Preoperative Sequential Portal and Hepatic Vein Embolization in Patients with Hepatobiliary Malignancy

CIRSE Standards of Practice on Portal Vein Embolization and Double Vein Embolization/Liver Venous Deprivation

This CIRSE Standards of Practice document is aimed at interventional radiologists and provides best practices for performing liver regeneration therapies prior to major hepatectomies, including portal vein embolization, double vein embolization and liver venous deprivation. It has been developed by an expert writing group under the guidance of the CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee. It encompasses all clinical and technical details required to perform liver regeneration therapies, revising the indications, contra-indications, outcome measures assessed, technique and expected outcomes.

Safety and Efficacy of Liver Venous Deprivation Following Transarterial Chemoembolization Before Major Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of liver venous deprivation (LVD) following transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

Between January 2021 and December 2022, HCC patients indicated for hepatectomy with initial insufficient future liver remnant (FLR) underwent LVD after TACE to induce preoperative liver hypertrophy.

Results

Twenty-seven HCC patients with a median age of 55 years underwent LVD. No TACE or LVD procedure-associated complications occurred, except for 1 case presenting with grade A liver failure after LVD (then recovered after 7 days). The FLR volume was 29.3% (interquartile range [IQR] = 7.5) and 48.9% (IQR = 8.6) of the total liver volume before and after LVD, respectively (p < 0.001). The degree of hypertrophy and FLR hypertrophy rate were 14.8% (IQR = 8.4) and 55.2% (IQR = 36.7), respectively. All 27 patients demonstrated sufficient FLR after LVD (24 patients at three weeks post-LVD, one at six weeks, and two at ten weeks), but only 21 patients accepted surgery. Postoperative histopathology showed 16 patients with cirrhosis and five with mild fibrosis (F1, F2). One patient presented with severe intraoperative bleeding due to damage of left hepatic vein and developed grade C liver failure, then died on day 32 postoperation.

Conclusion

LVD following TACE seems to be a safe, effective, and feasible method of inducing significant FLR regeneration in HCC, even in well-selected cirrhotic livers. Comparative studies with a large patient population and multicenter data are needed for further evaluation.

Portal Vein Embolization: Rationale, Techniques, and Outcomes to Maximize Remnant Liver Hypertrophy with a Focus on Contemporary Strategies

Hepatectomy remains the gold standard for curative therapy for patients with limited primary or metastatic hepatic tumors as it offers the best survival rates. In recent years, the indication for partial hepatectomy has evolved away from what will be removed from the patient to the volume and function of the future liver remnant (FLR), i.e., what will remain. With this regard, liver regeneration strategies have become paramount in transforming patients who previously had poor prognoses into ones who, after major hepatic resection with negative margins, have had their risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure minimized. Preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) via the purposeful occlusion of select portal vein branches to promote contralateral hepatic lobar hypertrophy has become the accepted standard for liver regeneration. Advances in embolic materials, selection of treatment approaches, and PVE with hepatic venous deprivation or concurrent transcatheter arterial embolization/radioembolization are all active areas of research. To date, the optimal combination of embolic material to maximize FLR growth is not yet known. Knowledge of hepatic segmentation and portal venous anatomy is essential before performing PVE. In addition, the indications for PVE, the methods for assessing hepatic lobar hypertrophy, and the possible complications of PVE need to be fully understood before undertaking the procedure. The goal of this article is to discuss the rationale, indications, techniques, and outcomes of PVE before major hepatectomy.

A prospective study of sequential hepatic vein embolization after portal vein embolization in patients scheduled for right-sided major hepatectomy: Results of feasibility and surgical strategy using functional liver assessment

BACKGROUND

Hepatic vein embolization (HVE) added to portal vein embolization (PVE) can further increase future remnant liver volume (FRLV) compared with PVE alone. This study was aimed to evaluate feasibility of sequential HVE in a prospective trial and to verify surgical strategy using functional FRLV (fFRLV).

METHODS

Hepatic vein embolization was prospectively indicated for post-PVE patients scheduled for right-sided major hepatectomy if the resection limit of fFRLV using EOB-magnetic resonance imaging was not satisfied. The resection limit was fFRLV: 615 mL/m² for predicting post-hepatectomy liver failure. Patients who underwent sequential PVE-HVE (n = 12) were compared with those who underwent PVE alone (n = 31).

RESULTS

All patients underwent HVE with no severe complications. Median fFRLV increased from 396 (range: 251-581) to 634 (range: 422-740) mL/m² by sequential PVE-HVE. From PVE to HVE, both of FRLV (P < .001) and fFRLV (P = .005) significantly increased. The increased width of fFRLV was larger than that of FRLV after performing HVE. Median growth rate was 71.3 (range: 33.3-80.3) %, which was higher than that of PVE alone (27.0%, range: 6.0-78.0). All-cohort resection rate was 88.3%. Strategy of using fFRLV for the resection limit and performing HVE in patients with insufficient functional volume resulted in no liver failure in all patients who underwent hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential HVE after PVE is feasible and safe, and HVE induced possibility of further liver growth and its functional improvement. Our surgical strategy using fFRLV may be justified.

Portal vein embolization failure: Current strategies and future perspectives to improve liver hypertrophy before major oncological liver resection

Portal vein embolization (PVE) is currently considered the standard of care to improve the volume of an inadequate future remnant liver (FRL) and decrease the risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). PHLF remains a significant limitation in performing major liver surgery and is the main cause of mortality after resection. The degree of hypertrophy obtained after PVE is variable and depends on multiple factors. Up to 20% of patients fail to undergo the planned surgery because of either an inadequate FRL growth or tumor progression after the PVE procedure (usually 6-8 wk are needed before surgery). The management of PVE failure is still debated, with a lack of consensus regarding the best clinical strategy. Different additional techniques have been proposed, such as sequential transarterial chemoembolization followed by PVE, segment 4 PVE, intra-portal administration of stem cells, dietary supplementation, and hepatic vein embolization. The aim of this review is to summarize the up-to-date strategies to overcome such difficult situations and discuss future perspectives on improving FRL hypertrophy.

Promoting Surgical Resection through Future Liver Remnant Hypertrophy

An inadequate future liver remnant (FLR) can preclude curative-intent surgical resection for patients with primary or secondary hepatic malignancies. For patients with normal baseline liver function and without risk factors, an FLR of 20% is needed to maintain postsurgical hepatic function. However, the FLR requirement is higher for patients who are exposed to systemic chemotherapy (FLR, >30%) or have cirrhosis (FLR, >40%). Interventional radiologic and surgical methods to achieve FLR hypertrophy are evolving, including portal vein ligation, portal vein embolization, radiation lobectomy, hepatic venous deprivation, and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy. Each technique offers particular advantages and disadvantages. Knowledge of these procedures can help clinicians to choose the suitable technique for each patient. The authors review the techniques used to develop FLR hypertrophy, focusing on technical considerations, outcomes, and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2022.

Liver Venous Deprivation (LVD) Versus Portal Vein Embolization (PVE) Alone Prior to Extended Hepatectomy: A Matched Pair Analysis

BACKGROUND

To investigate whether liver venous deprivation (LVD) as simultaneous, portal vein (PVE) and right hepatic vein embolization offers advantages in terms of hypertrophy induction before extended hepatectomy in non-cirrhotic liver.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between June 2018 and August 2019, 20 patients were recruited for a prospective, non-randomized study to investigate the efficacy of LVD. After screening of 134 patients treated using PVE alone from January 2015 to August 2019, 14 directly matched pairs regarding tumor entity (cholangiocarcinoma, CC and colorectal carcinoma, CRC) and hypertrophy time (defined as time from embolization to follow-up imaging) were identified. In both treatment groups, the same experienced reader (> 5 years experience) performed imaging-based measurement of the volumes of liver segments of the future liver remnant (FLR) prior to embolization and after the standard clinical hypertrophy interval (~ 30 days), before surgery. Percentage growth of segments was calculated and compared.

