Is wider surgical margin justified for better clinical outcomes in patients with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma?

Salvage Hepatectomy for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Radiofrequency Ablation: A Retrospective Cohort Study with Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Although radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a well-established locoregional treatment modality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the optimal strategy to handle local recurrence after ablation is still debated. This study aims to investigate the role of salvage hepatectomy (SH) as a rescue therapy for recurrent HCC after RFA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2004 and December 2020, 1161 patients were subject to surgical resection for HCC. Among them, 47 patients who underwent SH for local recurrence after ablation were retrospectively analyzed and compared to a propensity score-matched group of controls (n = 47) who received primary hepatectomy (PH). Short-term and long-term outcomes were analyzed between the two groups.

RESULTS

After matching, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative morbidity rates showed no statistically significant difference. Tumors in the SH group were associated with poor differentiation (SH 9 (19.1%) vs. PH 1 (2.1%), p < 0.001). The 5-year disease-free survival rates (31.6% vs. 73.4%, p < 0.001) and overall survival rates (80.3% vs. 94.2%, p = 0.047) were significantly lower in the SH group. In multivariable analysis, less extensive resection compared to the initial plan (hazard ratio (HR) 4.68, p = 0.024), higher grade (HR 5.38, P < 0.001), negative but close (<0.1 cm) resection margin (HR 22.14, p = 0.007), and R1 resection (HR 3.13, p = 0.006) were significant predictors for recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

SH for recurrent tumors after ablation showed safety and effectiveness equivalent to primary resection. As recurrent tumors show a higher grade and more aggressive behavior, more extensive resections with wide surgical margins are necessary to prevent recurrence.

Combined analysis of imaging tumor capsule with imaging tumor size guides the width of resection margin for solitary hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The optimal width of resection margin (RM) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the value of imaging tumor capsule (ITC) and imaging tumor size (ITS) in guiding RM width for patients with HCC.

METHODS

Patients who underwent hepatectomy for HCC in our center were retrospectively reviewed. ITC (complete/incomplete) and ITS (≤ 3 cm/> 3 cm) were assessed by preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Using subgroup analyses based on ITC and ITS, the impact of RM width [narrow RM (< 5 mm)/wide RM (≥ 5 mm)] on recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and RM recurrence was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 247 patients with solitary HCC were included. ITC and ITS were independent predictors for RFS and OS in the entire cohort. In patients with ITS ≤ 3 cm, neither ITC nor RM width showed a significant impact on prognosis, and the incidence of RM recurrence was comparable between the narrow RM and wide RM groups (15.6% vs. 4.3%, P = 0.337). In patients with ITS > 3 cm and complete ITC, the narrow RM group exhibited comparable RFS, OS, and incidence of RM recurrence with the wide RM group (P = 0.606, 0.916, and 0.649, respectively). However, in patients with ITS > 3 cm and incomplete ITC, the wide RM group showed better RFS and OS and a lower incidence of RM recurrence compared with the narrow RM group (P = 0.037, 0.018, and 0.046, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

As MRI-based preoperative markers, conjoint analysis of ITC with ITS aids in determining RM width for solitary HCC patients. Narrow RM is applicable in patients with ITS ≤ 3 cm regardless of ITC status and in those with ITS > 3 cm and complete ITC. Wide RM is preferred in those with ITS > 3 cm and incomplete ITC.

Prognostic Impact of Surgical Margin in Hepatectomy on Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Objective

This study aims to comprehensively evaluate the prognostic impact of the surgical margin in hepatectomy on patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

A comprehensive and systematic search for eligible articles published in English before July 2021 was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase electronic databases. The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were the primary endpoints.

Results

In total, 37 observational studies with 12,295 cases were included in this meta-analysis. The results revealed that a wide surgical margin (≥1 cm) was associated with better OS (hazard ration (HR), 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63–0.77) and DFS (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.61–0.71) compared to a narrow surgical margin (<1 cm). Subgroup analyses were conducted based on median follow-up time, gender, country, hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) status, tumor number, and liver cirrhosis. The prognostic benefit of a wide surgical margin was consistent in most subgroups, however, analysis of studies from Western countries showed that margin width was not associated with prognosis.

