Search

Background: This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the survival benefits of repeat hepatectomy (RH) and thermal ablation therapy (TAT) in managing recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in the PubMed, SinoMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Web of Science databases using relevant keywords to identify all studies published on this specific topic. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a fixed-effects model. Results: This meta-analysis included a total of 21 studies, comprising 2580 patients with recurrent HCC, among whom 1189 underwent RH and 1394 underwent TAT. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the RH group exhibited superior overall survival (OS) (HR=0.85, 95%CI 0.76~0.95, P=0.004) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR=0.79, 95%CI 0.7~0.9, P<0.01) compared to the TAT group. Regarding postoperative complications, the TAT group experienced fewer complications than the RH group (OR=3.23, 95%CI 1.48~7.07, P=0.003), while no significant difference in perioperative mortality was observed between the two groups (OR=2.11, 95%CI 0.54~8.19, P=0.28). Conclusion: The present study demonstrates that, in comparison to TAT, RH may confer superior survival benefits for patients with recurrent HCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: With the increasing demand for repeat hepatectomy, preventing perihepatic adhesion formation following initial hepatectomy is crucial. Adhesion-preventative barriers, like the new spray-type AdSprayTM (Terumo Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), have been proposed to reduce adhesion risk. However, data on their safety in minimally invasive hepatectomy (MIH) remain scarce. This is the first prospective study to evaluate the safety and feasibility of AdSprayTM in MIH. (2) Methods: A total of 124 patients who underwent MIH with AdSprayTM and 20 controls were analyzed. Subgroup analysis according to the AdSpray™ application area was conducted. Major complications were assessed using the Clavien–Dindo classification. Moreover, intraperitoneal pressure during AdSpray™ application was monitored in 20 cases. (3) Results: Major complications occurred in 6.4% of the patients, which was comparable to that in open hepatectomy. Intraperitoneal pressure remained stable below 12 mmHg during AdSpray™ application without any complications. No significant difference in complication rates was observed among subgroups. However, a potential increase in intra-abdominal abscess formation was suspected with AdSpray™ application to the resected liver surfaces. (4) Conclusions: AdSpray™ can be safely used in MIH; however, further research is needed to confirm the appropriacy of using AdSpray™, particularly over resected liver surfaces. Overall, AdSpray™ is a promising tool for enhancing the safety of MIH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accurate minimally invasive anatomic liver (sub)segmentectomy (MIAS) is technically demanding and not yet standardized, and its surgical outcomes are undefined. To study the impact of the minimally invasive approach on perioperative outcomes of anatomic liver (sub)segmentectomy (AS), we retrospectively studied and compared perioperative outcomes of 99 open AS (OAS) and 112 MIAS (laparoscopic 77, robotic 35) cases using the extrahepatic Glissonean approach, based on the 1:1 propensity score matched analyses. After matching (71:71), MIAS was superior to OAS in terms of blood loss (p < 0.0001), maximum postoperative serum total bilirubin (p < 0.0001), C-reactive protein (p = 0.034) levels, R0 resection rate (p = 0.021), bile leak (p = 0.049), and length of hospital stay (p < 0.0001). The matched robotic and laparoscopic AS groups (30:30) had comparable outcomes in terms of operative time, blood loss, transfusion, open conversion, postoperative morbidity and mortality, R0 resection, and hospital stay, although the rate of Pringle maneuver application (p = 0.0002) and the postoperative aspartate aminotransferase level (p = 0.002) were higher in the robotic group. Comparing the matched posterosuperior (sub)segmentectomy cases or unmatched repeat hepatectomy cases between MIAS and OAS, we observed significantly less blood loss and shorter hospital stays in MIAS. Robotic AS yielded comparable outcomes with laparoscopic AS in the posterosuperior (sub)segmentectomy and repeat hepatectomy settings, despite the worse tumor and procedural backgrounds in robotic AS. In conclusion, various types of MIAS standardized by the extrahepatic Glissonean approach were feasible and safe with more favorable perioperative outcomes than those of OAS. Although robotic AS had almost comparable outcomes with laparoscopic AS, robotics may serve to decrease the surgical difficulty of MIAS in selected patients undergoing posterosuperior (sub)segmentectomy and repeat hepatectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) patients with early recurrence usually suffer a poorer prognosis than those with late recurrence. We aimed to compare the treatment efficacy of repeat hepatectomy (RH) and percutaneous ablation (PA) in early-stage rHCC patients with early or late recurrence. Methods: This retrospective study enrolled 268 patients diagnosed with early-stage rHCC who received RH and PA. Overall survival (OS) and repeat recurrence-free survival (rRFS) were compared using log-rank analysis. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the confounding bias. Results: Among the 268 patients with early-stage rHCC, 79 underwent RH and 189 underwent PA. Early (n = 174) and late (n = 94) recurrence was defined as recurrence within and after 2 years following initial hepatectomy, respectively. For patients with early recurrence, RH and PA provided similar 5-year OS (71.5% versus 74.4%, P = 0.87) and rRFS rates (24.7% versus 24.9%, P = 0.73). For patients with late recurrence, RH resulted in comparable 5-year OS (73.1% versus 86.1%, P = 0.62) and rRFS rates (36.6% versus 27.8%, P = 0.34) as PA. After PSM, RH continued to share similar 5-year OS and rRFS rates with PA in patients with early recurrence, and comparable efficacy of RH and PA was also observed in patients with late recurrence. Conclusion: RH can offer comparable OS and rRFS rates as PA for early-stage rHCC patients, regardless of whether they experience early or late recurrence. Therefore, both RH and PA are feasible treatment options for early-stage rHCC patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) has increased, but appropriate indications for LRH are unclear. This study aimed to clarify appropriate indications for LRH. Methods We retrospectively compared surgical outcomes between open RH (ORH) (n = 57) and LRH (n = 40) groups. To detect difficult cases of complete pure LRH, we examined patients with unplanned intraoperative hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS)/open conversion (n = 6). Results In the LRH versus ORH group, as previous hepatectomy, laparoscopic (75% vs. 12%, p

(1) Background: With the increasing demand for repeat hepatectomy, preventing perihepatic adhesion formation following initial hepatectomy is crucial. Adhesion-preventative barriers, like the new spray-type AdSprayTM (Terumo Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), have been proposed to reduce adhesion risk. However, data on their safety in minimally invasive hepatectomy (MIH) remain scarce. This is the first prospective study to evaluate the safety and feasibility of AdSprayTM in MIH. (2) Methods: A total of 124 patients who underwent MIH with AdSprayTM and 20 controls were analyzed. Subgroup analysis according to the AdSpray™ application area was conducted. Major complications were assessed using the Clavien–Dindo classification. Moreover, intraperitoneal pressure during AdSpray™ application was monitored in 20 cases. (3) Results: Major complications occurred in 6.4% of the patients, which was comparable to that in open hepatectomy. Intraperitoneal pressure remained stable below 12 mmHg during AdSpray™ application without any complications. No significant difference in complication rates was observed among subgroups. However, a potential increase in intra-abdominal abscess formation was suspected with AdSpray™ application to the resected liver surfaces. (4) Conclusions: AdSpray™ can be safely used in MIH; however, further research is needed to confirm the appropriacy of using AdSpray™, particularly over resected liver surfaces. Overall, AdSpray™ is a promising tool for enhancing the safety of MIH.

