Liver venous deprivation versus portal vein embolization before major hepatectomy: future liver remnant volumetric and functional changes

CIRSE Standards of Practice on Portal Vein Embolization and Double Vein Embolization/Liver Venous Deprivation

This CIRSE Standards of Practice document is aimed at interventional radiologists and provides best practices for performing liver regeneration therapies prior to major hepatectomies, including portal vein embolization, double vein embolization and liver venous deprivation. It has been developed by an expert writing group under the guidance of the CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee. It encompasses all clinical and technical details required to perform liver regeneration therapies, revising the indications, contra-indications, outcome measures assessed, technique and expected outcomes.

Comparison of liver venous deprivation with portal vein embolization alone in patients undergoing major liver resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The clinical efficacy and safety between liver venous deprivation (LVD) and portal vein embolization (PVE) prior to major hepatectomy is still unclear.

METHODS

Studies comparing LVD and PVE were obtained by systemically searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library Central databases through 22 December 2023.

RESULTS

Ten studies including 588 patients were reviewed. Compared with PVE group, LVD group exhibited an increased liver resection rate (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.13-3.15; P = 0.01), a faster KGR (MD, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.31-2.42; P = 0.01), and a shorter time to hepatectomy (MD, -6.66; 95% CI, -8.03 to -5.30; P < 0.0001). The pooled results showed that post-embolization complications (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.66-2.74), overall postoperative complications (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.68-1.75), severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.43-1.14), and 90-day mortality (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.13-1.09) were not significantly different in both groups. LVD group had significantly lower post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) than PVE group (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.22-0.91; P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

LVD outperforms PVE regarding liver resection rate and future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy and shows comparable safety to PVE. In addition, LVD allowed for major hepatectomy with lower incidence of PHLF.

New trends in surgery for colorectal liver metastasis

By presenting the most up-to-date findings and incorporating the latest evidence, this article seeks to present a comprehensive guide for navigating the complexities inherent in the management of colorectal liver metastasis. It aims to serve as a valuable resource offering clinicians and healthcare professionals an understanding of the diverse modalities and approaches available for treating this challenging and multifaceted disease. In an era of rapidly evolving medical knowledge, this article examines the latest insights to make informed decisions in the realm of colorectal liver metastasis management. The article does not only highlight the up-to-date knowledge but also provides the evidence for existing therapeutic strategies. This practical tool provides evidence-based recommendations to clinicians, thereby contributing to the ongoing advancement of effective treatment strategies for this challenging disease.

Assessment of Segmentary Hypertrophy of Future Remnant Liver after Liver Venous Deprivation: A Single-Center Study

Background: Liver venous deprivation (LVD) is a recent radiological technique that has shown promising results on Future Remnant Liver (FRL) hypertrophy. The aim of this retrospective study is to compare the segmentary hypertrophy of the FRL after LVD and after portal vein embolization (PVE). Methods: Patients undergoing PVE or LVD between April 2015 and April 2020 were included. The segmentary volumes (seg 4, seg2+3 and seg1) were assessed before and after the radiological procedure. Results: Forty-four patients were included: 26 undergoing PVE, 10 LVD and 8 eLVD. Volume gain of both segment 1 and segments 2+3 was significantly higher after LVD and eLVD than after PVE (segment 1: 27.33 ± 35.37 after PVE vs. 38.73% ± 13.47 after LVD and 79.13% ± 41.23 after eLVD, p = 0.0080; segments 2+3: 40.73% ± 40.53 after PVE vs. 45.02% ± 21.53 after LVD and 85.49% ± 45.51 after eLVD, p = 0.0137), while this was not true for segment 4. FRL hypertrophy was confirmed to be higher after LVD and eLVD than after PVE (33.53% ± 21.22 vs. 68.63% ± 42.03 vs. 28.11% ± 28.33, respectively, p = 0.0280). Conclusions: LVD and eLVD may induce greater hypertrophy of segment 1 and segments 2+3 when compared to PVE.

Liver volumetry and liver-regenerative interventions: history, rationale, and emerging tools

BACKGROUND

Postoperative hepatic insufficiency (PHI) is the most feared complication after hepatectomy. Volume of the future liver remnant (FLR) is one objectively measurable indicator to identify patients at risk of PHI. In this review, we summarized the development and rationale for the use of liver volumetry and liver-regenerative interventions and highlighted emerging tools that could yield new advancements in liver volumetry.

METHODS

A review of MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted to identify literature related to liver volumetry. The references of relevant articles were reviewed to identify additional publications.

RESULTS

Liver volumetry based on radiologic imaging was developed in the 1980s to identify patients at risk of PHI and later used in the 1990s to evaluate grafts for living donor living transplantation. The field evolved in the 2000s by the introduction of standardized FLR based on the hepatic metabolic demands and in the 2010s by the introduction of the degree of hypertrophy and kinetic growth rate as measures of the FLR regenerative and functional capacity. Several liver-regenerative interventions, most notably portal vein embolization, are used to increase resectability and reduce the risk of PHI. In parallel with the increase in automation and machine assistance to physicians, many semi- and fully automated tools are being developed to facilitate liver volumetry.

