Search

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate minor hepatectomy (MiH) outcomes. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Liver surgery has moved toward a parenchyma-sparing approach, favoring MiHs over major resections. MiHs encompass a wide range of procedures. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients who underwent open liver resections in 17 high-volume centers. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: cirrhosis and associated digestive/biliary resections. Resections were classified as (Brisbane nomenclature): limited resections (LR); (mono)segmentectomies/bisegmentectomies (Segm/Bisegm); right anterior and right posterior sectionectomies (RightAnteriorSect/RightPosteriorSect). Additionally, we defined: complex LRs (ComplexLR = LRs with exposed vessels); postero-superior segmentectomies (PosteroSuperiorSegm = segment (Sg)7, Sg8, and Sg7+Sg8 segmentectomies); and complex core hepatectomies (ComplexCoreHeps = Sg1 segmentectomies and combined resections of Sg4s+Sg8+Sg1). Left lateral sectionectomies (LLSs, n = 442) and right hepatectomies (RHs, n = 1042) were reference standards. Outcomes were adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: Four thousand four hundred seventy-one MiHs were analyzed. Compared with RHs, MiHs had lower 90-day mortality (0.5%/2.2%), severe morbidity (8.6%/14.4%), and liver failure rates (2.4%/11.6%, P < 0.001), but similar bile leak rates. LR and LLS had similar outcomes. ComplexLR and Segm/Bisegm of anterolateral segments had higher bile leak rates than LLS rates (OR = 2.35 and OR = 3.24), but similar severe morbidity rates. ComplexCoreHeps had higher bile leak rates than RH rates (OR = 1.94); the severe morbidity rate approached that of RH. PosteroSuperiorSegm, RightAnteriorSect, and RightPosteriorSect had severe morbidity and bile leak rates similar to RH rates. MiHs had low liver failure rates, except RightAnteriorSect (vs LLS OR = 4.02). CONCLUSIONS: MiHs had heterogeneous outcomes. Mortality was low, but MiHs could be stratified according to severe morbidity, bile leak, and liver failure rates. Some MiHs had postoperative outcomes similar to RH.

International audience

Objective To stratify major hepatectomies (MajHs) according to their outcomes. Summary of background data MajHs are associated with non-negligible operative risks, but they include a wide range of procedures. Detailed depiction of the outcomes of different MajHs is the basis for a new classification of liver resections. Methods We retrospectively considered patients that underwent hepatectomy in 17 high-volume centers. Patients with an associated digestive/biliary resection were excluded. We analyzed open MajHs in non-cirrhotic patients. MajHs were classified according to the Brisbane nomenclature. Right hepatectomies (RHs) were reference standards. Outcomes were adjusted for potential confounders, including indication, liver function, preoperative portal vein embolization, and enrolling center. Results We analyzed a series of 2212 patients. In comparison with RH, left hepatectomy had lower mortality [0.6% vs 2.2%, odds ratio (OR) = 0.25], severe morbidity (11.7% vs 14.4%, OR = 0.62), and liver failure rates (2.1% vs 11.6%, OR = 0.16). Left hepatectomy+Sg1 and mesohepatectomy+/-Sg1 had outcomes similar to RH, except for higher bile leak rate (31.3% and 13.5% vs 6.7%, OR = 4.36 and OR = 2.29). RH + Sg1 had slightly worse outcomes than RH. Right and left trisectionectomies had higher mortality (5.0% and 7.3% vs 2.2%, OR = 2.07 and OR = 2.71) and liver failure rates than RH (19.0% and 22.0% vs 11.6%, OR = 2.03 and OR = 2.21). Left trisectionectomy had even higher severe morbidity (25.6% vs 14.4%, OR = 2.07) and bile leak rates (14.6% vs 6.7%, OR = 2.31). Conclusions The term "major hepatectomy" includes resections having heterogeneous outcome. Different MajHs can be stratified according to their mortality, severe morbidity, liver failure, and bile leak rates.

