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

Efficacy and perioperative safety of different future liver remnant modulation techniques: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In daily clinical practice, different future liver remnant (FLR) modulation techniques are increasingly used to allow a liver resection in patients with insufficient FLR volume. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and perioperative safety of portal vein ligation (PVL), portal vein embolization (PVE), liver venous deprivation (LVD) and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS).

METHODS

A literature search for studies comparing liver resections following different FLR modulation techniques was performed in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central, and pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Overall, 23 studies comprising 1557 patients were included. LVD achieved the greatest increase in FLR (17.32 %, 95% CI 2.49-32.15), while ALPPS was most effective in preventing dropout before the completion hepatectomy (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.15-0.55). PVL tended to be associated with a longer time to completion hepatectomy (MD 5.78 days, 95% CI -0.67-12.23). Liver failure occurred less frequently after LVD, compared to PVE (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14-0.87) and ALPPS (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.85).

DISCUSSION

ALPPS and LVD seem superior to PVE and PVL in terms of achieved FLR increase and subsequent treatment completion. LVD was associated with lower rates of post hepatectomy liver failure, compared to both PVE and ALPPS. A summary of the protocol has been prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022321474).

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

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

Efficacy of Technical Modifications to the Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy (ALPPS) Procedure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

To compare the outcomes of modified-Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) techniques with those of conventional-ALPPS.

Background

ALPPS is an established technique for treating advanced liver tumors.

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched. The outcomes were assessed by single-arm and 2-arm analyses.

Results

Seventeen studies containing 335 modified-ALPPS patients were included in single-arm meta-analysis. The estimated blood loss was 267 ± 29 mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 210-324 mL) during the first and 662 ± 51 mL (95% CI, 562-762 mL) during the second stage. The operation time was 166 ± 18 minutes (95% CI, 131-202 minutes) during the first and 225 ± 19 minutes (95% CI, 188-263 minutes) during the second stage. The major morbidity rate was 14% (95% CI, 9%-22%) after the first stage. The future liver remnant hypertrophy rate was 65.2% ± 5% (95% CI, 55%-75%) and the interstage interval was 16 ± 1 days (95% CI, 14-17 days). The dropout rate was 9% (95% CI, 5%-15%). The overall complication rate was 46% (95% CI, 37%-56%) and the major complication rate was 20% (95% CI, 14%-26%). The postoperative mortality rate was 7% (95% CI, 4%-11%). Seven studies containing 215 patients were included in comparative analysis. The hypertrophy rate was not different between 2 methods (mean difference [MD], -5.01; 95% CI, -19.16 to 9.14; P = 0.49). The interstage interval was shorter for partial-ALPPS (MD, 9.43; 95% CI, 3.29-15.58; P = 0.003). The overall complication rate (odds ratio [OR], 10.10; 95% CI, 2.11-48.35; P = 0.004) and mortality rate (OR, 3.74; 95% CI, 1.36-10.26; P = 0.01) were higher in the conventional-ALPPS.

Conclusions

The hypertrophy rate in partial-ALPPS was similar to conventional-ALPPS. This shows that minimizing the first stage of the operation does not affect hypertrophy. Moreover, the postoperative overall morbidity and mortality rates were lower following partial-ALPPS.

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

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

Parenchyma-Sparing Liver Resection or Regenerative Liver Surgery: Which Way to Go?

Liver resection for malignant tumors should respect oncological margins while ensuring safety and improving the quality of life, therefore tumor staging, underlying liver disease and performance status should all be attentively assessed in the decision process. The concept of parenchyma-sparing liver surgery is nowadays used as an alternative to major hepatectomies to address deeply located lesions with intricate topography by means of complex multiplanar parenchyma-sparing liver resections, preferably under the guidance of intraoperative ultrasound. Regenerative liver surgery evolved as a liver growth induction method to increase resectability by stimulating the hypertrophy of the parenchyma intended to remain after resection (referred to as future liver remnant), achievable by portal vein embolization and liver venous deprivation as interventional approaches, and portal vein ligation and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy as surgical techniques. Interestingly, although both strategies have the same conceptual origin, they eventually became caught in the never-ending parenchyma-sparing liver surgery vs. regenerative liver surgery debate. However, these strategies are both valid and must both be mastered and used to increase resectability. In our opinion, we consider parenchyma-sparing liver surgery along with techniques of complex liver resection and intraoperative ultrasound guidance the preferred strategy to treat liver tumors. In addition, liver volume-manipulating regenerative surgery should be employed when resectability needs to be extended beyond the possibilities of parenchyma-sparing liver surgery.

