Propensity score analysis demonstrated the prognostic advantage of anatomical liver resection in hepatocellular carcinoma

Impact of anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in preventing early-phase local recurrence after surgery

BACKGROUND

The superiority of anatomical liver resection (AR) for localized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) over nonanatomical liver resection (NR) remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the impact of AR in preventing local and early HCC recurrence.

METHODS

A total of 280 patients who underwent initial liver resection for solitary HCC ≤5 cm in diameter were categorized into the AR and NR groups and compared using propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

Between the matched pairs (n = 87 in each group), the incidence rates of local and early (recurrence within 2 years after surgery) recurrences in the AR group were significantly lower than those in the NR group (13.8% vs. 28.7%, p = .025; 20.7% vs. 35.6%, p = .028, respectively). The overall survival in the AR group was better than that in the NR group (median: 13.4 vs. 7.6 years, p = .003). NR was among independent risk factors for early recurrence (odds ratio: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.1-3.6, p = .023) and prognostic factors for local recurrence (hazard ratio: 2.44, 95% CI: 1.4-4.4, p = .003).

CONCLUSION

AR is superior in controlling local and early recurrence postoperatively for solitary HCC ≤5 cm in diameter compared with NR.

Non-anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: the SegSubTe classification to overcome the problem of heterogeneity

BACKGROUND

The superiority of anatomical resection (AR) vs. non-anatomical resection (NAR) in the surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is debated. ARs are well-defined procedures, whereas the lack of NAR standardization results in heterogeneous outcomes. This study aimed to introduce the SegSubTe classification for NAR detailing the appropriateness of the level of surgical section of the Glissonean pedicles feeding the tumor.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective analysis of pre- and postoperative imaging of consecutive patients treated with NAR for single HCC between 2012 and 2020 was conducted. The quality of surgery was assessed classifying the type of vascular supply and the level of surgical section (segmental, subsegmental or terminal next to the tumor) of vascular pedicles feeding the HCCs; then, the population was divided in "SegSubTe-IN" or "SegSubTe-OUT" groups, and the tumor recurrence and survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven patients who underwent NAR were included; 76% were SegSubTe-IN and 24% were SegSubTe-OUT. Total disease recurrence, local recurrence and cut-edge recurrence in the SegSubTe-IN vs. SegSubTe-OUT groups were 50% vs. 83% (P = 0.006), 20% vs. 52% (P = 0.003) and 16% vs. 39% (P = 0.020), respectively. SegSubTe-OUT odds ratio for local recurrence was 4.1 at univariate regression analysis. One-, three-, and five-year disease-free survival rates in the SegSubTe-IN vs. SegSubTe-OUT groups were 81%, 58% and 35% vs. 46%, 21% and 11%, respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The SegSubTe classification is a useful tool to stratify and standardize NAR for HCC, aiming at improving long-term oncological outcomes and reducing the heterogeneity of quality of NAR for HCC.

Laparoscopic anatomical versus non-anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in the posterosuperior segments: a propensity score matched analysis

Background

Since laparoscopic anatomical resection (LAR) for tumors, especially located in the posterosuperior (PS) segments of the liver remains difficult, laparoscopic non-anatomical resection (LNAR) are generally preferred. To compare the clinical outcomes between LAR and LNAR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in the PS segments.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the data for 1,029 patients who underwent hepatectomy for HCC between 2004 and 2019. Of 167 patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC in PS segments, 64 underwent LNAR and 103 underwent LAR. Patients were matched one-to-one using propensity score matching (46:46).

Results

LNAR was associated with significantly shorter operation time (P=0.001), lower estimated blood loss (P=0.001), lower transfusion rate (P=0.006) and shorter hospital stay (P=0.012) than LAR. The respective 1- ,3-, and 5-year overall survival rates (LAR: 95.3%, 87.1%, and 77.8%; LNAR: 96.7%, 91.6%, and 85.0%; P=0.262) and recurrence-free survival rates (LAR: 75.7%, 70.3%, and 68.9%; LNAR: 81.8%, 58.3%, and 55.3%; P=0.879) were similar. The intrahepatic recurrence rate was significantly higher in LNAR group than in LAR group (78.6% vs. 57.1%, P=0.023), but the post-recurrence treatments differed significantly between the two groups (P=0.016); the re-resection rate was much greater in the LNAR group (45.0% vs. 0%) group. The respective 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-recurrence survival rates were similar in the LAR and LNAR groups (P=0.212). After recurrence, survival in re-resection group was significantly greater than not (P=0.026).

Conclusions

LNAR is safe and feasible for HCC located in PS segments, and provided acceptable oncologic outcomes that are comparable to those of LAR. LNAR can be considered for patient with tumor located in PS segment when LAR is not feasible.

A Multicenter, Open-Label, Single-Arm Phase I Trial of Dual-Wield Parenchymal Transection: A New Technique of Liver Resection Using the Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator and Water-Jet Scalpel Simultaneously (HiSCO-14 Trial)

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the safety and feasibility of a technique of liver resection named dual-wield parenchymal transection technique (DWT), using cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator (CUSA) and water-jet scalpel simultaneously.

METHODS

This multicenter, prospective, open-label, and single-arm phase I trial included patients aged 20 years or older with hepatic tumors indicated for surgical resection and scheduled for open radical resection. This study was conducted at two institutions affiliated with the Hiroshima Surgical Study Group of Clinical Oncology (HiSCO). The primary endpoint was the proportion of massive intraoperative blood loss (≥ 1000 mL). The secondary endpoints were the amount of blood loss, operative time, parenchymal transection speed, postoperative complications, and mortality. The safety endpoints were device failure and adverse events associated with devices.

RESULTS

From June 2022 to May 2023, 20 patients were enrolled; one was excluded and 19 were included in the full analysis set (FAS). In the FAS, segmentectomy was performed in nine cases, sectionectomy in four cases, and hemihepatectomy in six cases. Radical resection was achieved in all patients. Intraoperative blood loss greater than 1000 mL was observed in five patients (26.3%). The median amount of blood loss was 545 mL (range, 180-4413), and blood transfusions were performed on two patients (10.5%). The median operative time was 346 minutes (range, 238-543) and the median parenchymal transection speed was 1.2 cm2/minute (range, 0.5-5.1). Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ Grade 3 occurred in four patients (21.1%). No mortalities occurred in this study. In the safety analysis, there were no device failures or adverse events associated with devices.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the safety and feasibility of DWT for liver resection. The efficacy of the DWT will be evaluated in future clinical trials.