CONCLUSION

Liver volumetry is the most reliable tool to detect patients at risk of PHI. Advances in imaging analysis technologies, newly developed functional measures, and liver-regenerative interventions have been improving our ability to perform safe hepatectomy.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION

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

National guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma

A consensus meeting of national experts from all major national hepatobiliary centres in the country was held on May 26, 2023, at the Pakistan Kidney and Liver Institute & Research Centre (PKLI & RC) after initial consultations with the experts. The Pakistan Society for the Study of Liver Diseases (PSSLD) and PKLI & RC jointly organised this meeting. This effort was based on a comprehensive literature review to establish national practice guidelines for hilar cholangiocarcinoma (hCCA). The consensus was that hCCA is a complex disease and requires a multidisciplinary team approach to best manage these patients. This coordinated effort can minimise delays and give patients a chance for curative treatment and effective palliation. The diagnostic and staging workup includes high-quality computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Brush cytology or biopsy utilizing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is a mainstay for diagnosis. However, histopathologic confirmation is not always required before resection. Endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration of regional lymph nodes and positron emission tomography scan are valuable adjuncts for staging. The only curative treatment is the surgical resection of the biliary tree based on the Bismuth-Corlette classification. Selected patients with unresectable hCCA can be considered for liver transplantation. Adjuvant chemotherapy should be offered to patients with a high risk of recurrence. The use of preoperative biliary drainage and the need for portal vein embolisation should be based on local multidisciplinary discussions. Patients with acute cholangitis can be drained with endoscopic or percutaneous biliary drainage. Palliative chemotherapy with cisplatin and gemcitabine has shown improved survival in patients with irresectable and recurrent hCCA.

Assessing regional hepatic function changes after hypertrophy induction by radioembolisation: comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI and 99mTc-mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy

BACKGROUND

To compare Gd-ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 99mTc-labelled mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS) as imaging-based liver function tests after unilateral radioembolisation (RE) in patients with primary or secondary liver malignancies.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients with primary or secondary liver malignancies who underwent Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI within a prospective study (REVoluTion) were evaluated. REVoluTion was a prospective open-label, non-randomised, therapy-optimising study of patients undergoing right-sided or sequential RE for contralateral liver hypertrophy at a single centre in Germany. MRI and hepatobiliary scintigraphy were performed before RE (baseline) and 6 weeks after (follow-up). This exploratory subanalysis compared liver enhancement on hepatobiliary phase MRI normalised to the spleen (liver-to-spleen ratio (LSR)) and the muscle (liver-to-muscle ratio (LMR)) with mebrofenin uptake on HBS for the total liver (TL) and separately for the right (RLL) and left liver lobe (LLL).

RESULTS

Mebrofenin uptake at baseline and follow-up each correlated significantly with LSR and LMR on MRI for TL (≤ 0.013) and RLL (≤ 0.049). Regarding the LLL, mebrofenin uptake correlated significantly with LMR (baseline, p = 0.013; follow-up, p = 0.004), whereas with LSR, a borderline significant correlation was only seen at follow-up (p = 0.051; p = 0.046).

CONCLUSION

LSRs and LMR correlate with mebrofenin uptake in HBS. This study indicates that Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI and 99mTc-labelled mebrofenin HBS may equally be used to assess an increase in contralateral liver lobe function after right-sided RE.

RELEVANCE STATEMENT

MRI may be a convenient and reliable method for assessing the future liver remnant facilitating treatment planning and monitoring of patients after RE-induced hypertrophy induction.

KEY POINTS

• Both MRI and HBS can assess liver function after RE. • Liver enhancement on MRI correlates with mebrofenin uptake on HBS. • MRI might be a convenient alternative for estimating future liver remnants after hypertrophy induction.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of liver venous deprivation versus portal vein embolization before hepatectomy: future liver volume, postoperative outcomes, and oncological safety

Introduction

This systematic review aimed to compare liver venous deprivation (LVD) with portal vein embolization (PVE) in terms of future liver volume, postoperative outcomes, and oncological safety before major hepatectomy.

Methods

We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines 2020 and AMSTAR 2 guidelines. Comparative articles published before November 2022 were retained.

Results

The literature search identified nine eligible comparative studies. They included 557 patients, 207 in the LVD group and 350 in the PVE group. This systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that LVD was associated with higher future liver remnant (FLR) volume after embolization, percentage of FLR hypertrophy, lower failure of resection due to low FLR, faster kinetic growth, higher day 5 prothrombin time, and higher 3 years' disease-free survival. This study did not find any difference between the LVD and PVE groups in terms of complications related to embolization, FLR percentage of hypertrophy after embolization, failure of resection, 3-month mortality, overall morbidity, major complications, operative time, blood loss, bile leak, ascites, post hepatectomy liver failure, day 5 bilirubin level, hospital stay, and three years' overall survival.

Conclusion

LVD is as feasible and safe as PVE with encouraging results making some selected patients more suitable for surgery, even with a small FLR.

Systematic review registration

The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO before conducting the study (CRD42021287628).

Tc-99m mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy to assess future liver remnant function before major liver surgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Assessment of liver function is paramount before hepatectomy. This study aimed to assess future liver remnant function (FLR-F) using hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS) and to compare it to FLR volume (FLR-V) in the prediction of posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). The impact of volume and function gains were also assessed in patients undergoing portal vein embolization (PVE) or liver venous deprivation (LVD).

METHODS

All consecutive patients undergoing major hepatectomy between 02/2018 and 09/2021 with preoperative HBS were included. FLR-V was expressed as percentage of total liver volume and analyzed using preoperative computed tomography. FLR-V and FLR-F gains after embolization were expressed in percentage. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to compare both methods in predicting PHLF.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were included. PVE and LVD were performed in 4 (11%) and 28 patients (78%), respectively. Overall, PHLF occurred in eight patients (22%). FLR-F gain after embolization showed significant ability to predict PHLF (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.789), with cut-off value of 150% showing a sensitivity of 1.00, a specificity of 0.42, and a negative predictive value of 1.00.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative HBS shows a high sensitivity to predict PHLF when HBS is performed twice to measure the function gain after venous embolization.