Liver venous deprivation versus associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy for colo-rectal liver metastases: a comparison of early and late kinetic growth rates, and perioperative and oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

Different techniques have been developed to optimize the Future Liver Remnant (FLR). Associated liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) and liver venous deprivation (LVD) have shown the higher hypertrophy rates, but their place in clinical practice is still debated.

METHODS

Thirty-two consecutive ALPPS and LVD procedures for CRLM performed between December 2015 and December 2019 were included. This retrospective study evaluated kinetic growth rates (KGR) as primary outcome, and perioperative and oncological outcomes as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

A total of 17 patients underwent LVD before surgery, whereas 15 underwent ALPPS. On early evaluation (7 vs 9 days, respectively), KGR did not differ between ALPPS and LVD cohort (0.8% per day vs 0.3% per day, p = 0.70; 23 cc/day vs 26 cc/day, p = 0.31). Late evaluation (21 vs 9 days) showed a KGR significantly decreased in the LVD group (0.6% per day vs 0.2% per day, p = 0.21; 20 cc/day vs 10 cc/day p = 0.02). Mean FLR-V increase was comparable in the two groups (60% vs 49%, p 0.32). Successful resection rate was 100% and 94% in LVD and ALPPS group, respectively. The hospital stay (p < 0.0001) and severe complications rate (p = 0.05) were lower after LVD. One and 3-years overall survival (OS) were 72,7% and 27,4% in the ALPSS group, versus 81,3% and 54,7% in LVD group (p = 0.10). The Median DFS was comparable between both techniques (6.1 months and 5.9 respectively, p = 0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

LVD and ALPPS shows similar KGR during the early period following preparation as well as similar survival outcomes. Hospital stay and severe complications are lower after LVD.

Safety and efficacy of right portal vein embolization in patients with prior left lateral liver resection

BACKGROUND

In patients with bilobar metastatic liver disease, surgical clearance of both liver lobes may be achieved through multiple-stage liver resections. For patients with extensive disease, a major two-staged hepatectomy consisting of resection of liver segments II and III before right-sided portal vein embolization (PVE) and resection of segments V-VIII may be performed, leaving only segments IV ± I as the liver remnant.

PURPOSE

To describe the outcome following right-sided PVE after prior complete resection of liver segments II and III.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, 15 patients (mean age = 60.4 ± 9.3 years) with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (n = 14) and uveal melanoma (n = 1) who were scheduled to undergo a major two-stage hepatectomy, were included. Total liver volume (TLV) and volume of the future liver remnant (FLR) were measured on pre- and postinterventional computed tomography (CT) scans, and standardized FLR volumes (ratio FLR/TLV) were calculated. Patient data were retrospectively analyzed regarding peri- and postinterventional complications, with special emphasis on liver function tests.

RESULTS

The mean standardized post-PVE FLR volume was 26.9% ± 6.4% and no patient developed hepatic insufficiency after the PVE. Based on FLR hypertrophy and liver function tests, all but one patient were considered eligible for the subsequent right-sided hepatectomy. However, due to local tumor progression, only 9/15 patients eventually proceeded to the second stage of surgery.  .

CONCLUSION

Right-sided PVE was safe and efficacious in this cohort of patients who had previously undergone a complete resection of liver segments II and III as part of a major staged hepatectomy pathway leaving only segments IV(±I) as the FLR. .

