Back to Search
Start Over
Recipient hepatectomy technique may affect oncological outcomes of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma.
- Source :
-
Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society [Liver Transpl] 2024 Oct 01; Vol. 30 (10), pp. 1002-1012. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Apr 01. - Publication Year :
- 2024
-
Abstract
- To date, caval sparing (CS) and total caval replacement (TCR) for recipient hepatectomy in liver transplantation (LT) have been compared only in terms of surgical morbidity. Nonetheless, the CS technique is inherently associated with an increased manipulation of the native liver and later exclusion of the venous outflow, which may increase the risk of intraoperative shedding of tumor cells when LT is performed for HCC. A multicenter, retrospective study was performed to assess the impact of recipient hepatectomy (CS vs. TCR) on the risk of posttransplant HCC recurrence among 16 European transplant centers that used either TCR or CS recipient hepatectomy as an elective protocol technique. Exclusion criteria comprised cases of non-center-protocol recipient hepatectomy technique, living-donor LT, HCC diagnosis suspected on preoperative imaging but not confirmed at the pathological examination of the explanted liver, HCC in close contact with the IVC, and previous liver resection for HCC. In 2420 patients, CS and TCR approaches were used in 1452 (60%) and 968 (40%) cases, respectively. Group adjustment with inverse probability weighting was performed for high-volume center, recipient age, alcohol abuse, viral hepatitis, Child-Pugh class C, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, cold ischemia time, clinical HCC stage within Milan criteria, pre-LT downstaging/bridging therapies, pre-LT alphafetoprotein serum levels, number and size of tumor nodules, microvascular invasion, and complete necrosis of all tumor nodules (matched cohort, TCR, n = 938; CS, n = 935). In a multivariate cause-specific hazard model, CS was associated with a higher risk of HCC recurrence (HR: 1.536, p = 0.007). In conclusion, TCR recipient hepatectomy, compared to the CS approach, may be associated with some protective effect against post-LT tumor recurrence.<br /> (Copyright © 2024 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)
- Subjects :
- Humans
Male
Female
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
Europe epidemiology
Risk Factors
Aged
Vena Cava, Inferior surgery
Vena Cava, Inferior pathology
Adult
Liver surgery
Liver pathology
Liver blood supply
Liver Transplantation adverse effects
Liver Transplantation methods
Liver Transplantation statistics & numerical data
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular surgery
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular pathology
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular mortality
Liver Neoplasms surgery
Liver Neoplasms pathology
Liver Neoplasms mortality
Hepatectomy adverse effects
Hepatectomy methods
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local epidemiology
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local prevention & control
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1527-6473
- Volume :
- 30
- Issue :
- 10
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 38551397
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1097/LVT.0000000000000373