Multi-organ Radiomics-Based Prediction of Future Remnant Liver Hypertrophy Following Portal Vein Embolization

BACKGROUND

Portal vein embolization (PVE) is used to induce remnant liver hypertrophy prior to major hepatectomy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of baseline computed tomography (CT) data for future remnant liver (FRL) hypertrophy after PVE.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, all consecutive patients undergoing right-sided PVE with or without hepatic vein embolization between 2018 and 2021 were included. CT volumetry was performed before and after PVE to assess standardized FRL volume (sFRLV). Radiomic features were extracted from baseline CT after segmenting liver (without tumor), spleen and bone marrow. For selecting features that allow classification of response (hypertrophy ≥ 1.33), a stepwise dimension reduction was performed. Logistic regression models were fitted and selected features were tested for their predictive value. Decision curve analysis was performed on the test dataset.

RESULTS

A total of 53 patients with liver tumor were included in this study. sFRLV increased significantly after PVE, with a mean hypertrophy of FRL of 1.5 ± 0.3-fold. sFRLV hypertrophy ≥ 1.33 was reached in 35 (66%) patients. Three independent radiomic features, i.e. liver-, spleen- and bone marrow-associated, differentiated well between responders and non-responders. A logistic regression model revealed the highest accuracy (area under the curve 0.875) for the prediction of response, with sensitivity of 1.0 and specificity of 0.5. Decision curve analysis revealed a positive net benefit when applying the model.

CONCLUSIONS

This proof-of-concept study provides first evidence of a potential predictive value of baseline multi-organ radiomics CT data for FRL hypertrophy after PVE.

Single-Center Retrospective Study Comparing Double Vein Embolization via a Trans-Jugular Approach with Liver Venous Deprivation via a Trans-Hepatic Approach

PURPOSE

To compare safety, technical and clinical outcomes of double vein embolization (DVE) via a trans-jugular approach with liver venous deprivation (LVD) via a trans-hepatic approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing simultaneous portal and hepatic veins embolization in view of a major hepatectomy (June 2019-November 2022). Hepatic vein embolization was performed either by transjugular plug (DVE) or by transhepatic plug followed by glue injection (LVD). Inclusion criteria were availability of pre-procedural CT scan, and availability of CT scans acquired 10 days and 25 days post-procedure. Comparative data included complication rate, fluoroscopy time, dose area product (DAP), Future Liver Remnant volume and function increase (FLR-V and FLR-F increase, respectively) and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients (n = 14 DVE; n = 22 LVD) were included. No baseline significant differences were observed among the two groups. One grade-3 complication (2.8%) was observed in the LVD group; one case of technical failure (2.8%) was observed in the DVE group. Fluoroscopy time and DAP were similar between DVE and LVD (29 ± 17.7 vs. 25 ± 8.2 min, p = 0.97; 105.1 ± 63.5 vs. 143.4 ± 79.5 Gy·cm2, p = 0.15). No differences arose at either time-point in FLR-V increase (46.7 ± 23.1% vs. 48.2 ± 28.2%, 52.9 ± 30.9% vs. 53.2 ± 29%, respectively, p = 0.9). FLR-F increase also did not differ significantly (62.8 ± 55.2 vs. 67.4 ± 57.5, p = 0.9). No differences in drop-out rate from surgery were observed. (28.6% vs. 27.3%, p = 0.93). One case of grade-B post-hepatectomy liver failure (2.8%) was observed in the LVD group.

CONCLUSION

LVD via transhepatic approach and DVE via transjugular approach seem equally safe and effective. Level of Evidence Level 3, Retrospective Cohort Study.

Comparing Liver Venous Deprivation and Portal Vein Embolization for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: Is It Time to Shift the Focus to Hepatic Functional Reserve Rather than Hypertrophy?

Purpose: Among liver hypertrophy technics, liver venous deprivation (LVD) has been recently introduced as an effective procedure to combine simultaneous portal inflow and hepatic outflow abrogation, raising growing clinical interest. The aim of this study is to investigate the role of LVD for preoperative optimization of future liver remnant (FLR) in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC), especially when compared with portal vein embolization (PVE). Methods: Between January 2013 and July 2022, all patients diagnosed with PHC and scheduled for preoperative optimization of FTR, through radiological hypertrophy techniques, prior to liver resection, were included. FTR volumetric assessment was evaluated at two distinct timepoints to track the progression of both early (T1, 10 days post-procedural) and late (T2, 21 days post-procedural) efficacy indicators. Post-procedural outcomes, including functional and volumetric analyses, were compared between the LVD and the PVE cohorts. Results: A total of 12 patients underwent LVD while 19 underwent PVE. No significant differences in either post-procedural or post-operative complications were found. Post-procedural FLR function, calculated with (99m) Tc-Mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy, and kinetic growth rate, at both timepoints, were greater in the LVD cohort (3.12 ± 0.55%/min/m2 vs. 2.46 ± 0.64%/min/m2, p = 0.041; 27.32 ± 16.86%/week (T1) vs. 15.71 ± 9.82%/week (T1) p < 0.001; 17.19 ± 9.88%/week (T2) vs. 9.89 ± 14.62%/week (T2) p = 0.034) when compared with the PVE cohort. Post-procedural FTR volumes were similar for both hypertrophy techniques. Conclusions: LVD is an effective procedure to effectively optimize FLR before liver resection for PHC. The faster growth rate combined with the improved FLR function, when compared to PVE alone, could maximize surgical outcomes by lowering post-hepatectomy liver failure rates.

Safety and Efficacy of Liver Venous Deprivation Following Transarterial Chemoembolization Before Major Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of liver venous deprivation (LVD) following transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

Between January 2021 and December 2022, HCC patients indicated for hepatectomy with initial insufficient future liver remnant (FLR) underwent LVD after TACE to induce preoperative liver hypertrophy.