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

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

DATA SOURCES

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

Uncommon indications for associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy: a systematic review

Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) represents an innovative surgical technique used for the treatment of large hepatic lesions at high risk for post-resection liver failure due to a small future liver remnant. The most significant amount of literature concerns the use of ALPPS for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CCC), and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). On the opposite, few is known about the role of ALPPS for the treatment of uncommon liver pathologies. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the current literature on this topic. A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible articles published up to February 2020 were included using the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Among the 486 articles screened, 45 papers met the inclusion criteria, with 136 described cases of ALPPS for rare indications. These 136 cases were reported in 18 different countries. Only in two countries, namely Germany and Brazil, more than ten cases were observed. As for the ALPPS indications, we reported 41 (30.1%) cases of neuroendocrine tumor (NET) metastases, followed by 27 (19.9%) cases of gallbladder cancer (GBC), nine (6.6%) pediatric cases, six (4.4%) gastrointestinal stromal tumors, six (4.4%) adult cases of benign primary liver disease, four (2.9%) adult cases of malignant primary liver disease, and 43 (31.6%) adult cases of malignant secondary liver disease. According to the International ALPPS Registry data, less than 10% of the ALPPS procedures have been performed for the treatment of uncommon liver pathologies. NET and GBC are the unique pathologies with acceptable numerosity. ALPPS for NET appears to be a safe procedure, with satisfactory long-term results. On the opposite, the results observed for the treatment of GBC are poor. However, these data should be considered with caution. The rationale for treating benign pathologies with ALPPS appears to be weak. No definitive response should be given for all the other pathologies. Multicenter studies are needed with the intent to clarify the potentially beneficial effect of ALPPS for their treatment.

How should liver hypertrophy be stimulated? A comparison of upfront associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) and portal vein embolization (PVE) with rescue possibility

Background

The role of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) in comparison to portal vein embolization (PVE) is debated. The aim of this study was to compare successful resection rates (RR) with upfront ALPPS vs. PVE with rescue ALPPS on demand and to compare the hypertrophy of the liver between ALPPS and PVE plus subsequent rescue ALPPS.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of all patients treated with PVE for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) or ALPPS (any diagnosis, rescue ALPPS included) at five Scandinavian university hospitals during the years 2013-2016 was conducted. A Chi-square test and a Mann-Whitney U test were used to assess the difference between the groups. A successful RR was defined as liver resection without a 90-day mortality.

Results

A total of 189 patients were included. Successful RR was in 84.5% of the patients with ALPPS upfront and in 73.3% of the patients with PVE and rescue ALPPS on demand (P=0.080). The hypertrophy of the future liver remnants (FLRs) with ALPPS upfront was 71% (48-97%) compared to 96% (82-113%) after PVE and rescue ALPPS (P=0.010).

Conclusions

Upfront ALPPS offers a somewhat higher successful RR than PVE with rescue ALPPS on demand. The sequential combination of PVE and ALPPS leads to a higher overall degree of hypertrophy than upfront ALPPS.

Monosegment ALPPS for bilateral colorectal liver metastasis - One is enough

Associated liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy – ALPPS – procedure emerged as an alternative to treat patients needing extensive hepatic resections, but with a small future liver remnant. Initially described using the left lateral segments as liver remnant, ALPPS has been adapted to leave as remainder only one segment. Describe a case of a patiente with bilobar colorectal liver metastasis submitted to segment 4-1 ALPPS. A 63-year-old man, previously submitted to transversostomy, due to a left colon stenosing adenocarcinoma, associated to bilobar liver metastasis, was referred for our evaluation, after receiving a FOLFOX based chemotherapy. Due to the large load of tumor within the liver, we opted to perform a segment 4-1 ALPPS, which was carried out with an interval of 21 days between first and second stages. The liver remnant increased from 250 cc to 694 cc (18% to 48% of standard liver volume). The patient was discharged 15 days after second stage surgery and was subjected to left colectomy after five months. He is disease-free ten months after liver surgery. Monosegment ALPPS is a challenging, but feasible procedure, that should be criteriously indicated in selected patients and performed by a hepatobiliary surgery team with experience in complex major hepatectomies.