Effect of anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite retrospective studies comparing anatomical liver resection (AR) and non-anatomical liver resection (NAR), the efficacy and benefits of AR for hepatocellular carcinoma remain unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors systemically reviewed MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library for propensity score matched cohort studies that compared AR and NAR for hepatocellular carcinoma. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary outcomes were recurrence patterns and perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 22 propensity score matched studies (AR, n =2,496; NAR, n =2590) were included. AR including systemic segmentectomy was superior to NAR regarding the 3-year and 5-year OS. AR showed significantly better 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year RFS than NAR, with low local and multiple intrahepatic recurrence rates. In the subgroup analyses of tumour diameter less than or equal to 5 cm and tumours with microscopic spread, the RFS in the AR group was significantly better than that in the NAR group. Patients with cirrhotic liver in the AR group showed comparable 3-year and 5-year RFS with the NAR group. Postoperative overall complications were comparable between AR and NAR.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis demonstrated that AR showed better OS and RFS with a low local and multiple intra-hepatic recurrence rate than NAR, especially in patients with tumour diameter less than or equal to 5 cm and non-cirrhotic liver.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

[Modern possibilities of fluorescent imaging in liver surgery]

The article presents a literature review of modern methods of fluorescent navigation in liver surgery. The technique of tumor «staining», mapping of liver segments, fluorescent cholangiography is covered. The own results of the use of indocyanine green in liver surgery are presented.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

Comparison of Anatomic and Non-Anatomic Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background and Objectives: The survival benefit of anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma has not been elucidated yet. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of anatomic and non-anatomic liver resection on surgical outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing anatomic or non-anatomic resections due to hepatocellular carcinoma between March 2006 and October 2019 was conducted. Demographics, preoperative laboratory assessments, treatment strategies, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Results: The total cohort consisted of 94 patients, with a mean age of 63.1 ± 8.9 years, and 74.5% were male. A total of 41 patients underwent anatomic liver resection, and 53 patients underwent non-anatomic resection. The overall survival rates were found to be similar (5-year overall survival was 49.3% for anatomic resection and 44.5% for non-anatomic resection). Estimated median overall survival times were 58.5 months and 57.3 months, respectively (p = 0.777). Recurrence-free 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were found to be 73.6%, 39.1%, and 32.8% in the non-anatomic resection group and 48.8%, 22.7%, and 22.7% in the anatomic resection group, respectively. Grade three or higher complication rates were found to be similar among the groups. Conclusions: This study did not find a difference between two surgical methods, in terms of survival. A tailored selection of the resection method should be made, with the aim of complete removal of tumoral lesions and leaving a suitable functional liver reserve, according to the parenchymal quality and volume of the liver remnant.

Oncological outcomes of anatomic versus non-anatomic resections for small hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity-score matched studies

Background

Primary liver cancer is the second-most commonly occurring cancer and has resulted in numerous deaths worldwide. Hepatic resection is of two main types, i.e., anatomic resection (AR) and non-anatomic resection (NAR). The oncological outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after AR and NAR are still considered controversial. Therefore, we aimed to compare the impact of AR and NAR on the oncological outcomes of HCC patients with tumor diameters ≤ 5 cm using the propensity score matching method and research-based evidence.

Method

A systematic literature search was conducted. The main outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), intrahepatic recurrence rate, and extrahepatic metastasis rate. Relative risk (RR) was calculated from forest plots and outcomes using random-effects model (REM).

Result

AR significantly improved DFS at 1, 3. and 5 years after surgery, compared to NAR (RR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.04–1.15, P = 0.0003; RR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.07–1.27, P = 0.0005; RR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.07–1.55, P = 0.008). However, both of the difference in DFS at 7 years and OS at 1 and 3 years after AR versus that after NAR were not statistically significant. Nevertheless, the long-term OS associated with AR (5, 7, and 10 years) was superior to that associated with NAR (RR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.03–1.21, P = 0.01; RR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.04–1.36, P = 0.01; RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.05–1.34, P = 0.008). The difference in the intrahepatic recurrence rate after AR versus that after NAR was not statistically significant, but the extrahepatic metastasis rate after AR was significantly lower than that observed after NAR (RR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.40–0.94, P = 0.03).

Conclusion

Therefore, AR should be the preferred surgical approach for HCC patients with tumor diameters ≤ 5 cm.

Trial registration

PROSPERO registration number CRD42022330596.

Predictive Value of Preoperative Serum AFP, CEA, and CA19-9 Levels in Patients with Single Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Retrospective Study

Purpose

This study aimed to explore the relationship between the tumor marker score (TMS) and the postoperative recurrence of single small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Patients and Methods

A total of 409 patients with one resectable HCC with a diameter of 3 cm or less who visited Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital from January 2010 to December 2014 were included in this study. Their alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) levels were classified into low and high groups using X-tile software. Each patients' TMS was calculated as the sum of each tumor marker (low = 0; high = 1).

Results

A total of 142 patients were classified as TMS0, 171 as TMS1, and 96 as TMS2. Kaplan–Meier analysis illustrated that TMS could divide the patients into groups with remarkably different prognoses, and the patients with high TMS had worse recurrence-free survival (RFS) than those with low TMS. Multivariate analysis showed that TMS, age, and HBeAg positive were the independent predictors of RFS rate. Subgroup analysis revealed that high TMS was a stable risk factor relative to TMS0. Receiver operating curves showed that the 1-, 3-, and 5-year area under curve (AUC) values of TMS were 0.698, 0.662, and 0.673, respectively. The AUC of TMS was higher than that of other common prognostic models in time-dependent receiver operating curve.

Conclusion

TMS was an independent prognostic factor for the postoperative recurrence of a single small HCC and can provide a well-discriminated risk stratification, thus contributing to prognostic prediction and adjuvant therapeutic development.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Anatomic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Prognostic Impact Assessed from Recurrence Treatment

BACKGROUND

The oncologic advantage of anatomic resection (AR) for primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical advantages of AR for primary HCC by using propensity score-matching and by assessing treatment strategies for recurrence after surgery.

