Good performance of liver stiffness measurement in the prediction of postoperative hepatic decompensation in patients with cirrhosis complicated with hepatocellular carcinoma

Von Willebrand Factor Antigen Improves Risk Stratification for Patients with a Diagnosis of Resectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), complications of portal hypertension, and disease recurrence determine the outcome for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing liver resection. This study aimed to evaluate the von Willebrand factor antigen (vWF-Ag) as a non-invasive test for clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) and a predictive biomarker for time to recurrence (TTR) and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

The study recruited 72 HCC patients with detailed preoperative workup from a prospective trial (NCT02118545) and followed for complications, TTR, and OS. Additionally, 163 compensated patients with resectable HCC were recruited to evaluate vWF-Ag cutoffs for ruling out or ruling in CSPH. Finally, vWF-Ag cutoffs were prospectively evaluated in an external validation cohort of 34 HCC patients undergoing liver resection.

RESULTS

In receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses, vWF-Ag (area under the curve [AUC], 0.828) was similarly predictive of PHLF as indocyanine green clearance (disappearance rate: AUC, 0.880; retention rate: AUC, 0.894), whereas computation of future liver remnant was inferior (AUC, 0.756). Cox-regression showed an association of vWF-Ag with TTR (per 10%: hazard ratio [HR], 1.056; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.017-1.097) and OS (per 10%: HR, 1.067; 95% CI 1.022-1.113). In the analyses, VWF-Ag yielded an AUC of 0.824 for diagnosing CSPH, with a vWF-Ag of 182% or lower ruling out and higher than 291% ruling in CSPH. Therefore, a highest-risk group (> 291%, 9.7% of patients) with a 57.1% incidence of PHLF was identified, whereas no patient with a vWF-Ag of 182% or lower (52.7%) experienced PHLF. The predictive value of vWF-Ag for PHLF and OS was externally validated.

CONCLUSION

For patients with resectable HCC, VWF-Ag allows for simplified preoperative risk stratification. Patients with vWF-Ag levels higher than 291% might be considered for alternative treatments, whereas vWF-Ag levels of 182% or lower identify patients best suited for surgery.

Prognostic Indicators of Overall Survival in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Undergoing Liver Resection

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the predominant form of primary liver cancer and the third contributor to malignancy-related deaths worldwide. The hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), transient elastography-liver stiffness measurement (TE-LSM), and the association between TBS (tumor burden score), alpha-fetoprotein levels, and the Child-Pugh classification (TAC score) can serve as valuable prognostic indicators for these patients. Therefore, the main objective of our research was to analyze the prognostic value of the HVPG, TE-LSM, TBS, and TAC scores. An observational and survival study was conducted on 144 subjects. Our findings indicated that HVPG greater than 10 mmHg, AFP surpassing 400 ng/mL, an advanced C-P class, and low TAC score are independent predictors of overall survival. During the multivariate analysis, AFP serum levels and C-P class proved statistically significant. The present study revealed significant differences in overall survival between the two groups divided upon HVPG values and settled by the cutoff of 10 mmHg (p = 0.02). Moreover, by dividing the cohort into three groups based on the TAC score (very low, low, and moderate), statistically significant differences in overall survival were observed across the groups (p = 0.004).

E-AHPBA-ESSO-ESSR Innsbruck consensus guidelines for preoperative liver function assessment before hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality after liver surgery. Standardized assessment of preoperative liver function is crucial to identify patients at risk. These European consensus guidelines provide guidance for preoperative patient assessment.

METHODS

A modified Delphi approach was used to achieve consensus. The expert panel consisted of hepatobiliary surgeons, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and hepatologists. The guideline process was supervised by a methodologist and reviewed by a patient representative. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. Evidence assessment and statement development followed Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology.

RESULTS

Based on 271 publications covering 4 key areas, 21 statements (at least 85 per cent agreement) were produced (median level of evidence 2- to 2+). Only a few systematic reviews (2++) and one RCT (1+) were identified. Preoperative liver function assessment should be considered before complex resections, and in patients with suspected or known underlying liver disease, or chemotherapy-associated or drug-induced liver injury. Clinical assessment and blood-based scores reflecting liver function or portal hypertension (for example albumin/bilirubin, platelet count) aid in identifying risk of PHLF. Volumetry of the future liver remnant represents the foundation for assessment, and can be combined with indocyanine green clearance or LiMAx® according to local expertise and availability. Functional MRI and liver scintigraphy are alternatives, combining FLR volume and function in one examination.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines reflect established methods to assess preoperative liver function and PHLF risk, and have uncovered evidence gaps of interest for future research.

