Is Enhanced One-Stage Hepatectomy a Safe and Feasible Alternative to the Two-Stage Hepatectomy in the Setting of Multiple Bilobar Colorectal Liver Metastases? A Comparative Analysis between Two Pioneering Centers

Is interval chemotherapy safe and does it improve the outcome of patients with colorectal liver metastases undergoing multimodal two-stage hepatectomy? - A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Multimodal two-stage hepatectomy (mTSH) is used in patients with bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) that cannot be treated with one surgical procedure due to insufficient future liver remnant. Interval chemotherapy has been proposed to improve disease control in CRLM patients undergoing mTSH. We here present a narrative review of clinical studies on mTSH including the use of interval chemotherapy in patients with CRLM.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of the PubMed databases as well as the ClinicalTrials.gov registry was performed.

RESULTS

The use of interval chemotherapy during mTSH was reported in 23 studies and applied in 595 out of 1,461 patients with CRLM. Two studies report on the actual effects of this treatment, one study describes a trend towards improved disease progression rate. No serious adverse events caused by interval chemotherapy were observed. There is currently no randomized clinical trial investigating the efficacy and safety of interval chemotherapy during mTSH.

CONCLUSION

The currently available data indicate that interval chemotherapy does neither impair liver hypertrophy during mTSH nor cause procedure-associated complications in patients with CRLM. Results from randomized clinical trials on the potential positive effect on disease control are not yet available.

Contemporary Surgical Management of Colorectal Liver Metastases

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the United States and the second most common cause of cancer-related death. Approximately 20-30% of patients will develop hepatic metastasis in the form of synchronous or metachronous disease. The treatment of colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) has evolved into a multidisciplinary approach, with chemotherapy and a variety of locoregional treatments, such as ablation and portal vein embolization, playing a crucial role. However, resection remains a core tenet of management, serving as the gold standard for a curative-intent therapy. As such, the input of a dedicated hepatobiliary surgeon is paramount for appropriate patient selection and choice of surgical approach, as significant advances in the field have made management decisions extremely nuanced and complex. We herein aim to review the contemporary surgical management of colorectal liver metastasis with respect to both perioperative and operative considerations.

Factors of oncological failure in two stage hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) has increased the chance of surgical resections for bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Nevertheless, drop-out between stages and early recurrence rates raise the question of surgical futility in some situations. This study aimed to identify factors of TSH oncological failure.

METHODS

Patients with bilobar CRLM eligible for TSH in three tertiary centers between 2010 and 2021 were included, and divided in Failure and Success groups. Oncological failure was defined as failure of the second stage hepatectomy for tumor progression or recurrence within 6 months after resection.

RESULTS

Among 95 patients, 18 (18.9%) had hepatic progression between the two stages, and 7 (7.4%) failed to complete the second stage hepatectomy. After TSH, 31 (32.6%) patients experienced early recurrence. Overall, 38 (40.0%) patients experienced oncological failure (Failure group). The Failure group had lower median DFS (3 vs. 32 months, p < 0.001) and median OS (29 vs. 70 months, p = 0.045) than the Success group. On multivariable analysis, progression between the two stages in the future liver remnant (OR = 15.0 (3.22-113.0), p = 0.002), and maximal tumor size ≥40 mm in the future liver remnant (OR = 13.1 (2.12-117.0), p = 0.009) were independent factors of oncological failure.

CONCLUSION

Recurrence between the two stages and maximal tumor size ≥40 mm in the future liver remnant were associated with TSH failure for patients with bilobar CRLM.

