Complete anatomic segmentectomy shows improved oncologic outcomes compared to incomplete anatomic segmentectomy

OBJECTIVES

To compare oncologic outcomes after segmentectomy with division of segmental bronchus, artery and vein (complete anatomic segmentectomy) versus segmentectomy with division of <3 segmental structures (incomplete anatomic segmentectomy).

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre, retrospective analysis of patients undergoing segmentectomy from March 2005 to May 2020. Operative reports were audited to classify procedures as complete or incomplete anatomic segmentectomy. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy or pulmonary resection beyond indicated segments were excluded. Survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier models and compared using log-rank tests. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for death. Cumulative incidence functions for loco-regional recurrence were compared with Gray's test, with death considered a competing event. Cox and Fine-Gray models were used to estimate cause-specific and subdistribution HRs, respectively, for loco-regional recurrence.

RESULTS

Of 390 cases, 266 (68.2%) were complete and 124 were incomplete anatomic segmentectomy. Demographics, pulmonary function, tumour size, stage and perioperative outcomes did not significantly differ between groups. Surgical margins were negative in all but 1 case. Complete anatomic segmentectomy was associated with improved lymph node dissection (5 vs 2 median nodes sampled; P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed reduced incidence of loco-regional recurrence (cause-specific HR = 0.42; 95% confidence interval 0.22-0.80; subdistribution HR = 0.43; 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.81), and non-significant improvement in overall survival (HR = 0.66; 95% confidence interval: 0.43-1.00) after complete versus incomplete anatomic segmentectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

This single-centre experience suggests complete anatomic segmentectomy provides superior loco-regional control and may improve survival relative to incomplete anatomic segmentectomy. We recommend surgeons perform complete anatomic segmentectomy and lymph node dissection whenever possible.

When to anatomically excise a benign lung tumor-correspondence regarding the article: "large mesenchymal cystic and chondroid pulmonary hamartoma mimicking lung cancer: case report"

The decision of whether to perform a large anatomic resection for a lung mass that is not definitely malignant comes often forward in the everyday practice of the thoracic surgeon. The general characteristics of the tumor as well as of the patient and the instinct and experience of the surgeon are the ones that dictate the final choice. Such a decision was made in the case of a large pulmonary hamartoma where a right middle lobectomy was performed with the postoperative course justifying the surgeons' choice.

Anatomic versus non-anatomic resection for early-stage intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a propensity score matching and stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis

BACKGROUND

Radical resection is still the most cost-effectiveness curative strategy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), but it remains controversial on the survival benefit of anatomic resection (AR). In this study, we sought to compare the oncologic outcomes between AR versus non-AR (NAR) as the primary treatment for early-stage ICC patients.

METHODS

Data of ICC patients who underwent hepatectomy and staged at AJCC I were retrospectively collected from 12 hepatobiliary centers in China between Dec 2012 and Dec 2015. Propensity score matching (PSM) and stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis were performed to minimize the effect of potential confounders, and the perioperative and long-term outcomes between AR and NAR groups were compared.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventy-eight ICC patients staged at AJCC I were eligible for this study, including 126 patients receiving AR and 152 patients receiving NAR. Compared to the NAR group, the AR group experienced more intraoperative blood loss before and after PSM or stabilized IPTW (all P > 0.05); AR group also experienced more intraoperative transfusion after stabilized IPTW (P > 0.05). In terms of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), no significant differences were observed between the two groups before and after PSM or stabilized IPTW (all P > 0.05). Multivariable Cox regression analyses found that AR was not an independent prognostic factor for either DFS or OS (all P > 0.05). Further analysis also showed that the survival benefit of AR was not found in any subgroup stratified by Child-Pugh grade (A or B), cirrhosis (presence or absence), tumor diameter (≤ 5 cm or > 5 cm) and pathological type (mass-forming or non-mass-forming) with all P > 0.05.

CONCLUSION

Surgical approach does not influence the prognosis of patients with stage I primary ICC, and NAR might be acceptable and oncological safety.