Results

Twenty-seven HCC patients with a median age of 55 years underwent LVD. No TACE or LVD procedure-associated complications occurred, except for 1 case presenting with grade A liver failure after LVD (then recovered after 7 days). The FLR volume was 29.3% (interquartile range [IQR] = 7.5) and 48.9% (IQR = 8.6) of the total liver volume before and after LVD, respectively (p < 0.001). The degree of hypertrophy and FLR hypertrophy rate were 14.8% (IQR = 8.4) and 55.2% (IQR = 36.7), respectively. All 27 patients demonstrated sufficient FLR after LVD (24 patients at three weeks post-LVD, one at six weeks, and two at ten weeks), but only 21 patients accepted surgery. Postoperative histopathology showed 16 patients with cirrhosis and five with mild fibrosis (F1, F2). One patient presented with severe intraoperative bleeding due to damage of left hepatic vein and developed grade C liver failure, then died on day 32 postoperation.

Conclusion

LVD following TACE seems to be a safe, effective, and feasible method of inducing significant FLR regeneration in HCC, even in well-selected cirrhotic livers. Comparative studies with a large patient population and multicenter data are needed for further evaluation.

Liver Venous Deprivation Versus Portal Vein Embolization Before Major Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Retrospective Comparison of Short- and Medium-Term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Liver venous deprivation (LVD) is a recent radiological technique performed to induce hypertrophy of the future liver remnant. Medium-term results of major hepatectomy after LVD have never been compared with the actual standard of care, portal vein embolization (PVE).

METHODS

We retrospectively compared data from 33 consecutive patients who had undergone LVD (n = 17) or PVE (n = 16) prior to a right hemi-hepatectomy or right extended hepatectomy indicated for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) between May 2015 and December 2019.

RESULTS

The 1-year and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates in the LVD group were 81.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 72-90) and 54.7% (95% CI: 46-63), respectively, against 85% (95% CI: 69-101) and 77.4% (95% CI: 54-100) in the PVE group; the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.64). The median disease-free survival (DFS) rate was also comparable: 6 months (95% CI: 4-7) in the LVD group and 12 months (95% CI: 1.5-13) in the PVE group (p = 0.29). The overall intra-operative and post-operative complication rates were similar between the two groups. The mean daily kinetic growth rate (KGR) was found to be higher after LVD than after PVE (0.2% vs. 0.1%, p = 0.05; 10 cc/day vs. 4.8 cc/day, p = 0.03), as was the mean increase in future liver remnant volume (FLR-V) (49% vs. 27%, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The LVD technique is well tolerated in patients undergoing right hemi-hepatectomy or right extended hepatectomy for CRLM. When compared with the PVE technique, the LVD technique has similar peri-operative and medium-term outcomes, but higher KGR and FLR-V increase.

A prospective study of sequential hepatic vein embolization after portal vein embolization in patients scheduled for right-sided major hepatectomy: Results of feasibility and surgical strategy using functional liver assessment

BACKGROUND

Hepatic vein embolization (HVE) added to portal vein embolization (PVE) can further increase future remnant liver volume (FRLV) compared with PVE alone. This study was aimed to evaluate feasibility of sequential HVE in a prospective trial and to verify surgical strategy using functional FRLV (fFRLV).

METHODS

Hepatic vein embolization was prospectively indicated for post-PVE patients scheduled for right-sided major hepatectomy if the resection limit of fFRLV using EOB-magnetic resonance imaging was not satisfied. The resection limit was fFRLV: 615 mL/m² for predicting post-hepatectomy liver failure. Patients who underwent sequential PVE-HVE (n = 12) were compared with those who underwent PVE alone (n = 31).

RESULTS

All patients underwent HVE with no severe complications. Median fFRLV increased from 396 (range: 251-581) to 634 (range: 422-740) mL/m² by sequential PVE-HVE. From PVE to HVE, both of FRLV (P < .001) and fFRLV (P = .005) significantly increased. The increased width of fFRLV was larger than that of FRLV after performing HVE. Median growth rate was 71.3 (range: 33.3-80.3) %, which was higher than that of PVE alone (27.0%, range: 6.0-78.0). All-cohort resection rate was 88.3%. Strategy of using fFRLV for the resection limit and performing HVE in patients with insufficient functional volume resulted in no liver failure in all patients who underwent hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential HVE after PVE is feasible and safe, and HVE induced possibility of further liver growth and its functional improvement. Our surgical strategy using fFRLV may be justified.

Efficacy and safety of different options for liver regeneration of future liver remnant in patients with liver malignancies: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several treatments induce liver hypertrophy for patients with liver malignancies but insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). Herein, the aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of existing surgical techniques using network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from databases for abstracts and full-text articles published from database inception through Feb 2022. The primary outcome was the efficacy of different procedures, including standardized FLR (sFLR) increase, time to hepatectomy, resection rate, and R0 resection margin. The secondary outcome was the safety of different treatments, including the rate of Clavien-Dindo≥3a and 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), three prospective trials (PTs), and twenty-one retrospective trials (RTs), and a total number of 2075 patients were recruited in this study. NMA demonstrated that the Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) had much higher sFLR increase when compared to portal vein embolization (PVE) (55.25%, 95% CI 45.27-65.24%), or liver venous deprivation(LVD) (43.26%, 95% CI 22.05-64.47%), or two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) (30.53%, 95% CI 16.84-44.21%), or portal vein ligation (PVL) (58.42%, 95% CI 37.62-79.23%). ALPPS showed significantly shorter time to hepatectomy when compared to PVE (-32.79d, 95% CI -42.92-22.66), or LVD (-34.02d, 95% CI -47.85-20.20), or TSH (-22.85d, 95% CI -30.97-14.72), or PVL (-43.37d, 95% CI -64.11-22.62); ALPPS was considered as the highest resection rate when compared to TSH (OR=6.09; 95% CI 2.76-13.41), or PVL (OR =3.52; 95% CI 1.16-10.72), or PVE (OR =4.12; 95% CI 2.19-7.77). ALPPS had comparable resection rate with LVD (OR =2.20; 95% CI 0.83-5.86). There was no significant difference between them when considering the R0 marge rate. ALPPS had a higher Clavien-Dindo≥3a complication rate and 90-day mortality compared to other treatments, although there were no significant differences between different procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