The Future Liver Remnant : Definition, Evaluation, and Management

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

Conventional Two-Stage Hepatectomy or Associating Liver Partitioning and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Pushing the surgical limits for initially unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are two approaches for sequential liver resection: two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) and associating liver partitioning and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS). However, the role of each treatment modality remains ill-defined. The present meta-analysis was designed to compare the safety, efficacy, and oncological benefits between ALPPS and TSH in the management of advanced CRLM.

Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted from online databases through to February 2020. Single-arm synthesis and cumulative meta-analysis were performed.

Results: Eight studies were included, providing a total of 409 subjects for analysis (ALPPS: N = 161; TSH: N = 248). The completions of the second stage of the hepatectomy [98 vs. 78%, odds ratio (OR) 5.75, p < 0.001] and R0 resection (66 vs. 37%; OR 4.68; p < 0.001) were more frequent in patients receiving ALPPS than in those receiving TSH, and the waiting interval was dramatically shortened in ALPPS (11.6 vs. 45.7 days, weighted mean difference = −35.3 days, p < 0.001). Nevertheless, the rate of minor complications was significantly higher in ALPPS (59 vs. 18%, OR 6.5, p < 0.001) than in TSH. The two treatments were similar in 90-day mortality (7 vs. 5%, p = 0.43), major complications (29 vs. 22%, p = 0.08), posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF; 9 vs. 9%, p = 0.3), biliary leakage (11 vs. 14%, p = 0.86), length of hospital stay (27.95 vs. 26.88 days, p = 0.8), 1-year overall survival (79 vs. 84%, p = 0.61), 1-year recurrence (49 vs. 39%, p = 0.32), and 1-year disease-free survival (34 vs. 39%, p = 0.66). Cumulative meta-analyses indicated chronological stability for the pooled effect sizes of resection rate, 90-day mortality, major complications, and PHLF.

Conclusions: Compared with TSH, ALPPS for advanced CRLM resulted in superior surgical efficacy with comparable perioperative mortality rate and short-term oncological outcomes, while this was at the cost of increased perioperative minor complications.

Changes of Endocan and its effect on hepatic stem cells during the rapid proliferation process of residual liver after ALPPS procedure

To establish a stable animal model of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS), as well as to explore whether Endocan and HGF/c-Met signalling pathway participate in the regeneration of residual liver through hepatic stem cells after ALPPS procedure. C57BL/6J male mice weighing 18-22 g were used in this study. The liver regeneration index was expressed as the ratio of Future Liver Remnant (FLR)/Body weight (BW) × 100%. Expression of hepatic stem cell marker CK19 was assessed by immunohistochemical method. Serum levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and Endocan were detected by ELISA. VEGF, Endocan and c-Met contents in residual liver were observed by Western blot analysis. The expression levels of Endocan and HGF/c-Met pathway-related genes were evaluated by qRT-PCR. Compared with the portal vein ligation (PVL) group and sham group, the ALPPS group had more CK19 positive cells and a higher liver regeneration index (P < .05). The serum levels of VEGF in the ALPPS group were increased significantly (P < .05) from the first day and decreased from the second day after surgery, and maintained consistently higher than that of the sham group (P < .05). Western blot showed that the expressions of VEGF and Endocan in ALPPS group were significantly higher than those in both sham and PVL groups at different time points. The Endocan plays a role in the rapid regeneration of residual liver after ALPPS, likely through the interaction with the HGF/c-Met pathway to affect the hepatic stem cell population. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY: Our animal study provides valuable insights on the effect of Endocan in the process of rapid regeneration of residual liver after ALPPS, which would lead to the possible expansion of clinical research on ALPPS surgery and further studies on its molecular underpinning during liver regeneration.

