Which cava anastomotic techniques are optimal regarding immediate and short-term outcomes after liver transplantation: A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: It has long been debated whether cava anastomosis should be performed with the piggyback technique or cava replacement, with or without veno-venous bypass (VVB), with or without temporary portocaval shunt (PCS) in the setting of liver transplantation. OBJECTIVES: To identify whether different cava anastomotic techniques and other maneuvers benefit the recipient regarding short-term outcomes and to provide international expert panel recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel (CRD42021240979). RESULTS: Of 3205 records screened, 307 publications underwent full-text assessment for eligibility and 47 were included in qualitative synthesis. Four studies were randomized control trials. Eighteen studies were comparative. The remaining 25 were single-center retrospective noncomparative studies. CONCLUSION: Based on existing data and expert opinion, the panel cannot recommend one cava reconstruction technique over another, rather the surgical approach should be based on surgeon preference and center dependent, with special consideration toward patient circumstances (Quality of evidence: Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong). The panel recommends against routine use of vevo-venous bypass (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong) and against the routine use of temporary porto-caval shunt (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong).

Is there a role for Ytrrium-90 in the treatment of unresectable and metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma?

BACKGROUND: Selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) with Ytrrium-90 (Y-90) has been used to treat hepatic malignancies with success. This study focuses on the efficacy and safety of Y-90 in the treatment of unresectable and metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). METHODS: A single-institution retrospective case review was performed for patients with unresectable and metastatic ICC treated with Y-90 between 2006 and 2016. RESULTS: Seventeen patients with ICC underwent 21 Y-90 treatments. Four patients had undergone prior liver resection, and six patients had extrahepatic disease at the time of treatment. Five year overall survival was 26.8%, with a median survival of 33.6 months. One patient underwent margin negative liver resection after a single treatment. Complications were appreciated in two cases. Ninety-day mortality was 0%. CONCLUSION: Treatment of ICC using Y-90 is a safe and promising procedure. Further research is needed to clarify its role in the treatment of unresectable and metastatic ICC.

Efficacy and safety of transversus abdominis plane blocks versus thoracic epidural anesthesia in patients undergoing major abdominal oncologic resections: A prospective, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare patient outcomes for thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) with transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks. METHODS: A prospective, randomized trial was performed for patients undergoing abdominal oncologic surgeries. RESULTS: There were 32 TAP and 35 TEA subjects. The TEA group demonstrated increased episodes of hypotension in the first 24 h (3 v 0.6, p = 0.02). There was no difference in 24-48 h fluid balance between the groups. Overall parenteral morphine equivalents of opioids administered for the TEA group were higher for each postoperative day (p < 0.05). The post-operative survey did not demonstrate any difference in subjective pain between the TAP and TEA groups (6 v 6 p = 0.35). There was no attributable morbidity associated with either technique. CONCLUSIONS: TAP block use was associated with lower parenteral morphine equivalent usage and decreased incidence of hypotension in the early post-operative period compared to TEA.