It has been suggested that patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have worse recurrence-free survival compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (CLT), leading to the hypothesis that short waitlist time or fast-tracking may include more aggressive tumors that would have been selected out by traditionally longer waitlist time. The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of waitlist time on HCC recurrence. The study cohort included 100 patients meeting T2 criteria by imaging before undergoing CLT (n = 90) or LDLT (n = 10). The 5-year recurrence-free probability was 89.9% for the entire cohort, and 91.9%, 90.5% and 86.6%, respectively, for waitlist time of 3 months or less, 3-6 months and > 6 months (p = 0.81). In the Cox proportional hazards model, waitlist time was also not a significant predictor of HCC recurrence. Tumor under-staging was observed in 20.5% of patients with waitlist time 3 months or less and 23.0% for waitlist time > 3 months (p = 0.81). In conclusion, our results failed to show an association between waitlist time and outcome after CLT or LDLT for HCC, and provided evidence disputing a significant role of waitlist time in the selection against HCC with unfavorable tumor biology.

UCAS (formerly UCCA and PCAS) has been extremely cooperative in providing data on applicants and admissions to higher education. Stuart Smith at UCAS deserves a special mention for his help. Appending MOSAIC codes to the records and completing initial analyses were undertaken at SPA Marketing Systems. The work would not have been possible without their assistance.

BackgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) is a common clinical problem with significant morbidity and mortality. All hospitalised patients are at risk. AKI is often preventable and reversible; however, the 2009 National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death highlighted systematic failings of identification and management, and recommended risk assessment of all emergency admissions.ObjectivesTo develop three predictive models to stratify the risk of (1) AKI on arrival in hospital; (2) developing AKI during admission; and (3) worsening AKI if already present; and also to (4) develop a clinical algorithm for patients admitted to hospital and explore effective methods of delivery of this information at the point of care.Study designQuantitative methodology (1) to formulate predictive risk models and (2) to validate the models in both our population and a second population. Qualitative methodology to plan clinical decision support system (CDSS) development and effective integration into clinical care.Settings and participantsQuantitative analysis – the study population comprised hospital admissions to three acute hospitals of East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust in 2011, excluding maternity and elective admissions. For validation in a second population the study included hospital admissions to Medway NHS Foundation Trust. Qualitative analysis – the sample consisted of six renal consultants (interviews) and six outreach nurses (focus group), with representation from all sites.Data collectionData (comprising age, sex, comorbidities, hospital admission and outpatient history, relevant pathology tests, drug history, baseline creatinine and chronic kidney disease stage, proteinuria, operative procedures and microbiology) were collected from the hospital data warehouse and the pathology and surgical procedure databases.Data analysisQuantitative – both traditional and Bayesian regression methods were used. Traditional methods were performed using ordinal logistic regression with univariable analyses to inform the development of multivariable analyses. Backwards selection was used to retain only statistically significant variables in the final models. The models were validated using actual and predicted probabilities, an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve analysis and the Hosmer–Lemeshow test. Qualitative – content analysis was employed.Main outcome measures(1) A clinical pratice algorithm to guide clinical alerting and risk modeling for AKI in emergency hospital admissions; (2) identification of the key variables that are associated with the risk of AKI; (3) validated risk models for AKI in acute hospital admissions; and (4) a qualitative analysis providing guidance as to the best approach to the implementation of clinical alerting to highlight patients at risk of AKI in hospitals.FindingsQuantitative – we have defined a clinical practice algorithm for risk assessment within the first 24 hours of hospital admission. Bayesian methodology enabled prediction of low risk but could not reliably identify high-risk patients. Traditional methods identified key variables, which predict AKI both on admission and at 72 hours post admission. Validation demonstrated an AUROC curve of 0.75 and 0.68, respectively. Predicting worsening AKI during admission was unsuccessful. Qualitative – analysis of AKI alerting gave valuable insights in terms of user friendliness, information availability, clinical communication and clinical responsibility, and has informed CDSS development.ConclusionsThis study provides valuable evidence of relationships between key variables and AKI. We have developed a clinical algorithm and risk models for risk assessment within the first 24 hours of hospital admission. However, the study has its limitations, and further analysis and testing, including continuous modelling, non-linear modelling and interaction exploration, may further refine the models. The qualitative study has highlighted the complexity regarding the implementation and delivery of alerting systems in clinical practice.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

No abstract