RESULTS

After matched follow-up periods (mean of 30.5 days), there were no statistically significant differences in relative hypertrophy of FLRs. Mean ± standard deviation relative hypertrophy rates for LVD/PVE were 59 ± 29.6%/54.1 ± 27.6% (p = 0.637) for segments II + III and 48.2 ± 22.2%/44.9 ± 28.9% (p = 0.719) for segments II-IV, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

LVD had no significant advantages over the standard method (PVE alone) in terms of hypertrophy induction of the FLR before extended hepatectomy in this study population.

Chinese expert consensus on conversion therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (2021 edition)

Recent advances in systemic and locoregional treatments for patients with unresectable or advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have resulted in improved response rates. This has provided an opportunity for selected patients with initially unresectable HCC to achieve adequate tumor downstaging to undergo surgical resection, a 'conversion therapy' strategy. However, conversion therapy is a new approach to the treatment of HCC and its practice and treatment protocols are still being developed. Review the evidence for conversion therapy in HCC and develop consensus statements to guide clinical practice. Evidence review: Many research centers in China have accumulated significant experience implementing HCC conversion therapy. Preliminary findings and data have shown that conversion therapy represents an important strategy to maximize the survival of selected patients with intermediate stage to advanced HCC; however, there are still many urgent clinical and scientific challenges for this therapeutic strategy and its related fields. In order to summarize and learn from past experience and review current challenges, the Chinese Expert Consensus on Conversion Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma (2021 Edition) was developed based on a review of preliminary experience and clinical data from Chinese and non-Chinese studies in this field and combined with recommendations for clinical practice. Sixteen consensus statements on the implementation of conversion therapy for HCC were developed. The statements generated in this review are based on a review of clinical evidence and real clinical experience and will help guide future progress in conversion therapy for patients with HCC.

Minimizing the risk of small-for-size syndrome after liver surgery

BACKGROUND

Primary and secondary liver tumors are not always amenable to resection due to location and size. Inadequate future liver remnant (FLR) may prevent patients from having a curative resection or may result in increased postoperative morbidity and mortality from complications related to small-for-size syndrome (SFSS).

DATA SOURCES

This comprehensive review analyzed the principles, mechanism and risk factors associated with SFSS and presented current available options in the evaluation of FLR when planning liver surgery. In addition, it provided a detailed description of specific modalities that can be used before, during or after surgery, in order to optimize the conditions for a safe resection and minimize the risk of SFSS.

RESULTS

Several methods which aim to reduce tumor burden, preserve healthy liver parenchyma, induce hypertrophy of FLR or prevent postoperative complications help minimize the risk of SFSS.

CONCLUSIONS

With those techniques the indications of radical treatment for patients with liver tumors have significantly expanded. The successful outcome depends on appropriate patient selection, the individualization and modification of interventions and the right timing of surgery.

Future remnant Liver optimization: preoperative assessment, volume augmentation procedures and management of PVE failure

Surgery is the cornerstone treatment for patients with primary or metastatic hepatic tumors. Thanks to surgical and anesthetic technological advances, current indications for liver resections have been significantly expanded to include any patient in whom all disease can be resected with a negative margin (R0) while preserving an adequate future residual liver (FRL). Post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) is still a feared complication following major liver surgery, associated with high morbidity, mortality and cost implications. PHLF is mainly linked to both the size and quality of the FRL. Significant advances have been made in detailed preoperative assessment, to predict and mitigate this complication, even if an ideal methodology has yet to be defined. Several procedures have been described to induce hypertrophy of the FRL when needed. Each technique has its advantages and limitations, and among them portal vein embolization (PVE) is still considered the standard of care. About 20% of patients after PVE fail to undergo the scheduled hepatectomy, and newer secondary procedures, such as segment 4 embolization, ALPPS and HVE, have been proposed as salvage strategies. The aim of this review is to discuss the current modalities available and new perspectives in the optimization of FRL in patients undergoing major liver resection.

Portal vein wedge resection and patch venoplasty using autologous and homologous vein grafts during surgery for hepatobiliary malignancies

Obtaining tumor-free resection margins is one of the most important factors for achieving favorable prognosis of patients undergoing resection for hepatobiliary malignancies. In this study, we present our experience of portal vein (PV) wedge resection and patch venoplasty using autologous or homologous vessel grafts for resecting perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, and distal bile duct cancer. Case 1 was 68-year-old male patient with type IV perihilar cholangiocarcinoma who underwent central bisectionectomy with caudate lobectomy and bile duct resection, and PV wedge resection and patch venoplasty with a cryopreserved iliac vein allograft patch. This patient survived 14 months after surgery. Case 2 was 77-year-old male patient with type IIIA perihilar cholangiocarcinoma who underwent left medial sectionectomy with caudate lobectomy, bile duct resection, and PV wedge resection and patch venoplasty with a cryopreserved iliac vein allograft patch. This patient survived 17 months after surgery. Case 3 was 54-year-old male patient with hepatitis B virus-associated liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma with PV tumor thrombus who underwent left hepatectomy. The PV wall defect was repaired with an autologous greater saphenous vein patch. This patient survived 11 months after surgery. Case 4 was 65-year-old female patient with distal bile duct cancer who underwent pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy, and main PV wedge resection and patch venoplasty with a cryopreserved iliac artery allograft patch. This patient survived 21 months after surgery. In conclusion, PV wedge resection and patch venoplasty can be used to facilitate complete tumor resection in patients undergoing various extents of surgical resection for hepatobiliary malignancies.

Parenchyma-preserving hepatectomy including segments I + IV resection and bile duct resection in a patient with type IV perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: A case report with video clip

It has been reported that parenchyma-preserving hepatectomy (PPH) might lower surgical curability with an increased likelihood of bile duct resection margins (BDRMs). Apparently, PPH is indicated for patients expected to achieve curative resection. The author herein presents a case of a 77-year-old male patient with type IV perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and decreased cardiac function treated with hepatic segments I + IV resection and bile duct resection. During the operation, he underwent two hepatic parenchymal transections matched with right trisectionectomy and left hepatectomy. After removing segments VI and I and extrahepatic bile duct, six hepatic duct openings were exposed at the left and right hila. As some of them were conjoined, two hepaticojejunostomies at the right liver and one hepaticojejunostomy at the left lateral section were performed consecutively. This operation took 7 hours. Eight sessions of intraoperative frozen-section biopsy were performed. All BDRMs were tumor-negative. According to the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system, the extent of the tumor was pT2bN2M0. It was regarded as stage IVA tumor. The patient recovered uneventfully. He was discharged on the 18th postoperative day. The patient underwent concurrent chemoradiation therapy and adjuvant chemotherapy. The patient has been doing well without tumor recurrence for the past 24 months to date. In conclusion, PPH can lead to curative resection and improved outcomes through reasonable adjustment of the extent of hepatectomy.

State-of-the-art surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most commonly diagnosed primary liver tumor with an increasing incidence worldwide. Management of patients with HCC is largely dictated by the presence of cirrhosis, disease stage, underlying liver function, and patient performance status.

PURPOSE

We provide an update on key aspects of surgical treatment options for patients with HCC. RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS: Liver resection and transplantation remain cornerstone treatment options for patients with early-stage disease and constitute the only potentially curative options for HCC. Selection of patients for surgical treatment should include a thorough evaluation of tumor characteristics and biology, as well as evidence-based use of various available treatment options to achieve optimal long-term outcomes for patients with HCC.

