The extent of resection influences outcome following hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases

Extended Right Hepatectomy following Clearance of the Left Liver Lobe and Portal Vein Embolization for Curatively Intended Treatment of Extensive Bilobar Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Single-Center Case Series

BACKGROUND

Two-staged hepatectomy (TSH) including portal vein embolization (PVE) may offer surgical treatment for extensive bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and outcomes of extended right hepatectomy (ERH) within TSH including PVE for patients with extended CRLM.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data of patients who underwent TSH for extended CRLM between 2015 and 2021 at our institution. Clearance of the left liver lobe (clear-up, CU) associated with PVE was followed by ERH.

RESULTS

Minimally invasive (n = 12, 46%, MIH) or open hepatectomy (n = 14, 54%, OH) was performed. Postoperative major morbidity and 90-day mortality were 54% and 0%. Three-year overall survival was 95%. Baseline characteristics, postoperative and long-term outcomes were comparable between MIH and OH. However, hospital stay was significantly shorter after MIH (8 vs. 15 days, p = 0.008). Additionally, the need for intraoperative transfusions tended to be lower in the MIH group (17% vs. 50%, p = 0.110).

CONCLUSIONS

ERH following CU and PVE for extended CRLM is feasible and safe in laparoscopic and open approaches. MIH for ERH may result in shorter postoperative hospital stays. Further high-volume, multicenter studies are required to evaluate the potential superiority of MIH.

Clinical outcomes of parenchymal-sparing versus anatomic resection for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The advantages of parenchymal-sparing resection (PSR) over anatomic resection (AR) of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remain controversial. Here, we aim to evaluate their safety and efficacy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term perioperative outcomes and long-term oncological outcomes for PSR and AR were performed by searching Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were considered eligible (totally 7228 patients: AR, n = 3154 (43.6%) vs. PSR, n = 4074 (56.4%)). Overall survival (OS, HR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.95-1.22, P = 0.245) and disease-free survival (DFS, HR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.94-1.28, P = 0.259) were comparable between the two groups. There were no significant differences in 3-year OS, 5-year OS, 3-year DFS, 5-year DFS, 3-year liver recurrence-free survival (liver-RFS) and 5-year liver-RFS. In terms of perioperative outcome, patients undergoing AR surgery were associated with prolonged operation time (WMD = 51.48 min, 95% CI: 29.03-73.93, P < 0.001), higher amount of blood loss (WMD = 189.92 ml, 95% CI: 21.39-358.45, P = 0.027), increased intraoperative blood transfusion rate (RR = 2.24, 95% CI: 1.54-3.26, P < 0.001), prolonged hospital stay (WMD = 1.00 day, 95% CI: 0.34-1.67, P = 0.003), postoperative complications (RR = 2.28, 95% CI: 1.88-2.77, P < 0.001), and 90-day mortality (RR = 3.08, 95% CI: 1.88-5.03, P < 0.001). While PSR surgery was associated with positive resection margins (RR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.61-0.97, P = 0.024), intrahepatic recurrence (RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.82-0.98, P = 0.021) and repeat hepatectomy (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.55-0.76, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Considering relatively acceptable heterogeneity, PSR had better perioperative outcomes without compromising oncological long-term outcomes. However, these findings must be carefully interpreted, requiring more supporting evidence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023445332.

Color Doppler Intraoperative Ultrasonography Evaluation of Hepatic Hemodynamics for Laparoscopic Parenchyma-Sparing Liver Resections

BACKGROUND

Tumors involving the hepatic veins at the hepatocaval confluence often require major or extended hepatectomies. Color Doppler intraoperative ultrasonography (CD-IOUS) evaluation of liver hemodynamics to assess congestion in the veno-occlusive parenchyma provides real-time information helpful in parenchyma-sparing surgery (PSS). This study evaluated the feasibility of CD-IOUS in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resections for such tumors and its capacity to allow PSS.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection for tumors at the hepatocaval confluence requiring resection of at least one hepatic vein between January 2010 and August 2020 were included. Patients were divided in 3 groups: (A) patients not assessed with CD-IOUS because it would not change the scheduled operation; patients assessed with CD-IOUS and treated with (B) PSS and (C) no-PSS. Portal blood flow in the veno-occlusive parenchyma was assessed using CD-IOUS at baseline and after clamping the concerned hepatic vein.

RESULTS

The study included 43 out of 47 patients with tumors at the hepatocaval confluence. There were 19 patients in group A. Among patients assessed with CD-IOUS, the resection of 26 hepatic veins was planned: 25 were resected, and 1 was spared. Group B included 22 patients treated with PSS, whereas group C included 2 patients with resection of all veno-occlusive parenchyma. No postoperative mortality or major morbidity was observed. The median length of hospital stay was 5 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Selected patients with tumors involving the hepatocaval confluence can be safely approached using laparoscopy. CD-IOUS evaluation of the veno-occlusive area can increase the success rate of PSS.

Impact of sarcopenia on outcomes of patients undergoing liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have indicated that sarcopenia is associated with poor post-operative outcomes in liver cancer patients, but the studies are limited by confounding from mixed diseases, retrospective data, and non-standardized measurement methods. At present, there is no research with both muscle mass and strength as predictors for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) outcomes. We studied the impact of sarcopenia on post-operative outcomes in HCC patients in a cohort study designed according to the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People standards.

METHODS

A total of 781 consecutive patients admitted to our centre were registered from May 2020 to August 2021. All participants submitted questionnaires and underwent handgrip strength, chair stand test, physical performance, and computed tomographic evaluation. Then, they were divided into three groups according to muscle mass and strength: Group A (reduced muscle mass and strength), Group B (reduced muscle strength or reduced muscle mass), and Group C (normal muscle mass and strength). The baseline data and post-operative outcomes were compared and analysed. The primary outcome variable in this study was the presence of a major post-operative complication, and the secondary outcome was the 90-day re-admission rate.

RESULTS

A total of 155 patients [median age, 60.00 (IQR, 51.00-66.00) years; 20 females (12.90%)] were included after strict exclusion. The mean (SD) BMI was 23.37 ± 0.23 kg/m² . The mean (SD) SMI of all participants was 47.05 ± 0.79 cm² /m² , and the mean (SD) handgrip strength was 32.84 ± 0.69 kg. Among them, 77 (49.68%) patients underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy, and 73 (47.10%) patients received major hepatectomy. Regarding the post-operative results, Group A had a higher rate of major complications [40.91% (9 of 22) vs. 11.94% (8 of 67) in Group B and 6.06 (4 of 66) in Group C; P = 0.001], higher rate of blood transfusion (77.27% vs. 46.27% in Group B and 42.42% in Group C; P = 0.015), higher hospitalization expenses (P = 0.001), and longer hospital stay (P < 0.001). There was no difference in 90-day re-admission rates among the three groups. Sarcopenia (hazard ratio, 10.735; 95% CI, 2.547-45.244; P = 0.001) and open surgery (hazard ratio, 4.528; 95% CI, 1.425-14.387; P = 0.010) were independent risk factors associated with major complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Sarcopenia is associated with adverse outcomes after liver resection for HCC. It should be evaluated upon admission to classify high-risk patients and reduce the risk of major complications.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Venous Thromboembolism Following Hepatectomy for Colorectal Metastases: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) following hepatectomy for colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases is unclear. These patients may represent a vulnerable population due to increased tumour burden. We aim to identify the risk of VTE development in routine clinical practice among patients with resected CRC liver metastases, the associated risk factors, and its impact on survival.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of Ontario patients undergoing hepatectomy for CRC metastases between 2002 and 2009 using linked universal healthcare databases. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between patient characteristics and VTE risk at 30 and 90-days after surgery. Cox proportional-hazards regression was used to estimate the association between VTE and adjusted cancer specific (CSS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

1310 patients were included with a mean age of 63 ± 11. 62% were male. 51% had one metastatic deposit. Major hepatectomy occurred in 64%. VTE occurred in 4% within 90 days of liver resection. Only longer length of stay was associated with VTE development (OR 6.88 (2.57-18.43), p <0.001 for 15-21 days versus 0-7 days). 38% of VTEs were diagnosed after discharge, comprising 1.52% of the total cohort. VTE was not associated with inferior CSS or OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk of VTE development in this population is similar to those undergoing hepatectomy for other indications, and to the risk following other cancer site resections where post-operative extended VTE prophylaxis is currently recommended. The number of VTEs occurring after discharge suggests there may be a role for extended VTE prophylaxis.