ALPPS demonstrated a higher regeneration rate, shorter time to hepatectomy, and higher resection rate than PVL, PVE, or TSH. There was no significant difference between them when considering the R0 marge rate. However, ALPPS developed the trend of higher Clavien-Dindo≥3a complication rate and 90-day mortality compared to other treatments.

Locoregional Therapy in the Management of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Is There Sufficient Evidence to Guide Current Clinical Practice?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) carries a dismal prognosis and, despite increasing incidence, still lacks effective treatments. In this scenario, locoregional therapies (LRT) are gaining interest as they may be effective at local tumor control and complementary to surgical and non-surgical approaches. In this article, we will review the evolving role of LRT performed by interventional radiologists in the management of iCCA.

RECENT FINDINGS

Accumulating retrospective evidence indicates that ablative therapies and transarterial embolizations are of benefit for iCCA with unresectable disease, demonstrating promising safety profiles and prolonged or comparable survival outcomes compared to systemic therapy and surgery. Additionally, for surgical candidates, portal ± hepatic venous embolization can improve the safety of hepatectomy by inducing preoperative hypertrophy of the non-involved liver lobe. LRTs are playing an increasingly important role in the multimodal treatment of iCCA from various perspectives with reduced toxicity relative to traditional treatments. To expand the scope of applications for LRTs in this setting, future prospective randomized studies are needed to confirm their efficacy and advantage.

Resectability of bilobar liver tumours after simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization versus portal vein embolization alone: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many patients with bi-lobar liver tumours are not eligible for liver resection due to an insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). To reduce the risk of posthepatectomy liver failure and the primary cause of death, regenerative procedures intent to increase the FLR before surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of the available literature and outcomes on the effectiveness of simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization (PVE/HVE) versus portal vein embolization (PVE) alone.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase up to September 2022. The primary outcome was resectability and the secondary outcome was the FLR volume increase.

RESULTS

Eight studies comparing PVE/HVE with PVE and six retrospective PVE/HVE case series were included. Pooled resectability within the comparative studies was 75 per cent in the PVE group (n = 252) versus 87 per cent in the PVE/HVE group (n = 166, OR 1.92 (95% c.i., 1.13-3.25)) favouring PVE/HVE (P = 0.015). After PVE, FLR hypertrophy between 12 per cent and 48 per cent (after a median of 21-30 days) was observed, whereas growth between 36 per cent and 67 per cent was reported after PVE/HVE (after a median of 17-31 days). In the comparative studies, 90-day primary cause of death was similar between groups (2.5 per cent after PVE versus 2.2 per cent after PVE/HVE), but a higher 90-day primary cause of death was reported in single-arm PVE/HVE cohort studies (6.9 per cent, 12 of 175 patients).

CONCLUSION

Based on moderate/weak evidence, PVE/HVE seems to increase resectability of bi-lobar liver tumours with a comparable safety profile. Additionally, PVE/HVE resulted in faster and more pronounced hypertrophy compared with PVE alone.

Volume and flow modulation strategies to mitigate post-hepatectomy liver failure

INTRODUCTION

Post hepatectomy liver failure is the most common cause of death following major hepatic resections with a perioperative mortality rate between 40% to 60%. Various strategies have been devised to increase the volume and function of future liver remnant (FLR). This study aims to review the strategies used for volume and flow modulation to reduce the incidence of post hepatectomy liver failure.

METHOD

An electronic search was performed of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed databases from 2000 to 2022 using the following search strategy "Post hepatectomy liver failure", "flow modulation", "small for size flow syndrome", "portal vein embolization", "dual vein embolization", "ALPPS" and "staged hepatectomy" to identify all articles published relating to this topic.

RESULTS

Volume and flow modulation strategies have evolved over time to maximize the volume and function of FLR to mitigate the risk of PHLF. Portal vein with or without hepatic vein embolization/ligation, ALPPS, and staged hepatectomy have resulted in significant hypertrophy and kinetic growth of FLR. Similarly, techniques including portal flow diversion, splenic artery ligation, splenectomy and pharmacological agents like somatostatin and terlipressin are employed to reduce the risk of small for size flow syndrome SFSF syndrome by decreasing portal venous flow and increasing hepatic artery flow at the same time.

CONCLUSION

The current review outlines the various strategies of volume and flow modulation that can be used in isolation or combination in the management of patients at risk of PHLF.

Portal vein embolization versus dual vein embolization for management of the future liver remnant in patients undergoing major hepatectomy: meta-analysis

Background

This meta-analysis aimed to compare progression to surgery, extent of liver hypertrophy, and postoperative outcomes in patients planned for major hepatectomy following either portal vein embolization (PVE) or dual vein embolization (DVE) for management of an inadequate future liver remnant (FLR).

Methods

An electronic search was performed of MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed databases using both medical subject headings (MeSH) and truncated word searches. Articles comparing PVE with DVE up to January 2022 were included. Articles comparing sequential DVE were excluded. ORs, risk ratios, and mean difference (MD) were calculated using fixed and random-effects models for meta-analysis.

