Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
2.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 31(7): 4436-4444, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38549003

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Optimal management of colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) is based on a combination of chemotherapy and surgical resection. The tumor regression grade (TRG) score is a histological scoring system to evaluate response to chemotherapy. The prognosis of a heterogeneous response in cases of multiple metastases has not been evaluated according to the TRG score. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent liver resection for multiple CRLM after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in two tertiary centers from January 2015 to April 2019 were retrospectively included. Oncological characteristics and outcome between TRG 1-2-3 (good response group), TRG 4-5 (poor response group) and heterogeneous TRG (good and poor TRG among different lesions within the same patient) groups were compared. RESULTS: Among the 327 patients included, 134 (41.0%) had good response (TRG 1-2-3), 120 (36.7%) had poor response (TRG 4-5), and 73 (22.3%) had heterogeneous response. The type and number of cycles of chemotherapy, k-Ras mutational status, and tumor number or size did not differ between the three groups. Use of irinotecan-based and anti-VEGF neoadjuvant therapy was associated with better TRG response [irinotecan-based: hazard ratio (OR) = 1.744; p = 0.045; anti-VEGF neoadjuvant therapy: 2.054; p = 0.005). Overall survival (OS) was higher in the 1-2-3 TRG group than in the heterogeneous TRG group (2-year OS = 81.3% vs. 60.3%, respectively; p = 0.003) and the 4-5 TRG group (2-year OS = 81.3% vs. 55.0%, respectively; p = 0.012) and similar between the heterogeneous and 4-5 TRG groups. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of heterogeneous pathological response according to TRG is 22.3%, and the prognosis is comparable to that of poor pathological response.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Colorectal Neoplasms , Hepatectomy , Liver Neoplasms , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Humans , Liver Neoplasms/secondary , Liver Neoplasms/drug therapy , Liver Neoplasms/surgery , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Colorectal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Male , Female , Retrospective Studies , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Survival Rate , Aged , Follow-Up Studies , Irinotecan/administration & dosage , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
3.
HPB (Oxford) ; 26(4): 586-593, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38341287

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are no data to evaluate the difference in populations and impact of centers with liver transplant programs in performing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). METHODS: This was a multicenter study including patients undergoing LLR for benign and malignant tumors at 27 French centers from 1996 to 2018. The main outcomes were postoperative severe morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 3154 patients were included, and 14 centers were classified as transplant centers (N = 2167 patients, 68.7 %). The transplant centers performed more difficult LLRs and more resections for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients who more frequently had cirrhosis. A higher rate of performing the Pringle maneuver, a lower rate of blood loss and a higher rate of open conversion (all p < 0.05) were observed in the transplant centers. There was no association between the presence of a liver transplant program and either postoperative severe morbidity (<10 % in each group; p = 0.228) or mortality (1 % in each group; p = 0.915). CONCLUSIONS: Most HCCs, difficult LLRs, and cirrhotic patients are treated in transplant centers. We show that all centers can achieve comparable safety and quality of care in LLR independent of the presence of a liver transplant program.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Laparoscopy , Liver Neoplasms , Liver Transplantation , Humans , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/pathology , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Liver Transplantation/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Hepatectomy/adverse effects , Laparoscopy/adverse effects , Length of Stay , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/surgery
4.
Surgery ; 173(5): 1129-1136, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36775758

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis represents the leading cause of acute gastrointestinal disorders, but only a small series regarding ambulatory appendectomies are available. The aim of this study was to report the results of ambulatory (day-case) appendectomy for acute appendicitis in a large consecutive cohort and to improve selection criteria in order to extend the indications. METHODS: All appendectomy procedures for acute appendicitis (March 2013 to June 2020) were included retrospectively. Criteria to select patients eligible for ambulatory appendectomy were based on our clinico-radiological St-Antoine's score ≥4. RESULTS: In total, 1,730 consecutive patients had an appendectomy for acute appendicitis: 1,279 (74%) in conventional settings and 451 (26%) in ambulatory settings. In the conventional group, 360 (28%) patients had surgery deferred to the next morning, whereas in the ambulatory group, 309 patients (70%) were readmitted the next morning (P < .0001). In the ambulatory group, 376 (83%) patients satisfied the criteria (score ≥4), and 90.9% were discharged on postoperative day 0. Rates of unplanned consultation and readmission were not significantly different (5.1% vs 6.6% P = .243). Multivariate analysis of the entire cohort confirmed absence of radiological perforation as highly predictive of early discharge (odds ratio = 6.073). In our cohort, these patients had an early discharge rate of 86.4% compared to 90.2% in those with a St-Antoine's score ≥4. Considering only radiological evidence of perforation as a selection criterion for ambulatory appendectomy, 581 more patients would be eligible for ambulatory surgery (+60%). CONCLUSION: Ambulatory surgery for acute appendicitis based on St-Antoine's score is safe. We propose to extend the indication for ambulatory management to all patients without radiological evidence of perforation.


