Search

BACKGROUND: For well-selected patients and procedures, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become the gold standard for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) when performed in specialized centers. However, little is currently known concerning patient-related and peri-operative factors that could play a role in survival outcomes associated with LLR for CRLM. AIM: To provide an extensive summary of reported outcomes and prognostic factors associated with LLR for CRLM. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library using the keywords "colorectal liver metastases", "laparoscopy", "liver resection", "prognostic factors", "outcomes" and "survival". Only publications written in English and published until December 2019 were included. Furthermore, abstracts of which no accompanying full text was published, reviews, case reports, letters, protocols, comments, surveys and animal studies were excluded. All search results were saved to Endnote Online and imported in Rayyan for systematic selection. Data of interest were extracted from the included publications and tabulated for qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Out of 1064 articles retrieved by means of a systematic and grey literature search, 77 were included for qualitative analysis. Seventy-two research papers provided data concerning outcomes of LLR for CRLM. Fourteen papers were eligible for extraction of data concerning prognostic factors affecting survival outcomes. Qualitative analysis of the collected data showed that LLR for CRLM is safe, feasible and provides oncological efficiency. Multiple research groups have reported on the short-term advantages of LLR compared to open procedures. The obtained results accounted for minor LLR, as well as major LLR, simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and liver resection, LLR of posterosuperior segments, two-stage hepatectomy and repeat LLR for CRLM. Few research groups so far have studied prognostic factors affecting long-term outcomes of LLR for CRLM. CONCLUSION: In experienced hands, LLR for CRLM provides good short- and long-term outcomes, independent of the complexity of the procedure. ispartof: WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL ONCOLOGY vol:13 issue:7 pages:732-757 ispartof: location:China status: published

Background Metastasectomy is probably underused in metastatic colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of centralized repeated assessment on resectability rate of liver metastases. Methods The prospective RAXO study was a nationwide study in Finland. Patients with treatable metastatic colorectal cancer at any site were eligible. This planned substudy included patients with baseline liver metastases between 2012 and 2018. Resectability was reassessed by the multidisciplinary team at Helsinki tertiary referral centre upfront and twice during first-line systemic therapy. Outcomes were resectability rates, management changes, and survival. Results Of 812 patients included, 301 (37.1 per cent) had liver-only metastases. Of these, tumours were categorized as upfront resectable in 161 (53.5 per cent), and became amenable to surgery during systemic treatment in 63 (20.9 per cent). Some 207 patients (68.7 per cent) eventually underwent liver resection or ablation. At baseline, a discrepancy in resectability between central and local judgement was noted for 102 patients (33.9 per cent). Median disease-free survival (DFS) after first resection was 20 months and overall survival (OS) 79 months. Median OS after diagnosis of metastatic colorectal cancer was 80, 32, and 21 months in R0–1 resection, R2/ablation, and non-resected groups, and 5-year OS rates were 68, 37, and 9 per cent, respectively. Liver and extrahepatic metastases were present in 511 patients. Of these, tumours in 72 patients (14.1 per cent) were categorized as upfront resectable, and 53 patients (10.4 per cent) became eligible for surgery. Eventually 110 patients (21.5 per cent) underwent liver resection or ablation. At baseline, a discrepancy between local and central resectability was noted for 116 patients (22.7 per cent). Median DFS from first resection was 7 months and median OS 55 months. Median OS after diagnosis of metastatic colorectal cancer was 79, 42, and 17 months in R0–1 resection, R2/ablation, and non-resected groups, with 5-year OS rates of 65, 39, and 2 per cent, respectively. Conclusion Repeated centralized resectability assessment in patients with colorectal liver metastases improved resection and survival rates.

Study Purpose The DRAGON 1 trial aims to assess training, implementation, safety and feasibility of combined portal- and hepatic-vein embolization (PVE/HVE) to accelerate future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy in patients with borderline resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. Methods The DRAGON 1 trial is a worldwide multicenter prospective single arm trial. The primary endpoint is a composite of the safety of PVE/HVE, 90-day mortality, and one year accrual monitoring of each participating center. Secondary endpoints include: feasibility of resection, the used PVE and HVE techniques, FLR-hypertrophy, liver function (subset of centers), overall survival, and disease-free survival. All complications after the PVE/HVE procedure are documented. Liver volumes will be measured at week 1 and if applicable at week 3 and 6 after PVE/HVE and follow-up visits will be held at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the resection. Results Not applicable. Conclusion DRAGON 1 is a prospective trial to assess the safety and feasibility of PVE/HVE. Participating study centers will be trained, and procedures standardized using Work Instructions (WI) to prepare for the DRAGON 2 randomized controlled trial. Outcomes should reveal the accrual potential of centers, safety profile of combined PVE/HVE and the effect of FLR-hypertrophy induction by PVE/HVE in patients with CRLM and a small FLR. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04272931 (February 17, 2020). Toestingonline.nl: NL71535.068.19 (September 20, 2019).