Results

Eight retrospective studies including 523 patients were included in the study. Baseline characteristics between the groups, specifically, age, sex, BMI, indication for resection, and baseline FLR (ml and per cent) were comparable. The percentage increase in hypertrophy was larger in the DVE group, 66 per cent in the DVE group versus 27 per cent in the PVE group, MD 39.07 (9.09, 69.05) (P = 0.010). Significantly fewer patients failed to progress to surgery in the DVE group than the PVE group, 13 per cent versus 25 per cent respectively OR 0.53 (0.31, 0.90) (P = 0.020). Rates of post-hepatectomy liver failure 13 per cent versus 22 per cent (P = 0.130) and major complications 20 per cent versus 28 per cent (Clavien–Dindo more than IIIa) (P = 0.280) were lower. Perioperative mortality was lower with DVE, 1 per cent versus 10 per cent (P = 0.010)

Conclusion

DVE seems to produce a greater degree of hypertrophy of the FLR than PVE alone which translates into more patients progressing to surgery. Higher quality studies are needed to confirm these results.

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.

Promoting Surgical Resection through Future Liver Remnant Hypertrophy

An inadequate future liver remnant (FLR) can preclude curative-intent surgical resection for patients with primary or secondary hepatic malignancies. For patients with normal baseline liver function and without risk factors, an FLR of 20% is needed to maintain postsurgical hepatic function. However, the FLR requirement is higher for patients who are exposed to systemic chemotherapy (FLR, >30%) or have cirrhosis (FLR, >40%). Interventional radiologic and surgical methods to achieve FLR hypertrophy are evolving, including portal vein ligation, portal vein embolization, radiation lobectomy, hepatic venous deprivation, and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy. Each technique offers particular advantages and disadvantages. Knowledge of these procedures can help clinicians to choose the suitable technique for each patient. The authors review the techniques used to develop FLR hypertrophy, focusing on technical considerations, outcomes, and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2022.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Imaging-guided interventions modulating portal venous flow: evidence and controversies

Portal hypertension is defined by an increase in the portosystemic venous gradient. In most cases, increased resistance to portal blood flow is the initial cause of elevated portal pressure. More than 90% of cases of portal hypertension are estimated to be due to advanced chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, a non-pharmacological treatment for portal hypertension, involve the placement of a stent between the portal vein and the hepatic vein or inferior vena cava which helps bypass hepatic resistance. Portal hypertension may also be a result of extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis or compression. In these cases, percutaneous portal vein recanalisation restores portal trunk patency, thus preventing portal hypertension-related complications. Any portal blood flow impairment leads to progressive parenchymal atrophy and triggers hepatic regeneration in preserved areas. This provides the rationale for using portal vein embolisation to modulate hepatic volume in preparation for extended hepatic resection. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive evidence-based review of the rationale for, and outcomes associated with, the main imaging-guided interventions targeting the portal vein, as well as to discuss the main controversies around such approaches.

Percutaneous liver venous deprivation: outcomes in heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

To evaluate liver venous deprivation (LVD) outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) heavily pretreated with systemic and hepatic arterial infusion pump (HAIP) chemotherapies that had an anticipated insufficient future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy after portal vein embolization (PVE).

METHODS

PVE was performed with liquid embolics using a transsplenic or ipsilateral transhepatic approach. Simultaneously and via a trans-jugular approach, the right hepatic vein was embolized with vascular plugs. Liver volumetry was assessed on computed tomography before and 3-6 weeks after LVD.

RESULTS

Twelve consecutive CRLM patients that underwent LVD before right hepatectomy or trisectionectomy were included, all previously treated with systemic chemotherapy for a mean of 11.9 months. Six patients had additional HAIP. After embolization, FLR ratio increased from 28.7% ± 5.9 to 42.2% ± 9.0 (P < 0.01). Mean kinetic growth rate (KGR) was 3.56%/week ± 2.3, with a degree of hypertrophy (DH) of 13.8% ± 7.1. In the HAIP subgroup, mean KGR and DH were respectively 3.58%/week ± 2.8 and 14.3% ± 8.7. No severe complications occurred. Ten patients reached surgery after 39 days ± 7.5.

CONCLUSION

In heavily pretreated patients, LVD safely stimulated a rapid and effective FLR hypertrophy, with a resultant high rate of resection.

Liver venous deprivation for resection of advanced hilar cholangiocarcinoma—a case report and review of the literature

Hilar cholangiocarcinoma is a rare primary malignancy associated with a dismal prognosis. Currently, complete extended right or left-sided hepatectomy is the primary curative therapy. Achieving a negative resection margin is associated with long-term survival and better quality of life, while post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) due to insufficient liver remnant remains the most dreaded complication with a negative effect on overall survival. Precise preoperative management with sufficient future remnant liver (FRL) volume is the key to achieving good results in the treatment of bile duct carcinoma. To present a case report and a literature review for preoperative FRL optimization prior to major hepatectomies for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Improvement of postoperative outcomes after extended liver resections in the case of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. A 62-year-old Caucasian woman with Lynch syndrome presented to our department with a hilar cholangiocarcinoma Bismuth type IIIa. The patient had an insufficient future liver volume for extended liver resection. She underwent preoperative preconditioning using a liver venous deprivation (LVD) and underwent two weeks later a right trisectorectomy without any interventional complications. Liver function remained stable postoperatively. The patient was discharged on the 20th postoperative day without major surgical post-operative complications or the need for readmission. LVD is a technically feasible, safe, and effective procedure to increase the FRL in a short period of time with low intra and post-operative complications and therefore improving the survival of patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