METHODS

The study reviewed data of patients who underwent AR or non-anatomic resection (NAR) for solitary HCC (≤ 5 cm) in two institutions between 2004 and 2017. Surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups in a propensity score-adjusted cohort. The time-to-interventional failure (TIF), defined as the elapsed time from resection to unresectable/unablatable recurrence, also was evaluated.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 250 patients: 77 patients (31%) with AR and 173 patients (69%) with NAR. In the propensity score-matched populations (AR, 67; NAR, 67), the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) for AR was better than for NAR (62% vs 35%; P = 0.005). No differences, however, were found in the 5-year overall survival between the two groups (72% vs 78%; P = 0.666). The 5-year TIF rates for the NAR group (60%) also were similar to those for the AR group (66%) (P = 0.413). In the cohort of 67 patients, curative repeat resection or ablation therapy was performed more frequently for the NAR patients (42%) than for the AR patients (10%) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

For solitary HCC, AR decreases recurrence after the initial hepatectomy. However, aggressive curative-intent interventions for recurrence compensate for the impaired RFS, even for patients undergoing NAR.

Anatomical Versus Non-anatomical Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma, a Propensity-matched Analysis Between Taiwanese and Japanese Patients

BACKGROUND/AIM

The aim of the study was to compare the outcomes of anatomical resection (AR) versus non-anatomical resection (NAR) for Japanese and Taiwanese patients with single, resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A propensity score matched (PSM) analysis was performed to compare the outcomes of the AR group to those of the NAR group. Tumor size <5 cm, T1 or T2 grade, without evidence of extrahepatic metastasis, invasion of portal or hepatic veins, or direct invasion of adjacent organs, were included in the study.

RESULTS

A total of 385 cases (Taiwanese 105, Japanese 280) were analyzed. After PSM, a total of 152 cases remain (Taiwan and Japan both 76 cases). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) data were not significantly different between the two groups at 5 years follow-up.

CONCLUSION

AR of HCC in Japanese patients has a similar 5-year DFS and OS as NAR of HCC in Taiwanese patients.

Long-Term Outcomes of Anatomic Versus Nonanatomic Resection in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients with Bile Duct Tumor Thrombus: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

Anatomic resection (AR) of the liver is generally recommended in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. However, the benefits of AR and nonanatomic resection (NAR) in HCC patients with bile duct tumor thrombus (BDTT) are unknown. This study aimed to compare long-term outcomes of AR and NAR in HCC patients with BDTT after curative resection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 175 consecutive HCC patients with BDTT after curative resection between April 2009 and December 2017 were included. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to minimize the influence of potential confounders. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the cohorts.

RESULTS

After PSM, 120 patients were analyzed. The AR group had better RFS than the NAR group (P = 0.010). Even though there was no statistically significant difference in OS (P = 0.140, power = 0.33), the 3- and 5-year OS rates in the AR group (52.4% and 44.2%, respectively) were obviously higher than those in the NAR group (35.4% and 30.4%, respectively). When patients were further stratified according to tumor size, better RFS and OS were observed in patients with small (≤ 5 cm) tumors after AR (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). Multivariate analysis identified AR (P = 0.024) as an independent favorable prognostic factor for RFS in HCC patients with BDTT.

CONCLUSIONS

AR is recommended for HCC patients with BDTT, especially in patients with small (≤ 5 cm) tumors.

Feasibility of Solo Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery in Non-anatomical Minor Liver Resection: a Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

We introduced solo surgery using a laparoscopic scope holder to wide an operator's activity range and reduce instrument crowding and clashing in single incisional surgery. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of solo single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (MULS) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

Among 477 consecutive patients between January 2004 and December 2017, 214 patients were included. To overcome selection bias, we performed 1:1 match using propensity score matching between SILS and MULS. Baseline characteristics, operative outcomes, and postoperative complications were compared.

RESULTS

No significant differences in baseline characteristics and pathologic features were found between the two groups. Operation time, estimated blood loss, and postoperative major complication were not significantly different (119.0 min vs 141.6 min, p = 0.275; 200.0 mL min vs 373.3 min, p = 0.222; 0 vs 0, p = 1.000). However, postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in SILS (2.73 days vs 7.67 days, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Solo SILS had comparable postoperative complications and feasibility in the aspect of operation time and hospital stay compared with conventional MULS for a favorable located single HCC.

Is It Just a Matter of Surgical Extension to Achieve the Cure of Hepatocarcinoma? A Meta-Analysis of Propensity-Matched and Randomized Studies for Anatomic Versus Parenchyma-Sparing Liver Resection

BACKGROUND

The benefit of anatomic (AR) versus parenchyma-sparing resection (PSR) in hepatocarcinoma (HCC) is still debated. The aim of the study was to compare AR vs. PSR in terms of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using Medline and Google Scholar. To reduce intra- and inter-study heterogeneity, only propensity-matched studies and randomized clinical trials (RCT) were evaluated and a generic inverse variance meta-analysis was run. A sub-analysis was performed in case of tumor microvascular invasion (MVI).

RESULTS

Eleven propensity-matched and one RCT were evaluated, with a total of 3445 patients (AR = 1776 and PSR = 1669). Tumor burden and liver function were comparable among studies (I² < 50%, p > 0.5). OS was similar between AR and PSR (HR 0.93; 95%CI, 0.75-1.15; p = 0.50, I² = 41%). DFS was improved in AR at 1 year (RR 0.84; 95%CI, 0.72-0.97; p = 0.02; I² = 36%) and 3 years (RR 0.90; 95%CI, 0.83-0.98; p = 0.02; I² = 40%) but not at 5 years (RR 0.94; 95%CI, 0.87-1.01; p = 0.07; I² = 41%). Furthermore, in the presence of MVI, no difference in OS and DFS was observed between AR and PSR.

CONCLUSION

When liver function and tumor burden are comparable, AR and PSR achieved similar overall survival. AR improved local control in the early period after surgery. Furthermore, in the presence of MVI, the extension of surgery was not associated with better OS and DFS.

Successful Anatomic Resection of Tumor-Bearing Portal Territory Delays Long-Term Stage Progression of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Optimal choice of surgical procedure for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains inconclusive. This study seeks to investigate the oncological superiority of anatomic resection (AR) of the tumor-bearing portal territory and potential mechanism of survival benefit for patients undergoing AR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In 203 patients who underwent curative resection for primary solitary HCC measuring ≤ 5 cm in diameter, which was resectable either by AR or limited resection (non-AR), long-term outcomes were compared with propensity score adjustment. Advantages of AR in local tumor control and postprogression survival were then evaluated by a multivariate analysis and a Markov model.

