Nonanatomical resection is comparable with anatomical resection in solitary hepatocellular carcinoma <5 cm in the right posterior section

Anatomical vs nonanatomical liver resection for solitary hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The long-term survival of patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following anatomical resection (AR) vs non-anatomical resection (NAR) is still controversial. It is necessary to investigate which approach is better for patients with solitary HCC.

AIM

To compare perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of AR and NAR for solitary HCC.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane Library. Participants of any age and sex, who underwent liver resection, were considered following the following criteria: (1) Studies reporting AR vs NAR liver resection; (2) Studies focused on primary HCC with a solitary tumor; (3) Studies reporting the long-term survival outcomes (> 5 years); and (4) Studies including patients without history of preoperative treatment. The main results were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Perioperative outcomes were also compared.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies, published between 2001 and 2020, were included in our meta-analysis, including 9444 patients who were mainly from China, Japan, and Korea. AR was performed on 4260 (44.8%) patients. The synthetic results showed that the 5-year OS [odds ratio (OR): 1.19; P < 0.001] and DFS (OR: 1.26; P < 0.001) were significantly better in the AR group than in the NAR group. AR was associated with longer operating time [mean difference (MD): 47.08; P < 0.001], more blood loss (MD: 169.29; P = 0.001), and wider surgical margin (MD = 1.35; P = 0.04) compared to NAR. There was no obvious difference in blood transfusion ratio (OR: 1.16; P = 0.65) or postoperative complications (OR: 1.24, P = 0.18).

CONCLUSION

AR is superior to NAR in terms of long-term outcomes. Thus, AR can be recommended as a reasonable surgical option in patients with solitary HCC.

Revisiting Surgical Strategies for Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Microvascular Invasion

Although liver resection (LR) and liver transplantation (LT) are widely considered as potentially curative therapies for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, there is still high risk of tumor recurrence in majority of HCC patients. Previous studies demonstrated that the presence of microvascular invasion (MVI), which was defined as the presence of tumor emboli within the vessels adjacent to HCC, was one of the key factors of early HCC recurrence and poor surgical outcomes after LR or LT. In this review, we evaluated the impact of current MVI status on surgical outcomes after curative therapies and aimed to explore the surgical strategies for HCC based on different MVI status with evidence from pathological examination. Surgical outcomes of HCC patients with MVI have been described as a varied range after curative therapies due to a broad spectrum of current definitions for MVI. Therefore, an international consensus on the validated definition of MVI in HCC is urgently needed to provide a more consistent evaluation and reliable prediction of surgical outcomes for HCC patients after curative treatments. We concluded that MVI should be further sub-classified into MI (microvessel invasion) and MPVI (microscopic portal vein invasion); for HCC patients with MPVI, local R0 resection with a narrow or wide surgical margin will get the same surgical results. However, for HCC patients with MI, local surgical resection with a wide and negative surgical margin will get better surgical outcomes. Nowadays, MVI status can only be reliably confirmed by histopathologic evaluation of surgical specimens, limiting its clinical application. Taken together, preoperative assessment of MVI is of utmost significance for selecting a reasonable surgical modality and greatly improving the surgical outcomes of HCC patients, especially in those with liver cirrhosis.

Indocyanine green fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy is considered difficult on the basis of the surgery difficulty scoring system. In this study, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the technical application of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients who underwent ICG fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy at Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Department of Zhongnan Hospital, Wuhan University, from June 2018 to December 2019, were included. The influence of patient position, trocar placement, hepatic inflow occlusion, central venous pressure (CVP), and the ICG fluorescence imaging-guided method were analyzed.

RESULTS

In 17 patients, the left lateral position was maintained when the main tumor was in the S7, and in the remaining nine patients, the supine position was maintained with the right side of the body raised when the main tumor was in the S6. Ten patients who underwent preoperative injection of ICG were successfully developed for nonanatomical hepatectomy. Sixteen patients received intraoperative ICG injection for anatomical hepatectomy (2 cases had positive imaging findings, 14 cases had negative imaging findings, and 2 cases had failed imaging findings). All patients underwent the Pringle maneuver during the procedure. Four patients were preset with subhepatic vena cava blocking and one patient with suprahepatic inferior vena cava blocking. CVP was controlled at 3.00 ± 0.63 (mean ± SD) cmH₂O. The operative time was 216.14 ± 52.05 min, and the bleeding volume was 128.57 ± 75.55 ml. Four patients had Clavien-Dindo level I complications, and one had level III complications. Postoperative hospitalization duration was 6.19 ± 1.40 days. There were 14 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, 9 with metastatic liver malignancies, 2 with hepatic hemangioma, 1 with focal nodular hyperplasia of the liver, and 10 with hepatitis B liver cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

ICG fluorescence imaging guidance could be helpful for the safe implementation of laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy.

Anatomic versus non-anatomic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, do we have an answer? A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anatomic resection (AR) is widely performed for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but it is generally not considered superior to non-anatomic resection (NAR) in terms of prognosis. So we compared the prognosis of AR with that of NAR for HCC.

METHODS

We searched for articles about AR versus NAR for HCC published between January 1998 and December 2018 in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Wanfang database. Meta-analysis was performed on patient characteristics, tumor characteristics, operative characteristics, perioperative outcomes and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 38 studies involving 9122 patients were included: 5062 were in the AR group and 4060 in the NAR group. Only one study included in our meta-analysis was randomized controlled trial, and others were comparative cohort studies. The AR group had an advantage over NAR group in the aspect of age, liver cirrhosis level and liver reserve function; but had a disadvantage in the aspect of tumor size, AFP level, operation time, blood loss, microvascular invasion, pathological differentiation and postoperative complication. The AR group gained 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) benefits versus NAR group, but there was significant heterogeneity between groups in terms of patient and tumor characteristics.

