Rescue Living-donor Liver Transplantation for Liver Failure Following Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Rescue Liver Transplantation for Posthepatectomy Liver Failure: A Systematic Review and Survey of an International Experience

BACKGROUND

Rescue liver transplantation (LT) is the only life-saving option for posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) whenever it is deemed as irreversible and likely to be fatal. The goals were to perform a qualitative systematic review of rescue LT for PHLF and a survey among various international LT experts.

METHODS

A literature search was performed from 2000 to 2022 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome framework, and to this, the authors' experience was added. The international online open survey included 6 cases of PHLF extracted from the literature and submitted to 976 LT experts. The primary outcome was whether experts would consider rescue LT for each case. Interrater agreement among experts was calculated using the free-marginal multirater kappa methodology.

RESULTS

The review included 40 patients. Post-LT mortality occurred in 8 (20%) cases (7/28 with proven cancer and 1/12 with benign disease). In the long term, 6 of 21 (28.6%) survivors with cancer died of recurrence (median = 38 mo) and 15 (71.4%) were alive with no recurrence (median = 111 mo). All 11 survivors with benign disease were alive and well (median = 39 mo). In the international survey among experts in LT, the percentage agreement to consider rescue LT was 28%-98%, higher for benign than for malignant disease ( P = 0.011). Interrater agreement for the primary endpoint was low, expected 5-y survival >50% being the strongest independent predictor to consider LT.

CONCLUSIONS

Rescue LT for PHLF may achieve good results in selected patients. Considerable inconsistencies of decision-making exist among LT experts when considering LT for PHLF.

Rescue liver transplantation after post-hepatectomy acute liver failure: A systematic review and pooled analysis

BACKGROUND

Post-hepatectomy liver failure is a severe complication after major liver resection and is associated with a high mortality rate. Nevertheless, there is no effective treatment for severe liver failure. In such a setting, rescue liver transplantation (LT) is used only in extraordinary cases with unclear results. This systematic review aims to define indication of LT in post-hepatectomy liver failure and post-LT outcomes, in terms of patient and disease-free survivals, to assess the procedure's feasibility and effectiveness.

METHODS

A systematic review of all English language full-text articles published until September 2022 was conducted. Inclusion criteria were articles describing patients undergoing LT for post-hepatectomy liver failure after liver resection, which specified at least one outcome of interest regarding patient/graft survival, postoperative complications, tumour recurrence and cause of death. A pseudo-individual participant data meta-analysis was performed to analyse data. Study quality was assessed with MINORS system. PROSPERO CRD42022349358.

RESULTS

Postoperative complication rate was 53.6%. All patients transplanted for benign indications survived. For malignant tumours, 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival was 94.7%, 82.1% and 74.6%, respectively. The causes of death were tumour recurrence in 83.3% of cases and infection-related in 16.7% of LT recipients. At Cox regression, being transplanted for unconventional malignant indications (colorectal liver metastasis, cholangiocarcinoma) was a risk factor for death HR = 8.93 (95%CI = 1.04-76.63; P-value = 0.046). Disease-free survival differs according to different malignant tumours (P-value = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-hepatectomy liver failure is an emergent indication for rescue LT, but it is not universally accepted. In selected patients, LT can be a life-saving procedure with low short-term risks. However, special attention must be given to long-term oncological prognosis before proceeding with rescue LT in an urgent setting, considering the severity of liver malignancy, organ scarcity, the country's organ allocation policies and the resource of living-related donation.

Perioperative Evaluation and Management of Patients With Cirrhosis: Risk Assessment, Surgical Outcomes, and Future Directions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patients with cirrhosis are at increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. We provide a narrative review of the available data regarding perioperative morbidity and mortality, risk assessment, and management of patients with cirrhosis undergoing non-hepatic surgical procedures.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive review of the literature from 1998-2018 and identified 87 studies reporting perioperative outcomes in patients with cirrhosis. We extracted elements of study design and perioperative mortality by surgical procedure, Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) class and Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score reported in these 87 studies to support our narrative review.

RESULTS

Overall, perioperative mortality is 2-10 times higher in patients with cirrhosis compared to patients without cirrhosis, depending on the severity of liver dysfunction. For elective procedures, patients with compensated cirrhosis (CTP class A, or MELD <10) have minimal increase in operative mortality. CTP class C patients (or MELD >15) are at high risk for mortality; liver transplantation or alternatives to surgery should be considered. Very little data exist to guide perioperative management of patients with cirrhosis, so most recommendations are based on case series and expert opinion. Existing risk calculators are inadequate.

CONCLUSIONS

Severity of liver dysfunction, medical comorbidities and the type and complexity of surgery, including whether it is elective versus emergent, are all determinants of perioperative mortality and morbidity in patients with cirrhosis. There are major limitations to the existing clinical research on risk assessment and perioperative management that warrant further investigation.