RESULTS

The AR group showed better recurrence-free survival [hazard ratio (HR), 0.51; 95% CI, 0.28-0.91; P = 0.023), time-to-interventional failure (TIF) (HR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.60; P = 0.014), and overall survival (HR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01-0.79, P = 0.029) than the non-AR group. Competing-risks regression revealed that AR significantly decreases local recurrence (HR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.02-0.97; P = 0.047) and is correlated with smaller number and size of recurrent lesions, both of which were predictors for better TIF and postprogression survival. A Markov model demonstrated that annual transition rate from the early recurrence stage (i.e., curative-intent treatment indicated) to the intermediate stage (i.e., only palliative-intent treatment indicated) was significantly lower (9.0% versus 35.6%, P = 0.027) when AR was completed at the initial hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

AR is oncologically advantageous for patients with primary solitary HCC. Initial choice of surgical procedure may have significant influence on the pattern of recurrence and postprogression clinical course that may affect overall survival of patients with HCC.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Preoperative three-dimensional versus two-dimensional evaluation in assessment of patients undergoing major liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matching study

Background

Compared with 2D evaluation, 3D evaluation possesses the virtues of displaying spatial anatomy of intrahepatic blood vessels and its relations to tumors, and enabling calculation of liver volumes, thus facilitating preoperative surgery planning.

Methods

The objective of this study is to study whether preoperative 3D (three-dimensional) evaluation produced better long-term overall survival (OS) outcomes compared to the traditional 2D (two-dimensional) evaluation in patients who underwent major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This retrospective study matched patients who underwent preoperative 2D evaluation with those who underwent preoperative 3D evaluation in a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching. The primary endpoints were long-term survival outcomes in the two groups after major hepatectomy for HCC.

Results

Of the 248 patients in each of the 2 matched groups, the baseline characteristics were comparable. The median follow-up for all patients was 36 months (range, 0-40 months). The 3-year OS of patients in the PSM cohort was 38.5%. Compared with the 2D Group, patients in the 3D Group had a better OS rate (HR 0.722, 95% CI: 0.556-0.938, P=0.015) and disease-free survival (DFS) rate (HR 0.741, 95% CI: 0.590-0.929, P=0.009). The 3-year OS and DFS rate for the 3D Group versus the 2D group were 58.9% and 44.0% versus 47.4% and 33.1%, respectively.

Conclusions

3D preoperative evaluation resulted in significantly better intermediate-term (3-year) overall survival rate than the traditional 2D evaluation.

Prognosis after resection of single large hepatocellular carcinoma: Results from an Asian high-volume liver surgery center

Background & aims

In 2012, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) system designated a single large hepatocellular carcinoma (SLHCC) (>5 cm) as BCLC stage A rather than stage B. However, a recent study from western countries reported that prognosis following liver resection (LR) among patients with SLHCC was similar to that among patients with BCLC stage B. We aim to evaluate the prognosis following LR among patients with SLHCC from an Asian high-volume liver surgery center.

Methods

Patients who underwent curative-intent LR for histologically proven HCC between 2011 and 2017 were enrolled using an HCC registry database. Overall survival (OS) among patients with BCLC stages 0, A, and B was examined. Patients with a SLHCC were classified as BCLC stage A1.

Results

Among 543 patients, 89 (16.4%) were BCLC stage 0, 289 (53.2%) were BCLC stage A, 92 (16.9%) were BCLC stage A1, and 73 (13.4%) were BCLC stage B. The median follow-up was 38 months. The five-year OS rates among patients with BCLC stages 0, A, A1, and B were 83.5%, 83.7%, 77.4%, and 55.4%, respectively (p<0.001). No difference in OS was noted for patients with BCLC stage A versus A1 (p = 0.11), even after adjusting for competing factors (hazard ratio = 0.97, 95% confidence interval = 0.53–1.79; p = 0.93).

Conclusion

Prognosis following LR among patients with SLHCC was similar to that among patients with BCLC stage A. The prognosis for SLHCC should thus be considered comparable to that for BCLC stage A.

Significance of the surgical hepatic resection margin in patients with a single hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

The impact of a wide surgical margin on the outcome of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has not been evaluated in relation to the type of liver resection performed, anatomical or non-anatomical. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of surgical margin status on outcomes in patients undergoing anatomical or non-anatomical resection for solitary HCC.

Methods

Data from patients with solitary HCC who had undergone non-anatomical partial resection (Hr0 group) or anatomical resection of one Couinaud segment (HrS group) between 2000 and 2007 were extracted from a nationwide survey database in Japan. Overall and recurrence-free survival associated with the surgical margin status and width were evaluated in the two groups.

Results

A total of 4457 patients were included in the Hr0 group and 3507 in the HrS group. A microscopically positive surgical margin was associated with poor overall survival in both groups. A negative but 0-mm surgical margin was associated with poorer overall and recurrence-free survival than a wider margin only in the Hr0 group. In the HrS group, the width of the surgical margin was not associated with patient outcome.

Conclusion

Anatomical resection with a negative 0-mm surgical margin may be acceptable. Non-anatomical resection with a negative 0-mm margin was associated with a less favourable survival outcome.

2018 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer globally and the fourth most common cancer in men in Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle-aged and elderly patients. These practice guidelines will provide useful and constructive advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 44 experts in hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2014 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions.

2018 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer globally and the fourth most common cancer in men in Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle-aged and elderly patients. These practice guidelines will provide useful and constructive advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 44 experts in hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology and radiation oncology in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2014 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions.

Appropriate treatment modality for solitary small hepatocellular carcinoma: Radiofrequency ablation vs. resection vs. transplantation?

There has been controversy regarding the first-line treatment modality for the patients who have small solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), surgical hepatic resection (HR) and liver transplantation (LT). For selection of treatment modality of HCC, it should be considered of hepatic reservoir function as well as the tumor stage. If the liver function is good enough, HR may be the first choice regardless of the tumor size. However, recent studies comparing RFA with resection showed comparable outcome and similar survival rates. RFA, HR and LT provide good outcome for patients who have small HCCs. RFA would be desired in patients who have below 3.0 cm in size and low alpha-fetoprotein (<200 ng/mL). However, in small HCC with high tumor marker, HR should be considered. Better patient selection for the ‘resection first’ approach and early detection of recurrence can achieve better outcomes of the salvage LT strategy. Another benefit of resection first strategy is that it make possible to do enlist of LT for patients before recurrence at high risk of HCC recurrence after resection on the basis of pathologic aggressiveness, microvascular invasion and/or satellites nodule. They should be applied appropriately according to the tumor size, location, tumor markers and underlying liver parenchymal disease.