Vessel-Guided Mesohepatectomy for Liver Partition and Staged Major Parenchyma-Sparing Hepatectomies with Super-Selective Portal Vein Embolization or Enhanced ALPPS to Achieve R0 Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases at the Hepatocaval Confluence

Background. R0 minor parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) is feasible for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) in contact with hepatic veins (HV) at hepatocaval confluence since HV can be reconstructed, but in the case of contact with the first-order glissonean pedicle (GP), major hepatectomy is mandatory. To pursue an R0 parenchyma-sparing policy, we proposed vessel-guided mesohepatectomy for liver partition (MLP) and eventually combination with liver augmentation techniques for staged major PSH. Methods. We analyzed 15 consecutive vessel-guided MLPs for CRLM at the hepatocaval confluence. Patients had a median of 11 (range: 0-67) lesions with a median diameter of 3.5 cm (range: 0.0-8.0), bilateral in 73% of cases. Results. Grade IIIb or more complications occurred in 13%, median hospital stay was 14 (range: 6-62) days, 90-day mortality was 0%. After a median follow-up of 17.5 months, 1-year OS and RFS were 92% and 62%. In nine (64%) patients, MLP was combined with portal vein embolization (PVE) or ALPPS to perform staged R0 major PSH. Future liver remnant (FLR) volume increased from a median of 15% (range: 7-20%) up to 41% (range: 37-69%). Super-selective PVE was performed in three (33%) patients and enhanced ALPPS (e-ALPPS) in six (66%). In two e-ALPPS an intermediate stage of deportalized liver PSH was necessary to achieve adequate FLR volume. Conclusions. Vessel-guided MLP may transform the liver in a paired organ. In selected cases of multiple bilobar CRLM, to guarantee oncological radicality (R0), major PSH is feasible combining advanced surgical parenchyma sparing with liver augmentation techniques when FLR volume is insufficient.

Two-stage hepatectomy in resection of colorectal liver metastases - a single-institution experience with case-control matching and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) has been proposed for patients with bilateral liver tumours who have a high risk of posthepatectomy liver failure after one-stage hepatectomy (OSH). This study aimed to determine the outcomes of TSH for extensive bilateral colorectal liver metastases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of liver resections for colorectal liver metastases was conducted. The TSH group was compared to the OSH group in terms of perioperative outcomes and survival. Case-control matching was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 632 consecutive liver resections for colorectal liver metastases were performed between 2000 and 2020. The study group (TSH group) consisted of 15 patients who completed TSH. The control group included 151 patients who underwent OSH. The case-control matching-OSH group consisted of 14 patients. The major morbidity and 90-day mortality rates were 40% and 13.3% in the TSH group, 20.5% and 4.6% in the OSH group and 28.6% and 7.1% in the case-control matching-OSH group, respectively. The recurrence-free survival, median overall survival, and 3- and 5-year survival rates were 5 months, 21 months, 33% and 13% in the TSH group; 11 months, 35 months, 49% and 27% in the OSH group; and 8 months, 23 months, 36% and 21%, respectively, in the case-control matching-OSH group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

TSH used to be a favourable therapeutic choice in a select population of patients. Now, OSH should be preferred whenever feasible because it has lower morbidity and equivalent oncological outcomes to those of completed TSH.

Transversal hepatectomies: Classification and intention-to-treat validation of new parenchyma-sparing procedures for deep-located hepatic tumors

BACKGROUND

Deep-located liver tumors involving hepatic veins at the caval confluence or main Glissonean pedicles generally require a major hepatectomy. An intraoperative ultrasound guidance policy opened a possibility to opt for parenchyma-sparing procedures as alternatives to major hepatectomy, called transversal hepatectomies. We ought to standardize the procedure and analyze the surgical outcome, oncological suitability, and salvageability.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study. All consecutive patients undergoing hepatectomies for liver tumors between January 2005 and August 2020 were reviewed. Transversal hepatectomies were classified as follows: upper transversal hepatectomy: resection of the posterosuperior segments along with at least 1 hepatic vein and preservation of the anteroinferior ones; roller coaster hepatectomy: transversal hepatectomy with tumor vessel detachment from at least 2 hepatic veins; and lower transversal hepatectomy: amputation of the distal portion of at least 1 hepatic vein with tumor vessel detachment from first/second-order Glissonean pedicles. Morbidity, mortality, local recurrences, and salvageability in cases of relapse were considered.

RESULTS

A total of 61 transversal hepatectomies were performed: 40 (66%) upper transversal hepatectomies, 19 (31%) roller coaster hepatectomies, and 2 (3%) lower transversal hepatectomies. The median preserved liver volume was 67% (range 41-86). Mortality was 0, and major morbidity was 6%. Local recurrence occurred in 7 (11%) patients. Ten out of 34 (29%) patients with liver-only recurrence received redo surgery.