Optimization of the future remnant liver: review of the current strategies in Europe

Liver resection still represent the treatment of choice for liver malignancies, but in some cases inadequate future remnant liver (FRL) can lead to post hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) that still represents the most common cause of death after hepatectomy. Several strategies in recent era have been developed in order to generate a compensatory hypertrophy of the FRL, reducing the risk of post hepatectomy liver failure. Portal vein embolization, portal vein ligation, and ALLPS are the most popular techniques historically adopted up to now. The liver venous deprivation and the radio-embolization are the most recent promising techniques. Despite even more precise tools to calculate the relationship among volume and function, such as scintigraphy with ^99mTc-mebrofenin (HBS), no consensus is still available to define which of the above mentioned augmentation strategy is more adequate in terms of kind of surgery, complexity of the pathology and quality of liver parenchyma. The aim of this article is to analyse these different strategies to achieve sufficient FRL.

Conversion therapy for primary liver cancer: Indications and selective strategies

Primary liver cancer has an insidious onset and no specific symptoms at early stage. Most patients are in the middle or advanced stage when diagnosed, and only 20%-40% of patients meet the criteria for radical resection. At present, surgical resection is still the main radical treatment for primary liver cancer, but factors such as liver function decompensation, too large tumor volume, too small future liver remnant, intrahepatic multiple metastasis, tumor thrombus invading the large vessels or bile duct, and distant metastasis limit the application of surgical resection or liver transplantation. In recent years, with the advances of basic research of primary liver cancer, the development of surgical techniques and equipment, as well as the development of new molecular targeted drugs and immunotherapy drugs, a part of unresectable patients with primary liver cancer can receive conversion therapy to improve liver function, minimize tumor volume, minimize or inactivate tumor thrombus, and increase the residual liver volume. Following conversion therapy, patients with primary liver cancer can undergo surgical resection or liver transplantation, which greatly improve the therapeutic efficacy and patient survival.

Ipsilateral access portal venous embolization (PVE) for preoperative hypertrophy exhibits low complication rates in Clavien-Dindo and CIRSE scales

Background

Portal venous embolization (PVE) is a minimal invasive preoperative strategy that aims to increase future liver remnant (FLR) in order to facilitate extended hemihepatectomy. We analyzed our data retrospectively regarding complications and degree of hypertrophy (DH).

Methods: 88 patients received PVE either by particles / coils (n = 77) or by glue / oil (n = 11), supported by 7 right hepatic vein embolizations (HVE) by coils or occluders. All complications were categorized by the Clavien- Dindo (CD) and the CIRSE classification.

Results

In 88 patients (median age 68 years) there was one intervention with a biliary leak and subsequent drainage (complication grade 3 CD, CIRSE 3), two with prolonged hospital stay (grade 2 CD, grade 3 CIRSE) and 13 complications grade 1 CD, but no complications of grade 4 or higher neither in Clavien- Dindo nor in CIRSE classification. The median relative increase in FLR was 47% (SD 35%). The mean pre-intervention standardized FLR rose from 23% (SD 10%) to a post-intervention standardized FLR of 32% (SD 12%). The degree of hypertrophy (DH) was 9,3% (SD 5,2%) and the kinetic growth rate (KGR) per week was 2,06 (SD 1,84).

Conclusion

PVE and, if necessary, additional sequential HVE were safe procedures with a low rate of complications and facilitated sufficient preoperative hypertrophy of the future liver remnant.

Standard and modified techniques for parenchyma-preserving hepatectomy focused on segments I+IV resection in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

Resection of the hepatic segments I+IV (S1+S4) is the most common type of parenchyma-preserving hepatectomy (PPH) for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHCC). The author describes personal experience on the standard and modified techniques for PPH focused on S1+S4 resection in patients with PHCC. 1) Isolated caudate lobectomy with bile duct resection (BDR) is the minimal type of PPH, but not currently recommended due to technical difficulty. 2) Partial hepatectomy of S1+S4a±segment V (S5) with BDR provides wide operative field, but extension of BDR is limited and resection of S1 paracaval portion is still difficult. 3) Resection of S1+S4+S5 with BDR provides wider operative field for complete S1 resection and multiple biliary reconstruction. 4) Resection of S1+S4 with BDR offers very wide operative field and allows wider extent of hilar BDR, and thus presents the most common type of PPH. A supplementary video clip presents the detailed standard surgical procedure for resection of S1+S4 with BDR in a patient with type IIIA PHCC. 5) Modified resection of S1+S4±S5 or segment VIII (S8) with BDR facilitates additional resection of tumor-involved S5 or S8 ducts. 6) Major hilar vascular invasion is usually contraindicated for PPH and only small portal vein invasion requiring wedge resection and patch venoplasty is allowed. In conclusion, PPH can achieve curative resection and improved outcomes in patients with PHCC via reasonable modification of the extent of hepatectomy and hilar BDR. PPH may have advantages in selected patients depending on the extent of tumor, and in patients with high operative risk.

Portal and hepatic vein embolization prior to major hepatectomy

PURPOSE

 To analyze safety and effectiveness of simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization (PHVE) or sequential hepatic vein embolization (HVE) compared to portal vein embolization (PVE) for future remnant liver (FRL) hypertrophy prior to major hepatic surgery.

METHODS

 Patients undergoing PVE, PHVE or HVE at our tertiary care center between 2018 and 2020 were retrospectively included. FRLV, standardized FRLV (sFRLV) and sFRLV growth rate per day were assessed via volumetry, as well as laboratory parameters.

RESULTS

 36 patients (f = 15, m = 21; median 64.5 y) were included, 16 patients received PHVE and 20 patients PVE, of which 4 received sequential HVE. Significant increase of FRLV was achieved with both PVE and PHVE compared to baseline (p < 0.0001). sFRLV growth rate did not significantly differ following PHVE (2.2 ± 1.2 %/d) or PVE (2.2 ± 1.7 %/d, p = 0.94). Left portal vein thrombosis (LPVT) was observed after PHVE in 6 patients and in 1 patient after PVE. Sequential HVE showed a considerably high growth rate of 1.42 ± 0.45 %/d after PVE.

CONCLUSION

 PHVE effectively induces FRL hypertrophy but yields comparable sFRLV to PVE. Sequential HVE further induces hypertrophy after insufficient growth due to PVE. Considering a potentially higher rate of LPVT after PHVE, PVE might be preferred in patients with moderate baseline sFRLV, with optional sequential HVE in non-sufficient responders.

Oncological Outcomes after Liver Venous Deprivation for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Single Center Experience

Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are the major cause of death in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The cornerstone treatment of CRLM is surgical resection. Post-operative morbidity and mortality are mainly linked to an inadequate future liver remnant (FLR). Nowadays preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) is the most widely performed technique to increase the size of the future liver remnant (FLR) before major hepatectomies. One method recently proposed to increase the FLR is liver venous deprivation (LVD), but its oncological impact is still unknown. The aim of this study is to report first short- and long-term oncological outcomes after LVD in patients undergoing right (or extended right) hepatectomy for CRLM. Seventeen consecutive patients undergoing LVD between July 2015 and May 2020 before an (extended) right hepatectomy were retrospectively analyzed from an institutional database. Post-operative and follow-up data were analyzed and reported. Primary outcomes were 1-year and 3-year overall survival (OS) and hepatic recurrence (HR). Postoperative complications occurred in 8 patients (47%). No deaths occurred after surgery. HR occurred in 9 patients (52.9%). 1-year and 3-year OS were 87% (95% confidence interval [CI]: ±16%) and 60.3%, respectively (95% CI: ±23%). Median Disease-Free Survival (DFS) was 6 months (CI 95%: 4.7-7.2). With all the limitations of a retrospective study with a small sample size, LVD showed similar oncological outcomes compared to literature reports for Portal Vein Embolization (PVE).

