Study protocol of the HYPER-LIV01 trial: a multicenter phase II, prospective and randomized study comparing simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization to portal vein embolization for hypertrophy of the future liver remnant before major hepatectomy for colo-rectal liver metastases

Postoperative hepatic insufficiency despite preoperative portal vein embolization: Not just about the volumetrics

BACKGROUND

Future liver remnant hypertrophy is the primary endpoint of portal vein embolization before major hepatectomy. However, even when adequate future liver remnant is achieved, postoperative hepatic insufficiency is not universally averted. We aimed to identify preoperative risk factors of postoperative hepatic insufficiency despite the use of portal vein embolization.

METHODS

Patients who underwent portal vein embolization followed by major hepatectomy at 6 academic medical centers were retrospectively reviewed. Postoperative hepatic insufficiency was defined as postoperative peak bilirubin >7 mg/dL. Preoperative variables associated with postoperative hepatic insufficiency were analyzed.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2019, 164 patients underwent portal vein embolization followed by major hepatectomy. Twenty (12%) patients developed postoperative hepatic insufficiency. On univariate analysis, postoperative hepatic insufficiency was associated with older age, performance status, preoperative biliary drainage, smaller pre- and post-portal vein embolization future liver remnant volumes, diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma/gallbladder cancer, and preoperative cholangitis. There was significant future liver remnant hypertrophy noted even in the setting of postoperative hepatic insufficiency (from 27% to 39%); however, degree of hypertrophy >5% (100% vs 93%, P = .6) and kinetic growth rate >2%/week (95% vs 82%, P = .3) did not differ between the postoperative hepatic insufficiency and non-postoperative hepatic insufficiency groups. On multivariate analysis, the diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma/gallbladder cancer and preoperative cholangitis (postoperative hepatic insufficiency incidence 34% and 62%, respectively), but not future liver remnant volumetrics, were independently associated with postoperative hepatic insufficiency. Postoperative hepatic insufficiency raised post-hepatectomy 90-day mortality from 3.5% to 45% and hospitalization from 7 days to 16 days (both P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative hepatic insufficiency still occurs in 12% of patients after major hepatectomy despite preoperative portal vein embolization. In addition to traditional volumetric information, surgeons should be aware of preoperative cholangitis and cholangiocarcinoma/gallbladder cancer as powerful predictors of this fatal complication.

Combined Portal and Hepatic Vein Embolization Produces Greater Hypertrophy than Portal Vein Embolization Alone with Similar Post-Hepatectomy Outcomes and is not Impacted by Hepatic Artery Infusion Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Combined portal and hepatic vein embolization (cPVE-HVE) induces hypertrophy of future liver remnant before hepatectomy. We compared liver hypertrophy and post-hepatectomy outcomes between cPVE-HVE and portal vein embolization (PVE) alone.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patient outcomes after cPVE-HVE and PVE were compared across all pathologies for degree of hypertrophy (DH), kinetic growth rate (KGR), impact of hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), and post-hepatectomy complications at a single center.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 305 patients, 250 underwent PVE and 55 underwent cPVE-HVE. Pre-embolization future liver remnant (FLR) was 28% versus 32% (p < 0.001) for cPVE-HVE and PVE. Post-embolization DH (11.3% versus 9.4%; p = 0.001) and KGR (3.33% versus 2.29%; p < 0.001) were significantly greater for cPVE-HVE over shorter interval (22 versus 28 days; p = 0.007). HAIC was used in 42% (n = 23) of patients before cPVE-HVE and did not impact hypertrophy. Post-hepatectomy outcomes were similar between cPVE-HVE (n = 38) and PVE (n = 250) cohorts. Rates of transfusion (39% versus 40%; p > 0.9), liver failure (7.9% versus 9.2%, p = 0.6), grade 3-5 complications (42% versus 42%, p > 0.9), 90 day all-cause mortality (5.3% versus 3.6%, p = 0.6), and median hospitalization (7 versus 8 days; p = 0.067) were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

cPVE-HVE was associated with greater hypertrophy than PVE alone, with similar post-hepatectomy outcomes. cPVE-HVE after HAIC was safe with similar hypertrophy. Randomized clinical trial evidence is needed to clearly delineate indication for cPVE-HVE and assess postoperative outcomes.

Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Liver Venous Deprivation and Portal Vein Embolization Before Planned Hepatectomy in Patients with Extensive Colorectal Liver Metastases and High-Risk Factors for Inadequate Regeneration

BACKGROUND

Liver venous deprivation (LVD) is known to induce better future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy than portal vein embolization (PVE). The role of LVD, compared with PVE, in inducing FLR hypertrophy and allowing safe hepatectomy for patients with extensive colorectal liver metastases (CLM) and high-risk factors for inadequate hypertrophy remains unclear.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LVD (n = 22) were matched to patients undergoing PVE (n = 279) in a 1:3 ratio based on propensity scores, prior to planned hepatectomy for CLM at a single center (1998-2023). The propensity scores accounted for high-risk factors for inadequate hypertrophy, namely pre-procedure standardized FLR (sFLR), body mass index, number of systemic therapy cycles, an extension of PVE to segment IV portal vein branches, prior resection, and chemotherapy-associated liver injury.

RESULTS

The matched cohort included 78 patients (LVD, n = 22; PVE, n = 56). Baseline characteristics were comparable. The number of tumors in the whole liver was similar but more LVD patients had five or more tumors in the left liver (32% vs. 11%; p = 0.024). Post-procedure sFLR was similar but LVD patients had a significantly higher degree of hypertrophy (16% vs. 11%; p = 0.017) and kinetic growth rate (3.9 vs. 2.4% per week; p = 0.006). More LVD patients underwent extended right hepatectomy (93% vs. 55%; p = 0.008). Only one patient had postoperative hepatic insufficiency after PVE, and no patients died within 90 days of hepatectomy.

CONCLUSION

In patients with extensive CLM and high-risk factors, LVD is associated with better FLR hypertrophy compared with PVE and allows for safely performing curative-intent extended major hepatectomy.

Molecular mechanisms in liver repair and regeneration: from physiology to therapeutics

Liver repair and regeneration are crucial physiological responses to hepatic injury and are orchestrated through intricate cellular and molecular networks. This review systematically delineates advancements in the field, emphasizing the essential roles played by diverse liver cell types. Their coordinated actions, supported by complex crosstalk within the liver microenvironment, are pivotal to enhancing regenerative outcomes. Recent molecular investigations have elucidated key signaling pathways involved in liver injury and regeneration. Viewed through the lens of metabolic reprogramming, these pathways highlight how shifts in glucose, lipid, and amino acid metabolism support the cellular functions essential for liver repair and regeneration. An analysis of regenerative variability across pathological states reveals how disease conditions influence these dynamics, guiding the development of novel therapeutic strategies and advanced techniques to enhance liver repair and regeneration. Bridging laboratory findings with practical applications, recent clinical trials highlight the potential of optimizing liver regeneration strategies. These trials offer valuable insights into the effectiveness of novel therapies and underscore significant progress in translational research. In conclusion, this review intricately links molecular insights to therapeutic frontiers, systematically charting the trajectory from fundamental physiological mechanisms to innovative clinical applications in liver repair and regeneration.

Liver venous deprivation (LVD) before extended hepatectomy: a French multicentric retrospective cohort

Background

Post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) is the first cause of death after major hepatectomy, and future liver remnant (FLR) volume is the main factor predicting PHLF. Liver venous deprivation (LVD) via portal and hepatic vein embolization has been suggested to induce a better hypertrophy of the FLR than portal vein embolization. The aim of this retrospective multicentric study was to assess safety, feasibility and efficacity of LVD in a French national multicentric register.

Methods

Between 2016 and 2023, LVD was performed in 7 expert centers, for patients with liver malignancies requiring major hepatectomy with an FLR percentage of total liver volume (FLR%) ≤25% for a healthy liver or <30% for a diseased liver. FLR volumetry was assessed before and 4 weeks after the procedure.

Results

One hundred and ninety-two patients were included in the study. The technical success rate was 100% and severe complication rate post-LVD was 2.6% (5/192). The FLR% increased by 61.7% over an average of 27±9.7 days. Major hepatectomy was performed 40 days after LVD on 161 (83.8%) patients. Hepatectomy was not performed on 31 (16.2%) patients, mostly because of oncological progression. Severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIA) occurred in 21.1% (34/161) of patients. Postoperative mortality rate was 4.3% (7/161).

