Is close monitoring in the intensive care unit necessary after elective liver resection?

Major liver resections, perioperative issues and posthepatectomy liver failure: A comprehensive update for the anesthesiologist

Significant advances in surgical techniques and relevant medium- and long-term outcomes over the past two decades have led to a substantial expansion in the indications for major liver resections. To support these outstanding results and to reduce perioperative complications, anesthesiologists must address and master key perioperative issues (preoperative assessment, proactive intraoperative anesthesia strategies, and implementation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery approach). Intensive care unit monitoring immediately following liver surgery remains a subject of active and often unresolved debate. Among postoperative complications, posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) occurs in different grades of severity (A-C) and frequency (9%-30%), and it is the main cause of 90-d postoperative mortality. PHLF, recently redefined with pragmatic clinical criteria and perioperative scores, can be predicted, prevented, or anticipated. This review highlights: (1) The systemic consequences of surgical manipulations anesthesiologists must respond to or prevent, to positively impact PHLF (a proactive approach); and (2) the maximal intensive treatment of PHLF, including artificial options, mainly based, so far, on Acute Liver Failure treatment(s), to buy time waiting for the recovery of the native liver or, when appropriate and in very selected cases, toward liver transplant. Such a clinical context requires a strong commitment to surgeons, anesthesiologists, and intensivists to work together, for a fruitful collaboration in a mandatory clinical continuum.

Surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: A comprehensive review of current recommendations

The new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in a global health emergency that has also caused profound changes in the treatment of cancer. The management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) across the world has been modified according to the scarcity of care resources that have been diverted mostly to face the surge of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Oncological and hepatobiliary societies have drafted recommendations regarding the adaptation of guidelines for the management of HCC to the current healthcare situation. This review focuses on specific recommendations for the surgical treatment of HCC (i.e., hepatic resection and liver transplantation), which still represents the best chance of cure for patients with very early and early HCC. While surgery should be pursued for very selected patients in institutions where standards of care are maintained, alternative or bridging methods, mostly thermoablation and transarterial therapies, can be used until surgery can be performed. The prognosis of patients with HCC largely depends on both the characteristics of the tumour and the stage of underlying liver disease. Risk stratification plays a pivotal role in determining the most appropriate treatment for each case and needs to balance the chance of cure and the risk of COVID-19 infection during hospitalization. Current recommendations have been critically reviewed to provide a reference for best practices in the clinical setting, with adaptation based on pandemic trends and categorization according to COVID-19 prevalence.

Strategies for the delay of surgery in the management of resectable hepatobiliary malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objective

We aimed to review data about delaying strategies for the management of hepatobiliary cancers requiring surgery during the covid-19 pandemic.

Background

Given the covid-19 pandemic, many jurisdictions, to spare resources, have limited access to operating rooms for elective surgical activity, including cancer, thus forcing deferral or cancellation of cancer surgeries. Surgery for hepatobiliary cancer is high-risk and particularly resource-intensive. Surgeons must critically appraise which patients will benefit most from surgery and which ones have other therapeutic options to delay surgery. Little guidance is currently available about potential delaying strategies for hepatobiliary cancers when surgery is not possible.

Methods

An international multidisciplinary panel reviewed the available literature to summarize data relating to standard-of-care surgical management and possible mitigating strategies to be used as a bridge to surgery for colorectal liver metastases, hepatocellular carcinoma, gallbladder cancer, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

Results

Outcomes of surgery during the covid-19 pandemic are reviewed. Resource requirements are summarized, including logistics and adverse effects profiles for hepatectomy and delaying strategies using systemic, percutaneous and radiation ablative, and liver embolic therapies. For each cancer type, the long-term oncologic outcomes of hepatectomy and the clinical tools that can be used to prognosticate for individual patients are detailed.

Conclusions

There are a variety of delaying strategies to consider if availability of operating rooms decreases. This review summarizes available data to provide guidance about possible delaying strategies depending on patient, resource, institution, and systems factors. Multidisciplinary team discussions should be leveraged to consider patient- and tumour-specific information for each individual case.

Perioperative Management in Hepatic Resections: Comparative Effectiveness of Neuraxial Anesthesia and Disparity of Care Patterns

BACKGROUND

Complication rates after hepatic resection can be affected by management decisions of the hospital care team and/or disparities in care. This is true in many other surgical populations, but little study has been done regarding patients undergoing hepatectomy.

METHODS

Data from the claims-based national Premier Perspective database were used for 2006 to 2014. The analytical sample consisted of adults undergoing partial hepatectomy and total hepatic lobectomy with anesthesia care consisting of general anesthesia (GA) only or neuraxial and GA (n = 9442). The key independent variable was type of anesthesia that was categorized as GA versus GA + neuraxial. The outcomes examined were clinical complications and health care resource utilization. Unadjusted bivariate and adjusted multivariate analyses were conducted to examine the effects of the different types of anesthesia on clinical complications and health care resource utilization after controlling for patient- and hospital-level characteristics.

RESULTS

Approximately 9% of patients were provided with GA + neuraxial anesthesia during hepatic resection. In multivariate analyses, no association was observed between types of anesthesia and clinical complications and/or health care utilization (eg, admission to intensive care unit). However, patients who received blood transfusions were significantly more likely to have complications and intensive care unit stays. In addition, certain disparities of care, including having surgery in a rural hospital, were associated with poorer outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Neuraxial anesthesia utilization was not associated with improvement in clinical outcome or cost among patients undergoing hepatic resections when compared to patients receiving GA alone. Future research may focus on prospective data sources with more clinical information on such patients and examine the effects of GA + neuraxial anesthesia on various complications and health care resource utilization.

Liver resection morbidity, mortality, and risk factors at the departments of hepatobiliary surgery in Veracruz, Mexico

INTRODUCTION

Liver resection has been associated with high morbidity and mortality, and the most serious complication is liver failure. Patient evaluation is limited to risk scales. The 50-50 criteria and bilirubin peak>7mg/dl have been used as mortality predictors.

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the risk factors associated with morbidity and mortality for liver resection in our population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study was carried out on 51 patients that underwent liver resection. Sociodemographic variables, pathology, and the surgical act were analyzed, together with morbidity and mortality and their associated factors.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients, 23 men and 28 women, were analyzed. They had a mean age of 51.4±19.13 years, 64.7% had concomitant disease, and their mean MELD score was 7.49±1.79. The mean size of the resected lesions was 7.34±3.47cm, 51% were malignant, and 34 minor resections were performed. The Pringle maneuver was used in 64.7% of the cases and the mean blood loss was 1,090±121.76ml. Morbidity of 25.5% was associated with viral hepatitis infection, greater blood loss, transfusion requirement, the Pringle maneuver, lower hemoglobin and PTT values, and higher MELD, INR, bilirubin, and glucose values. A total 3.9% mortality was associated with hyperbilirubinemia, hyperglycemia, and greater blood loss and transfusions.

CONCLUSIONS

The main risk factors associated with the morbidity and mortality of liver resection in our population were those related to the preoperative biochemical parameters of the patient and the factors that occurred during the surgical act.