Effects of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy on liver function—an analysis of impact and functional recovery using the LiMAx test

Standardizing eligibility and patient selection for Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy: A Delphi consensus statement

INTRODUCTION

Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a procedure for minimally invasive drug administration in patients with peritoneal metastasis. Previous studies have emphasized the importance of uniformity in treatment protocols and standardization of this practice. This study aimed to reach a consensus on eligibility, patient selection, and choice of chemotherapy for PIPAC.

METHODS

A three-round modified Delphi study was conducted. A steering group formulated a list of baseline statements, addressing the objectives. The steering group consisted of seven expert surgical and medical oncologists. Available evidence and published key opinions were critically reviewed. An international expert panel scored those statements on a 4-point Likert scale. The statements were submitted electronically and anonymously. Consensus was reached if the agreement rate was ≥75%. A minimum Cronbach's alpha of >0.8 was set.

RESULTS

Forty-five (45/58; 77.6%) experts participated and completed all rounds. Experts were digestive surgeons (n = 28), surgical oncologists (n = 7), gynecologists (n = 5), medical oncologists (n = 4), and one clinical researcher. Their assessment of 81 preliminary statements in the first round resulted in 41 consolidated statements. In round two, consensus was reached on 40 statements (40/41; 97.6%) with a consensus of ≥80% for each individual statement. In the third round, 40 statements were unanimously approved as definitive. The choice of first- and second-line chemotherapy remained controversial and could not reach consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

This International Delphi study provides practical guidance on eligibility and patient selection for PIPAC. Ongoing trial data and long-term results that could contribute to the further standardization of PIPAC are eagerly awaited.

Perioperative LiMAx Test Analysis: Impact of Portal Vein Embolisation, Chemotherapy and Major Liver Resection

BACKGROUND

Postoperative liver failure (PLF) is a severe complication after major liver resection (MLR). To increase the safety of patients, clinical bedside tests are of great importance. However, limitations of their applicability and validity impair their value.

METHODS

Preoperative measurements of the liver maximum capacity (LiMAx) were performed in n = 40 patients, who underwent MLR (≥3 segments). Matched postoperative LiMAx was measured in n = 21 patients. Liver function was compared between pretreated patients (n = 11 with portal vein embolisation (PVE) and n = 19 patients with preoperative chemotherapy) and therapy naïve patients. The LiMAx values were compared with liver-specific blood parameters and volumetric analysis.

RESULTS

In total, n = 40 patients were enrolled in this study. The majority of patients (n = 33; 82.5%) had high preoperative LiMAx values (>315 µg/kg/h), while only seven patients (17.5%) had medium values (140-315 µg/kg/h), and none of the patients had low values (<140 µg/kg/h). A comparison of pretreated patients (with PVE and/or chemotherapy) and therapy naïve patients showed no significant difference in the preoperative LiMAx values (p > 0.05). The preoperative LiMAx values were significantly higher than the matched postoperative values on postoperative day 1 (p < 0.0001). A comparison between the expected and measured postoperative LiMAx showed a difference (≥10%) in 7 out of 13 patients (53.8%). After an initial postoperative decrease in the LiMAx, the patients without complications (n = 12) showed a continuous increase until 14 days after surgery. In the patients with postoperative complications, a decrease in the LiMAx was associated with a prolonged recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients undergoing MLR within the 0.5% rule, which is the clinical gold standard, the LiMAx values do not offer any additional information. Additionally, the LiMAx may have reflected liver function, but it did not deliver additional information regarding postoperative liver recovery. The clinical use of LiMAx might be relevant in selected patients beyond the 0.5% rule.

E-AHPBA-ESSO-ESSR Innsbruck consensus guidelines for preoperative liver function assessment before hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality after liver surgery. Standardized assessment of preoperative liver function is crucial to identify patients at risk. These European consensus guidelines provide guidance for preoperative patient assessment.

METHODS

A modified Delphi approach was used to achieve consensus. The expert panel consisted of hepatobiliary surgeons, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and hepatologists. The guideline process was supervised by a methodologist and reviewed by a patient representative. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. Evidence assessment and statement development followed Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology.