Anatomical versus Non-anatomical Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Microscope Vascular Invasion: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background: The benefits of anatomical resection (AR) and non-anatomical resection (NAR) on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with microscope vascular invasion (MVI) remain unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic outcomes of AR and NAR for HCC patients with MVI. Study Design: A total of 362 consecutive HCC patients diagnosed with MVI after hepatic resection between February 2005 and December 2013 were included in this study. The patient outcomes were compared, and a 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was applied to eliminate selection bias. Results: Before PSM, compared to the NAR group, the AR group contained more patients that exceeded the Milan criteria, with larger, unilobar tumors and higher AST levels. After PSM, 100 patients were classified into the propensity-matched AR group (PS-AR), while 170 were classified into the propensity-matched NAR group (PS-NAR). Baseline data, including liver function and tumor burden measurements, were similar in the matched groups. The respective 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 78.9%, 56.9%, and 51.5% in the PS-AR group and 76.2%, 53.0%, and 42.4% in the PS-NAR group (P = 0.301). The 1-, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 51.1%, 44.7% and 42.0% in the PS-AR group and 44.9%, 34.3% and 26.4% in the PS-NAR group, respectively (P = 0.039). Multivariate analysis identified AR (P=0.025) as an independent favorable prognostic factor for DFS in HCC patients with MVI. Conclusions: Anatomical resection was superior to non-anatomical resection for improving DFS in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with microscope vascular invasion.

Oncologic superiority of anatomic resection of hepatocellular carcinoma by ultrasound-guided compression of the portal tributaries compared with nonanatomic resection: An analysis of patients matched for tumor characteristics and liver function

BACKGROUND

The superiority of anatomic resection compared with nonanatomic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma remains a matter of debate. Further, the technique for anatomic resection (dye injection) is difficult to reproduce. Anatomic resection using a compression technique is an easy and reversible procedure based on liver discoloration after ultrasound-guided compression of the tumor-feeding portal tributaries. We compared the oncologic efficacy of compression technique anatomic resection with that of nonanatomic resection.

METHODS

Among patients with resected hepatocellular carcinoma, patients who underwent compression technique anatomic resection were matched 1-to-2 with nonanatomic resection cases based on the Child-Pugh class, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma number (1/>1), and hepatocellular carcinoma size (>30, 30-50, and >50 mm). The exclusion criteria were nonanatomic resection because of severe cirrhosis, major hepatectomy, 90-day mortality (0 compression technique anatomic resection), non-cancer-related death, and follow-up <12 months. A total of 47 patients who underwent compression technique anatomic resection were matched with 94 nonanatomic resection cases.

RESULTS

All patients were Child-Pugh A, and 53% were cirrhotic. Liver function tests and signs of portal hypertension were similar between the groups. There was 1 hepatocellular carcinoma in 81% of the patients, and the hepatocellular carcinoma was ≥30 mm in 68%. Patients undergoing anatomic resection with compression had better 5-year survival (77% vs 60%; risk ratio = 0.423; P = .032; multivariable analysis), less local recurrences (4% vs 20%; P = .012), and better 2-year local recurrence-free survival (94% vs 78%; P = .012). Nonlocal recurrence-free survival was similar between the groups. The compression technique anatomic resection group more often had repeat radical treatment for recurrence (68% vs 28%; P = .0004) and had better 3-year survival after recurrence (65% vs 42%; P = .043).

CONCLUSION

Compression technique anatomic resection appears to provide a more complete removal of the hepatocellular carcinoma-bearing portal territory. Local disease control and survival are better with compression technique anatomic resection than with nonanatomic resection.

Open Liver Resection, Laparoscopic Liver Resection, and Percutaneous Thermal Ablation for Patients with Solitary Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma (≤30 mm): Review of the Literature and Proposal for a Therapeutic Strategy

BACKGROUND

Patients with a single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤3 cm and preserved liver function have the highest likelihood to be cured if treated. The most adequate treatment methods are yet a matter that is debated.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature about open anatomic resection (AR), laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), and percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA).

RESULTS

PTA is effective as resection for HCC < 2 cm, when they are neither subcapsular nor perivascular. PTA in HCC of 2-3 cm is under evaluation. AR with the removal of the tumor-bearing portal territory is recommended for HCC > 2 cm, except for subcapsular ones. In comparison with open surgery, LRR has better short-term outcomes and non-inferior long-term outcomes. LLR is standardized for superficial limited resections and for left-sided AR.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the available evidences, the following therapeutic proposal can be advanced. Laparoscopic limited resection is the standard for any subcapsular HCC. PTA is the first-line treatment for deep-located HCC < 2 cm, except for those in contact with Glissonean pedicles. Laparoscopic AR is the standard for deep-located HCC of 2-3 cm of the left liver, while open AR is the standard for deep-located HCC of 2-3 cm in the right liver. HCC in contact with Glissonean pedicles should be scheduled for resection (open or laparoscopic) independent of their size. Liver transplantation is reserved to otherwise untreatable patients or as a salvage procedure at recurrence.

Long-term oncologic results of anatomic vs. parenchyma-sparing resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. A propensity score-matching analysis

PURPOSE

The extent of liver resection for the optimal treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is debated. The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of anatomic resection (AR) vs. parenchyma-sparing resection (PSR) on disease recurrence and patient survival.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients with HCC who underwent liver resection from January 2001 to August 2015. Patients receiving AR or PSR were compared by a propensity score analysis (PSA) (caliper = 0.1). The primary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates, and assessed by the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

455 consecutive patients were evaluated. After PSA 354 patient were studied (177 pairs for each group). The median follow-up time was 28.2 months. The median OS was 47.5 months (95% CI: 30.0-65.9) for AR and 56.5 months (95% CI 33.2-79.6) for PSR (p = 0.169). The median DFS was 29.2 months (95% CI 17.6-40.8) for AR and 24.8 months (95% CI: 15.2-34.2) for PSR (p = 0.337). The multivariate regression model showed that cirrhosis (HR 2.85, 95% CI: 1.53-5.32; p = 0.001), BCLC grade B (HR 4.15, 95% CI: 1.33-12.95; p = 0.014), microvascular invasion (HR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.03-2.31; p = 0.033), presence of satellitosis (HR 1.94, 95% CI: 1.25-3.01; p = 0.003), severe complications (HR 6.09, 95% CI: 2.26-16.40; p > 0.001) were independently associated with poor long-term oncologic outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The extent of resection did not significantly affect overall and disease-free survival while tumor characteristics and underlying liver function appeared significant determinants.