Robotic minor hepatectomy: optimizing outcomes and cost of care

BACKGROUND

The advantages of robotic liver surgery are strongest for minor resections, where incision size drives recovery time, but cost remains a concern. We hypothesized that patients who underwent robotic minor liver resections would have superior peri-operative outcomes resulting in decreased cost.

METHODS

We queried the medical record and cost data for patients who underwent open or robotic minor (1-2 segment) liver resection from 1/2016-8/2019. Financial data were normalized to Medicare reimbursements.

RESULTS

There were 87 patients who underwent minor liver resections (robotic n = 46, open n = 41). Specimen size (173 ± 203 vs 257 ± 481 cm³), surgical duration (233 ± 87 vs 227 ± 83 min), estimated blood loss (187 ± 236 vs 194 ± 165 mL), and margin status (89% vs 93% R0) were similar for robotic and open resections respectively, yet complications (3/46, 7% vs 10/41, 24%, p = 0.02) and length of stay (2.2 ± 2.2 vs 6.2 ± 2.9, p < 0.001) were significantly lower for patients who underwent robotic resection. These factors contributed to minor robotic liver resections costing $534 less than open resections ($3597 ± 1823 vs $4131 ± 1532, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing robotic minor hepatectomy had superior peri-operative outcomes resulting in lower total cost of care when compared to open minor hepatectomy. Financial considerations should not adversely influence selection of a robotic approach for minor hepatectomy.

Anatomical Versus Nonanatomical Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastasis

BACKGROUND

Anatomical resection (AR) for colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) is disputable. We investigated the impact of AR on short-term outcomes and survival in CLM patients.

METHODS

Patients having hepatectomy with AR or nonanatomical resection (NAR) for CLM were reviewed. Comparison was made between AR and NAR groups. Group comparison was performed again after propensity score matching with ratio 1:1.

RESULTS

AR group (n = 234 vs n = 89 in NAR group) had higher carcinoembryonic antigen level (20 vs 7.8 ng/mL, p ≤ 0.001), more blood loss (0.65 vs 0.2 L, p < 0.001), more transfusions (19.2% vs 3.4%, p = 0.001), longer operation (339.5 vs 180 min, p < 0.001), longer hospital stay (9 vs 6 days, p < 0.001), more tumors (p < 0.001), larger tumors (4 vs 2 cm, p < 0.001), more bilobar involvement (20.9% vs 7.9%, p = 0.006), and comparable survival (overall, p = 0.721; disease-free, p = 0.695). After propensity score matching, each group had 70 patients, with matched tumor number, tumor size, liver function, and tumor marker. AR group had more open resections (85.7% vs 68.6%, p = 0.016), more blood loss (0.556 vs 0.3 L, p = 0.001), more transfusions (17.1% vs 4.3%, p = 0.015), longer operation (310 vs 180 min, p < 0.001), longer hospital stay (8.5 vs 6 days, p = 0.002), comparable overall survival (p = 0.819), and comparable disease-free survival (p = 0.855).

CONCLUSION

Similar disease-free survival and overall survival of CLM patients were seen with the use of AR and NAR. However, AR may entail a more eventful postoperative course. NAR with margin should be considered whenever feasible.

Anatomic Resection Is Not Required for Colorectal Liver Metastases with RAS Mutation

BACKGROUND

Non-anatomic resection (NAR) has emerged as a safe and effective technique for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). More recently, RAS mutation has been identified as an important indicator of aggressive disease, which may require anatomic resection (AR). In this retrospective study, we compared the long-term outcomes of AR versus NAR in CRLM patients with and without RAS mutations.

METHODS

Patients with known RAS mutation status who underwent AR or NAR for CRLM between 2006 and 2016 were included. Differences in baseline characteristics were adjusted using 1:1 propensity score matching, including the most important factors that contributed to the decision to use the resection technique. Overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and liver-specific recurrence-free survival (L-RFS) were compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

Among 622 total patients, 338 (54%) underwent AR and 284 (46%) NAR. There was no difference in OS or L-RFS between the AR and NAR groups, regardless of mutation status. There was increased RFS in the RAS WT patients with NAR (P = 0.034), but no difference in RFS in the whole cohort or RAS mutant group. After propensity score matching, 360 patients were analyzed, and no differences in OS, RFS, or L-RFS rates were seen between any groups. There was also no difference in margin recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar outcomes can be achieved with both AR and NAR, regardless of RAS mutation status. These data do not support a universal requirement for AR in RAS mutant CRLM when not necessary to achieve an R0 resection.

Parenchymal-sparing versus extended hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To assess the safety and efficacy of parenchymal-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) as a treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CLM).

METHODS

A comprehensive medical literature search was performed. Perioperative and long-term survival outcomes were pooled. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis were performed to identify potential sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies comprising 7081 CLM patients were eligible for this study. The PSH was performed on 3974 (56.1%) patients. We found that the OS (overall survival; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.08) and RFS (recurrence-free survival; HR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.94-1.07) were comparable between non-PSH and PSH group. The perioperative outcomes were better in PSH than in non-PSH group. Non-PSH group was significantly associated with longer operative time (standard mean difference [SMD] = 1.17, 95% CI: 0.33-2.00), increased estimated blood loss (SMD = 1.36, 95% CI: 0.64-2.07), higher intraoperative transfusion rate (risk ratio [RR] = 2.27, 95% CI: 1.60-3.23), and more postoperative complications (RR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.16-1.66). Meta-regression analyses revealed that no variable influenced the association between surgical types and the survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that PSH is associated with better perioperative outcomes without compromising oncological outcomes. Given the increasing incidence of hepatic parenchyma, the PSH treatment offers a greater opportunity of repeat resection for intrahepatic recurrent tumors. It should be considered as an effective surgical approach for CLM.

Propensity score analysis of non-anatomical versus anatomical resection of colorectal liver metastases

Background

There are concerns that non‐anatomical resection (NAR) worsens perioperative and oncological outcomes compared with those following anatomical resection (AR) for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Most previous studies have been biased by the effect of tumour size. The aim of this study was to compare oncological outcomes after NAR versus AR.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent CRLM resection with curative intent from 1999 to 2016. Data were retrieved from a prospectively developed database. Survival and perioperative outcomes for NAR and AR were compared using propensity score analyses.

Results

Some 358 patients were included in the study. Median follow‐up was 34 (i.q.r. 16–68) months. NAR was associated with significantly less morbidity compared with AR (31·1 versus 44·4 per cent respectively; P = 0·037). Larger (hazard ratio (HR) for lesions 5 cm or greater 1·81, 95 per cent c.i. 1·13 to 2·90; P = 0·035) or multiple (HR 1·48, 1·03 to 2·12; P = 0·035) metastases were associated with poor overall survival (OS). Synchronous (HR 1·33, 1·01 to 1·77; P = 0·045) and multiple (HR 1·51, 1·14 to 2·00; P = 0·004) liver metastases, major complications after liver resection (HR 1·49, 1·05 to 2·11; P = 0·026) or complications after resection of the primary colorectal tumour (HR 1·51, 1·01 to 2·26; P = 0·045) were associated with poor disease‐free survival (DFS). AR was prognostic for poor OS only in tumours smaller than 30 mm, and R1 margin status was not prognostic for either OS or DFS. NAR was associated with a higher rate of salvage resection than AR following intrahepatic recurrence.

