Purpose of review The enthusiasm generated by the results of the Edmonton protocol of islet transplantation is inciting a great number of institutions to start such programs. However, the procedure of islet isolation and purification is costly, complex and technically challenging. In order to share costs and to avoid facing the steep learning curve of the procedure, many centers interested in islet transplantation have looked into collaborating with experienced groups serving as core islet isolation facilities. Recent findings The proof of principle that remote islet processing and shipment could be successfully implemented with obtainng the Portland/Minneapolis, Huddinge/Giessen and Houston/Miami partnerships. Moreover, in order to increase both the donor pool and the number of patients gaining access to islet transplantation, multicenter networks,such as the Swiss-French GRAGIL consortium and the 4-country Nordic Network in Scandinavia have been built. The GRAGIL group has been fully operational since 1999, allowing the transplantation of 27 islet preparations processed in Geneva, Switzerland into 20 recipients in France over the course of 4.5 years.Organizational issues in the design of such networks are discussed based on the example of the GRAGIL experience. Summary The feasibility and the efficiency of islet transplantation in multicenter networks have been demonstrated. This strategy allows to increase the donor pool and the accessibility to islet transplantation in an extended population area. (J Intervent Radiol, 2006, 15:626-631 )

PURPOSE: This study included all patients treated at the University Hospital of Geneva for a first episode of uncomplicated diverticulitis. Risks of recurrence and treatment failure were evaluated by comparing the results between short-course and long-course intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy groups. METHODS: The records of all patients hospitalized at our facility from January 2007 to February 2012 for a first episode of uncomplicated diverticulitis (Hinchey Ia), as confirmed by computed tomography, were prospectively collected. We published an auxiliary analysis from this registered study at Clinicaltrials.gov (identifier number: NCT01015378). Two groups of patients were considered: one received a short-course IV antibiotic arm (ceftriaxone and metronidazole) for up to 5 days (followed by 5 days of oral antibiotics); the other received a long-course IV arm between days 5 and 10. The primary outcome was the recurrence-free survival time. RESULTS: Follow-up was completed for 256 patients-50% men and 50% women, with a median age of 56 years (range, 24-85 years). The average follow-up was 50 months (range, 19-89 months). Of the 256 patients included in the study, 46 patients received a short-course IV antibiotic treatment and 210 received a long-course treatment. The recurrence-free survivals were very similar between the two groups, which was supported by a log rank test (P = 0.772). Four treatment failures, all in the long-course IV antibiotic treatment group, occurred. CONCLUSION: Treatment of diverticulitis with a short IV antibiotic treatment is possible and does not modify the recurrence rate in patients with uncomplicated diverticulitis.
Anti-Bacterial Agents ; Arm ; Diverticulitis* ; Diverticulitis, Colonic ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Male ; Prospective Studies ; Recurrence* ; Treatment Failure