CONCLUSION

Transversal hepatectomies offer a new parenchyma-sparing perspective for the management of complex tumor presentation, which would otherwise demand major tissue removal or even unresectability. Safety, adequate local control, and salvageability are further pillars of this approach herein systematized.

Multiple Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases

Over the past decades, liver cancer's minimally invasive approach has primarily become as a new standard of oncological care. Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are one of the most developed indications of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). CRLM resection is still the best treatment known in terms of survival. As multiple CRLM are found in up to 80% of cases at diagnosis (Manfredi S. and al, Annals of Surgery 2006), a lot of possible technical management approaches are described. With the development of the parenchymal-sparing strategy, multiple concomitant laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) are gaining acceptance. However, no recommendation is available regarding its indications and feasibility. Also, laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy is developing for bilobar CRLM, and this also does not have established recommendation. The purpose of this paper was to highlight novelty and updates in the field of multiple minimally invasive liver resections. A review of the international literature was performed. The feasibility of laparoscopic concomitant multiple LLR and two-stage hepatectomy for CRLM as well as their outcomes were discussed. These clarifications could further guide the implementation of minimal resection in multiple colorectal liver metastases therapies.

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.

Current trends in regenerative liver surgery: Novel clinical strategies and experimental approaches

Liver resections are performed to cure patients with hepatobiliary malignancies and metastases to the liver. However, only a small proportion of patients is resectable, largely because only up to 70% of liver tissue is expendable in a resection. If larger resections are performed, there is a risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure. Regenerative liver surgery addresses this limitation by increasing the future liver remnant to an appropriate size before resection. Since the 1980s, this surgery has evolved from portal vein embolization (PVE) to a multiplicity of methods. This review presents an overview of the available methods and their advantages and disadvantages. The first use of PVE was in patients with large hepatocellular carcinomas. The increase in liver volume induced by PVE equals that of portal vein ligation, but both result only in a moderate volume increase. While awaiting sufficient liver growth, 20%–40% of patients fail to achieve resection, mostly due to the progression of disease. The MD Anderson Cancer Centre group improved the PVE methodology by adding segment 4 embolization (“high-quality PVE”) and demonstrated that oncological results were better than non-surgical approaches in this previously unresectable patient population. In 2012, a novel method of liver regeneration was proposed and called Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS). ALPPS accelerated liver regeneration by a factor of 2–3 and increased the resection rate to 95%–100%. However, ALPPS fell short of expectations due to a high mortality rate and a limited utility only in highly selected patients. Accelerated liver regeneration, however, was there to stay. This is evident in the multiplicity of ALPPS modifications like radiofrequency or partial ALPPS. Overall, rapid liver regeneration allowed an expansion of resectability with increased perioperative risk. But, a standardized low-risk approach to rapid hypertrophy has been missing and the techniques used and in use depend on local expertise and preference. Recently, however, simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization (PVE/HVE) appears to offer both rapid hypertrophy and no increased clinical risk. While prospective randomized comparisons are underway, PVE/HVE has the potential to become the future gold standard.

The Histopathological Growth Pattern of Colorectal Liver Metastases Impacts Local Recurrence Risk and the Adequate Width of the Surgical Margin

BACKGROUND

The histopathological growth pattern (HGP) of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) has been associated with prognosis. This study was designed to elucidate if the HGP is associated with local recurrence risk and impacts the adequate width of surgical margin.

METHODS

All consecutive patients resected for CLM in 2018-2019 were considered. HGP was prospectively classified as follows: desmoplastic, pushing, and replacement. Surgical margin was classified as follows: R0 (margin ≥ 1 mm), R1vasc (0-mm margin, tumor detachment from intrahepatic vessels), and R1par (tumor exposure along transection plane). R0 resections were further distinguished in R0min (1-mm margin) and R0wide (> 1-mm margin).