The incidence of postoperative adhesions is directly correlated with the difficulty level of repeat hepatectomies. However, the incidence, location, and severity of postoperative adhesions in relation to hepatectomy-related operative procedures are yet unclear. First hepatectomy-induced hard dense adhesions were evaluated from the surgical records and/or videos of 168 patients who underwent second hepatectomies. The incidence of postoperative hard dense adhesions around the liver was significantly associated with locations, such as the hepatic cut surface, dissected areas around the liver, and peri-incision peritoneum, and hepatectomy-related operative procedures, such as Pringle maneuver and cholecystectomy. The incidence of hard dense adhesions after dissection was higher around the right liver than in the left infraphrenic space. Further, the incidence of hard dense adhesions around the hepatoduodenal ligament or Morison pouch was greater than 30% even in patients who did not undergo Pringle maneuver, cholecystectomy, or hepatorenal ligament dissection. Although the incidence of hard dense adhesions of the peritoneum around the incision was higher after open hepatectomy than after laparoscopic hepatectomy, adhesion barrier use reduced the incidence of such adhesions in patients after open hepatectomy. Hepatectomy-related operative procedures such as peri-hepatic dissection, Pringle maneuver and cholecystectomy are directly associated with postoperative hard dense adhesions. However, the incidence of postoperative hard dense adhesions around the hepatoduodenal ligament and Morison pouch was high even when the above-mentioned operative procedures were not performed. These findings may help inform clinical decisions regarding the indications and sites for adhesion barrier use during hepatectomies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Development of intrahepatic recurrence of HCC is common even following index curative-intent hepatectomy. Multiple studies have demonstrated that repeat hepatectomy (RH) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) may be performed in patients with recurrent disease. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing RHR versus RFA for recurrent HCC. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary hepatic malignancy and a leading cause of cancer-related death in both the developed and developing world. Recurrent HCC (rHCC) develops in a significant proportion of patients even following curative-intent resection. In the absence of a structured treatment algorithm, a number of treatment options including repeat hepatectomy (RH) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have been utilized in select patients with rHCC. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing RHR versus RFA for rHCC. Four electronic databases were screened until September 2022. A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Overall and disease-free survival were comparable among the two groups. Patients undergoing RH were less likely to develop a second recurrence (RR 0.89, 95% C.I. 0.81 to 0.98, p = 0.02). Overall and major morbidity were significantly increased in the RH group (RR 3.01, 95% C.I. 1.98 to 4.56, p < 0.001 and RR 3.65, 95% C.I. 2.07 to 6.43, p < 0.001, respectively), while mortality was similar between RFA and RH. The data demonstrated that RFA is a safe and efficient alternative to RH for selected patients with rHCC. Nevertheless, despite higher morbidity associated with RH, repeat resection remains the preferred treatment option whenever feasible, as it allows for better local disease control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We had reported the novel concept of "caudal approach in laparoscopic liver resection" in 2013. In the first report, the caudal approach of laparoscopic transection--first posterior sectionectomy without prior mobilization of the liver in the left lateral position was described. Thereafter, 10 complex laparoscopic extended posterior sectionectomies with combined resection of the right hepatic vein or diaphragm were performed using the same approach. In the present study, the short-term outcomes of these cases and 42 cases of laparoscopic sectionectomies or hemi-hepatectomies (excluding left lateral sectionectomy) were compared. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of patients' backgrounds, diseases for resection, preoperative liver function, tumor number and size, as well as outcomes, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, morbidity, conversion to laparotomy, and post-operative hospital stay. Even complex laparoscopic extended posterior sectionectomy was safely performed using this procedure. This approach has the technical benefits of acquiring a well-opened transection plane between the resected liver fixed to the retroperitoneum and the residual liver sinking to the left with the force of gravity during parenchymal transection, and less bleeding from the right hepatic vein due to its higher position than the inferior vena cava. Furthermore, it has an oncological benefit similar to that of the anterior approach in open liver resection, even in posterior sectionectomy. The detailed procedure and general conceptual benefits of the caudal approach to laparoscopic liver resection for repeated multimodal treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The actual efficacy of use of adhesion barriers during liver surgery remains to be fully understood. Methods: We conducted an extensive review of clinical data and operation videos of 210 patients who underwent repeat hepatectomy to clarify the factors associated with the degree of adhesion as evaluated by the TORAD score. Results: Adhesion barriers were placed in 131 patients (Seprafilm® [n = 77], Adspray® [n = 32], and Interceed® [n = 22)]), but not in the remaining 79 patients during the previous surgery. Multivariate analysis identified a high adhesion severity score at relaparotomy as being associated with an increased risk of postoperative global morbidity (odds ratio [OR], 1.75 per +1 point, P <.001) and major morbidity (OR, 1.88 per +1 point; P <.001), and use of an adhesion barrier at the previous surgery as being an independent predictor of a low adhesion severity score (OR, 0.21; P <.001). Use of adhesion barriers showed tendency toward lower adhesion severity scores at relaparotomy as compared to the control group, irrespective of the type of adhesion barrier used. Conclusion: A high degree of adhesion formation was directly associated with an increased risk of postoperative morbidity after relaparotomy, and use of adhesion barriers appears to reduce the extent of adhesion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Repeat hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are widely used to treat early recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) located in the subcapsular region, but the optimal treatment strategy remains to be controversial. Methods A total of 126 RHCC patients in the subcapsular location after initial radical hepatectomy were included in this study between Dec 2014 and Jan 2018. These patients were divided into the RFA group (46 cases) and the repeat hepatectomy group (80 cases). The primary endpoints include repeat recurrence-free survival (rRFS) and overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoint was complications. The propensity-score matching (PSM) was conducted to minimize the bias. Complications were evaluated using the Clavien-Dindo classification, and severe complications were defined as classification of complications of ≥grade 3. Results There were no significant differences in the incidence of severe complications were observed between RFA group and repeat hepatectomy group in rRFS and OS both before (1-, 2-, and 3-year rRFS rates were 65.2%, 47.5%, and 33.3% vs 72.5%, 51.2%, and 39.2%, respectively, P = 0.48; 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 93.5%, 80.2%, and 67.9% vs 93.7%, 75.8%, and 64.2%, respectively, P = 0.92) and after PSM (1-, 2-, and 3-year rRFS rates were 68.6%, 51.0%, and 34.0% vs 71.4%, 42.9%, and 32.3%, respectively, P = 0.78; 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 94.3%, 82.9%, and 71.4% vs 88.6%, 73.8%, and 59.0%, respectively, P = 0.36). Moreover, no significant differences in the incidence of severe complications were observed between the RFA group and repeat hepatectomy group. Conclusion Both repeat hepatectomy and RFA are shown to be effective and safe for the treatment of RHCC located in the subcapsular region.

