Search

Objective: We conducted a randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial to investigate if intravenous, multimodal, patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) could be noninferior to multimodal thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) in patients undergoing open liver surgery., Summary Background Data: The increasing use of minimally invasive techniques and fast track protocols have questioned the position of epidural analgesia as the optimal method of pain management after abdominal surgery., Methods: Patients operated with open liver resection between February 2012 and February 2016 were randomly assigned to receive either IV-PCA enhanced with ketorolac/diclofenac (IV-PCA, n = 66) or TEA (n = 77) within an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol. Noninferiority would be declared if the mean pain score on the numeric rating scale (NRS) for postoperative days (PODs) 0 to 5 in the IV-PCA group was no worse than the mean pain score in the TEA group by a margin of <1 point on an 11-point scale (0-10)., Results: The primary endpoint, mean NRS pain score was 1.7 in the IV-PCA group and 1.6 in the TEA group, establishing noninferiority. Pain scores were lower in the TEA group on PODs 0 and 1, but higher or equal on PODs 2 and 5. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter for patients in the IV-PCA group (74 vs 104 h, P < 0.001). The total opioid consumption during the first 3 days was significantly lower in the IV-PCA group., Conclusions: IV-PCA was noninferior to TEA for the treatment of postoperative pain in patients undergoing open liver resection.

Objective: To perform the first randomized controlled trial to compare laparoscopic and open liver resection., Summary Background Data: Laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly used for the surgical treatment of liver tumors. However, high-level evidence to conclude that laparoscopic liver resection is superior to open liver resection is lacking., Methods: Explanatory, assessor-blinded, single center, randomized superiority trial recruiting patients from Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway from February 2012 to January 2016. A total of 280 patients with resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to undergo laparoscopic (n = 133) or open (n = 147) parenchyma-sparing liver resection. The primary outcome was postoperative complications within 30 days (Accordion grade 2 or higher). Secondary outcomes included cost-effectiveness, postoperative hospital stay, blood loss, operation time, and resection margins., Results: The postoperative complication rate was 19% in the laparoscopic-surgery group and 31% in the open-surgery group (12 percentage points difference [95% confidence interval 1.67-21.8; P = 0.021]). The postoperative hospital stay was shorter for laparoscopic surgery (53 vs 96 hours, P < 0.001), whereas there were no differences in blood loss, operation time, and resection margins. Mortality at 90 days did not differ significantly from the laparoscopic group (0 patients) to the open group (1 patient). In a 4-month perspective, the costs were equal, whereas patients in the laparoscopic-surgery group gained 0.011 quality-adjusted life years compared to patients in the open-surgery group (P = 0.001)., Conclusions: In patients undergoing parenchyma-sparing liver resection for colorectal metastases, laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly less postoperative complications compared to open surgery. Laparoscopic resection was cost-effective compared to open resection with a 67% probability. The rate of free resection margins was the same in both groups. Our results support the continued implementation of laparoscopic liver resection.

Objective: 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)., Background: 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., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusions: 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).