Moving forward in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma

Despite being the second most frequent primary liver tumor in humans, early diagnosis and treatment of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) are still unsatisfactory. In fact, survival after 5 years is expected in less than one fourth of patients diagnosed with this disease. Rare incidence, late appearance of symptoms and heterogeneous biology are all factors contributing to our limited knowledge of this cancer and determining its poor prognosis in the clinical setting. Several efforts have been made in the last decades in order to achieve an improved classification/understanding with regard to the diverse CCA forms. Location within the biliary tree has helped to distinguish between intrahepatic, perihilar and distal CCA types. Sequence analysis contributed to identifying several characteristic genetic aberrations in CCA that may also serve as possible targets for therapy. Novel findings are expected to significantly improve the management of this malignancy in the near future. In this changing scenario our review focuses on the current and future strategies for CCA treatment. Both systemic and surgical treatments are discussed in detail. The results of the main studies in this field are reported, together with the ongoing trials. The current findings suggest that an integrated multidisciplinary approach to this malignancy would be helpful to improve its outcome.

Induction of Robust Future Liver Remnant Hypertrophy Before Hepatectomy With a Modified Liver Venous Deprivation Technique Using a Trans-venous Access for Hepatic Vein Embolization

Purpose: Hepatic and/or portal vein embolization are performed before hepatectomy for patients with insufficient future liver remnant and usually achieved with a trans-hepatic approach. The aim of the present study is to describe a modified trans-venous liver venous deprivation technique (mLVD), avoiding the potential risks and limitations of a percutaneous approach to hepatic vein embolization, and to assess the safety, efficacy, and surgical outcome after mLVD. Materials and Methods: Retrospective single-center institutional review board-approved study. From March 2016 to June 2019, consecutive oncologic patients with combined portal and hepatic vein embolization were included. CT volumetric analysis was performed before and after mLVD to assess liver hypertrophy. Complications related to mLVD and surgical outcome were obtained from medical records. Results: Thirty patients (62.7 ± 14.5 years old, 20 men) with liver metastasis (60%) or primary liver cancer (40%) underwent mLVD. Twenty-one patients (70%) had hepatic vein anatomic variants. Technical success of mLVD was 100%. Four patients had complications (three minor and one major). FLR hypertrophy was 64.2% ± 51.3% (mean ± SD). Twenty-four patients (80%) underwent the planned hepatectomy and no surgery was canceled as a consequence of mLVD complications or insufficient hypertrophy. Fifty percent of patients (12/24) had no or mild complications after surgery (Clavien-Dindo 0-II), and 45.8% (11/24) had more serious complications (Clavien-Dindo III-IV). Thirty-day mortality was 4.2% (1/24). Conclusion: mLVD is an effective method to induce FLR hypertrophy. This technique is applicable in a wide range of oncologic situations and in patients with complex right liver vein anatomy.

Liver Venous Deprivation (LVD) or Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy (ALPPS)?: A Retrospective Multicentric Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare two techniques of remnant liver hypertrophy in candidates for extended hepatectomy: radiological simultaneous portal vein (PVE) and hepatic vein embolization (HVE); namely liver venous deprivation (LVD), and ALPPS.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Recent advances in chemotherapy and surgical techniques have widened indications for extended hepatectomy, before which remnant liver augmentation is mandatory. ALPPS and LVD typically show higher hypertrophy rates than PVE, but their respective places in patient management remain unclear.

METHODS

All consecutive ALPPS and LVD procedures performed in eight French centers between 2011 and 2020 were included. The main endpoint was the successful resection rate (resection rate without 90-day mortality) analyzed according to an intention-to-treat principle. Secondary endpoints were hypertrophy rates, intra- and post-operative outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 209 patients, 124 had LVD 37 [13,1015] days before surgery, while 85 underwent ALPPS with an inter-stages period of 10 [6, 69] days. ALPPS was mostly-performed for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), LVD for CRLM and perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Hypertrophy was faster for ALPPS. Successful resection rates were 72.6% for LVD ± rescue ALPPS (n=6) versus 90.6% for ALPPS (p<0.001). Operative duration, blood losses and length-of-stay were lower for LVD, while 90-day major complications and mortality were comparable. Results were globally unchanged for CRLM patients, or after excluding the early 2 years of experience (learning-curve effect).

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first one comparing LVD versus ALPPS in the largest cohort so far. Despite its retrospective design, it yields original results that may serve as the basis for a prospective study.

Hepatobiliary Scintigraphy and Glass 90Y Radioembolization with Personalized Dosimetry: Dynamic Changes in Treated and Nontreated Liver

Background: The functional changes that occur over time in the liver following ⁹⁰Y-radioembolization (RE) using personalized dosimetry (PD) remain to be investigated. Methods: November 2016–October 2019: we retrospectively included hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated by ⁹⁰Y-glass RE using PD, who underwent hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS) at baseline and at 15 days, 1, 2, 3, and 6 months after RE. Results: There were 16 patients with unilobar disease (100%) included, and 64 HBS were performed. Whole liver function significantly decreased over time. The loss was maximal at 2 weeks: −32% (p = 0.002) and remained below baseline at 1 (−15%; p = 0.002), 2 (−25%; p < 0.001), and 3 months (−16%; p = 0.027). No radioembolization-induced liver disease was observed. Treated liver function strongly decreased to reach −64% (p < 0.001) at 2 months. Nontreated liver function decreased at 2 weeks (−21%; p = 0.027) and remained below baseline before reaching +20% (p = 0.002) and +59% (p < 0.001) at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Volumetric and functional changes exhibited parallel evolutions in the treated livers (p = 0.01) but independent evolutions in the nontreated livers (p = 0.08). Conclusion: RE using PD induces significant regional changes in liver function over time. As early as 15 days following RE, both the treated and nontreated livers showed a decreased function. Nontreated liver function recovered after 3 months and greatly increased afterwards.