Abstract Background Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm of the pancreas is a rare tumor in young women, metastasizing in only 5–15% of cases, and most commonly to the liver. Although treatment guidelines have not been established, surgical resection is usually performed. We report a rare case of repeat hepatectomy for liver metastases after distal pancreatectomy with solid pseudopapillary neoplasm. Case presentation The patient was a 71-year-old woman who underwent distal pancreatectomy for solid pseudopapillary neoplasm, and liver metastasis occurred 4 years after the first surgery. Partial liver resection was performed for four liver metastases, and histopathological examination revealed a diagnosis of liver metastasis from solid pseudopapillary neoplasm. However, 18 months later, liver metastases were detected again; three tumors were identified, and partial resection was performed, which has provided 18 months’ recurrence-free survival. Conclusions Long-term prognosis can be expected following R0 resection for resectable liver metastasis from solid pseudopapillary neoplasm.

Abstract Background Primary neuroendocrine tumor (NET) originating from the extrahepatic bile duct is rare, although liver metastasis from gastroenteropancreatic NET is frequently observed. We herein report a case who successfully underwent repeat hepatectomy for liver metastases from bile duct NET grade 2 (G2). Case presentation A 75-year-old man presented with jaundice and was suspected of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma by computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). He underwent extended left hepatectomy, extrahepatic bile duct resection, and hepaticojejunostomy. Pathological findings showed a NET G2 of the biliary tract arising from the common bile duct. Two years and 11 months after surgery, a liver metastasis was detected and hepatectomy was performed. During the surgery, another liver metastasis was detected, and limited liver resection for the two lesions was performed. Pathological findings showed four liver metastases of NET G2. Five years and 4 months after the first surgery (2 years and 5 months after the second hepatectomy), four liver metastases were detected. Thereafter, he received somatostatin analogues for 1 year. Although the size of tumors increased slightly, the number did not change. He underwent limited liver resections and was diagnosed with 7 liver metastases of NET G2. Finally, another hepatectomy (fourth hepatectomy) was performed and long-term survival without recurrence was obtained for as long as 8 years after the first surgery. Conclusions Repeat hepatectomy is a good option to obtain long-term survival for liver metastases from bile duct NET G2 in select patients.

Hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is extremely rare, and preoperative diagnosis is difficult because hepatic EHE has clinicopathological features that are similar to those of angiosarcoma. However, it is important to differentiate hepatic EHE from angiosarcoma because the latter is an aggressive tumor with poor prognosis. We herein report a case of hepatic EHE that was difficult to distinguish from angiosarcoma by tumor biopsy. A 30-year-old man with Crohn’s disease presented with multiple liver tumors. The tumors were preoperatively diagnosed as angiosarcoma by tumor biopsy. The patient underwent extended left hemihepatectomy with biliary reconstruction and partial resection of segments 6 and 8. Immunohistochemical staining was positive for CD34, factor VIII, and calmodulin binding transcription activator 1 (CAMTA1), and the pathological diagnosis was EHE. Two years after surgery, a recurrent tumor was found in liver segment 6, for which laparoscopic partial hepatectomy was performed. Pathological examination revealed recurrence of EHE. The patient remained well with no evidence of tumor recurrence as of 9 months after the second resection. In conclusion, we described a case of hepatic EHE that was initially diagnosed as angiosarcoma on biopsy. Immunohistochemical staining with CAMTA1 may help distinguish EHE from angiosarcoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary hepatic malignancy and a leading cause of cancer-related death in both the developed and developing world. Recurrent HCC (rHCC) develops in a significant proportion of patients even following curative-intent resection. In the absence of a structured treatment algorithm, a number of treatment options including repeat hepatectomy (RH) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have been utilized in select patients with rHCC. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing RHR versus RFA for rHCC. Four electronic databases were screened until September 2022. A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Overall and disease-free survival were comparable among the two groups. Patients undergoing RH were less likely to develop a second recurrence (RR 0.89, 95% C.I. 0.81 to 0.98, p = 0.02). Overall and major morbidity were significantly increased in the RH group (RR 3.01, 95% C.I. 1.98 to 4.56, p < 0.001 and RR 3.65, 95% C.I. 2.07 to 6.43, p < 0.001, respectively), while mortality was similar between RFA and RH. The data demonstrated that RFA is a safe and efficient alternative to RH for selected patients with rHCC. Nevertheless, despite higher morbidity associated with RH, repeat resection remains the preferred treatment option whenever feasible, as it allows for better local disease control.

