Sequential arterial and portal vein embolizations before right hepatectomy in patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma

[Radiological treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in 2010]

Several radiological techniques have been used for treating hepatocellular carcinoma. These include transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) and percutaneous therapy, such as radiofrequency (RF). The treatment efficacy of radiofrequency for hepatocellular carcinoma has been confirmed by several randomized and non randomized studies, with a benefit in terms of morbidity comparatively to surgery when cirrhosis is present. Radiofrequency ablation treatment is based on tumour size, shape and location, with a defined strategy and a proper patient selection. We will also review indications and technical aspects of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE). It is an accepted worldwide and effective treatment for patients with unresectable large or multinodular hepatocellular carcinoma. It improves significantly survival for adequate selected patients with preservation of liver function.

[Surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma in 2010]

Radiofrequency ablation, partial or total hepatectomy represent curative treatment options for patients suffering from hepatocellular carcinoma in 2010. In this review article, the role (indication, limits, results) of hepatic resection and liver transplantation are discussed.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: current management and future development-improved outcomes with surgical resection

Currently, surgical resection is the treatment strategy offering the best long-term outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Especially for advanced HCC, surgical resection is the only strategy that is potentially curative, and the indications for surgical resection have expanded concomitantly with the technical advances in hepatectomy. A major problem is the high recurrence rate even after curative resection, especially in the remnant liver. Although repeat hepatectomy may prolong survival, the suitability may be limited due to multiple tumor recurrence or background liver cirrhosis. Multimodality approaches combining other local ablation or systemic therapy may help improve the prognosis. On the other hand, minimally invasive, or laparoscopic, hepatectomy has become popular over the last decade. Although the short-term safety and feasibility has been established, the long-term outcomes have not yet been adequately evaluated. Liver transplantation for HCC is also a possible option. Given the current situation of donor shortage, however, other local treatments should be considered as the first choice as long as liver function is maintained. Non-transplant treatment as a bridge to transplantation also helps in decreasing the risk of tumor progression or death during the waiting period. The optimal timing for transplantation after HCC recurrence remains to be investigated.

Portal vein embolization: rationale, outcomes, controversies and future directions

Portal vein embolization (PVE) is now considered the standard of care to improve safety for patients undergoing extensive hepatectomy with an anticipated small future liver remnant (FLR). PVE is used to induce contralateral liver hypertrophy in preparation for major liver resection. Optimal patient selection is essential to maximize the clinical benefits of PVE. Computed tomography volumetry is used to calculate a standardized FLR and determine the need for preoperative PVE. Percutaneous PVE can be performed via the transhepatic ipsilateral or contralateral approaches, depending on operator preference. Several different embolic agents are available to the interventional radiologist, all with similar effectiveness in inducing hypertrophy. When an extended hepatectomy is planned, right PVE should include segment 4, in order to maximize FLR hypertrophy. Multiple studies have demonstrated the beneficial outcomes of PVE in both patients with healthy livers and with underlying liver diseases. Novel improvements to PVE should expand its scope to patients who were previously not candidates for the procedure.

Uses and limitations of portal vein embolization for improving perioperative outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatic resection remains the only curative option for the majority of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who do not meet criteria for transplantation or local ablative options. As the majority of patients with HCC also have underlying chronic liver disease and cirrhosis, post-hepatectomy complications can be significant, and in some prohibitive. The technique of portal vein embolization (PVE) has evolved to increase the candidacy of patients for major hepatectomy, as well as improve postoperative outcomes and safety. This review will focus on PVE and discuss our institution's experience with uses and limitations of this technique for HCC.

Pretreatment assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma: expert consensus statement

Staging of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is complex and relies on multiple factors including tumor extent and hepatic function. No single staging system is applicable to all patients with HCC. The staging of the American Joint Committee on Cancer / International Union for Cancer Control should be used to predict outcome following resection or liver transplantation. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer scheme is appropriate in patients with advanced HCC not candidate for surgery. Dual phase computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging can be used for pretreatment assessment of tumor extent but the accuracy of these methods remains poor to characterize < 1 cm lesions. Assessment of tumor response should not rely only on tumor size and new imaging methods are available to evaluate response to therapy in HCC patients. Liver volumetry is part of the preoperative assessment of patients with HCC candidate for resection as it reflects liver function. Preoperative portal vein embolization is indicated in patients with small future liver remnant (≤ 20% in normal liver; ≤ 40% in fibrotic or cirrhotic liver). Tumor size is not a contraindication to liver resection. Liver resection can be proposed in selected patients with multifocal HCC. Besides tumor extent, surgical resection of HCC may be performed in selected patients with chronic liver disease.

