Análisis de la mortalidad tras una fractura de cadera en un período de 15 años: la mortalidad al año se correlaciona directamente con la mortalidad a los 2 años / Mortality trend over 15 years in hip fracture: mortality at 1 year directly correlates with mortality at 2 years

OBJETIVO: Evaluar la tendencia de la letalidad al año y a 2 años, tiempo de espera de cirugía y estadía hospitalaria en fractura de cadera entre 2002 y 2016. Además, evaluar la correlación entre letalidad a uno y dos años. MÉTODO: Diseño transversal. Fueron incluidos pacientes mayores de 60 años que ingresaron por fractura de cadera entre 2002 y 2016. Se solicitó al Registro Civil reportar si los pacientes estaban con vida al 30 de junio de 2019. La correlación de Spearman fue estimada para determinar la tendencia de la letalidad a uno y dos años, la edad, el tiempo de espera de cirugía, y la estadía hospitalaria durante el periodo estudiado. Además, una regresión linear fue estimada entre letalidad a un año y dos años. RESULTADOS: Fueron incluidos 961 fracturas de cadera. Se observó una tendencia a la disminución en la letalidad a 1 (rho » -0.23) y 2 años (rho » -0.29), en la proporción de hombres (rho » -0.25), en la estadía hospitalaria (rho » -0.06), y en el tiempo de espera de cirugía (rho » -0.11), sin alcanzar significancia estadística. La letalidad a 1 año fue de 0,17 (intervalo de confianza de 95% [IC95%]: 0,14 a 0,19), y a 2 años, de 0,26 (IC 95%: 0,23 a 0,29). Se estimó un R2 de 0,60 entre la letalidad a 1 y 2 años. CONCLUSIONES: La letalidad a uno y dos años, el tiempo de espera de cirugía, la edad de presentación, y la estadía hospitalaria no han variado significativamente en el periodo estudiado. Se observa una fuerte correlación entre la letalidad a uno y dos años, lo que sugiere un riesgo constante de mortalidad después de una fractura de cadera.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the trend in 1 and 2 years, the fatality rate, the waiting time for surgery, and the length of hospital stay in a single center between 2002 and 2016. Also, to evaluate the relationship between the one-year and two-year fatality rates. METHODS: A cross-sectional study. Patients older than 60 years of age who were admited due to hip fracture between 2002 and 2016 were included. A request was made to the Chilean National Civil Registry to determine if the patients were alive on June 30, 2019. The Spearman correlation was estimated to determine the trend of the one-year and two-year fatality rates, the age, the type of fracture, and the waiting time for surgery. Also, a linear regression analysis was estimated between the one-year and two-year fatality rates. RESULTS: A total of 961 hip fractures were included. From 2002 to 2016, a downward trend was found in the 1-year (rho » -0.23) and 2-year fatality rates (rho » -0.29), in the proportion of male patients (rho » -0.25), in the length of hospital stay (rho » -0.06), and in the waiting time for surgery (rho » -0.11), not reaching statistical difference. The 1-year fatality rate was of 0,17 (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.14 to 0.19) and the 2-year fatality rate was of 0,26 (95%CI: 0.23 to 0.29). An R2 of 0.60 was estimated between the 1-year and 2-year fatality rates. CONCLUSIONS: The one-year and two-year fatality rates, the waiting time for surgery, and the length of hospital stay remained constant during the period analyzed. A strong correlation between the one-year and two-year fatality rates was found, which suggests a constant risk of death after hip fracture.

