Postreperfusion Liver Biopsy as Predictor of Early Graft Dysfunction and Survival After Orthotopic Liver Transplantation.

Background: Postreperfusion liver biopsy (PRB) can assess the degree of ischemia/reperfusion injury (IRI) after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The influence of IRI on graft outcomes and overall survival is controversial. Aim: To determine the correlation between the severity of IRI in PRB and overall graft and patient survival and, secondarily, to identify factors on PRB that predict poor graft outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent OLT using donation after brain death (DBD) with PRB. The severity of IRI in PRB was graded. Predictors of IRI were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis and the Kaplan-Meier with log rank test for the graft and overall survival, respectively. Results: We included 280 OLTs (64.7%). The histopathological assessment of IRI severity was as follows: no IRI (N = 96, 34.3%), mild IRI (N = 65; 23.2%), moderate IRI (N = 101; 36.1%), and severe IRI (N = 18; 6.4%). The incidence rates of initial good graft function (IGGF), primary nonfunction and early allograft dysfunction (EAD) were 32.5%, 3.9%, and 18.6%, respectively. Severe IRI was associated with a lower incidence of IGGF (OR: 0.34, 95% CI 0.12-0.92; P = 0.03). Patients with severe IRI tended to have a higher incidence of EAD (33.2% vs. 18.6, P = 0.23). The cold ischemia time was an independent predictor of severe IRI on the multivariate analysis. Severe IRI was associated with poor 1- and 5-year overall survival rates (67% and 44%, respectively, compared with 84 and 68% in nonsevere IRI). Patients with severe IRI exhibited worse graft and overall survival. Conclusions: Cold ischemia time predicts the development of severe IRI. Patients with severe IRI show worse graft and overall survival and a lower incidence of IGGF, suggesting that histopathological findings could be useful for identifying patients at high risk of worse outcomes after OLT.

Reply to: "Does it matter which plastic stents we use for the treatment of post-surgical leaks? Or is it a one-size-fits-all?"

We appreciate the interest of Sánchez-Luna et al. in our article "Endoscopic internal drainage using transmural double-pigtail stents in leaks following upper gastrointestinal tract surgery", and find their suggestion about using softer urological double pigtail stents (DPS) for endoscopic internal drainage (EID) interesting.

Long-term clinical outcome and survival predictors in patients with cirrhosis after 10-mm-covered transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt / Resultados clínicos a largo plazo y predictores de la supervivencia de pacientes con cirrosis hepática tras inserción de prótesis recubierta transyugular intrahepática porto-sistémica dilatadas a 10mm

Background and aims: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) are successfully used in the management of portal hypertension (PH)-related complications. Debate surrounds the diameter of the dilation. The aim was to analyse the outcomes of and complications deriving from TIPS in patients with cirrhosis and identify predictors of survival. Methods: This was a retrospective single-centre study, which included patients with cirrhosis who had a TIPS procedure for PH from 2009 to October 2018. Demographic, clinical and radiological data were collected. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to measure survival and predictors of survival were identified with the Cox regression model. Results: A total of 98 patients were included (78.6% male), mean age was 58.5 (SD±/−9.9) and the median MELD was 13.3 (IQR 9.5–16). The indications were refractory ascites (RA), variceal bleeding (VB) and hepatic hydrothorax (HH). Median survival was 72 months (RA 46.4, VB 68.5 and HH 64.7) and transplant-free survival was 26 months. Clinical and technical success rates were 70.5% and 92.9% respectively. Age (HR 1.05), clinical success (HR 0.33), sodium (HR 0.92), renal failure (HR 2.46) and albumin (HR 0.35) were predictors of survival. Hepatic encephalopathy occurred in 28.6% of patients and TIPS dysfunction occurred in 16.3%. Conclusions: TIPS with 10-mm PTFE-covered stent is an effective and safe treatment for PH-related complications in patients with cirrhosis. Age, renal failure, sodium, albumin and clinical success are independent predictors of long-term survival.(AU)