Current surgical management of hilar and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: the role of resection and orthotopic liver transplantation

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a rare but devastating malignancy that presents late, is notoriously difficult to diagnose, and is associated with a high mortality. Surgical resection is the only chance for cure or long-term survival. The treatment of CCA has remained challenging because of the lack of effective adjuvant therapy, aggressive nature of the disease, and critical location of the tumor in close proximity to vital structures such as the hepatic artery and the portal vein. Moreover, the operative approach is dictated by the location of the tumor and the presence of underlying liver disease. During the past 4 decades, the operative management of CCA has evolved from a treatment modality that primarily aimed at palliation to curative intent with an aggressive surgical approach to R0 resection and total hepatectomy followed by orthotopic liver transplantation.

Surgical resection of high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma: patient selection, preoperative considerations, and operative technique

Hepatocellular carcinoma remains a leading cause of cancer death worldwide. There are an increasing number of patients that do not meet traditional criteria for surgical resection as a result of historically poor outcomes. We define these oncologically high-risk patients as those with either one of these risk factors or a combination of them: large (>5 cm) primary tumors, multinodular disease, and/or major vascular invasion. With appropriate selection and preparation, long-term survival is possible in this subset of patients after resection. This review focuses on the surgical treatment of these high-risk patients, focusing on our own institution's approach and methods as well as reviewing the literature pertinent to the support of our current practice.

Serum HGF and TGF-beta1 levels after right portal vein embolization

AIM

The changes in the serum hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) and transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta1 levels after portal vein embolization (PVE), and their clinical significance, remain unclear and we aimed to assess their relationship.

METHODS

The serum HGF and TGF-beta1 levels were prospectively measured in 22 patients before and 1, 3, 5, 7, and 14 day after right PVE. Computed tomographic volumetry was performed before and at a mean of 26 +/- 4 days after right PVE.

RESULTS

Three to four weeks after right PVE, the volume of embolized lobe significantly decreased from 704 +/- 157 cm(3) before PVE to 539 +/- 168 cm(3) after PVE (P < 0.001). In contrast, the volume of nonembolized lobe significantly increased from 426 +/- 142 cm(3) to 560 +/- 165 cm(3) (P < 0.001). The serum HGF level significantly increased on day 3 after PVE compared with the pretreatment level (P = 0.005), while the serum TGF-beta1 level significantly decreased and reached its lowest value on day 3 (P = 0.002). Using Pearson's correlation analysis, we found that the serum HGF and TGF-beta1 levels on day 14 negatively associated with the large hypertrophic response in the nonembolized lobe (HGF: r = -0.490, P = 0.021; TGF-beta1: r = -0.473, P = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

PVE induced an increase in the serum HGF level and reduced the serum TGF-beta1 level. Measurement of serum HGF and TGF-beta1 levels on day 14 after right PVE may be useful for assessment of the future liver hypertrophy in nonembolized lobe after right PVE.

Predictive factors for hypertrophy of the future remnant liver after selective portal vein embolization

BACKGROUND

To analyze predictive factors of hypertrophy of the nonembolized future remnant liver (FRL) after transhepatic preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) of the liver to be resected.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Age, gender, indocyanin green clearance test, chemotherapy before PVE, type of chemotherapy, operators, extent of PVE, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) associated with PVE, time delay between PVE and surgery, and platelet count were retrospectively evaluated as predictive factors for hypertrophy of FRL in 107 patients with malignant disease in noncirrhotic liver. PVE targeted the right liver lobe [n = 70] or the right liver lobe and segment IV [n = 37] when FRL/total liver volume ratio was below 25% in healthy liver or 40% in altered liver.

RESULTS

After PVE, FRL volume significantly increased by 69%, from 344 +/- 156 cm(3) to 543 +/- 192 cm(3) (P < .0001). The degree of hypertrophy was negatively correlated with FRL volume (correlation coefficient = -0.55, P < .0001) and FRL/TFL ratio (correlation coefficient = -0.52, P < .0001) before PVE. Patients, who have undergone chemotherapy with platin agents prior to PVE, demonstrated lower hypertrophy (P = .048).