Post hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) - Recent advances in prevention and clinical management

BACKGROUND

Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) is a relatively rare but feared complication following liver surgery, and associated with high morbidity, mortality and cost implications. Significant advances have been made in detailed preoperative assessment, particularly of the liver function in an attempt to predict and mitigate this complication.

METHODS

A detailed search of PubMed and Medline was performed using keywords "liver failure", "liver insufficiency", "liver resection", "postoperative", and "post-hepatectomy". Only full texts published in English were considered. Particular emphasis was placed on literature published after 2015. A formal systematic review was not found feasible hence a pragmatic review was performed.

RESULTS

The reported incidence of PHLF varies widely in reported literature due to a historical absence of a universal definition. Incorporation of the now accepted definition and grading of PHLF would suggest the incidence to be between 8 and 12%. Major risk factors include background liver disease, extent of resection and intraoperative course. The vast majority of mortality associated with PHLF is related to sepsis, organ failure and cerebral events. Despite multiple attempts, there has been little progress in the definitive and specific management of liver failure. This review article discusses recent advances made in detailed preoperative evaluation of liver function and evidence-based targeted approach to managing PHLF.

CONCLUSION

PHLF remains a major cause of mortality following liver resection. In absence of a specific remedy, the best approach is mitigating the risk of it happening by detailed assessment of liver function, patient selection and general care of a critically ill patient.

Liver resection in Cirrhotic liver: Are there any limits?

Liver resection remains one of the most technically challenging surgical procedure in abdominal surgery due to the complex anatomical arrangement in the liver and its rich blood supply that constitutes about 20% of the cardiac output per cycle. The challenge for resection in cirrhotic livers is even higher because of the impact of surgical stress and trauma imposed on borderline liver function and the impaired ability for liver regeneration in cirrhotic livers. Nonetheless, evolution and advancement in surgical techniques as well as knowledge in perioperative management of liver resection has led to a substantial improvement in surgical outcome in recent decade. The objective of this article was to provide updated information on the recent developments in liver surgery, from preoperative evaluation, to technicality of resection, future liver remnant augmentation and finally, postoperative management of complications.

Short- and long-term impact of reoperation for complications after major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The impact of reoperation for complications after major liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma was evaluated.

METHODS

In this retrospective study covering 25 years, patients with reoperation for complications after major liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma were compared with patients without reoperation in terms of demographics, tumor characteristics, operative details, postoperative results, oncologic outcomes, and survival. Reasons for reoperation were also investigated.

RESULTS

Forty-nine out of 1,092 patients underwent reoperation within a median of 0.2 days (range, 0-6.9 days) after hepatectomy. Patients with and without reoperation had similar baseline characteristics and liver function. Nonetheless, patients with reoperation had a higher indocyanine green retention rate at 15 minutes (12.55% vs 10.5%, P = .015), more operative blood loss (1.4 L vs 1 L, P = .012), a higher blood transfusion rate (44.9% vs 29.2%, P = .029), longer hospital stay (21 days vs 11 days, P < .001), a higher hospital mortality (38.8% vs 3.0%, P < .001), and a higher 90-day mortality (38.8% vs 4.7%, P < .001). Hemorrhage was the most common cause for reoperation (26/49, 53.1%), mainly resulting from coagulopathic bleeding from raw areas (12/26, 46.2%) and bleeding from diaphragmatic veins (6/26, 23.1%). However, reoperation did not affect 5-year overall survival (50.2% vs 48.3%, P = .468).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative hemorrhage was associated with a high mortality, signifying the importance of meticulous hemostasis and careful perioperative management. Oncologic outcomes, however, were not affected by reoperation.

Survival Benefit of Locoregional Treatment for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Advanced Liver Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with decompensated liver cirrhosis (LC) is a life-threatening condition, which is amenable to liver transplantation (LT) as the standard first-line treatment. However, the application of LT can be limited due to a shortage of donor livers. This study aimed to clarify the effect of non-surgical therapy on the survival of patients with HCC and decompensated LC.

METHODS

Of the 58,886 patients with HCC registered in the nationwide survey of the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan (January 2000-December 2005), we included 1,344 patients with primary HCC and Child-Pugh (C-P) grade C for analysis in this retrospective study. Among the patients analyzed, 108 underwent LT, 273 were treated by local ablation therapy (LAT), 370 were treated by transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), and 593 received best supportive care (BSC). The effect of LT, LAT, and TACE on overall survival (OS) was analyzed using multivariate and propensity score analyses.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics did not differ significantly between each treatment group and the BSC group, after propensity score matching. LAT (hazard ratio [HR]) =0.568; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.80) and TACE (HR=0.691; 95% CI, 0.50-0.96) were identified as significant contributors to OS if the C-P score was less than 11 and tumor conditions met the Milan criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with HCC within the Milan criteria and with a C-P score of 10 or 11, locoregional treatment can be used as a salvage treatment if LT is not feasible.