Conclusion

In summary, a surgical margin wider than 1 cm prolongs the long-term prognosis of HCC patients compared to a surgical margin narrower than 1 cm.

Hepatectomy for Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Resection Margin Width Does Not Predict Survival

BACKGROUND

The survival benefit of negative margins for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been demonstrated. However, there is no consensus regarding the optimal resection margin width. We assessed the impact of hepatic resection margin width for solitary HCC on overall (OS), recurrence-free (RFS), and liver-specific recurrence-free survival (LSRFS).

METHODS

Clinicopathologic data were retrospectively collected for solitary HCC patients who underwent a negative margin hepatectomy (1992-2015). Margin width was categorized in tertiles as "narrow" (≤ 0.3 cm), "intermediate" (0.31-1.0 cm), or "wide" (> 1.0 cm). Survival was compared among groups.

RESULTS

Of the 178 included patients, most were male (76%); median age, MELD score, and tumor size were 63 years, 8, and 5.2 cm, respectively; 93% were Child-Pugh class A. Median margin width was 0.5 cm. Median follow-up and OS were 47.8 months and 76.7 months, respectively. There was no significant survival difference among narrow, intermediate, and wide margin groups with a median OS of 53 months (IQR 21-not reached [NR]), 74 months (IQR 14-138), and 97 months (IQR 37-142) (p = 0.87), respectively. Median RFS was 33.0 months; again, there was no difference among narrow, intermediate, and wide margin groups with a median of 31 months (IQR 18-NR), 45 months (IQR 14-NR), and 27 months (IQR 11-NR), respectively (p = 0.66). Median LSRFS was 63.0 months (IQR 14-NR) with no difference among groups (p = 0.87). In multivariate analyses, margin width was not associated with OS (p = 0.77), RFS (p = 0.74), or LSRFS (p = 0.92). Findings were similar in all subgroups analyzed (≤ 5 cm, > 5 cm, microvascular invasion, T1, T2/T3, anatomical or non-anatomical resection, major or minor hepatectomy).

CONCLUSIONS

Narrow margins appear to be oncologically safe and the feasibility of achieving wide margins should not determine resectability.

Effect of surgical margin on postoperative prognosis in patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity score matching analysis

Objective: The effect of surgical margin (SM) on the postoperative prognosis of patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of SM on the postoperative prognosis of patients with solitary HCC by using propensity score matching (PSM).

Methods: Patients with solitary HCC who underwent liver resection were divided into a wide margin group (1.0 cm or more, group W) and a narrow margin group (< 1.0 cm, group N). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) associated with the SM status and the factors influencing postoperative prognosis were evaluated.

Results: Before PSM, the indicators were not balanced between the two groups. PFS and OS were significantly lower in group N than group W. The factors affecting postoperative prognosis were international normalized ratio (INR), AST, capsule integrity, microvascular invasion, tumour embolus and tumour size. After PSM, data of both groups were balanced and comparable, and no significant differences in OS or PFS between the two groups. The INR in the above affecting factors was excluded.

Conclusion: For solitary HCC patients with negative SMs, SM size does not affect prognosis. INR, AST, capsule integrity, microvascular invasion, tumour embolus and tumour size are independent factors influencing the postoperative prognosis of solitary HCC patients.

Narrow-Margin Hepatectomy Resulted in Higher Recurrence and Lower Overall Survival for R0 Resection Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Purpose

To evaluate the impact of resection margin on recurrence pattern and survival for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with narrow margin resection, with the aim to guide postoperative treatment.

Materials and Methods

Two hundred forty HCC patients after curative hepatectomy between 2014 and 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. The cases were divided into narrow-margin (width of resection margin <1cm, n=106) and wide-margin (width of resection margin ≥1cm, n=134) groups based on the width of resection margin. Recurrence pattern, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between the above two groups. An additional cohort of nine cases with positive margin plus post-operative stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) was also analyzed for the recurrence pattern.

