Portal vein arterialization: a possibility in cholangiocarcinomas infiltrating the right hepatic artery?

Postoperative Management of Portal Vein Arterialization: An Interdisciplinary Institutional Approach

Portal vein arterialization (PVA) is a surgical procedure that plays a crucial role in hepatic vascular salvage when hepatic artery flow restoration remains elusive. Dedicated diagnostic vascular imaging and the timely management of PVA shunts are paramount to preventing complications, such as portal hypertension and thrombosis. Regrettably, a lack of standardized postoperative management protocols for PVA has increased morbidity and mortality rates post-procedure. In response to this challenge, we developed a PVA standard operating procedure (SOP) tailored to the needs of interventional radiologists. This SOP is designed to harmonize postoperative care, fostering scientific comparability across cases. This concise brief report aims to offer radiologists valuable insights into the PVA technique and considerations for post-PVA care and foster effective interdisciplinary collaboration.

Comparing Liver Venous Deprivation and Portal Vein Embolization for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: Is It Time to Shift the Focus to Hepatic Functional Reserve Rather than Hypertrophy?

Purpose: Among liver hypertrophy technics, liver venous deprivation (LVD) has been recently introduced as an effective procedure to combine simultaneous portal inflow and hepatic outflow abrogation, raising growing clinical interest. The aim of this study is to investigate the role of LVD for preoperative optimization of future liver remnant (FLR) in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC), especially when compared with portal vein embolization (PVE). Methods: Between January 2013 and July 2022, all patients diagnosed with PHC and scheduled for preoperative optimization of FTR, through radiological hypertrophy techniques, prior to liver resection, were included. FTR volumetric assessment was evaluated at two distinct timepoints to track the progression of both early (T1, 10 days post-procedural) and late (T2, 21 days post-procedural) efficacy indicators. Post-procedural outcomes, including functional and volumetric analyses, were compared between the LVD and the PVE cohorts. Results: A total of 12 patients underwent LVD while 19 underwent PVE. No significant differences in either post-procedural or post-operative complications were found. Post-procedural FLR function, calculated with (99m) Tc-Mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy, and kinetic growth rate, at both timepoints, were greater in the LVD cohort (3.12 ± 0.55%/min/m2 vs. 2.46 ± 0.64%/min/m2, p = 0.041; 27.32 ± 16.86%/week (T1) vs. 15.71 ± 9.82%/week (T1) p < 0.001; 17.19 ± 9.88%/week (T2) vs. 9.89 ± 14.62%/week (T2) p = 0.034) when compared with the PVE cohort. Post-procedural FTR volumes were similar for both hypertrophy techniques. Conclusions: LVD is an effective procedure to effectively optimize FLR before liver resection for PHC. The faster growth rate combined with the improved FLR function, when compared to PVE alone, could maximize surgical outcomes by lowering post-hepatectomy liver failure rates.

Update on the Applications of Radiomics in Diagnosis, Staging, and Recurrence of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

This paper offers an assessment of radiomics tools in the evaluation of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for papers published in the English language no earlier than October 2022.

RESULTS

We found 236 studies, and 37 satisfied our research criteria. Several studies addressed multidisciplinary topics, especially diagnosis, prognosis, response to therapy, and prediction of staging (TNM) or pathomorphological patterns. In this review, we have covered diagnostic tools developed through machine learning, deep learning, and neural network for the recurrence and prediction of biological characteristics. The majority of the studies were retrospective.

CONCLUSIONS

It is possible to conclude that many performing models have been developed to make differential diagnosis easier for radiologists to predict recurrence and genomic patterns. However, all the studies were retrospective, lacking further external validation in prospective and multicentric cohorts. Furthermore, the radiomics models and the expression of results should be standardized and automatized to be applicable in clinical practice.