Background and aims We aimed to investigate the impact of vascular resection (VR) on postoperative outcomes and survival of patients undergoing hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Methods A retrospective analysis of a multi-institutional series of 270 patients with resected ICC was carried out. Patients were divided into three groups: portal vein VR (PVR), inferior vena cava VR (CVR) and no VR (NVR). Univariate and multivariate analysis were applied to define the impact of VR on postoperative outcomes and survival. Results Thirty-one patients (11.5%) underwent VR: 15 (5.6%) to PVR and 16 (5.9%) to CVR. R0 resection rates were 73.6% in NVR, 73.3% of PVR and 68.8% in CVR. The postoperative mortality rate was increased in VR groups: 2.5% in NVR, 6.7% in PVR and 12.5% in CVR. The 5-years overall survival (OS) rates progressively decreased from 38.4% in NVR, to 30.1% in CVR and to 22.2% in PVR, p = 0.030. However, multivariable analysis did not confirm an association between VR and prognosis. The following prognostic factors were identified: size ≥50 mm, patterns of distribution of hepatic nodules (single, satellites or multifocal), lymph-node metastases (N1) and R1 resections. In the VR group the 5-years OS rate in patients without lymph-node metastases undergoing R0 resection (VRR0N0) was 44.4%, while in N1 patients undergoing R1 resection was 20% (p Conclusion Vascular resection (PVR and CVR) is associated with higher operative risk, but seems to be justified by the good survival results, especially in patients without other negative prognostic factors (R0N0 resections).

Background: While ALPPS triggers a fast liver hypertrophy, it is still unclear which factors matter most to achieve accelerated hypertrophy within a short period of time. The aim of the study was to identify patient-intrinsic factors related to the growth of the future liver remnant (FLR). Methods: This cohort study is composed of data derived from the International ALPPS Registry from November 2011 and October 2018. We analyse the influence of demographic, tumour type and perioperative data on the growth of the FLR. The volume of the FLR was calculated in millilitre and percentage using computed-tomography (CT) scans before and after stage 1, both according to Vauthey formula. Results: A total of 734 patients were included from 99 centres. The median sFLR at stage 1 and stage 2 was 0.23 (IQR, 0.18–0.28) and 0.39 (IQR: 0.31–0.46), respectively. The variables associated with a lower increase from sFLR1 to sFLR2 were age˃68 years (p =.02), height ˃1.76 m (p ˂.01), weight ˃83 kg (p ˂.01), BMI˃28 (p ˂.01), male gender (p ˂.01), antihypertensive therapy (p ˂.01), operation time ˃370 minutes (p ˂.01) and hospital stay˃14 days (p ˂.01). The time required to reach sufficient volume for stage 2, male gender accounts 40.3% in group ˂7 days, compared with 50% of female, and female present 15.3% in group ˃14 days compared with 20.6% of male. Conclusions: Height, weight, FLR size and gender could be the variables that most constantly influence both daily growths, the interstage increase and the standardized FLR before the second stage.

Objective: The aim of this study was to establish clinically relevant outcome benchmark values using criteria for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) with portomesenteric venous resection (PVR) from a low-risk cohort managed in high-volume centers. Summary Background Data: PD with PVR is regarded as the standard of care in patients with cancer involvement of the portomesenteric venous axis. There are, however, no benchmark outcome indicators for this population which hampers comparisons of patients undergoing PD with and without PVR resection. Methods: This multicenter study analyzed patients undergoing PD with any type of PVR in 23 high-volume centers from 2009 to 2018. Nineteen outcome benchmarks were established in low-risk patients, defined as the 75th percentile of the median outcome values of the centers (NCT04053998). Results: Out of 1462 patients with PD and PVR, 840 (58%) formed the benchmark cohort, with a mean age was 64 (SD11) years, 413 (49%) were females. Benchmark cutoffs, among others, were calculated as follows: Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rate (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery): ≤14%; in-hospital mortality rate: ≤4%; major complication rate Grade≥3 and the CCI up to 6 months postoperatively: ≤36% and ≤26, respectively; portal vein thrombosis rate: ≤14% and 5-year survival for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: ≥9%. Conclusion: These novel benchmark cutoffs targeting surgical performance, morbidity, mortality, and oncological parameters show relatively inferior results in patients undergoing vascular resection because of involvement of the portomesenteric venous axis. These benchmark values however can be used to conclusively assess the results of different centers or surgeons operating on this high-risk group.