RESULTS

A total of 340 resection areas in 136 patients were analyzed (70 R0min, 143 R0wide, 31 R1vasc, 96 R1par). HGP was desmoplastic in 26 cases, pushing in 221, and replacement in 93. Thirty-six local recurrences occurred (11%, median follow-up 21 months): 1 after R0wide, 4 after R0min, 3 after R1vasc, and 28 after R1par resection. In R1par group, local recurrence rate was high independently of HGP (29%). In R1vasc and R0min groups, local recurrence risk was higher in the replacement group (R1vasc: 29% vs. 4% if pushing/desmoplastic; R0min: 11% vs. 4%). In R0wide group, local recurrence risk was low for all HGP ( < 1%). Independent predictors of local recurrence were replacement HGP (odds ratio = 1.654, P = 0.036), and R1par resection (odds ratio = 57.209, P < 0.001 vs. R0).

CONCLUSIONS

Replacement HGP is associated with an increased risk of local recurrence. In these patients, a wide surgical margin should be pursued, because R1vasc and R0min resections could be insufficient. R1par resection is inadequate, independently of the HGP.

Current Surgical Management Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases

Simple Summary

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancer diagnoses in the world. At least half of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer will develop metastatic disease, with most being identified in the liver. Surgical resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is potentially curative. Surgical resection of CRLM, however, remains underutilized despite the continued expansion of operative strategies available. This is likely due to differing views on resectability. Resectability is a surgical assessment, and the classification of CRLM as unresectable should only be made by an experienced hepatobiliary surgeon. Obtaining a surgical evaluation at the time of liver metastasis discovery may help mitigate the challenge of assessing resectability and the determination of potential operative time windows within current multimodal management strategies. The aim of this review is to help facilitate discussions surrounding resectability as well as the timing and sequencing of both surgical and non-surgical therapies.

Abstract

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer diagnosis in the world, and the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths. Despite significant progress in management strategies for colorectal cancer over the last several decades, metastatic disease remains difficult to treat and is often considered incurable. However, for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), surgical resection offers the best opportunity for survival, can be curative, and remains the gold standard. Unfortunately, surgical treatment options are underutilized. Misperceptions regarding resectable and unresectable CRLM likely play a role in this. The assessment of factors that impact resectability status like medical fitness, technical considerations, and disease biology can be difficult, necessitating careful multidisciplinary input and discussion. The identification of ideal operative time windows that align with the multimodal management of these patients can also be perplexing. For all patients with CRLM it may therefore be advantageous to obtain surgical evaluation at the time of discovering liver metastases to mitigate these challenges and minimize the risk of undertreatment. In this review we summarize current surgical management strategies for CRLM and discuss factors to be considered when determining resectability.

Horseshoe hepatectomy : Another step pursuing the concept of parenchyma sparing major hepatectomies

We describe a case of complex parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy for multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases. A 66-years-old male, who previously received a diagnosis of a stenosing adenocarcinoma of the hepatic flexure and synchronous bilobar liver metastases, was referred to our hospital. At the time of the presentation of the disease, a contrast-enhanced CT scan showed 24 liver lesions, with a bilobar distribution and two major cluster of lesions in segment 6 and 7. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, global partial response, with complete response for most lesions, was detected: seven lesions were visible after re-staging. Surgical strategy was planned by means of three-dimensional reconstruction and simulation software. A unique transection plane comprising partial resection of segments 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8 and complete resection of segments 6 and 7 was performed. Left, middle and right hepatic veins were exposed on the cut surface. Accurate preoperative planning and intraoperative ultrasound for resection guidance allowed us to follow complex transection planes and treat a patient with a high burden of bilobar deeply located disease in a parenchymal-sparing perspective.

Technique of vessel-skeletonized parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy for the oncological treatment of bilobar colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

To aid in the oncological management of multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs), we describe a new surgical procedure, VEssel-Skeletonized PArenchyma-sparing Hepatectomy (VESPAH).

STUDY DESIGN

Of 152 patients with CRLMs treated with hepatectomy, 33 patients had multiple bilobar liver metastases (≥8 liver metastases); their surgical procedures and clinical outcomes were retrospectively summarized and compared between those who underwent VESPAH and those who underwent major hepatectomy (Major Hx).