Improving the Safety of Major Resection for Hepatobiliary Malignancy: Portal Vein Embolization and Recent Innovations in Liver Regeneration Strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

For three decades, portal vein embolization (PVE) has been the "gold-standard" strategy to hypertrophy the anticipated future liver remnant (FLR) in advance of major hepatectomy. During this time, CT volumetry was the most common method to preoperatively assess FLR quality and function and used to determine which patients are appropriate surgical candidates. This review provides the most up-to-date methods for preoperatively assessing the anticipated FLR and summarizes data from the currently available strategies used to induce FLR hypertrophy before surgery for hepatobiliary malignancy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Functional and physiological imaging is increasingly replacing standard CT volumetry as the method of choice for preoperative FLR assessment. PVE, associating liver partition and portal vein ligation, radiation lobectomy, and liver venous deprivation are all currently available techniques to hypertrophy the FLR. Each strategy has pros and cons based on tumor type, extent of resection, presence or absence of underlying liver disease, age, performance status, complication rates, and other factors. Numerous strategies can lead to FLR hypertrophy and improve the safety of major hepatectomy. Which is best has yet to be determined.

Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy for Unresectable Hepatitis B Virus-related Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Single Center Study of 45 Patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to assess the efficacy and safety of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) in patients with hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

BACKGROUND

ALPSS allows curative resection of conventionally-unresectable liver tumors. However, its role in HCC is largely unknown.

METHODS

Consecutive HCC patients who underwent ALPPS at our center between April 2013 and September 2017 were retrospectively studied. The oncological results were compared with patients receiving transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE), and patients undergoing one-stage resection by using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

The median tumor diameter was 13 cm (range: 6-22 cm) in patients with a single tumor (n = 28), whereas the median total tumor diameter was 12 cm (range: 9-31 cm) in patients with multiple tumors (n = 17). After stage-1 ALPPS, the median future liver remnant (FLR) increased by 56.8%. The stage-2 ALPPS was completed in 41 patients (91.1%) after a median of 12 days. The 90-day mortality rate was 11.1% (5/45). The overall survival (OS) rates at 1- and 3-year were 64.2% and 60.2%, whereas the disease-free survival (DFS) rates at 1 and 3 years were 47.6% and 43.9%, respectively. On PSM analysis, the long-term survival of patients undergoing ALPPS was significantly better than those receiving TACE (OS, P = 0.004; DFS, P < 0.0001) and similar to those subjected to one-stage liver resection (OS, P = 0.514; DFS, P = 0.849).

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term survival after ALPPS was significantly better than TACE, and similar to those after one-stage liver resection. ALPPS is a viable treatment option for patients with unresectable HCC in selected patients.

In situ split plus portal vein ligation (ISLT) - a salvage procedure following inefficient portal vein embolization to gain adequate future liver remnant volume prior to extended liver resection

Background

Right extended liver resection is frequently required to achieve tumor-free margins. Portal venous embolization (PVE) of the prospective resected hepatic segments for conditioning segments II/III does not always induce adequate hypertrophy in segments II and III (future liver remnant volume (FLRV)) for extended right-resection. Here, we present the technique of in situ split dissection along segments II/III plus portal disruption to segments IV-VIII (ISLT) as a salvage procedure to overcome inadequate gain of FLRV after PVE.

Methods

In eight patients, FLRV was further pre-conditioned following failed PVE prior to hepatectomy (ISLT-group). We compared FLRV changes in the ISLT group with patients receiving extended right hepatectomy following sufficient PVE (PVEres-group). Survival of the ISLT-group was compared to PVEres patients and PVE patients with insufficient FLRV gain or tumor progress who did not receive further surgery (PVEnores-group).

Results

Patient characteristics and surgical outcome were comparable in both groups. The mean FLRV-to-body-weight ratio in the ISLT group was smaller than in the PVEres-group pre- and post-PVE. One intraoperative mortality due to a coronary infarction was observed for an ISLT patient. ISLT was successfully completed in the remaining seven ISLT patients. Liver function and 2-year survival of ~ 50% was comparable to patients with extended right hepatectomy after efficient PVE. Patients who received a PVE but who were not subsequently resected (PVEnores) demonstrated no survival beyond 4 months.

Conclusion

Despite extended embolization of segments I and IV-VIII, ISLT should be considered if hypertrophy was not adequate. Liver function and overall survival after ISLT was comparable to patients with trisectionectomy after efficient PVE.

