Search

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a growing epidemic and a risk factor for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study investigated the long-term outcomes of liver resection (LR) for HCC in patients with MS. Rates, timing, patterns, and treatment of recurrences were investigated, and cancer-specific survivals were assessed. METHODS: Between 2001 and 2021, data from 24 clinical centers were collected. Overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and cancer-specific survival were analyzed as well as recurrence patterns and treatment. The analysis was conducted using a competing-risk framework. The trajectory of the risk of recurrence over time was applied to a competing risk analysis. For post-recurrence survival, death resulting from tumor progression was the primary endpoint, whereas deaths with recurrence relating to other causes were considered as competing events. RESULTS: In total, 813 patients were included in the study. Median OS was 81.4 months (range 28.1-157.0 months), and recurrence occurred in 48.3% of patients, with a median RFS of 39.8 months (range 15.7-174.7 months). Cause-specific hazard of recurrence showed a first peak 6 months (0.027), and a second peak 24 months (0.021) after surgery. The later the recurrence, the higher the chance of receiving curative intent approaches (p = 0.001). Size >5 cm, multiple tumors, microvascular invasion, and cirrhosis were independent predictors of recurrence showing a cause-specific hazard over time. RFS was associated with death for recurrence (hazard ratio: 0.985, 95% CI: 0.977-0.995; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MS undergoing LR for HCC have good long-term survival. Recurrence occurs in 48% of patients with a double-peak incidence and time-specific hazards depending on tumor-related factors and underlying disease. The timing of recurrence significantly impacts survival. Surveillance after resection should be adjusted over time depending on risk factors. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a growing epidemic and a significant risk factor for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The present study demonstrated that patients who undergo surgical resection for HCC on MS have a good long-term survival and that recurrence occurs in almost half of the cases with a double peak incidence and time-specific hazards depending on tumor-related factors and underlying liver disease. Also, the timing of recurrence significantly impacts survival. Clinicians should therefore adjust follow-up after surgery accordingly, considering timing of recurrence and specific risk factors. Also, the results of the present study might help design future trials on the use of adjuvant therapy following resection.

Purpose: Single large hepatocellular carcinoma >5cm (SLHCC) traditionally requires a major liver resection. Minor resections are often performed with the goal to reduce morbidity and mortality. Aim of the study was to establish if a major resection should be considered the best treatment for SLHCC or a more limited resection should be preferred. Methods: A multicenter retrospective analysis of the HE.RC.O.LE.S. Group register was performed. All collected patients with surgically treated SLHCC were divided in 5 groups of treatment (major hepatectomy, sectorectomy, left lateral sectionectomy, segmentectomy, non-anatomical resection) and compared for baseline characteristics, short and long-term results. A propensity-score weighted analysis was performed. Results: 535 patients were enrolled in the study. Major resection was associated with significantly increased major complications compared to left lateral sectionanectomy, segmentectomy and non-anatomical resection (all p<0.05) and borderline significant increased major complications compared to sectorectomy (p=0.08). Left lateral sectionectomy showed better overall survival compared to major resection (p=0.02), while other groups of treatment resulted similar to major hepatectomy group for the same item. Absence of oncological benefit after major resection and similar outcomes among the 5 groups of treatment was confirmed even in the sub-population excluding patients with macrovascular invasion. Conclusion: Major resection was associated to increased major post-operative morbidity without long-term survival benefit; when technically feasible and oncologically adequate, minor resections should be preferred for the surgical treatment of SLHCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic liver surgery is increasingly used for more challenging procedures. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and oncological safety of laparoscopic right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases after portal vein embolization., Methods: This was an international retrospective multicentre study of patients with colorectal liver metastases who underwent open or laparoscopic right and extended right hepatectomy after portal vein embolization between 2004 and 2020. The perioperative and oncological outcomes for patients who underwent laparoscopic and open approaches were compared using propensity score matching., Results: Of 338 patients, 84 patients underwent a laparoscopic procedure and 254 patients underwent an open procedure. Patients in the laparoscopic group less often underwent extended right hepatectomy (18% versus 34.6% (P = 0.004)), procedures in the setting of a two-stage hepatectomy (42% versus 65% (P < 0.001)), and major concurrent procedures (4% versus 16.1% (P = 0.003)). After propensity score matching, 78 patients remained in each group. The laparoscopic approach was associated with longer operating and Pringle times (330 versus 258.5 min (P < 0.001) and 65 versus 30 min (P = 0.001) respectively) and a shorter length of stay (7 versus 8 days (P = 0.011)). The R0 resection rate was not different (71% for the laparoscopic approach versus 60% for the open approach (P = 0.230)). The median disease-free survival was 12 (95% c.i. 10 to 20) months for the laparoscopic approach versus 20 (95% c.i. 13 to 31) months for the open approach (P = 0.145). The median overall survival was 28 (95% c.i. 22 to 48) months for the laparoscopic approach versus 42 (95% c.i. 35 to 52) months for the open approach (P = 0.614)., Conclusion: The advantages of a laparoscopic over an open approach for (extended) right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases after portal vein embolization are limited., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Foundation Ltd.)