Long-term results of laparoscopic liver resection for the primary treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: role of the surgeon in anatomical resection

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is a potentially curative therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). LLR is a newly developed and safe technique associated with shorter hospital stay, less pain, better cosmetic outcomes, and similar complication rates as open surgery; however, data on its long-term outcomes remain scarce.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined the clinical and follow-up data of 234 patients who underwent LLR (performed by a single surgeon in all cases) for the primary treatment of HCC between July 2007 and December 2015 at Asan Medical Center.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 55.63 (range 31-76) years; 167 were men. The median follow-up duration was 38 (range 6-116) months. A total of 227 patients (97.0%) had Child-Turcotte-Pugh grade A disease. Of them, 167 (71.4%) underwent anatomical resections and 63 (28.6%) underwent non-anatomical partial hepatectomies. Overall survival rates were 98.3, 91.7, and 87.1%, and recurrence-free survival rates were 82.1, 67.5, and 55.3% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. In Cox regression analysis, anatomical resection was a risk factor for recurrence (univariate analysis: hazard ratio [HR] 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.75; p = 0.001; multivariate analysis: HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.38-0.94; p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR is an acceptable primary treatment for patients with HCC with good hepatic function and with an appropriate anatomical structure, and is associated with improved prognosis. LLR can achieve lower recurrence rates through anatomical resection.

A novel scoring system predicts adjuvant chemolipiodolization benefit for hepatocellular carcinoma patients after hepatectomy

Our aim in this study was to develop a prognostic scoring system with which to identify patients most likely to benefit from adjuvant chemolipiodolization (ACL) after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Data from 1150 HCC patients who underwent liver resection between 2002 and 2008 at the Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital were used to develop the scoring system. Patients were stratified into prognostic subgroups using the new scoring system, and the outcomes of patients who received ACL and those who did not were compared in each subgroup. Using data from 379 patients operated on between 2008 and 2010 for validation, the scoring system had a concordance index (C-index) of 0.75 for predicting post-resectional overall survival (OS). It optimally stratified patients into three prognostic subgroups with scores of 0–5, 6–9 and ≥ 10, having better, medium and worse survival outcomes, respectively. A difference in OS between ACL and non-ACL patients was only detected in the subgroup with scores ≥ 10 (1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates: 63.9%, 22.6%, and 9.0% vs. 33.8%, 5.6%, and 2.8%, p = 0.001). Our proposed scoring system provides an effective tool for selecting the patients most likely to benefit from ACL.

Evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma spread via the portal system by 3-dimensional mapping

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The pattern of tumor cell spread via the portal system has not been fully clarified in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to evaluate the intrahepatic distribution of cancer cells derived from the main tumor by assessing histological portal invasion and/or intrahepatic metastasis (vp/im).

METHODS

In 14 patients who underwent anatomical resection of primary solitary HCC ≤ 50 mm in diameter, vp/im were examined pathologically, and the sites of the lesions were reproduced on preoperative 3D-CT images. The number of vp/im and the distance of each lesion from the tumor margin were also determined.

RESULTS

The tumor diameter was <30 mm in seven patients (smaller HCCs) and 30-50 mm in seven patients (larger HCCs). 3D mapping revealed that almost all vp/im were localized to the peritumoral area within one cm of the tumor margin in smaller HCCs, whereas vp/im seemed to spread extensively to the feeding 3rd level portal branches in larger HCCs. The number of vp/im was greater in patients with larger HCCs than in those with smaller HCCs.

CONCLUSIONS

3D mapping suggested tumor cells of HCC spread via the portal vein extensively in several cases.

Does anatomic resection improve the postoperative outcomes of solitary hepatocellular carcinomas located on the liver surface?

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether anatomic resection achieves better outcomes than nonanatomic resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of anatomic resection and nonanatomic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma located on the liver surface via one-to-one propensity score-matching analysis.

METHODS

Data from all consecutive patients who underwent liver resection for primary solitary hepatocellular carcinoma at Nara Medical University Hospital, Japan, January 2007- December 2015 were retrieved. Superficial hepatocellular carcinomas were defined as hepatocellular carcinoma that extended to a depth of < 3 cm from the liver surface and measured < 5 cm in diameter. The prognoses of the patients with superficial hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent anatomic resection and nonanatomic resection were compared.

RESULTS

In this study 23 patients with superficial hepatocellular carcinoma underwent anatomic resection and 70 patients who underwent nonanatomic resection. The recurrence-free survival rate of the patients who underwent anatomic resection was better than that of the patients who underwent nonanatomic resection (P = .006), while no such difference was observed for nonsuperficial hepatocellular carcinoma. After the propensity score-matching procedure, the resected liver volume and operation time were the only background or clinical characteristics to exhibit significant differences between the anatomic resection (n = 20) and nonanatomic resection groups (n = 20). The recurrence-free survivial rate of the patients who underwent anatomic resection was significantly than that of the patients that underwent nonanatomic resections (P = .030), but overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (P = .182).

CONCLUSION

Anatomic resection decreases the risk of tumor recurrence and improves recurrence-free survival compared with nonanatomic resection in patients with superficial hepatocellular carcinoma.