RESULTS

Of the 33 patients, 20 patients were resected by VESPAH (the VESPAH group) and 13 patients by major hepatectomy (Major Hx group). The median number of CRLMs was 13 (range, 8-53) in the VESPAH group and 10 (range, 8-41) in the Major Hx group (P=0.511). No operative mortality nor severe morbidity was observed in either group. The VESPAH group showed earlier recovery of remnant liver function after surgery than the Major Hx group; the incidence of grade B/C post hepatectomy liver failure was 5% in the VESPAH group and 38% in the Major Hx group, P=0.048). Intrahepatic tumor recurrence was confirmed in 14 (70%) and 7 (54%) patients in the VESPAH and Major Hx groups, respectively (P=0.416). There was no significant difference in median overall survival (OS) after hepatectomy between the two groups; the median OS was 47 months in the VESPAH group and 33 months in the Major Hx group (P=0.481). The VESPAH group showed the higher induction rate of adjuvant chemotherapy within 2 months after surgery (P=0.002) and total number of repeat hepatectomy for intrahepatic recurrence (P=0.060) than the Major Hx group.

CONCLUSIONS

VESPAH enables us to clear surgical navigation by hepatic vessel skeletonization and may enhance patient tolerability of not only adjuvant chemotherapy but also repeat hepatectomies during the patients' lifetimes.

Prediction of remnant liver volume using 3D simulation software in patients undergoing R1vasc parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy for multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases: reliability, clinical impact, and learning curve

BACKGROUND

Assessment of the future liver remnant (FLR) is routinely performed before major hepatectomy. In R1-vascular one-stage hepatectomy (R1vasc-OSH), given the multiplanar dissection paths, the FLR is not easily predictable. Preoperative 3D-virtual casts may help. We evaluated the predictability of the FLR using the 3D-virtual cast in the R1vasc-OSH for multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CLM).

METHODS

Thirty consecutive patients with multiple bilobar CLMs scheduled for R1vasc-OSH were included. Predicted and real-FLRs were compared. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to determine the impact of 3D-virtual cast on postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Median number of CLM and resection areas were 12 (4-33) and 3 (1-8). Median predicted-FLR was 899 ml (558-1157) and 60% (42-85), while for the real-FLR 915 ml (566-1777) and 63% (43-87). Median discrepancy between predicted and real-FLR was -0.6% (p = 0.504), indicating a slight tendency to underestimate the FLR. The difference was more evident in more than 12 CLMs (p = 0.013). A discrepancy was not evident according to the number of resection areas (p = 0.316). No mortality occurred. Patients in virtual-group had lower major complications compared to nonvirtual-group (0% vs 18%, p-value 0.014).

CONCLUSION

FLR estimation based on 3D-analysis is feasible, provides a safe surgery and represents a promising method in planning R1vasc-OSH for patients with multiple bilobar CLMs.

Parenchyma-sparing vessel-guided major hepatectomy: nonsense or new paradigm in liver surgery?

Advanced liver surgery.

Effects of the proximity of metastasis to the central vessels of the liver on surgical outcomes and survival in colorectal cancer with liver metastasis

BACKGROUND

Resectability of liver metastasis is important to establish a treatment strategy for patients with colorectal cancer. We aimed to evaluate the effect of the distance from metastasis to the centre of the liver on surgical outcomes and survival after hepatectomy.

METHODS

The clinical data of a total of 155 patients who underwent hepatectomy for colorectal cancer with liver metastasis were retrospectively reviewed. We measured the minimal length from metastasis to the bifurcation of the portal vein at the primary branch of the Glissonean tree and defined it as 'centrality'. The postoperative outcomes and survival among the patients were then analysed.

RESULTS

Anatomic resections were more frequently performed, and the operative time was longer in the patients with high centrality (≤1.5 cm) than in the patients with low centrality (>1.5 cm). A size of ≥5 cm for the largest lesion, a number of lesions of ≥3 and centrality of ≤1.5 cm were found to be the independent risk factors of a positive resection margin after hepatectomy. The patients with high centrality showed worse recurrence-free survival than those with low centrality; however, there was no significant difference found in the overall survival. In the multivariate analysis, high centrality was not found to be associated with worse recurrence-free and overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Centrality significantly affected the surgical outcomes and treatment strategy for liver metastasis but did not influence the survival of the patients with colorectal cancer. Active efforts through surgical resections are important to treat liver metastasis of high centrality.