CONCLUSION

Hypertrophy after PVE is inversely correlated to initial FRL volume. Hypertrophy of the liver might be influenced by the systemic chemotherapeutic received before PVE.

Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma after attempted portal vein embolization in 25 patients

OBJECTIVE

Portal vein embolization (PVE) has been widely used to facilitate major liver resection; however, curative surgery even after PVE may not be possible mainly because of inadequate hypertrophy of remnant liver or disease progression. For these patients, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the next therapeutic option. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of TACE after PVE in 25 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

CONCLUSION

TACE using a single chemotherapeutic agent can be performed safely and effectively in HCC patients who previously underwent PVE. TACE after PVE allowed two of the patients to be downstaged so they could undergo surgical resection.

Surgical treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma in a new era: comparison among leading Eastern and Western centers, Leeds

OBJECTIVE

Surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) remains challenging, with radical procedures thought to offer the best chance of long-term survival. Here we present our data for surgical resection of HCCA for the period 2001-2008.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database was interrogated to identify all resections. Clinico-pathological data were analyzed and assessed for impact on survival.

RESULTS

51 patients were identified. Almost three-quarters required hepatic trisectionectomy. Overall survival was 76% at 1 year, 36% at 3 years and 20% at 5 years. When R0 resection was achieved, the 5-year survival was 40%. Portal vein resection, perineural invasion and T-stage were predictive of overall survival on univariate analysis. Only T-stage remained significant on multivariate analysis. Lymph node status predicted disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

Radical surgery continues to offer the prospect of long-term survival for patients with HCCA. Earlier detection and referral to tertiary centers may allow more patients to have potentially curative surgical resections.

"State of the art" in liver resection and living donor liver transplantation: a worldwide survey of 100 liver centers

BACKGROUND

New strategies have been developed to expand indications for liver surgery. The objective was to evaluate the current practice worldwide regarding critical liver mass and manipulation of the liver volume.

METHODS

A survey was sent to 133 liver centers worldwide, which focused on (a) critical liver volume, (b) preoperative manipulation of the liver mass, and (c) use of liver biopsy and metabolic tests.

RESULTS

The overall response rate to the survey was 75%. Half of the centers performed more than 100 resections per year; 86% had an associated liver transplant program. The minimal remnant liver volume for resection was 25% (15-40%) in cases of normal liver parenchyma and 50% (25-90%) in the presence of underlying cirrhosis. The minimal remnant liver volume for living donors was 40% (30-50%), whereas the accepted graft body weight ratio was 0.8 (0.6-1.2). Portal vein occlusion to manipulate the liver volume before resection was performed in 89% of the centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Limits of liver volume and the current practice of liver manipulation before resection were comparable among different centers and continents. The minimal remnant liver volume in normal liver was 25%, and more than 80% of the centers performed portal vein occlusion.

Preoperative liver hypertrophy induced by portal flow occlusion before major hepatic resection for colorectal metastases can be impaired by bevacizumab

BACKGROUND

This prospective study evaluated the effect of bevacizumab on the hypertrophy of the future liver remnant (FLR) after portal vein occlusion (PVO) before major hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients with colorectal liver metastases treated with preoperative FOLFOX/FOLFIRI chemotherapy regimen since 2002 were evaluated for the degree of hypertrophy of the FLR after right PVO. The results were compared with a similar group of 13 patients treated since 2006 with a chemotherapeutic regimen including bevacizumab and PVO. The FLR was measured by volumetric computed tomography 4 weeks before and after PVO.

RESULTS

Before PVO, the FLR volumes were similar in the 13 patients who received bevacizumab (bev+) (mean +/- standard deviation, 497 +/- 136 cm(3)) and the 27 patients who did not receive bevacizumab (bev-) (511 +/- 222 cm(3), P = NS). After PVO, the increase in the FLR volume was significantly lower in the bev+ group (561 +/- 171 cm(3)) compared with the bev- group (667 +/- 213 cm(3), P < .031). In the bev+ group, patients who had received six or more cycles and were > or =60 years old experienced far lower hypertrophy. A right hepatectomy was performed in 29 patients (72%) without mortality and no clinically important differences in morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Bevacizumab may impair hypertrophy of the FLR after PVO in preparation for major hepatectomy particularly, in patients aged > or =60 years and those who receive six or more cycles of bevacizumab, suggesting that major liver resection should be considered with caution in patients who have received bevacizumab.