The Number of Positive Tumor Marker Status Is Beneficial for the Selection of Therapeutic Modalities in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatic resection (HR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are popular local therapies for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Alpha-fetoprotein, Lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive fraction of alpha-fetoprotein, and des-c-carboxy prothrombin are well-known and useful tumor markers for HCC. The positive number status of these tumor markers has recently been demonstrated as beneficial for predicting outcome for HCC patients treated with local therapy. Although the normal ranges reported have differed by institution, the positivity of tumor markers is consistent and can easily be assessed. Kumamoto and Wakayama's group clearly demonstrated the following: 1) Regardless of the degree of tumor stage, a triple-positive tumor marker profile can predict poor outcome in HCC patients undergoing HR; 2) For RFA alone, HCC patients with double- and triple-positive status, having less than three lesions and lesions ≤3 cm in diameter show comparably insufficient outcomes; 3) For HCC patients with lesions ≤5 cm in Child-Pugh grade A, HR is preferred over RFA; 4) Microvascular invasion rates increased even in the double-positive patients, while poorly differentiated HCC was frequently observed only in the triple-positive patients; and 5) RFA with chemoembolization, anatomical liver resection, and postoperative adjuvant chemoembolization or hepatic arterial chemotherapy might improve the outcome for patients with highly malignant HCC with multiple positive tumor markers. However, the impacts of these therapies still need to be evaluated in prospective comparative studies.

Anatomical resection of hepatocellular carcinoma: A critical review of the procedure and its benefits on survival

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common type of cancer and the third most frequent cause of cancer-related death. Advances in preoperative assessment of HCC (e.g., imaging studies and liver function tests), surgical techniques, and postoperative care have improved the surgical outcomes and survival of patients who undergo hepatic resection for HCC. However, in the last 20 years, the long-term survival after hepatectomy has remained unsatisfactory owing to the high rates of local recurrence and multicentric occurrence. Anatomical liver resection (AR) was introduced in the 1980s. Although several studies have revealed tangible benefits of AR for HCC, these benefits are still debated. Because most HCCs occur in patients with liver cirrhosis and poor hepatic function, there are many factors that affect survival, including the surgical method. Nevertheless, many studies have documented the perioperative and long-term benefits of AR in various conditions. In this article, we review the results of several recently published, well-designed comparative studies of AR, to investigate whether AR provides real benefits on survival outcomes. We also discuss the potential pitfalls associated with this approach.

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

Anatomical resection (AR) is superior to nonanatomical resection (NAR) in theory, but the actual clinical benefit of AR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial due to the substantial heterogeneity of HCC. Here, we retrospectively compared AR and NAR outcomes for solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) <5 cm in the right posterior section (RPS) and investigated the risk factors for HCC recurrence and liver-related mortality.The study included 99 consecutive patients who underwent curative surgical resection of an HCC in the RPS (S6 and S7) between January 2003 and December 2009. Each patient had a solitary HCC <5 cm and a noncirrhotic liver.The median estimated blood loss during operation and median operative time were significantly worse in the AR group. In addition, the median tumor size and incidence of microvascular invasion were significantly worse in the AR group. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 74.1%, 66.3%, and 58.2% in the AR group and 84.7%, 64.4%, and 48.2% in the NAR group, respectively (P = 0.172). The corresponding liver-related overall survival rates were 96.3%, 84.7%, and 77.0% in the AR group and 97.2%, 90.1%, and 88.7% in the NAR group, respectively (P = 0.335). NAR was not associated with HCC recurrence or liver-related mortality in multivariate analysis.The outcomes of NAR for a solitary HCC <5 cm in the RPS are comparable to those achieved with AR with respect to long-term liver-related overall survival and disease-free survival.

Anatomical versus non-anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma exceeding Milan criteria

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is effective for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exceeding the Milan criteria in selected patients. However, the benefit of anatomical resection (AR) versus non-anatomical resection (NAR) has not been clarified in this patient subgroup. This study aimed to compare outcomes between AR and NAR for HCC exceeding the Milan criteria.

METHODS

Data on consecutive patients with HCC exceeding the Milan criteria who underwent liver resection with curative intent over a recent 6-year interval were extracted from a prospective single-centre HCC database and examined retrospectively. The postoperative outcomes of patients were compared before and after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Some 546 patients were included: 264 in the AR and 282 in the NAR group. In the original cohort, the AR group contained more patients with larger tumours, multiple tumours, macroscopic portal vein tumour thrombi, incomplete tumour capsules and microscopic vascular invasion. After propensity score matching, 177 pairs of patients were selected. The baseline data, including liver function and tumour burden, were similar in the matched groups. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate was comparable between the matched NAR and AR groups (36·5 versus 28·5 per cent; P = 0·448). Similar results were observed for 3-year overall survival (57·5 versus 50·3 per cent; P = 0·385), recurrence patterns and early recurrence rates (57·6 per cent versus 59·9 per cent; P = 0·712).

CONCLUSION

AR and NAR achieved favourable and similar outcomes for HCC exceeding the Milan criteria in selected patients.

Clinical Impact of Anatomical Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Pathologically Proven Portal Vein Invasion

BACKGROUND

Portal vein invasion (PVI) is known to be a poor prognostic factor for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. Anatomical liver resection (ALR) is a preferable procedure for treating HCC. However, the effect of ALR for HCC with PVI has not been fully evaluated. The aim of this study is to investigate the survival benefit of ALR for HCC patients with or without pathologically proven portal vein invasion (pPVI).

METHODS

Curative hepatic resection was performed for a single HCC in 313 patients. The patients were divided into two groups according to the absence or presence of pPVI (absence: n = 216, presence: n = 97). These groups were then subclassified by the surgical procedures employed (ALR or non-ALR), and the clinical characteristics and stratified prognoses were compared according to the surgical procedure between the subgroups. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to explore the significant prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Among the patients without pPVI, there was no significant difference in postoperative survival between the groups. However, among the patients with pPVI, both the 5-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates in the ALR group were significantly higher than those in the non-ALR group (46.1 % vs. 16.3 %; p = 0.0019 and 33.8 % vs. 0 %; p = 0.0010). Multivariate analyses revealed that tumor differentiation and intraoperative blood loss (IOB) were associated with postoperative survival in patients without pPVI. On the other hand, in patients with pPVI, ALR, serum AFP level, and IOB were associated with postoperative survival.

CONCLUSION

ALR confers a survival benefit for HCC patients with pPVI.

Comparison of the outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy between two regional medical centers in China and Japan

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common malignant disease of the liver in China and Japan. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of HCC patients after hepatectomy between two regional medical centers in China and Japan.