Debate: Improvements in Systemic Therapies for Liver Metastases Will Increase the Role of Locoregional Treatments

The benefit of resection of liver metastases depends on primary diseases. Neuroendocrine tumors are associated with favorable prognosis after resection of liver metastases. Gastric cancer has worse tumor biology, and resection of gastric liver metastases should be performed in selected patients. A multidisciplinary approach is well established for colorectal liver metastases (CLMs). Resection remains the only curative treatment of CLM. Chemotherapy and molecular-targeted therapy have improved survival in unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. Understanding of the following two strategies, conversion therapy and two-stage hepatectomy, are important to make this patient group to be candidates for curative-intent surgery.

The Future Liver Remnant : Definition, Evaluation, and Management

When considering patients for a major hepatectomy, one must carefully consider the volume of liver to be left behind and if additional procedures are necessary to augment its volume. This review considers the optimal volume of the future liver remnant (FLR) and analyzes the techniques of augmenting this volume, the various growth parameters to assess adequate growth of the FLR, as well as further management when there has been inadequate growth of the FLR.

Radiological Simultaneous Portohepatic Vein Embolization (RASPE) Before Major Hepatectomy: A Better Way to Optimize Liver Hypertrophy Compared to Portal Vein Embolization

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this retrospective study was to compare portal vein embolization (PVE) and radiologica simultaneous portohepatic vein embolization (RASPE) for future liver remnant (FLR) growth in terms of feasibility, safety, and efficacy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

After portal vein embolization (PVE), 15% of patients remain ineligible for hepatic resection due to insufficient hypertrophy of the FLR. RASPE has been proposed to induce FLR growth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2016 and 2018, 73 patients were included in the study. RASPE was proposed for patients with a ratio of FLR to total liver volume (FLR/TLV) of <25% (RASPE group). This group was compared to patients who underwent PVE for a FLR/TLV <30% (PVE group). Patients in the 2 groups were matched for age, sex, type of tumor, and number of chemotherapy treatments. FLR was assessed by computed tomography before and 4 weeks after the procedure.

RESULTS

The technical success rate in both groups was 100%. Morbidity post-embolization, and the time between embolization and surgery were similar between the groups. In the PVE group, the FLR/TLV ratio before embolization was 31.03% (range: 18.33%-38.95%) versus 22.91% (range: 16.55-32.15) in the RASPE group (P < 0.0001). Four weeks after the procedure, the liver volume increased by 28.98% (range: 9.31%-61.23%) in the PVE group and by 61.18% (range: 23.18%-201.56%) in the RASPE group (P < 0.0001). Seven patients in the PVE group, but none in the RASPE group, had postoperative liver failure (P = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

RASPE can be considered as "radiological associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy." RASPE induced safe and profound growth of the FLR and was more efficient than PVE. RASPE also allowed for extended hepatectomy with less risk of post-operative liver failure.

Hepatic atrophy treatment with portal vein embolization to control intrahepatic duct stenosis-associated cholangitis

We present two cases of hepatic atrophy treatment with portal vein embolization (PVE) to control intractable cholangitis. The first case was a 60-year-old male who was admitted for repeated episodes of cholangitis. He had undergone cholecystectomy and Roux-en-Y choledochojejunostomy 2 years earlier. Imaging studies showed left intrahepatic duct dilatation and anastomotic site stricture. The patient was reluctant to undergo another surgery. Thus, we decided to perform left PVE to induce atrophy of the left liver. The left liver shrank and stayed silent for 5 years, but a radiological intervention was necessary to treat symptomatic anastomotic stenosis. The patient has done well for 12 years after PVE. The second case was a 51-year-old female who was also admitted for repeated episodes of cholangitis. She had undergone excision of type I choledochal cyst 2 years earlier. Imaging studies showed right hepatic duct stenosis. Cholangitis developed repeatedly. Thus, radiologic interventions were performed 8 times over 9 years. Finally, she was referred for surgery, but she was very reluctant to undergo another surgery. We planned a wait-and-see strategy following right PVE. After PVE, the right liver progressively shrank. Three months after PVE, we decided to wait for a longer period until further atrophy of the right liver. The patient has been doing well for 14 months after PVE without any episode of cholangitis. In conclusion, experience from our two cases suggests that hepatic parenchymal induction therapy through percutaneous PVE can be a therapeutic option for patients with perihilar biliary stenosis-associated cholangitis.

Effect of structured use of preoperative portal vein embolization on outcomes after liver resection of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

Background

Portal vein embolization (PVE) is performed to reduce the risk of liver failure and subsequent mortality after major liver resection. Although a cut‐off value of 2·7 per cent per min per m² has been used with hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS) for future remnant liver function (FRLF), patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) potentially benefit from an additional cut‐off of 8·5 per cent/min (not corrected for body surface area). Since January 2016 a more liberal approach to PVE has been adopted, including this additional cut‐off for HBS of 8·5 per cent/min. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of this approach on liver failure and mortality.

Methods

This was a single‐centre retrospective study in which consecutive patients undergoing liver resection under suspicion of PHC in 2000–2015 were compared with patients treated in 2016–2019, after implementation of the more liberal approach. Primary outcomes were postoperative liver failure (International Study Group of Liver Surgery grade B/C) and 90‐day mortality.

Results

Some 191 patients with PHC underwent liver resection. PVE was performed in 6·4 per cent (9 of 141) of the patients treated in 2000–2015 and in 32 per cent (16 of 50) of those treated in 2016–2019. The 90‐day mortality rate decreased from 16·3 per cent (23 of 141) to 2 per cent (1 of 50) (P = 0·009), together with a decrease in the rate of liver failure from 19·9 per cent (28 of 141) to 4 per cent (2 of 50) (P = 0·008). In 2016–2019, 24 patients had a FRLF greater than 8·5 per cent/min and no liver failure or death occurred, suggesting that 8·5 per cent/min is a reliable cut‐off for patients with suspected PHC.

Conclusion

The major decrease in liver failure and mortality rates in recent years and the simultaneous increased use of PVE suggests an important role for PVE in reducing adverse outcomes after surgery for PHC.

Hepatic vein embolization after portal vein embolization to induce additional liver hypertrophy in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of salvage hepatic vein embolization (HVE) on the volume of the future liver remnant (FLR) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and inadequate hypertrophy following initial portal vein embolization (PVE).

METHODS

From April 2011 to October 2018, 9 patients with mCRC underwent HVE following PVE. The right or middle hepatic vein was embolized with coils and/or vascular plugs. Liver volumes were calculated at baseline, following PVE, and following HVE, in order to assess the hypertrophic effect of PVE and HVE on the FLR.

RESULTS

Nine patients underwent HVE (n = 3, right HVE; n = 6, middle HVE) because of inadequate FLR hypertrophy following PVE. The standardized FLR increased from 0.16 (median, range 0.08-0.24) at baseline to 0.22 (median, range 0.13-0.29) following PVE (p = 0.0005) to 0.26 (median, range 0.19-0.37) following HVE (p = 0.0050). HVE was performed 40 days (median, range 19-128 days) following PVE, and assessment of FLR hypertrophy was performed 41 days (median, range 19-92 days) following HVE. Four of nine patients underwent hepatectomy; 5 patients failed to undergo hepatectomy (n = 3, inadequate hypertrophy; n = 1, disease progression; n = 1, portal hypertension). One patient required repeat HVE due to a patent accessory vein.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage HVE is an effective technique to induce additional FLR hypertrophy in patients with mCRC and inadequate FLR after initial PVE.

KEY POINTS

• Hepatic vein embolization is effective to induce additional liver hypertrophy in surgical patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma and inadequate hypertrophy after portal vein embolization. • Increases in future liver remnant volume are feasible in patients who receive hepatotoxic neoadjuvant systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal carcinoma. • Sequential portal vein embolization and hepatic vein embolization can be a viable technique to induce liver hypertrophy in patients with small baseline future liver remnant volumes (< 20%).

