Pål‐Dag Line

Prof. Pål‐Dag Line

Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

35Years (1992-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 July 2014 in Kidney International
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GMGeir Mjøen
Geir Mjøen
SHStein Hallan
Stein Hallan
AHAnders Hartmann
Anders Hartmann
AFAksel Foss
Aksel Foss
KMKarsten Midtvedt
Karsten Midtvedt
HHHallvard Holdaas
Hallvard Holdaas
Previous studies have suggested that living kidney donors maintain long-term renal function and experience no increase in cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. However, most analyses have included control groups less healthy than the living donor population and have had relatively short follow-up periods. Here we compared long-term renal function and cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in living kidney donors compared with a control group of individuals who would have been eligible for donation. All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) was identified in 1901 individuals who donated a kidney during 1963 through 2007 with a median follow-up of 15.1 years. A control group of 32,621 potentially eligible kidney donors was selected, with a median follow-up of 24.9 years. Hazard ratio for all-cause death was significantly increased to 1.30 (95% confidence interval 1.11–1.52) for donors compared with controls. There was a significant corresponding increase in cardiovascular death to 1.40 (1.03–1.91), while the risk of ESRD was greatly and significantly increased to 11.38 (4.37–29.6). The overall incidence of ESRD among donors was 302 cases per million and might have been influenced by hereditary factors. Immunological renal disease was the cause of ESRD in the donors. Thus, kidney donors are at increased long-term risk for ESRD, cardiovascular, and all-cause mortality compared with a control group of non-donors who would have been eligible for donation.

1 May 2013 in Annals of Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MHMorten Hagness
Morten Hagness
AFAksel Foss
Aksel Foss
PLPål‐Dag Line
Pål‐Dag Line
TSTim Scholz
Tim Scholz
PJPål Foyn Jørgensen
Pål Foyn Jørgensen
SDSvein Dueland
Svein Dueland
The objective of this pilot study was to investigate the potential for long-term overall survival (OS) after liver transplantation for colorectal liver metastases (CLMs). Patients with nonresectable CLMs have poor prognosis, and few survive beyond 5 years. CLMs are currently considered an absolute contraindication for liver transplantation, although liver transplantation for primary and some secondary liver malignancies shows excellent outcome in selected patients. Before 1995, several liver transplantations for CLMs were performed, but outcome was poor (5-year survival rate: 18%) and liver transplantation for CLMs was abandoned. Since then, the survival rate after liver transplantation in general has improved by almost 30%. On the basis of this, a 5-year survival rate of about 50% after liver transplantation for CLMs could be anticipated. In a prospective pilot study, liver transplantation for nonresectable CLMs was performed (n = 21). Main inclusion criteria were liver-only CLMs, excised primary tumors, and at least 6 weeks of chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier estimates of the OS rate at 1, 3, and 5 years were 95%, 68%, and 60%, respectively. Metastatic recurrence of disease was common (mainly pulmonary). However, a significant proportion of the recurrences were accessible for surgery, and at follow-up (after median of 27 months; range, 8-60), 33% had no evidence of disease. Hepatic tumor load before liver transplantation, time from primary surgery to liver transplantation, and progressive disease on chemotherapy were identified as significant prognostic factors. OS exceeds by far reported outcome for chemotherapy, which is the only treatment option available for this patient group. Furthermore, OS is comparable with liver resection for resectable CLMs and survival after repeat liver transplantation for nonmalignant diseases. Selection strategies based on prognostic factors may further improve the outcome (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01311453).

1 May 2015 in Annals of Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SDSvein Dueland
Svein Dueland
TGTormod K. Guren
Tormod K. Guren
MHMorten Hagness
Morten Hagness
BGBengt Glimelius
Bengt Glimelius
PLPål‐Dag Line
Pål‐Dag Line
KTKjell M. Tveit
Kjell M. Tveit
The primary objective was to compare overall survival (OS) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) with nonresectable liver-only metastases treated by liver transplantation or chemotherapy. CRC is the third most common cancer worldwide. About 50% of patients will develop metastatic disease primarily to the liver and the lung. The majority of patients with liver metastases receive palliative chemotherapy, with a median OS of trial patients of about 2 years, and less than 10% are alive at 5 years. Patients with nonresectable liver-only CRC metastases underwent liver transplantation in the SECA study (n = 21). Disease-free survival (DFS) and OS of patients included in the SECA study were compared with progression-free survival (PFS) and OS in a similar cohort of CRC patients with liver-only disease included in a first-line chemotherapy study, the NORDIC VII study (n = 47). PFS/DFS and OS were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. DFS/PFS in both groups were 8 to 10 months. However, a dramatic difference in OS was observed. The 5-year OS rate was 56% in patients undergoing liver transplantation compared with 9% in patients starting first-line chemotherapy. The reason for the large difference in OS despite similar DFS/PFS is likely different metastatic patterns at relapse/progression. Relapse in the liver transplantation group was often detected as small, slowly growing lung metastases, whereas progression of nonresectable liver metastases was observed in the chemotherapy group. Compared with chemotherapy, liver transplantation resulted in a marked increased OS in CRC patients with nonresectable liver-only metastases.