Conclusions

NAR has at least equivalent oncological outcomes to AR while proving to be safer. NAR should therefore be the primary surgical approach to CRLM, especially for lesions smaller than 30 mm.

Anatomy of the Right Anterior Sector of the Liver and Its Clinical Implications in Surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgery remains the gold standard both for delimited hepatocellular carcinoma by selective anatomic liver segentectomy and for colorectal liver metastases by parenchymal sparing liver resection. Right anterior sector (RAS) (segments V-VIII; Couinaud) is the largest and most difficult sector to operate on. A better knowledge of its segmentation could prevent postoperative remnant liver ischemia and its impacts on patient's survival.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed for papers on anatomy and surgery of the right anterior sector.

RESULTS

Segmentation of the RAS depended of the anatomic variations of the third-order portal branches. Cranio-caudal segmentation was the most commonly found (50-53%), followed by ventro-dorsal (23-26%), trifurcation (13-20%), and quadrifurcation types (5-11%). Ventral and dorsal partial or total subsegmentectomy seemed accessible in 47 to 50% of patients, including bifurcation, trifurcation, and quadrifurcation types, and could spare up to 22% of the total liver volume. The RAS hepatic vein was present in 85-100% of the patients and could be used as a landmark between RAS dorsal and ventral part in 63% of patients. Reported overall morbidity rate of RAS subsegmentectomy ranged from 33 to 59% among studies with a postoperative major complication rate (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) ranging around 18% and a biliary leakage rate from 16 to 21%. In-hospital reported mortality rate was low (0-3%), and results were comparable to "classic" liver resections. RAS subsegmentectomy remains a complex procedure; median operating time ranged from 253 to 520 min and median intraoperative blood loss reached 1255 ml.

CONCLUSION

Better knowledge of RAS anatomy could allow for parenchymal preservation by using subsegmentectomy of the RAS, selective or as a part of a major hepatectomy.

Feasibility and Safety of Laparoscopic Right Colectomy in Oldest-Old Patients with Colon Cancer: Results of the CLIMHET Study Group

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy for colorectal cancer treatment is widely accepted. However, there is no consensus as to whether or not laparoscopy can be considered the preferred treatment strategy in octogenarian and nonagenarian patients with colon cancer. The aim of this study was to compare operative and postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic right colectomy between oldest-old (≥80 years) and younger (<80 years) patients with colon cancer.

METHODS

The study population was sampled from the CLIMHET Study Group cohort. Between January 2005 and December 2015, data were retrieved for all patients who had undergone elective laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer in five University Hospital centers in France (CHU of Clermont-Ferrand, Hôpital Civil of Strasbourg-IRCAD, Hôpital Henri-Mondor of Créteil, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou of Paris, and CHRU of Tours).

RESULTS

Overall, 473 cancer patients were selected and analyzed. There were 156 oldest-old patients (median age: 84.1 years, range: 80-96) and 317 younger patients (median age: 67 years, range: 25-79). After adjusting based on propensity score on gender, obesity, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, smoking, arteriopathy, coronaropathy, comorbidity, and American Joint Committee on Cancer staging, no significant difference was found in operative and postoperative outcomes, except for time to resume a regular diet (3.6 days versus 3.0 days, P = .008) and length of hospital stay (12.1 days versus 9.1 days, P = .03), which were longer for oldest-old patients. Overall and disease-free survival rates were also equivalent between groups.

CONCLUSION

These findings support that laparoscopic right colectomy can be safely performed in cancer patients aged 80 and older, and its outcomes are similar in oldest-old and younger patients.

Influence of the Type and Amount of Liver Resection on the Survival of the Patients with Colorectal Metastases

INTRODUCTION:

Colorectal liver metastases have a poor prognosis, and only 2% have an average 5-year survival if left untreated. Despite radical resection, the average five-year survival is between 25% and 44%.

AIM:

To explore the experience of the Clinic in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases, comparing it with data from the literature and based on the comparison to determine the influence of the type and extensity of resection survival after radical surgical treatment of patients.

METHODS:

This is a retrospective study. The study comprised the period between 01.01.2006 to 31.12.2015. It included a total of 239 cases, of whom: 179 patients underwent radical interventions, 5 palliative and 55 patients underwent explorative interventions due to liver metastases.

RESULTS:

Radical resection of liver metastases has the impact of the patient survival, and the survival is the smallest in the patients with left hemihepatectomy and the longest in the patients with bisegmentectomy. But no specific technique and the number of resected segments influenced the survival of patients with colorectal liver metastases.

CONCLUSION:

In patients with colorectal liver metastases only resection has potentially curative character. The type and amount of liver resection has no influence of the survival.

Laparoscopic parenchymal preserving liver resections for colorectal liver metastases in the era of highly effective systemic therapy and selective internal radiation therapy can often prevent a hemihepatectomy. (With video)

BACKGROUND

Preservation of hepatic parenchyma is important in liver surgery to prevent postoperative liver failure and according to some reports it could offer a prolonged survival and lower recurrence rates compared to major hepatectomies in patients with colorectal liver metastases. However, laparoscopic parenchyma-preserving liver resections can be technically challenging. The aim of this video is to illustrate the concept of laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resections after conversion chemotherapy with targeted therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this video we present three cases in which a laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resection was performed after neo-adjuvant therapy: the first patient had a giant solitary colorectal metastasis in segment V and VIII. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was given, resulting in a 30% volume reduction of the lesion after which a laparoscopic anterior sectionectomy was successfully performed. The second patient had five colorectal liver metastases. After conversion chemotherapy, four remaining metastases were resected by laparoscopic surgery. The last patient had 7 colorectal liver metastases. After 18 cycles of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and a good response to selective internal radiation therapy, a laparoscopic liver resection of six metastases and radiofrequency ablation of 1 central lesion were performed.

RESULTS

The video of these three cases shows that laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver surgery is feasible after neo-adjuvant systemic therapy and selective internal radiation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The emergence of more effective systemic chemotherapies with biologicals and SIRT for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases often creates a possibility for parenchymal-preserving liver resections to achieve an R0 resection.

Perioperative and Long-Term Outcome for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Impact of Major Versus Minor Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

The objective of the current study was to investigate both short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing curative-intent resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) stratified by extent of hepatic resection relative to overall final pathological margin status.

METHODS

One thousand twenty-three patients with ICC who underwent curative-intent resection were identified from a multi-institutional database. Demographic, clinicopathological, and operative data, as well as overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared among patients undergoing major and minor resection before and after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Overall, 608 (59.4%) patients underwent major hepatectomy, while 415 (40.6%) had a minor resection. Major hepatectomy was more frequently performed among patients who had large, multiple, and bilobar tumors. Roughly half of patients (n = 294, 48.4%) developed a postoperative complication following major hepatectomy versus only one fourth of patients (n = 113, 27.2%) after minor resection (p < 0.001). In the propensity model, patients who underwent major hepatectomy had an equivalent OS and RFS versus patients who had a minor hepatectomy (median OS, 38 vs. 37 months, p = 0.556; and median RFS, 20 vs. 18 months, p = 0.635). Patients undergoing major resection had comparable OS and RFS with wide surgical margin (≥10 and 5-9 mm), but improved RFS when surgical margin was narrow (1-4 mm) versus minor resection in the propensity model. In the Cox regression model, tumor characteristics and surgical margin were independently associated with long-term outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Major hepatectomy for ICC was not associated with an overall survival benefit, yet was associated with increased perioperative morbidity. Margin width, rather than the extent of resection, affected long-term outcomes. Radical parenchymal-sparing resection should be advocated if a margin clearance of ≥5 mm can be achieved.

Parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) versus non-PSH for bilobar liver metastases of colorectal cancer

Background

Preoperative interventions have increased the resectability of colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases. This retrospective study compares outcomes after liver resection for bilobar CRC metastases between patients who underwent parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH), i.e., segmentectomies and smaller resections on both lobes, and those treated with non-PSH, i.e., hemihepatectomy plus any resection on the other lobe.

Methods

A cohort of 119 patients who underwent liver resection for bilobar CRC metastases were included. Perioperative course and long-term survival were compared between 59 patients who underwent PSH and 60 patients who underwent non-PSH. Statistical analyses were done using Pearson's chi-square test, Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test. Overall survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox regression analysis.

Results

The median number of liver metastases was 2 in patients treated with PSH and 3 in those treated with non-PSH (P<0.01). Postoperative mortality, severe complications and radicality did not differ significantly between groups. Median intraoperative bleeding was 250 mL for PSH and 600 mL for non-PSH (P<0.001). Median operation time and hospital stay were significantly shorter for PSH. Overall survival was comparable between groups, also after adjustment for covariates.

Conclusions

There were no significant differences in outcome, except for differences in bleeding, operation time and postoperative stay, favoring PSH. Furthermore, minimizing resection did not influence radicality. Hence, this study supports the use of PSH for bilobar CRC liver metastases when possible.

Perioperative fluid management in major hepatic resection: an integrative review

BACKGROUND

Fluid intervention and vasoactive pharmacological support during hepatic resection depend on the preference of the attending clinician, institutional resources, and practice culture. Evidence-based recommendations to guide perioperative fluid management are currently limited. Therefore, we provide a contemporary clinical integrative overview of the fundamental principles underpinning fluid intervention and hemodynamic optimization for adult patients undergoing major hepatic resection.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review was performed of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials using the terms "surgery", "anesthesia", "starch", "hydroxyethyl starch derivatives", "albumin", "gelatin", "liver resection", "hepatic resection", "fluids", "fluid therapy", "crystalloid", "colloid", "saline", "plasma-Lyte", "plasmalyte", "hartmann's", "acetate", and "lactate". Search results for MEDLINE and EMBASE were additionally limited to studies on human populations that included adult age groups and publications in English.

RESULTS

A total of 113 articles were included after appropriate inclusion criteria screening. Perioperative fluid management as it relates to various anesthetic and surgical techniques is discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should have a fundamental understanding of the surgical phases of the resection, hemodynamic goals, and anesthesia challenges in attempts to individualize therapy to the patient's underlying pathophysiological condition. Therefore, an ideal approach for perioperative fluid therapy is always individualized. Planning and designing large-scale clinical trials are imperative to define the optimal type and amount of fluid for patients undergoing major hepatic resection. Further clinical trials evaluating different intraoperative goal-directed strategies are also eagerly awaited.

Parenchymal-Sparing Versus Anatomic Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal liver metastases develop in 50% of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Surgical resection for colorectal liver metastasis typically involves either anatomical resection (AR) or parenchymal-sparing hepatectomy (PSH). The objective of the current study was to analyze data on parenchymal versus non-parenchymal-sparing hepatic resections for CLM.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature regarding parenchymal-sparing hepatectomy was performed. MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were searched for publications containing the following medical subject headings (MeSH): "Colorectal Neoplasms," "Neoplasm Metastasis," "Liver Neoplasms" and "Hepatectomy". Besides, the following keywords were used to complete the literature search: "Hepatectomy," "liver resection," "hepatic resection," "anatomic/anatomical," "nonanatomic/ nonanatomical," "major," "minor," "limited," "wedge," "CRLM/CLM," and "colorectal liver metastasis." Data was reviewed, aggregated, and analyzed.

RESULTS

Two thousand five hundred five patients included in 12 studies who underwent either PSH (n = 1087 patients) or AR (n = 1418 patients) were identified. Most patients had a primary tumor that originated in the colon (PSH 52.2-74.4% vs. AR 53.9-74.3%) (P = 0.289). The majority of studies included a large subset of patients with only a solitary tumor with a reported median tumor number of 1-2 regardless of whether the patient underwent PSH or AR. Median EBL was no different among patients undergoing PSH (100-896 mL) versus AR (200-1489 mL) for CLM (P = 0.248). There was no difference in median length-of-stay following PSH (6-17 days) versus AR (7-15 days) (P = 0.747). While there was considerable inter-study variability regarding margin status, there was no difference in the incidence of R0 resection among patients undergoing PSH (66.7-100%) versus AR (71.6-98.6%) (P = 0.58). When assessing overall survival, there was no difference whether resection of CLM was performed with PSH (5 years OS: mean 44.7%, range 29-62%) or AR (5 years OS: mean 44.6%, range 27-64%) (P = 0.97).

CONCLUSION

PSH had a comparable safety and efficacy profile compared with AR and did not compromise oncologic outcomes. PSH should be considered an appropriate surgical approach to treatment for patients with CLM that facilitates preservation of hepatic parenchyma.

Primary Malignancy is an Independent Determinant of Morbidity and Mortality after Liver Resection

Although outcomes after liver resection have improved, there remains considerable perioperative morbidity and mortality with these procedures. Studies suggest a primary liver cancer diagnosis is associated with poorer outcomes, but the extent to which this is attributable to a higher degree of hepatic dysfunction is unclear. To better delineate this, we performed a matched pair analysis of primary versus metastatic malignancies using a national database. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2005–2013) was analyzed to select elective liver resections. Diagnoses were sorted as follows: 1) primary liver cancers and 2) metastatic neoplasms. A literature review identified factors known to impact hepatectomy outcomes; these variables were evaluated by a univariate analysis. The most predictive factors were used to create similar groups from each diagnosis category via propensity matching. Multivariate regression was used to validate results in the wider study population. Outcomes were compared using chi-squared test and Fisher exact test. Matched groups of 4838 patients were similar by all variables, including indicators of liver function. A number of major complications were significantly more prevalent with a primary diagnosis; overall major morbidity rates in the metastatic and primary groups were 29.3 versus 41.6 per cent, respectively. The mortality rate for primary neoplasms was 4.6 per cent (vs 1.6%); this represents a risk of death nearly three-times greater (95% confidence interval = 2.20–3.81, P < 0.0001) in cancers of hepatic origin. Hepatectomy carries substantially higher perioperative risk when performed for primary liver cancers, independent of hepatic function and resection extent. This knowledge will help to improve treatment planning, patient education, and resource allocation in oncologic liver resection.

Borderline operability in hepatectomy patients is associated with higher rates of failure to rescue after severe complications

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

To understand the influence of age and comorbidities, this study analyzed the incidence and risk factors for post-hepatectomy morbidity/mortality in patients with "borderline" (BL) operability, defined by the preoperative factors: age ≥75 years, dependent function, lung disease, ascites/varices, myocardial infarction, stroke, steroids, weight loss >10%, and/or sepsis.