Results

Postoperative recurrence was found in 128 (53.3%) patients. The recurrence rate was significantly higher in narrow-margin group than that in wide-margin group (P=0.001), especially for the pattern of marginal recurrence (20.8 vs. 4.5%, P=0.003). The 1-, 2-, 3-year RFS rates for the narrow-margin and wide-margin groups were 55.8, 43.9, 36.9, and 78.7, 67.9, 60.2%, respectively, with significant difference between the two groups (P<0.001). Patients with narrow margin showed a tendency of decreased OS than those with wide margin (P<0.001). As comparison, the nine cases with positive margin treated with postoperative SBRT showed low recurrence rate and no marginal recurrence was found.

Conclusion

Patients with narrow resection margin were associated with higher recurrence rate and worse survival than those with wide resection margin. These patients may benefit from adjuvant local treatment, such as radiotherapy.

Ideal Surgical Margin to Prevent Early Recurrence After Hepatic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS

Postoperative early recurrence after hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) poses a challenge to surgeons, and the effect of a surgical margin is still controversial. This study aimed to identify an ideal margin to prevent early recurrence.

METHODS

A total of 226 consecutive patients who underwent primary curative hepatic resection for solitary and primary HCC were enrolled. The definition of early recurrence was determined using the minimum P value approach. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors of early recurrence. The receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify the optimal cut-off of the surgical margin and early recurrence.

RESULTS

Recurrence within 8 months induced the poorest overall survival (P = 2×10^-15). ROC analysis showed that the optimal cut-off value of the surgical margin was 7 mm. The risk factors of early recurrence (≤ 8-month recurrence) were preoperative alpha-fetoprotein levels ≥ 100 ng/ml (Odds ratio [OR] 4.92 [2.28-10.77], P < 0.0001) and a surgical margin < 7 mm (OR 3.09 [1.26-8.85], P = 0.01) by multivariable analysis. The probability of early recurrence ranged from 5.0% in the absence of any factors to 43.5% in the presence of both factors. Among patients with alpha-fetoprotein levels ≥ 100 ng/ml, non-capsule formation, or microvascular invasion, there was a significant difference in 5-year overall survival between surgical margins of < 7 mm and ≥ 7 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

A > 7-mm margin is important to prevent early recurrence. Patients with HCC and alpha-fetoprotein levels > 100 ng/ml, non-capsule formation, or microvascular invasion may have a survival benefit from a ≥ 7-mm margin.

Effect of Surgical Margin Width on Patterns of Recurrence among Patients Undergoing R0 Hepatectomy for T1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An International Multi-Institutional Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Although a positive surgical margin is a known prognostic factor for recurrence, the optimal surgical margin width in the context of an R0 resection for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is still debated. The aim of the current study was to examine the impact of wide (> 1 cm) versus narrow (< 1 cm) surgical margin status on the incidence and recurrence patterns among patients with T1 HCC undergoing an R0 hepatectomy.

METHODS

Between 1998 and 2017, patients with T1 HCC who underwent R0 hepatectomy for stage T1 HCC were identified using an international multi-institutional database. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was estimated, and recurrence patterns were examined based on whether patients had a wide versus narrow resection margins.

RESULTS

Among 404 patients, median patient age was 66 years (IQR: 58-73). Most patients (n = 326, 80.7%) had surgical margin < 1 cm, while 78 (19.3%) patients had a > 1 cm margin. The majority of patients had early recurrences (< 24 months) in both margin width groups (< 1 cm: 70.3% vs > 1 cm: 85.7%, p = 0.141); recurrence site was mostly intrahepatic (< 1 cm: 77% vs > 1 cm: 61.9%, p = 0.169). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year RFS among patients with margin < 1 cm were 77%, 48.9%, and 35.3% versus 81.7%, 65.8%, and 60.7% for patients with margin > 1 cm, respectively (p = 0.02). Among patients undergoing anatomic resection, resection margin did not impact RFS (3-year RFS: < 1 cm: 49.2% vs > 1 cm: 58.9%, p = 0.169), whereas in the non-anatomic resection group, margin width > 1 cm was associated with a better 3-year RFS compared to margin < 1 cm (86.7% vs 47.3%, p = 0.017). On multivariable analysis, margin > 1 cm remained protective against recurrence (HR = 0.50, 95%CI 0.28-0.89), whereas Child-Pugh B (HR = 2.13, 95%CI 1.09-4.15), AFP > 20 ng/mL (HR = 1.71, 95%CI 1.18-2.48), and presence of microscopic lymphovascular invasion (HR = 1.48, 95%CI 1.01-2.18) were associated with a higher hazard of recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Resection margins > 1 cm predicted better RFS among patients undergoing R0 hepatectomy for T1 HCC, especially small (< 5 cm) HCC. Although resection margin width did not influence outcomes after anatomic resection, wider margins were more important among patients undergoing non-anatomic liver resections.

