Search

Background: Extensive resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma is the most effective treatment, but high morbidity and poor prognosis remain concerns. Previous data have shown marked differences in outcomes between comparable Eastern and Western centers. We compared the outcomes of the management for hilar cholangiocarcinoma at one Japanese and one British institution with comparable experience., Methods: Of 298 consecutive patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma evaluated at Hirosaki University Hospital, Japan and St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK, 183 underwent radical resection. Clinicopathologic variables and postoperative outcomes were compared., Results: Significant differences were not observed between the Hirosaki and Leeds cohorts in overall outcomes despite several differences in the patient characteristics. Although there was a difference in 90-day mortality (2.5% vs 13.6%, respectively), disease-specific 5-year survival rates were 32.8% and 31.9%, respectively (P = .767). Multivariate analysis identified trisectionectomy (odds ratio = 2.32; P = .010), combined pancreatoduodenectomy (odds ratio = 7.88; P = .010), and perioperative blood transfusion (odds ratio = 1.88; P = .045) were associated with postoperative major complications, while preoperative biliary drainage associated with postoperative major complications, while preoperative biliary drainage (risk ratio = 2.21; P = .018), perioperative blood transfusion (risk ratio = 1.58; P = .029), lymph node metastasis (risk ratio = 2.00; P = .002), moderate/poorly differentiated tumor (risk ratio = 1.72; P = .029), microvascular invasion (risk ratio = 1.63; P = .046), and R1 resection (risk ratio = 1.90; P = .005) were risk factors for poor survival., Conclusion: Disease-specific survival and prognostic factors were similar in both centers. Meticulous operative technique to avoid perioperative blood transfusion may improve long-term survival., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)