OBJECTIVE: The European Guidelines Meeting on Laparoscopic Liver Surgery was held in Southampton on February 10 and 11, 2017 with the aim of presenting and validating clinical practice guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery.BACKGROUND: The exponential growth of laparoscopic liver surgery in recent years mandates the development of clinical practice guidelines to direct the speciality's continued safe progression and dissemination.METHODS: A unique approach to the development of clinical guidelines was adopted. Three well-validated methods were integrated: the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology for the assessment of evidence and development of guideline statements; the Delphi method of establishing expert consensus, and the AGREE II-GRS Instrument for the assessment of the methodological quality and external validation of the final statements.RESULTS: Along with the committee chairman, 22 European experts; 7 junior experts and an independent validation committee of 11 international surgeons produced 67 guideline statements for the safe progression and dissemination of laparoscopic liver surgery. Each of the statements reached at least a 95% consensus among the experts and were endorsed by the independent validation committee.CONCLUSION: The European Guidelines Meeting for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery has produced a set of clinical practice guidelines that have been independently validated for the safe development and progression of laparoscopic liver surgery. The Southampton Guidelines have amalgamated the available evidence and a wealth of experts' knowledge taking in consideration the relevant stakeholders' opinions and complying with the international methodology standards.

Objective: To present short-term outcomes of liver surgery in patients with initially unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) downsized by chemotherapy plus targeted agents.Background: The increase of complex hepatic resections of CRLM, technical innovations pushing boundaries of respectability, and use of intensified induction systemic regimens warrant for safety data in a homogeneous multicenter prospective cohort.Methods: Patients with initially unresectable CRLM, who underwent complete resection after induction systemic regimens with doublet or triplet chemotherapy, both plus targeted therapy, were selected from the ongoing phase III CAIRO5 study (NCT02162563). Short-term outcomes and risk factors for severe postoperative morbidity (Clavien Dindo grade ≥ 3) were analyzed using logistic regression analysis.Results: A total of 173 patients underwent resection of CRLM after induction systemic therapy. The median number of metastases was 9 and 161 (93%) patients had bilobar disease. Thirty-six (20.8%) 2-stage resections and 88 (51%) major resections (>3 liver segments) were performed. Severe postoperative morbidity and 90-day mortality was 15.6% and 2.9%, respectively. After multivariable analysis, blood transfusion (odds ratio [OR] 2.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-6.4], P = 0.03), major resection (OR 2.9 [95% CI 1.1-7.5], P = 0.03), and triplet chemotherapy (OR 2.6 [95% CI 1.1-7.5], P = 0.03) were independently correlated with severe postoperative complications. No association was found between number of cycles of systemic therapy and severe complications (r = -0.038, P = 0.31).Conclusion: In patients with initially unresectable CRLM undergoing modern induction systemic therapy and extensive liver surgery, severe postoperative morbidity and 90-day mortality were 15.6% and 2.7%, respectively. Triplet chemotherapy, blood transfusion, and major resections were associated with severe postoperative morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Excessive increase of portal flow and pressure following extended hepatectomy have been associated to insufficient growth or function of the future liver remnant (FLR), with the risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). We prospectively assess the influence of liver hemodynamics on FLR regeneration and function in Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS). METHODS: Twenty-three patients underwent ALPPS; liver hemodynamics were assessed throughout the procedures. Volume and function of the FLR were evaluated by angio-CT and 99mTc-Mebrofenin-scintigraphy. RESULTS: The portal vein flow at the end of stage-1 correlated with the increase of the FLR volume (p = 0.002). Patients with portal vein pressure (PVP)