Liver venous deprivation compared to portal vein embolization to induce hypertrophy of the future liver remnant before major hepatectomy: A single center experience

BACKGROUND

To assess the safety and efficacy of liver venous deprivation (simultaneous hepatic vein embolization with portal vein embolization) compared with portal vein embolization alone before major hepatectomy in patients with small future liver remnant.

METHODS

We assessed all consecutive patients who underwent ipsilateral liver venous deprivation before major hepatectomy (>4 Couinaud's segments) at the University Hospital Lausanne from 2016 to 2018. Postembolization, volumetric analysis after liver venous deprivation and postoperative outcomes were compared with patients who underwent portal vein embolization alone (portal vein embolization group) from 2010 to 2016.

RESULTS

During the study period, 21 patients underwent liver venous deprivation and 39 portal vein embolization alone. In the liver venous deprivation versus portal vein embolization groups, dropout rate owing to disease progression was 1 of 21 vs 9 of 39 (P = .053). There were no per procedural complications after liver venous deprivation and no difference in the postoperative outcomes. Future liver remnant hypertrophy was greater in the liver venous deprivation group (median 135%, interquartile range: 123%-154%) than in the portal vein embolization group (median 124%, interquartile range: 107%-140%) at a median time of 22 days after liver venous deprivation vs 26 days after portal vein embolization (P = .034). The median kinetic growth rate was also greater (2.9%/week, interquartile range: 1.9-4.3% vs 1.4%/week, interquartile range: 0.7-2.1%; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Ipsilateral liver venous deprivation before major hepatectomy is safe and seems to induce a greater and faster future liver remnant hypertrophy than after portal vein embolization alone. More data are needed to analyze the impact of liver venous deprivation on tumor growth.

Selective occlusion of the hepatic artery and portal vein improves liver hypertrophy for staged hepatectomy

Background

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of selective occlusion of the hepatic artery and portal vein (SOAP) for staged hepatectomy (SOAPS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)

Methods

From December 2014 to August 2018, 9 patients with unresectable HCC were chosen to undergo SOAPS. SOAP without liver partition was performed in the first stage. The second stage was performed when future liver remnant (FLR) was equal to or bigger than 40% of the standard liver volume (SLV). The growth rate of FLR, perioperative outcomes, and survival data was recorded.

Results

In the first stage, all the 9 patients completed SOAP. Two cases received radiological interventional method and 7 cases received open operation. None of them developed liver failure and died following SOAP. After SOAP, FLR increased 145.0 ml (115.0 to 210 ml) and 37.1% (25.6 to 51.7%) on average. The average time interval between the two stages was 14.1 days (8 to 18 days). In the second stage, no in-hospital deaths occurred after SOAPS. One patient suffered from liver failure after SOAPS, and artificial liver support was adopted and his total bilirubin level returned to normal after postoperative day 35. The alpha-fetoprotein level of 8 patients reduced to normal within 2 months after SOAPS. Among 9 patients, 5 patients survived, 4 patients died of intrahepatic recurrence, lung metastasis, or bone metastasis. In the 5 survived cases, bone metastasis and intrahepatic recurrence were found in 1 patient, intrahepatic recurrence was found in another patient, and the remaining 3 patients were free of recurrence. The median disease-free survival time and overall survival time were 10.4 and 13.9 months, respectively.

Conclusion

SOAP can facilitate rapid and sustained FLR hypertrophy, and SOAPS is safe and effective in patients with unresectable HCC.

Combined hepatic and portal vein embolization as preparation for major hepatectomy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Some patients remain deemed unsuitable for resection after portal vein embolization (PVE) because of insufficient hypertrophy of the future remnant liver (FRL). Hepatic and portal vein embolization (HPVE) has been shown to induce hypertrophy of the FRL. The aim of this study was to provide a systematic review of the available literature on HPVE as preparation for major hepatectomy.

METHODS

The literature search was performed on online databases. Studies including patients who underwent preoperative HPVE were retrieved for evaluation.

RESULTS

Six articles including 68 patients were published between 2003 and 2017. HPVE was performed successfully in all patients with no mortality and morbidity-related procedures. The degree of hypertrophy of the FRL after HPVE ranged from 33% to 63.3%. Surgical resection after preoperative HPVE could be performed in 85.3% of patients, but 14.7% remained unsuitable for resection because of insufficient hypertrophy of the FRL or tumor progression. Posthepatectomy morbidity and mortality rates were 10.3% and 5.1%, respectively. The postoperative liver failure rate was nil.

CONCLUSION

HPVE as a preparation for major hepatectomy appears to be feasible and safe and could increase the resectability of patients initially deemed unsuitable for resection because of absent or insufficient hypertrophy of the FRL after PVE alone.

Perioperative impact of liver venous deprivation compared with portal venous embolization in patients undergoing right hepatectomy: preliminary results from the pioneer center

Background

Preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) is currently the standard technique used routinely to increase the size of the future remnant liver (FRL) before major hepatectomies. The degree of hypertrophy (DH) is approximatively 10% and requires on average six weeks. ALPPS is faster and achieves a good DH but with a higher morbidity and mortality. One method recently proposed to increase the FRL is liver venous deprivation (LVD), but its clinical and operative impact is still unknown. The aim of this study is to compare intra- and postoperative morbidity/mortality and the histological evaluation of the liver parenchyma between PVE and LVD in patients undergoing anatomic right hepatectomy.

Methods

Fifty-three consecutive patients undergoing PVE and LVD before a major hepatectomy were retrospectively analysed between 2015 and 2017. In order to reduce the bias, only potential standard right hepatectomies were selected. Surgical resections and the radiologic procedures were performed by the same Institution. Intra-operative parameters (transfusions, perfusions, bleeding, operative time), postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo and ISGLS criteria), and histological findings were compared.

Results

To induce FRL growth 16 patients underwent PVE and 13 LVD. One patient of the PVE group was not resected due to peritoneal metastases. Surgery was performed for hepatocellular carcinoma (PVE =9, LVD =3), metastases (PVE =5, LVD =10), or others diseases (PVE =2, LVD =0). Per- and post-operative morbidity/mortality rates after PVE and LVD procedures were null. No differences between the two groups were found in terms of intraoperative bleeding (median: 550 vs. 1,200 mL; P=0.36), hepatic pedicle clamping (5 vs. 3 patients; P=0.69), intraoperative red blood cells transfusions (median: 622 vs. 594; P=0.42) and operative time (median: 270 vs. 330 min; P=0.34). Post-operative course was similar when comparing both medical and surgical complications in the two arms (PVE n=7, LVD n=10, P=0.1). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa) occurred in 3 patients undergoing PVE and in 1 patient of the LVD group (P=0.6). No difference in biliary leak (P=0.1), haemorrhage (P=0.2) and liver failure (P=0.64) was found. One cirrhotic patient in the group of PVE died of post-operative liver failure due to left portal vein thrombosis. Although we experienced a more marked liver damage when assessing on neoplastic liver parenchyma, no statistical difference was observed in terms of atrophy (P=0.19), necrosis (P=0.5), hemorrhage (P=0.42) and sinusoidal dilatation (P=0.69).

Conclusions

Despite the limitations of our study, to our knowledge this is the first report to compare the two techniques LVD is a promising and safe procedure to induce a fast FRL hypertrophy, showing similar mortality/morbidity rates during and after surgery compared to PVE.