Subject(s)
Appendicitis , Laparoscopy , Humans , Appendectomy/adverse effects , Appendectomy/methods , Appendicitis/diagnostic imaging , Appendicitis/surgery , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Patient Selection , Acute Disease , Ambulatory Surgical Procedures/methods , Length of Stay
6.
Ann Surg ; 276(5): 860-867, 2022 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35894428

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To define benchmark cutoffs for redo liver transplantation (redo-LT). BACKGROUND: In the era of organ shortage, redo-LT is frequently discussed in terms of expected poor outcome and wasteful resources. However, there is a lack of benchmark data to reliably evaluate outcomes after redo-LT. METHODS: We collected data on redo-LT between January 2010 and December 2018 from 22 high-volume transplant centers. Benchmark cases were defined as recipients with model of end stage liver disease (MELD) score ≤25, absence of portal vein thrombosis, no mechanical ventilation at the time of surgery, receiving a graft from a donor after brain death. Also, high-urgent priority and early redo-LT including those for primary nonfunction (PNF) or hepatic artery thrombosis were excluded. Benchmark cutoffs were derived from the 75th percentile of the medians of all benchmark centers. RESULTS: Of 1110 redo-LT, 373 (34%) cases qualified as benchmark cases. Among these cases, the rate of postoperative complications until discharge was 76%, and increased up to 87% at 1-year, respectively. One-year overall survival rate was excellent with 90%. Benchmark cutoffs included Comprehensive Complication Index CCI ® at 1-year of ≤72, and in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates of ≤13% and ≤15%, respectively. In contrast, patients who received a redo-LT for PNF showed worse outcomes with some values dramatically outside the redo-LT benchmarks. CONCLUSION: This study shows that redo-LT achieves good outcome when looking at benchmark scenarios. However, this figure changes in high-risk redo-LT, as for example in PNF. This analysis objectifies for the first-time results and efforts for redo-LT and can serve as a basis for discussion about the use of scarce resources.


Subject(s)
End Stage Liver Disease , Liver Transplantation , Tissue and Organ Procurement , Benchmarking , End Stage Liver Disease/surgery , Graft Survival , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
7.
Transpl Int ; 34(5): 835-843, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33650170

ABSTRACT

Optimal management of inferior vena cava (IVC) is crucial to ensure safety in late liver retransplantation (ReLT). The aim of this study was to evaluate different surgical strategies with regard to IVC in late ReLT. All consecutive late ReLT (≥90 days from the previous transplant) from 2013 to 2018 in a single center was reviewed (n = 66). Of them, 46 (69.7%) were performed without venovenous bypass (VVB) including 29 with caval preservation (CP) and 17 with caval replacement (CR). The remaining 20 cases (30.3%) required the use of VVB. Among ReLT without VVB, CP was associated with a lower number of packed red blood cells (median 4 vs. 7; P = 0.016) and a lower incidence of post-transplant acute kidney injury (6.9% vs. 47.1%; P = 0.003). The feasibility of CP was 95% (14/15) in patients with previous 3-vein piggyback caval anastomosis versus 48.3% (15/31) after other techniques (P = 0.003). Indirect signs of portal hypertension (PHT) before retransplantation were predictive of VVB requirement. Early and long-term outcomes were similar across the three groups (CP without VVB, CR without VVB, and VVB). Preserving the IVC in late ReLT is associated with better postoperative renal function and is facilitated by a previous 3-vein piggyback. Routine CR is not justified in late ReLT.


Subject(s)
Liver Transplantation , Humans , Liver , Reoperation , Retrospective Studies , Vena Cava, Inferior/surgery
8.
Surg Endosc ; 35(3): 1006-1013, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33048229

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The advantages of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) are well known, but their financial costs are poorly evaluated. The aim of this study was to analyze the economic impact of surgical difficulty on LLR costs, and to identify clinical factors that most affect global charges. METHODS: All patients who underwent LLR from 2014 to 2018 in a single French center were included. The IMM classification was used to stratify surgical difficulty, from group I through group III. The costing method was done combining top-down and bottom-up approaches. A multivariate analysis was performed in order to identify clinical factors that most affect global charges. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy patients were included (Group I: n = 136 (50%), Group II: n = 60 (22%), Group III: n = 74 (28%)). Total expenses significantly increased (p < 0.001) from Group I to Group III, but there was no difference regarding financial income (p = 0.133). Technical platform expenses significantly increased (p < 0.001) from Group I to Group III and represented the main expense among all costs with a total of 4 930 ± 2 601€. Among technical platform expenses, the anesthesia platform represented the main expense. In multivariate analysis, the four clinical factors that affected global charges in the whole study population were operating time (p < 0.001), length of stay (p < 0.001), admission in ICU (p < 0.001) and the occurrence of major complication (p < 0.05). An admission in ICU was the clinical factor that affected most global charges, as an ICU stay had a 39.1% increase effect on global charges in the whole study population. CONCLUSION: LLR is a cost-effective procedure. The more complex is the LLR, the higher is the hospital cost. An admission in ICU was the clinical factor that most affected global charges.


Subject(s)
Hepatectomy/economics , Laparoscopy/economics , Liver/surgery , Aged , Costs and Cost Analysis , Female , Hospital Costs , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Postoperative Care , Treatment Outcome
9.
East Mediterr Health J ; 24(1): 92-98, 2018 Apr 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29658625

ABSTRACT

The noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) emergency health kit was developed in response to the growing prevalence of NCDs in low and middle-income countries. Under conditions of conflict or following natural disasters, regular treatment of this category of diseases is often disrupted and rarely prioritized. This leads to greater morbidity and mortality both in the short and long term. The Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) has both a high incidence of NCDs and currently is the site of several major conflicts and hosts most of the world's refugees. Therefore, the WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean initiated the development of the NCD emergency health kit to provide a structured set of medications, equipment and renewables to supply the needs of a population of 10 000 people over a period of 3 months following disruption of normal medical services. This report discusses the rationale and anticipated use of the NCD emergency health kit followed by the selection criteria, structure, content and quantification process of the kit. Finally, the next steps are examined, including the procurement, logistics and monitoring and evaluation process of the kit.


Subject(s)
Developing Countries , Emergencies , Equipment and Supplies/supply & distribution , Noncommunicable Diseases/drug therapy , Prescription Drugs/supply & distribution , Africa, Northern , Armed Conflicts , Asia, Western , Capacity Building/organization & administration , Disasters , Health Services Accessibility/organization & administration , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...