METHODS

All elective hepatectomies were identified in the 2005-2013 ACS-NSQIP database. Predictors of 30-day morbidity/mortality in BL patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

A 3,574/15,920 (22.4%) patients met BL criteria. Despite non-BL and BL patients undergoing similar magnitude hepatectomies (P > 0.4), BL patients had higher severe complication (SC, 23.3% vs. 15.3%) and mortality rates (3.7% vs. 1.2%, P < 0.001). BL patients with any SC experienced a 14.1% mortality rate (vs. 7.3%, non-BL, P < 0.001). Independent risk factors for SC in BL patients included American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score >3 (odds ratio, OR - 1.29), smoking (OR - 1.41), albumin <3.5 g/dl (OR - 1.36), bilirubin >1 (OR - 2.21), operative time >240 min (OR - 1.58), additional colorectal procedure (OR - 1.78), and concurrent procedure (OR - 1.73, all P < 0.05). Independent predictors of mortality included disseminated cancer (OR - 0.44), albumin <3.5 g/dl (OR - 1.94), thrombocytopenia (OR - 1.95), and extended/right hepatectomy (OR - 2.81, all P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Hepatectomy patients meeting BL criteria have an overall post-hepatectomy mortality rate that is triple that of non-BL patients. With less clinical reserve, BL patients who suffer SC are at greater risk of post-hepatectomy death. J. Surg. Oncol. 2017;115:337-343. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Hepatic vascular inflow occlusion is associated with reduced disease free survival following resection of colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Hepatic vascular inflow occlusion (VIO) can be applied during resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) to control intra-operative blood loss, but has been linked to accelerated growth of micrometastases in experimental models. This study aimed to investigate the effects of hepatic VIO on disease-free and overall survival (DFS and OS) in patients following resection for CRLM.

METHODS

All patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between January 2006 and September 2015 at our center were analyzed. Hepatic VIO was performed if deemed indicated by the operating surgeon and severe ischemia was defined as ≥20 min continuous or ≥45 min cumulative intermittent VIO. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify predictive factors for DFS and OS.

RESULTS

A total of 208 patients underwent liver resection for CRLM. VIO was performed in 64 procedures (31%), and fulfilled the definition of severe ischemia in 40 patients. Patients with severe ischemia had inferior DFS (5-year DFS 32% vs. 11%, P < 0.01), and inferior OS (5-year OS 37% vs. 64%, P < 0.01). At multivariate analysis, a high clinical risk score (Hazard ratio (HR) 1.60 (1.08-2.36)) and severe ischemia (HR 1.89 (1.21-2.97)) were independent predictors of worse DFS. Severe ischemia was not an independent predictor of OS.

CONCLUSION

The present cohort study suggests that prolonged hepatic VIO during liver resection for CRLM was associated with reduced DFS. A patient-tailored approach seems advisable although larger studies should confirm these findings.

Parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies (PSH) for bilobar colorectal liver metastases are associated with a lower morbidity and similar oncological results: a propensity score matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate whether a parenchymal-sparing strategy provides similar results in terms of morbidity, mortality, and oncological outcome of non-PSH hepatectomies in a propensity score matched population (PSMP) in case of multiple (>3) bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CLM).

BACKGROUND

The surgical treatment of bilobar liver metastasis is challenging due to the necessity to achieve complete resection margins and a sufficient future remnant liver. Two approaches are adaptable as follows: parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies (PSH) and extended hepatectomies (NON-PSH).

METHODS

A total of 3036 hepatectomies were analyzed from a multicentric retrospective cohort of hepatectomies. Patients were matched in a 1:1 propensity score analysis in order to compare PSH versus NON-PSH resections.

RESULTS

PSH was associated with a lower number of complications (≥1) (25% vs. 34%, p = 0.04) and a lower grade of Dindo-Clavien III and IV (10 vs. 16%, p = 0.03). Liver failure was less present in PSH (2 vs. 7%, p = 0.006), with a shorter ICU stay (0 day vs. 1 day, p = 0.004). No differences were demonstrated in overall and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, PSH resection for bilobar multiple CLMs represents a valid alternative to NON-PSH resection in selected patients with a reduced morbidity and comparable oncological results.

Comparison of Anatomical and Nonanatomical Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastasis: A Meta-Analysis of 5207 Patients

It remains unclear whether hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) should be performed as anatomical resection (AR) or nonanatomical resection (NAR). The aim of this study is to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of AR and NAR for CRLM. PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify eligible studies. Twenty one studies involving 5207 patients were analyzed: 3034 (58.3%) underwent AR procedure and 2173 (41.7%) underwent NAR procedure. The results showed that overall survival (OS, hazard ratio (HR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95–1.18) and disease free survival (DFS, HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.99–1.24) did not differ significantly between AR and NAR. Duration of operation, postoperative morbidity and mortality were higher in AR than in NAR. There were no significant differences in blood loss and prevalence rate of postoperative positive margins (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.37–1.52). Our analysis shows that AR does not seem to bring more prognostic benefits than NAR for the treatment of CRLM, and does seem to be inferior to NAR in terms of duration of operation, incidence of postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Multisciplinary management of patients with liver metastasis from colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death. Surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy have been till now the main therapeutic strategies for disease control and improvement of the overall survival. Twenty-five per cent (25%) of CRC patients have clinically detectable liver metastases at the initial diagnosis and approximately 50% develop liver metastases during their disease course. Twenty-thirty per cent (20%-30%) are CRC patients with metastases confined to the liver. Some years ago various studies showed a curative potential for liver metastases resection. For this reason some authors proposed the conversion of unresectable liver metastases to resectable to achieve cure. Since those results were published, a lot of regimens have been studied for resectability potential. Better results could be obtained by the combination of chemotherapy with targeted drugs, such as anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. However an accurate selection for patients to treat with these regimens and to operate for liver metastases is mandatory to reduce the risk of complications. A multidisciplinary team approach represents the best way for a proper patient management. The team needs to include surgeons, oncologists, diagnostic and interventional radiologists with expertise in hepatobiliary disease, molecular pathologists, and clinical nurse specialists. This review summarizes the most important findings on surgery and systemic treatment of CRC-related liver metastases.

Two-dimensional assessment of submillimeter cancer-free margin area in colorectal liver metastases

The aim of the study is to evaluate the prognostic impact of the extent of submillimeter or zero surgical margin (SubMM) area among the patients who underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).The influence of suboptimal margin width of <1 mm on long-term outcome is unclear.A total of 423 liver resections for CRLM were performed at Japanese Red Cross Medical Center between 2007 and 2015. Among them, we identified 235 patients who underwent curative initial liver resection and classified them into 2 groups: R0 (margin: ≥1 mm) and R1 (SubMM). The R1 group was further divided into 2 groups by the extent of SubMM area: small SubMM area (≤4 cm) and broad SubMM area (>4 cm).The median tumor number was 4 (range 1-97), 23% had solitary and 37% had 8 or more number of metastases. With a median follow-up period of 30 months, the overall 1-, 3-, 5-year survival for R0 (n = 72) versus R1 (n = 163) groups were 98.4% vs 87.5%, 75.5% versus 57.1%, and 50.1% versus 36.6%, respectively (P = 0.004). After propensity score analysis allowing for matching the tumor number (<8 vs 8 or more), tumor size, and serum carcinoembryonic antigen level, the DFS and OS were significantly higher in the small SubMM area group (P = 0.024, P = 0.049), respectively.Although wide margins >1 mm should be attempted whenever possible, reducing the extent of SubMM area (≤4 cm) can contribute to better long-term outcome when wide margin is not practicable.

Parenchymal-sparing liver surgery in patients with colorectal carcinoma liver metastases

Liver resection is the treatment of choice for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM). However, major resections are often required to achieve R0 resection, which are associated with substantial rates of morbidity and mortality. Maximizing the amount of residual liver gained increasing significance in modern liver surgery due to the high incidence of chemotherapy-associated parenchymal injury. This fact, along with the progressive expansion of resectability criteria, has led to the development of a surgical philosophy known as "parenchymal-sparing liver surgery" (PSLS). This philosophy includes a variety of resection strategies, either performed alone or in combination with ablative therapies. A profound knowledge of liver anatomy and expert intraoperative ultrasound skills are required to perform PSLS appropriately and safely. There is a clear trend toward PSLS in hepatobiliary centers worldwide as current evidence indicates that tumor biology is the most important predictor of intrahepatic recurrence and survival, rather than the extent of a negative resection margin. Tumor removal avoiding the unnecessary sacrifice of functional parenchyma has been associated with less surgical stress, fewer postoperative complications, uncompromised cancer-related outcomes and higher feasibility of future resections. The increasing evidence supporting PSLS prompts its consideration as the gold-standard surgical approach for CLM.