METHODS

Data on HCC after hepatectomy were collected from January 2005 to December 2014 from Nagasaki University Hospital in Nagasaki, Japan and the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University in Nanchang, China. The patient and tumor characteristics, HCC etiology, and overall survival rates after hepatectomy were investigated.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients in the Nagasaki group and 238 patients in the Nanchang group were diagnosed with HCC and underwent hepatectomy. The major underlying liver diseases were hepatitis C infection (32%, 64/200) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) (34.5%, 69/200) in the Nagasaki group, while in the Nanchang group, hepatitis B infection (79.4%, 189/238) was the dominant etiology. Large tumors (> 5 cm), the presence of a tumor capsule and a high alpha-fetoprotein value (≥ 400 U/L) were more frequently observed in the Nanchang group as compared with the Nagasaki group (p < 0.05). According to an outcome analysis, the Nanchang patients showed worse survival rates as compared with Nagasaki patients, particularly those with American Joint Committee on Cancer stages I and III due to the aggressive character of HCC in the Nanchang group.

CONCLUSION

There are significant differences in the clinicopathologic features and outcomes of HCC patients from Japan and China. These differences may impact the eligibility for potentially curative therapy and the prognosis of patients with HCC.

Comparison of Survival Outcomes Between Right Posterior Sectionectomy and Right Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Cirrhotic Liver: A Single-Centre Experience

BACKGROUND

Right hepatectomy (RH) instead of right posterior sectionectomy (RPS) is commonly performed for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhotic livers located lateral to the right hepatic vein in order to ensure adequate resection margin. This potentially increased the risk of postoperative liver failure. This study aims to compare survival outcomes and surgical morbidities between RH and RPS.

METHODS

All patients between 2003 and 2013 with resection for solitary HCC in cirrhotic livers at segment 6/7 were reviewed. Baseline demographics, liver function, perioperative outcomes, and overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between RH and RPS.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients were included in this study. Thirty-two patients had RH and forty-nine with RPS were selected as controls. Majority of the HCC patients (91.4 %) suffered from chronic hepatitis B. There was no significant difference in age, gender and Child-Pugh grade between the two groups. The median tumour size of RH group was 6 vs. 4 cm in the RPS group (p < 0.0001). Both groups had no statistical difference in resection margin and their associated morbidities. The 5-year OS for RH and RPS was 76 and 83.8 %, respectively (p = 0.766), whereas their corresponding DFS was 52.6 and 52.2 % (p = 0.859). Despite the discrepancy of tumour size among the two groups, there was no statistical difference in subgroup analysis based on their corresponding stage of disease.

CONCLUSION

RPS can achieve similar OS and DFS as RH for HCC, and should be considered as the treatment of choice in order to optimise the postoperative remnant parenchymal liver functions.

Complete removal of the tumor-bearing portal territory decreases local tumor recurrence and improves disease-specific survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Anatomic resection (AR) of the tumor-bearing portal territory has been reported to be associated with a decreased recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, because of the heterogeneity of the study populations, its oncologic advantage remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to determine the clinical advantage of AR for primary HCC, based on the data from a large prospective cohort treated under a constant surgical policy.

METHODS

In 209 Child-Pugh class A patients with primary, solitary HCC measuring ⩽5.0cm in diameter, which was resectable either by AR or limited resection (non-AR), the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared with patients in whom complete AR was achieved and those who eventually ended up with non-AR after adjustment for the propensity scores to select AR. Advantages of AR in disease-specific survival and local recurrence were also evaluated by competing-risks regression to clarify the true oncologic impact of AR.

RESULTS

The AR group showed better DFS than the non-AR group (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-0.99; p=0.046), while no significant difference was observed in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.46-1.48; p=0.511). Competing-risks regression revealed that AR significantly decreases local recurrence (HR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.05-0.30; p<0.001) and improves disease-specific survival (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.28-0.90; p=0.020), while the other cause of death was highly influenced by patient age (>65years) (HR, 7.51; 95% CI, 2.16-26.04; p=0.002) and not associated with AR.

CONCLUSION

Complete removal of tumor-bearing portal territory decreases the risk of local recurrence and death from HCC.

Outcomes and recurrence pattern after non-anatomic liver resection for solitary hepatocellular carcinomas

Backgrounds/Aims

Anatomic resection (AR) is preferred for eradicating portal tributaries in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the extent of resection is influenced by underlying liver disease and tumor location. We compared the surgical outcomes and recurrence pattern between non-anatomic resection (NR) and AR.

Methods

From March 2009 to February 2012, 184 patients underwent surgical resection for HCC. Among these, 79 patients who were primarily treated for a single tumor without rupture or macroscopic vascular invasion were enrolled. The patients were divided into 2 groups based on the extent of resection: AR (n=31) or NR (n=48). We compared the clinical characteristics, overall survival, disease-free survival, pattern of recurrence, and biochemical liver functions during the perioperative period between the two groups.

Results

The extent of resection had no significant effect on overall or disease-free survival rates. The overall 1- and 3-year survival rates were 97% and 82% in the AR group, and 96% and 89% in the NR group, respectively (p=0.49). In addition, the respective 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates for the AR and NR groups were 84% and 63%, and 85% and 65%, respectively (p=0.94). On the other hand, the presence of hepatic cirrhosis and a tumor size of >5 cm were significant risk factors for recurrence according to multivariate analysis (p<0.001 and p=0.003, respectively). The frequency of early recurrence, the first site of recurrence, and the pattern of intrahepatic recurrence were similar between the 2 groups (p=0.419, p=0.210, and p=0.734, respectively); in addition, the frequency of marginal recurrence did not differ between the 2 groups (1 patient in the AR group and 2 in the NR group). The NR group showed better postoperative liver function than the AR group.

Conclusions

Non-anatomic liver resection can be a safe and efficient treatment for patients with a solitary HCC without rupture or gross vascular invasion.

An update of biochemical markers of hepatocellular carcinoma

The definition of a tumor marker is broad, which covers a wide spectrum of biomacromolecules synthesized in excess concentration by a wide variety of neoplastic cells. Tumor markers can be normal endogenous products that are produced at a greater rate in cancer cells or the products of newly switched on genes that remained inactive in the normal cells. These markers consist of any products of either tumor itself or the host in reaction to tumor's presence that distinguishes malignant tissues from benign and is measurable in body fluids or tissues. They increase with progressive or recurrent disease, decrease with response to treatment, and normalize with remission. Clinical applications include screening in asymptomatic individuals, confirming a suspected diagnosis, assisting in tumor classification and staging, prognosis, monitoring treatment response, surveillance for residual disease, and early detection of recurrent disease.