Conclusions

This study is the largest to confirm that LVD is a safe, reproducible, efficient technique that induces rapid major FLR growth. However, this new technique needs to be standardized and harmonized between centers to ensure uniform results.

Comprehensive Review of Future Liver Remnant (FLR) Assessment and Hypertrophy Techniques Before Major Hepatectomy: How to Assess and Manage the FLR

BACKGROUND

The regenerative capacities of the liver and improvements in surgical techniques have expanded the possibilities of resectability. Liver resection is often the only curative treatment for primary and secondary malignancies, despite the risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). This serious complication (with a 50% mortality rate) can be avoided by better assessment of liver volume and function of the future liver remnant (FLR).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to understand and assess clinical, biological, and imaging predictors of PHLF risk, as well as the various hypertrophy techniques, to achieve an adequate FLR before hepatectomy.

METHOD

We reviewed the state of the art in liver regeneration and FLR hypertrophy techniques.

RESULTS

The use of new biological scores (such as the aspartate aminotransferase/platelet ratio index + albumin-bilirubin [APRI+ALBI] score), concurrent utilization of 99mTc-mebrofenin scintigraphy (HBS), or dynamic hepatocyte contrast-enhanced MRI (DHCE-MRI) for liver volumetry helps predict the risk of PHLF. Besides portal vein embolization, there are other FLR optimization techniques that have their indications in case of risk of failure (e.g., associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy, liver venous deprivation) or in specific situations (transarterial radioembolization).

CONCLUSION

There is a need to standardize volumetry and function measurement techniques, as well as FLR hypertrophy techniques, to limit the risk of PHLF.

Preoperative imaging of colorectal liver metastases: what the radiologist and the multidisciplinary team need to know

The management of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) has transformed over the past 2 decades. Advances in surgical techniques, systemic therapies, and local treatments have resulted in a paradigm shift. Disease that would once have been considered terminal is now frequently treated aggressively with both a disease-free and overall survival benefit. In line with the expanding range of treatment options, there has been an increase in the volume and complexity of imaging required in the management of these patients to ensure optimal patient selection and outcome. The radiologist plays a pivotal role in interpreting these studies, conveying the relevant information and informing the discussion at multidisciplinary team meetings. The purpose of this review is to provide an update for radiologists on the current surgical management of patients with CRLM highlighting specific imaging information that is required by the multidisciplinary team when assessing resectability and/or the need for additional liver-directed therapies.

Transfemoral hepatic vein access in double vein embolization - initial experience and feasibility

BACKGROUND

Hepatic vein embolization in double vein embolization (DVE) can be performed with transhepatic, transjugular or transfemoral access. This study evaluates the feasibility and technical success of using a transfemoral access for the hepatic vein embolization in patients undergoing preoperative to induce hypertrophy of the future liver remnant (FLR).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of single center cohort including 17 consecutive patients. The baseline standardized FLR was 18.2% (range 14.7-24.9). Portal vein embolization was performed with vascular plugs and glue through an ipsilateral transhepatic access. Hepatic vein embolization was performed using vascular plugs. Access for the hepatic vein was either transhepatic, transjugular or transfemoral. Technical success, number of hepatic veins embolized and complications were registered. In addition, volumetric data including degree of hypertrophy (DH) and kinetic growth rate (KGR), and resection data were registered. R: Seven of the 17 patients had transfemoral hepatic vein embolization, with 100% technical success. No severe complications were registered. In the whole cohort, the median number of hepatic veins embolized was 2 (1-6). DH was 8.6% (3.0-19.4) and KGR was 3.6%/week (1.4-7.4), without significant differences between the patients having transfemoral versus transhepatic /transjugular access (p = 0.48 and 0.54 respectively). Time from DVE to surgery was median 4.8 weeks (2.6-33.9) for the whole cohort, with one patient declining surgery, two having explorative laparotomy and one patient having change of surgical strategy due to insufficient growth.

CONCLUSION

Transfemoral access is a feasible option with a high degree of technical success for hepatic vein embolization in patients with small future liver remnants needing DVE.

