(Abstracted from Lancet 2018;392:2697–2704) Infertility is common and affects about 10% to 15% of couples. In such couples, 1 in 500 women has infertility due to uterine causes, with uterine agenesis (Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser [MRKH] syndrome), or due to hysterectomy, malformation, or the sequelae of infection or surgery.
Introduction: Late acute rejection leads to worse patient and graft survival after liver transplantation. Aim: To analyze the reported results published in recent years by leading transplant centers in evaluating late acute rejection and update the clinical manifestations, diagnosis and treatment of liver transplantation. Method: Systematic literature review through Medline-PubMed database with headings related to late acute rejection in articles published until November 2013 was done. Were analyzed demographics, immunosuppression, rejection, infection and graft and patient survival rates. Results: Late acute rejection in liver transplantation showed poor results mainly regarding patient and graft survival. Almost all of these cohort studies were retrospective and descriptive. The incidence of late acute rejection varied from 7-40% in these studies. Late acute rejection was one cause for graft loss and resulted in different outcomes with worse patient and graft survival after liver transplant. Late acute rejection has been variably defined and may be a cause of chronic rejection with worse prognosis. Late acute rejection occurs during a period in which the goal is to maintain lower immunosuppression after liver transplantation. Conclusion: The current articles show the importance of late acute rejection. The real benefit is based on early diagnosis and adequate treatment at the onset until late follow up after liver transplantation.
Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is the second most prevalent primary liver neoplasm after hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), corresponding to 10% to 15% of cases. Pathologies that cause chronic biliary inflammation and bile stasis are known predisposing factors for development of ICC. The incidence and cancer-related mortality of ICC is increasing worldwide. Most patients remain asymptomatic until advance stage, commonly presenting with a liver mass incidentally diagnosed. The only potentially curative treatment available for ICC is surgical resection. The prognosis is dismal for unresectable cases. The principle of the surgical approach is a margin negative hepatic resection with preservation of adequate liver remnant. Regional lymphadenectomy is recommended at time of hepatectomy due to the massive impact on outcomes caused by lymph node (LN) metastasis. Multicentric disease, tumor size, margin status and tumor differentiation are also important prognostic factors. Staging laparoscopy is warranted in high-risk patients to avoid unnecessary laparotomy. Exceedingly complex surgical procedures, such as major vascular, extrahepatic bile ducts and visceral resections, ex vivo hepatectomy and autotransplantation, should be implemented in properly selected patients to achieve negative margins. Neoadjuvant therapy may be used in initially unresectable lesions in order to downstage and allow resection. Despite optimal surgical management, recurrence is frustratingly high. Adjuvant chemotherapy with radiation associated with locoregional treatments should be considered in cases with unfavorable prognostic factors. Selected patients may undergo re-resection of tumor recurrence. Despite the historically poor outcomes of liver transplantation for ICC, highly selected patients with unresectable disease, especially those with adequate response to neoadjuvant therapy, may be offered transplant. In this article, we reviewed the current literature in order to highlight the most recent advances and recommendations for the surgical treatment of this aggressive malignancy.
Immune checkpoint inhibitors are agents that act by inhibiting the mechanisms of immune escape displayed by various cancers. The success of immune checkpoint inhibitors against several tumors has promoted a new treatment strategy in clinical oncology, and this has encouraged physicians to increase the number of patients who receive the immune checkpoint therapy. In the present article, we review the main concepts regarding immune checkpoint mechanisms and how cancer disrupts them to undergo immune escape. In addition, we describe the most essential concepts related to immune checkpoint inhibitors. We critically review the literature on preclinical and clinical studies of the immune checkpoint inhibitors as a treatment option for thyroid cancer, ovarian carcinoma, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, adrenocortical carcinoma and neuroendocrine tumors. We present the challenges and the opportunities of using immune checkpoint inhibitors against these endocrine malignancies, highlighting the breakthroughs and pitfalls that have recently emerged.