Major hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with or without portal vein embolization: Perioperative outcome and survival

BACKGROUND

Preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) is performed to minimize perioperative risks of major hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but its effects on tumor growth are ill defined. Perioperative outcome and survival after major hepatic resection for HCC, with and without PVE, were investigated.

METHODS

Patients that underwent major hepatic resection (> or =3 segments) for HCC between January 1998 and May 2007 were analyzed retrospectively. Preoperative PVE was performed when the remnant liver volume was predicted to be insufficient.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients underwent major hepatic resection for HCC: 21 patients with PVE before resection (PVE group) and 33 patients without PVE (non-PVE group). PVE and non-PVE groups had similar rates of fibrosis or cirrhosis, hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B virus, American Joint Committee on Cancer stage, preoperative transarterial chemoembolization, overall postoperative complications, and positive margin (P = nonsignificant for all rates). There were no perioperative deaths in the PVE group and 6 (18%) deaths in the non-PVE group (P = .038). Median follow-up was 21 months. Excluding perioperative deaths, overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 94%, 82%, and 72%, respectively, in the PVE group and 93%, 63%, and 54%, respectively, in the non-PVE group (P = .35). Similarly, disease-free survival (DFS) rates were not significantly different between the groups, with 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS rates of 84%, 56%, and 56%, respectively, in the PVE group and 66%, 49%, and 49%, respectively, in the non-PVE group (P = .38).

CONCLUSION

PVE before major hepatic resection for HCC is associated with improved perioperative outcome. Excluding perioperative mortality, overall survival and DFS rates were similar between patients with and without preoperative PVE.

Sequential preoperative ipsilateral hepatic vein embolization after portal vein embolization to induce further liver regeneration in patients with hepatobiliary malignancy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of ipsilateral hepatic vein embolization (HVE) performed after portal vein embolization (PVE) on liver regeneration.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

PVE induces shrinkage of the embolized lobe and compensatory enlargement of the non-embolized lobe, but it does not always induce sufficient liver regeneration. There was no effective method to accelerate liver regeneration in addition to PVE yet.

METHODS

During a 1-year study period, preoperative HVE were performed on 12 patients who had shown limited liver regeneration after PVE awaiting right hepatectomy. The right hepatic vein was embolized with multiple coils after insertion of vena cava filters or vascular plugs.

RESULTS

No HVE procedure-related complications occurred, but embolization of the wrong hepatic vein trunk occurred in 1 patient. The increase in blood liver enzymes after HVE was comparable with that after PVE alone. In 9 patients who underwent hepatectomy, the proportions of future liver remnant volume to total liver volume were 34.8% +/- 1.5% before PVE, 39.7% +/- 0.6% 1 to 2 weeks after PVE, 44.2% +/- 1.1% 2 weeks after HVE, and 64.5% +/- 6.2% 1 week after right hepatectomy. Cirrhotic livers showed lower regeneration rates following HVE after PVE and 1 patient underwent hepatectomy 17 months after HVE. Immunohistochemistry showed that apoptosis occurred more in the liver area affected by both PVE and HVE than in that affected by PVE alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative sequential application of PVE and HVE seems to be safe and effective in facilitating contralateral liver regeneration by inducing more severe liver damage than PVE alone.

Present status and future perspectives of preoperative portal vein embolization

BACKGROUND

Portal vein embolization (PVE) has been gaining increasing acceptance before major hepatectomy. This review presents the application, outcome, and recent developments of PVE.

METHODS

After a systematic search of "portal vein embolization" in PubMed, we reviewed and retrieved articles written in English related to PVE. There were no other criteria for exclusion of published information pertaining to this topic.

RESULTS

Hypertrophy of future liver remnants with PVE in patients with hepatobiliary malignancy results in fewer complications and shorter hospital stays after major hepatectomy, and add to the pool of candidates for surgical treatment. Some new techniques, such as sequential hepatic artery-portal vein embolization and PVE with stem cell administration, have showed a promising clinical future.

CONCLUSIONS

PVE has achieved significant improvement in the outcome of major hepatectomy, and has enlarged the candidate pool of liver resection as well. Future study is needed to identify the precise mechanism of liver regeneration after PVE.