Left trisectionectomy combined with resection of the right hepatic vein and inferior vena cava after right hepatic vein embolization for advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Background

When the inferior right hepatic vein (IRHV) is present, left hepatic trisectionectomy with resection of the right hepatic vein (RHV) is theoretically possible without reconstruction of the RHV. We here report a successful case of this extended hepatectomy after RHV embolization for advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Case presentation

A 71-year-old man was admitted to our clinic with abdominal pain. Computed tomography showed a cholangiocarcinoma located at the caudate lobe that involved the inferior vena cava (IVC) and the roots of the three major hepatic veins. Portal vein embolization of the left and right anterior portal veins was performed. As the IRHV was present but thin, RHV was also embolized. Left hepatic trisectionectomy with resection of the involved IVC and RHV, preserving the IRHV, was done. The IVC was reconstructed with artificial graft. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 36.

Conclusion

RHV embolization is useful in extended left trisectionectomy with resection of the RHV when the IRHV is present but thin.

Dealing with an insufficient future liver remnant: Portal vein embolization and two-stage hepatectomy

Colorectal liver metastases (CLM) are not always resectable at the time of diagnosis. An insufficient future liver remnant is a factor excluding patients from curative intent resection. To deal with this issue, two-stage hepatectomy was introduced approximately 20 years ago. It is a sequential treatment strategy for bilateral CLM, which consists of preoperative chemotherapy, portal vein embolization, and planned first and second liver resections. This study reviews current evidence supporting use of two-stage hepatectomy.

Simultaneous hepatic and portal vein ligation induces rapid liver hypertrophy: A study in pigs

BACKGROUND

Liver hypertrophy induced by partial portal vein occlusion (PVL) is accelerated by adding simultaneous parenchymal transection ("ALPPS procedure"). This preclinical experimental study in pigs tests the hypothesis that simultaneous ligation of portal and hepatic veins of the liver also accelerates regeneration by abrogation of porto-portal collaterals without need for operative transection.

METHODS

A pig model of portal vein occlusion was compared with the novel model of simultaneous portal and hepatic vein occlusion, where major hepatic veins draining the portal vein-deprived lobe were identified with intraoperative ultrasonography and ligated using pledgeted transparenchymal sutures. Kinetic growth was compared, and the portal vein system was then studied after 7 days using epoxy casts of the portal circulation. Portal vein flow and portal pressure were measured, and Ki-67 staining was used to evaluate the proliferative response.

RESULTS

Pigs were randomly assigned to portal vein occlusion (n = 8) or simultaneous portal and hepatic vein occlusion (n = 6). Simultaneous portal and hepatic vein occlusion was well tolerated and led to mild cytolysis, with no necrosis in the outflow vein-deprived liver sectors. The portal vein-supplied sector increased by 90 ± 22% (mean ± standard deviation) after simultaneous portal and hepatic vein occlusion compared with 29 ± 18% after PVL (P < .001). Collaterals to the deportalized liver developed after 7 days in both procedures but were markedly reduced in simultaneous portal and hepatic vein occlusion. Ki-67 staining at 7 days was comparable.

CONCLUSION

This study in pigs found that simultaneous portal and hepatic vein occlusion led to rapid hypertrophy without necrosis of the deportalized liver. The findings suggest that the use of simultaneous portal and hepatic vein occlusion accelerates liver hypertrophy for extended liver resections and should be evaluated further.

Liver hypertrophy: Underlying mechanisms and promoting procedures before major hepatectomy

Various procedures can promote hypertrophy of the future liver remnant (FLR) before major hepatectomy to prevent postoperative liver failure. The pathophysiological situation following portal vein embolization (PVE), hepatic artery ligation/embolization or hepatectomy remains unclear. On one hand, the main mechanisms of hepatic regeneration appear to be driven by hepatic hypoxia (involving the hepatic arterial buffer response), an increased portal blood flow inducing shear stress and the involvement of several mediators (inflammatory cytokines, vasoregulators, growth factors, eicosanoids and several hormones). On the other hand, several factors are associated with impaired liver regeneration, such as biliary obstruction, malnutrition, diabetes mellitus, male gender, age, ethanol and viral infection. All these mechanisms may explain the varying degrees of hypertrophy observed following a surgical or radiological procedure promoting hypertrophy the FLR. Radiological procedures include left and right portal vein embolization (extended or not to segment 4), sequential PVE and hepatic vein embolization (HVE), and more recently combined PVE and HVE. Surgical procedures include associated liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy, and more recently the combined portal embolization and arterial ligation procedure. This review aimed to clarify the pathophysiology of liver regeneration; it also describes radiological or surgical procedures employed to improve liver regeneration in terms of volumetric changes, the feasibility of the second step and the benefits and drawbacks of each procedure.

PERCUTANEOUS RADIOFREQUENCY ASSISTED LIVER PARTITION WITH PORTAL VEIN EMBOLIZATION FOR STAGED HEPATECTOMY (PRALPPS)

BACKGROUND

When a major hepatic resection is necessary, sometimes the future liver remnant is not enough to maintain sufficient liver function and patients are more likely to develop liver failure after surgery.

AIM

To test the hypothesis that performing a percutaneous radiofrecuency liver partition plus percutaneous portal vein embolization (PRALPPS) for stage hepatectomy in pigs is feasible.

METHODS

Four pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus) both sexes with weights between 25 to 35 kg underwent percutaneous portal vein embolization with coils of the left portal vein. By contrasted CT, the difference between the liver parenchyma corresponding to the embolized zone and the normal one was identified. Immediately, using the fusion of images between ultrasound and CT as a guide, radiofrequency needles were placed percutaneouslyand then ablated until the liver partition was complete. Finally, hepatectomy was completed with a laparoscopic approach.

RESULTS

All animals have survived the procedures, with no reported complications. The successful portal embolization process was confirmed both by portography and CT. In the macroscopic analysis of the pieces, the depth of the ablation was analyzed. The hepatic hilum was respected. On the other hand, the correct position of the embolization material on the left portal vein could be also observed.

CONCLUSION

"Percutaneous radiofrequency assisted liver partition with portal vein embolization" (PRALLPS) is a feasible procedure.

A predictive scoring system for insufficient liver hypertrophy after preoperative portal vein embolization

BACKGROUND

The factors which affect hypertrophy of the future liver remnant after portal vein embolization remain unclear. The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical factors affecting the hypertrophy rate after portal vein embolization and to develop a scoring system predicting insufficient liver hypertrophy.

METHODS

The cases of a total of 152 patients who underwent portal vein embolization of the right portal branch between 2006 and 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. The score to predict insufficient (<25%) hypertrophy was established based on logistic regression analyses of the clinical parameters before portal vein embolization.

RESULTS

After portal vein embolization, the future liver remnant volume, expressed as the median (range), significantly increased from 364 (151-801) mL, 33% (18%-54%), to 451 (242-866) mL, 42% (26%-65%). The median hypertrophy rate was 24% (-5% to 96%). A preoperative predictive scoring system for insufficient liver hypertrophy was constructed using the following 3 factors: an initial future liver remnant volume ≥35% (2 points), alkaline phosphatase ≥450 IU/dL (1 point), and cholinesterase <220 mg/dL (1 point). The constructed scoring system indicated the proportion of patients with insufficient liver hypertrophy (<25%) to be 6 out of 42 (14%) in the low-score group (0 points), 44 out of 77 (57%) in the medium-score group (1-2 points), and 30 out of 33 (91%) in the high-score group (3-4 points). The hypertrophy rate of future liver remnant was different among the 3 groups (low-score group, 38.9% [-2.4% to 81.4%]; medium-score group, 22.7% [-5.1% to 95.5%]; high-score group, 18.2% [2.4%-30.7%]) (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The constructed scoring system was able to stratify patients before portal vein embolization according to the possibility of developing insufficient liver hypertrophy.

