Search

BACKGROUND: Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality after liver surgery. Standardized assessment of preoperative liver function is crucial to identify patients at risk. These European consensus guidelines provide guidance for preoperative patient assessment. METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was used to achieve consensus. The expert panel consisted of hepatobiliary surgeons, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and hepatologists. The guideline process was supervised by a methodologist and reviewed by a patient representative. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. Evidence assessment and statement development followed Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. RESULTS: Based on 271 publications covering 4 key areas, 21 statements (at least 85 per cent agreement) were produced (median level of evidence 2- to 2+). Only a few systematic reviews (2++) and one RCT (1+) were identified. Preoperative liver function assessment should be considered before complex resections, and in patients with suspected or known underlying liver disease, or chemotherapy-associated or drug-induced liver injury. Clinical assessment and blood-based scores reflecting liver function or portal hypertension (for example albumin/bilirubin, platelet count) aid in identifying risk of PHLF. Volumetry of the future liver remnant represents the foundation for assessment, and can be combined with indocyanine green clearance or LiMAx® according to local expertise and availability. Functional MRI and liver scintigraphy are alternatives, combining FLR volume and function in one examination. CONCLUSION: These guidelines reflect established methods to assess preoperative liver function and PHLF risk, and have uncovered evidence gaps of interest for future resea

Background: Involved lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) have been associated with increased local recurrence (LR) and ipsi-lateral LR (LLR) rates. However, consensus regarding the indication and type of surgical treatment for suspicious LLNs is lacking. This study evaluated the surgical treatment of LLNs in an untrained setting at a national level. Methods: Patients who underwent additional LLN surgery were selected from a national cross-sectional cohort study regarding patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in 69 Dutch hospitals in 2016. LLN surgery consisted of either ‘node-picking’ (the removal of an individual LLN) or ‘partial regional node dissection’ (PRND; an incomplete resection of the LLN area). For all patients with primarily enlarged (≥7 mm) LLNs, those undergoing rectal surgery with an additional LLN procedure were compared to those undergoing only rectal resection. Results: Out of 3057 patients, 64 underwent additional LLN surgery, with 4-year LR and LLR rates of 26% and 15%, respectively. Forty-eight patients (75%) had enlarged LLNs, with corresponding recurrence rates of 26% and 19%, respectively. Node-picking (n = 40) resulted in a 20% 4-year LLR, and a 14% LLR after PRND (n = 8; p = 0.677). Multivariable analysis of 158 patients with enlarged LLNs undergoing additional LLN surgery (n = 48) or rectal resection alone (n = 110) showed no significant association of LLN surgery with 4-year LR or LLR, but suggested higher recurrence risks after LLN surgery (LR: hazard ratio [HR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7–3.2, p = 0.264; LLR: HR 1.9, 95% CI 0.2–2.5, p = 0.874). Conclusion: Evaluation of Dutch practice in 2016 revealed that approximately one-third of patients with primarily enlarged LLNs underwent surgical treatment, mostly consisting of node-picking. Recurrence rates were not significantly affected by LLN surgery, but did suggest worse outcomes. Outcomes of LLN surgery after adequate training requires further research.

Background:The robot-assisted approach is now often used for rectal cancer surgery, but its use in colon cancer surgery is less well defined. This study aims to compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted colon cancer surgery to conventional laparoscopy in the Netherlands. Methods: Data on all patients who underwent surgery for colon cancer from 2018 to 2020 were collected from the Dutch Colorectal Audit. All complications, readmissions, and deaths within 90 days after surgery were recorded along with conversion rate, margin and harvested nodes. Groups were stratified according to the robot-assisted and laparoscopic approach. Results:In total, 18,886 patients were included in the analyses. The operative approach was open in 15.2%, laparoscopic in 78.9% and robot-assisted in 5.9%. The proportion of robot-assisted surgery increased from 4.7% in 2018 to 6.9% in 2020. There were no notable differences in outcomes between the robot-assisted and laparoscopic approach for Elective cT1-3M0 right, left, and sigmoid colectomy. Only conversion rate was consistently lower in the robotic group. (4.6% versus 8.8%, 4.6% versus 11.6%, and 1.6 versus 5.9%, respectively).Conclusions: This nationwide study on surgery for colon cancer shows there is a gradual but slow adoption of robotic surgery for colon cancer up to 6.9% in 2020. When comparing the outcomes of right, left, and sigmoid colectomy, clinical outcomes were similar between the robotic and laparoscopic approach. However, conversion rate is consistently lower in the robotic procedures.