Clinical outcomes of parenchymal-sparing versus anatomic resection for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The advantages of parenchymal-sparing resection (PSR) over anatomic resection (AR) of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remain controversial. Here, we aim to evaluate their safety and efficacy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term perioperative outcomes and long-term oncological outcomes for PSR and AR were performed by searching Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were considered eligible (totally 7228 patients: AR, n = 3154 (43.6%) vs. PSR, n = 4074 (56.4%)). Overall survival (OS, HR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.95-1.22, P = 0.245) and disease-free survival (DFS, HR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.94-1.28, P = 0.259) were comparable between the two groups. There were no significant differences in 3-year OS, 5-year OS, 3-year DFS, 5-year DFS, 3-year liver recurrence-free survival (liver-RFS) and 5-year liver-RFS. In terms of perioperative outcome, patients undergoing AR surgery were associated with prolonged operation time (WMD = 51.48 min, 95% CI: 29.03-73.93, P < 0.001), higher amount of blood loss (WMD = 189.92 ml, 95% CI: 21.39-358.45, P = 0.027), increased intraoperative blood transfusion rate (RR = 2.24, 95% CI: 1.54-3.26, P < 0.001), prolonged hospital stay (WMD = 1.00 day, 95% CI: 0.34-1.67, P = 0.003), postoperative complications (RR = 2.28, 95% CI: 1.88-2.77, P < 0.001), and 90-day mortality (RR = 3.08, 95% CI: 1.88-5.03, P < 0.001). While PSR surgery was associated with positive resection margins (RR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.61-0.97, P = 0.024), intrahepatic recurrence (RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.82-0.98, P = 0.021) and repeat hepatectomy (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.55-0.76, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Considering relatively acceptable heterogeneity, PSR had better perioperative outcomes without compromising oncological long-term outcomes. However, these findings must be carefully interpreted, requiring more supporting evidence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023445332.

Impact of anatomic resection on long-term survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with T1-T2 disease or microscopic vascular invasion

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to clarify potential candidates for anatomic resection (AR) among patients with pathological T1-T2 (pT1-T2) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and to determine whether AR is effective for HCC with microscopic vascular invasion (MVI).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 288 patients with pT1a (n = 50), pT1b (n = 134) or pT2 (n = 104) HCC who underwent curative-intent resection between 1990 and 2010. Surgical outcomes were compared between patients who underwent AR (n = 189) and those who underwent nonanatomic resection (NAR; n = 99) according to pT category and MVI status.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent AR were more likely to have good hepatic functional reserve and an aggressive primary tumor than those who underwent NAR. When patients were stratified according to pT category, AR had a more favorable impact on survival than NAR only in patients with pT2 HCC in univariate (5-year survival, 51.5% vs. 34.6%; p = 0.010) and multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 0.505; p = 0.014). However, AR had no impact on survival in patients with pT1a or pT1b HCC. In patients with MVI (n = 57), AR achieved better survival than NAR (5-year survival, 52.0% vs. 16.7%; p = 0.019) and was an independent prognostic factor (hazard ratio 0.335; p = 0.020). In patients without MVI (n = 231), there was no significant difference in survival between the two groups (p = 0.221).

CONCLUSION

AR was identified as an independent factor in improved survival in patients with pT2 HCC or HCC with MVI.

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.

Anatomic resection versus radiofrequency ablation with an ablative margin ≥ 1.0 cm for solitary small hepatocellular carcinoma measuring ≤ 3 cm: Comparison of long-term outcomes using propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the long-term outcomes of anatomic resection (AR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with an ablative margin (AM) of ≥ 1.0 cm as first-line treatment for solitary hepatocellular carcinoma measuring ≤ 3 cm.

METHODS

Two hundred and fifty-one patients who underwent AR (n = 156) or RFA (ablative margin ≥ 1.0 cm, n = 95) at any of 6 tertiary hospitals from 2009 to 2018 were enrolled. Propensity score matched analysis (PSM) were used to compare overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and perioperative outcomes. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors associated with RFS and OS.

RESULTS

PSM created 67 patient-pairs. After 96 months of follow-up, RFA with an ablative margin ≥ 1.0 cm and AR showed comparable 1-year, 3-year, 5-year, and 8-year OS rates before (P = 0.580) and after (P = 0.640) PSM. However, RFS was better at 1, 3, 5, and 8 years after AR before (P = 0.0036) and after (P = 0.017) PSM. The operation time and postoperative hospital stay were significantly longer in the AR group than in the RFA group before and after PSM (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis identified age and type of treatment to be independent prognostic factors for RFS and age and hepatitis C to be associated with OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term OS was not significantly different between AR and RFA with an AM ≥ 1.0 cm in patients with a solitary hepatocellular carcinoma measuring ≤ 3 cm; but, RFS appeared to be better after AR than after RFA. However, RFA was associated with fewer perioperative complications and a shorter postoperative hospital stay.

