Search

Background: Treatment of bile duct injuries (BDI) during cholecystectomy depends on the severity of injury and the timing of diagnosis. Standard of care for severe BDIs is hepaticojejunostomy. The aim of this retrospective multi-center study was to assess the optimal timing for repair of BDI with hepaticojejunostomy. Methods: Members of the European-African HepatoPancreatoBiliary Association were invited to report all consecutive patients with hepaticojejunostomy after BDI from January 2000 to June 2016. Patients were stratified according to the timing of biliary reconstruction with hepaticojejunostomy: early (day 0–7), intermediate (1–6 weeks) and late (6 weeks–6 months). Primary endpoint was re-intervention >90 days after the hepaticojejunostomy and secondary endpoints were severe 90-day complications and liver-related mortality. Results: In total 913 patients from 48 centers were included in the analysis. In 401 patients (44%) the bile duct injury was diagnosed intraoperatively, and 126 patients (14%) suffered from concomitant vascular injury. In multivariable analysis the timing of hepaticojejunostomy had no impact on postoperative complications, the need for re-intervention after 90 days nor liver-related mortality. The rate of re-intervention more than 90 days after the hepaticojejunostomy was significantly increased in male patients but decreased in older patients. Severe co-morbidity increased the risk for liver-related mortality (HR 3.439; CI 1.37–8.65; p = 0.009). Conclusion: After BDI occurring during cholecystectomy, the timing of biliary reconstruction with hepaticojejunostomy did not have any impact on severe postoperative complications, the need for re-intervention or liver-related mortality. Individualised treatment after iatrogenic bile duct injury is still advisable.

Background: Treatment of bile duct injuries (BDI) during cholecystectomy depends on the severity of injury and the timing of diagnosis. Standard of care for severe BDIs is hepaticojejunostomy. The aim of this retrospective multi-center study was to assess the optimal timing for repair of BDI with hepaticojejunostomy. Methods: Members of the European-African HepatoPancreatoBiliary Association were invited to report all consecutive patients with hepaticojejunostomy after BDI from January 2000 to June 2016. Patients were stratified according to the timing of biliary reconstruction with hepaticojejunostomy: early (day 0–7), intermediate (1–6 weeks) and late (6 weeks–6 months). Primary endpoint was re-intervention >90 days after the hepaticojejunostomy and secondary endpoints were severe 90-day complications and liver-related mortality. Results: In total 913 patients from 48 centers were included in the analysis. In 401 patients (44%) the bile duct injury was diagnosed intraoperatively, and 126 patients (14%) suffered from concomitant vascular injury. In multivariable analysis the timing of hepaticojejunostomy had no impact on postoperative complications, the need for re-intervention after 90 days nor liver-related mortality. The rate of re-intervention more than 90 days after the hepaticojejunostomy was significantly increased in male patients but decreased in older patients. Severe co-morbidity increased the risk for liver-related mortality (HR 3.439; CI 1.37–8.65; p = 0.009). Conclusion: After BDI occurring during cholecystectomy, the timing of biliary reconstruction with hepaticojejunostomy did not have any impact on severe postoperative complications, the need for re-intervention or liver-related mortality. Individualised treatment after iatrogenic bile duct injury is still advisable.

Contains fulltext : 174360.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Background and Aims: Due to the shortage of donor livers, minor ABO-incompatible liver transplantations are commonly performed. Together with the allograft, immunocompetent B-lymphocytes, called passenger lymphocytes, are transplanted. In case of minor ABO-incompatibility, these passenger lymphocytes produce antibodies directed towards the recipient's red blood cells, which causes immune-mediated hemolysis, also known as the passenger lymphocyte syndrome (PLS). Although this is a self-limiting disorder, serious complications can occur, including graft failure. Retrospectively, we evaluated the role of PLS in minor ABO-incompatible liver transplantations performed at our center. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted for all minor ABO-incompatible liver transplantations performed at the Antwerp University Hospital between 2003 and 2015. All patient files were inspected for clinical and laboratory findings. In cases of PLS diagnosis, the applied treatment was also studied. Results: In total, 10 patients underwent a minor ABO-incompatible liver transplantation and 4 showed signs of PLS. All 4 PLS patients were treated with different therapeutic strategy, corresponding to the severity of hemolysis. In all 4 cases, PLS resolved following treatment. Conclusion: When performing minor ABO-incompatible liver transplantations, knowledge of PLS is elemental. Next to a high index of clinical suspicion, we suggest routine screening for markers of hemolysis, with emphasis on haptoglobin level and direct antiglobulin test, weekly in the first 4 weeks post-transplantation as well as in case of a sudden hemoglobin drop within the first 3 months after transplantation. Peri- and postoperative transfusion support using donor-compatible blood has been suggested to prevent the occurrence or limit the extent of hemolysis.

Item does not contain fulltext, Background: The Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) is a quantitative evaluation of the quality of donor organs and is implemented in the US allocation system. This single-centre study investigates whether the implementation of the KDRI in our decision-making process to accept or decline an offered deceased donor kidney, increases our acceptance rate. Methods: From April 2015 until December 2016, we prospectively calculated the KDRI for all deceased donor kidney offers allocated by Eurotransplant to our centre. The number of the transplanted versus declined kidney offers during the study period were compared to a historical set of donor kidney offers. Results: After implementation of the KDRI, 26.1% (75/288) of all offered donor kidneys were transplanted, compared with 20.7% (136/657) in the previous period (P < 0.001). The median KDRI of all transplanted donor kidneys during the second period was 0.97 [Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) 47%], a value significantly higher than the median KDRI of 0.85 (KDPI 34%) during the first period (P = 0.047). A total of 68% of patients for whom a first-offered donor kidney was declined during this period were transplanted after a median waiting time of 386 days, mostly with a lower KDRI donor kidney. Conclusions: Implementing the KDRI in our decision-making process increased the transplantation rate by 26%. The KDRI can be a supportive tool when considering whether to accept or decline a deceased donor kidney offer. More data are needed to validate this score in other European centres.