Resection for Klatskin tumors: technical complexities and results

Klatskin's tumors, actually-redefined as perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (phCCA) do represent 50-70% of all CCAs and develop in a context of chronic inflammation and cholestasis of bile ducts. Surgical resection provides the only chance of cure for this disease but is technically challenging because of the complex, intimate and variable relationship between biliary and vascular structures at this location. Five years survival rates range between 25-45% (median 27-58 months) in case of R0 resection and 0-23% (median 12-21 months) in case of R1 resection respectively. It should be noted that the major costs of high radicality are represented by relative high morbidity and mortality rates (i.e., 20-66% and 0-9% respectively). Considering the fact that radical resection may represent the only curative treatment of phCCA, we focused our review on surgical planning and techniques that may improve resectability rates and outcomes for locally advanced phCCA. The surgical treatment of phCCA can be successful when following aspects have been fulfilled: (I) accurate preoperative diagnostic aimed to identify the tumor in all its details (localization and extension) and to study all the risk factors influencing a posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF): i.e., liver volume, liver function, liver quality, haemodynamics and patient characteristics; (II) High end surgical skills taking in consideration the local extension of the tumor and the vascular invasion which usually require an extended hepatic resection and often a vascular resection; (III) adequate postoperative management aimed to avoid major complications (i.e., PHLF and biliary complications). These are technically challenging operations and must be performed in a high volume centres by hepato-biliary-pancreas (HBP)-surgeons with experience in microsurgical vascular techniques.

ALPPS in a patient with periductal infiltrating intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) is a novel method to prevent post-hepatectomy hepatic failure. We present a case of periductal infiltrating intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma undergone ALPPS, that was conducted as intraoperative choice instead of conducting preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE). A 65-year-old male patient was to undergo extended right posterior sectionectomy, but the operation plan was changed to conduct right hepatectomy with/without bile duct resection due to invasion of the right hepatic duct. After deciding to conduct ALPPS, we stopped further perihilar dissection and liver was transected. The right portal vein was ligated and Surgicel was densely packed between the transected hemilivers. There was rapid regeneration of the left liver on computed tomography follow-up, thus the second-stage right hepatectomy was conducted 10 days after the first-stage operation. Bile duct resection (BDR) was not performed due to heavy perihilar adhesion and inflammation, but fortunately tumor-negative bile duct resection margin was achieved after meticulous dissection. This patient recovered uneventfully and discharged nine days after the second-stage right hepatectomy. Thereafter he underwent concurrent chemoradiation therapy. He is doing well so far without evidence of tumor recurrence for 20 months after operation. In conclusion, this case suggests that ALPPS may be applied to an unexpected situation requiring PVE, but ALPPS is not recommend for treatment of perihilar malignancy requiring BDR.

ALPPS as a salvage procedure after insufficient future liver remnant hypertrophy following portal vein occlusion

BACKGROUND

A minimum future liver remnant (FLR) of 30% is required to avoid post hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). Portal vein occlusion (PVO) is the main strategy to induce hypertrophy of the FLR, but some patients will not reach sufficient FLR hypertrophy to enable resection. Recently ALPPS has emerged as a "Salvage Procedure" for PVO failure. The aim of this study was to report the short term outcomes of ALPPS following PVO failure.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients enrolled within the international ALPPS Registry between October 2012 and November 2015 (NCT01924741) was performed. Patients with documented PVO failure were included. The outcomes reported included feasibility, FLR growth rate and safety of ALPPS. Complications were recorded as per Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

From 510 patients enrolled in the Registry there were 22 patients with previous PVO failure. Two patients were excluded due to missing data and twenty patients were analysed. All of them completed the proposed ALPPS with a medium FLR increase of 88% (23-115%) between two stages and no 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

In experienced centers, ALPPS following PVO failure is feasible and safe. The FLR hypertrophy was similar to other ALPPS series. ALPPS is a potential rescue strategy after PVO failure.

Portal Vein Embolization: State-of-the-Art Technique and Options to Improve Liver Hypertrophy

Portal vein embolization (PVE) is associated with a high technical and clinical success rate for induction of future liver remnant hypertrophy prior to surgical resection. The degree of hypertrophy is variable and depends on multiple factors, including technical aspects of the procedure and underlying chronic liver disease. For patients with insufficient liver volume following PVE, adjunctive techniques, such as intra-portal administration of stem cells, dietary supplementation, transarterial embolization, and hepatic vein embolization, are available. Our purpose is to review the state-of-the-art technique associated with high-quality PVE and to discuss options to improve hypertrophy of the future liver remnant.

Preoperative Left Portal Vein Embolization for Left Liver Resection in High-Risk Hepatobiliary Malignancy Patients

BACKGROUND

Preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) is performed for right liver (RL) and sometimes left liver (LL) resection to prevent postoperative surgical complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 10 patients who underwent preoperative left PVE before LL resection for hepatobiliary malignancies along with 3 propensity score-matched control groups (n = 40 each).

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 68.6 ± 6.9 years. Diagnoses included intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 4), perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (n = 3), neuroendocrine carcinoma (n = 1), recurrent cholangiocarcinoma (n = 1), and inflammatory liver mass (n = 1). The reason for left PVE was a large LL >40 % of the total liver volume (TLV) with a major comorbidity or age > 70 years with a poor overall condition. All patients underwent preplanned operations, including LL resection at 1-3 weeks post PVE. The LL volume proportion of the TLV was 44.9 ± 1.7 and 40.7 ± 2.3 % before and after PVE; thus, 1-2 weeks post PVE, the kinetic shrinkage rate of the LL was 9.4 ± 3.3 %, and the kinetic growth rate of the RL was 7.6 ± 2.7 %. The overall surgical complication rates were 40, 50, and 39.2 % in the left PVE, large LL control, and all three control groups, respectively (p ≥ 0.727). In contrast, the adjusted rates of major complications were 0 % in the left PVE group versus 36.8 % (p = 0.040), 25.6 % (p = 0.123), and 15.8 % (p = 0.295) in the large-, medium-, and small-sized LL control groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience indicates that left PVE is safe and induces atrophy of the LL effectively. We suggest that it can be a useful option to reduce the risk of postoperative complications in elderly high-risk patients.

Extreme liver resections with preservation of segment 4 only

AIM

To evaluate safety and outcomes of a new technique for extreme hepatic resections with preservation of segment 4 only.

METHODS

The new method of extreme liver resection consists of a two-stage hepatectomy. The first stage involves a right hepatectomy with middle hepatic vein preservation and induction of left lobe congestion; the second stage involves a left lobectomy. Thus, the remnant liver is represented by the segment 4 only (with or without segment 1, ± S1). Five patients underwent the new two-stage hepatectomy (congestion group). Data from volumetric assessment made before the second stage was compared with that of 10 matched patients (comparison group) that underwent a single-stage right hepatectomy with middle hepatic vein preservation.

RESULTS

The two stages of the procedure were successfully carried out on all 5 patients. For the congestion group, the overall volume of the left hemiliver had increased 103% (mean increase from 438 mL to 890 mL) at 4 wk after the first stage of the procedure. Hypertrophy of the future liver remnant (i.e., segment 4 ± S1) was higher than that of segments 2 and 3 (144% vs 54%, respectively, P < 0.05). The median remnant liver volume-to-body weight ratio was 0.3 (range, 0.28-0.40) before the first stage and 0.8 (range, 0.45-0.97) before the second stage. For the comparison group, the rate of hypertrophy of the left liver after right hepatectomy with middle hepatic vein preservation was 116% ± 34%. Hypertrophy rates of segments 2 and 3 (123% ± 47%) and of segment 4 (108% ± 60%, P > 0.05) were proportional. The mean preoperative volume of segments 2 and 3 was 256 ± 64 cc and increased to 572 ± 257 cc after right hepatectomy. Mean preoperative volume of segment 4 increased from 211 ± 75 cc to 439 ± 180 cc after surgery.