Background Although surgical resection has been considered the only curative option for colorectal liver metastases (CLM), thermal ablation has recently been suggested as an alternative curative treatment. A prospective randomised trial is required to define the efficacy of resection vs ablation for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases. Methods Design and setting: This is a multicentre, open, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial design with internal pilot and will be performed in tertiary liver centres in UK and The Netherlands. Participants: Eligible patients will be those with colorectal liver metastases at high surgical risk because of their age, co-morbidities or tumour burden and who would be suitable for liver resection or thermal ablation. Intervention: Thermal ablation as per local policy. Control: Surgical liver resection performed as per centre protocol. Co-interventions: Further chemotherapy will be offered to patients as per current practice. Outcomes Pilot study: Same as main study and in addition patients and clinicians’ acceptability of the trial to assist in optimisation of recruitment. Primary outcome: Disease-free survival (DFS) at two years post randomisation. Secondary outcomes: Overall survival, timing and site of recurrence, additional therapy after treatment failure, quality of life, complications, length of hospital stay, costs, trial acceptability, DFS measured from end of intervention. Follow-up: 24 months from randomisation; five-year follow-up for overall survival. Sample size: 330 patients to demonstrate non-inferiority of thermal ablation. Discussion This trial will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of thermal ablation vs surgical resection for high-risk people with colorectal liver metastases, and guide the optimal treatment for these patients. Trial registration ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN52040363. Registered on 9 March 2016. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2499-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The main limiting factor for major liver resections is the volume and function of the future remnant liver (FLR). Portal vein embolization (PVE) is now standard in most centers for preoperative hypertrophy of FLR. However, it has a failure rate of about 20-30 %. In these cases, the "Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy" (ALPPS) may represent a suitable and possibly the only alternative.We performed a retrospective analysis of nine patients who had ALPPS following an insufficient hypertrophy after PVE. Computed tomography volumetry were performed before and after PVE as well as the first step of ALPPS. Furthermore, complications, 30-day mortality and outcome were analyzed.The FLR volume rose significantly by 77.7 +/- 40.7 % (FLR/TLV: 34.9 +/- 9.7 %) as early as 9 days after the first stage despite insufficient hypertrophy after preoperative portal vein embolization. Major complications (Grade > IIIb) occurred in 33 % of the patients, and 30-day mortality was 11.1 %. The OS at 1 and 2 years was 78 and 44 %. Four patients are presently still alive at a median of 33.4 (range 15-48) months (survival rate 44.4 %).The ALPPS procedure could be a suitable alternative for patients following insufficient PVE or indeed the last chance of a potentially curative treatment in this situation. Nevertheless, the high morbidity and mortality rates and the lack of data on the long-term oncological outcome must also be taken into account.

BACKGROUND: In patients with resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), either two-staged or simultaneous resections of the primary tumor and liver metastases are performed. Data on radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for the treatment of CRLM during a simultaneous procedure is lacking. The primary aim was to analyze short-term and long-term outcome of RFA in simultaneous treatment. A secondary aim was to compare simultaneous resection with the colorectal-first approach.METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 241 patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous CRLM between 2000-2016. Median follow-up was 36.1 months (IQR 18.2-58.8 months). A multivariable analysis was performed to analyze the postoperative morbidity, using the comprehensive complication index. A propensity matched analysis was performed to compare survival rates.RESULTS: In multivariable analysis, the best predictor of lower complication severity was treatment with RFA (p = 0.040). Higher complication rates were encountered in patients who underwent an abdominoperineal resection (p = 0.027) or age > 60 years (p = 0.022). The matched analysis showed comparable overall survival in RFA treated patients versus patients undergoing a liver resection with a five year overall survival of 39.4% and 37.5%, respectively (p = 0.782). In a second matched analysis, 5-year overall survival rates in simultaneously treated patients (43.8%) was comparable to patients undergoing the colorectal first approach (43.0%, p = 0.223).CONCLUSIONS: RFA treatment of CRLM in simultaneous procedures is associated with a lower complication severity and non-inferior oncological outcome as compared to partial liver resection. RFA should be considered a useful alternative to liver resection.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and long-term results of 2-stage hepatectomy (TSH) in patients with bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective multicenter study including 4 Italian hepatobiliary surgery units. One hundred thirty patients were selected for TSH between 2002 and 2011. The primary endpoint was feasibility of TSH and analysis of factors associated with failure to complete the procedure. The secondary endpoint was the long-term survival analysis. RESULTS: Patients presented with synchronous CRLM in 80.8% of cases, with a mean number of 8.3 CRLM and with concomitant extrahepatic disease in 20.0% of cases. The rate of failure to complete TSH was 21.5% and tumor progression was the most frequent reason for failure (18.5% of cases). Primary tumor characteristics, type, number, and distribution of CRLM were not associated with significantly different risks of disease progression. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that tumor progression during prehepatectomy chemotherapy was the only independent risk factor for failure to complete TSH. The 5- and 10-year overall survival rates for patients who completed TSH were 32.1% and 24.1%, respectively, with a median survival of 43 months. Duration of prehepatectomy chemotherapy >= 6 cycles was found to be the only independent predictor of overall and disease-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that selection of patients by response to prehepatectomy chemotherapy may be extremely important before planning TSH because tumor progression while receiving prehepatectomy chemotherapy was associated with significantly higher risk of failure to complete the second stage. For patients who completed the TSH strategy, long-term outcomes can be achieved with results similar to those observed after single-stage hepatectomy. (C) 2014 by the American College of Surgeons.