Anatomic resection improved the long-term outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma patients with microvascular invasion: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The long-term effect of anatomic resection (AR) is better than that of non-anatomic resection (NAR). At present, there is no study on microvascular invasion (MVI) and liver resection types.

AIM

To explore whether AR improves long-term survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by removing the peritumoral MVI.

METHODS

A total of 217 patients diagnosed with HCC were enrolled in the study. The surgical margin was routinely measured. According to the stratification of different tumor diameters, patients were divided into the following groups: ≤ 2 cm group, 2-5 cm group, and > 5 cm group.

RESULTS

In the 2-5 cm diameter group, the overall survival (OS) of MVI positive patients was significantly better than that of MVI negative patients (P = 0.031). For the MVI positive patients, there was a statistically significant difference between AR and NAR (P = 0.027). AR leads to a wider surgical margin than NAR (2.0 ± 2.3 cm vs 0.7 ± 0.5 cm, P < 0.001). In the groups with tumor diameters < 2 cm, both AR and NAR can obtain a wide surgical margin, and the surgical margins of AR are wider than that of NAR (3.5 ± 5.8 cm vs 1.6 ± 0.5 cm, P = 0.048). In the groups with tumor diameters > 5 cm, both AR and NAR fail to obtain wide surgical margin (0.6 ± 1.0 cm vs 0.7 ± 0.4 cm, P = 0.491).

CONCLUSION

For patients with a tumor diameter of 2-5 cm, AR can achieve the removal of peritumoral MVI by obtaining a wide incision margin, reduce postoperative recurrence, and improve prognosis.

Anatomic resection has superior long-term survival compared with wedge resection for second primary lung cancer after prior lobectomy

OBJECTIVES

The extent of surgical resection for early-stage second primary lung cancer (SPLC) in patients with a previous lobectomy is unclear. We sought to compare anatomic lung resections (lobectomy and segmentectomy) and wedge resections for small peripheral SPLC using a population-based database.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database was queried for all patients with ≤2 cm peripheral SPLC diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 who underwent prior lobectomy for the first primary and surgical resection only for the SPLC. American College of Chest Physicians guidelines were used to classify SPLC. Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox regression were used to compare overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 356 patients met the inclusion criteria with 203 (57%) treated with wedge resection and 153 (43%) treated with anatomic resection. Significantly better median survival was observed with anatomic resection than with wedge resection using a Kaplan-Meier analysis (124 vs 63 months; P < 0.001). With multivariable Cox regression, improved long-term survival was observed for anatomic resection (hazard ratio: 0.44, confidence interval: 0.27-0.70; P = 0.001). Improvement in survival was demonstrated with wedge resection when lymph node sampling was done. Lastly, we calculated the average treatment effect on the treated with inverse probability weighting for a subgroup of patients and found that those with wedge resection and lymph node sampling had shorter long-term survival times.

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomic resections may provide better long-term survival than wedge resections for patients with early-stage peripheral SPLC after prior lobectomy. Significant improvement in survival was observed with wedge resection for SPLC when adequate lymph node dissection was performed.

Single-port thoracoscopic anatomic resection for chronic inflammatory lung disease

Background

It is challenging to proceed thoracoscopic anatomic resection when encountering severe pleural adhesion or calcified peribronchial lymphadenopathy. Compared with multiple-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (MP-VATS), how to overcome these challenges in single-port (SP-) VATS is still an intractable problem. In the present study, we reported the surgical results of chronic inflammatory lung disease and shared some useful SP-VATS techniques.

Methods

We retrospectively assessed the surgical results of chronic inflammatory lung disease, primarily bronchiectasis, and mycobacterial infection, at our institution between 2010 and 2018. The patients who underwent SP-VATS anatomic resection were compared with those who underwent MP-VATS procedures. We analyzed the baseline characteristics, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes, and illustrated four special techniques depending on the situation: flexible hook electrocautery, hilum-first technique, application of Satinsky vascular clamp, and staged closure of bronchial stump method.

Results

We classified 170 consecutive patients undergoing thoracoscopic anatomic resection into SP and MP groups, which had significant between-group differences in operation time and overall complication rate (P = 0.037 and 0.018, respectively). Compared to the MP-VATS group, the operation time of SP-VATS was shorter, and the conversion rate of SP-VATS was relatively lower (3.1% vs. 10.5%, P = 0.135). The most common complication was prolonged air leakage (SP-VATS, 10.8%; MP-VATS, 2.9%, P = 0.045).

Conclusions

For chronic inflammatory lung disease, certain surgical techniques render SP-VATS anatomic resection feasible and safe with a lower conversion rate.