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in combination with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (TACE-RFA) and repeat hepatectomy in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after curative resection. Methods: This retrospective study evaluated consecutive medical records of patients who received either TACE-RFA or repeat hepatectomy between January 2010 and May 2021. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and complications were compared. Results: Of the 2672 patients who received either TACE-RFA or repeat hepatectomy, 111 eligible patients were included in our study, 63 in the TACE-RFA group and 48 in the repeat hepatectomy group. The median OS was 38 months in the TACE-RFA group and 42 months in the repeat hepatectomy group, with no statistically difference between the two groups (P =0.45). Meanwhile, there was also no statistically significant difference in PFS between the two groups (P =0.634). Although both groups achieved similar outcomes, the rate of major complications was significantly higher in the repeat hepatectomy group (P =0.003). Conclusions: Patients with recurrent HCC in the TACE-RFA group and the repeat hepatectomy group had similar OS and PFS regardless of the patient's tumor diameter, but the TACE-RFA group was safer and more minimally invasive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has been known that repeat laparoscopic hepatectomy (RLH) after open hepatectomy is technically challenging because of adhesions around the hilum. It is quite often that conventional tourniquet technique for the Pringle maneuver is difficult in RLH, and we introduced Laparoscopic Satinsky Vascular Clamp (LSVC) for inflow control in RLH. The Spiegel lobe is the anatomical landmark in LSVC technique. If a space behind the hepatoduodenal ligament and the Spiegel lobe was obtained, LSVC was applied laterally from the left side of the hepatoduodenal ligament, whereas LSVC was vertically applied for those with obstruction of a space behind the hepatoduodenal ligament. We performed 14 cases of RLH for those with histories of open hepatectomies by lateral (n = 6) and vertical (n = 8) LSVC technique with successful inflow control, confirmed by intraoperative Doppler ultrasound. Five patients underwent 2 or more previous histories of hepatectomies. The RLH included segmentectomy (n = 1), subsegmentectomy (n = 2) and partial hepatectomy (n = 11). The median time for the Pringle maneuver, operative time, and blood loss was 47 min, 237.5 min, and 160 mL. All the patients completed pure laparoscopic hepatectomy. In conclusion, LSVC technique is a safe and reliable technique for the Pringle maneuver in RLH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Repeat hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are widely used to treat early recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) located in the subcapsular region, but the optimal treatment strategy remains to be controversial. Methods: A total of 126 RHCC patients in the subcapsular location after initial radical hepatectomy were included in this study between Dec 2014 and Jan 2018. These patients were divided into the RFA group (46 cases) and the repeat hepatectomy group (80 cases). The primary endpoints include repeat recurrence-free survival (rRFS) and overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoint was complications. The propensity-score matching (PSM) was conducted to minimize the bias. Complications were evaluated using the Clavien-Dindo classification, and severe complications were defined as classification of complications of ≥grade 3. Results: There were no significant differences in the incidence of severe complications were observed between RFA group and repeat hepatectomy group in rRFS and OS both before (1-, 2-, and 3-year rRFS rates were 65.2%, 47.5%, and 33.3% vs 72.5%, 51.2%, and 39.2%, respectively, P = 0.48; 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 93.5%, 80.2%, and 67.9% vs 93.7%, 75.8%, and 64.2%, respectively, P = 0.92) and after PSM (1-, 2-, and 3-year rRFS rates were 68.6%, 51.0%, and 34.0% vs 71.4%, 42.9%, and 32.3%, respectively, P = 0.78; 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 94.3%, 82.9%, and 71.4% vs 88.6%, 73.8%, and 59.0%, respectively, P = 0.36). Moreover, no significant differences in the incidence of severe complications were observed between the RFA group and repeat hepatectomy group. Conclusion: Both repeat hepatectomy and RFA are shown to be effective and safe for the treatment of RHCC located in the subcapsular region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background A few reports to date have described the effectiveness of surgical resection for recurrent intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). We report in this study a patient who achieved long-term survival after surgical resection for recurrent hepatic and pulmonary metastases of ICC. Case presentation A 62-year-old man was referred to our hospital for examination of a tumor in the left lobe of the liver. Computed tomography (CT) scans of the abdomen revealed a hypovascularized tumor, 30 mm in hepatic segment 2 (S2). The patient was diagnosed with a mass-forming type of ICC. A left lateral sectionectomy with regional lymph node dissection was performed. Histopathological examination showed moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma in the hepatic S2 with lymph node metastasis. There were two intrahepatic metastases around the main tumor. The pathological stage of the ICC was pT2pN1M0pStageIIIB. The patient did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery. Twelve months after surgery, liver lesions in S4/S8 and S7 were detected on CT scans. A partial hepatectomy was performed. The histopathological features were similar to those of the previous ICC. The patient did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy after the repeat hepatectomy. Four years and four months after this repeat hepatectomy, CT scans showed multiple nodes in S4 and S10 of the left lung and in S1 of the right lung. Wedge resection of the left upper lobe and sectionectomy in S10 of the left lung were performed. Histopathological findings of the resected lung nodules were compatible with metastatic ICC. The nodule in S1 of the right lung was too small to be diagnosed as metastasis; therefore, it was not resected. After pulmonary resection, the patient was treated with gemcitabine and cisplatin for 6 months. After chemotherapy, the size of the nodule in S1 increased gradually. One year and ten months after the pulmonary resection, we performed wedge resection of S1 of the right lung, and the histopathological findings were compatible with metastatic ICC. The patient is alive without evidence of disease 8 years after the initial surgery and 8 months after the last pulmonary resection. Conclusions ICC with poor prognostic factors can frequently recur; however, surgical resection for recurrent ICC might, for selected patients, enable long-term survival.

Abstract Background Although hepatectomy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) prolongs survival in up to 40% of people, recurrence rates approach 70%. We used a multidisciplinary approach to treat recurrent liver metastases, including chemotherapy, surgery, and palliative care. On the other hand, development of chemotherapeutic agents is remarkable and improves long-term survival. However, whether chemotherapy and repeat hepatectomy combination therapy improve survival or not is still unclear. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of repeat hepatectomy with systemic chemotherapy for mCRC. Methods Following Institutional Review Board approval, we reviewed the records of all patients who underwent hepatectomy for mCRC between 1974 and 2015 at Fujita Health University Hospital. We used the Kaplan–Meier method to estimate overall survival from the first and last hepatectomy in multi hepatectomy cases after 2005 and compared outcomes between groups using the log-rank test. Results A total of 426 liver resections were performed for mCRC; of these, 236 cases were performed after 2005 (late group). In 118 (50%) cases, the site of recurrence was the liver, 59 (50%) underwent repeat hepatectomy, and 14 cases had ≥ 2 repeat hepatectomies. Overall survival (OS) before and after 2005 was 42.2 and 64.1 months, respectively, with the late group having better OS compared to the early (1974–2004) group. OS for single hepatectomy cases was 83.2 months, for two hepatectomies was 42.9 months, and for three hepatectomies was 35.3 months. In total, 59 patients did not undergo surgery after recurrence with an OS of 28.7 months. Mortality of the second and third repeat hepatectomy was 1.7% and 15.3%, respectively. Conclusion Repeat hepatectomy with systemic chemotherapy for mCRC is feasible and might achieve improved survival in carefully selected patients.

Background: It remains unclear whether the short-term benefits of laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) accrue to patients with recurrent liver tumors. The present study aimed to report our own center's experience and perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LRH in comparison with open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) for treating recurrent liver tumors.Patients and Methods: A propensity score–matched study was performed including 426 patients receiving LRH or ORH for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma between January 2017 and December 2018. Surgical outcomes and perioperative inflammation-based markers, including monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and systemic immune–inflammation index were collected from medical records and analyzed. Additionally, a systematic literature review was performed to identify relevant studies in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases up to October 1, 2020. Information including patient demographics, pathologic characteristics, and short-term outcomes was extracted and analyzed using random- or fixed-effects models.Results: Of 68 LRHs, 57 were matched with an ORH finally. Our study demonstrated that LRH was significantly associated with less intraoperative blood loss (50 vs. 100 mL; P < 0.001), lower rate of hepatic inflow occlusion (10.52 vs. 33.3%; P = 0.003), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (5 vs. 6 days; P = 0.001) after 1:1 propensity score matching. The operation time, rate of blood transfusion, and postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. Moreover, all four inflammation-based markers were significantly lower in LRH group on postoperative day 1. In the meta-analysis, a total of 12 studies comprising 1,315 patients receiving repeat hepatectomy met the selection criteria. Similar to our own study, the meta-analysis showed shorter hospital stay [standard mean difference (SMD) = −0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.79 to −0.22, P < 0.001], less intraoperative blood loss (SMD = −0.79, 95% CI = −1.11 to −0.47, P < 0.001), and lower rate of major postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR) = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.19–0.66, P = 0.001] in the LRH group. There was no difference in the field of overall postoperative complication and operation time between LRH and ORH groups.Conclusion: Compared with ORH, LRH results in relatively better surgical outcomes and faster postoperative recovery. It could be considered a feasible and effective option for the treatment of recurrent liver tumors.