BackgroundExpanded clinical and surgical techniques in liver transplantation can markedly improve patient and graft survival. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of intraoperative portocaval shunts in liver transplantation.Material/MethodsSearches were conducted in Cochrane, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases, and updated in January 2018. The following specific outcomes of interest were defined and evaluated separated using 2 different reviews and meta-analyses for 1) hemi-portocaval shunt (HPCS) and 2) temporary portocaval shunt (TPCS). Comparative studies were analyzed separately for both surgical portocaval shunt modalities.ResultsOnly 1 well-designed randomized controlled trial was found. Most studies were retrospective or prospective. Initially, we found 1479 articles. Of those selected, 853 were from PubMed/MEDLINE, 32 were from Cochrane and 594 were from EMBASE. Our meta-analysis included a total of 3232 patients for all the included studies. Results found that 41 patients with HPCS experienced increased 1-year patient survival (OR 16.33; P=0.02) and increased 1-year graft survival (OR 17.67; P=0.01). The TPCS analysis with 1633 patients found patients had significantly shorter intensive care unit length of stay (days) (P=0.006) and hospital length of stay (P=0.02) and had decreased primary nonfunction (PNF) (OR 0.30, P=0.02) and mortality rates (OR 0.52, P=0.01).ConclusionsIntraoperative surgical portosystemic shunt in relation to liver transplantation with TPCS was able to prevent PNF, decrease hospital length of stay and unit care length of stay. Furthermore, in analyzing data for patients with HPCS, we observed increases in the 1-year graft and patient survival rates. More prospective randomized trials are needed to arrive at a more precise conclusion.
BackgroundSurgical treatment of abdominal hernias in cirrhotics is often delayed due to the higher morbidity and mortality associated with the underlying liver disease. Some patients are followed conservatively and only operated on when complications occur (“wait and see” approach). The aim of this study is to compare outcomes of cirrhotic patients undergoing conservative non-operative care or elective hernia repair.MethodsA prospective observational study including 246 cirrhotic patients with abdominal hernia was carried out. Patients were given the option to select their treatment: elective hernia repair or conservative non-operative care. Demographics, characteristics of underlying liver disease, type of hernia, complications and mortality were analyzed. During follow-up of patients who opted for the “wait and see” approach, emergency hernia repair was performed in case of hernia complications.ResultsElective hernia repair was performed in 57 patients and 189 patients were kept in conservative care, of which 43 (22.7%) developed complications that required emergency hernia repair. Elective surgery provided better five-years survival than conservative care (80% vs. 62%; p = 0.012). Multivariate analysis identified multiples hernias [Hazards Ratio (HR):6.7, p < 0.001] and clinical follow-up group (HR 3.62, p = 0.005) as risk factors for mortality. Among patients undergoing surgical treatment, multivariate analysis revealed MELD>11 (HR 7.8; p = 0.011) and emergency hernia repair (HR 5.35; p = 0.005) as independent risk factors for 30-day mortality.ConclusionsElective hernia repair offers an acceptable morbidity and ensures longer survival. “Wait and see” approach jeopardizes cirrhotic patients and should be avoided, given the higher incidence of emergency surgery due to hernia complications.
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most prevalent cancer and it is linked with chronic liver disease. Liver transplantation (LT) is the best curative treatment modality, since it can cure simultaneously the underlying liver disease and HCC. Milan criteria (MC) are the benchmark for selecting patients with HCC for LT, achieving up to 91% 1-year survival post transplantation. However, when considering intention-to-treat (ITT) rates are substantially lower, mainly due dropout. Additionally, Milan criteria (MC) are too restrictive and more inclusive criteria have been reported with good outcomes. Mainly, in Eastern countries, deceased donors are scarce, therefore Asian centers have developed living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) to a state-of-art status. There are many eastern centers reporting huge numbers of LDLT with outstanding results. Regarding HCC patients, they have reported many criteria including more advanced tumors achieving reasonable outcomes. Western countries have well-established deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) programs. However, organ shortage and restrictive criteria for listing patients with HCC endorses LDLT as a good option to offer curative treatment to more HCC patients. However, there are some controversial reports claiming higher rates of HCC recurrence after LDLT than DDLT. An extensive review included 30 studies with cohorts of HCC patients who underwent LDLT in both East and West countries. We reported also the results of our Institution, in Brazil, where it was performed the first LDLT. This review also addresses the eligibility criteria for transplanting patients with HCC developed in Western and Eastern countries.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.