Perioperative management for hepatic resection surgery

Current insights into anaesthesia and critical care management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Multifaceted implications for the anaesthesiologist and intensive care physician

BACKGROUND

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is on the rise worldwide, due to the increasing prevalence of liver diseases associated with metabolic dysfunction and better management of cirrhosis and its complications. The diversification of HCC treatments has recently increased, with the choice of strategy based on HCC characteristics, liver function and comorbidities. The combination of new therapies has transformed the prognosis, with up to 70% survival at 5 years.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to analyse the most recent data on preoperative evaluation, peri-operative anaesthetic management of liver resection, liver transplantation and other types of procedures, and to highlight the multidisciplinary aspect of such management.

MAIN FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The importance of preanaesthetic evaluation will depend largely on the procedure proposed, associated co-morbidities and the stage of liver disease. This assessment should verify stabilisation of all comorbidities, and evaluate the degree of portal hypertension, cirrhosis severity and sarcopenia. Liver resection and liver transplantation for HCC present specific surgical challenges, and minimally invasive techniques improve recovery. Nonsurgical procedures considered as therapeutic (ablation) or standby (regional embolisation) are diverse, and all expose patients to specific intra-anaesthetic complications, sometimes requiring intensive care management. Peri-operative anaesthetic strategies deployed in the management of liver resection or nonsurgical procedures involve specific management of fluids, coagulation, narcosis and analgesia, which can impact on patients' overall, and cancer prognosis. Lastly, new down-staging strategies combining several types of procedure and possibly immunotherapy, also call for collegial reflection on posthepatic transplant immunosuppression, which must remain tailored to each individual patient.

The effectiveness and outcomes of epidural analgesia in patients undergoing open liver resection: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Open liver resection necessitates a substantial upper abdominal inverted-L incision, resulting in severe pain and compromising patient recovery. Despite the efficacy of epidural analgesia in providing adequate postoperative analgesia, the potential epidural-related adverse effects should be carefully considered. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of continuous epidural analgesia and intravenous analgesia in open liver resection.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted, collecting data from patients who underwent open liver resection between 2007 and 2017. Propensity score matching was implemented to mitigate confounding variables, with patients being matched in a 1:1 ratio based on propensity scores. The primary outcome was the comparison of postoperative morphine consumption at 24, 48, and 72 hours between the two groups. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, postoperative outcomes, and epidural-related adverse effects.

RESULTS

A total of 612 patients were included, and after matching, there were 204 patients in each group. Opioid consumption at 24, 48, and 72 hours postoperatively was statistically lower in the epidural analgesia group compared to the intravenous analgesia group (p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in pain scores (p = 0.422). Additionally, perioperative hypotension requiring treatment, as well as nausea and vomiting, were significantly higher in the epidural analgesia group compared to the intravenous analgesia group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Epidural analgesia is superior to intravenous morphine in terms of reducing postoperative opioid consumption within the initial 72 h after open liver resection. Nevertheless, perioperative hypotension, which necessitates management, should be approached with consideration and vigilance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered in the Clinical Trials Registry at www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ , NCT number: NCT06301932.

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.

Morbidity and mortality of elderly patients with pancreaticobiliary disease according to age and comprehensive geriatric assessment: A prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to analyze the influence of age and comprehensive geriatric evaluation on clinical results of pancreaticobiliary disease management in elderly patients.

METHODS

A prospective observational study has been undertaken, including 140 elderly patients (over 75 years) with benign pancreaticobiliary disease. Patients were divided according to age in the following groups: group 1: 75-79 years old; group 2: 80-84 years old; group 3: 85 years and older. They underwent a comprehensive geriatric assessment with different scales: Barthel Index, Pfeiffer Index, Charlson Index, and Fragility scale, at admission and had been follow-up 90 days after hospital discharge to analyze its influence on morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 140 patients have been included (group 1=51; group 2=43 and group 3=46). Most of them, 52 cases (37.8%), had acute cholecystitis, followed by 29 cases of acute cholangitis (20.2%) and acute pancreatitis with 25 cases (17.9%). Significant differences has been observed on complications in different age groups (p=0.033). Especially in patients with a Barthel Index result ≤60, which suggests that these less functional patients had more severe complications after their treatment (p=0.037). The mortality rate was 7.1% (10 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences were found between age, morbidity and mortality in elderly patients with pancreaticobiliary disease. Comprehensive geriatric scales showed some utility in their association with specific complications.

Anatomic versus non-anatomic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma-A European multicentre cohort study in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients

BACKGROUND

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in the western world over the past decades. As liver resection (LR) represents one of the most efficient treatment options, advantages of anatomic (ALR) versus non-anatomic liver resection (NALR) show a lack of consistent evidence. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate complications and survival rates after both resection types.

METHODS

This is a multicentre cohort study using retrospectively and prospectively collected data. We included all patients undergoing LR for HCC between 2009 and 2020 from three specialised centres in Switzerland and Germany. Complication and survival rates after ALR versus NALR were analysed using uni- and multivariate Cox regression models.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ninety-eight patients were included. Median follow-up time was 52.76 months. 164/298 patients (55%) underwent ALR. Significantly more patients with cirrhosis received NALR (n = 94/134; p < 0.001). Complications according to the Clavien Dindo classification were significantly more frequent in the NALR group (p < 0.001). Liver failure occurred in 13% after ALR versus 8% after NALR (p < 0.215). Uni- and multivariate cox regression models showed no significant differences between the groups for recurrence free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Furthermore, cirrhosis had no significant impact on OS and RFS.

CONCLUSION

No significant differences on RFS and OS rates could be observed. Post-operative complications were significantly less frequent in the ALR group while liver specific complications were comparable between both groups. Subgroup analysis showed no significant influence of cirrhosis on the post-operative outcome of these patients.