Background: It is well known that laparoscopic liver surgery can offer advantages over open liver surgery in selected patients. However, what type of procedures can benefit most from a laparoscopic approach has been investigated poorly thus far. The aim of this study is thus to define the extent of advantages of laparoscopic over open liver surgery for lesions in the anterolateral (AL) and posterosuperior (PS) segments., Methods: In this international multicentre retrospective cohort study, laparoscopic and open minor liver resections for lesions in the AL and PS segments were compared after propensity score matching. The differential benefit of laparoscopy over open liver surgery, calculated using bootstrap sampling, was compared between AL and PS resections and expressed as a Delta of the differences., Results: After matching, 3,040 AL and 2,336 PS resections were compared, encompassing open and laparoscopic procedures in a 1:1 ratio. AL and PS laparoscopic liver resections were more advantageous in comparison to open in terms of blood loss, transfusion rate, complications, and length of stay. However, AL resections benefitted more from laparoscopy than PS in terms of overall and severe complications (D-difference were 4.8%, P=0.046 and 3%, P=0.046) and blood loss (D-difference was 195 mL, P<0.001). Similar results were observed in the subset for high-volume centres, while in recent years no significant differences were found in the differential benefit between AL and PS segments., Conclusions: The advantage of laparoscopic over open liver surgery is greater in the AL segments than in the PS segments., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://hbsn.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/hbsn-23-494/coif). M.A.H. and L.A.A. serve as unpaid editorial board members of HepatoBiliary Surgery and Nutrition. Outside of the submitted work, S.L.B. reported payment or honoraria from Baxter, Olympus, Siemens and Johnson & Johnson, and A.A.F. reported speaker’s honoraria from Bayer and Olympus. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2024 Hepatobiliary Surgery and Nutrition. All rights reserved.)

. The telephone follow-up by a nurse case manager in major surgery. A prospective observational study., Introduction: One of the methods used in case management is a structured telephone follow-up, helpful in improving patient satisfaction, supporting autonomy, and addressing information needs post-discharge., Objective: To describe the experience of nursing case management and post-hospital telephone follow-up in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery., Method: Single-centre prospective observational study. All consecutive patients undergoing major abdominal surgery from April 2021 to May 2022 were included. Symptoms and nursing care needs during the post-discharge period, along with case management interventions, were described., Results: Of the 205 patients included in the study, 89.8% underwent elective surgery and 135 (65.9%) did not develop postoperative complications, with a median hospital stay of 8 days. 182 (88.8%) patients reported at least one postoperative symptom, with fatigue, altered bowel movements, pain, and lack of appetite being the most common. Interventions provided by the case manager decreased progressively over time, from 149 at the first telephone contact (72%) to 44 at the third (25%). A total of 22 patients (10.7%) were readmitted to the hospital, 12 of whom on the recommendation of the case manager., Conclusions: After discharge, patients experience numerous issues: although the symptoms encountered are common during the post-operative period, they often require support beyond the patient's capacity. The intervention of the case manager with information and support for self-management of symptoms enabled the early identification of risk situations.