Risk Prediction Model Based on Magnetic Resonance Elastography-Assessed Liver Stiffness for Predicting Posthepatectomy Liver Failure in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background/Aims

Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) is a major complication that increases mortality in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after surgical resection. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the utility of magnetic resonance elastography-assessed liver stiffness (MRE-LS) for the prediction of PHLF and to develop an MRE-LS-based risk prediction model.

Methods

A total of 160 hepatocellular carcinoma patients who underwent surgical resection with available preoperative MRE-LS data were enrolled. Clinical and laboratory parameters were collected from medical records. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify the risk factors for PHLF and develop a risk prediction model.

Results

PHLF was present in 24 patients (15%). In the multivariate logistic analysis, high MRE-LS (kPa; odds ratio [OR] 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12 to 1.98, p=0.006), low serum albumin (≤3.8 g/dL; OR 15.89, 95% CI 2.41 to 104.82, p=0.004), major hepatic resection (OR 4.16, 95% CI 1.40 to 12.38, p=0.014), higher albumin-bilirubin score (>-0.55; OR 3.72, 95% CI 1.15 to 12.04, p=0.028), and higher serum α-fetoprotein (>100 ng/mL; OR 3.53, 95% CI 1.20 to 10.40, p=0.022) were identified as independent risk factors for PHLF. A risk prediction model for PHLF was established using the multivariate logistic regression equation. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the risk prediction model was 0.877 for predicting PHLF and 0.923 for predicting grade B and C PHLF. In leave-one-out cross-validation, the risk model showed good performance, with AUCs of 0.807 for all-grade PHLF and 0. 871 for grade B and C PHLF.

Conclusions

Our novel MRE-LS-based risk model had excellent performance in predicting PHLF, especially grade B and C PHLF.

Liver stiffness measured by magnetic resonance elastography in early recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after treatment: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

BACKGROUND

With high diagnostic accuracy, magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) is a noninvasive tool and can be adopted to measure liver stiffness (LS). In this study, meta-analysis was carried out to further evaluate whether LS measured by MRE can predict early recurrence in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Cochrane Library database were searched for studies related to LS measured by MRE in the prediction of recurrence in patients with HCC. Survival outcome was estimated by hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Meta-analysis was conducted with the Stata 16.0.

RESULTS

The results of this meta-analysis will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.

CONCLUSION

This study will provide evidence support for LS measured by MRE in predicting the recurrence of HCC.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The private information from individuals will not be published. This systematic review also should not damage participants' rights. Ethical approval is not available. The results may be published in a peer-reviewed journal or disseminated in relevant conferences.

OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER

DOI 10.17605/ OSF.IO / SURH3.

Treatment of hepatitis C virus infection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Truth or dare?

The discovery of direct acting antivirals (DAA) with high rates of sustained virusological response is the biggest epoch-making event in the history of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment. DAAs improve liver function, prevent hepatic decompensation, and might even reverse liver fibrosis. Although initial research pointed towards a potential drawback, it is now known beyond doubt that DAA treatment reduces hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) occurrence or recurrence after curative treatments. Unfortunately, the story has reached another plot twist, as several other issues have emerged: (i) Should we treat patients with early HCC and HCV before or after surgery/ablation? (ii) Should patients with HCC on the waiting list receive DAA before or after liver transplantation? (iii) Should we use interferon-free in patients with intermediate stage HCC or in patients under systemic treatments? In this review, we aim to offer some evidence-based answers to these changing clinical dilemmas where possible, or at least some educated guesses in cases were no or little data exists.

Model for liver hardness using two-dimensional shear wave elastography, durometer, and preoperative biomarkers

BACKGROUND

Post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) increases morbidity and mortality after liver resection for patients with advanced liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. Preoperative liver stiffness using two-dimensional shear wave elastography (2D-SWE) is widely used to evaluate the degree of fibrosis. However, the 2D-SWE results were not accurate. A durometer measures hardness by quantifying the ability of a material to locally resist the intrusion of hard objects into its surface. However, the durometer score can only be obtained during surgery.

AIM

To measure correlations among 2D-SWE, palpation by surgeons, and durometer-measured objective liver hardness and to construct a liver hardness regression model.

