1
|
Giuliani T, Ibáñez JM, Montalvá-Orón E, Robledo AB, Chicote CM, Sanz AH, Ibañez CB, Mizrahi DC, Castelló IB, Torres JFM, Andújar RL. Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation: which graft warns the most? Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 408:196. [PMID: 37191721 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-02876-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2022] [Accepted: 03/31/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPK) is still characterized by high rates of postoperative complications. This study aims to offer an in-depth characterization of early, medium-term, and late complications following SPK to derive insights for postoperative management and follow-up. METHODS Consecutive SPK transplantations were analysed. Pancreatic graft (P-graft)- and kidney graft (K-graft)-related complications were analysed separately. The global postoperative course was assessed in three timeframes (early, medium-term, and late) using the comprehensive complication index (CCI). Predictors of complications and early graft loss were explored. RESULTS Complications occurred in 61.2% of patients, and the 90-day mortality was 3.9%. The overall burden of complications was significantly high during admission (CCI 22.4 ± 21.1) and decreased gradually afterwards. P-graft-related complications burdened the most in the early postoperative course (CCI 11.6 ± 13.8); postoperative ileus and perigraft fluid collection were the most frequent complications, and pseudoaneurysms, haemorrhages, and bowel leaks were the major concerns. K-related complications were milder but represented the largest proportion of the CCI in the late postoperative timeframe (CCI 7.6 ± 13.6). No predictors of P-graft- or K-graft-related complications were found. CONCLUSION Pancreas graft-related complications represent the largest part of the clinical burden in the early postoperative timeframe but are negligible after 3 months. Kidney grafts have a relevant impact in the long term. The multidisciplinary approach to SPK recipients should be driven based on all graft-specific complications and tailored on a time-dependent basis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tommaso Giuliani
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona Hospital Trust, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Javier Maupoey Ibáñez
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Eva Montalvá-Orón
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
- IIS La Fe, CIBERehd, Instituto de Salud San Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
| | - Andrea Boscà Robledo
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Cristina Martínez Chicote
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Ana Hernando Sanz
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Cristina Ballester Ibañez
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - David Calatayud Mizrahi
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Isabel Beneyto Castelló
- Department of Nephrology and Kidney Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | | | - Rafael López Andújar
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
- IIS La Fe, CIBERehd, Instituto de Salud San Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Fundora Y, Hessheimer AJ, Del Prete L, Maroni L, Lanari J, Barrios O, Clarysse M, Gastaca M, Barrera Gómez M, Bonadona A, Janek J, Boscà A, Álamo Martínez JM, Zozaya G, López Garnica D, Magistri P, León F, Magini G, Patrono D, Ničovský J, Hakeem AR, Nadalin S, McCormack L, Palacios P, Zieniewicz K, Blanco G, Nuño J, Pérez Saborido B, Echeverri J, Bynon JS, Martins PN, López López V, Dayangac M, Lodge JPA, Romagnoli R, Toso C, Santoyo J, Di Benedetto F, Gómez-Gavara C, Rotellar F, Gómez-Bravo MÁ, López Andújar R, Girard E, Valdivieso A, Pirenne J, Lladó L, Germani G, Cescon M, Hashimoto K, Quintini C, Cillo U, Polak WG, Fondevila C. Alternative forms of portal vein revascularization in liver transplant recipients with complex portal vein thrombosis. J Hepatol 2023; 78:794-804. [PMID: 36690281 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2023.