Background: It remains unclear whether the short-term benefits of laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) accrue to patients with recurrent liver tumors. The present study aimed to report our own center's experience and perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LRH in comparison with open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) for treating recurrent liver tumors. Patients and Methods: A propensity score–matched study was performed including 426 patients receiving LRH or ORH for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma between January 2017 and December 2018. Surgical outcomes and perioperative inflammation-based markers, including monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and systemic immune–inflammation index were collected from medical records and analyzed. Additionally, a systematic literature review was performed to identify relevant studies in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases up to October 1, 2020. Information including patient demographics, pathologic characteristics, and short-term outcomes was extracted and analyzed using random- or fixed-effects models. Results: Of 68 LRHs, 57 were matched with an ORH finally. Our study demonstrated that LRH was significantly associated with less intraoperative blood loss (50 vs. 100 mL; P < 0.001), lower rate of hepatic inflow occlusion (10.52 vs. 33.3%; P = 0.003), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (5 vs. 6 days; P = 0.001) after 1:1 propensity score matching. The operation time, rate of blood transfusion, and postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. Moreover, all four inflammation-based markers were significantly lower in LRH group on postoperative day 1. In the meta-analysis, a total of 12 studies comprising 1,315 patients receiving repeat hepatectomy met the selection criteria. Similar to our own study, the meta-analysis showed shorter hospital stay [standard mean difference (SMD) = −0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.79 to −0.22, P < 0.001], less intraoperative blood loss (SMD = −0.79, 95% CI = −1.11 to −0.47, P < 0.001), and lower rate of major postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR) = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.19–0.66, P = 0.001] in the LRH group. There was no difference in the field of overall postoperative complication and operation time between LRH and ORH groups. Conclusion: Compared with ORH, LRH results in relatively better surgical outcomes and faster postoperative recovery. It could be considered a feasible and effective option for the treatment of recurrent liver tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm of the pancreas is a rare tumor in young women, metastasizing in only 5–15% of cases, and most commonly to the liver. Although treatment guidelines have not been established, surgical resection is usually performed. We report a rare case of repeat hepatectomy for liver metastases after distal pancreatectomy with solid pseudopapillary neoplasm. Case presentation: The patient was a 71-year-old woman who underwent distal pancreatectomy for solid pseudopapillary neoplasm, and liver metastasis occurred 4 years after the first surgery. Partial liver resection was performed for four liver metastases, and histopathological examination revealed a diagnosis of liver metastasis from solid pseudopapillary neoplasm. However, 18 months later, liver metastases were detected again; three tumors were identified, and partial resection was performed, which has provided 18 months' recurrence-free survival. Conclusions: Long-term prognosis can be expected following R0 resection for resectable liver metastasis from solid pseudopapillary neoplasm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the survival benefits of repeat hepatectomy (RH) and thermal ablation therapy (TAT) in managing recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)., Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in the PubMed, SinoMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Web of Science databases using relevant keywords to identify all studies published on this specific topic. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a fixed-effects model., Results: This meta-analysis included a total of 21 studies, comprising 2580 patients with recurrent HCC, among whom 1189 underwent RH and 1394 underwent TAT. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the RH group exhibited superior overall survival (OS) (HR=0.85, 95%CI 0.76∼0.95, P=0.004) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR=0.79, 95%CI 0.7∼0.9, P<0.01) compared to the TAT group. Regarding postoperative complications, the TAT group experienced fewer complications than the RH group (OR=3.23, 95%CI 1.48∼7.07, P=0.003), while no significant difference in perioperative mortality was observed between the two groups (OR=2.11, 95%CI 0.54∼8.19, P=0.28)., Conclusion: The present study demonstrates that, in comparison to TAT, RH may confer superior survival benefits for patients with recurrent HCC., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Dong, Zhang, Wan and Zhang.)

Background: Although adhesion barriers are increasingly used in liver surgery, there are no sufficient data yet in support of their safety. Methods: Data of 104 consecutive patients in whom a spray‐type adhesion barrier (AdSpray®) was used after hepatectomy were compared with those of 94 control subjects in whom no adhesion barriers were used, and the risk factors for major morbidity after hepatectomy were investigated. Results: The incidence of major morbidity was not significantly different between the AdSpray group and the control group (17% vs 15%, P =.645), although multivariate analyses revealed that the use of AdSpray was associated with an increased risk of abdominal abscess (odds ratio [OR], 4.42; P =.043). Similar tendency was also confirmed after propensity score adjustment to account for the potential selection bias. A sub‐group analysis revealed that incidence of abscess formation decreased as operators' experience in the used of AdSpray increased, and multivariate analysis identified preoperative chemotherapy (OR, 3.96; P =.043) as being independent predictors of abscess formation after the use of AdSpray. Conclusions: AdSpray use was not associated with global incidence of major morbidity after liver surgery, although surgeon's experience would be needed for adequate use of AdSpray to minimize the risk of postoperative abscess formation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary neuroendocrine tumor (NET) originating from the extrahepatic bile duct is rare, although liver metastasis from gastroenteropancreatic NET is frequently observed. We herein report a case who successfully underwent repeat hepatectomy for liver metastases from bile duct NET grade 2 (G2). Case presentation: A 75-year-old man presented with jaundice and was suspected of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma by computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). He underwent extended left hepatectomy, extrahepatic bile duct resection, and hepaticojejunostomy. Pathological findings showed a NET G2 of the biliary tract arising from the common bile duct. Two years and 11 months after surgery, a liver metastasis was detected and hepatectomy was performed. During the surgery, another liver metastasis was detected, and limited liver resection for the two lesions was performed. Pathological findings showed four liver metastases of NET G2. Five years and 4 months after the first surgery (2 years and 5 months after the second hepatectomy), four liver metastases were detected. Thereafter, he received somatostatin analogues for 1 year. Although the size of tumors increased slightly, the number did not change. He underwent limited liver resections and was diagnosed with 7 liver metastases of NET G2. Finally, another hepatectomy (fourth hepatectomy) was performed and long-term survival without recurrence was obtained for as long as 8 years after the first surgery. Conclusions: Repeat hepatectomy is a good option to obtain long-term survival for liver metastases from bile duct NET G2 in select patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Purpose: To investigate the long‐term outcome and entire treatment course of patients with technically unresectable CRLM who underwent conversion hepatectomy and to examine factors associated with conversion to hepatectomy. Methods: Recurrence and survival data with long‐term follow‐up were analyzed in the cohort of a multi‐institutional phase II trial for technically unresectable colorectal liver metastases (the BECK study). Results: A total of 22/12 patients with K‐RAS wild‐type/mutant tumors were treated with mFOLFOX6 + cetuximab/bevacizumab. The conversion R0/1 hepatectomy rate was significantly higher in left‐sided