Introducción: Los shunt intrahepático porto-sistémicos (TIPS) son utilizados con éxito en el tratamiento de las complicaciones de la hipertensión portal (HTP). Existe cierta controversia referente al diámetro dilatado. Los objetivos fueron analizar los resultados y las complicaciones derivadas de los TIPS en cirróticos, y determinar los factores predictores de la supervivencia. Métodos: Se trata de un estudio retrospectivo unicéntrico que incluyó pacientes cirróticos que recibieron un TIPS por HTP desde 2009 a octubre-2018. Se recogieron variables clínicas, demográficas y radiológicas. Se determinó la supervivencia mediante el método Kaplan-Meier y se identificaron los predictores de supervivencia con el modelo de regresión de Cox. Resultados: Se incluyeron 98 pacientes (78,6% varones). La media de edad fue de 58,5 años (DE ±9,9) y mediana de MELD 13,3 (RIC 9,5-16). Las indicaciones fueron ascitis refractaria (AR), hemorragia varicosa (HV) e hidrotórax hepático (HH). La mediana de supervivencia fue de 72 meses (AR 46,4; HV 68,5 y HH 64,7 meses) y la supervivencia libre de trasplante fue de 26 meses. El éxito técnico y clínico fue del 92,9 y 70,5%, respectivamente. La edad (HR 1,05), el éxito clínico (HR 0,33), el sodio (HR 0,92), la disfunción renal (HR 2,46) y la albúmina (HR 0,35) fueron factores predictivos de supervivencia. El 28,6% desarrolló encefalopatía hepática y un 16,3% presentó disfunción del TIPS. Conclusiones: Los TIPS con prótesis recubiertas dilatadas a 10mm son un tratamiento efectivo y seguro de las complicaciones derivadas de HTP en pacientes cirróticos. La edad, la disfunción renal, el sodio, la albúmina y el éxito clínico son factores independientes predictivos de la supervivencia a largo plazo.(AU)

Impact of Biological Agents on Postsurgical Complications in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Multicentre Study of Geteccu.

BACKGROUND: The impact of biologics on the risk of postoperative complications (PC) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is still an ongoing debate. This lack of evidence is more relevant for ustekinumab and vedolizumab. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of biologics on the risk of PC. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in 37 centres. Patients treated with biologics within 12 weeks before surgery were considered "exposed". The impact of the exposure on the risk of 30-day PC and the risk of infections was assessed by logistic regression and propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1535 surgeries were performed on 1370 patients. Of them, 711 surgeries were conducted in the exposed cohort (584 anti-TNF, 58 vedolizumab and 69 ustekinumab). In the multivariate analysis, male gender (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.2-2.0), urgent surgery (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2-2.2), laparotomy approach (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.1-1.9) and severe anaemia (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.3-2.6) had higher risk of PC, while academic hospitals had significantly lower risk. Exposure to biologics (either anti-TNF, vedolizumab or ustekinumab) did not increase the risk of PC (OR: 1.2; 95% CI: 0.97-1.58), although it could be a risk factor for postoperative infections (OR 1.5; 95% CI: 1.03-2.27). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative administration of biologics does not seem to be a risk factor for overall PC, although it may be so for postoperative infections.

Endoscopic internal drainage using transmural double-pigtail stents in leaks following upper gastrointestinal tract surgery.