Induction of tumor growth after preoperative portal vein embolization: is it a real problem?

Although preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) is an effective means to increase future remnant liver (FRL) volume, little has been published on possible adverse effects. This review discusses the clinical and experimental evidence regarding the effect of PVE on tumor growth in both embolized and nonembolized liver lobes, as well as potential strategies to control tumor progression after PVE. A literature review was performed using MEDLINE with keywords related to experimental and clinical studies concerning PVE, portal vein ligation (PVL), and tumor growth. Cross-references and references from reviews were also checked. Clinical and experimental data suggest that tumor progression can occur after preoperative PVE in embolized and nonembolized liver segments. Clinical evidence indicating possible tumor progression in patients with colorectal metastases or with primary liver tumors is based on studies with small sample size. Although multiple studies demonstrated tumor progression, evidence concerning a direct increase in tumor growth rate as a result of PVE is circumstantial. Three possible mechanisms influencing tumor growth after PVE can be recognized, namely changes in cytokines or growth factors, alteration in hepatic blood supply and an enhanced cellular host response promoting local tumor growth after PVE. Post-PVE chemotherapy and sequential transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) before PVE have been proposed to reduce tumor mass after PVE. We conclude that tumor progression can occur after PVE in patients with colorectal metastases as well as in patients with primary liver tumors. However, further research is needed in order to rate this risk of tumor progression after PVE.

Complete hepatocellular carcinoma necrosis following sequential porto-arterial embolization

Most patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are not eligible for curative treatment, which is resection or transplantation. Two recent series have emphasized the potential benefits of preoperative arterio-portal embolization prior to surgical resection of such tumours. This preoperative strategy offers a better disease free survival rate and a higher rate of total tumor necrosis. In case of non resectable HCC it is now widely accepted that transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) leads to a better survival when compared to conservative treatment. Thus, the question remains whether combined portal vein embolization (PVE) may enhance the proven efficiency of TACE in patients with unresectable HCC. We herein report the case of a 56-year-old cirrhotic woman with a voluminous HCC unsuitable for surgical resection. Yet, complete tumour necrosis and prolonged survival could be achieved after a combined porto-arterial embolization. This case emphasizes the potential synergistic effect of a combined arterio-portal embolization and the hypothetical survival benefit of such a procedure, in selected patients, with HCC not suitable for surgery or local ablative therapy.

Major liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in the morbidly obese: a proposed strategy to improve outcome

Background

Morbid obesity strongly predicts morbidity and mortality in surgical patients. However, obesity's impact on outcome after major liver resection is unknown.

Case presentation

We describe the management of a large hepatocellular carcinoma in a morbidly obese patient (body mass index >50 kg/m²). Additionally, we propose a strategy for reducing postoperative complications and improving outcome after major liver resection.

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the first report of major liver resection in a morbidly obese patient with hepatocellular carcinoma. The approach we used could make this operation nearly as safe in obese patients as it is in their normal-weight counterparts.

Surgical resection of hepatocellular carcinoma

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in the United States, primarily due to hepatitis C-related liver disease. Nearly 85%-90% of patients with HCC have underlying chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. Advanced tumor burden or prohibitive hepatic dysfunction precludes operative resection in most patients with HCC. Surgical resection is a treatment option with curative intent in patients with HCC not associated with cirrhosis or in patients with well-compensated liver disease. Tumor extent and hepatic function must be assessed preoperatively to avoid postresection hepatic failure, an often fatal condition that may require urgent liver transplantation. Appropriately selected candidates for liver resection have 5-year postoperative survival rates of 40%-70%, but recurrence rates approach 70%, especially in patients with cirrhosis. For this reason, the best resection for patients with HCC and cirrhosis is orthotopic liver transplantation, which has 5-year posttransplant survival rates of 65%-80% in well-selected candidates.

Chemoembolization of the liver after portal vein embolization: report of three cases

Patients with hepatic malignancies who undergo portal vein embolization (PVE) in anticipation of major hepatectomy may not ultimately undergo resection for various reasons. For patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, the next viable treatment option is often chemoembolization, but the safety of chemoembolization after PVE is not well documented. The present report describes the authors' experience with chemoembolization after PVE in three patients.

Is embolization of segment 4 portal veins before extended right hepatectomy justified?