CIRSE Standards of Practice on Portal Vein Embolization and Double Vein Embolization/Liver Venous Deprivation

This CIRSE Standards of Practice document is aimed at interventional radiologists and provides best practices for performing liver regeneration therapies prior to major hepatectomies, including portal vein embolization, double vein embolization and liver venous deprivation. It has been developed by an expert writing group under the guidance of the CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee. It encompasses all clinical and technical details required to perform liver regeneration therapies, revising the indications, contra-indications, outcome measures assessed, technique and expected outcomes.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The Role of Surgery in Liver Cirrhosis

Background

Liver surgery is an essential component of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment. Advances in surgical techniques and perioperative care have improved outcomes and have helped to expand surgical indications. However, liver fibrosis and cirrhosis still remain major problems for liver surgery due to the relevant impact on liver regeneration of the future liver remnant (FLR) after surgery. Especially in patients with clinically significant portal hypertension due to liver cirrhosis, surgery is limited. Despite recent efforts in developing predictive models, estimating the postoperative hepatic function remains difficult.

Summary

In this review, we focus on the role of surgery in the treatment of HCC in structurally altered livers. The importance of assessing FLR with techniques such as contrast-enhanced CT, e.g., with the help of artificial intelligence is highlighted. Moreover, strategies for increasing the FLR with approaches like portal vein embolization and liver vein deprivation prior to surgery are discussed. Patient selection, minimally invasive liver surgery including robotic techniques, and perioperative concepts like the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines are identified as crucial parts of avoiding posthepatectomy liver failure.

Key Message

The need for ongoing research to optimize patient selection criteria and perioperative care and to develop innovative biomarkers for outcome prediction is emphasized.

Assessing regional hepatic function changes after hypertrophy induction by radioembolisation: comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI and 99mTc-mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy

BACKGROUND

To compare Gd-ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 99mTc-labelled mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS) as imaging-based liver function tests after unilateral radioembolisation (RE) in patients with primary or secondary liver malignancies.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients with primary or secondary liver malignancies who underwent Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI within a prospective study (REVoluTion) were evaluated. REVoluTion was a prospective open-label, non-randomised, therapy-optimising study of patients undergoing right-sided or sequential RE for contralateral liver hypertrophy at a single centre in Germany. MRI and hepatobiliary scintigraphy were performed before RE (baseline) and 6 weeks after (follow-up). This exploratory subanalysis compared liver enhancement on hepatobiliary phase MRI normalised to the spleen (liver-to-spleen ratio (LSR)) and the muscle (liver-to-muscle ratio (LMR)) with mebrofenin uptake on HBS for the total liver (TL) and separately for the right (RLL) and left liver lobe (LLL).

RESULTS

Mebrofenin uptake at baseline and follow-up each correlated significantly with LSR and LMR on MRI for TL (≤ 0.013) and RLL (≤ 0.049). Regarding the LLL, mebrofenin uptake correlated significantly with LMR (baseline, p = 0.013; follow-up, p = 0.004), whereas with LSR, a borderline significant correlation was only seen at follow-up (p = 0.051; p = 0.046).

CONCLUSION

LSRs and LMR correlate with mebrofenin uptake in HBS. This study indicates that Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI and 99mTc-labelled mebrofenin HBS may equally be used to assess an increase in contralateral liver lobe function after right-sided RE.

RELEVANCE STATEMENT

MRI may be a convenient and reliable method for assessing the future liver remnant facilitating treatment planning and monitoring of patients after RE-induced hypertrophy induction.

KEY POINTS

• Both MRI and HBS can assess liver function after RE. • Liver enhancement on MRI correlates with mebrofenin uptake on HBS. • MRI might be a convenient alternative for estimating future liver remnants after hypertrophy induction.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of liver venous deprivation versus portal vein embolization before hepatectomy: future liver volume, postoperative outcomes, and oncological safety

Introduction

This systematic review aimed to compare liver venous deprivation (LVD) with portal vein embolization (PVE) in terms of future liver volume, postoperative outcomes, and oncological safety before major hepatectomy.

Methods

We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines 2020 and AMSTAR 2 guidelines. Comparative articles published before November 2022 were retained.

