Eficacia de la asociación de una sola dosis de gamaglobulina hiperinmune anti-hepatitis B más entecavir en la profilaxis de la hepatitis B después del trasplante hepático: experiencia de un centro en la Argentina / [Efficacy of the association of a single dose of hepatitis B hyperimmune gammaglobulin and entecavir in the prophylaxis of hepatitis B after liver transplantation: experience of a single center in Argentina].

The present study reports the effectiveness of the association of a single dose of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIg) associated to entecavir in the prophylaxis of hepatitis B in patients who have undergone liver transplantation. Six patients that had been transplanted because of hepatitis B liver disease were retrospectively evaluated. Three of them developed non-oncological complications related to liver cirrhosis, two had hepatocellular carcinoma and another one had fulminant HBV hepatitis. The mean follow-up was 22 months (range: 7-52 months). The 6 patients received entecavir as prophylactic treatment before transplantation. The pretransplant viral load was undetectable in all patients. HBsAg seroconversion was observed in four of the six patients. Three patients died during follow-up, two because of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma, none of them had detectable HBV serum viral load. In a small series of patients we could demonstrate that a regimen with a single dose of gamma globulin entecavir is effective in the post-transplant management of patients with liver disease associated with HBV. Future studies will be able to demonstrate the effectiveness of specific gamma globulin-free regimens.

Morbilidad de las ileostomías temporarias / Morbidity of temporary ileostomies

Antecedentes: La morbilidad de las ileostomías oscila entre un 11 y 70 por ciento. Objetivo: Evaluar la morbilidad de las ileostomías temporarias. Lugar de aplicación: Centro de alta complejidad. Diseño: Estudio retrospectivo. Población: 93 pacientes con ileostomías temporarias. Método: Se evaluaron los pacientes en los que se realizaron ileostomías temporarias entre Septiembre de 1999 y Junio de 2006. Se analizó la morbilidad de las ileostomías, antes y luego del cierre. Tres técnicas de cierre fueron evaluadas: enterorrafia (21 por ciento), enterectomía con enterorrafia (16. 1 por ciento) y anastomosis latero-lateral mecánica (60.9 por ciento). Resultados: Se incluyeron 93 pacientes. Los motivos de desfuncionalización fueron: resección anterior ultrabaja en 29 (31 por ciento) casos, pouch ileoanal en 33 (35.5 por ciento) pacientes, y otras causas en 31 (33.3 por ciento). La morbilidad global fue 39.8 por ciento. Las complicaciones más frecuentes fueron: dermatitis (15 por ciento), suboclusión (10.7 por ciento) y alto débito (7.5 por ciento). No existieron diferencias significativas en la morbilidad al comparar el tipo de cirugía (urgencia vs. electiva), ni la causa (benigna vs. neoplasia). El cierre se efectuó en 87 pacientes (93.5 por ciento), en un período medio de 2.3 ± 2.8 meses. La morbilidad global fue 17.2 por ciento; dehiscencia de anastomosis (6.9 por ciento), suboclusión intestinal (2.3 por ciento), perforaciones periileostómicas (3.4 por ciento). La tasa de reoperación fue 9.2 por ciento. Un 6.9 por ciento presentó eventraciones y 3.4 por ciento infecciones de herida. Al comparar las complicaciones entre las técnicas de cierre intestinal, no hubo diferencias significativas. Conclusiones: La morbilidad de las ileostomías antes del cierre no fue despreciable, la mayoría fueron complicaciones menores. Luego del cierre no hubo diferencias significativas entre las tres técnicas.

Background: The morbidity of ileostomies has been reported between 11 and 70 per cent. Aim: Evaluate the morbidity of temporary loop ileostomies. Place of application: High complexity center. Design: Retrospective study. Methods: Ninety three patients with temporay loop ileostomies were included between September 1999 and June 2006. The end point was morbidity before and after closure of the ostomies. Three techniques were analized: enterorraphy (21 per cent), bowel resection with enterorraphy (16.1 per cent), and lineal stappled anastomosis (60.9 per cent). Results: Ninety three patients were included. The causes of construction the ileostomies were: low anterior resection in 29 (31 per cent) cases, ileoanal pouch in 33 (35.5 per cent) patients, and other causes in 31 (33.3 per cent). The overall morbidity was 39.8 per cent. The most frecuent complications were: skin scoriation (15 per cent), Small bowel occlusion (10.7 per cent), and high output (7.5 per cent). There were no statistical difference between the type of surgery (emergency vs. elective), neither the causes (benign vs. neoplasia). The ileostomy closure was performed in 87 (93.5 per cent) patients, in a median time of 2.3 ± 2.8 months. The overaIl morbidity was 17.2 per cent: anastomotic leakeage (6.9 per cent), small bowel occlusion (2.3 per cent), paraileostomic perforations (3.4 per cent). The reoperation rate was 9.2 per cent. There were 6.9 per cent of eventrations and 3.4 per cent of wound infections. There were no statistical differences when the three techniques of closure were compared. Conclusions: Complications of ileostomies before closure were not few, but most were minor. After closure there were no statistical differences between surgical techniques.