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2022] [Revised: 12/22/2022] [Accepted: 01/12/2023] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Complex portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a challenge in liver transplantation (LT). Extra-anatomical approaches to portal revascularization, including renoportal (RPA), left gastric vein (LGA), pericholedochal vein (PCA), and cavoportal (CPA) anastomoses, have been described in case reports and series. The RP4LT Collaborative was created to record cases of alternative portal revascularization performed for complex PVT. METHODS An international, observational web registry was launched in 2020. Cases of complex PVT undergoing first LT performed with RPA, LGA, PCA, or CPA were recorded and updated through 12/2021. RESULTS A total of 140 cases were available for analysis: 74 RPA, 18 LGA, 20 PCA, and 28 CPA. Transplants were primarily performed with whole livers (98%) in recipients with median (IQR) age 58 (49-63) years, model for end-stage liver disease score 17 (14-24), and cold ischemia 431 (360-505) minutes. Post-operatively, 49% of recipients developed acute kidney injury, 16% diuretic-responsive ascites, 9% refractory ascites (29% with CPA, p <0.001), and 10% variceal hemorrhage (25% with CPA, p = 0.002). After a median follow-up of 22 (4-67) months, patient and graft 1-/3-/5-year survival rates were 71/67/61% and 69/63/57%, respectively. On multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis, the only factor significantly and independently associated with all-cause graft loss was non-physiological portal vein reconstruction in which all graft portal inflow arose from recipient systemic circulation (hazard ratio 6.639, 95% CI 2.159-20.422, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Alternative forms of portal vein anastomosis achieving physiological portal inflow (i.e., at least some recipient splanchnic blood flow reaching transplant graft) offer acceptable post-transplant results in LT candidates with complex PVT. On the contrary, non-physiological portal vein anastomoses fail to resolve portal hypertension and should not be performed. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS Complex portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a challenge in liver transplantation. Results of this international, multicenter analysis may be used to guide clinical decisions in transplant candidates with complex PVT. Extra-anatomical portal vein anastomoses that allow for at least some recipient splanchnic blood flow to the transplant allograft offer acceptable results. On the other hand, anastomoses that deliver only systemic blood flow to the allograft fail to resolve portal hypertension and should not be performed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yiliam Fundora
- General & Digestive Surgery Service, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Amelia J Hessheimer
- General & Digestive Surgery Service, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain; General & Digestive Surgery Service, Hospital Universitario La Paz, IdiPAZ, Madrid, Spain; CIBERehd, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
| | - Luca Del Prete
- Transplantation Center, Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Lorenzo Maroni
- Hepatobiliary Surgery & Transplant Unit, Policlinico Sant'Orsola IRCCS, University of Bologna, Italy
| | - Jacopo Lanari
- Department of Surgery, Oncology, & Gastroenterology, Hepatobiliary & Liver Transplantation Unit, Padua University Hospital, Padua, Italy
| | - Oriana Barrios
- Department of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Mikel Gastaca
- Hepatobiliary Surgery & Liver Transplantation Unit, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Hospital Universitario Cruces, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Manuel Barrera Gómez
- Hospital Universitario Nuestra Señora de Candelaria, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain
| | - Agnès Bonadona
- Grenoble Alpes University, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Digestive Surgery & Liver Transplantation, Grenoble, France
| | - Julius Janek
- Department of Transplant Surgery, F.D. Roosevelt Hospital, Banská Bystrica, Slovakia
| | - Andrea Boscà
- Liver Transplantation & Hepatology Laboratory, Hepatology, HPB Surgery & Transplant Unit, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe, La Fe University Hospital, Valencia, Spain
| | | | - Gabriel Zozaya
- HPB and Liver Transplant Unit, Clínica Universidad de Navarra; Institute of Health Research of Navarra (IdisNA), Pamplona, Spain
| | | | - Paolo Magistri
- Hepato-pancreato-biliary Surgery & Liver Transplantation Unit, Università degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
| | - Francisco León
- Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, Málaga, Spain
| | - Giulia Magini
- Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Damiano Patrono
- General Surgery 2U - Liver Transplant Centre, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Jiří Ničovský
- Centrum Kardiovaskulární a Transplantační Chirurgie, Brno, Czechia
| | - Abdul Rahman Hakeem
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Silvio Nadalin
- University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany; European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association (ELITA) Board
| | | | - Pilar Palacios
- Hospital Clínico Universitario de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain
| | - Krzysztof Zieniewicz
- Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland; European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association (ELITA) Board
| | - Gerardo Blanco
- Hospital Universitario de Badajoz, Universidad de Extremadura, Badajoz, Spain
| | - Javier Nuño
- Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
| | - Baltasar Pérez Saborido
- Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery & Liver Transplant Unit, Hospital Universitario Rio Hortega, Valladolid, Spain
| | - Juan Echeverri
- Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain
| | - J Steve Bynon
- University of Texas Houston - Memorial Hermann TMC, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Paulo N Martins
- University of Massachusetts - Memorial Medical Center, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Víctor López López
- Department of Surgery & Transplantation, Hospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca, Murcian Institue of Biosanitary Research (IMIB), Murcia, Spain
| | - Murat Dayangac
- Medipol University Hospital Center for Organ Transplantation, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - J Peter A Lodge
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Renato Romagnoli
- General Surgery 2U - Liver Transplant Centre, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Christian Toso
- Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland; European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association (ELITA) Board
| | - Julio Santoyo
- Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, Málaga, Spain
| | - Fabrizio Di Benedetto
- Hepato-pancreato-biliary Surgery & Liver Transplantation Unit, Università degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
| | | | - Fernando Rotellar
- HPB and Liver Transplant Unit, Clínica Universidad de Navarra; Institute of Health Research of Navarra (IdisNA), Pamplona, Spain
| | | | - Rafael López Andújar
- CIBERehd, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain; Liver Transplantation & Hepatology Laboratory, Hepatology, HPB Surgery & Transplant Unit, Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe, La Fe University Hospital, Valencia, Spain
| | - Edouard Girard
- Grenoble Alpes University, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Digestive Surgery & Liver Transplantation, Grenoble, France
| | - Andrés Valdivieso
- Hepatobiliary Surgery & Liver Transplantation Unit, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Hospital Universitario Cruces, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Jacques Pirenne
- Abdominal Transplant Surgery, UZ Leuven, KUL, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Laura Lladó
- Department of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Giacomo Germani
- Department of Surgery, Oncology, & Gastroenterology, Hepatobiliary & Liver Transplantation Unit, Padua University Hospital, Padua, Italy; European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association (ELITA) Board
| | - Matteo Cescon
- Hepatobiliary Surgery & Transplant Unit, Policlinico Sant'Orsola IRCCS, University of Bologna, Italy
| | - Koji Hashimoto
- Transplantation Center, Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Cristiano Quintini
- Transplantation Center, Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Umberto Cillo
- Department of Surgery, Oncology, & Gastroenterology, Hepatobiliary & Liver Transplantation Unit, Padua University Hospital, Padua, Italy
| | - Wojciech G Polak
- Division of HPB & Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Transplant Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association (ELITA) Board
| | - Constantino Fondevila
- General & Digestive Surgery Service, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain; General & Digestive Surgery Service, Hospital Universitario La Paz, IdiPAZ, Madrid, Spain; CIBERehd, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain; European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association (ELITA) Board.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Giuliani T, Ibáñez JM, Orón EM, Robledo AB, Chicote CM, Hernando Sanz A, Ballester Ibáñez C, Mizrahi DC, Castelló IB, Merino Torres JF, López Andújar R. Appraising pancreatic fistula in pancreas transplantation: A comprehensive complication index based analysis of postoperative outcomes and predictors of graft survival. Pancreatology 2022; 22:1167-1174. [PMID: 36220755 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2022.09.238] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2022] [Revised: 09/05/2022] [Accepted: 09/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A definition of pancreatic fistula specifically addressing pancreas transplantation (PT) is lacking. This study sought to characterize pancreatic fistula in this setting and to define its clinical relevance on the postoperative course