Phase I/II Study of Sorafenib in Combination with Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy Using Low-Dose Cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil

We conducted a phase I/II study in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to determine the recommended dose, as well as the safety and efficacy, of combination therapy of sorafenib with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) using low dose cisplatin (CDDP) and 5-fluorouracil (5FU). Cohorts consisting of 3-6 patients with HCC received an escalated dose of CDDP and 5-FU until a maximum-tolerated dose was achieved. The treatment regimen was as follows: oral administration of sorafenib (400 mg twice daily for 28 days) combined with HAIC using CDDP (14-20 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 8) and 5-FU (170-330 mg/m(2), continuously on days 1-5 and 8-12) via an implanted catheter system). Each treatment cycle consisted of 28 days and three cycles of combination therapy. At the end of the first cycle, adverse events were evaluated and future dose escalation was determined. Eighteen patients with advanced HCC were enrolled. Dose-limiting toxicity was observed in two patients from cohort 1 (erythema multiforme and grade 4 thrombocytopenia) and in one patient from cohort 2 (erythema multiforme). Seven of the 18 patients achieved a partial response, seven showed stable disease, two were diagnosed as progressive disease, and two were not assessable. The response rate was 38.9% and the disease control rate was 77.8%. The time-to-progression was 9.7 months and the 1-year survival rate was 88.2%. Oral administration of 400 mg of sorafenib twice daily, 20 mg/m(2) of intra-arterial infusion of CDDP, and 5-FU at 330 mg/m(2) are the recommended doses for combination therapy, which was well tolerated and efficacious. This combination therapy may be a promising treatment for patients with advanced HCC. A large prospective randomized multicenter study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01214343) is ongoing.

A Newly Developed Shear Wave Elastography Modality: With a Unique Reliability Index

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to prospectively assess the usefulness of the reliability index, namely the percentage of the net amount of effective shear wave velocity (VsN).

METHODS

One hundred and sixty-eight patients with chronic liver disease, who underwent ultrasound elastography, were consecutively enrolled. Shear wave measurement (SWM), FibroScan, virtual touch quantification, and shear wave elastography were performed for all patients, and the variations in the measurement results were compared with VsN. The absolute average value of the difference between SWM_Vs and Vs measured using other elastography devices is termed |ΔVs|. VsN was classified into three groups: ≥50, <50, and 0 (failure measurement). In these groups, there was a significant difference in abdominal circumference, body mass index, the distance between the ultrasound probe surface and the liver, and |ΔVs|. When the distance between the ultrasound probe surface and the liver was >2 cm, VsN tended to be significantly lower (p < 0.001).

RESULTS

When VsN was <50, |ΔVs| became high, and there was variation in the results between each device.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that VsN is a useful value to decide whether Vs is appropriate or not.

Comparison of Daclatasvir and Asunaprevir for Chronic HCV 1b Infection with Telaprevir and Simeprevir plus Peginterferon and Ribavirin, with a Focus on the Prevention of Occurrence and Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy of the all-oral administration of daclatasvir and asunaprevir for 24 weeks was compared with that of telaprevir for 12 weeks plus pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PEG-IFN/RBV) for 24 weeks, and that of simeprevir for 12 weeks plus PEG-IFN/RBV for 24 weeks, with a focus on the prevention of occurrence and recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and α-fetoprotein (AFP) as suppressive markers of HCC were also measured.

METHODS

Patients received daclatasvir and asunaprevir (n = 17), simeprevir plus PEG-IFN/RBV (n = 15) and telaprevir plus PEG-IFN/RBV (n = 25). Sustained virological response (SVR) and the mean change in the level of serum ALT, AFP and platelet (PLT) count were compared among the three groups.

RESULTS

No difference in SVR was observed in patients given daclatasvir with asunaprevir (SVR4), telaprevir plus PEG-IFN/RBV or simeprevir plus PEG-IFN/RBV (SVR24). Also, no significant difference was observed in the mean change of serum ALT, AFP or PLT count among the three groups.

CONCLUSION

The preventive effect of the IFN-free, all-oral regimen of daclatasvir and asunaprevir was observed with a focus on the occurrence and recurrence of HCC, as was IFN-based treatment with telaprevir or simeprevir plus PEG-IFN/RBV.

Defining Post Hepatectomy Liver Insufficiency: Where do We stand?

BACKGROUND

Post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) is a major source of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing liver resection. The aim of this review is to summarize the recent literature available on PHLF including its definition, predictive factors, preoperative risk assessment, severity grading, preventative measures, and management strategies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out with the search engines PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane Database using the keywords related to "liver failure", "posthepatectomy", and "hepatic resection".