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Impact of Wait Time at a Single Center

ABSTRACT Introduction and aim. Liver transplantation (LT) provides durable survival for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, there is continuing debate concerning the impact of wait time and acceptable tumor burden on outcomes after LT. We sought to review outcomes of LT for HCC at a single, large U.S. center, examining the influence of wait time on post-LT outcomes. Material and methods. We reviewed LT for HCC at Mayo Clinic in Florida from 1/1/2003 until 6/30/2014. Follow up was updated through 8/1/ 2015. Results. From 2003-2014,978 patients were referred for management of HCC. 376 patients were transplanted for presumed HCC within Milan criteria, and the results of these 376 cases were analyzed. The median diagnosis to LT time was 183 days (8 - 4,337), and median transplant list wait time was 62 days (0 -1815). There was no statistical difference in recurrence-free or overall survival for those with wait time of less than or greater than 180 days from diagnosis of HCC to LT. The most important predictor of long term survival after LT was HCC recurrence (HR: 18.61, p < 0.001). Recurrences of HCC as well as survival were predicted by factors related to tumor biology, including histopathological grade, vascular invasion, and pre-LT serum alpha-fetoprotein levels. Disease recurrence occurred in 13%. The overall 5-year patient survival was 65.8%, while the probability of 5-year recurrence-free survival was 62.2%. Conclusions. In this large, single-center experience with long-term data, factors of tumor biology, but not a longer wait time, were associated with recurrence-free and overall survival.

Resultados de un programa nacional de trasplante cardiaco pediátrico: fortalezas y debilidades / Results of a national program of pediatric heart transplantation: strengths and weakness

El trasplante cardiaco pediátrico es una terapia efectiva para tratar la insuficiencia cardiaca avanzada. Objetivos: Analizar los resultados inmediatos y a mediano plazo de niños enlistados para trasplante cardiaco. Pacientes y Método: Se analizó el registro de pacientes enlistados para trasplante, entre octubre de 2001 y julio de 2016, analizando datos demográficos, diagnósticos, status de enlistamiento, tiempo de espera, datos de donantes, uso de asistencia ventricular, complicaciones y mortalidad. Resultados: La serie abarca 30 pacientes con edad promedio de 9,4 años (1 mes a 15 años). El diagnóstico principal fue miocardiopatía dilatada en 24 pacientes (80%). El status de ingreso fue I (urgencia) en 19 casos y II (no urgencia) en 11. Fallecieron 10 en la lista de espera (33,3%) en un promedio de 52 días (13 a 139 días). Catorce pacientes fueron trasplantados (46.7%), con un tiempo de espera de 199,6 días (4 a 586 días). Requirieron asistencia ventricular 9 pacientes (30%). Todos recibieron inmunosupresión tri asociada. Un paciente falleció a los 16 días por falla primaria del injerto (7,1%). El seguimiento promedio fue de 43 meses (0,5 a 159 meses). Dos pacientes fallecieron alejadamente (55 y 82 meses) por rechazo secundario al abandono de tratamiento inmunosupresor. La supervivencia a 1 y 5 años fue 93% y 74%, respectivamente. Conclusiones: Nuestro programa ha trasplantado al 50% de los pacientes enlistados con buena supervivencia a mediano plazo. Una proporción significativa de pacientes se enlistó con carácter de urgencia y un 34.5% de los pacientes fallecieron en la lista de espera.

Pediatric heart transplantation is an effective therapy to treat advanced heart failure in children. Objectives: To analyze the immediate and mid-term results of pediatric patients listed for heart transplantation. Patients and Methods: Registration of patients admitted to our transplant protocol between October 2001 and July 2016 were reviewed, analyzing demographic data, diagnosis, status at the time of listing, waiting time until transplantation, donor data, use of ventricular assist device, hemodynamic data, complications and global mortality. Results: Thirthy patients where included with a mean age of 9.4 years (1 month to 15 years). The most frequent diagnosis was dilated cardiomyopathy in 24 patients (80%). The status was I (urgency) in 19 cases and II in 11 cases. Ten patients died on the waiting list (33.3%) at an average of 52 days (13-139 days). Fourteen were transplanted (46.7%), with a waiting time of 199.6 days (4-586 days). Nine patients required mechanical support (30%). All patients received triple association of immunosuppression. One patient died 16 days post transplant due to primary graft failure (7.1%). The average follow-up was 43 months (0.5-159 months). Two patients died later on (82 and 55 months), both due to secondary rejection because of voluntary cessation of immunosuppressive therapy. Survival at 1 and 5 years was 93% and 74%, respectively. Conclusions: Our program has successfully transplanted 50% of patients enrolled, with good medium-term survival. A significant proportion of patients were listed as a medical emergency and 34.5% died on the waiting list.