Segment 4 occlusion in portal vein embolization increase future liver remnant hypertrophy - A Scandinavian cohort study

BACKGROUND

The additional value of including segment 4 (S4) portal branches in right portal vein embolization (rPVE) is debated. The aim of the study was to explore this in a large multicenter cohort.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study consisting of all patients subjected to rPVE from August 2012 to May 2017 at six Scandinavian university hospitals. PVE technique was essentially the same in all centers, except for the selection of main embolizing agent (particles or glue). All centers used coils or particles to embolize S4 branches. A subgroup analysis was performed after excluding patients with parts of or whole S4 included in the future liver remnant (FLR).

RESULTS

232 patients were included in the study, of which 36 received embolization of the portal branches to S4 in addition to rPVE. The two groups (rPVE vs rPVE + S4) were similar (gender, age, co-morbidity, diagnosis, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, bilirubin levels prior to PVE and embolizing material), except for diabetes mellitus which was more frequent in the rPVE + S4 group (p = 0.02). Pre-PVE FLR was smaller in the S4 group (333 vs 380 ml, p = 0.01). rPVE + S4 resulted in a greater percentage increase of the FLR size compared to rPVE alone (47 vs 38%, p = 0.02). A subgroup analysis, excluding all patients with S4 included in the FLR, was done. There was no longer a difference in pre-PVE FLR between groups (333 vs 325 ml, p = 0.9), but still a greater percentage increase and also absolute increase of the FLR in the rPVE + S4 group (48 vs 38% and 155 vs 112 ml, p = 0.01 and 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In this large multicenter cohort study, additional embolization of S4 did demonstrate superior growth of the FLR compared to standard right PVE.

[Preconditioning of the liver]

Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) still represents a severe complication after major liver resection associated with a high mortality. In addition to an insufficient residual liver volume various factors play an important role in the pathophysiology of PHLF. These include the quality of the parenchyma, liver function, perfusion, i.e. maintenance of adequate inflow and outflow, as well as the condition of the patient and comorbidities. While the liver volume is relatively easy to evaluate using modern imaging techniques, the evaluation of liver function and liver quality require a differentiated approach. Both factors can be influenced by the constitutional status of the patient, medical history and previous treatment and must be given sufficient consideration in the risk evaluation. An adequate perfusion, e.g. portal and arterial circulation and adequate outflow by at least one hepatic vein as well an adequate biliary drainage should be always guaranteed in order to allow regeneration of the residual liver tissue. Only the understanding of all these aspects will support the surgeon in a correct and safe evaluation of the resectability. Additionally, the liver surgeon should be aware of all available perioperative and postoperative options to treat and to prevent PHLF. In this review article the most important questions regarding the risk factors related to PHLF are presented and the potential therapeutic and prophylactic management is described. The main goal is to ensure functional operability of the patient if oncological resectability is possible. In other words: in the case of correct oncological indication, the liver surgeon should be able to resect what is resectable or, alternatively, make resectable what primarily was not resectable.

Multidisciplinary management of liver metastases in patients with colorectal cancer: a consensus of SEOM, AEC, SEOR, SERVEI, and SEMNIM

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has the second-highest tumor incidence and is a leading cause of death by cancer. Nearly 20% of patients with CRC will have metastases at the time of diagnosis, and more than 50% of patients with CRC develop metastatic disease during the course of their disease. A group of experts from the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology, the Spanish Association of Surgeons, the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology, the Spanish Society of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, and the Spanish Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging met to discuss and provide a multidisciplinary consensus on the management of liver metastases in patients with CRC. The group defined the different scenarios in which the disease can present: fit or unfit patients with resectable liver metastases, patients with potential resectable liver metastases, and patients with unresectable liver metastases. Within each scenario, the different strategies and therapeutic approaches are discussed.

Conversion therapy and suitable timing for subsequent salvage surgery for initially unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: What is new?

AIM

To review the conversion therapy for initially unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients and the suitable timing for subsequent salvage surgery.

METHODS

A PubMed search was undertaken from 1987 to 2017 to identify articles using the keywords including “unresectable” “hepatocellular carcinoma”, ”hepatectomy”, ”conversion therapy”, “resection”, “salvage surgery” and “downstaging”. Additional studies were investigated through a manual search of the references from the articles. The exclusion criteria were duplicates, case reports, case series, videos, contents unrelated to the topic, comments, and editorial essays. The main and widely used conversion therapies and the suitable timing for subsequent salvage surgery were discussed in detail. Two members of our group independently performed the literature search and data extraction.