RESULTS

Based on 271 publications covering 4 key areas, 21 statements (at least 85 per cent agreement) were produced (median level of evidence 2- to 2+). Only a few systematic reviews (2++) and one RCT (1+) were identified. Preoperative liver function assessment should be considered before complex resections, and in patients with suspected or known underlying liver disease, or chemotherapy-associated or drug-induced liver injury. Clinical assessment and blood-based scores reflecting liver function or portal hypertension (for example albumin/bilirubin, platelet count) aid in identifying risk of PHLF. Volumetry of the future liver remnant represents the foundation for assessment, and can be combined with indocyanine green clearance or LiMAx® according to local expertise and availability. Functional MRI and liver scintigraphy are alternatives, combining FLR volume and function in one examination.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines reflect established methods to assess preoperative liver function and PHLF risk, and have uncovered evidence gaps of interest for future research.

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the difficulty and outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic major liver resections for colorectal liver metastases: A propensity-score and coarsened exact-matched controlled study

BACKGROUND

Minimal invasive liver resections are a safe alternative to open surgery. Different scoring systems considering different risks factors have been developed to predict the risks associated with these procedures, especially challenging major liver resections (MLR). However, the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAT) on the difficulty of minimally invasive MLRs remains poorly investigated.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic and robotic MLRs for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) performed across 57 centers between January 2005 to December 2021 were included in this analysis. Patients who did or did not receive NAT were matched based on 1:1 coarsened exact and 1:2 propensity-score matching. Pre- and post-matching comparisons were performed.

RESULTS

In total, the data of 5189 patients were reviewed. Of these, 1411 procedures were performed for CRLM, and 1061 cases met the inclusion criteria. After excluding 27 cases with missing data on NAT, 1034 patients (NAT: n = 641; non-NAT: n = 393) were included. Before matching, baseline characteristics were vastly different. Before matching, the morbidity rate was significantly higher in the NAT-group (33.2% vs. 27.2%, p-value = 0.043). No significant differences were seen in perioperative outcomes after the coarsened exact matching. After the propensity-score matching, statistically significant higher blood loss (mean, 300 (SD 128-596) vs. 250 (SD 100-400) ml, p-value = 0.047) but shorter hospital stay (mean, 6 [4-8] vs. 6 [5-9] days, p-value = 0.043) were found in the NAT-group.

CONCLUSION

The current study demonstrated that NAT had minimal impact on the difficulty and outcomes of minimally-invasive MLR for CRLM.

Liver Function-How to Screen and to Diagnose: Insights from Personal Experiences, Controlled Clinical Studies and Future Perspectives

Acute and chronic liver disease is a relevant problem worldwide. Liver function plays a crucial role in the course of liver diseases not only in estimating prognosis but also with regard to therapeutic interventions. Within this review, we discuss and evaluate different tools from screening to diagnosis and give insights from personal experiences, controlled clinical studies and future perspectives. Finally, we offer our novel diagnostic algorithm to screen patients with presumptive acute or chronic liver disease in the daily clinical routine.

The LiMAx Test as Selection Criteria in Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery

Background: Liver failure is a crucial predictor for relevant morbidity and mortality after hepatic surgery. Hence, a good patient selection is mandatory. We use the LiMAx test for patient selection for major or minor liver resections in robotic and laparoscopic liver surgery and share our experience here. Patients and methods: We identified patients in the Magdeburg registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS) who underwent robotic or laparoscopic minor or major liver surgery and received a LiMAx test for preoperative evaluation of the liver function. This cohort was divided in two groups: patients with normal (LiMAx normal) and decreased (LiMAx decreased) liver function measured by the LiMAx test. Results: Forty patients were selected from the MD-MILS regarding the selection criteria (LiMAx normal, n = 22 and LiMAx decreased, n = 18). Significantly more major liver resections were performed in the LiMAx normal vs. the LiMAx decreased group (13 vs. 2; p = 0.003). Hence, the mean operation time was significantly longer in the LiMAx normal vs. the LiMAx decreased group (356.6 vs. 228.1 min; p = 0.003) and the intraoperative blood transfusion significantly higher in the LiMAx normal vs. the LiMAx decreased group (8 vs. 1; p = 0.027). There was no significant difference between the LiMAx groups regarding the length of hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss, liver surgery related morbidity or mortality, and resection margin status. Conclusion: The LiMAx test is a helpful and reliable tool to precisely determine the liver function capacity. It aids in accurate patient selection for major or minor liver resections in minimally invasive liver surgery, which consequently serves to improve patients’ safety. In this way, liver resections can be performed safely, even in patients with reduced liver function, without negatively affecting morbidity, mortality and the resection margin status, which is an important predictive oncological factor.