METHODS

We enrolled 74 hepatectomy patients with liver hardness in a derivation cohort. Tactile-based liver hardness scores (0-100) were determined through palpation of the liver tissue by surgeons. Additionally, liver hardness was measured using a durometer. Correlation coefficients for durometer-measured hardness and preoperative parameters were calculated. Multiple linear regression models were constructed to select the best predictive durometer scale. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and univariate and multivariate analyses were used to calculate the best model’s prediction of PHLF and risk factors for PHLF, respectively. A separate validation cohort (n = 162) was used to evaluate the model.

RESULTS

The stiffness measured using 2D-SWE and palpation scale had good linear correlation with durometer-measured hardness (Pearson rank correlation coefficient 0.704 and 0.729, respectively, P < 0.001). The best model for the durometer scale (hardness scale model) was based on stiffness, hepatitis B virus surface antigen, and albumin level and had an R² value of 0.580. The area under the ROC for the durometer and hardness scale for PHLF prediction were 0.807 (P = 0.002) and 0.785 (P = 0.005), respectively. The optimal cutoff value of the durometer and hardness scale was 27.38 (sensitivity = 0.900, specificity = 0.660) and 27.87 (sensitivity = 0.700, specificity = 0.787), respectively. Patients with a hardness scale score of > 27.87 were at a significantly higher risk of PHLF with hazard ratios of 7.835 (P = 0.015). The model’s PHLF predictive ability was confirmed in the validation cohort.

CONCLUSION

Liver stiffness assessed by 2D-SWE and palpation correlated well with durometer hardness values. The multiple linear regression model predicted durometer hardness values and PHLF.

Noninvasive Diagnostics for Portal Hypertension: A Comprehensive Review

Noninvasive diagnostics for portal hypertension include imaging and functional tests, as well as blood-based biomarkers, and capture different features of the portal hypertensive syndrome. Definitive conclusions regarding their clinical utility require assessment of their diagnostic value in specific clinical settings (i.e., diagnosing a particular hemodynamic condition within a well-defined target population). Several noninvasive methods are predictive of clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH; hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] ≥ 10 mm Hg; the threshold for complications of portal hypertension); however, only a minority of them have been evaluated in compensated advanced chronic liver disease (i.e., the target population). Importantly, most methods correlate only weakly with HVPG at high values (i.e., in patients with CSPH). Nevertheless, selected methods show promise for diagnosing HVPG ≥ 16 mm Hg (the cut-off for increased risks of hepatic decompensation and mortality) and monitoring HVPG changes in response to nonselective beta-blockers or etiological treatments. Finally, we review established and potential future clinical applications of noninvasive methods.

Spleen volumetry and liver transient elastography: Predictors of persistent posthepatectomy decompensation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Posthepatectomy decompensation remains a frequent and poor outcome after hepatectomy, but its prediction is still inaccurate. Liver stiffness measurement can predict posthepatectomy decompensation, but there is a so-called "gray zone" that requires another predictor. Because splenomegaly is an objective sign of portal hypertension, we hypothesized that spleen volumetry could improve the identification of patients at risk.

METHODS

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent hepatectomy in our tertiary center between August 2014 and December 2017 were reviewed. The primary endpoint was to determine if the spleen volumetry and liver stiffness measurement were independent predictors of posthepatectomy decompensation, and secondarily, to determine if they were synergistic through a theoretic predictive model.

RESULTS

One hundred and seven patients were included. The median follow-up time was 3 months (3-5). Postoperative 90-day mortality was 4.7%. By multivariate analysis, liver stiffness measurement and spleen volumetry predicted posthepatectomy decompensation. The liver stiffness measurement had a cutoff point of 11.6 kPa (area under receiver operating curve = 0.71 confidence interval 95% 0.71-0.88, sensitivity: 89%, specificity: 47%). The spleen volumetry cutoff point was 381.1 cm³ (area under receiver operating curve = 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.93, sensitivity: 55%, specificity: 91%). The spleen volumetry improved prediction of posthepatectomy decompensation, because use of the spleen volumetry increased sensitivity (from 62% to 97%) and the negative predictive value (from 96% to 100%) along with a negligible decrease in specificity (from 96.7 to 93.4) and positive predictive value (from 64% to 59%) (P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Spleen volumetry (>380 cm³) and liver stiffness measurement (>12 kPa) are non-invasive, independent, and synergistic tools that appear to be able to predict posthepatectomy decompensation. The importance of this finding is that these measurements may help to anticipate posthepatectomy decompensation and may possibly be used to direct alternative treatments to resection.