BACKGROUND: The risk of death after surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is high; nearly one in every five patients dies within 90 days after surgery. When the oncological benefit is limited, a high-risk resection may not be justified. This retrospective cohort study aimed to create two preoperative prognostic models to predict 90-day mortality and overall survival (OS) after major liver resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.METHODS: Separate models were built with factors known before surgery using multivariable regression analysis for 90-day mortality and OS. Patients were categorized in three groups: favourable profile for surgical resection (90-day mortality rate below 10 per cent and predicted OS more than 3 years), unfavourable profile (90-day mortality rate above 25 per cent and/or predicted OS below 1.5 years), and an intermediate group.RESULTS: A total of 1673 patients were included. Independent risk factors for both 90-day mortality and OS included ASA grade III-IV, large tumour diameter, and right-sided hepatectomy. Additional risk factors for 90-day mortality were advanced age and preoperative cholangitis; those for long-term OS were high BMI, preoperative jaundice, Bismuth IV, and hepatic artery involvement. In total, 294 patients (17.6 per cent) had a favourable risk profile for surgery (90-day mortality rate 5.8 per cent and median OS 42 months), 271 patients (16.2 per cent) an unfavourable risk profile (90-day mortality rate 26.8 per cent and median OS 16 months), and 1108 patients (66.2 per cent) an intermediate risk profile (90-day mortality rate 12.5 per cent and median OS 27 months).CONCLUSION: Preoperative risk models for 90-day mortality and OS can help identify patients with resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma who are unlikely to benefit from surgical resection. Tailored shared decision-making is particularly essential for the large intermediate group.

Background: Evaluation of morbidity and mortality after hepatic resection often lacks stratification by extent of resection or diagnosis. Although a liver resection for different indications may have technical similarities, postoperative outcomes differ. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the risk of major complications and mortality after resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Methods: Meta-analysis was performed to assess postoperative mortality (in-hospital, 30-, and 90-day) and major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III). Results: A total of 32 studies that reported on 19,503 patients were included. Pooled in-hospital, 30-day, and 90-day mortality were 5.9% (95% confidence interval 4.1–8.4); 4.6% (95% confidence interval 4.0–5.2); and 6.1% (95% confidence interval 5.0–7.3), respectively. Pooled proportion of major complications was 22.2% (95% confidence interval 17.7–27.5) for all resections. The pooled 90-day mortality was 3.1% (95% confidence interval 1.8–5.2) for a minor resection, 7.4% (95% confidence interval 5.9–9.3) for all major resections, and 11.4% (95% confidence interval 6.9–18.7) for extended resections (P = .001). Major complications were 38.8% (95% confidence interval 29.5–49) after a major hepatectomy compared to 11.3% (95% confidence interval 5.0–24.0) after a minor hepatectomy (P = .001). Asian studies had a pooled 90-day mortality of 4.4% (95% confidence interval 3.3–5.9) compared to 6.8% (95% confidence interval 5.6–8.2) for Western studies (P = .02). Cohorts with patients included before 2000 had a pooled 90-day mortality of 5.9% (95% confidence interval 4.8–7.3) compared to 6.8% (95% confidence interval 5.1–9.1) after 2000 (P = .44). Conclusion: When informing patients or comparing outcomes across hospitals, postoperative mortality rates after liver resection should be reported for 90-days with consideration of the diagnosis and the extent of liver resection.

Histopathological growth patterns (HGPs) of liver metastases represent a potential biomarker for prognosis after resection. They have never been studied in neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases (NETLM). This study evaluated if distinct HGPs can be observed in resected NETLM and if they have prognostic value. Sixty-three patients who underwent resection of NETLM between 01–01-2001 and 31–12-2021 were retrospectively included. HGPs were scored on Haematoxylin&Eosin slides using light microscopy, distinguishing desmoplastic- (dHGP), pushing- (pHGP) and replacement HGP (rHGP). Average HGP scores were calculated per patient. Each patient was classified according to predominant HGP. Overall and Disease-Free Survival (OS and DFS) were evaluated through Kaplan–Meier analysis and Cox regression. Eighteen patients had predominant dHGP (29%), 33 had predominant pHGP (52%) and 11 had predominant rHGP (17%). One patient had mixed HGP (2%). Five-year OS was 76% (95%CI: 66–87%) for the overall cohort. Five-year OS was 92% (95%CI: 77–100%) for dHGP, was 73% (95%CI: 59–91%) for pHGP, 50% (95%CI: 25–100%) for rHGP. Five-year DFS was 39% (95%CI: 19–83%) for dHGP, 44% (95%CI: 27–71%) for rHGP and 50% (95%CI: 23–100%) for pHGP. There was no significant association between HGP and OS or DFS in multivariable analysis. Distinct HGPs could be identified in NETLM. In patients who underwent resection of NETLM, no association was found between HGPs and postoperative survival. Half of the patients with NETLM have a predominant pushing growth pattern, which is a rare growth pattern in liver metastases from breast and colorectal cancer., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published