primary tumors than in right‐sided tumors (75.0% vs 30.0%, P =.022). The median follow‐up was 72.6 months. The 5‐year overall survival (OS) rate in the entire cohort was 48.1%. In patients who underwent R0/1 hepatectomy (n = 21), the 5‐year RFS rate and OS rate were 19.1% and 66.3%, respectively. At the final follow‐up, seven patients had no evidence of disease, five were alive with disease, and 20 had died from their original cancer. All 16 patients who achieved 5‐year survival underwent conversion hepatectomy, and 11 of them underwent further resection for other recurrences (median: 2, range: 1‐4). Conclusions: Conversion hepatectomy achieved a similar long‐term survival to the results of previous studies in initially resectable patients, although many of them experienced several post‐hepatectomy recurrences. Left‐sided primary was found to be the predictor for conversion hepatectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Repeat laparoscopic hepatectomy (LRH) offers an option for recurrent tumors in liver remnants following an initial liver resection of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) and cholangiocellular carcinoma (CCC), showing advantages in some outcomes. The objective of the study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of LRH in comparison with repeat open hepatectomy (ORH) for recurrent liver cancer.Methods: A systematic review was performed in compliance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) and AMSTAR (Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews) guidelines. We performed a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to identify studies that compared LRH with ORH from inception to September 30, 2019. Outcomes of interest included operation time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, complication rate, transfusion and R0 resection rate. The protocol was registered with the PROSPERO register of systematic reviews.Results: 10 retrospective observational studies were suitable for this analysis, involving 767 patients with 334 undergoing LRH (43.5%) and 433 undergoing ORH (56.5%). Compared with ORH, LRH had less intraoperative blood loss (SMD = -1.03; 95% CI: 1.48~-0.59, P < 0.001), less overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.16-0.99, P = 0.048), less major complications (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15-0.62, P = 0.001), shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.98; 95% CI: 1.41~-0.54, P < 0.001) and higher R0 resection rate (OR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.39-3.81, P = 0.001). It was comparable in operation time (WMD = -7.66; 95% CI: 52.50-37.19, P = 0.738), transfusion rate (OR = 0.33; 95% CI:0.11-1.05, P = 0.060), and mortality (OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.27-2.18, P = 0.615) between LRH and ORH.Conclusion: Our results indicate that LRH is a safe and effective technique. Benefits, especially less intra-operative blood loss, less complications rate, shorter hospital stay and higher R0 resection, might be offered in the laparoscopic approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Repeat hepatectomy (ReHx) for recurrent hepatic malignancies reportedly provides oncological benefit for patients. However, severe adhesions at the time of ReHx may preclude safe and curative resection and there has been no reliable measure to estimate the surgical risk at ReHx. This study sought to create a new scoring system for evaluating the severity of adhesion after hepatectomy and tested its performance looking at the correlation with morbidity rate. Methods: Operative videos of 66 patients undergoing a second hepatectomy were reviewed and the difficulty levels in lysis of adhesion around the hepatic hilum (A score) and surrounding the liver (B score) were scored by two examiners and validated by two additional reviewers. Results: Very high interobserver agreement was confirmed between the two examiners (κ value, 0.960‐0.963) and reproducibility of results were validated with weighted kappa values of >0.8 in both surgical resident and hepatobiliary surgeon. Linear correlation was confirmed between the difficulty score and postoperative morbidity rate. Multivariate analyses confirmed that previous cholecystectomy or transection of visceral surface of segment 4 or 5 was an independent factor predicting hard to extreme adhesions at the hepatic hilum regardless of the use of anti‐adhesion materials. Conclusions: The new difficulty scoring system for the lysis of adhesion at ReHx showed good interobserver agreement and reproducibility of the results. Given the strong correlation with postoperative morbidity rate, the present score could be used for evaluating the technical difficulties in ReHx and may offer a reliable measure for estimating the efficacy of anti‐adhesion materials in future analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study assessed predictors of survival after repeat hepatectomy and the feasibility of a repeat hepatectomy after a major hepatectomy in the patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM).Background: More than half of all patients who receive a curative initial hepatectomy for CLM develop hepatic recurrence, and aggressive indications for a repeat hepatectomy can improve the outcome in selected patients. However, the feasibility of repeat hepatectomy after major hepatectomy remains uncertain, and optimal selection criteria for repeat hepatectomy have not yet been established.Methods: Data were collected retrospectively on 296 CLM patients who underwent an initial curative hepatectomy between 2007 and 2017 at our institution. The postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing a repeat hepatectomy after major hepatectomy were assessed, and independent predictors of survival were investigated.Results: After a median follow-up period of 32 months, 247 patients (83%) developed disease recurrence and 122 patients (49%) underwent repeat hepatectomy. The 5-year overall survival (OS) was significantly higher in patients who underwent a repeat hepatectomy than in those who did not receive repeat hepatectomy (51% vs. 19%, respectively; P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, an extrahepatic lesion at the time of the repeat hepatectomy (HR, 2.49; P = 0.001) and 5 or more liver tumors at the time of recurrence (HR, 1.88; P = 0.04) remained as independent factors negatively affecting OS after repeat hepatectomy. The type of operative procedure and the intraoperative and postoperative factors at the time of the initial hepatectomy did not have any significant influence on the OS after repeat hepatectomy. No significant difference in OS was found between patients who received repeat hepatectomy after major hepatectomy (n = 43) and those after non-major hepatectomy (n = 79).Conclusions: The operative procedure and the liver tumor status at the time of the initial hepatectomy have little impact on the indications for a repeat hepatectomy for recurrent CLM. Repeat hepatectomy is feasible even if major hepatectomy was initially performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is extremely rare, and preoperative diagnosis is difficult because hepatic EHE has clinicopathological features that are similar to those of angiosarcoma. However, it is important to differentiate hepatic EHE from angiosarcoma because the latter is an aggressive tumor with poor prognosis. We herein report a case of hepatic EHE that was difficult to distinguish from angiosarcoma by tumor biopsy. A 30-year-old man with Crohn's disease presented with multiple liver tumors. The tumors were preoperatively diagnosed as angiosarcoma by tumor biopsy. The patient underwent extended left hemihepatectomy with biliary reconstruction and partial resection of segments 6 and 8. Immunohistochemical staining was positive for CD34, factor VIII, and calmodulin binding transcription activator 1 (CAMTA1), and the pathological diagnosis was EHE. Two years after surgery, a recurrent tumor was found in liver segment 6, for which laparoscopic partial hepatectomy was performed. Pathological examination revealed recurrence of EHE. The patient remained well with no evidence of tumor recurrence as of 9 months after the second resection. In conclusion, we described a case of hepatic EHE that was initially diagnosed as angiosarcoma on biopsy. Immunohistochemical staining with CAMTA1 may help distinguish EHE from angiosarcoma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) still represents a challenge for surgeons especially in case with previous open liver surgery. The aim of the study is to perform a systematic review of the current literature to investigate the feasibility of LRLR after open liver resection (OLR) for liver diseases.Methods: A computerized search was performed for all English language studies evaluating LRLR. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the short-term outcomes in comparative studies between LRLR with previous laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and OLR.Results: From the initial 55 manuscripts, 8 studies including 3 comparative studies between LRLR after OLR and LLR were investigated. There was a total of 108 patients. Considering initial surgery, the extent of initial liver resection was major liver resection in 20% of patients in whom it was reported. In all the patients, the most frequent primary histology was hepatocellular carcinoma, followed by colorectal liver metastasis. A half of reported patients had severe adhesions at the time of LRLR. The median operative time for LRLR was ranged from 120 to 413 min and the median blood loss ranged from 100 to 400 mL. There were 11% of the patients conversions to open surgery, hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery, or tumor ablation. The overall postoperative morbidity was 15% of all the patients, and there was no postoperative mortality. The median postoperative hospital stay was ranged from 3.5 to 10 days. The meta-analysis shows that LRLR after OLR is associated with a longer operative time and a more important blood loss compared to LRLR after LLR. However, no difference between LRLR after OLR and LLR was shown as far as hospital stay and morbidity rate are concerned.Conclusions: LRLR after OLR has been described in eight articles with favorable short-term outcomes in highly selected patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

>bold<>italic/italic<>/bold< Whether repeat hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases should be performed after chemotherapy or observation is unclear. >bold<>italic/italic<>/bold< We selected patients with resectable hepatic recurrence after their first hepatectomies performed between 2000 and 2015. They were classified according to the further treatment: Group A, prompt repeat hepatectomy; Group B, observation; and Group C, ≤6 months of chemotherapy. In Group B/C, patients who later underwent hepatectomy and those who did not due to disease progression were classified as B1/C1 and B2/C2, respectively. Predictors of B2/C2 were evaluated. >bold<>italic/italic<>/bold< Groups A, B, and C consisted of 81, 36, and 17 patients, respectively. Recurrence-free interval was longer in Group A (median months; Group A, 10.3; Group B, 5.7; Group C, 3.5; >italic/italic< < 0.01). Group B1/C1 and B2/C2 included 34 and 19 patients, respectively. Five-year survival after recurrence of Group B1/C1 was 56%, which was comparable with Group A (56%, >italic/italic< = 0.77) and better than Group B2/C2 (0%, >italic/italic< < 0.01). Multivariate analysis showed synchronous colorectal liver metastases (OR 7.23) and recurrent hepatic tumor number (OR 4.04) were predictors of tumor progression. >bold<>italic/italic<>/bold< Selecting patients optimally either for prompt or delayed repeat hepatectomy following chemotherapy or observation is a feasible strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim: Repeat hepatectomy is increasingly performed for the management of recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term functional liver volume (FLV) after a second hepatic procedure and to measure survival outcome. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, patients treated for recurrent CRLM in the years 2005–2015 at two liver centers were included. Total FLV was calculated before the first procedure and before and after the second procedure. Overall survival was calculated. Results: Eighty-two patients were identified. The median follow-up was 53 (40–71) months from the first procedure. The median interval between first and second procedure was 13 (8–22) months. The initial FLV was 1584 (1313–1927) mL. The FLV was 1438 (1204–1896) mL after the first procedure and 1470 (1172–1699) mL after the second procedure (P<0.001). After the second procedure, a total of ten patients (12%) had a residual liver volume of less than 75% of the initial liver volume. The 5-year overall survival was 37 (26–54)% after the second procedure. Conclusion: Small changes in FLV were found after two hepatic procedures but with considerable inter-individual variation. Patients selected for a repeated hepatic procedure for recurrent CRLM had an acceptable survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Tumor recurrence after liver resection continues to pose a major problem in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Here we aimed to evaluate prognostic markers for disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in HCC-patients who underwent liver resection in curative intent. Additionally, we investigated the effects of HCC-recurrence in a subgroup of patients.Methods: Between 2010 and 2016, 111 patients underwent surgical resection for HCC at our institution. A subgroup of 50 patients showed tumor recurrence (n = 50) during follow-up. The associations of DFS and OS with histopathologic characteristics were assessed using univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses.Results: Median DFS was 31 months and median OS was 27 months. Milan criteria (p = 0.045), macrovascular invasion (p = 0.044) and UICC tumor stage (p = 0.003) were independently associated with DFS while macrovascular invasion (p = 0.001) and MELD score (p = 0.010) were independently associated with OS. Tumor recurrence did not show an association with OS (p = 0.228). However, patients with HCC-recurrence who underwent repeat-surgical or interventional treatment showed improved OS compared to patients treated with palliative or sorafenib treatment alone (OS 18 months vs. 2 months; p < 0.001).Conclusion: Tumor recurrence alone is not associated with poor oncological outcome and repeat liver resections as well as local-ablative procedures may help to improve OS in HCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To retrospectively compare the efficacy and safety of combined radiofrequency ablation and percutaneous ethanol injection (RFA-PEI) with repeat hepatectomy for elderly patients with initial recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after hepatic surgery. Methods: From January 2009 to June 2015, 105 elderly patients (≥70 years) who underwent RFA-PEI (n = 57) or repeated hepatectomy (n = 48) for recurrent HCC ≤ 5.0 cm were included in the study. The overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were analysed with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by the log-rank test. Non-tumour-related death, complications and hospital stays were assessed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the prognostic significance of the variables in predicting the OS and RFS. Results: OS rates were 78.2%, 40.8% and 36.7% at 1, 3 and 5 years after RFA-PEI and 76.3%, 52.5% and 42.6% after repeat hepatectomy, respectively (p = 0.413). Correspondingly, the 1-, 3- and 5-year RFS rates after RFA-PEI and repeat hepatectomy were 69.5%, 37.8%, 33.1% and 73.1%, 49.7%, 40.7%, respectively (p = 0.465). Non-tumour-related deaths in the RFA-PEI group (2/57) were significantly fewer than those in the repeat hepatectomy group (10/48) (p = 0.016). RFA-PEI was superior to repeat hepatectomy regarding the major complication rates and length of in-hospital stay (both p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the tumour number was the significant prognostic factor for the OS (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.961, 95% CI = 1.043-3.686, p = 0.037) and RFS (HR = 1.866, 95% CI = 1.064-3.274, p = 0.030). Conclusion: RFA-PEI provides comparable OS and RFS to repeat hepatectomy for elderly patients with small recurrent HCC after hepatectomy but with fewer non-tumour-related deaths, major complications and shorter hospital stays. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the resectability and effectiveness of repeat hepatectomy for relapsing liver metastases of colorectal origin in terms of morbidity, mortality, overall survival, and disease-free survival. Methods: A retrospective study was performed on a prospective cohort of patients with colorectal liver metastases who underwent repeat surgery at Hospital Universitario San Cecilio, Granada (Spain), from March 2003 to June 2013. Primary outcome variables included survival and morbidity within 30 days post-surgery. Results: A total of 147 patients with colorectal liver metastases underwent surgical excision during the study period; 61 patients had liver recurrence, and 34 of these received repeat surgery. The overall survival rate at 5 and 10 years for resected patients (n = 27/34) was 48% and 48%. Mean hospital stay was 8.9 ± 3.5 days, morbidity was 9%, and mortality was 0%. Conclusion: Repeat liver resection for colorectal liver metastases is a safe, effective surgical procedure whose results are similar to those obtained after initial liver resection.