Impact of marginal resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE

The surgical margin for liver resection to treat hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is occasionally < 1 mm. This study determined the impact of a surgical margin < 1 mm [marginal resection (MR)] on the types of recurrence and the prognosis in solitary HCC.

METHODS

The data of 454 patients undergoing curative liver resection for solitary HCC in our institution were analyzed. The patients were divided into the MR (n = 90) and non-MR (n = 364) groups. The clinicopathological data and outcomes after liver resection were compared. A case-matching analysis using a propensity scoring method was also performed.

RESULTS

The recurrence-free survival was significantly and overall survival was marginally significantly lower in the MR group than in the non-MR group (p = 0.012-0.051, respectively). According to a multivariate analysis, MR was not a significant independent factor for recurrence-free survival (p = 0.056). After propensity score matching, there were no significant differences in the recurrence-free and overall survival between the two groups (p = 0.375-0.496, respectively). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the intrahepatic recurrence patterns between the two groups before and after matching.

CONCLUSION

MR for solitary HCC might be sufficient in patients with a limited liver functional reserve.

Is anatomical resection necessary for early hepatocellular carcinoma? A single institution retrospective experience

Aim: The present study aimed to determine whether anatomical resection was necessary for early hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: A log-rank test or two-stage test was used for univariate analysis. A Cox proportional hazards model was used for multivariable analysis. Results: For patients without microvascular invasion, a resection margin ≥1 cm provided the longest recurrence-free survival time regardless of whether they underwent anatomical resection (p = 0.005) or nonanatomical resection (p = 0.006). For patients with microvascular invasion, anatomical resection combined with a resection margin ≥1 cm provided the longest recurrence-free survival time compared with other treatments (p = 0.001). Conclusion: Anatomical resection was not necessary for patients without microvascular invasion. However, for patients with microvascular invasion, both anatomical resection and a resection margin ≥1 cm were necessary.

Clinical relevance of alpha-fetoprotein in determining resection margin for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is associated with high recurrence rates. Adequate resection margin which is carried out by surgeons may reduce tumor recurrence. Nevertheless, the margin width remains controversial particularly in cirrhotic patients where optimal parenchymal preservation is necessary. This study aims to find a reference for proposing the resection margin when liver resection is planning.Totally, 534 patients who received liver resection for HCC were included. The clinical profiles of the patients, tumor characteristics and patients' survival were all collected. The patients were classified according to resection margin (<0.5 cm, 0.5-0.99 cm, and ≥1 cm) and preoperative α-fetoprotein (AFP) levels (<15 ng/ml, 15-200 ng/ml, and >200 ng/ml), then survival was calculated.Most of the patients had hepatitis B (52.4%) and hepatitis C (24.0%) infection. Multivariate analysis showed that narrow resection margin (<0.5 cm) (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.323, P = .024), high AFP level (≥15 ng/ml) (HR: 1.305, P = .039), major extent of resection (≥3 segments) (HR: 1.507, P = .034), and underlying cirrhosis (HR: 1.404, P = .009) were independent risk factors for disease-free survival. In further survival analysis, resection margin was not significant for disease-free survival if serum AFP levels were <15ng/ml. However, for the patients with AFP level between 15 and 200 ng/ml, resection margin ≥0.5 cm was significant to improve 5-year disease-free survival from 24.6 months to 38.7 months (P = .040). For the patients with AFP >200 ng/ml, resection margin had to be extended to ≥1 cm to improve 5-year disease-free survival from 33.9 months to 48.8 months (P = .012). When the patients meeting AFP <15 ng/ml with tumor-free margin, AFP between 15 and 200 ng/ml with margin ≥0.5 cm, and AFP level >200 ng/ml with margin ≥1 cm were compared, their survival rates were not different.Adequate resection margin can be guided by pre-operative AFP levels. Tumor-free margin is enough for patients with normal AFP level. A resection margin ≥0.5 cm is advised for the patients with AFP between 15 and 200 ng/ml, and ≥1 cm for the patients with AFP over 200 ng/ml.

