Search

Objective: Assess cost and complication outcomes after liver transplantation (LT) using normothermic machine perfusion (NMP). Background: End-ischemic NMP is often used to aid logistics, yet its impact on outcomes after LT remains unclear, as does its true impact on costs associated with transplantation. Methods: Deceased donor liver recipients at 2 centers (January 1, 2019, to June 30, 2023) were included. Retransplants, splits, and combined grafts were excluded. End-ischemic NMP (OrganOx-Metra) was implemented in October 2022 for extended-criteria donation after brain death (DBDs), all donations after circulatory deaths (DCDs), and logistics. NMP cases were matched 1:2 with static cold storage controls (SCS) using the Balance-of-Risk [donation after brain death (DBD)-grafts] and UK-DCD Score (DCDgrafts). Results: Overall, 803 transplantations were included, 174 (21.7%) receiving NMP. Matching was achieved between 118 NMP-DBDs with 236 SCS; and 37 NMP-DCD with 74 corresponding SCS. For both graft types, median inpatient comprehensive complications index values were comparable between groups. DCD-NMP grafts experienced reduced cumulative 90-day comprehensive complications index (27.6 vs 41.9, P=0.028). NMP also reduced the need for early relaparotomy and renal replacement therapy, with subsequently less frequent major complications (Clavien-Dindo =IVa). This effect was more pronounced in DCD transplants. NMP had no protective effect on early biliary complications. Organ acquisition/preservation costs were higher with NMP, yet NMP-treated grafts had lower 90-day pretransplant costs in the context of shorter waiting list times. Overall costs were comparable for both cohorts. Conclusions: This is the first risk-adjusted outcome and cost analysis comparing NMP and SCS. In addition to logistical benefits, NMP was associated with a reduction in relaparotomy and bleeding in DBD grafts, and overall complications and post-LT renal replacement for DCDs. While organ acquisition/preservation was more costly withNMP, overall 90-day health care costs-per-transplantation were comparable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is emerging as a diagnostic and surveillance tool in cancer and recurrence. The recurrence rates after liver transplant for cancer are significant, highlighting the need for early detection and treatment. We report a cohort of patients who underwent liver transplant for hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma, or colorectal cancer liver metastasis and received ctDNA testing pre- and/or post-transplant. We aim to show how ctDNA testing can be incorporated into pre-transplant work-up and post-transplant surveillance and discuss the benefits of this testing modality in the identification of genetic targets and surveillance of recurrence. Introduction: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is emerging as a promising, non-invasive diagnostic and surveillance biomarker in solid organ malignancy. However, its utility before and after liver transplant (LT) for patients with primary and secondary liver cancers is still underexplored. Methods: Patients undergoing LT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) with ctDNA testing were included. CtDNA testing was conducted pre-transplant, post-transplant, or both (sequential) from 11/2019 to 09/2023 using Guardant360, Guardant Reveal, and Guardant360 CDx. Results: 21 patients with HCC (n = 9, 43%), CRLM (n = 8, 38%), CCA (n = 3, 14%), and mixed HCC/CCA (n = 1, 5%) were included in the study. The median follow-up time was 15 months (range: 1–124). The median time from pre-operative testing to surgery was 3 months (IQR: 1–4; range: 0–5), and from surgery to post-operative testing, it was 9 months (IQR: 2–22; range: 0.4–112). A total of 13 (62%) patients had pre-transplant testing, with 8 (62%) having ctDNA detected (ctDNA+) and 5 (32%) not having ctDNA detected (ctDNA-). A total of 18 (86%) patients had post-transplant testing, 11 (61%) of whom were ctDNA+ and 7 (33%) of whom were ctDNA-. The absolute recurrence rates were 50% (n = 5) in those who were ctDNA+ vs. 25% (n = 1) in those who were ctDNA- in the post-transplant setting, though this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.367). Six (29%) patients (HCC = 3, CCA = 1, CRLM = 2) experienced recurrence with a median recurrence-free survival of 14 (IQR: 6–40) months. Four of these patients had positive post-transplant ctDNA collected following diagnosis of recurrence, while one patient had positive post-transplant ctDNA collected preceding recurrence. A total of 10 (48%) patients had sequential ctDNA testing, of whom n = 5 (50%) achieved ctDNA clearance (+/−). The remainder were ctDNA+/+ (n = 3, 30%), ctDNA−/− (n = 1, 10%), and ctDNA−/+ (n = 1, 11%). Three (30%) patients showed the acquisition of new genomic alterations following transplant, all without recurrence. Overall, the median tumor mutation burden (TMB) decreased from 1.23 mut/Mb pre-transplant to 0.00 mut/Mb post-transplant. Conclusions: Patients with ctDNA positivity experienced recurrence at a higher rate than the ctDNA- patients, indicating the potential role of ctDNA in predicting recurrence after curative-intent transplant. Based on sequential testing, LT has the potential to clear ctDNA, demonstrating the capability of LT in the treatment of systemic disease. Transplant providers should be aware of the potential of donor-derived cell-free DNA and improved approaches are necessary to address such concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An algorithm for managing periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) after total hip replacement (THR) surgery using a multidisciplinary approach and a clearly defined protocol may improve infection eradication rates. In this article, we present an algorithm for the management of different types of PJIs including the acutely infected cemented and cementless THRs where the components are well-fixed postoperatively and when the infection is secondary to haematogenous spread in previously well-functioning and well-fixed implants. For chronic PJIs where the components are often loose, the standard treatment includes a two-stage revision procedure. However, in a highly selected subset of patients, a single-stage approach has been utilised with high rates of eradicating infections.