Background: Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) is commonly treated with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with microwave ablation (MWA) or repeated hepatectomy(RH), but the optimal treatment strategy is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of TACE-MWA and RH in RHCC patients after initial radical hepatectomy., Methods: A total of 210 RHCC patients were included between June 2014 and January 2021, with 126 patients in the TACE-MWA group and 84 patients in the RH group. The primary endpoints were median repeat recurrence-free survival (rRFS) and overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoint was complications. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was conducted to minimize bias. Subgroup analysis based on recurrence patterns (recurrence time and tumor size) was performed, and prognostic factors were studied., Results: Before PSM, the RH group had better median OS (37.0 vs 26.0 months, P<0.001) and rRFS (15.0 vs 14.0 months, P = 0.003). After PSM, the RH group also had a better median OS (33.5 vs 29.0 months, P = 0.038), but there was no significant difference in median rRFS between the two groups (14.0 vs 13.0 months, P = 0.099). Subgroup analysis showed that when RHCC diameter>5 cm, RH had a better median OS (33.5 vs 25.0 months, P = 0.013) and rRFS (14.0 vs 10.9 months, P = 0.030). When the RHCC diameter was≤5 cm, there was no significant difference in the median OS (37.0 vs 31.0 months, P = 0.338) and rRFS (15.0 vs 17.0 months, P = 0.758) between the two groups. When RHCC relapses in the early stage (≤2 years), there is no significant difference in the median OS (26.0 vs 26.0 months, P = 0.310) and rRFS (12.0 vs 10.5 months, P = 0.089) between the two groups. When RHCC relapses in the late stage (>2 years), the RH group has better median OS (41.0 vs 33.0 months, P<0.001) and rRFS (30.0 vs 20.0 months, P = 0.010)., Conclusion: Individualized therapy is necessary for RHCC. TACE -MWA may be a good choice for RHCC with early recurrence or tumor diameter ≤5 cm. However, RH should be the first choice for RHCC with late recurrence or tumor diameter>5 cm., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Background: Repeat hepatectomy is often required for hepatocellular carcinoma and metastatic tumors. However, this procedure is technically challenging, so laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) has not been widely adopted. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of LRH compared with open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) and laparoscopic primary hepatectomy (LPH).Methods: We introduced laparoscopic hepatectomy at our institution in April 2014. We performed 127 LPH (LPH group) and 33 LRH procedures (LRH group) from April 2014 to April 2017; 37 patients underwent ORH from January 2010 to April 2017 (ORH group). This study retrospectively compared the patient characteristics and short-term outcomes of the LRH and ORH groups as well as the LRH and LPH groups.Results: There were no conversions to open surgery in the LRH group. In comparing the LRH and ORH groups, there were no significant differences in patient characteristics except for the type of approach to the previous hepatectomy (p = 0.004) and indocyanine green retention rate at 15 min (median 12.5 vs. 8.75%, p = 0.026). The LRH group had less blood loss (median 30 mL vs. 652 mL; p < 0.001), less intraoperative transfusion (6.1 vs. 32.4%; p = 0.006), and shorter postoperative hospital stays (median 6.5 days vs. 9.0 days; p < 0.001). There were no differences with regard to operation time, severe postoperative complications, and mortality. In comparing the LRH and LPH groups, there was a significant difference only in past history of abdominal surgery (100 vs. 61.4%; p < 0.001). In the short-term outcomes, the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LRH group (median 6.5 days vs. 7 days; p = 0.033), and the other results were comparable between the two groups.Conclusions: LRH is feasible and useful for repeat hepatectomy, achieving good short-term outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Perihepatic adhesions induced by hepatectomy make the subsequent repeat hepatectomy technically demanding. The aim of this study was to verify the effect of hyaluronic acid/carboxymethyl cellulose-based bioresorbable membrane (HA membrane) in preventing posthepatectomy adhesion formation by focusing on the ease of the adhesiolysis in subsequent hepatectomy for recurrent tumors. Methods: A total of 201 patients who underwent hepatectomy using HA membrane were prospectively followed-up for 3 years. Thirty of the 201 patients underwent a repeat hepatectomy for recurrence. The operative data of 85 cases of repeat hepatectomy, the primary hepatectomy of which had been performed without the use of HA membrane, served as the historical control data. The primary endpoint was the time interval between the skin incision and the start of hepatic parenchymal transection (the preparation time) including adhesiolysis. Secondary endpoints were blood loss during the operation, incidence of postoperative complications, and the biochemical data. Results: The median preparation time (183 vs. 228 min; p = 0.027) and total operation time (374 vs. 439 min; p = 0.041) were significantly shorter in the HA membrane group than in the control group. Conclusion: Use of HA membranes during hepatectomy enabled significant shortening of the adhesiolysis time during the sequential hepatectomy performed for recurrent tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Repeat hepatectomy is beneficial for selected patients with recurrence of liver malignancies. However, the operative procedure becomes technically demanding when the previous hepatectomy was complex, with hepatic veins and stump of portal pedicles exposed on the liver transection surface. We performed left hepatectomy after right paramedian sectoriectomy (RPMS) for three patients. Here, we describe our surgical technique and the postoperative outcomes achieved. This procedure allowed for safe adhesiolysis between the middle and right hepatic veins by following a fibrous plane. The mean operative time was 8.7 h, including 4.9 h of adhesiolysis. The mean remnant liver volume (right lateral sector and the caudate lobe) was calculated as 704 ml, being 62% of total liver volume. There was no postoperative liver failure or mortality. In conclusion, left hepatectomy after RPMS is a feasible procedure for patients with sufficient remnant liver volume, even though the middle and right hepatic veins run side by side after liver regeneration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]