CONCLUSION

The proposed method for extreme hepatectomy with preservation of segment 4 only represents a technique that could allow complete resection of multiple bilateral liver metastases.

Surgical Therapy of Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients with cholangiocarcinoma present with advanced disease that is often challenging to diagnose and to treat. The optimal preoperative evaluation requires a coordinated multidisciplinary approach. Surgical resection is the mainstay of therapy.

METHODS

This systematic review delineates surgical treatment strategies for cholangiocarcinoma in general as well as special considerations concerning the particular tumor localization. A literature search (see keywords) was conducted using PubMed and publications between 1990 and 2016 regarding resectable and advanced cholangiocarcinoma were reviewed. Selected studies were utilized based on their significance and innovation.

RESULTS

The type and extent of resection performed depends on the location of the cholangiocarcinoma within the liver or biliary tree and the extent of local tumor invasion. The common surgical strategy contains: (i) for intrahepatic tumors: tailored partial hepatectomy combined with extended hilar, suprapancreatic, celiac axis lymphadenectomy, (ii) for hilar tumors: complete resection of the extrahepatic biliary tree combined with extended hepatectomy inclusive of segment I, resection of portal vein bifurcation, and systematic N1/N2 lymphadenectomy, and (iii) for distal tumors: en bloc pancreatoduodenectomy combined with complete resection of the extrahepatic bile duct below the hepatic confluence and systematic N1/N2 lymphadenectomy. Pathologic confirmation is not required prior to resection. Preoperative biliary drainage and remnant liver volume augmentation are necessary in selected patients with intrahepatic or hilar cholangiocarcinoma considered for extensive liver resection.

CONCLUSION

Cure for cholangiocarcinoma requires complete surgical resection with histologically negative margins. R0 resection provides a satisfactory long-term outcome in patients with lymph node-negative stage. Neoadjuvant treatment followed by liver transplantation provides long-term survival in highly selected cases with localized, unresectable, lymph node-negative hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

The role of portal vein embolization in the surgical management of primary hepatobiliary cancers. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Primary liver and biliary cancers are very aggressive tumors. Surgical treatment is the main option for cure or long term survival. The main purpose of this systematic review is to underline the indications for portal vein embolization (PVE), in patients with inadequate future liver remnant (FLR) and to analyze other parameters such as resection rate, morbidity, mortality, survival after PVE and hepatectomy for primary hepatobiliary tumors. Also the role of trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) before PVE, is investigated.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was performed in Pub Med and the Cochrane Library from 01.01.1990 to 30.09.2015.

RESULTS

Forty articles were selected, including 2144 patients with a median age of 61 years. The median excision rate was 90% for hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) and 86% for hilar cholangiocarcinomas (HCs). The main indications for PVE in patients with HCC and presence of liver fibrosis or cirrhosis was FLR <40% when liver function was good (ICGR15 < 10%) and FLR < 50% when liver function was affected (ICGR15:10-20%). The combination of TACE and PVE increased hypertrophy rate and was associated with better overall survival and disease free survival and should be considered in advanced HCC tumors with inadequate FLR. In patients with HCs PVE was performed, after preoperative biliary drainage, when FLR was <40%, in the majority of studies, with very good post-operative outcome. However indications should be refined.

CONCLUSION

PVE before major hepatectomy allows resection in a patient group with advanced primary hepato-biliary tumors and inadequate FLR, with good long term survival.

Dynamic Change of Total Bilirubin after Portal Vein Embolization is Predictive of Major Complications and Posthepatectomy Mortality in Patients with Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate the role of dynamic change in total bilirubin after portal vein embolization (PVE) in predicting major complications and 30-day mortality in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained data of 64 HCCA patients who underwent PVE before hepatectomy in our institution was used. Total bilirubin and other parameters were measured daily in peri-PVE period. The difference between them and the baseline value from days 0-5 to day -1 (∆D1) and days 5-14 to day -1 (∆D2) were calculated. The relationship between ∆D1 and ∆D2 of total bilirubin and major complications as well as 30-day mortality was analyzed.

RESULTS

Out of 64 patients, 10 developed major complications (15.6 %) and 6 patients (9.3 %) had died within 30 days after surgery. The ∆D2 of total bilirubin after PVE was most significantly associated with major complications (P < 0.001) and 30-day mortality (P = 0.002). In addition, it was found to be an independent predictor of major complications after PVE (odds ratio (OR) = 1.050; 95 % CI 1.017-1.084). ASA >3 (OR = 12.048; 95 % CI 1.019-143.321), ∆D2 of total bilirubin (OR = 1.058; 95 % CI 1.007-1.112), and ∆D2 of prealbumin (OR = 0.975; 95 % CI 0.952-0.999) were associated with higher risk of 30-day mortality after PVE. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed that ∆D2 of total bilirubin were better predictors than ∆D1 for major complications (AUC (∆D2) 0.817; P = 0.002 vs. AUC (∆D1) 0.769; P = 0.007) and 30-day mortality (ACU(∆D2) 0.868; P = 0.003 vs. AUC(∆D1) 0.721;P = 0.076).

CONCLUSION

Patients with increased total bilirubin in 5-14 days after PVE may indicate a higher risk of major complications and 30-day mortality if the major hepatectomy were performed.

Portal vein embolization for induction of selective hepatic hypertrophy prior to major hepatectomy: rationale, techniques, outcomes and future directions

The ability to modulate the future liver remnant (FLR) is a key component of modern oncologic hepatobiliary surgery practice and has extended surgical candidacy for patients who may have been previously thought unable to survive liver resection. Multiple techniques have been developed to augment the FLR including portal vein embolization (PVE), associating liver partition and portal vein ligation (ALPPS), and the recently reported transhepatic liver venous deprivation (LVD). PVE is a well-established means to improve the safety of liver resection by redirecting blood flow to the FLR in an effort to selectively hypertrophy and ultimately improve functional reserve of the FLR. This article discusses the current practice of PVE with focus on summarizing the large number of published reports from which outcomes based practices have been developed. Both technical aspects of PVE including volumetry, approaches, and embolization agents; and clinical aspects of PVE including data supporting indications, and its role in conjunction with chemotherapy and transarterial embolization will be highlighted. PVE remains an important aspect of oncologic care; in large part due to the substantial foundation of information available demonstrating its clear clinical benefit for hepatic resection candidates with small anticipated FLRs.

Balloon dilation of jejunal afferent loop functional stenosis following left hepatectomy and hepaticojejunostomy long time after pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: a case report

We present a rare case of functional stenosis of the jejunal loop following left hepatectomy and hepaticojejunostomy long after pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD), which was successfully managed by balloon dilation. A 70-year-old Korean man had undergone PPPD 6 years before due to 1.8 cm-sized distal bile duct cancer. Sudden onset of obstructive jaundice led to diagnosis of recurrent bile duct cancer mimicking perihilar cholangiocarcinoma of type IIIb. After left portal vein embolization, the patient underwent resection of the left liver and caudate lobe and remnant extrahepatic bile duct. The pre-existing jejunal loop and choledochojejunostomy site were used again for new hepaticojejunostomy. The patient recovered uneventfully, but clamping of the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) tube resulted in cholangitis. Biliary imaging studies revealed that biliary passage into the afferent jejunal limb was significantly impaired. We performed balloon dilation of the afferent jejunal loop by using a 20 mm-wide balloon. Follow-up hepatobiliary scintigraphy showed gradual improvement in biliary excretion and the PTBD tube was removed at 1 month after balloon dilation. This very unusual condition was regarded as disuse atrophy of the jejunal loop, which was successfully managed by balloon dilation and intraluminal keeping of a large-bore PTBD tube for 1 month.