Axel Andres

A global online survey was administered to 69 islet transplantation programs, covering 84 centers and 5 networks. The survey addressed questions on program organization and activity in the 2000–2020 period, including impact on activity of national health care coverage policies. We obtained full data from 55 institutions or networks worldwide and basic activity data from 6 centers. Additional data were obtained from alternative sources. A total of 94 institutions and 5 networks was identified as having performed islet allotransplantation. 4,365 islet allotransplants (2,608 in Europe, 1,475 in North America, 135 in Asia, 119 in Oceania, 28 in South America) were reported in 2,170 patients in the survey period. From 15 centers active at the start of the study period, the number of simultaneously active islet centers peaked at 54, to progressively decrease to 26 having performed islet allotransplants in 2020. Notably, only 16 centers/networks have done >100 islet allotransplants in the survey period. Types of transplants performed differed notably between North America and the rest of the world, in particular with respect to the near-absence of simultaneous islet-kidney transplantation. Absence of heath care coverage has significantly hampered transplant activity in the past years and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

Transplant oncology is a field of growing interest, with increasing number of patients transplanted for cancer [1]. Among such indications, colorectal liver metastasis is under intense scrutiny considering the high number of potential new recipients. The important article by the Oslo group published in the current issue of Transplant International brings more light on their post-transplant fate [2].

Objective: Teaching in the operating room represents the cornerstone of surgical education. Residents need to perform a sufficient number of basic procedures in order to gain independence. However, it is still debated what impact surgical teaching has on outcomes. With this study, we provide recent data of a large national cohort and identify new factors that are associated with increased teaching. Methods: We studied common procedures that are essential for surgical training: Laparoscopic Appendectomy (LA), Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC), ostomy closure (OC), laparoscopic (LH) and Open Inguinal Hernia Repair (OH). The national database of the Swiss association for quality management in surgery was screened, and 72072 patients were identified from 2009 to 2019. Teaching was defined as a procedure mainly performed by a surgeon in training under supervision. Results: A minority of basic surgical procedures were used for teaching (LA 28.1%, LC 22.3%, OC 21.5%, OH 31.8%, LH 6.3%), even in teaching hospitals of > 200 beds (LA 33.0%, LC 32.9%, OC 27%, OH 51.5%, LH 6.5%). During the study period, there was also generally a trend towards less teaching, exemplified by the two most frequent procedures: LA 35.6 to 26.7% (-25.0%, p = <0.001), LC 27.6 to 18.9% (-31.5%, p = <0.001). Operating time was significantly longer for procedures that were used for teaching with a more pronounced effect for inguinal hernia repairs: LA 63.4 vs 57.5min (+10.3%, p = <0.001), LC 84.0 vs 74.9min (+12.1%, p = <0.001), OC 88.6 vs 81.6min (+8.6%, p = <0.001), OH 81.5 vs 68.3min (+19.3%, p = <0.001), LH 97.9 vs 73.8min (+32.7%, p = <0.001). The overall complication rate for LA (2.6 vs 1.8%, p = <0.001) and LC (3.6 vs 2.8%, p = <0.001) were slightly higher in the no-teaching group and without a significant difference between the groups for OC, LH and OH. We identified the following parameters associated with increased teaching: A hospital size above 200 beds (OR = 2.48, p = <0.001), an operation during office hours (OR = 1.27, p = <0.001), the summer months (OR = 1.11, p = <0.001) and weekdays (OR = 1.10, p = 0.003). Conclusion: The teaching of basic surgical procedures appears safe. Even if associated with longer operating times, it should be promoted as teaching is currently only performed in a minority of procedures (10-33%).

Liver transplantation for colorectal metastasis: a stepwise approach

Liver transplantation (LT) has become the standard of care for selected primary and secondary malignancies. Considered a contra-indication to transplantation until recently, unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have gained interest since the publication of the SECA trial by the University of Oslo. It showed a 5-year overall survival of 60%, comparable to the one of standard transplant indication. This report generated multiple questions about the place of LT for CRLM and gave raise to several trials aiming at answering them. The present review is exploring this topic, defining the current state of the field, and extrapolating the future milestones.

Deciding who should receive a liver transplant (LT) depends on both urgency and utility. Most survival scores are validated through discriminative tests, which compare predicted outcomes between patients. Assessing post-transplant survival utility is not discriminate, but should be “calibrated” to be effective. There are currently no such calibrated models. We developed and validated a novel calibrated model to predict individual survival after LT for Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis (PSC). We applied a software tool, PSSP, to adult patients in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (n = 2769) who received a LT for PSC between 2002 and 2013; this produced a model for predicting individual survival distributions for novel patients. We also developed an appropriate evaluation measure, D-calibration, to validate this model. The learned PSSP model showed an excellent D-calibration (p = 1.0), and passed the single-time calibration test (Hosmer-Lemeshow p-value of over 0.05) at 0.25, 1, 5 and 10 years. In contrast, the model based on traditional Cox regression showed worse calibration on long-term survival and failed at 10 years (Hosmer-Lemeshow p value = 0.027). The calculator and visualizer are available at: http://pssp.srv.ualberta.ca/calculator/liver_transplant_2002. In conclusion we present a new tool that accurately estimates individual post liver transplantation survival.