Performance of the Liver Maximum Function Capacity Test, Fibrinogen, and Transient Elastography in Patients with Acute Liver Injury

BACKGROUND

Acute liver failure (ALF) occurs as a rare, sudden, extensive loss of liver function in a previously healthy liver. In advanced cases, ALF may require liver transplantation (LT). Available prognostic parameters have limited accuracy to decide, which patient to consider for LT. The liver maximum function capacity test (LiMAx) can accurately determine liver function and was assessed as predictor of survival, along with coagulation parameters and liver stiffness in nonacetaminophen-induced ALF.

METHODS

Various liver function tests, including LiMAx measurements, coagulation factors, and transient elastography (TE), were analyzed retrospectively for associations with clinical outcome in 34 patients with ALF or acute hepatitis (AH). Data were compared between patients with spontaneous recovery (SR) and non-SR (3-month mortality/LT; NSR).

RESULTS

The analysis included 34 patients (22 ALF, 12 AH; 19 males, 15 females; age 36.7 ± 14.6 years) with drug-induced liver injury (DILI) (n = 12), autoimmune hepatitis (AIH; n = 13), AIH-DILI overlap (n = 1), viral (n = 9), or cryptogenic liver failure (n = 1). Thirty-one patients recovered spontaneously, 2 patients died, and 1 patient underwent LT. The LiMAx was 197.6 (±68.4) for SR versus 92.33 (±65.0) for NSR (p = 0.0157). Fibrinogen was significantly lower in patients with NSR than in SR patients (209.0 vs. 106.3; p = 0.02). Mean liver stiffness measured by TE was 39.3 for NSR and 17.3 for SR (p = 0.26). KCC was fulfilled in only 4 patients (3 SR, 1 NSR). LiMAx results correlated positively with serum fibrinogen and antithrombin III concentrations and correlated negatively with liver stiffness. No other analyzed factor could differentiate between SR and NSR.

CONCLUSION

Decision-making in ALF remains challenging. LiMAx and fibrinogen might predict the prognosis in patients with nonacetaminophen-induced ALF and in combination could be feasible tools to decide if LT is necessary.

Oxaliplatin-induced hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome

Oxaliplatin (OXA) is a third-generation platinum anticancer drug that is mainly used for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Of note, hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (HSOS) induced by OXA has become a key concern for patients with CRC receiving chemotherapy with OXA in recent years. Splenomegaly, thrombocytopenia, abnormal liver function, and portal hypertension are some of the main clinical characteristics seen in patients with OXA-induced HSOS. Previous studies have suggested that oxidative stress, inflammatory damage, liver fibrosis, and platelet aggregation and adhesion may be involved in the pathogenesis of OXA-induced HSOS. Currently, there are no specific drugs for prevention and treatment of OXA-induced HSOS. In this review, we summarized the epidemiology, pathological characteristics, clinical predictive indicators, related mechanisms, possible prevention and treatment of OXA-related HSOS.

Liver function, quantified by the LiMAx test, as a predictor for the clinical outcome of critically ill patients treated with linezolid

BACKGROUND

Critically ill patients commonly suffer from infections that require antimicrobial therapy. In previous studies, liver dysfunction was shown to have an essential impact on the dose selection in these patients. This pilot study aims to assess the influence of liver dysfunction, measured by the novel LiMAx test, on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients treated with linezolid.

METHODS

Twenty-nine critically ill patients were included and treated with linezolid. Indications for linezolid therapy were secondary or tertiary peritonitis (46.7%), bloodstream infection (6.7%) and 46.7% were other infections with gram-positive bacteria. Linezolid Cmin, maximal liver function capacity (LiMAx test) and plasma samples were collected while linezolid therapy was in a steady-state condition. Furthermore, potential factors for the clinical outcome were investigated using logistic regression analysis. Clinical cure was defined as the resolution or significant improvement of clinical symptoms without using additional antibiotic therapy or intervention.

