AbstractBackgroundUndifferentiated embryonal sarcoma of the liver (UESL) is a rare tumor for which there are few evidence‐based guidelines. The aim of this study was to define current management strategies and outcomes for these patients using a multi‐institutional dataset curated by the Pediatric Surgical Oncology Research Collaborative.MethodsData were collected retrospectively for patients with UESL treated across 17 children's hospitals in North America from 1989 to 2019. Factors analyzed included patient and tumor characteristics, PRETEXT group, operative details, and neoadjuvant/adjuvant regimens. Event‐free and overall survival (EFS, OS) were the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively.ResultsSeventy‐eight patients were identified with a median age of 9.9 years [interquartile range [IQR): 7–12]. Twenty‐seven patients underwent resection at diagnosis, and 47 patients underwent delayed resection, including eight liver transplants. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy led to a median change in maximum tumor diameter of 1.6 cm [IQR: 0.0–4.4] and greater than 90% tumor necrosis in 79% of the patients undergoing delayed resection. R0 resections were accomplished in 63 patients (81%). Univariate analysis found that metastatic disease impacted OS, and completeness of resection impacted both EFS and OS, while multivariate analysis revealed that R0 resection was associated with decreased expected hazards of experiencing an event [hazard ratio (HR): 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.04–0.6]. At a median follow‐up of 4 years [IQR: 2–8], the EFS was 70.0% [95% CI: 60%–82%] and OS was 83% [95% CI: 75%–93%].ConclusionComplete resection is associated with improved survival for patients with UESL. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy causes minimal radiographic response, but significant tumor necrosis.
Defining Shock and Preshock for Mortality Risk Stratification in Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patients
Background: Previous studies have defined preshock as isolated hypotension or isolated hypoperfusion, whereas shock has been variably defined as hypoperfusion with or without hypotension. We aimed to evaluate the mortality risk associated with hypotension and hypoperfusion at the time of admission in a cardiac intensive care unit population. Methods: We analyzed Mayo Clinic cardiac intensive care unit patients admitted between 2007 and 2015. Hypotension was defined as systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg or mean arterial pressure <60 mm Hg, and hypoperfusion as admission lactate >2 mmol/L, oliguria, or rising creatinine. Associations between hypotension and hypoperfusion with hospital mortality were estimated using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Among 10 004 patients with a median age of 69 years, 43.1% had acute coronary syndrome, and 46.1% had heart failure. Isolated hypotension was present in 16.7%, isolated hypoperfusion in 15.3%, and 8.7% had both hypotension and hypoperfusion. Stepwise increases in hospital mortality were observed with hypotension and hypoperfusion compared with neither hypotension nor hypoperfusion (3.3%; all P <0.001): isolated hypotension, 9.3% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.4–2.2]); isolated hypoperfusion, 17.2% (adjusted odds ratio, 2.3 [95% CI, 1.9–3.0]); both hypotension and hypoperfusion, 33.8% (adjusted odds ratio, 2.8 [95% CI, 2.1–3.6]). Adjusted hospital mortality in patients with isolated hypoperfusion was higher than in patients with isolated hypotension ( P =0.02) and not significant different from patients with both hypotension and hypoperfusion ( P =0.18). Conclusions: Hypotension and hypoperfusion are both associated with increased mortality in cardiac intensive care unit patients. Hospital mortality is higher with isolated hypoperfusion or concomitant hypotension and hypoperfusion (classic shock). We contend that preshock should refer to isolated hypotension without hypoperfusion, while patients with hypoperfusion can be considered to have shock, irrespective of blood pressure.