CONCLUSION

AR is superior to NAR regarding the long-term outcomes considering the relatively acceptable heterogeneity. More prospective randomized controlled trials are required to further confirm the actual effect of AR or NAR on survival for HCC with less heterogeneity.

Radiofrequency ablation vs. surgery for perivascular hepatocellular carcinoma: Propensity score analyses of long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The therapeutic outcomes of surgical resection (SR) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for perivascular hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have not been compared. The aim of this study was to compare SR with RFA as first-line treatment in patients with perivascular HCC and to evaluate the long-term outcomes of both therapies.

METHODS

This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board. The requirement for informed consent was waived. Between January 2006 and December 2010, a total of 283 consecutive patients with small perivascular HCCs (≤3 cm, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage 0 or A) underwent SR (n = 182) or RFA (n = 101) as a first-line treatment. The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were compared by propensity score matching. Subgroup analysis of these outcomes was conducted according to the type of hepatic vessels.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 7.8 years. Matching yielded 62 pairs of patients. In the two matched groups, the PFS rates at 5 and 10 years were 58.0% and 17.8%, respectively, in the SR group, and 25.4% and 14.1%, respectively, in the RFA group (p <0.001). The corresponding OS rates at 5 and 10 years were 93.5% and 91.9% in the SR group and 82.3% and 74.1% in the RFA group, respectively (p <0.001). In contrast to those in patients with perivenous HCCs, subgroup analysis indicated that extrahepatic recurrence and OS were significantly different according to the treatment modality in patients with periportal HCCs (p = 0.004 and p <0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with small perivascular HCCs, SR provided better long-term tumor control and OS than RFA, particularly for periportal tumors.

LAY SUMMARY

Surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation are both treatment options for perivascular hepatocellular carcinoma. We compared outcomes in patients treated with either method. Surgical resection provided better long-term tumor control and overall survival than radiofrequency ablation for patients with a small perivascular hepatocellular carcinoma (≤3 cm) as a first-line treatment, particularly for periportal tumors. The location of the tumor and the type of peritumoral hepatic vessels need to be considered when choosing between surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation for small HCCs.

Need for normalization: the non-standard reference standard for microvascular invasion diagnosis in hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

Preoperative microvascular invasion (MVI) assessment in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the current research focuses, with studies reporting controversial results regarding MVI-associated risk factors. As a possible source of bias, reported MVI rate (percentage of MVI-positive patients) varies a lot among studies. Pathological examination should have been the golden criteria of MVI diagnosis, but no standard and generally adopted pathological examination protocol exists.

Methods and results

It is highly possible that underestimated pathological diagnosis of MVI exists. We present two likely examples to stress the problem and indicate the root of the problem partially being an unreliable pathological examination. Results of studies basing on unreliable reference standard can be less convincing and even misleading, which is the most basic and fundamental problem in this research field.

Conclusion

There is an urgent need to settle the disputes regarding pathological sampling, microscopy, and reporting, in order to promote future academic exchange and consensus development on MVI assessment. Several concerns about pathological MVI assessment should be focused on in the future research as we put up in the review.

The hepatectomy efficacy of huge hepatocellular carcinoma and its risk factors: A meta analysis

BACKGROUND

There has always been a controversy on the hepatectomy for huge hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Therefore, we aim to explore the hepatectomy efficacy of huge HCC and its risk factors.

METHODS

A systematic research was performed using PubMed, MedLine, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library from their establishment to August 2017. The major endpoints were overall survival (OS) rate and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate, and the secondary ones were the morbidity of complications and mortality of hepatectomy.

RESULTS

About 13 studies with a total of 7609 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The hepatectomy efficacy of huge HCC was inferior to non-huge HCC both in OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.90-2.50, P < .00001; I = 66%, P = .003) and RFS (HR = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.76-2.19, P < .00001; I = 74%, P = .0001). However, the risk difference[RD] of the 1-year, 3-year and 5-year OS tended to be acceptable (RD = -0.05, 95% CI = -0.11-0.00, P = .05; RD = -0.13, 95% CI = -0.21--0.05, P = .002; RD = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.19--0.01, P = .03; respectively). Moreover, there were also no significant differences between huge HCC and non-huge HCC in the morbidity of complication and mortality of hepatectomy (RD = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.09-0.23, P = .38; RD = -0.01, 95% CI = -0.00--0.03, P = .06; respectively). Related risk factors were measured to explore the differences, and the results showed that the level of alpha fetal protein (AFP) and the margin-positive rate were higher (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.26-0.88, P = .0003; odd radio[OR] = 32.52, 95% CI = 1.02-6.22, P = .04; respectively), the characteristic of huge HCC tended to be worse such as lower clinical or pathological stage, incomplete capsule and incorporate satellite metastases (OR = 2.91, 95% CI = 1.68-5.04, P = .001; OR = 3.99, 95% CI = 3.40-4.67, P < .00001; OR = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.66-3.83, P < .0001; respectively), and the rate of micorvascular invasion (MVI) including portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) were higher (OR = 3.36, 95% CI = 1.61-7.02, P = .001; OR = 2.75, 95% CI = 2.29-3.31, P < .00001; respectively) in the huge HCC.

CONCLUSION

The hepatectomy efficacy of huge HCC was inferior to non-huge HCC, but its survival benefits and feasibility were confirmed in this meta-analysis. In addition, higher level of AFP, positive margin, lower clinical or pathological stage, incomplete capsule, incorporate satellite metastasis and MVI were significantly correlated with poor OS.