Favorable Survival with Non-curative Treatments for Patients with Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Liver Transplant Denial.

BACKGROUND: Many patients are not candidates for liver transplant for non-tumor-related reasons including medical comorbidities and non-adherence. The prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are not liver transplant candidates in the era of locoregional therapy (LRT) including y90 is not well defined. AIMS: This study seeks to evaluate outcomes and the natural history of early-stage HCC in patients who were denied liver transplant listing due to non-tumor reasons and instead were treated with LRT. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation was performed for all patients who completed liver transplant evaluation with their tumor within Milan criteria but were denied due to non-tumor reasons and were treated with LRT at a single tertiary referral center. RESULTS: The 61 patients included had a favorable overall survival, with a median survival 60.3 months (86.9% at 1 year and 52.7% at 5 years). Patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis (n = 34) had significantly longer overall survival compared to those with Child-Pugh B/C cirrhosis (median survival of 70.3 months versus 26.1 months, p = 0.005). Survival in patients with Child-Pugh A at 1, 3, and 5 years was 97%, 80%, and 73%, respectively, compared to 74%, 41%, and 31% in patients with Child-Pugh B/C. CONCLUSIONS: In a small single-center cohort, patients with HCC who were denied liver transplant due to non-tumor reasons and underwent LRT and had Child-Pugh A cirrhosis had survival approaching the national average for patients who undergo liver transplantation. Patients with Child-Pugh B/C cirrhosis had significantly worse outcomes than those with Child-Pugh A.

Discrepancy between self-reported and actual colonoscopy polypectomy practices for the removal of small polyps.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is associated with higher rates of complete resection compared with cold biopsy forceps (CBF) for the removal of small polyps (4-9 mm). This study aimed to evaluate self-reported polypectomy preferences and actual practice patterns among endoscopists at an academic center and to identify factors associated with the use of CSP for small polyps. METHODS: In phase A, endoscopists completed a survey evaluating preferences for polypectomy techniques. In phase B, we performed a retrospective analysis of all consecutive colonoscopies with polypectomy (January 2016 to September 2018). Uni- and multivariate analysis were performed to identify factors associated with CSP for small polyps. RESULTS: Nineteen of 26 (73%) endoscopists completed the survey (phase A); 3 (15.8%) were interventional endoscopists. Most respondents indicated that they use CSP (89.5%) for small polyps and identified no reasons for choosing CBF over CSP (73.7%). In phase B, we identified 1118 colonoscopies with 2625 polypectomies for polyps ≤9 mm. Most diminutive polyps (≤3 mm) were removed with CBF (819 of 912; 90%). CBF (46.2%) was also preferentially used for removal of small polyps (n = 1713), followed by hot snare polypectomy (27.2%), and CSP (26.6%). On multivariate analysis, interventional endoscopists were associated with a higher likelihood of using CSP for small polyps (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.79; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Significant discrepancy exists between self-reported preferences and actual polypectomy practices. CBF is still preferentially used over CSP for the removal of polyps sized 4-9 mm; further strategies are needed to monitor and implement adequate polypectomy techniques.