RESULTS

Cured patients presented lower median linezolid Cmin yet a significantly higher mean LiMAx-value compared to the clinical failure group (1.9 mg/L vs. 5.1 mg/L) (349 μg/kg/h vs. 131 μg/kg/h). In the logistic regression model, LiMAx < 178 μg/kg/h was the only independent predictor of clinical failure with a sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 93%.

CONCLUSIONS

The LiMAx test predicts clinical failure more precisely than linezolid trough levels in critically ill surgical patients. Therefore liver failure may have a stronger impact on the outcome of critically ill surgical patients than low linezolid Cmin. While linezolid Cmin failed to predict patient's outcome, LiMAx results were the only independent predictor of clinical failure.

Prospective study of change in liver function and fat in patients with colorectal liver metastases undergoing preoperative chemotherapy: protocol for the CLiFF Study

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative chemotherapy in patients undergoing resection for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) improves oncological outcomes. However, chemotherapy-associated liver injury (occurring in two patterns: vascular and fat deposition) is a real clinical concern prior to hepatic resection. After major liver resection, regeneration of the residual liver is a prerequisite for recovery and avoidance of liver failure, but this regenerative capacity may be hindered by chemotherapy. Thus, there is a need to predict for this serious complication. Over the past two decades, several tests and derived indices have been developed, which have failed to achieve clinical utility, mainly as they were indirect measurements of liver function. Here, we will use a novel test of liver function (the liver maximum capacity (LiMAx) test), and measure liver fat using MRI.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This prospective study will assess changes in liver function longitudinally, measured by the LiMAx test, and liver fat, measured by advanced MRI using both MR spectroscopy and the modified Dixon method, in up to 35 patients undergoing preoperative chemotherapy for CLM. The primary outcomes will be the changes in liver function and fat compared with baseline prechemotherapy measurements. Secondary outcome measures include: routinely measured liver function blood tests, anthropometric measurements, postoperative histology and digital quantification of fat, postoperative complications and mortality and quality of life.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by a National Health Service Research Ethics Committee and registered with the Health Research Authority. Dissemination will be via international and national conferences and the National Institute for Health Research network. Manuscripts will be published.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This study is registered online at www.clinicaltrials.gov (registration number NCT03562234).

Hepatic steatosis in patients undergoing resection of colorectal liver metastases: A target for prehabilitation? A narrative review

The prevalence of elevated intra-hepatic fat (IHF) is increasing in the Western world, either alone as hepatic steatosis (HS) or in conjunction with inflammation (steatohepatitis). These changes to the hepatic parenchyma are an independent risk factor for post-operative morbidity following liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). As elevated IHF and colorectal malignancy share similar risk factors for development it is unsurprisingly frequent in this cohort. In patients undergoing resection IHF may be elevated due to excess adiposity or its elevation may be induced by neoadjuvant chemotherapy, termed chemotherapy associated steatosis (CAS). Additionally, chemotherapy is implicated in the development of inflammation termed chemotherapy associated steatohepatitis (CASH). Following cessation of chemotherapy, patients awaiting resection have a 4-6 week washout period prior to resection that is a window for prehabilitation prior to surgery. In patients with NAFLD dietary and pharmacological interventions can reduce IHF within this timeframe but this approach to modifying IHF is untested in this population. In this review, the aetiology of CAS and CASH is reviewed with recommendations to identify those at risk. We also focus on the post-chemotherapy washout period, reviewing dietary interventions applied to the metabolic population and suggest this window may be used as an opportunity to optimise IHF with such a regime as part of a pre-operative prehabilitation programme to produce improved patient outcomes.

Effect of lipid metabolism disorder on liver function in patients with malignant tumors after chemotherapy: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

This study aims to investigate the effect of lipid metabolism disorder on liver function in patients with malignant tumors after chemotherapy.

METHOD

A total of 428 patients with malignant tumors with normal liver function in our hospital between May 2013 to June 2018 were divided into an observation group (lipid metabolism disorder, n = 265) and control group (normal lipid metabolism, n = 163). The lipid metabolism levels and liver damage of the two groups were compared before and after chemotherapy.