Anatomic versus non-anatomic resection of hepatocellular carcinoma with microvascular invasion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The efficacy of anatomical resection (AR) and non-anatomical resection (NR) in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with microvascular invasion (MVI) remains unknown. This study compared the safety and outcomes of these surgical procedures. A systematic literature search was conducted. The main outcomes were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS). Overall hazard ratio (HR) was calculated from Kaplan-Meier plots and outcomes using random-effects models. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the AR and NR groups (risk ratio [RR]: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-1.17, p = 0.496). OS was higher with AR at 1 year (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.45-0.98, p = 0.037), 3 years (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.50-0.82, p = 0.000), and 5 years (RR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.65-0.89, p = 0.001). AR was associated with a higher OS rate (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.47-0.82, p = 0.001). AR was associated with improved DFS at 1 year (RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.82, p = 0.000), 3 years (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.86, p = 0.000), and 5 years (95% CI: 0.75 to 0.94, p = 0.002). Compared with NR, AR had significant advantages on overall HR of DFS (HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.91, p = 0.012). In conclusion, AR was associated with higher rates of OS and DFS in HCC patients with MVI. Thus, for well-presented liver function HCC patients which are predicted to have positive MVI, AR is recommended.

Surgical outcomes of ipsilateral metachronous second primary lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

The optimal surgical approach for metachronous second primary lung cancer (MSPLC), especially ipsilateral MSPLC, remains unclear. This study aimed to review postoperative complications and examine surgical outcomes based on the extent of resection after surgery for ipsilateral MSPLC.

METHODS

Clinical data from 61 consecutive patients who underwent pulmonary resection for ipsilateral MSPLC according to the Martini-Melamed criteria between January 2005 and December 2017 in 3 institutes were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Postoperative complications were identified in 12 patients (19.7%). Regarding the combination of initial and second surgery, intraoperative bleeding was significantly greater in patients with anatomic-anatomic resection than in others (P < 0.001). Operation time was significantly longer in patients with anatomic-anatomic resection than in others (P < 0.001). However, postoperative complications showed no significant differences based on the combination of surgeries. Five-year overall survival rates in patients with anatomic resection and wedge resection after second surgery were 75.8% and 75.8%, respectively (P = 0.738), and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 54.2% and 67.6%, respectively (P = 0.368). Cox multivariate analysis identified ever-smoker status (P = 0.029), poor performance status (P = 0.011) and tumour size >20 mm (P = 0.001) as independent predictors of poor overall survival, while ever-smoker status (P = 0.040) and tumour size >20 mm (P = 0.007) were considered independent predictors of poor recurrence-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding postoperative and long-term outcomes for patients with ipsilateral MSPLC, surgical intervention is safe and offers good long-term survival. Wedge resection is an acceptable provided tumours ≤2 cm and ground-glass opacity-predominant as a second surgery for early-stage ipsilateral MSPLC.

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.

Comparison of anatomic and non-anatomic resections for very early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: The importance of surgical resection margin width in non-anatomic resection

BACKGROUND

The superiority of anatomic resection (AR) over non-anatomic resection (NAR) for very early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has remained a topic of debate. Thus, this study aimed to compare the prognosis after AR and NAR for single HCC less than 2 cm in diameter.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with single HCC of diameter less than 2 cm who underwent curative hepatectomy between 1997 and 2017 were included in this retrospective study.

RESULTS

In total, 159 patients were included in this study. Of these, 52 patients underwent AR (AR group) and 107 patients underwent NAR (NAR group). No significant differences were noted in recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) between the AR and NAR groups (P = 0.236 and P = 0.363, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that low preoperative platelet count and presence of satellite nodules were independent prognostic factors of RFS and OS. Wide surgical resection margin did not affect RFS (P = 0.692) in the AR group; however, in the NAR group, RFS was found to be higher with surgical resection margin widths ≥1 cm than with surgical resection margin widths <1 cm (P = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

Prognosis was comparable between the NAR and AR groups for very early-stage HCC with well-preserved liver function. For better oncologic outcomes, surgeons should endeavor in keeping the surgical resection margin widths during NAR ≥1 cm.

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.

Nomogram to Assist in Surgical Plan for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Prediction Model for Microvascular Invasion

BACKGROUND

Microvascular invasion (MVI) relates to poor survival in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. In this study, we aim at developing a nomogram for MVI prediction and potential assistance in surgical planning.