Model for End-Stage Liver Disease, Model for Liver Transplantation Survival and Donor Risk Index as predictive models of survival after liver transplantation in 1,006 patients

OBJECTIVES: Liver transplantation has not increased with the number of patients requiring this treatment, increasing deaths among those on the waiting list. Models predicting post-transplantation survival, including the Model for Liver Transplantation Survival and the Donor Risk Index, have been created. Our aim was to compare the performance of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease, the Model for Liver Transplantation Survival and the Donor Risk Index as prognostic models for survival after liver transplantation. METHOD: We retrospectively analyzed the data from 1,270 patients who received a liver transplant from a deceased donor in the state of São Paulo, Brazil, between July 2006 and July 2009. All data obtained from the Health Department of the State of São Paulo at the 15 registered transplant centers were analyzed. Patients younger than 13 years of age or with acute liver failure were excluded. RESULTS: The majority of the recipients had Child-Pugh class B or C cirrhosis (63.5%). Among the 1,006 patients included, 274 (27%) died. Univariate survival analysis using a Cox proportional hazards model showed hazard ratios of 1.02 and 1.43 for the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and the Model for Liver Transplantation Survival, respectively (p<0.001). The areas under the ROC curve for the Donor Risk Index were always less than 0.5, whereas those for the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and the Model for Liver Transplantation Survival were significantly greater than 0.5 (p<0.001). The cutoff values for the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (≥29.5; sensitivity: 39.1%; specificity: 75.4%) and the Model for Liver Transplantation Survival (≥1.9; sensitivity 63.9%, specificity 54.5%), which were calculated using data available before liver transplantation, were good predictors of survival after liver transplantation (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Model for Liver Transplantation Survival displayed similar death prediction ...

Results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be transplanted? / Resultados do transplante cardíaco no paciente urgente - quem deve ser transplantado?

Objective: To evaluate immediate and long-term results of cardiac transplantation at two different levels of urgency. Methods: From November 2003 to December 2012, 228 patients underwent cardiac transplantation. Children and patients in cardiogenic shock were excluded from the study. From the final group (n=212), 58 patients (27%) were hospitalized under inotropic support (Group A), while 154 (73%) were awaiting transplantation at home (Group B). Patients in Group A were younger (52.0±11.3 vs. 55.2±10.4 years, P=0.050) and had shorter waiting times (29.4±43.8 vs. 48.8±45.2 days; P=0.006). No difference was found for sex or other comorbidities. Haemoglobin was lower and creatinine higher in Group A. The characteristics of the donors were similar. Follow-up was 4.5±2.7 years. Results: No differences were found in time of ischemia (89.1±37.0 vs. 91.5±34.5 min, P=0.660) or inotropic support (13.8% vs. 11.0%, P=0.579), neither in the incidence of cellular or humoral rejection and of cardiac allograft vasculopathy. De novo diabetes de novo in the first year was slightly higher in Group A (15.5% vs. 11.7%, P=0.456), and these patients were at increased risk of serious infection (22.4% vs. 12.3%, P=0.068). Hospital mortality was similar (3.4% vs. 4.5%, P=0.724), as well as long-term survival (7.8±0.5 vs. 7.4±0.3 years). Conclusions: The results obtained in patients hospitalized under inotropic support were similar to those of patients awaiting transplantation at home. Allocation of donors to the first group does not seem to compromise the benefit of transplantation. These results may not be extensible to more critical patients. .