1 July 2015 in Annals of Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PLPål‐Dag Line
Pål‐Dag Line
MHMorten Hagness
Morten Hagness
ABAudun Elnaes Berstad
Audun Elnaes Berstad
AFAksel Foss
Aksel Foss
SDSvein Dueland
Svein Dueland
Selected patients with nonresectable colorectal liver metastases benefit from liver transplantation and have acceptable 5-year survival rates. However, allocating full-sized grafts to this group of patients is difficult due to the scarcity of grafts. This could be improved by utilizing small partial grafts, which mandates effective strategies to overcome the problems regarding insufficient functional liver mass. We have developed a protocol incorporating previously reported experiences from living donor transplantation and recent developments in liver surgery, facilitating transplantation of very small liver grafts. At the time of transplantation, segments 1 to 3 are resected in the recipient and orthotopically replaced by a segment 2 to 3 allograft. Portal inflow is modulated by redirecting the portal flow to the graft with concomitant focus on keeping the portal vein pressure below 20 mm Hg. A second-stage hepatectomy is performed as soon as the graft has regenerated to a sufficient volume. A graft weighing 330 g was transplanted to a 50-year-old man weighing 92 kg, and the portal vein to the right remnant liver was closed. The volume of the liver graft was doubled 2 weeks after the first procedure, and it increased further after the second procedure, with extended right hepatectomy performed at day 23 after transplantation. There were no signs of liver failure or small-for-size syndrome. The current protocol and ongoing study could represent a possible strategy to increase the availability of liver transplantation to patients with nonresectable liver tumors such as hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases.

10 December 2007 in Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LAL. Aabakken
L. Aabakken
MBM. Bretthauer
M. Bretthauer
PLPål‐Dag Line
Pål‐Dag Line
Background and study aims: Double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) has been proved to be effective for deep intubation of the small bowel. Patients with a Roux-en-Y enteroanastomosis and biliary problems have been a challenge in gastrointestinal practice because of the lack of endoscopic access to the biliary anastomosis. We report on the first case series of patients with Roux-en-Y anatomy who have been examined using DBE. Patients and methods: Between September 2005 and May 2006, 18 endoscopic retrograde cholangiography procedures were performed in 13 patients (median age 53, range 2 - 81 years) using the DBE technique at our hospital. Most of the cases (10/13) had had a liver transplant for primary sclerosing cholangitis. The Fujinon T-series DBE system was used in all cases. Results: The entero-enteric anastomosis was reached easily in all 18 procedures, and the end of the Roux limb was reached in 17/18 procedures. The mean intubation time was 40 minutes (range 5 - 120 minutes). Adequate imaging was achieved in all but two cases, one of whom had a native papilla. Biliary stenting was performed in two patients, stent removal in three patients, and removal of a small stone in one patient. Conclusions: Endoscopic access and biliary cannulation in the setting of Roux-en-Y anatomy is safe and feasible using the new DBE system for enteral intubation. Adaptation of accessories would further improve the utility of the procedure.

16 March 2011 in Diabetologia
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TVT. G. Valderhaug
T. G. Valderhaug
JHJ. Hjelmesæth
J. Hjelmesæth
AHA. Hartmann
A. Hartmann
JRJ. Røislien
J. Røislien
HBH. A. Bergrem
H. A. Bergrem
TJT. Jenssen
T. Jenssen
Aims/objective We aimed to assess the long-term effects of post-transplant glycaemia on long-term survival after renal transplantation. Methods Study participants were 1,410 consecutive transplant recipients without known diabetes who underwent an OGTT 10 weeks post-transplant and were observed for a median of 6.7 years (range 0.3–13.8 years). The HRs adjusted for age, sex, traditional risk factors and transplant-related risk factors were estimated. Results Each 1 mmol/l increase in fasting plasma glucose (fPG) or 2 h plasma glucose (2hPG) was associated with 11% (95% CI −1%, 24%) and 5% (1%, 9%) increments in all-cause mortality risk and 19% (1%, 39%) and 6% (1%, 12%) increments in cardiovascular (CV) mortality risk, respectively. Including both fPG and 2hPG in the multi-adjusted model the HR for 2hPG remained unchanged, while the HR for fPG was attenuated (1.05 [1.00, 1.11] and 0.97 [0.84, 1.14]). Compared with recipients with normal glucose tolerance, patients with post-transplant diabetes mellitus had higher all-cause and CV mortality (1.54 [1.09, 2.17] and 1.80 [1.10, 2.96]), while patients with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) had higher all-cause, but not CV mortality (1.39 [1.01, 1.91] and 1.04 [0.62, 1.74]). Conversely, impaired fasting glucose was not associated with increased all-cause or CV mortality (0.79 [0.52, 1.23] and 0.76 [0.39, 1.49]). Post-challenge hyperglycaemia predicted death from any cause and infectious disease in the multivariable analyses (1.49 [1.15, 1.95] and 1.91 [1.09, 3.33]). Conclusions/interpretation For predicting all-cause and CV mortality, 2hPG is superior to fPG after renal transplantation. Also, early post-transplant diabetes, IGT and post-challenge hyperglycaemia were significant predictors of death. Future studies should determine whether an OGTT helps identify renal transplant recipients at increased risk of premature death.