INTRODUCTION: different endoscopic procedures have been proposed for the management of surgical leaks. Endoscopic internal drainage using trans-fistulary double-pigtail plastic stents has emerged as an alternative strategy, especially in fistulae presenting after laparoscopic gastric sleeve. METHODS: a retrospective case series was performed at a single tertiary care center including all upper gastrointestinal post-surgical leaks primarily managed with endoscopic trans-fistulary insertion of double-pigtail plastic stents. Clinical success was defined as the absence of extravasation of oral radiographic contrast and radiological resolution of the collection with adequate oral intake Results: nine patients were included, six (66.6 %) females with a median age of 52.6 years (IQR 47-60). Five cases presented after laparoscopic gastric sleeve, two cases after distal esophagectomies, one after a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and another one after a pancreaticoduodenectomy. Fistulae measured < 10 mm in five patients (55.6 %) and 10-20 mm in four patients (44.4 %). Six were early leaks. Technical and clinical success was achieved in nine (100 %) and seven (77.8 %) cases, respectively. Seven (77.8 %) patients required ≤ 3 endoscopic procedures. The median hospital stay after the first endoscopic procedure was 12 days (IQR 6.5-17.5 days), while the overall median time until leak healing was 118.5 days (IQR 84.5-170). One patient with a post-esophagectomy intrathoracic leak developed an esophageal-tracheal fistula 37 days after stent deployment. CONCLUSIONS: our results support the use of endoscopic internal drainage in postsurgical abdominal leaks, regardless of the type of surgery. Although only two patients with intrathoracic dehiscence were included.

Lumen apposing metal stents versus tubular self-expandable metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy in malignant biliary obstruction.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) is an effective option for biliary drainage in malignant biliary obstruction. Lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) are increasingly been used for EUS-CDS. It is unknown how LAMS compare to tubular self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) for EUS-CDS. Our aim is to compare the clinical outcomes of LAMS versus SEMS for EUS-CDS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Single-center retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-CDS after failed ERCP for initial biliary drainage between 2011 and 2019. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients who had conventional covered SEMS and LAMS placed for EUS-CDS. Outcome measures included unplanned procedural events, technical success, clinical success, adverse events and reinterventions. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: During the study period 57 patients met inclusion criteria (37 LAMS, 20 SEMS). All EUS-CDS were technically successful (LAMS group 95% CI 90.3-100%, SEMS group 95% CI 83.2-100%). There were no differences between groups in unplanned procedural events (4 LAMS deployment issues, 2 mild bleeding in SEMS group; 10 vs 10.8%), clinical success (37/37 [100%] vs 19/20 [95%]), and short-term adverse events (5/37 [13.5%] vs 4/20 [20%], p = 0.71). Complete follow-up data were available in 41 patients for a mean of 376 ± 145 days. Endoscopic reintervention was required for duodenal stent placement (n = 9) or biliary stent dysfunction (n = 4), with no difference between LAMS and SEMS group (6/37 [16.2%] vs 7/20 [35%]). There were no differences in overall survival between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy after failed ERCP has equally high technical and clinical success rates with either LAMS or SEMS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction. No differences in adverse events, reinterventions and survival were seen with either type of stent. The cost-effectiveness of LAMS vs SEMS for EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy remains to be proven.

Long-term clinical outcome and survival predictors in patients with cirrhosis after 10-mm-covered transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) are successfully used in the management of portal hypertension (PH)-related complications. Debate surrounds the diameter of the dilation. The aim was to analyse the outcomes of and complications deriving from TIPS in patients with cirrhosis and identify predictors of survival. METHODS: This was a retrospective single-centre study, which included patients with cirrhosis who had a TIPS procedure for PH from 2009 to October 2018. Demographic, clinical and radiological data were collected. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to measure survival and predictors of survival were identified with the Cox regression model. RESULTS: A total of 98 patients were included (78.6% male), mean age was 58.5 (SD±/-9.9) and the median MELD was 13.3 (IQR 9.5-16). The indications were refractory ascites (RA), variceal bleeding (VB) and hepatic hydrothorax (HH). Median survival was 72 months (RA 46.4, VB 68.5 and HH 64.7) and transplant-free survival was 26 months. Clinical and technical success rates were 70.5% and 92.9% respectively. Age (HR 1.05), clinical success (HR 0.33), sodium (HR 0.92), renal failure (HR 2.46) and albumin (HR 0.35) were predictors of survival. Hepatic encephalopathy occurred in 28.6% of patients and TIPS dysfunction occurred in 16.3%. CONCLUSIONS: TIPS with 10-mm PTFE-covered stent is an effective and safe treatment for PH-related complications in patients with cirrhosis. Age, renal failure, sodium, albumin and clinical success are independent predictors of long-term survival.