Results

The literature search identified nine eligible comparative studies. They included 557 patients, 207 in the LVD group and 350 in the PVE group. This systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that LVD was associated with higher future liver remnant (FLR) volume after embolization, percentage of FLR hypertrophy, lower failure of resection due to low FLR, faster kinetic growth, higher day 5 prothrombin time, and higher 3 years' disease-free survival. This study did not find any difference between the LVD and PVE groups in terms of complications related to embolization, FLR percentage of hypertrophy after embolization, failure of resection, 3-month mortality, overall morbidity, major complications, operative time, blood loss, bile leak, ascites, post hepatectomy liver failure, day 5 bilirubin level, hospital stay, and three years' overall survival.

Conclusion

LVD is as feasible and safe as PVE with encouraging results making some selected patients more suitable for surgery, even with a small FLR.

Systematic review registration

The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO before conducting the study (CRD42021287628).

Factors of oncological failure in two stage hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) has increased the chance of surgical resections for bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Nevertheless, drop-out between stages and early recurrence rates raise the question of surgical futility in some situations. This study aimed to identify factors of TSH oncological failure.

METHODS

Patients with bilobar CRLM eligible for TSH in three tertiary centers between 2010 and 2021 were included, and divided in Failure and Success groups. Oncological failure was defined as failure of the second stage hepatectomy for tumor progression or recurrence within 6 months after resection.

RESULTS

Among 95 patients, 18 (18.9%) had hepatic progression between the two stages, and 7 (7.4%) failed to complete the second stage hepatectomy. After TSH, 31 (32.6%) patients experienced early recurrence. Overall, 38 (40.0%) patients experienced oncological failure (Failure group). The Failure group had lower median DFS (3 vs. 32 months, p < 0.001) and median OS (29 vs. 70 months, p = 0.045) than the Success group. On multivariable analysis, progression between the two stages in the future liver remnant (OR = 15.0 (3.22-113.0), p = 0.002), and maximal tumor size ≥40 mm in the future liver remnant (OR = 13.1 (2.12-117.0), p = 0.009) were independent factors of oncological failure.

CONCLUSION

Recurrence between the two stages and maximal tumor size ≥40 mm in the future liver remnant were associated with TSH failure for patients with bilobar CRLM.

Right portal vein ligation is still relevant for left hemi-liver hypertrophy: results of a comparative study using a propensity score between right portal vein ligation and embolization

BACKGROUND

In two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar liver metastases from colorectal cancer, future liver remnant (FLR) growth can be achieved using several techniques, such as right portal vein ligation (RPVL) or right portal vein embolization (RPVE). A few heterogeneous studies have compared these two techniques with contradictory results concerning FLR growth. The objective of this study was to compare FLR hypertrophy of the left hemi-liver after RPVL and RPVE.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective comparative study using a propensity score of patients who underwent RPVL or RPVE prior to major hepatectomy between January 2010 and December 2020. The endpoints were FLR growth (%) after weighting using the propensity score, which included FLR prior to surgery and the number of chemotherapy cycles. Secondary endpoints were the percentage of patients undergoing simultaneous procedures, the morbidity and mortality, the recourse to other liver hypertrophy procedures, and the number of invasive procedures for the entire oncologic program in intention-to-treat analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty-four consecutive patients were retrospectively included and analyzed, 18 in the RPVL group, and 36 in the RPVE group. The demographic characteristics were similar between the groups. After weighting, there was no significant difference between the RPVL and RPVE groups for FLR growth (%), respectively 32.5% [19.3-56.0%] and 34.5% [20.5-47.3%] (p = 0.221). There was no significant difference regarding the secondary outcomes except for the lower number of invasive procedures in RPVL group (median of 2 [2.0, 3.0] in RPVL group and 3 [3.0, 3.0] in RPVE group, p = 0.001)).

CONCLUSION

RPVL and RPVE are both effective to provide required left hemi-liver hypertrophy before right hepatectomy. RPVL should be considered for the simultaneous treatment of liver metastases and the primary tumor.