The utility of the MELD score in predicting mortality following liver resection for metastasis

BACKGROUND

The MELD score has been demonstrated to be predictive of hepatectomy outcomes in mixed patient samples of primary and secondary liver cancers. Because MELD is a measure of hepatic dysfunction, prior conclusions may rely on the high prevalence of cirrhosis observed with primary lesions. This study aims to evaluate MELD score as a predictor of mortality and develop a risk prediction model for patients specifically undergoing hepatic metastasectomy.

METHODS

ACS-NSQIP 2005-2013 was analyzed to select patients who had undergone liver resections for metastases. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis determined the MELD score most associated with 30-day mortality. A literature review identified variables that impact hepatectomy outcomes. Significant factors were included in a multivariable analysis (MVA). A risk calculator was derived from the final multivariable model.

RESULTS

Among the 14,919 patients assessed, the mortality rate was 2.7%, and the median MELD was 7.3 (range = 34.4). A MELD of 7.24 was identified by ROC (sensitivity = 81%, specificity = 51%, c-statistic = 0.71). Of all patients above this threshold, 4.4% died at 30 days vs. 1.1% in the group ≤7.24. This faction represented 50.1% of the population but accounted for 80.3% of all deaths (p < 0.001). The MVA revealed mortality to be increased 2.6-times (OR = 2.55, 95%CI 1.69-3.84, p < 0.001). A risk calculator was successfully developed and validated.

CONCLUSIONS

MELD>7.24 is an important predictor of death following hepatectomy for metastasis and may prompt a detailed assessment with the provided risk calculator. Attention to MELD in the preoperative setting will improve treatment planning and patient education prior to oncologic liver resection.

Parenchymal-Sparing Hepatectomy Does Not Increase Intrahepatic Recurrence in Patients with Advanced Colorectal Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic impact of major hepatectomy (MH) on liver recurrence has yet to be clarified in patients with advanced colorectal liver metastases (CLMs).

METHODS

In our institute, parenchymal-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) is a standard procedure for CLMs consistently throughout initial and repeat resection, and MH is selected only in cases in which CLMs are close to major Glisson's pedicles. We reviewed 145 patients who underwent curative hepatectomy for advanced CLMs (≥4 nodules and ≤50 mm in size) from 1999 to 2012. Surgical outcomes and survival were compared between patients who underwent PSH and MH.

RESULTS

PSH was performed in 113 patients (77.9 %) and MH in 32 (22.1 %) patients with advanced CLMs. Tumor characteristics and short-term outcomes did not differ between the 2 groups. Incidence of positive tumor margin (8.8 % in PSH vs 9.4 % in MH; p = .927) and rates of liver-only recurrence (43.4 % in PSH and 50.0 % in MH; p = .505) did not differ. No significant differences were found in 5-year overall survival (37.0 % in PSH vs 29.4 % in MH, p = .473), recurrence-free survival (7.6 vs 6.8 %, p = .597), and liver recurrence-free survival (21.0 vs 21.3 %, p = .691). A total of 65 patients had liver-only recurrence, for which repeat hepatectomy was performed in 81.5 % (53 of 65) following our parenchymal-sparing approach.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with advanced CLM, PSH does not increase positive surgical margin or liver recurrence in comparison with MH. A parenchymal-sparing approach offers a high rate of repeat resection for liver recurrence (salvageability).

Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes After Major Liver Surgery and Extended Hemihepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases

PURPOSE

To determine the surgical and oncologic outcomes after major liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) at a Dutch University Hospital.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients with CRLM who had undergone major liver resection, defined as ≥ 4 liver segments, between January 2000 and December 2015 were identified from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

Major liver surgery was performed in 117 patients. Of these, 26 patients had undergone formal extended left or right hemihepatectomy. Ninety-day postoperative mortality was 8%. Major postoperative complications occurred in 27% of patients; these adverse events were more common in the extended hemihepatectomy group. Median disease-free survival was 11 months and median overall survival 44 months.

CONCLUSION

Major liver surgery, including formal extended hemihepatectomy, is associated with significant operative morbidity and mortality but can confer prolonged overall survival for patients with CRLM.

Parenchymal-sparing Hepatectomy in Colorectal Liver Metastasis Improves Salvageability and Survival

OBJECTIVE

To investigate prognostic impact of parenchymal-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) for solitary small colorectal liver metastasis (CLM).

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether PSH confers an oncologic benefit through increased salvageability or is a detriment through increasing recurrence rate.

METHODS

Database of 300 CLM patients with a solitary tumor (≤ 30 mm in size) was reviewed from 1993 to 2013. A total of 156 patients underwent PSH and 144 patients underwent right hepatectomy, left hepatectomy, or left lateral sectionectomy (non-PSH group).

RESULTS

The rate of PSH increased over the study period (P < 0.01). PSH did not impact negatively on overall (OS), recurrence-free, and liver-only recurrence-free survival, compared with non-PSH (P = 0.53, P = 0.97, and P = 0.69, respectively). Liver-only recurrence was observed in 22 patients (14%) in the PSH and 25 (17%) in the non-PSH group (P = 0.44). Repeat hepatectomy was more frequently performed in the PSH group (68% vs 24%, P < 0.01). Subanalysis of patients with liver-only recurrence revealed better 5-year overall survival from initial hepatectomy and from liver recurrence in the PSH than in the non-PSH group [72.4% vs 47.2% (P = 0.047) and 73.6% vs 30.1% (P = 0.018), respectively]. Multivariate analysis revealed that non-PSH was a risk of noncandidacy for repeat hepatectomy (hazard ratio: 8.18, confidence interval: 1.89-45.7, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

PSH did not increase recurrence in the liver remnant but more importantly improved 5-year survival in case of recurrence (salvageability). PSH should be the standard approach to CLM to allow for salvage surgery in case of liver recurrence.

Anatomy of Hepatic Resectional Surgery

Liver anatomy can be variable, and understanding of anatomic variations is crucial to performing hepatic resections, particularly parenchymal-sparing resections. Anatomic knowledge is a critical prerequisite for effective hepatic resection with minimal blood loss, parenchymal preservation, and optimal oncologic outcome. Each anatomic resection has pitfalls, about which the operating surgeon should be aware and comfortable managing intraoperatively.

Impact of Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism on Postoperative Morbidity, Mortality, and Resource Utilization after Hepatectomy

The impact of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after hepatectomy on patient morbidity, mortality, and resource usage remains poorly defined. Better understanding of thromboembolic complications is needed to improve perioperative management and overall outcomes. About 3973 patients underwent hepatectomy within NSQIP between 2005 and 2008. Patient characteristics, operative features, and postoperative correlates of VTE were compared with identify risk factors for VTE and to assess its overall impact on postoperative outcomes.

Overall incidence of postoperative VTE was 2.4 per cent. Risk factors for postoperative VTE included older age, male gender, compromised functional status, degree of intraoperative blood transfusion, preoperative albumin level (all P < 0.05), and extent of hepatectomy ( P = 0.004). Importantly, major postoperative complications, including acute renal failure, pneumonia, sepsis, septic shock, reintubation, prolonged ventilation, cardiac arrest, and reoperation were all associated with higher rates of VTE (all P < 0.05). Operative mortality was increased among patients with VTE (6.5% vs 2.4%, P = 0.03), and patients with VTE had a 2-fold increase in hospital length of stay (12.0 vs 6.0 days, P < 0.001). Postoperative VTE remains a significant source of morbidity, mortality, and increased resource usage after hepatectomy in the United States. Routine aggressive VTE prophylaxis measures are imperative to avoid development of VTE among patients requiring hepatectomy.