METHODS

A total of 357 patients were assigned to training (n = 257) and validation (n = 100) cohort. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to reveal preoperative predictors for MVI. A nomogram incorporating independent predictors was constructed and validated. Disease-free survival was compared between patients, and the potential of the predicted MVI in making surgical procedure was also explored.

RESULTS

Pathological examination confirmed MVI in 140 (39.2%) patients. Imaging features including larger tumor, intra-tumoral artery, tumor type, and higher serum AFP independently correlated with MVI. The nomogram showed desirable performance with an AUROC of 0.803 (95% CI, 0.746-0.860) and 0.814 (95% CI, 0.720-0.908) in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. Good calibration were also revealed by calibration curve in both cohorts. The decision curve analysis indicated that the prediction nomogram was of promising usefulness in clinical work. In addition, survival analysis revealed that patients with positive-predicted MVI suffered a higher risk of early recurrence (P < 0.01). There was no difference in disease-free survival between anatomic or non-anatomic resection in large HCC or small HCC without nomogram-predicted MVI. However, anatomic resection improved disease-free survival in small HCC with nomogram-predicted MVI.

CONCLUSIONS

The nomogram obtained desirable results in predicting MVI. Patients with predicted MVI were associated with early recurrence and anatomic resection was recommended for small HCC patients with predicted MVI.

The Impact of Extent of Liver Resection Among Patients with Neuroendocrine Liver Metastasis: an International Multi-institutional Study

BACKGROUND

Liver resection in patients with neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NELM) provides a survival benefit, yet the optimal extent of resection remains unknown. We sought to examine outcomes of patients undergoing non-anatomic (NAR) versus anatomic liver resection (AR) for NELM using a large international cohort of patients.

METHODS

Two hundred and fifty-eight patients who underwent curative intent liver resection from January 1990 to December 2016 were identified from eight institutions. Patients were excluded if they underwent concurrent ablation, had extrahepatic disease, underwent a debulking operation, or had mixed anatomic and non-anatomic resections. Overall (OS) and recurrence-free (RFS) survival were compared among patients based on the extent of liver resection (AR vs. NAR).

RESULTS

Most primary tumors were located in the pancreas (n = 117, 45.4%) or the small intestine (n = 65, 25.2%). Liver resection consisted of NAR (n = 126, 48.8%) or AR (n = 132, 51.2%) resection. The overwhelming majority of patients who underwent NAR had an estimated liver involvement of < 50% (NAR 109, 97.3% vs. AR n = 82, 65.6%; P < 0.001). Patients who underwent NAR also had higher rates of primary tumor lymph node metastasis (NAR n = 79, 71.2% vs. AR n = 37, 33.6%; P < 0.001) and microscopically positive margins (R1) (NAR n = 29, 25.7% vs. AR n = 16, 12.5%; P = 0.009). After a median follow-up of 47.7 months, 48 (18.6%) patients died and 37.0% (n = 95) had evidence of disease recurrence. Patients who underwent AR had both longer median OS (not reached) and RFS (not reached) versus patients who underwent NAR (median OS 138.3 months; median RFS 31.3 months) (both P < 0.01). After controlling for patient and disease-related factors, extent of liver resection was independently associated with an increased risk of recurrence (HR 2.39, 95% CI 1.04-5.48; P = 0.04) but not death (HR 1.92, 95% CI 0.40-9.28; P = 0.42).

CONCLUSION

NAR was independently associated with a higher incidence of recurrence versus patients who undergo a formal anatomic hepatectomy among patients with NELM.

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.

Significance of liver hanging maneuver for anatomical hepatectomy in patients with a large hepatocellular carcinoma compressing intrahepatic vasculatures

Backgrounds/Aims

To achieve complete anatomic hepatectomy in a large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), hepatic transection through an anterior approach is required. Liver hanging maneuver (LHM) is a useful procedure for transection of an adequately cut plane in anatomical liver resection. It may reduce intraoperative bleeding and transection time.

Methods

We examined records of 27 patients with large HCC (over 10 cm in size) who underwent anatomic hepatic resection with LHM (n=11, between 2001 and 2007) or without LHM (n=16, between 2000 and 2003). The two groups were retrospectively compared in terms of patient demographics, preoperative hepatic function, surgical records, and post-hepatectomy outcome.

