Summary The outcomes of split‐liver transplantation are controversial. This study compared outcomes and morbidity after extended right lobe liver transplantation (ERLT) and whole liver transplantation (WLT) in adults. MEDLINE and Web of Science databases were searched systematically and unrestrictedly for studies on ERLT and its impact on graft and patient survival, and postoperative complications. Graft loss and patient mortality odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were assessed by meta‐analyses using Mantel–Haenszel tests with a random‐effects model. Vascular and biliary complications, primary nonfunction, 3‐month, 1‐, and 3‐year graft and patient survival, and retransplantation after ERLT and WLT were analyzed. The literature search yielded 10 594 articles. After exclusion, 22 studies (n = 75 799 adult transplant patients) were included in the analysis. ERLT was associated with lower 3‐month (OR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.09–1.89, P = 0.01), 1‐year (OR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.08–1.97, P = 0.01), and 3‐year (OR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.01–1.84, P = 0.04) graft survival. WL grafts were less associated with retransplantation (OR = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.41–0.80; P < 0.01), vascular complications (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.38–0.74, P < 0.01) and biliary complications (OR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.47–0.95; P = 0.03). Considering ERLT as major Extended Donor Criteria is justified because ERL grafts are associated with vasculobiliary complications and the need for retransplantation, and have a negative influence on graft survival.

With increasing trends for the adoption of robotic surgery, many centers are considering changing their practices from open or laparoscopic to robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer. We compared the outcomes of robot-assisted rectal resection with those of open and laparoscopic surgery. We searched Medline, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases until October 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies comparing robotic surgery with open or laparoscopic rectal resection were included. Fifteen RCTs and 11 prospective studies involving 6922 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed that robotic surgery has lower blood loss, less surgical site infection, shorter hospital stays, and higher negative resection margins than open resection. Robotic surgery also has lower conversion rates, lower blood loss, lower rates of reoperation, and higher negative circumferential margins than laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery had longer operation times and higher costs than open and laparoscopic surgery. There were no differences in other complications, mortality, and survival between robotic surgery and the open or laparoscopic approach. However, heterogeneity between studies was moderate to high in some analyses. The robotic approach can be the method of choice for centers planning to change from open to minimally invasive rectal surgery. The higher costs of robotic surgery should be considered as a substitute for laparoscopic surgery (PROSPERO: CRD42022381468).

This study aimed to identify cutoff values for donor risk index (DRI), Eurotransplant (ET)-DRI, and balance of risk (BAR) scores that predict the risk of liver graft loss. MEDLINE and Web of Science databases were searched systematically and unrestrictedly. Graft loss odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were assessed by meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel tests with a random-effects model. Cutoff values for predicting graft loss at 3 months, 1 year, and 3 years were analyzed for each of the scores. Measures of calibration and discrimination used in studies validating the DRI and the ET-DRI were summarized. DRI ≥ 1.4 (six studies, n = 35 580 patients) and ET-DRI ≥ 1.4 (four studies, n = 11 666 patients) were associated with the highest risk of graft loss at all time points. BAR > 18 was associated with the highest risk of 3-month and 1-year graft loss (n = 6499 patients). A DRI cutoff of 1.8 and an ET-DRI cutoff of 1.7 were estimated using a summary receiver operator characteristic curve, but the sensitivity and specificity of these cutoff values were low. A DRI and ET-DRI score ≥ 1.4 and a BAR score > 18 have a negative influence on graft survival, but these cutoff values are not well suited for predicting graft loss.

ContextHepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major cause of liver-morbidity and mortality among patients with thalassemia. Peginterferon plus ribavirin is currently the recommended therapy for hepatitis C infection in patients do not have thalassemia, but using ribavirin in patients with thalassemia is restricted due to its hemolytic effect. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding ribavirin to peginterferon or interferon, authors performed a systematic review on the available literatures.Evidence AcquisitionTrials were identified through electronic database, manual searches of journals and bibliographies and approaching authors of trials. Randomized trials that enrolled patients with a diagnosis of thalassemia and chronic hepatitis C infection treated with interferon or peginterferon with or without ribavirin were included. Two investigators independently evaluated the trials for inclusion criteria, risk of bias and data extraction. The primary outcomes were sustained virological response (SVR), liver-related morbidity, mortality and adverse events. The odds ratios from each trial were calculated individually and in the subgroup analysis of trials. Data were analyzed with fixed-effect model.ResultsThree randomized clinical trials with 92 patients were included. All three trials had unclear risk of bias. Compared with peginterferon monotherapy, adding ribavirin to peginterferon had significant beneficial effect on sustained virological response (OR = 3.44, 95% CI: 1.18 - 10.06). There was no significant difference between combination therapy and monotherapy in the end of treatment achievement response. Other than about 30% increase in blood transfusion due to anemia that returned to normal level 2 - 3 months after treatment, there was no significant increase in side effects followed by adding ribavirin to pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN). Data were insufficient to determine the impact of genotype, viral load and age on the response to treatment.ConclusionsCompared with monotherapy, adding ribavirin to treatment is more effective in removing hepatitis C virus from the bloodstream in patients with thalassemia, it is also more effective in reducing the relapse rate after treatment. Except the increase in blood transfusion, there was no significant increase in side effects followed by adding ribavirin.

Background Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are selected for transplantation if they have a low tumour burden and low risk of recurrence. The morphometric Milan criteria have been the cornerstone for patient selection, but dynamic morphological and biological tumour characteristics surfaced as an encouraging tool to refine the selection of patients with HCC and to support the expansion of the Milan criteria. The outcomes of the most prevalent models that select patients with HCC for liver transplantation were analysed in this study, which aimed to identify the selection model that offered the best recurrence-free and overall survival after transplantation. Methods Studies that compared Milan, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), up-to-seven (UPTS), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), and MetroTicket 2.0 (MT2) models were included. One-year, 3-year, and 5-year recurrence-free and overall survival rates of patients selected for transplantation using different models were analysed. Results A total of 60 850 adult patients with HCC selected for liver transplantation using Milan, UCSF, UPTS, AFP, or MT2 criteria were included. Patients selected for transplantation using the MT2 model had the highest 1-, 3-, and 5-year recurrence-free survival. In addition, patients selected for transplantation using MT2 criteria had the best 1- and 3-year overall survival, whereas patients selected for transplantation using the Milan criteria had the best 5-year overall survival rates. Conclusion The MT2 model offered the best post-transplant outcomes in patients with HCC, highlighting the importance of considering tumour morphology and biology when selecting patients with HCC for liver transplantation.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Liver transplantation is the only promising treatment for end-stage liver disease and patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. However, too many organs are rejected for transplantation. Methods: We analyzed the factors involved in organ allocation in our transplant center and reviewed all livers that were declined for transplantation. Reasons for declining organs for transplantation were categorized as major extended donor criteria (maEDC), size mismatch and vascular problems, medical reasons and risk of disease transmission, and other reasons. The fate of the declined organs was analyzed. Results: 1086 declined organs were offered 1200 times. A total of 31% of the livers were declined because of maEDC, 35.5% because of size mismatch and vascular problems, 15.8% because of medical reasons and risk of disease transmission, and 20.7% because of other reasons. A total of 40% of the declined organs were allocated and transplanted. A total of 50% of the organs were completely discarded, and significantly more of these grafts had maEDC than grafts that were eventually allocated (37.5% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Most organs were declined because of poor organ quality. Donor-recipient matching at time of allocation and organ preservation must be improved by allocating maEDC grafts using individualized algorithms that avoid high-risk donor-recipient combinations and unnecessary organ declination.