Pre-resectional inflow vascular control: extrafascial dissection of Glissonean pedicle in liver resections

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We are evaluated technique of anatomic major and minor hepatic resections using suprahilar-extrafascial dissection of Glissonean pedicle with vascular stapling device for transection of hepatic vessels intending to minimize operative time, and blood loss.

METHODOLOGY

We prospectively analyzed the clinical records of 170 patients who underwent hepatic resection by suprahilar-extrafascial pedicle isolation and stapling technique in our clinic for emergency surgery in Belgrade. Patients who underwent hilar extrahepatic intrafascial dissection were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

We performed 102 minor liver resections and 68 major hepatectomies. The minor liver resections were associated with significantly shorter surgery duration (95.1±31.1 vs. 186.6±56.5) and transection time (35.9±14.5 vs. 65.3±17.2) than major hepatectomies (P<0.001 for all). The mean blood loss was 255.6±129.9 mL in minor resection and 385.7±200.1 mL in major resection (P=0.003). The mean blood transfusion requirement was 300.8±99.5 mL for the patients with minor hepatectomy and 450.9±89.6 mL for those with major liver resection (P=0.067). There was no significant difference in morbidity and mortality between the groups (P=0.989; P=0.920). Major as well as minor liver resection were a superior oncologic operation with no significant difference in the 3-year overall survival rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Extrafascial dissection of Glissonean pedicle with vascular stapling represents both an effective and safe surgical technique of anatomical liver resection. Presented approach allows early and easy ischemic delineation of appropriate anatomical liver territory to be removed (hemiliver, section, segment) with selective inflow vascular control. Also, it is not time consuming and it is very useful in re-resection, as well as oncologically reasonable.

Defining perioperative risk after hepatectomy based on diagnosis and extent of resection

Outcomes after hepatectomy have been assessed incompletely and have not been stratified by both extent of resection and diagnosis. We hypothesized that operative risk is better assessed by stratifying diagnoses into low- and high-risk categories and extent of resection into major and minor resection categories to more accurately evaluate the outcomes after hepatectomy. ACS-NSQIP was reviewed for 30-day operative mortality and major morbidity after partial hepatectomy (PH), left hepatectomy (LH), right hepatectomy (RH), and trisectionectomy (TS). Mortality was reviewed per diagnosis. "High Risk" was defined as the diagnoses associated with the greatest mortality. Major and minor resections were defined by comparison of outcomes for extent of resection by univariate analysis. Chi-square tests, t tests, Fisher's exact tests, and multivariable logistic regression were utilized to compare the outcomes across groups. Among the 7,043 patients, the greatest mortality was observed with hepatocellular carcinoma (5.2%) and cholangiocarcinoma (8.2%), either intra- or extrahepatic, which were classified "High Risk". Metastatic disease, benign neoplasms, and gallbladder cancer had a mortality rate of 1.3, 0.5, and 1.0%, respectively, and were classified "Low Risk". PH and LH were similar statistically for operative mortality and major morbidity within respective diagnosis risk groups (Low Risk: PH vs. LH and High Risk: PH vs. LH; all p > 0.05) and were defined as "Minor Resections". Similarly, RH and TS had similar operative mortality and major morbidity within respective diagnosis risk groups (Low Risk: RH vs. TS and High Risk: RH vs. TS; all p > 0.05) and were defined as "Major Resections". Risks of major morbidity and mortality increased for both diagnoses and the extent of resection. With minor resections, mortality and major morbidity were 5 and 1.6 times greater respectively for high-risk diagnosis than for low-risk diagnosis. With major resections, mortality and major morbidity were 4 and 1.6 times greater, respectively, for high-risk diagnoses than low-risk diagnoses. With low-risk diagnoses, mortality and major morbidity were 2.9 and 1.7 times greater, respectively, for major resections than minor resections (p < 0.001). With high-risk diagnoses, mortality and major morbidity were 2.3 and 1.7 times greater, respectively, for major resections than minor resections (all p < 0.001). Regardless of the extent of resection, high-risk diagnoses were independently associated with mortality (OR = 3.2 and 3.1, respectively) and major morbidity (OR = 1.5 and 1.5, respectively). Risk of hepatectomy is better assessed when stratified by both the diagnostic risk and the extent of resection. Accurate assessment of these outcomes has significant implications for preoperative planning, informed consent, resource utilization, and inter-institutional comparisons.

Prognostic factors for survival in patients with colorectal liver metastases: experience of a single brazilian cancer center

CONTEXT

Liver metastases are a common event in the clinical outcome of patients with colorectal cancer and account for 2/3 of deaths from this disease. There is considerable controversy among the data in the literature regarding the results of surgical treatment and prognostic factors of survival, and no analysis have been done in a large cohort of patients in Brazil.

OBJECTIVES

To characterize the results of surgical treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases, and to establish prognostic factors of survival in a Brazilian population.

METHOD

This was a retrospective study of patients undergoing liver resection for colorectal metastases in a tertiary cancer hospital from 1998 to 2009. We analyzed epidemiologic variables and the clinical characteristics of primary tumors, metastatic disease and its treatment, surgical procedures and follow-up, and survival results. Survival analyzes were done by the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test was applied to determine the influence of variables on overall and disease-free survival. All variables associated with survival with P<0.20 in univariate analysis, were included in multivariate analysis using a Cox proportional hazard regression model.

RESULTS

During the period analyzed, 209 procedures were performed on 170 patients. Postope-rative mortality in 90 days was 2.9% and 5-year overall survival was 64.9%. Its independent prognostic factors were the presence of extrahepatic disease at diagnosis of liver metastases, bilateral nodules and the occurrence of major complications after liver surgery. The estimated 5-year disease-free survival was 39.1% and its prognostic factors included R1 resection, extrahepatic disease, bilateral nodules, lymph node involvement in the primary tumor and primary tumors located in the rectum.

CONCLUSION

Liver resection for colorectal metastases is safe and effective and the analysis of prognostic factors of survival in a large cohort of Brazilian patients showed similar results to those pointed in international series. The occurrence of major postoperative complications appears to be able to compromise overall survival and further investigation in needed in this topic.

Venous thromboembolism after hepatic resection: analysis of 5,706 patients

OBJECTIVE

The routine use of venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis after hepatic surgery remains controversial due to the relatively low incidence of this complication and the significant risk of perioperative bleeding. The objective of our analysis was to identify perioperative predictors of postoperative VTE in patients undergoing resection.

METHODS

All patients from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User File from 2005 to 2009 who underwent hepatic resection were included for analysis. Forward stepwise multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine perioperative variables that are significantly associated with VTE after hepatic surgery.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of VTE after hepatic resection was 2.9 %. Significant predictors of VTE after hepatic resection included preoperative mechanical ventilation, male gender, operative time > 3 h, age ≥ 70 years, intraoperative transfusion, and extended hepatectomy. Several non-VTE postoperative complications were also associated with subsequent VTE, including prolonged mechanical ventilation, need for early reoperation, and postoperative bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Many perioperative factors, including extended hepatectomy as well as several postoperative non-VTE complications, are associated with an increased risk of VTE after hepatic resection. Knowledge of these factors may assist surgeons in deciding which patients merit more aggressive prophylaxis against this complication.

Anatomical versus nonanatomical resection of colorectal liver metastases: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to compare anatomical resection (AR) versus nonanatomical resection (NAR) for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) with respect to perioperative and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

Literature search was performed to identify comparative studies reporting outcomes for both AR and NAR for CLM. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMD with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated using either the fixed effects model or random effects model.

RESULTS

Seven nonrandomized controlled studies matched the selection criteria and reported on 1,662 subjects, of whom 989 underwent AR, and 673 underwent NAR for CLM. Compared with the perioperative results, NAR reduced the operation time (WMD, 0.39; 95% CI, 1.97-79.17) and blood transfusion requirement (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.87-4.74), whereas postoperative morbidity and mortality were similar between the two groups. With respect to oncologic outcomes, there was no significant difference in surgical margins, overall survival and disease-free survival between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

NAR is a safe procedure for CLM and does not compromise oncological outcomes. However, the findings have to be carefully interpreted due to the lower level of evidence.