Objectives: To analyze long-term oncological outcome along with prognostic risk factors in a large cohort of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) undergoing ALPPS. Background: ALPPS is a two-stage hepatectomy variant that increases resection rates and R0 resection rates in patients with primarily unresectable CRLM as evidenced in a recent randomized controlled trial. Long-term oncologic results, however, are lacking. Methods: Cases in- and outside the International ALPPS Registry were collected and completed by direct contacts to ALPPS centers to secure a comprehensive cohort. Overall, cancer-specific (CSS), and recurrence-free (RFS) survivals were analyzed along with independent risk factors using Cox-regression analysis. Results: The cohort included 510 patients from 22 ALPPS centers over a 10-year period. Ninety-day mortality was 4.9% and median overall survival, CSS, and RFS were 39, 42, and 15 months, respectively. The median follow-up time was 38 months (95% confidence interval 32-43 months). Multivariate analysis identified tumor-characteristics (primary T4, right colon), biological features (K/N-RAS status), and response to chemotherapy (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) as independent predictors of CSS. Traditional factors such as size of metastases, uni versus bilobar involvement, and liver-first approach were not predictive. When hepatic recurrences after ALPPS was amenable to surgical/ablative treatment, median CSS was significantly superior compared to chemotherapy alone (56 vs 30 months, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This large cohort provides the first evidence that patients with primarily unresectable CRLM treated by ALPPS have not only low perioperative mortality, but achieve appealing long-term oncologic outcome especially those with favorable tumor biology and good response to chemotherapy.

Background Surgery is the most effective treatment option for neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM). This study investigated the role of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) as a novel strategy in treatment of NELM. Methods The International ALPPS Registry was reviewed to study patients who underwent ALPPS for NELM. Results From 2010 to 2017, 954 ALPPS procedures from 135 international centers were recorded in the International ALPPS Registry. Of them, 24 (2.5%) were performed for NELM. Twenty-one patients entered the final analysis. Overall grade ≥3b morbidity was 9% after stage 1 and 27% after stage 2. Ninety-day mortality was 5%. R0 resection was achieved in 19 cases (90%) at stage 2. Median follow-up was 28 (19–48) months. Median disease free survival (DFS) was 17.3 (95% CI: 7.1–27.4) months, 1-year and 2-year DFS was 73.2% and 41.8%, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was not reached. One-year and 2-year OS was 95.2% and 95.2%, respectively. Conclusions ALPPS appears to be a suitable strategy for inclusion in the multimodal armamentarium of well-selected patients with neuroendocrine liver metastases. In light of the morbidity in this initial series and a high rate of disease-recurrence, the procedure should be taken with caution.

Annals of surgical oncology (2020). doi:10.1245/s10434-019-08192-z, Published by Springer, Berlin [u.a.]

Objective To test the degree of agreement in selecting therapeutic options for patients suffering from colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) among surgical experts around the globe. Summary/background Only few areas in medicine have seen so many novel therapeutic options over the past decades as for liver tumors. Significant variations may therefore exist regarding the choices of treatment, even among experts, which may confuse both the medical community and patients. Methods Ten cases of CRLM with different levels of complexity were presented to 43 expert liver surgeons from 23 countries and 4 continents. Experts were defined as experienced surgeons with academic contributions to the field of liver tumors. Experts provided information on their medical education and current practice in liver surgery and transplantation. Using an online platform, they chose their strategy in treating each case from defined multiple choices with added comments. Inter-rater agreement among experts and cases was calculated using free-marginal multirater kappa methodology. A similar, but adjusted survey was presented to 60 general surgeons from Asia, Europe, and North America to test their attitude in treating or referring complex patients to expert centers. Results Thirty-eight (88%) experts completed the evaluation. Most of them are in leading positions (92%) with a median clinical experience of 25 years. Agreement on therapeutic strategies among them was none to minimal in more than half of the cases with kappa varying from 0.00 to 0.39. Many general surgeons may not refer the complex cases to expert centers, including in Europe, where they also engage in complex liver surgeries. Conclusions Considerable inconsistencies of decision-making exist among expert surgeons when choosing a therapeutic strategy for CRLM. This might confuse both patients and referring physicians and indicate that an international high-level consensus statements and widely accepted guidelines are needed.

At diagnosis, 15–25% of patients with stage IV colon cancer have synchronous detected liver metastases. About 30% of patients are not initially resectable due to the extent of hepatic disease or a small future liver remnant (FLR). When size of FLR is regarded to be not sufficient to sustain liver function in the postoperative course, techniques of portal vein occlusion (PVO) such as portal vein embolization (PVE) or portal vein ligation (PVL) can be used in the context of a classic two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) to get increase of the residual liver. Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) is a novel two-stage technique which combines PVO and parenchymal transection, followed by hepatectomy in a shorter period of time than classical TSH. However, many concerns have been addressed to the safety of this procedure. Further refinements of the original technique have been explored to improve its results. We report herein the case of a 44-year-old female patient with an obstructive cancer of the sigmoid colon and synchronous bilateral colorectal liver metastases, treated with the so-called “mini-ALPPS” approach.