Results

Although transection time was not significantly different between the two groups, the amount of intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the LHM group than that in the non-LHM group (1,269±1,407 ml vs. 2,197±1,281 ml, p=0.039). Related blood transfusion or total operation time in the LHM group tended to be lower than those in the non-LHM group, although differences between the two groups were not statistically significant (p<1.0). Prevalence of total complications in the LHM group tended to be lower than that in the LHM group (36% vs. 88%, p=0.011). However, prevalence of hepatectomy-related complications or length of hospital stay was not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusions

LHM can reduce intraoperative blood loss. It is useful for transecting adequately cut plane in a hepatectomy for a large HCC. However, postoperative outcomes are not improved by LHM compared to those by non-LHM.

Comparison of anatomic and non-anatomic hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to compare the prognostic impact of anatomic resection (AR) versus non-anatomic resection (NAR) on patient survival after resection of a single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

To control for confounding variable distributions, a 1-to-1 propensity score match was applied to compare the outcomes of AR and NAR. Among 710 patients with a primary, solitary HCC of <5.0 cm in diameter that was resectable by either AR or NAR from 2003 to 2007 in Japan and Korea, 355 patients underwent NAR and 355 underwent AR of at least one section with complete removal of the portal territory containing the tumor.

RESULTS

Overall survival (OS) was better in the AR than NAR group (hazard ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval 1.28-2.19, P < 0.001) while disease-free survival showed no significant difference. Significantly fewer patients in the AR than NAR group developed intrahepatic HCC recurrence and multiple intrahepatic recurrences. Patients with poorly differentiated HCC who underwent AR had improved disease-free survival and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomic resection decreases the risk of tumor recurrence and improves OS in patients with a primary, solitary HCC of <5.0 cm in diameter.

Enucleation versus Anatomic Resection for Giant Hepatic Hemangioma: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic hemangiomas are the most common benign liver tumors, and the management of giant hepatic hemangioma (GHH) is still in controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the postoperative outcomes of enucleation versus anatomic resection for GHH.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1988 to December 2015 to identify studies comparing the outcomes of enucleation versus anatomic resection for GHH. Finally, we performed this meta-analysis using the Review Manager 5.3 software, and the results were presented as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). The major limitation is that all data were derived from nonrandomized studies, and we cannot exclude potential selection bias.

RESULTS

Nine studies involving 1,185 patients were included. The results showed that there was a lower incidence of complications (RR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.84, I² = 0%, p = 0.0007); no incidents of death occurred among the 9 included trials. Blood loss (MD = -419.07 mL, 95% CI -575.04 to -263.09, I² = 83%, p < 0.00001), duration of surgery (MD = -23.5 min, 95% CI -45.28 to -1.74, I² = 0%, p = 0.03), and length of hospital stay (MD = -1.59 days, 95% CI -3.06 to -0.13, I² = 0%, p = 0.03) were much lower in the enucleation group.

CONCLUSIONS

GHH can be removed safely by either enucleation or anatomic resection. Enucleation can preserve more hepatic parenchyma and reduce postoperative complications, which is why it should be the preferred surgical procedure for suitable lesions.

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.

Robotic extrahepatic Glissonean pedicle approach for anatomic liver resection in the right liver: techniques and perioperative outcomes

BACKGROUND

The Glissonean pedicle approach is one of the most popular methods of anatomic liver surgery. Liver surgeons have attempted to reproduce this method laparoscopically. In this study, we introduce our technique of the extrahepatic Glissonean approach for anatomic liver resections, using a robotic system, and report on short-term perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

From December 2008 to July 2014, 10 patients underwent robotic anatomic liver resection in the right liver. The procedure is as follows: (1) mobilization of the liver and isolation and clamping of a selected Glissonean pedicle; (2) transection of the liver parenchyma using a rubber band retraction technique; (3) division of the Glissonean pedicle after full exposure, followed by completion of parenchymal transection.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 52.50 (range 28-59) years, and seven were male. All patients had hepatocellular carcinoma. The types of resections performed were as follows: segmentectomy 6 (n = 1), segmentectomy of 4b + 5 ventral segments (n = 2), right posterior sectionectomy (n = 3), extended right hepatectomy (n = 1), extended right posterior sectionectomy (n = 2), and central bisectionectomy (n = 1). Only one case was converted to open surgery due to severe tumor adhesions on the diaphragm. The median operative time was 555 min (range 413-848), and the median estimated blood loss was 225 ml (range 30-700), with no perioperative transfusions. The overall complication rate was 70 % (grade I, 5; grade II, 1; grade III, 1; grade IV, 0). The median length of hospital stay postsurgery was 7 days (range 6-11).

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery allowed for successful anatomic liver resections via an extrahepatic Glissonean pedicle approach in the right liver and can be safely performed in selected patients.