and long-term graft survival (GS). METHODS Consecutive simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantations were analysed. The global postoperative course was assessed through the comprehensive complication index (CCI). PF was defined according to the original International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Predictors of poor postoperative course and GS were explored. RESULTS Seventy-eight patients were analysed. Surgical morbidity was 48.7%, with severe complications occurring in 39.7%. Ninety-day mortality was 2.6%. PF occurred in 56.6% of patients, although its average clinical burden was low and did not correlate with either early or long-term outcomes. Peri-graft fluid collections, postoperative day (POD) 1 drain fluid amylase (DFA) ≥ 2200 U/L, and POD 5 DFA/serum amylase ratio ≥7.0 independently correlated with poor postoperative course. Perigraft fluid collections were associated with reduced GS. CONCLUSION Conventionally defined pancreatic fistula is frequent following PT, although its clinical impact is negligible. To define clinically relevant PF, novel cut-offs for DFA might be pondered in a future series, while perigraft fluid collections should be strongly considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tommaso Giuliani
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain; Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona Hospital Trust, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Javier Maupoey Ibáñez
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Eva Montalvá Orón
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Andrea Boscà Robledo
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Cristina Martínez Chicote
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Ana Hernando Sanz
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Cristina Ballester Ibáñez
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - David Calatayud Mizrahi
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Isabel Beneyto Castelló
- Department of Nephrology and Kidney Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | | | - Rafael López Andújar
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplantation, La Fe University Hospital and University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Loinaz Segurola C, Ochando Cerdán F, Vicente López E, Serrablo Requejo A, López Cillero P, Gómez Bravo MÁ, Fabregat Prous J, Varo Pérez E, Miyar de León A, Fondevila Campo C, Valdivieso López A, Blanco Fernández G, Sánchez B, López Andújar R, Fundora Suárez Y, Cugat Andorra E, Díez Valladares L, Herrera Cabezón J, García Gil A, Morales Soriano R, Pardo Sánchez F, Sabater Ortí L, López Baena JÁ, Muñoz Bellvís L, Martín Pérez E, Pérez Saborido B, Suárez Muñoz MÁ, Meneu Día JC, Albiol Quer M, Sanjuanbenito Dehesa A, Ramia Ángel JM, Pereira Pérez F, Paseiro Crespo G, Palomo Sánchez JC, León Sanz M. Results of a survey on peri-operative nutritional support in pancreatic and biliary surgery in Spain. NUTR HOSP 2020; 37:238-242. [PMID: 32090583 DOI: 10.20960/nh.02895] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction: a survey on peri-operative nutritional support in pancreatic and biliary surgery among Spanish hospitals in 2007 showed that few surgical groups followed the 2006 ESPEN guidelines. Ten years later we sent a questionnaire to check the current situation. Methods: a questionnaire with 21 items sent to 38 centers, related to fasting time before and after surgery, nutritional screening use and type, time and type of peri-operative nutritional support, and number of procedures. Results: thirty-four institutions responded. The median number of pancreatic resections (head/total) was 29.5 (95% CI: 23.0-35; range, 5-68) (total, 1002); of surgeries for biliary malignancies (non-pancreatic), 9.8 (95% CI: 7.3-12.4; range, 2-30); and of main biliary resections for benign conditions, 10.4 (95% CI: 7.6-13.3; range, 2-33). Before surgery, only 41.2% of the sites used nutritional support (< 50% used any nutritional screening procedure). The mean duration of preoperative fasting for solid foods was 9.3 h (range, 6-24 h); it was 6.6 h for liquids (range, 2-12). Following pancreatic surgery, 29.4% tried to use early oral feeding, but 88.2% of the surveyed teams used some nutritional support; 26.5% of respondents used TPN in 100% of cases. Different percentages of TPN and EN were used in the other centers. In malignant biliary surgery, 22.6% used TPN always, and EN in 19.3% of cases. Conclusions: TPN is the commonest nutrition approach after pancreatic head surgery. Only 29.4% of the units used early oral feeding, and 32.3% used EN; 22.6% used TPN regularly after surgery for malignant biliary tumours. The 2006 ESPEN guideline recommendations are not regularly followed 12 years after their publication in our country.
Collapse
|