Valoración de las peticiones de endoscopia para reanudar la actividad durante la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2: denegación de las no indicadas y priorización de las aceptadas / No disponible

INTRODUCCIÓN: la pandemia mundial por SARS-CoV-2 obligó a paralizar las unidades de endoscopia. Previamente a la reanudación de la actividad endoscópica diseñamos un protocolo de valoración de gastroscopias y colonoscopias, desprogramadas durante la pandemia, denegando las no indicadas y priorizando las indicadas. MÉTODOS: establecimos dos tipos de denegación: a) contexto covid-19 en ≤ 50 años sin síntomas de alarma y baja probabilidad de hallazgos endoscópicos relevantes; y b) contexto inadecuado por no ser acordes con las guías o protocolos clínicos. Las denegaciones se archivaron en la historia clínica del paciente. Clasificamos las adecuadas en preferentes, convencionales y seguimiento. Comparamos las denegadas por especialidad. Valoramos los hallazgos de las preferentes. RESULTADOS: valoramos 1.658 peticiones (44 % gastroscopias, 56 % colonoscopias) entre el 16 marzo y el 30 junio de 2020. Se consideraron adecuadas 1.164 (70 %), de ellas preferentes el 8,5 %, convencionales el 48 %, seguimiento el 43 % y no valorables el 0,5 %. Se denegaron 494 (30 %): 20 % "contexto covid-19" y 80 % "contexto inadecuado". Los motivos de denegación en las gastroscopias fueron: seguimiento de lesiones (33 %), síntomas insuficientemente estudiados (20 %) y síntomas recidivantes con gastroscopia previa (18 %). Los motivos de denegación en las colonoscopias fueron: vigilancia pospolipectomía (25 %), cáncer colorrectal intervenido (21 %) y antecedentes familiares de cáncer (13 %). Encontramos diferencias significativas en la denegación según la especialidad: Cirugía General (52 %), Hematología (37 %) y Atención Primaria (29 %). Un 31 % de las preferentes mostraron hallazgos relevantes. CONCLUSIONES: un 24 % de nuestras endoscopias son discordantes con las recomendaciones científicas. Su denegación y la priorización de las adecuadas optimizan la utilización de recursos

No disponible

Evaluation of endoscopy requests in the resumption of activity during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: denial of nonindicated requests and prioritization of accepted requests.

INTRODUCTION: the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic forced the closure of endoscopy units. Before resuming endoscopic activity, we designed a protocol to evaluate gastroscopies and colonoscopies cancelled during the pandemic, denying inappropriate requests and prioritizing appropriate ones. METHODS: two types of inappropriate request were established: a) COVID-19 context, people aged ≤ 50 years without alarm symptoms and a low probability of relevant endoscopic findings; and b) inappropriate context, requests not in line with clinical guidelines or protocols. Denials were filed in the medical record. Appropriate requests were classified into priority, conventional and follow-up. Requests denied by specialty were compared and the findings of priority requests were evaluated. RESULTS: between March 16th and June 30th 2020, 1,658 requests (44 % gastroscopies and 56 % colonoscopies) were evaluated, of which 1,164 (70 %) were considered as appropriate (priority 8.5 %, conventional 48 %, follow-up 43 % and non-evaluable 0.5 %) and 494 (30 %) as inappropriate (20 % COVID-19 context, 80 % inappropriate context). The reasons for denial of gastroscopy were follow-up of lesions (33 %), insufficiently studied symptoms (20 %) and relapsing symptoms after a previous gastroscopy (18 %). The reasons for denial of colonoscopies were post-polypectomy surveillance (25 %), colorectal cancer after surgery (21 %) and a family history of cancer (13 %). There were significant differences in denied requests according to specialty: General Surgery (52 %), Hematology (37 %) and Primary Care (29 %); 31 % of priority cases showed relevant findings. CONCLUSIONS: according to our study, 24 % of endoscopies were discordant with scientific recommendations. Therefore, their denial and the prioritization of appropriate ones optimize the use of resources.