Simultaneous colorectal and parenchymal-sparing liver resection for advanced colorectal carcinoma with synchronous liver metastases: Between conventional and mini-invasive approaches

The optimal timing of surgery in case of synchronous presentation of colorectal cancer and liver metastases is still under debate. Staged approach, with initial colorectal resection followed by liver resection (LR), or even the reverse, liver-first approach in specific situations, is traditionally preferred. Simultaneous resections, however, represent an appealing strategy, because may have perioperative risks comparable to staged resections in appropriately selected patients, while avoiding a second surgical procedure. In patients with larger or multiple synchronous presentation of colorectal cancer and liver metastases, simultaneous major hepatectomies may determine worse perioperative outcomes, so that parenchymal-sparing LR should represent the most appropriate option whenever feasible. Mini-invasive colorectal surgery has experienced rapid spread in the last decades, while laparoscopic LR has progressed much slower, and is usually reserved for limited tumours in favourable locations. Moreover, mini-invasive parenchymal-sparing LR is more complex, especially for larger or multiple tumours in difficult locations. It remains to be established if simultaneous resections are presently feasible with mini-invasive approaches or if we need further technological advances and surgical expertise, at least for more complex procedures. This review aims to critically analyze the current status and future perspectives of simultaneous resections, and the present role of the available mini-invasive techniques.

Limitations in resectability of colorectal liver metastases 2020 - A systematic approach for clinicians and patients

Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) affect over 50 % of all patients with colorectal cancer, which is the second leading cause of cancer in the western world. Resection of CRLM may provide cure and improves survival over chemotherapy alone. However, resectability of CLRM has to be decided in multidisciplinary tumor boards and is based on oncological factors, technical factors and patient factors. The advances of chemotherapy lead to the abolition of contraindications to resection in favor of technical resectability, but somatic mutations and molecular subtyping may improve selection of patients for resection in the future. Technical factors center around anatomy of the lesions, volume of the remnant liver and quality of the liver parenchymal. Multiple strategies have been developed to overcome volume limitations and they are reviewed here. The least investigated topic is how to select the right patients among an elderly and frail patient population for the large variety of technical options specifically for bi-lobar CRLM to keep 90-day mortality as low as possible. The review is an overview over the current state-of-the art and a systematic guide to the topic of resectability of CRLM for both clinicians and patients.

Minor Hepatectomies: Focusing a Blurred Picture: Analysis of the Outcome of 4471 Open Resections in Patients Without Cirrhosis

OBJECTIVE

To elucidate minor hepatectomy (MiH) outcomes.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Liver surgery has moved toward a parenchyma-sparing approach, favoring MiHs over major resections. MiHs encompass a wide range of procedures.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients who underwent open liver resections in 17 high-volume centers.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

cirrhosis and associated digestive/biliary resections. Resections were classified as (Brisbane nomenclature): limited resections (LR); (mono)segmentectomies/bisegmentectomies (Segm/Bisegm); right anterior and right posterior sectionectomies (RightAnteriorSect/RightPosteriorSect). Additionally, we defined: complex LRs (ComplexLR = LRs with exposed vessels); postero-superior segmentectomies (PosteroSuperiorSegm = segment (Sg)7, Sg8, and Sg7+Sg8 segmentectomies); and complex core hepatectomies (ComplexCoreHeps = Sg1 segmentectomies and combined resections of Sg4s+Sg8+Sg1). Left lateral sectionectomies (LLSs, n = 442) and right hepatectomies (RHs, n = 1042) were reference standards. Outcomes were adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Four thousand four hundred seventy-one MiHs were analyzed. Compared with RHs, MiHs had lower 90-day mortality (0.5%/2.2%), severe morbidity (8.6%/14.4%), and liver failure rates (2.4%/11.6%, P < 0.001), but similar bile leak rates. LR and LLS had similar outcomes. ComplexLR and Segm/Bisegm of anterolateral segments had higher bile leak rates than LLS rates (OR = 2.35 and OR = 3.24), but similar severe morbidity rates. ComplexCoreHeps had higher bile leak rates than RH rates (OR = 1.94); the severe morbidity rate approached that of RH. PosteroSuperiorSegm, RightAnteriorSect, and RightPosteriorSect had severe morbidity and bile leak rates similar to RH rates. MiHs had low liver failure rates, except RightAnteriorSect (vs LLS OR = 4.02).