RESULTS

Liver resection is a curative treatment of liver tumors. However, it leads to concurrent death and regeneration of the remaining hepatocytes. Factors related to the patient, liver parenchyma and the extent of surgery can inhibit regeneration leading to PHLF.

CONCLUSION

Given its resistance to treatment and the high postoperative mortality associated with PHLF, great effort has been put in to both accurately identify patients at high risk and to develop strategies that can help prevent its occurrence.

Real-Life Clinical Practice with Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Single-Center Experience Second Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Sorafenib has become a standard therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following the demonstration of significant increase in progression-free survival as well as overall survival (OS) in the 2-phase III trials. We examined efficacy and adverse events (AEs) in patients treated with sorafenib over a 6-year period since approval in Japan.

METHODS

Two hundred and forty-one patients treated with sorafenib at the Kinki University Hospital were retrospectively analyzed clinically for the factors related to survival periods, tumor response evaluated by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Cancer of the Liver (RECICL) and AEs.

RESULTS

OS was 14.3 months. According to the RECICL, the objective response and disease control rates were 18.6% (43 of 241) and 61.1% (137 of 241), respectively. AEs were seen in 77.3% (187 of 241), with Grade 3 or higher in 23.6% (57 of 241). The most frequent AE was hand-foot skin reaction in 109 patients (45.0%), and 28 patients (11.8%) showed Grade 3 or higher. Significant factors contributing to the OS were treatment duration (p = 0.0204), up-to-7 criteria (p = 0.0400), increase of Child-Pugh score (p = 0.0008) and tumor response determined by the RECICL (p = 0.0007).

CONCLUSION

Based on the analysis, using many cases at a single center, we concluded that continuation of treatment with sorafenib for ≥90 days without decrease of liver function was critical if tumor response was determined as stable disease or higher.

Challenges of Clinical Research on Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Challenges of clinical practice and research on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were reviewed. There are several differences in clinical practice between Japan and the Western countries such as tumor markers, understanding of pathological early HCC, imaging diagnosis, treatment strategy, staging system and subclassification of HCC. Further studies are warranted for the clinical practices of Japan to be adopted in the rest of the world.

New insights after the first 1000 liver transplantations at The University of Hong Kong

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

One thousand liver transplantations have been performed at the only liver transplant center in Hong Kong over a period of 22 years, which covered the formative period of living donor liver transplantation. These 1000 transplantations, which marked the journey of liver transplantation from development to maturation at the center, should be educational. This research was to study the experience and to reflect on the importance of technical innovations and case selection.

METHODS

The first 1000 liver transplantations were studied. Key technical innovations and surgical therapeutics were described. Recipient survival including hospital mortality was analyzed. Recipient survival comparison was made for deceased donor liver transplantation and living donor liver transplantation indicated by hepatocellular carcinoma and other diseases.

RESULTS

Among the 1000 transplantations, 418 used deceased donor grafts and 582 used living donor grafts. With the accumulation of experience, hospital mortality improved to < 2% in the past 2 years. In the treatment of diseases other than hepatocellular carcinoma, living donor liver transplantation was superior to deceased donor liver transplantation, with a 10-year recipient survival around 90%.

CONCLUSION

Transplant outcomes have been improving consistently over the series, with a very low hospital mortality and a predictably high long-term survival.

Post-hepatectomy liver failure

Hepatectomies are among some of the most complex operative interventions performed. Mortality rates after major hepatectomy are as high as 30%, with post-hepatic liver failure (PHLF) representing the major source of morbidity and mortality. We present a review of PHLF, including the current definition, predictive factors, pre-operative risk assessment, techniques to prevent PHLF, identification and management. Despite great improvements in morbidity and mortality, liver surgery continues to demand excellent clinical judgement in selecting patients for surgery. Appropriate choice of pre-operative techniques to improve the functional liver remnant (FLR), fastidious surgical technique, and excellent post-operative management are essential to optimize patient outcomes.

Considerations for radiation therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: the radiation oncologists' perspective

Although the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system does not recommend radiation therapy (RT) as a locoregional modality in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), many prospective and retrospective studies have reported excellent local control with favorable survival rates after RT using modern techniques. Additionally, there have been several comparative or meta-analysis results reporting the superiority of RT in unresectable HCC. Therefore, it might be more reasonable to apply RT in unresectable HCC as an alternative locoregional modality to improve local control in HCC. However, several considerations for the application of RT in HCC exist. The considerations for RT in HCC are purpose, combination treatment and technique. The purpose of RT should be based on baseline liver status as well as tumor extent and location. There are several reasonable advantages in local, intrahepatic and extrahepatic control when combined with other modalities, but it could lead to overtreatment in some cases. The technical considerations according to the purpose and combination modality are the final step. For the application of RT in HCC, the purpose of RT, combination strategy and technical considerations should be taken into account.