A wide-margin liver resection improves long-term outcomes for patients with HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma with microvascular invasion

BACKGROUND

The impact of the resection margin on survival outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma remains to be determined. This study aimed to examine the association between the width of resection margin and the presence of microvascular invasion in hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

We reviewed data on 2,508 consecutive patients who underwent liver resection for a solitary, hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma for operative morbidity, tumor recurrence, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Microvascular invasion was identified histologically in 929 patients (37.0%). A wide margin of resection (≥1 cm, n = 384) resulted in better 5-year recurrence and overall survival versus a narrow margin of resection (<1 cm, n = 545) among patients with microvascular invasion (71.1% versus 85.9%; 44.9% versus 25.0%; both P < .001), but not in patients without microvascular invasion (P = .131, .182). Similar results were identified after propensity-score matching. A wide margin resection also had a lesser incidence of early recurrence developed within the first postoperative 24 months (58.1% versus 72.7%; P < .001). Compared with a wide resection margin, a narrow margin was associated with worse recurrence and overall survival in patients with microvascular invasion (hazard ratio: 1.50 and 1.75). In addition, a wide or a narrow resection margin had differences in the rate of grade I-III, but not grade IV complications (31.0% versus 21.7%; P = .017; 3.5% versus 1.6%; P = .147) among cirrhotic patients with microvascular invasion.

CONCLUSION

The presence of microvascular invasion was associated with a worse prognosis after resection. A wide resection margin resulted in better long-term prognoses versus a narrow resection margin among patients with hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma with microvascular invasion.

Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) in short- and long-term outcomes compared to open hepatectomy (OH) in patients treated for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

An electronic search of reports published before August 2017 was carried out to identify comparative studies evaluating LH versus OH for HCC.

RESULTS

A total of 5889 patients (2421 underwent LH; 3468 underwent OH) were included in our meta-analysis from 47 studies. Laparoscopic hepatectomies were associated with favorable outcomes in terms of operative blood loss (mean difference [MD], -147.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], -217.00, -77.55), blood transfusion requirement (odds ratio [OR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.40, 0.65), pathologic resection margins (MD, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.02, 0.12; P = 0.01), R0 resection rate (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.98, 1.84; P = 0.07), and length of hospital stay (MD, -5.13; 95% confidence interval, -6.23, -4.03). There were no differences between the groups in overall survival (OS) at 1 year (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.00, 1.98), 3 years (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.93, 1.36), or 5 years (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.94, 1.46), in disease-free survival (DFS) at 1 (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94, 1.51), 3 years (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.86, 1.33), or 5 years (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.92, 1.40), or in recurrence (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74, 1.08).

CONCLUSION

Compared to OH, LH is superior in terms of lower intraoperative blood loss and the requirement for blood transfusion, larger pathologic resection margins, increased R0 resection rates, and shorter length of hospital stay. Laparoscopic hepatectomy and OH have similar OS, DFS, and recurrence.

Oncological and surgical result of hepatoma after robot surgery

BACKGROUND

Most liver resections are currently performed using an open approach. Robotic hepatectomy has been suggested as a safe and effective approach for hepatocellular carcinoma; however, studies regarding oncological and surgical outcomes are still limited. Accordingly, we performed this study to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes between robotic and open approaches.

