Systematic review of outcome of downstaging hepatocellular cancer before liver transplantation in patients outside the Milan criteria.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the evidence on tumour downstaging before liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) initially staged beyond the Milan criteria. METHODS: MEDLINE (from 1952), Embase (from 1980) and the Cochrane Library were searched. The review included cohort studies that reported the outcomes of patients with HCC outside the Milan criteria who underwent downstaging before transplantation. RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and included a total of 720 patients who underwent transplantation following downstaging after initial presentation with disease outside the Milan criteria. The rate of successful downstaging varied from 24 to 69 per cent of patients. Reported survival rates ranged from 82 to 100 per cent, 79 to 100 per cent and 54·6 to 94 per cent at 1, 3 and 5 years respectively. These were comparable with results for patients presenting within the Milan criteria. CONCLUSION: Successful downstaging of HCC to within the Milan criteria is feasible in a proportion of patients. Absolute and disease-free survival rates in patients transplanted following downstaging are comparable to those in patients within the Milan criteria.

Systematic review and literature appraisal on methodology of conducting and reporting critical-care echocardiography studies: a report from the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine PRICES expert panel.

BACKGROUND: The echocardiography working group of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine recognized the need to provide structured guidance for future CCE research methodology and reporting based on a systematic appraisal of the current literature. Here is reported this systematic appraisal. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review, registered on the Prospero database. A total of 43 items of common interest to all echocardiography studies were initially listed by the experts, and other "topic-specific" items were separated into five main categories of interest (left ventricular systolic function, LVSF n = 15, right ventricular function, RVF n = 18, left ventricular diastolic function, LVDF n = 15, fluid management, FM n = 7, and advanced echocardiography techniques, AET n = 17). We evaluated the percentage of items reported per study and the fraction of studies reporting a single item. RESULTS: From January 2000 till December 2017 a total of 209 articles were included after systematic search and screening, 97 for LVSF, 48 for RVF, 51 for LVDF, 36 for FM and 24 for AET. Shock and ARDS were relatively common among LVSF articles (both around 15%) while ARDS comprised 25% of RVF articles. Transthoracic echocardiography was the main echocardiography mode, in 87% of the articles for AET topic, followed by 81% for FM, 78% for LVDF, 70% for LVSF and 63% for RVF. The percentage of items per study as well as the fraction of study reporting an item was low or very low, except for FM. As an illustration, the left ventricular size was only reported by 56% of studies in the LVSF topic, and half studies assessing RVF reported data on pulmonary artery systolic pressure. CONCLUSION: This analysis confirmed sub-optimal reporting of several items listed by an expert panel. The analysis will help the experts in the development of guidelines for CCE study design and reporting.

Meta-analysis of peritoneal lavage in appendicectomy.

Background: The use of peritoneal lavage to prevent postoperative intra-abdominal abscess (IAA) after appendicectomy has been debated widely. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of suction alone versus lavage for appendicitis was performed to determine the relative benefit of lavage. Primary outcomes were postoperative IAA and wound infection (WI). Inclusion criteria were human studies reporting a comparison of appendicectomy with or without peritoneal lavage. Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, the majority of which were retrospective. Only three were RCTs. Four studies included analysis only of the paediatric population. The rate of IAA was 1·0-19·5 per cent in patients receiving suction alone and 1·5-18·6 per cent in those having lavage. WI rates were 1·0-29·2 per cent for suction alone and 0·8-20·5 per cent for lavage. The pooled risk difference for IAA was 0·01 (95 per cent c.i. -0·03 to 0·06; P = 0·50) and that for WI was 0·00 (-0·05 to 0·05; P = 0·98). Analyses of both outcomes indicated a medium degree of heterogeneity between effect estimates with I 2 values of 71 per cent (P = 0·001) and 70 per cent (P = 0·010) for IAA and WI respectively. Conclusion: There is no evidence of benefit of lavage over suction for postoperative infective complications, and no individual study demonstrated a significant benefit in patients receiving lavage.