RESULTS

No significant differences in age, gender, body mass index, tumor types, history of surgery, levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT; an indicator of liver function), and chemotherapy regimen were observed between the two groups. However, the observation group showed increased levels of total cholesterol (P = 0.000), triglycerides (P = 0.000), and low-density lipoprotein (P = 0.01), as well as decreased levels of high-density lipoprotein (P = 0.000) before chemotherapy compared with the control group. Furthermore, patients with lipid metabolism disorders were more likely to develop abnormal liver function after chemotherapy. Moreover, mixed lipid metabolism disorder was more likely to cause severe liver damage after chemotherapy. Additionally, the number of patients with lipid metabolism disorders after chemotherapy (n = 367) was significantly increased compared with before chemotherapy (n = 265) (P < 0.01), indicating that chemotherapy might induce or aggravate an abnormal lipid metabolism.

CONCLUSIONS

After receiving chemotherapy, patients with malignant tumors presenting lipid metabolism disorders are more prone to liver damage and lipid metabolism disorders than patients with a normal lipid metabolism.

Practical guidelines for the use of technetium-99m mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy in the quantitative assessment of liver function

Surgical resection remains the most important curative treatment for liver tumors; however, it harbors the risk of developing posthepatectomy liver failure. The principal risk is associated with the quality and quantity of the future remnant liver. Therefore, preoperative assessment of the future remnant liver is essential in patients scheduled for major liver resection. Technetium-99m mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS) in combination with single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography is increasingly applied for the quantitative assessment of liver function before major liver surgery. This dynamic quantitative liver function test allows assessment of both total and regional liver function, represented by the hepatic mebrofenin uptake rate, thereby assisting in adequate patient selection. Since routine implementation, it has shown to reduce the risk of posthepatectomy liver failure and has proven to be more valuable than volumetric assessment. To ensure optimal and reproducible results that can be compared across different centers, it is crucial to standardize the methodology and ensure practical applicability of this technique, thereby facilitating external validation and multicenter trials. This article provides an overview of the HBS methodology used at some of the largest HBS centers and covers practical details in the application of HBS for the quantitative scintigraphic assessment of liver function.

Liver maximum capacity (LiMAx) test as a helpful prognostic tool in acute liver failure with sepsis: a case report

Background

Acute liver failure (ALF) is a life-threatening entity particularly when infectious complications worsen the clinical course. Urgent liver transplantation (LT) is frequently the only curative treatment. However, in some cases, recovery is observed under conservative treatment. Therefore, prognostic tools for estimating course of the disease are of great clinical interest. Since laboratory parameters sometimes lack sensitivity and specificity, enzymatic liver function measured by liver maximum capacity (LiMAx) test may offer novel and valuable additional information in this setting.

Case presentation

We here report the case of a formerly healthy 20-year old male caucasian patient who was admitted to our clinic for ALF of unknown origin in December 2017. Laboratory parameters confirmed the diagnosis with an initial MELD score of 28 points. Likewise, enzymatic liver function was significantly impaired with a value of 147 [> 315] μg/h/kg. Clinical and biochemical analyses for viral-, autoimmune-, or drug-induced hepatitis were negative. Liver synthesis parameters further deteriorated reaching a MELD score of 40 points whilst clinical course was complicated by septic pneumonia leading to severe hepatic encephalopathy grade III-IV, finally resulting in mechanical ventilation of the patient. Interestingly, although clinical course and laboratory data suggested poor outcome, serial LiMAx test revealed improvement of the enzymatic liver function at this time point increasing to 169 μg/h/kg. Clinical condition and laboratory data slowly improved likewise, however with significant time delay of 11 days. Finally, the patient could be dismissed from our clinic after 37 days.

Conclusion

Estimating prognosis in patients with ALF is challenging by use of the established scores. In our case, improvement of enzymatic liver function measured by the LiMAx test was the first parameter predicting beneficial outcome in a patient with ALF complicated by sepsis.

Randomized clinical trial comparing liver resection with and without perioperative assessment of liver function

Background

Liver function tests may help to predict outcomes after liver surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact on postoperative outcome and patient management of perioperative liver function testing using the LiMAx^® test.