CONCLUSIONS

MiHs had heterogeneous outcomes. Mortality was low, but MiHs could be stratified according to severe morbidity, bile leak, and liver failure rates. Some MiHs had postoperative outcomes similar to RH.

Two-Stage Hepatectomy and ALPPS for Advanced Bilateral Liver Metastases: a Tailored Approach Balancing Risk and Outcome

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) with or without portal vein ligation (PVL) or portal vein embolization (PVE) and associated liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) are surgical strategies in the treatment of advanced colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). The role of each strategy is yet ill defined. The aim of this analysis is to share our center experience with conventional TSH with or without PVL/PVE and ALPPS in patients with advanced bilateral CRLM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were extracted from a prospectively collected institutional database. Complication rates according to the Dindo-Clavien classification, overall and recurrence-free survival data were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2017, 790 liver resections were performed in 611 patients with CRLM. Out of 320 patients with bilateral disease, TSH (as right or extended right hepatectomy) with or without PVL/PVE was performed in 50 patients and ALPPS in 8. Stage 2 was completed in 36 (72%) out of 50 TSH/PVL/PVE and in all ALPPS patients (100%). Median follow-up was 15.8 months (0.9 to 111.9 months). On an intention-to-treat basis, the median overall survival was 26.7 (21.8-35.1 range) months after TSH/PVL/PVE and 36.2 months (11.3-61.2 range) after ALPPS (p = 0.809). In the TSH/PVL/PVE cohort, the median overall survival was 29.9 (19.0-40.3) months in patients who completed stage 2 compared to 13.8 months in patients who did not (p < 0.001). Disease recurred in 60% in the TSH/PVL/PVE cohort and in 87.5% in the ALPPS cohort (p = 0.777). The median recurrence-free survival was 5.9 (1.7-18.6) months after TSH/PVL/PVE and 3 (1.6-14.8) months after ALPPS (p = 0.680).

CONCLUSION

The treatment of advanced bilateral CRLM remains a surgical and oncological challenge. A tailored approach to bilateral CRLM uses TSH/PVL/PVE as first and ALPPS as second rescue treatment in order to achieve resectability in patients with extensive tumor burden not amenable to one-stage resection. ALPPS should be reserved for patients with no other surgical options.

Is progression in the future liver remnant a contraindication for second-stage hepatectomy?

BACKGROUND

Two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) strategy is used to treat patients with bilobar colorectal liver metastasis (CLM). However, many patients do not undergo the second hepatectomy owing to disease progression in the future liver remnant (FLR) after portal vein embolization (PVE). This study aimed to assess the impact of disease progression in the FLRs of patients who completed the first hepatectomy.

METHODS

68 consecutive patients underwent the first hepatectomy followed by PVE. Six patients (9%) dropped out after the PVE (two-stage failed [TSF] group) because of unresectable hepatic or general disease progression. Seventeen patients (25%) completed their second hepatectomy despite disease progression in the FLR (new CLM [nCLM] group) as it was considered resectable, while 45 patients (66%) underwent the second hepatectomy (control group).

RESULTS

The 5-year overall survival rates in the TSF, nCLM, and control groups were 0%, 7%, and 60%, respectively (P < 0.001). The median overall survival times between the TSF and nCLM groups were 26 months and 42 months (P = 0.005). Patients in the nCLM group whose hepatic disease progression was detected preoperatively versus intraoperatively had comparable survival rates.

CONCLUSION

Resectable hepatic disease progression in the FLR after PVE should not be considered a contraindication for the second hepatectomy.