RESULTS

Liver volume measurements [future liver remnant (FLR)/total liver volume or residual liver volume/bodyweight ratio] and function tests (scoring systems and liver stiffness) were often performed in order to justify whether patients were suitable candidates for surgery. Successful conversion therapy was usually defined as downstaging the tumor, increasing FLR and providing subsequent salvage surgery, without increasing complications, morbidity or mortality. The requirements for performing salvage surgery after transcatheter arterial chemoembolization were the achievement of a partial remission in radiology, the disappearance of the portal vein thrombosis, and the lack of extrahepatic metastasis. Patients with a standardized FLR (sFLR) > 20% were good candidates for surgery after portal vein embolization, while other predictive parameters like growth rate, kinetic growth rate were treated as an effective supplementary. There was probably not enough evidence to provide a standard operation time after associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy or yttrium-90 microsphere radioembolization. The indications of any combinations of conversion therapies and the subsequent salvage surgery time still need to be carefully and comprehensively evaluated.

CONCLUSION

Conversion therapy is recommended for the treatment of initially unresectable HCC, and the suitable subsequent salvage surgery time should be reappraised and is closely related to its previous therapeutic effect.

Tourniquet-ALPPS is a promising treatment for very large hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

When very large hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCCs) with insufficient future liver remnants are treated using associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS), the outcome is often poor. We therefore tested the efficacy of a modified version of that technique, tourniquet-ALPPS. A review of the literature examining outcomes of HCC and IHCC patients treated with ALPPS revealed the incidences of morbidity ≥ III and postoperative mortality to be respectively 20.7% and 16.1% among HCC patients and 50% and 45.4% among IHCC patients. In the present case series, in which HCC and IHCC patients were treated with tourniquet-ALPPS, median tumor size was 100 mm (range: 70–200 mm). After surgical stage I, there was no morbidity, no mortality and the median future liver remnant had increased at day 7 by 76%. In surgical stage II, 100% of tumors were resectable (8 right trisectionectomies, 5 with inferior vena cava resection). Two patients experienced serious morbidity ≥ IIIB and 1 patient died (11%). One- and 3-year overall survival was 75% and 60%, respectively. Thus tourniquet-ALPPS appears to be an effective alternative to classical ALPPS for the treatment of patients with HCC or IHCC.

The use of a NHS-PEG coated, collagen-based sealant in a patient undergoing Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS)

INTRODUCTION

ALPPS (Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy) is a new two-stage hepatectomy for patients in whom conventional treatment is not feasible due to insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). During stage one of ALPPS, accelerated growth of the FLR is induced by ligation of the portal vein and in situ split of the liver, which prevents interlobar collateral portal circulation and attributes to the accelerated hypertrophy response. This can present a risk for postoperative haemorrhage. Furthermore, adhesion of the adjacent resection surfaces might complicate the second stage of the procedure. Hemopatch® is a flexible, NHS-PEG coated, absorbable collagen-based sealant that provides haemostasis. This paper illustrates the use of Hemopatch during ALPPS for hemostasis and prevention of adhesions between the cut-surfaces of the liver.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

An 81-year-old patient requiring right hemihepatectomy for synchronous liver metastases underwent ALPPS. During stage one, Hemopatch was applied according to the manufacturer's instructions to the hepatic resection surfaces. Stage-2 was performed uneventfully, with no adhesions observed in the resection plane 18days after the first stage. The patient was discharged without any major complications.

DISCUSSION

Hemopatch is a useful tool in prevention of postoperative haemorrhage in patients undergoing ALPPS procedure as well as in the prevention of adhesions between the cut-surfaces after transection. This facilitates stage-2 of the procedure which potentially improves postoperative outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Topic haemostatic agents to cover the transection surface during stage one of ALPPS could help to prevent adverse interstage events.

Resection for Klatskin tumors: technical complexities and results

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