Methods

A multicentre RCT was conducted in six academic liver centres. Patients with intrahepatic tumours scheduled for open liver resection of at least one segment were eligible. Patients were randomized to undergo additional perioperative liver function tests (LiMAx^® group) or standard care (control group). Patients in the intervention arm received two perioperative LiMAx^® tests, one before the operation for surgical planning and another after surgery for postoperative management. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients transferred directly to a general ward. Secondary endpoints were severe complications, length of hospital stay (LOS) and length of intermediate care/ICU (LOI) stay.

Results

Some 148 patients were randomized. Thirty‐six of 58 patients (62 per cent) in the LiMAx^® group were transferred directly to a general ward, compared with one of 60 (2 per cent) in the control group (P < 0·001). The rate of severe complications was significantly lower in the LiMAx^® group (14 per cent versus 28 per cent in the control group; P = 0·022). LOS and LOI were significantly shorter in the LiMAx^® group (LOS: 10·6 versus 13·3 days respectively, P = 0·012; LOI: 0·8 versus 3·0 days, P < 0·001).

Conclusion

Perioperative use of the LiMAx^® test improves postoperative management and reduces the incidence of severe complications after liver surgery. Registration number: NCT01785082 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov).

Functional considerations in ALPPS - consequences for clinical management

BACKGROUND

Since perioperative morbidity and mortality in ALPPS are extraordinarily high, a deeper understanding of actual liver function during the procedure is essential to make the approach safer.

METHODS

Data from 17 patients who underwent ALLPS were analyzed regarding their course of liver function capacity assessed with the LiMAx test and compared to an equal-sized matched cohort of patients that underwent PVE.

RESULTS

A comparison of LiMAx prior to and following ALPPS Step I (330 [258-385] vs. 197 [144-224] μg/kg/h, p = 0.003) and prior to and following PVE (386 [330-519] vs. 378 [336-455] μg/kg/h, p = 0.534) demonstrated a significant drop in function after ALLPS. A volume/function analysis predicting FLR function regarding step II revealed an excellent correlation of predicted versus assessed postoperative liver function with a mean relative difference of 9 (-6 to 18)% and an ICC of 0.905 (123 [74-138] vs. 107 [77-175] μg/kg/h, p = 0.310).

CONCLUSIONS

We provide evidence that liver function capacity is significantly impaired due to ALPPS step I. This is particularly notable when compared to PVE. Our data also shows that the portal ligated liver lobe still continues to contribute significantly to overall liver function. Therefore, FLR function after step II is still predictable by volume/function analysis.

LiMAx Test Improves Diagnosis of Chemotherapy-Associated Liver Injury Before Resection of Colorectal Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy of colorectal liver metastases (CLMs) prior to liver resection implies the risk of chemotherapy-associated liver injury, leading to increased postoperative morbidity and mortality OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the LiMAx (liver maximum capacity) test for diagnosis of chemotherapy-associated liver injury.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of patients with CLMs, prior to liver resection. We performed preoperative assessment of liver function using biochemical parameters and the LiMAx test. The individual history of chemotherapy within 12 months, including regimen, number of cycles, and therapy-free interval were collected, and histopathological evaluation of tumor-free liver tissue was performed in resected patients.

RESULTS

A total of 204 patients were included, of whom 127 (62%) had received previous chemotherapy. The LiMAx test was worse after chemotherapy (340 ± 95 vs. 391 ± 82 µg/kg/h; p < 0.001). Impaired LiMAx results (<315 µg/kg/h) were determined in 49% of patients after chemotherapy, and no effects of chemotherapy, liver steatosis or fibrosis on biochemical parameters were observed. LiMAx impairment was dependent on the number of oxaliplatin cycles, the therapy-free interval, and obesity in multivariate analysis. In addition, the LiMAx test was worse in patients with relevant steatosis, fibrosis and steatohepatitis. Patients with an impaired LiMAx showed sufficient regeneration during chemotherapy cessation when surgery was postponed (272 ± 57 - 348 ± 72 µg/kg/h; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

The LiMAx test enables non-invasive preoperative diagnosis of chemotherapy-associated liver injury. Preoperative performance of the LiMAx test can augment surgical strategy and timing of surgery after previous chemotherapy, thus avoiding increased postoperative morbidity.