METHODS

Between June, 2013 and July, 2016, a total of 63 HCC patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy, and 177 patients undergoing open hepatectomy were included in this study to assess the surgical and oncological outcomes after hepatectomy. The data of demographic, clinical features, hepatitis profile, tumor characters, TNM stage, surgical type, pathological outcomes, and postoperative results were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The demographic and clinical features of patients with HCC in both groups were statistically comparable. The robotic group had longer operative times (296 ± 84 vs. 182 ± 51 min, p = 0.032). The postoperative complications rate was slightly lower in the robotic group (11.1 vs. 15.3%, p = 0.418). The rate of Ro resection was similar in both groups (93.7 vs. 96%, p = 0.56). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the robotic group (6.21 ± 2.06 vs. 8.18 ± 6.99 days, p = 0.001). The overall recurrence rate of HCC was lower in the robotic group (27 vs. 37.3%, p = 0.140). The 1, 2, 3 year disease-free survival rates were 72.5, 64.3, and 61.6%, respectively, for the open group, while they were 77.8, 71.9, and 71.9%, respectively, for the robotic group, (p = 0.325). The 1, 2, 3 year overall survival rates were 95.4, 92.3, and 92.3%, respectively, for the open group, while they were 100, 97.7, and 97.7%, respectively, for the robotic group (p = 0.137).

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery is a safe and feasible procedure for liver resection in selected patients. The oncological and surgical outcomes of robotic hepatectomy were comparable to open surgery. The robotic hepatectomy carried significantly shorter length of hospital stay.

Correlation between Resection Margin and Disease Recurrence with a Restricted Cubic Spline Model in Patients with Resected Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The relationship between resection margin (RM) and recurrence of resected hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is unclear.

METHODS

We reviewed clinical data for 419 patients with HCC. The oncologic outcomes were compared between 2 groups of patients classified according to the inflexion point of the restricted cubic spline plot.

RESULTS

The patients were divided according to an RM of <1 cm (n = 233; narrow RM group) or ≥1 cm (n = 186; wide RM group). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate was lower (34.8 vs. 43.8%, p = 0.042) and recurrence near the resection site was more frequent (4.7 vs. 0%, p = 0.010) in the narrow RM group. Patients with multiple lesions, or prior transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) were excluded from subgroup analyses. In patients with a 2-5 cm HCC, the 5-year RFS was greater in the wide RM group (54.4 vs. 32.5%, p = 0.036). Narrow RM (hazard ratio 1.750, 95% CI 1.029-2.976, p = 0.039) was independently associated with disease recurrence.

CONCLUSION

In patients with a single 2-5 cm HCC without prior TACE/RFA, an RM of ≥1 cm was associated with lower risk of recurrence after liver resection.

Prognostic impact of surgical margin in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical margin is an important prognostic factor in hepatectomy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). But the extent of surgical margins is still controversial. Our study was designed to systematically evaluate the prognosis of different width of resection margin.

METHODS

We conducted comprehensive searches of electronic databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and the ISI Web of Science for relevant studies. A meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 7 studies comprising 1932 patients were included. The patients with wider surgical margin were significantly higher than those with narrow surgical margin on 3-year overall survival (odds ratio [OR]: 1.58, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.21-2.06, P = .0008), 5-year overall survival (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.20-2.59, P = .004), 1-year disease-free survival (DFS)/recurrence-free survival (RFS) (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.12-1.82, P = .005), 3-year DFS/RFS (OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.35-2.03, P < .00001), and 5-year DFS/RFS (OR: 1.69, 95% CI: 1.37-2.08, P < .00001). There was no significant difference in the 1-year overall survival rate for the 2 groups (OR: 1.24, 95% CI: 0.89-1.72, P = .20).

CONCLUSION

In comparison with the narrow surgical margin group (<1 cm), the wide surgical margin (≥1 cm) can significantly improve the prognosis in patients with HCC.