Current state of surgical treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer

Hepatic resection is the procedure of choice for curative treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CLM). Objectives of surgical strategy are low intraoperative blood loss, short liver ischemic times and minor postoperative morbidity and mortality. Blood loss is an independent predictor of mortality and compromises, in common with postoperative complications, long-term outcome after hepatectomy for CLM. The type of liver resection has no impact on the outcome of patients with CLM; wedge resections are not inferior to anatomical resections in terms of tumor clearance, pattern of recurrence or survival. Despite the lack of proof of survival benefit, routine lymphadenectomy has been advocated, allowing the detection of microscopic lymph node metastases and with prognostic value. In experienced hands, minimally invasive liver surgery is safe with acceptable morbidity and mortality and oncological results comparable to open hepatic surgery, but with reduced blood loss and earlier recovery. The European Colorectal Metastases Treatment Group recommended treating up front with chemotherapy for patients with both resectable and unresectable CLM. However, neoadjuvant chemotherapy can induce damage to the remnant liver, dependent on the number of chemotherapy cycles. Therefore, in our opinion, preoperative chemotherapy should be reserved for patients whose CLM are marginally resectable or unresectable. A meta analysis of randomized trials dealing with perioperative chemotherapy for the treatment of resectable CLM demonstrated a benefit of systemic chemotherapy but did not answer the question of whether a neoadjuvant or adjuvant approach should be preferred. Analysis of the literature demonstrates that the results of specialized centers cannot be attained in the reality of comprehensive patient care. Reasons behind the commonly poorer results seen in cancer networks as compared with literature-based data are, on the one hand, geographical disparities in access to specialized surgical and medical care. On the other hand, a selection bias in the reports of the literature may be assumed. Studies of surgical resection for CLM derive almost exclusively from case series generally drawn from large academic centers where patient selection or surgical expertise is superior to what is found in many communities. Therefore, we may conclude that the comprehensive propagation of the standards outlined in this paper constitutes a major task in the near future to reduce the variations in survival of patients with CLM.

Parenchyma-preserving hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Hepatic resection of colorectal liver metastases is the only curative treatment option. As clinical and experimental data indicate that the extent of liver resection correlates with growth of residual metastases, the present study analyzes the potential benefit of a parenchyma-preserving liver surgery approach.

METHODS

Data from a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing liver resection for colorectal metastases were reviewed. Evaluation of outcome was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Correlations were calculated between clinical-pathological variables.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-three patients underwent 198 liver resections for colorectal metastases: 26 major hepatectomies, 65 minor anatomical resections, 78 non-anatomical resections, as well as 29 combinations of minor anatomical and non-anatomical procedures. Overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival was 93%, 62%, and 40%, respectively. Patients with repeated liver resections had a 5-year survival of 27%. Interestingly, large dissection areas were associated with a significant reduction of the 5-year survival rate (33%). Five-year survival after major hepatectomy was not significantly reduced.

CONCLUSION

For colorectal liver metastases, minor resections offer a prolonged survival compared to major hepatectomies. As patients with stage IV colorectal disease are candidates for repeat resections, preservation of hepatic parenchyma is of increasing importance in the setting of multi-modal and repeated therapy approaches.

Post-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after major hepatectomy: does peripheral venous thromboembolism prevention outweigh bleeding risks?

BACKGROUND

Although standard of care after most abdominal surgeries, post-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after major hepatectomy is commonly withheld due to bleeding risks. The objective of this retrospective study is to evaluate the benefits and risks of post-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after major hepatectomy at two high volume academic centers.

METHODS

Demographics, clinicopathologic data, treatments, and post-operative outcomes from patients who underwent major hepatectomy were reviewed.

RESULTS

From 2005 to 2010, 419 patients underwent major hepatectomy; 275 (65.6%) were treated with pharmacologicthromboprophylaxis beginning a median of 1 day after resection. Post-operative symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurred in 15 (3.6%) patients. Patients treated with pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis had lower rates of symptomatic VTE (2.2% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.03) and post-operative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (16.7% vs. 26.4%, p = 0.02) with similar rates of overall RBC transfusion (35.0% vs. 30.6%, p = 0.36) compared to untreated patients. Specifically, isolated deep venous thrombosis (0% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.04) and pulmonary embolism (2.2% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.35) occurred less often in treated patients. Analysis of demographics, clinicopathologic data, and treatment factors revealed that pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis was the only variable associated with post-operative VTE.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis lowers the incidence of symptomatic VTE after major hepatectomy without increasing the rate of RBC transfusion.

Anatomical versus nonanatomical resection of colorectal liver metastases: is there a difference in surgical and oncological outcome?

BACKGROUND

The increased use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and minimally invasive therapies for recurrence in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM) makes a surgical strategy to save as much liver volume as possible pivotal. In this study, we determined the difference in morbidity and mortality and the patterns of recurrence and survival in patients with CLM treated with anatomical (AR) and nonanatomical liver resection (NAR).

METHODS

From January 2000 to June 2008, patients with CLM who underwent a resection were included and divided into two groups: patients who underwent AR, and patients who underwent NAR. Patients who underwent simultaneous radiofrequency ablation in addition to surgery and patients with extrahepatic metastasis were excluded. Patient, tumor, and treatment data, as well as disease-free and overall survival (OS) were compared.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients (44%) received AR and 113 patients (56%) underwent NAR. NAR were performed for significant smaller metastases (3 vs. 4 cm, P < 0.001). The Clinical Risk Score did not differ between the groups. After NAR, patients received significantly less blood transfusions (20% vs. 36%, P = 0.012), and the hospital stay was significantly shorter (7 vs. 8 days, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in complications, positive resection margins, or recurrence. For the total study group, estimated 5-year disease-free and OS was 31 and 44%, respectively, with no difference between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study resulted in no significant difference in morbidity, mortality, recurrence rate, or survival according to resection type. NAR can be used as a save procedure to preserve liver parenchyma.

Hepatic veins as a site of clot formation following liver resection

Pulmonary embolism occurs more frequently after hepatectomy than previously thought but is infrequently associated with peripheral deep vein thrombosis. In this paper, we report 2 cases of postoperative hepatic vein thrombosis after liver resection. Both patients had undergone major hepatectomy of a non-cirrhotic liver largely exposing the middle hepatic vein. Clots were incidentally found in the middle hepatic vein 4 and 17 d after surgery despite routine systemic thrombo-prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin. Coagulation of the transition plan in a context of mutation of the prothrombin gene and inflammation induced biloma were the likely predisposing conditions. Clots disappeared following curative anticoagulation. We conclude that thrombosis of hepatic veins may occur after liver resection and is a potential source of pulmonary embolism.

Colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Despite major advances in therapies for liver metastases, colorectal cancer remains one of the commonest causes of cancer-related deaths in the UK.

SOURCES OF DATA

The international literature on the management of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) was reviewed.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Due to a combination of highly active systemic agents and low perioperative mortality achieved by high-volume centres, a growing number of patients are being offered liver resection with curative intent. Patients with bilobar and/or extrahepatic disease who would previously have received palliative treatment only, are undergoing major surgery with good results. This review focuses on preoperative evaluation, surgical planning and the role of adjuvant therapies in the management of patients with CLM.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Can ablative therapies match the outcomes of surgical resection? How can even more patients be rendered resectable?

GROWING POINTS

The use of other therapies, such as radiofrequency ablation and selective internal radiation therapy.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

New chemotherapy regimens for neo-adjuvant therapy and the development of new modalities of liver tumour ablation.