Search

Summary: Background: Liver transplantation is traditionally performed around the clock to minimize organ ischemic time. However, the prospect of prolonging preservation times holds the potential to streamline logistics and transform liver transplantation into a semi-elective procedure, reducing the need for nighttime surgeries. Dual hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion (DHOPE) of donor livers for 1–2 h mitigates ischemia-reperfusion injury and improves transplant outcomes. Preclinical studies have shown that DHOPE can safely extend the preservation of donor livers for up to 24 h. Methods: We conducted an IDEAL stage 2 prospective clinical trial comparing prolonged (≥4 h) DHOPE to conventional (1–2 h) DHOPE for brain-dead donor livers, enabling transplantation the following morning. Liver allocation to each group was based on donor hepatectomy end times. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of all serious adverse events (SAE) within 30 days after transplantation. The primary feasibility endpoint was defined as the number of patients assigned and successfully receiving a prolonged DHOPE-perfused liver graft. Trial registration at: WHO International Clinical Trial Registry Platform, number NL8740. Findings: Between November 1, 2020 and July 16, 2022, 24 patients were enrolled. The median preservation time was 14.5 h (interquartile range [IQR], 13.9–15.5) for the prolonged group (n = 12) and 7.9 h (IQR, 7.6–8.6) for the control group (n = 12; p = 0.01). In each group, three patients (25%; 95% CI 3.9–46%, p = 1) experienced a SAE. Markers of ischemia-reperfusion injury and oxidative stress in both perfusate and recipients were consistently low and showed no notable discrepancies between the two groups. All patients assigned to either the prolonged group or control group successfully received a liver graft perfused with either prolonged DHOPE or control DHOPE, respectively. Interpretation: This first-in-human clinical trial demonstrates the safety and feasibility of DHOPE in prolonging the preservation time of donor livers to enable daytime transplantation. The ability to extend the preservation window to up to 20 h using hypothermic oxygenated machine preservation at a 10 °C temperature has the potential to reshape the landscape of liver transplantation. Funding: University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands.

Summary: Background: The oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery has been questioned for several abdominal cancers. Concerns also exist regarding the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer as randomised trials are lacking. Methods: In this international randomised non-inferiority trial, we recruited adults with resectable pancreatic cancer from 35 centres in 12 countries. Patients were randomly assigned to either MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Both patients and pathologists were blinded to the assigned approach. Primary endpoint was radical resection (R0, ≥1 mm free margin) in patients who had ultimately undergone resection. Analyses for the primary endpoint were by modified intention-to-treat, excluding patients with missing data on primary endpoint. The pre-defined non-inferiority margin of −7% was compared with the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of absolute difference in the primary endpoint. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN44897265). Findings: Between May 8, 2018 and May 7, 2021, 258 patients were randomly assigned to MIDP (131 patients) or ODP (127 patients). Modified intention-to-treat analysis included 114 patients in the MIDP group and 110 patients in the ODP group. An R0 resection occurred in 83 (73%) patients in the MIDP group and in 76 (69%) patients in the ODP group (difference 3.7%, 90% CI −6.2 to 13.6%; pnon-inferiority = 0.039). Median lymph node yield was comparable (22.0 [16.0–30.0] vs 23.0 [14.0–32.0] nodes, p = 0.86), as was the rate of intraperitoneal recurrence (41% vs 38%, p = 0.45). Median follow-up was 23.5 (interquartile range 17.0–30.0) months. Other postoperative outcomes were comparable, including median time to functional recovery (5 [95% CI 4.5–5.5] vs 5 [95% CI 4.7–5.3] days; p = 0.22) and overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67–1.46, p = 0.94). Serious adverse events were reported in 23 (18%) of 131 patients in the MIDP group vs 28 (22%) of 127 patients in the ODP group. Interpretation: This trial provides evidence on the non-inferiority of MIDP compared to ODP regarding radical resection rates in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The present findings support the applicability of minimally invasive surgery in patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer. Funding: Medtronic Covidien AG, Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited, Dutch Gastroenterology Society.