A double blinded prospective randomized trial comparing the effect of anatomic versus non-anatomic resection on hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of anatomic resection (AR) versus non-anatomic resection (NAR) on recurrence rates in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

Eligible patients were randomized to AR or NAR from January 2006 to July 2007 at a single center. The primary outcome was the 2-year recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, time to first recurrence, 1-, 3-, and 5-year RFS, and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Fifty-three (51%) and 52 (50%) patients underwent NAR and AR, respectively. A larger proportion of patients achieved margins ≥20 mm in the AR group (52% vs. 30%; P = 0.023). Complications (blood loss, transfusion requirement, and hospital stay) were similar between the two groups. Median follow-up was 33 (range, 2-77) months. Incidence of local recurrence at 2 years was 30% and 59% in the AR and NAR groups, respectively. Median time to first local recurrence in the AR group was significantly longer than in the NAR group (53 vs. 10 months, P = 0.010). There was no difference in overall RFS between the two groups (P = 0.290).

DISCUSSION

AR decreased the 2-year local recurrence rate and increased the time to first local recurrence compared to NAR in patients with HCC.

Radiofrequency ablation using a 10-mm target margin for small hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with liver cirrhosis: A prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To compare 3-year clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) targeting 5- or 10-mm margins for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

In total, 96 cirrhotic patients with a small solitary HCC (diameter ≤3 cm) were included in this prospective trial (ChiCTRTRC-10000954). Patients were stratified by Child-Pugh class and randomly allocated into groups targeting either wide margins (≥10 mm, WM) or narrow margins (≥5 mm but <10 mm, NM). RFA was performed under real-time monitoring, and ablative margins were evaluated by pre- and post-operative three-dimensional registration on CT.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 38.3 ± 4.8 months, 83.3% (40/48) of patients succeeded in obtaining a 10-mm margin in WM group. Based on intention-to-treat analysis, the 3-year incidences of local tumor progression (LTP) (14.9% vs 30.2%), intrahepatic recurrence (IHR) (15.0% vs 32.7%), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (31.7 ± 12.1 vs 24.0 ± 11.7 months) for WM group were significantly improved compared to NM group. Several prognostic factors were identified from univariate and multivariate analyses. Additionally, cirrhosis-stratified subgroup analyses demonstrated significant survival benefits of WM in patients with Child-Pugh class B cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

RFA treatment targeting 10-mm margin may reduce the risk of tumor recurrence in cirrhotic patients with a single small HCC.

Effect of surgical margin in R0 hepatectomy on recurrence-free survival of patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinomas without macroscopic vascular invasion

The study aimed to investigate the impact of different surgical margins on recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) without macroscopic vascular invasion.The data of 586 selected patients who underwent curative hepatectomy for HCC between 2001 and 2012 were analyzed. The patients were divided into the anatomic resection and the nonanatomic resection groups according to the surgical approaches. Each group was further divided into group A (surgical margin <5 mm), group B (5 mm ≤ surgical margin < 10 mm), and group C (surgical margin ≥10 mm). Relationship between surgical margins and RFS in different groups was established by receiver operating characteristic curve and Kaplan-Meier analyses.The RFS of the anatomic resection group was significantly longer than that of the nonanatomic resection group (P = 0.026). There were no statistical differences in RFS between groups A, B, and C (PA VS B = 0.512, PA VS C = 0.272, PB VS C = 0.822, nA = 38, nB = 43, nC = 80) in the anatomic resection group while in the nonanatomic resection group, RFSs of groups B and C were longer than that of group A (PA VS B = 0.009, PA VS C = 0.000, PB VS C = 0.505, nA = 151, nB = 119, nC = 155).The analytic results suggest that if the patients with solitary HCC without macroscopic vascular invasion fall in the anatomic resection group, a minimal surgical margin (≥0 mm) is probably appropriate for hepatectomy; however, in cases of the nonanatomic resection, a surgical margin ≥5 mm should be regarded suitable for surgery of HCC.

Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy by the Caudal Approach Versus Conventional Approach: A Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) is increasingly performed for the treatment of many liver diseases. However, it remains a challenging procedure and is limited to highly specialized centers. Increasing the safety and efficacy of LRH is crucial. This study evaluated the safety and feasibility of the novel caudal approach (CDA) in LRH and in comparison with the conventional approach (CA).