Objetivo: Avaliar os resultados imediatos e de longo prazo do transplante cardíaco em dois níveis diferentes de urgência. Métodos: De novembro de 2003 a dezembro de 2012, 228 pacientes foram submetidos a transplante cardíaco. Crianças e os pacientes em choque cardiogênico foram excluídos do estudo. Do grupo final (n=212), 58 pacientes (27%) estavam hospitalizados e em suporte inotrópico (Grupo A), enquanto 154 (73%) aguardavam transplante em casa (Grupo B). Os pacientes do Grupo A eram mais jovens (52,0±11,3 vs. 55,2±10,4 anos, P=0,050) e tinham menor tempo de espera (29,4±43,8 vs. 48,8±45,2 dias, P=0,006). Não foram encontradas diferenças entre os sexos ou outras comorbidades. Níveis de hemoglobina foram menores e de creatinina superiores no Grupo A. As características dos doadores foram semelhantes. O acompanhamento foi de 4,5±2,7 anos. Resultados: Não foram observadas diferenças no tempo de isquemia (89,1 ± 37,0 vs. 91,5 ± 34,5 min, P=0,660) ou no suporte inotrópico (13,8% vs. 11,0%, P=0,579), nem na incidência de rejeição celular ou humoral e de vasculopatia do enxerto. Incidência de diabetes de novo no início do primeiro ano foi um pouco maior no Grupo A (15,5% vs. 11,7%, P=0,456), e esses pacientes apresentaram maior risco de infecção grave (22,4% vs. 12,3%, P=0,068). A mortalidade hospitalar foi semelhante (3,4% vs. 4,5%, P=0,724), bem como a sobrevida a longo prazo (7,8±0,5 vs. 7,4±0,3 anos). Conclusões: Os resultados obtidos em pacientes hospitalizados em suporte inotrópico foram semelhantes aos de pacientes que aguardam o transplante em casa. Alocação de doadores para o primeiro grupo não parece comprometer o benefício do transplante. Esses resultados podem não ser estendidos aos pacientes mais críticos. .

Análise da mortalidade na lista de espera de fígado no Paraná, Brasil: o que devemos fazer para enfrentar a escassez de órgãos? / Analysis of liver waiting list mortality in Paraná, Brazi: what shall we do to face organ shortage?

RACIONAL: O transplante hepático é a melhor modalidade terapêutica para pacientes em estágio final de doença hepática. Minimização de morte, enquanto se espera o procedimento, envolve priorização de acordo com o estado clínico e a alocação adequada de fígados de doadores. OBJETIVO: Análise da mortalidade na lista de espera de fígado no estado do Paraná, PR, Brasil. MÉTODOS: Foram analisados ​​os dados sobre todos os pacientes (n = 65) que foram registrados na lista de espera de fígado durante um período de 32 meses. RESULTADOS: A morte em lista de espera foi de 41,5% (n = 27). Nenhuma diferença estatística foi observada em relação aos MELD / MELD-Na entre o grupo que faleceu (19,88 / 21,6) e não morreu (17,28 / 19,47). MELD-Na previu maior mortalidade, especialmente no subgrupo de pacientes com gravidade intermediária da doença (classe B) previsto pelo escore de CTP. CONCLUSÃO: É crítica a escassez de doadores de órgãos nessa região e a taxa de mortalidade em lista de espera excede em muito o risco inerente de um transplante de fígado, especialmente entre pacientes com MELD mais baixos. É desejável a utilização de um protocolo agressivo de doadores com critérios expandidos, split liver e transplante de doador vivo.

BACKGROUND: Orthotopic liver transplantation is the best therapeutic modality for patients with end stage of liver disease. Minimization of death, while waiting for the procedure, involves accurate priorization according to clinical status and appropriate allocation of donor livers. AIM: The mortality analysis in the liver waiting list in Paraná state, PR, Brazil. METHODS: Were analyzed the data on all patients (n=65) who were registered on the liver waiting list during a 32 months period in the state of Paraná, southern Brazil. RESULTS: The death rated in waiting list was 41,5% (n=27). No statistic difference was observed regarding the MELD/MELD-Na scores between the group who died (19,88/21,6) and not died (17,28/19,47). MELD-Na predicted a higher mortality, especially in the subgroup of patients with intermediate severity of disease (class B) predicted by the CTP score. CONCLUSION: It´s critical the shortage of donor organs in our region, waiting list mortality rate far exceeds the inherent risk of a liver transplant, especially among patients with lower MELD scores. It´s desirable to use an aggressive protocol of expanded criteria donors, split liver and living donor transplant.