Outcomes of enhanced one-stage ultrasound-guided hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases compared to those of ALPPS: a multicenter case-match analysis

BACKGROUND

In case of bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CLM) associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) has been proposed. Enhanced one-stage ultrasound-guided hepatectomy (e-OSH) may represent a further solution for these patients. Aim of this study was to compare by case-match analyses the outcome of ALPPS and e-OSH.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2017, patients undergoing ALPPS for bilobar CLM were matched 1:2 with patients receiving e-OSH. Patients were matched according to the Fong Score (1-3/4-5), the number of CLM (3-7/≥8), the number of CLM in the left liver (1-2/≥3) and preoperative chemotherapy. All the patients in the e-OSH group had a right -sided major vascular contact. The main endpoints of the study were perioperative outcomes, overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients were selected (26 ALPPS and 52 e-OSH) based on matching process. The two treatments differed significantly in major morbidity (26.9% ALPPS vs 7.7% e-OSH, p = 0.017). Median OS (31.7 vs 32.6 months) and DFS (10.6 vs 7.8 months) were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that ALPPS and e-OSH for bilobar CLM achieve comparable long-term results, despite higher morbidity reported after ALPPS. These findings should drive to reposition e-OSH in managing these patients.

Simultaneous curative resection of double colorectal carcinoma with synchronous bilobar liver metastases

Synchronous colorectal carcinoma (SCRC) indicates more than one primary colorectal carcinoma (CRC) discovered at the time of initial presentation, accounts for 3.1%-3.9% of CRC, and may occur either in the same or in different colorectal segments. The accurate preoperative diagnosis of SCRC is difficult and diagnostic failures may lead to inappropriate treatment and poorer prognosis. SCRC requires colorectal resections tailored to individual patients, based on the number, location, and stage of the tumours, from conventional or extended hemicolectomies to total colectomy or proctocolectomy, when established predisposing conditions exist. The overall perioperative risks of surgery for SCRC seem to be higher than for solitary CRC. Simultaneous colorectal and liver resection represents an appealing surgical strategy in selected patients with CRC and synchronous liver metastases (CRLM), even though the cumulative risks of the two procedures need to be adequately evaluated. Simultaneous resections have the noticeable advantage of avoiding a second laparotomy, give the opportunity of an earlier initiation of adjuvant therapy, and may significantly reduce the hospital costs. Because an increasing number of recent studies have shown good results, with morbidity, perioperative hospitalization, and mortality rates comparable to staged resections, simultaneous procedures can be selectively proposed even in case of complex colorectal resections, including those for SCRC and rectal cancer. However, in patients with multiple bilobar CRLM, major hepatectomies performed simultaneously with colorectal resection have been associated with significant perioperative risks. Conservative or parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies reduce the extent of hepatectomy while preserving oncological radicality, and may represent the best option for selected patients with multiple CRLM involving both liver lobes. Parenchymal-sparing liver resection, instead of major or two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar disease, seemingly reduces the overall operative risk of candidates to simultaneous colorectal and liver resection, and may represent the most appropriate surgical strategy whenever possible, also for patients with advanced SCRC and multiple bilobar liver metastases.

Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy in the Treatment of Colorectal Liver Metastases: Current Scenario

Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) has expanded the surgical armamentarium for patients with advanced and bilateral colorectal liver metastases. However, the enthusiasm that the medical fraternity had about ALPPS was hampered by a high mortality rate and early and frequent tumor recurrence. While surgical safety has improved, mainly due to technical refinements and a better patient selection, the oncological value in the face of early tumor recurrence remains unclear. The only randomized controlled trial on ALPPS versus two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) so far confirmed that ALPPS led to higher resectability with comparable perioperative complication rate, but oncological outcome was not measured. Robust data regarding long-term outcome are still missing. TSH and ALPPS might be complementary strategies for the resection of colorectal liver metatsases (CRLM) with ALPPS being reserved for patients with no other surgical option, that is, after failed portal vein embolization or those with an extremely small future liver remnant. In other words, ALPPS can be considered a supplementary tool and a last resort in the liver surgeon's hand to offer resectability in otherwise nonresectable CRLM. In these individual cases, and always embedded into a multimodal treatment setting, ALPPS may offer a chance of complete tumor removal and prolonged survival and even a chance for cure.