BACKGROUND

Preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) is increasingly used as a preparation for major hepatectomy in patients with inadequate liver remnant volume or function. However, whether segment 4 (S4) portal veins should be embolized is controversial. The effect of S4 PVE on the volume gain of segments 2 and 3 (S2+3) was examined.

METHODS

Among 73 patients with uninjured liver who underwent right portal vein embolization (RPVE, n = 15) or RPVE extended to S4 portal veins (RPVE+4, n = 58), volume changes in S2+3 and S4 after embolization were compared. Clinical outcomes and PVE complications were assessed.

RESULTS

After a median of 27 days, the S2+3 volume increased significantly after both RPVE and RPVE+4, but the absolute increase was significantly higher for RPVE+4 (median, 106 mL vs 141 mL; P = .044), as was the hypertrophy rate (median, 26% vs 54%; P = .021). There was no significant difference between RPVE and RPVE+4 in the absolute S4 volume increase (52 mL for RPVE vs 55 mL for RPVE+4; P = .61) or the hypertrophy rate of S4 (30% for RPVE vs 26% for RPVE+4; P = .45). Complications of PVE occurred in 1 patient (7%) after RPVE and 6 (10%) after RPVE+4 (P > .99). No PVE complication precluded subsequent resection. Curative hepatectomy was performed in 13 patients (87%) after RPVE and 40 (69%) after RPVE+4 (P = .21).

CONCLUSIONS

RPVE+4 significantly improves S2+3 hypertrophy compared with RPVE alone. Extending RPVE to S4 does not increase PVE-associated complications.

Liver surgery in the presence of cirrhosis or steatosis: Is morbidity increased?

Background data

The prevalence of steatosis and hepatitis-related liver cirrhosis is dramatically increasing together worldwide. Cirrhosis and, more recently, steatosis are recognized as a clinically important feature that influences patient morbidity and mortality after hepatic resection when compared with patients with healthy liver.

Objective

To review present knowledge regarding how the presence of cirrhosis or steatosis can influence postoperative outcome after liver resection.

Methods

A critical review of the English literature was performed to provide data concerning postoperative outcome of patients presenting injured livers who required hepatectomy.

Results

In clinical studies, the presence of steatosis impaired postoperative outcome regardless the severity and quality of the hepatic fat. A great improvement in postoperative outcome has been achieved using modern and multidisciplinary preoperative workup in cirrhotic patients. Due to the lack of a proper classification for morbidity and a clear definition of hepatic failure in the literature, the comparison between different studies is very limited. Although, many surgical strategies have been developed to protect injured liver surgery, no one have gained worldwide acceptance.

Conclusion

Surgeons should take the presence of underlying injured livers into account when planning the extent and type of hepatic surgery. Preoperative and perioperative interventions should be considered to minimize the additional damage. Further randomized trials should focus on the evaluation of novel preoperative strategies to minimize risk in these patients. Each referral liver center should have the commitment to report all deaths related to postoperative hepatic failure and to use a common classification system for postoperative complications.

Preoperative portal vein embolization: indications and technical considerations

Preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) has become an important tool in the management of select patients before major hepatic resection. PVE redirects portal flow to the intended future remnant liver (FRL) to induce hypertrophy of the nondiseased portion of the liver and thereby may reduce complications and shorten hospital stays after surgery. This article reviews the technical considerations for performing PVE including the use of the ipsilateral or contralateral approaches, how to choose a particular embolic agent for PVE, the importance of liver volumetric measurements to estimate functional hepatic reserve, the pathophysiology of PVE, and some of the results showing the benefit of the procedure. In addition, the indications and contraindications for performing PVE in patients with and without chronic liver disease, the use of combination therapies, and the concern for tumor growth after PVE will be discussed.

[Liver resection and transplantation for hepatic tumors]

Hepatic surgery has made substantial advances in the last two decades due to technical developments and improvements in perioperative management. This has reduced surgery dependent mortality to less than 5%, and provides the possibility of carrying out more substantial hepatic resections and to interpret the indications more liberally, also for tumours localized unfavorably. A widely standardized surgical technique as well as new possibilities for organ conservation and, in particular, immunosuppression mean that given suitable indications, liver transplantation is today regarded as a routine procedure for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. This work provides an overview of the current status of surgical therapy for the most frequent, benign liver tumours, as well as for hepatocellular and cholangiocellular carcinoma.