Excessive weight gain, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes are frequently observed in patients having undergone liver transplantation (LTx). These alterations are probably multifactorial in origin, and cluster to generate a metabolic syndrome (MS), increasing the risk of cardiovascular events. We assessed the prevalence of MS (National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III criteria) in 296 LTx patients in the course of regular follow-up, at least 6 months after transplantation (median, 38 months). Several pre-LTx and post-LTx data were collected to identify the factors associated with the presence of MS. In a subset of 99 patients, insulin resistance was measured by the homeostasis model assessment. High blood pressure was present in 53% of cases, hyperlipidemia in 51%, high glucose in 37%, and enlarged waist circumference in 32%. Overall, MS (defined as 3 or more of the above features) was present in 44.5% of cases. Insulin resistance (homeostasis model assessment Ͼ 2.7) was observed in 41% of cases. Hypertension and hyperlipidemia were more frequent in subjects on cyclosporine than in tacrolimus-treated cases, whereas the type of immunosuppressive drug had no effect on the prevalence of diabetes, enlarged waist, and MS. In a logistic regression analysis, only pre-LTx body mass index (odds ratio, 1.20), body mass index increase (odds ratio, 1.18), and pre-LTx diabetes (odds ratio, 2.36) predicted MS; age, gender, etiology of liver disease, time from LTx, type of immunosuppressive drug, and previous hepatocellular carcinoma were removed from the model. Disorders related to MS are frequent in LTx patients, and are related to both pre-LTx conditions and to weight gain. Weight control is mandatory in LTx patients to prevent risk factors of premature atherosclerosis. Liver Transpl 14: [1648][1649][1650][1651][1652][1653][1654] 2008 The survival and quality of life of patients after liver transplantation (LTx) has markedly improved during the last decades, but the survival curve has now flattened.1 The return to normal daily life and home and working activities, together with normalization of the hypermetabolic state of advanced liver failure 2 and free food intake, are accompanied by a progressive weight gain.3 In turn, this heralds the development of hypertension, changes in blood lipid profile with hyperlipidemia, and altered glucose regulation. 4,5 The origin of these alterations, apparently related to insulin resistance (IR) and characterizing the metabolic syndrome (MS), is under debate.In a very few cases, the occurrence of posttransplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) or full-blown posttransplantation metabolic syndrome (PTMS) might be the effect of recurrent liver disease, caused by etiologic factors also involved in the original liver cell failure, 6 via nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and cryptogenic cirrhosis, 7 and encouraged by unhealthy lifestyles. In the vast majority of cases PTDM and PTMS might be lifestyle-related and induced by post-LTx immunosup-

No abstract

Hepatic allografts from donors positive only for anti-HBs do not transmit HBV infection. Hepatic allografts from anti-HBc-positive donors frequently transmit HBV infection to naive recipients regardless of the donor anti-HBs status, and antiviral prophylaxis may be indicated. Anti-HBs-positive recipients appear resistant to HBV infection after orthotopic liver transplantation with an allograft from an anti-HBc-positive donor. Recipients positive only for anti-HBc infrequently develop HBV infection when transplanted with an allograft from an anti-HBc-positive donor; however, HBV prophylaxis may be justified.

BackgroundIn 2013 Guidelines on diagnosis and management of ASBO have been revised and updated by the WSES Working Group on ASBO to develop current evidence-based algorithms and focus indications and safety of conservative treatment, timing of surgery and indications for laparoscopy.RecommendationsIn absence of signs of strangulation and history of persistent vomiting or combined CT-scan signs (free fluid, mesenteric edema, small-bowel feces sign, devascularization) patients with partial ASBO can be managed safely with NOM and tube decompression should be attempted. These patients are good candidates for Water-Soluble-Contrast-Medium (WSCM) with both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The radiologic appearance of WSCM in the colon within 24 hours from administration predicts resolution. WSCM maybe administered either orally or via NGT both immediately at admission or after failed conservative treatment for 48 hours. The use of WSCM is safe and reduces need for surgery, time to resolution and hospital stay.NOM, in absence of signs of strangulation or peritonitis, can be prolonged up to 72 hours. After 72 hours of NOM without resolution, surgery is recommended.Patients treated non-operatively have shorter hospital stay, but higher recurrence rate and shorter time to re-admission, although the risk of new surgically treated episodes of ASBO is unchanged. Risk factors for recurrences are age <40 years and matted adhesions. WSCM does not decrease recurrence rates or recurrences needing surgery.Open surgery is often used for strangulating ASBO as well as after failed conservative management. In selected patients and with appropriate skills, laparoscopic approach is advisable using open access technique. Access in left upper quadrant or left flank is the safest and only completely obstructing adhesions should be identified and lysed with cold scissors. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis should be attempted preferably if first episode of SBO and/or anticipated single band. A low threshold for open conversion should be maintained.Peritoneal adhesions should be prevented. Hyaluronic acid-carboxycellulose membrane and icodextrin decrease incidence of adhesions. Icodextrin may reduce the risk of re-obstruction. HA cannot reduce need of surgery.Adhesions quantification and scoring maybe useful for achieving standardized assessment of adhesions severity and for further research in diagnosis and treatment of ASBO.

BackgroundObstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) is a challenging matter in terms of obstruction release as well of oncological issues. Several options are available and no guidelines are established. The paper aims to generate evidenced based recommendations on management of OLCC.MethodsThe PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were queried for publications focusing on OLCC published prior to April 2010. A extensive retrieval, analyses, and grading of the literature was undertaken. The findings of the research were presented and largely discussed among panellist and audience at the Consensus Conference of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and Peritoneum and Surgery (PnS) Society held in Bologna July 2010. Comparisons of techniques are presented and final committee recommendation are enounced.ResultsHartmann's procedure should be preferred to loop colostomy (Grade 2B). Hartmann's procedure offers no survival benefit compared to segmental colonic resection with primary anastomosis (Grade 2C+); Hartmann's procedure should be considered in patients with high surgical risk (Grade 2C). Total colectomy and segmental colectomy with intraoperative colonic irrigation are associated with same mortality/morbidity, however total colectomy is associated with higher rates impaired bowel function (Grade 1A). Segmental resection and primary anastomosis either with manual decompression or intraoperative colonic irrigation are associated with same mortality/morbidity rate (Grade 1A). In palliation stent placement is associated with similar mortality/morbidity rates and shorter hospital stay (Grade 2B). Stents as a bridge to surgery seems associated with lower mortality rate, shorter hospital stay, and a lower colostomy formation rate (Grade 1B).ConclusionsLoop colostomy and staged procedure should be adopted in case of dramatic scenario, when neoadjuvant therapy could be expected. Hartmann's procedure should be performed in case of high risk of anastomotic dehiscence. Subtotal and total colectomy should be attempted when cecal perforation or in case of synchronous colonic neoplasm. Primary resection and anastomosis with manual decompression seems the procedure of choice. Colonic stents represent the best option when skills are available. The literature power is relatively poor and the existing RCT are often not sufficiently robust in design thus, among 6 possible treatment modalities, only 2 reached the Grade A.