Search

Background: Pediatric liver transplant (PLT) activity has flourished over time although with limited expansion in the graft pool. The study aims to identify pre‐transplant factors that predict post‐transplant patient and graft survival in the PLT population. Methods: Retrospective review of PLTs at a single tertiary transplant unit from 2000 to 2019. Univariate and multivariate analyses of pre‐transplant factors were performed to identify predictors of patient and graft survival. Results: Two hundred and seventy‐six patients received 320 PLTs. The most common cause of graft loss was hepatic artery thrombosis (n = 13, 29.6%). The most common cause of mortality was sepsis (n = 11, 29.7%). Univariate analysis showed that the following variables had a significant (p <.05) impact on patient survival: recipient age, weight, height, graft type (technical variant graft), transplant category (acute liver failure), the era of transplant, and invasive ventilation. The following variables had a significant (p <.05) impact on graft survival: recipient age, weight, height, transplant category (acute liver failure), and the era of transplant. Multivariate analysis precluded the era of transplant as the only significant factor for patient survival; patients transplanted after 2005 had significantly higher patient survival. No independent factor predicting graft survival was identified. For children transplanted after 2005, the only factor that predicted patient survival was pre‐transplant invasive ventilation. Conclusions: Our study suggests that the learning curve and pre‐transplant invasive ventilation in the recipient have a significant impact on patient survival. The traditional view of worse outcomes of smaller PLT candidates should be changed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cystic echinococcosis (CE) is a chronic, complex, zoonotic disease caused by Echinococcus Granulose tapeworms. The disease may present with a variety of symptoms, ranging from asymptomatic to fatal. Surgical intervention is the primary treatment modality for CE. Despite advances in surgical techniques and chemotherapy, disease recurrence remains a major concern. Therefore, we aimed to determine the true rate of CE recurrence after primary resection and identify possible factors that increase the risk of recurrence. A systematic search of Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochran Library was conducted to identify studies reporting the incidence of CE recurrence after primary radical surgery. Data were pooled using random effect models. The disease prevalence was determined by calculating the ratio of CE recurrence and the total number of patients. A meta-regression was conducted to identify any potential factors linked to recurrence. A total of 38 eligible studies, with a total of 6,222 CE patients who underwent primary surgical removal, revealed a pooled recurrence rate of 8% (95% CI: 6%-10%). However, significant heterogeneity was observed (I2 p-value <0.001). Subgroup analysis by region showed the highest incidence of recurrence in European and Turkish studies, with rates of 11% (95% CI: 7%-17%) and 9% (95% CI: 5%-14%), respectively. The lowest recurrence rate was observed in Asian studies, with a rate of 4% (95% CI: 2%-7%). Moreover, the non-radical intervention has a recurrence of 5% (95%CI: 4%-7%), radical 7% (95%CI: 6%-9%), and studies that contained both interventions have 10% (95%CI: 6%-16%), P-value= 0.04. This is the first meta-analysis to evaluate the overall incidence of CE recurrence after primary surgical removal. The study also revealed a substantial degree of heterogeneity across the included studies and indicated possible risk factors for higher recurrence rates, such as the study's geographic area, type of surgery and the year it was published. These findings will help to guide future research in developing effective strategies to prevent or reduce CE recurrence and improve patient outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Asian Surgical Association and Taiwan Society of Coloproctology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)