METHODS

Of a total of 40 patients who underwent LRH between June 2007 and July 2015 at our center, 10 cases underwent the CDA, while 30 underwent the CA. Operative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Clinical data and patient characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Only 1 patient required a laparoscopic-assisted procedure in the CDA group, while 14 patients were converted to laparotomy (n = 10) or laparoscopic-assisted procedures (n = 4) in the CA group, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .060). However, the difference in conversion to laparotomy between the two groups was significant (P = .043). In addition, when considering 23 patients with malignancies, the median surgical margin was significantly greater in the CDA group (n = 6) (20 mm versus 10 mm; P = .023) than in the CA group (n = 17). Other operative and postoperative outcomes were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CDA achieves safety and feasibility similar to that of the CA in LRH and requires relatively less conversion to laparotomy. In selected patients, the CDA offers an alternative option to the CA for LRH in experienced hands. Further studies with larger samples are warranted to evaluate the CDA.

The importance of surgical margins in primary malignancies of the liver

Resection is an important treatment modality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Anatomic resection is generally preferred for HCC. When anatomic resection is not feasible, prospective data have demonstrated an improved outcome among HCC patients who have a resection with wide versus narrow surgical margins. Similarly, among patients with ICC, R1 resection has been associated with worse outcomes. In addition, margin width may also impact risk of recurrence and survival. As such, provided adequate functional liver remnant remains, anatomic resection with wide margins is recommended for HCC and ICC.

Patterns of cancer recurrence in localized resected hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Tumor resection in non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with adequate liver reserve offers a potential cure, but has a high 5-year recurrence rate. We analyzed the patterns of cancer relapse after partial hepatectomy to guide post-operative management.

METHODS

A total of 144 HCC patients (1996-2011) after partial hepatectomy were reviewed. Statistical correlations were determined using univariate and partition analyses.

RESULTS

A median follow-up of 20 months showed recurrence in 71 (49%) patients, and the median time to recurrence was 11.9 months. Vascular invasion (P<0.01) and number of lesions (P<0.01) predicted for recurrence. Histologic grade was not correlated with recurrence. Twenty-two (31%) patients developed both surgical margin (SM) and concurrent intrahepatic recurrences, and 28 (40%) had non-SM intrahepatic recurrences with no other signs of recurrence. On partition analysis, the risk of marginal recurrence in patients with SM <1 mm and SM ≥1 mm was 35% and 13.5% respectively. Approximately 57% of patients with intrahepatic recurrence had recurrence ≤2.5 cm from SM.

CONCLUSIONS

Intrahepatic recurrence after partial hepatectomy is common and is significantly associated with vascular invasion and tumor stage. About 57% of patients with intrahepatic relapse had a recurrence close (≤2.5 cm) to the SM. Additionally, patients with SM <1 mm have a higher recurrence rate and may benefit from adjuvant local therapy.

Efficacy of sorafenib as adjuvant therapy to prevent early recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after curative surgery: A pilot study

AIM

Until now, no effective adjuvant therapy to prevent early recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after curative treatment has been reported. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical benefit of sorafenib as adjuvant treatment in subjects with HCC after hepatic resection.

METHODS

The pilot study was undertaken involving HCC patients who had undergone curative liver surgery with high recurrence risk factors. Time to recurrence and disease recurrence rate were assessed. Sorafenib 400 mg q.d. was administrated continuously for 4 months after hepatic resection.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients were enrolled and eligible for final data analysis. The median follow-up time was 19 months (range, 9.5-30.2). Time to recurrence in the sorafenib arm was 21.45 ± 1.98 months (mean ± standard deviation), compared to 13.44 ± 2.66 months in the control arm (P = 0.006). The median recurrence-free survival in the sorafenib arm did not reach the data cut-off date compared to 8 months in the control arm (P = 0.006). The recurrence rate between the two groups was significantly different (29.4% vs 70.7%, P = 0.032). Cox regression analysis showed that taking study medicine was the only prognostic variable associated with HCC recurrence (hazard ratio = 0.24, 95% confidence interval = 0.08-0.75, P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that setting sorafenib as adjuvant therapy for HCC to prevent early recurrence after hepatic resection could be a potential indication. The cumulative recurrence-free survival rate also demonstrated the preventive effectiveness of sorafenib.