99mTc-mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy and volume metrics before liver preparation: correlations and discrepancies in non-cirrhotic patients

Background

Accurate identification of insufficient future liver remnant (FLR) is required to select patients for liver preparation and limit the risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). The objective of this study was to investigate the correlations and discrepancies between the most-commonly used FLR volume metrics and ^99mTc-mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS).

Methods

In 101 non-cirrhotic patients who underwent HBS before major hepatectomy, we retrospectively analyzed the correlations and discrepancies between FLR function and FLR volume metrics: actual percentage (FLRV%), standardized to body surface area (FLRV%^BSA) and weight (FLRV%^weight), and FLR to body weight ratio (FLRV-BWR).

Results

Among 67 patients with FLR function ≥2.69%/min/m², PHLF was observed in none and 13 patients according to respectively 50-50 and ISGLS criteria. FLRV%, FLRV%^BSA, FLRV%^weight and FLRV-BWR significantly correlated with FLR function (P<0.001), with Spearman's correlation coefficients of 0.680, 0.704, 0.698, and 0.711, respectively. No difference was observed between the areas under the curve of FLRV%, FLRV%^BSA, FLRV%^weight and FLR-BWR (all P=ns). Overall, the percentages of patients misclassified by FLRV%, FLRV%^BSA, FLRV%^weight (thresholds: 30%) and FLR-BWR (threshold: 0.5) versus FLR function (threshold: 2.69%/min/m²) were 23.8% (95% CI: 15.9-33.3%), 18.8% (95% CI: 11.7-27.8%), 17.8% (95% CI: 11-26.7%), and 31.7% (95% CI: 22.8-41.7%), respectively. FLR volume metrics wrongly classified 1-13.9% of patients with sufficient FLR function (i.e., ≥2.69%/min/m²), and 9.9-30.7% of patients with insufficient FLR function. FLRV-BWR was the most and the least reliable measure to identify patients with sufficient and insufficient FLR function, respectively.

Conclusions

Despite significant correlations, the discrepancy rates between FLR volume and function metrics speaks in favor of implementing ^99mTc-mebrofenin HBS in the work-up before liver preparation.

Oncological Outcomes after Liver Venous Deprivation for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Single Center Experience

Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are the major cause of death in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The cornerstone treatment of CRLM is surgical resection. Post-operative morbidity and mortality are mainly linked to an inadequate future liver remnant (FLR). Nowadays preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) is the most widely performed technique to increase the size of the future liver remnant (FLR) before major hepatectomies. One method recently proposed to increase the FLR is liver venous deprivation (LVD), but its oncological impact is still unknown. The aim of this study is to report first short- and long-term oncological outcomes after LVD in patients undergoing right (or extended right) hepatectomy for CRLM. Seventeen consecutive patients undergoing LVD between July 2015 and May 2020 before an (extended) right hepatectomy were retrospectively analyzed from an institutional database. Post-operative and follow-up data were analyzed and reported. Primary outcomes were 1-year and 3-year overall survival (OS) and hepatic recurrence (HR). Postoperative complications occurred in 8 patients (47%). No deaths occurred after surgery. HR occurred in 9 patients (52.9%). 1-year and 3-year OS were 87% (95% confidence interval [CI]: ±16%) and 60.3%, respectively (95% CI: ±23%). Median Disease-Free Survival (DFS) was 6 months (CI 95%: 4.7-7.2). With all the limitations of a retrospective study with a small sample size, LVD showed similar oncological outcomes compared to literature reports for Portal Vein Embolization (PVE).

Study protocol of the HYPER-LIV01 trial: a multicenter phase II, prospective and randomized study comparing simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization to portal vein embolization for hypertrophy of the future liver remnant before major hepatectomy for colo-rectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

In patients undergoing major liver resection, portal vein embolization (PVE) has been widely used to induce hypertrophy of the non-embolized liver in order to prevent post-hepatectomy liver failure. PVE is a safe and effective procedure, but does not always lead to sufficient hypertrophy of the future liver remnant (FLR). Hepatic vein(s) embolization has been proposed to improve FLR regeneration when insufficient after PVE. The sequential right hepatic vein embolization (HVE) after right PVE demonstrated an incremental effect on the FLR but it implies two different procedures with no time gain as compared to PVE alone. We have developed the so-called liver venous deprivation (LVD), a combination of PVE and HVE during the same intervention, to optimize the phase of liver preparation before surgery. The main objective of this randomized phase II trial is to compare the percentage of change in FLR volume at 3 weeks after LVD or PVE.

METHODS

Patients eligible to this multicenter prospective randomized phase II study are subjects aged from 18 years old suffering from colo-rectal liver metastases considered as resectable and with non-cirrhotic liver parenchyma. The primary objective is the percentage of change in FLR volume at 3 weeks after LVD or PVE using MRI or CT-Scan. Secondary objectives are assessment of tolerance, post-operative morbidity and mortality, post-hepatectomy liver failure, rate of non-respectability due to insufficient FLR or tumor progression, per-operative difficulties, blood loss, R0 resection rate, post-operative liver volume and overall survival. Objectives of translational research studies are evaluation of pre- and post-operative liver function and determination of biomarkers predictive of liver hypertrophy. Sixty-four patients will be included (randomization ratio 1:1) to detect a difference of 12% at 21 days in FLR volumes between PVE and LVD.

DISCUSSION

Adding HVE to PVE during the same procedure is an innovative and promising approach that may lead to a rapid and major increase in volume and function of the FLR, thereby increasing the rate of resectable patients and limiting the risk of patient's drop-out.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov on 15th February 2019 (NCT03841305).