or the clot within the aneurysm may embolise causing severe morbidity. PAA may be treated surgically by performing a bypass from the arterial segment proximal to the aneurysm to the arterial segment below the aneurysm, which excludes the aneurysm from the circulation. It may also be treated by a stent graft that is inserted percutaneously or through a small cut in the groin. The success of the procedure is gauged by the ability of the graft to stay patent over an extended duration. While surgical treatment is usually preferred in an emergency, the evidence on first line treatment in a non-emergency setting is unclear. This is an update of a review first published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of an endovascular stent graft versus conventional open surgery for the treatment of asymptomatic popliteal artery aneurysms (PAA) on primary and assisted patency rates, hospital stay, length of the procedure and local complications. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 29 January 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing endovascular stent grafting versus conventional open surgical repair in patients undergoing unilateral or bilateral prophylactic repair of asymptomatic PAAs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We collected data on primary and assisted primary patency rates (primary endpoints) as well as operating time, the length of hospital stay, limb salvage and local wound complications (secondary endpoints). We presented results as risk ratio or mean difference with 95% confidence intervals and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: No new studies were identified for this update. A single RCT with a total of 30 PAAs met the inclusion criteria. There was a low risk of selection bias and detection bias. However, the risks of performance bias, attrition bias and reporting bias were unclear from the study. Despite being an RCT, the certainty of the evidence was downgraded to moderate due to the small sample size, resulting in wide confidence intervals (CIs); only 30 PAAs were randomised over a period of five years (15 PAAs each in the groups receiving endovascular stent graft and undergoing conventional open surgery). The primary patency rate at one year was 93.3% in the endovascular group and 100% in the surgery group (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.12; moderate-certainty evidence). The assisted patency rate at one year was similar in both groups (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no clear evidence of a difference between the two groups in the primary or assisted patency rates at four years (13 grafts were patent from 15 PAA treatments in each group; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.32; moderate-certainty evidence); the effects were imprecise and compatible with the benefit of either endovascular stent graft or surgery or no difference. Mean hospital stay was shorter in the endovascular group (4.3 days for the endovascular group versus 7.7 days for the surgical group; mean difference (MD) -3.40 days, 95% CI -4.42 to -2.38; P < 0.001; moderate-certainty evidence). Mean operating time was also reduced in the endovascular group (75.4 minutes in the endovascular group versus 195.3 minutes in the surgical group; MD -119.90 minutes, 95% CI -137.71 to -102.09; P < 0.001; moderate-certainty evidence). Limb salvage was 100% in both groups. Data on local wound complications were not published in the trial report. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence to determine the effectiveness of endovascular stent graft versus conventional open surgery for the treatment of asymptomatic PAAs is limited to data from one small study. At one year there is moderate-certainty evidence that primary patency may be improved in the surgery group but assisted primary patency rates were similar between groups. At four years there was no clear benefit from either endovascular stent graft or surgery to primary or assisted primary patency (moderate-certainty evidence). As both operating time and hospital stay were reduced in the endovascular group (moderate-certainty evidence), it may represent a viable alternative to open repair of PAA. A large multicenter RCT may provide more information in the future. However, difficulties in recruiting enough patients are likely, unless it is an international collaboration including a number of high volume vascular centres.

Can the R.e.N.a.L nephrometry score preoperatively predict postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy?

AIM: We evaluate whether the preoperative R.E.N.A.L Nephrometry Score (RNS) can predict the postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing either an open or laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively calculated the RNS of 128 patients who underwent either an open partial nephrectomy (OPN) (n = 38) or laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) (n = 90) between 2003 and 2011. Patients were categorized into low, moderate or high complexity groups based on RNSs. Intra-operative warm ischemic time (WIT), peri-operative surgical outcomes using the Clavien-Dindo classification, postoperative histology, positive surgical margin rates were correlated to the RNS. RESULTS: The RNS was associated with the length of the WIT in OPN (low vs. moderate vs. high: 11.4 vs. 13.1 vs. 23.4 minutes, p = 0.025) and blood loss in LPN (low vs. moderate 319 vs. 498 ml, p = 0.009). The positive surgical margins were greater in high versus moderate RNS lesions (40 vs. 7.4%, p = 0.045). No differences were seen in complications, hospital stay or transfusion rates. The RNS was significantly higher in OPN versus LPN (7.45 vs. 6.2, p = 0.0002). CONCLUSION: An Increasing RNS was associated with increased WIT in OPN and blood loss in LPN, supporting RNS relationship to tumor complexity. A higher RNS in OPN indicate it may corroborate procedure choice. RNS should allow comparisons between treatment modalities for similar complexity lesions and with further research could aid stratification of individual risk preoperatively.