Single-Center Retrospective Study Comparing Double Vein Embolization via a Trans-Jugular Approach with Liver Venous Deprivation via a Trans-Hepatic Approach

PURPOSE

To compare safety, technical and clinical outcomes of double vein embolization (DVE) via a trans-jugular approach with liver venous deprivation (LVD) via a trans-hepatic approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing simultaneous portal and hepatic veins embolization in view of a major hepatectomy (June 2019-November 2022). Hepatic vein embolization was performed either by transjugular plug (DVE) or by transhepatic plug followed by glue injection (LVD). Inclusion criteria were availability of pre-procedural CT scan, and availability of CT scans acquired 10 days and 25 days post-procedure. Comparative data included complication rate, fluoroscopy time, dose area product (DAP), Future Liver Remnant volume and function increase (FLR-V and FLR-F increase, respectively) and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients (n = 14 DVE; n = 22 LVD) were included. No baseline significant differences were observed among the two groups. One grade-3 complication (2.8%) was observed in the LVD group; one case of technical failure (2.8%) was observed in the DVE group. Fluoroscopy time and DAP were similar between DVE and LVD (29 ± 17.7 vs. 25 ± 8.2 min, p = 0.97; 105.1 ± 63.5 vs. 143.4 ± 79.5 Gy·cm2, p = 0.15). No differences arose at either time-point in FLR-V increase (46.7 ± 23.1% vs. 48.2 ± 28.2%, 52.9 ± 30.9% vs. 53.2 ± 29%, respectively, p = 0.9). FLR-F increase also did not differ significantly (62.8 ± 55.2 vs. 67.4 ± 57.5, p = 0.9). No differences in drop-out rate from surgery were observed. (28.6% vs. 27.3%, p = 0.93). One case of grade-B post-hepatectomy liver failure (2.8%) was observed in the LVD group.

CONCLUSION

LVD via transhepatic approach and DVE via transjugular approach seem equally safe and effective. Level of Evidence Level 3, Retrospective Cohort Study.

Essential updates 2021/2022: Update in surgical strategy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

Resection is the only potential curative treatment for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC); however, complete resection is often technically challenging due to the anatomical location. Various innovative approaches and procedures were invented to circumvent this limitation but the rates of postoperative morbidity (20%-78%) and mortality (2%-15%) are still high. In patients diagnosed with resectable PHC, deliberate and coordinated preoperative workup and optimization of the patient and future liver remnant are crucial. Biliary drainage is recommended to relieve obstructive jaundice and optimize the clinical condition before liver resection. Biliary drainage for PHC can be performed either by endoscopic biliary drainage or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. To date there is no consensus about which method is preferred. The volumetric assessment of the future remnant liver volume and optimization mainly using portal vein embolization is the gold standard in the management of the risk to develop post hepatectomy liver failure. The improvement of systemic chemotherapy has contributed to prolong the survival not only in patients with unresectable PHC but also in patients undergoing curative surgery. In this article, we review the literature and discuss the current surgical treatment of PHC.

Current status and perspectives in the surgical and oncological management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is the second most common primary liver tumor after hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Management depends on their resectability at the time of diagnosis. Two types can be distinguished by imaging: resectable ICCs amenable to surgery and locally advanced and/or metastatic ICCs, that are treated by chemotherapy, radiotherapy or loco-regional treatment (radioembolization, chemoembolization, intra-arterial chemotherapy and thermoablation). Over the last decade, the management strategy for these tumors has been modified by the appearance of loco-regional treatments as well as the introduction of immunotherapy that have shown their efficacy in the control of ICC. The aim of this review is to describe the current status of treatments for ICCs, as well as the different therapeutic strategies being assessed.

A prospective study of sequential hepatic vein embolization after portal vein embolization in patients scheduled for right-sided major hepatectomy: Results of feasibility and surgical strategy using functional liver assessment

BACKGROUND

Hepatic vein embolization (HVE) added to portal vein embolization (PVE) can further increase future remnant liver volume (FRLV) compared with PVE alone. This study was aimed to evaluate feasibility of sequential HVE in a prospective trial and to verify surgical strategy using functional FRLV (fFRLV).

METHODS

Hepatic vein embolization was prospectively indicated for post-PVE patients scheduled for right-sided major hepatectomy if the resection limit of fFRLV using EOB-magnetic resonance imaging was not satisfied. The resection limit was fFRLV: 615 mL/m² for predicting post-hepatectomy liver failure. Patients who underwent sequential PVE-HVE (n = 12) were compared with those who underwent PVE alone (n = 31).

RESULTS

All patients underwent HVE with no severe complications. Median fFRLV increased from 396 (range: 251-581) to 634 (range: 422-740) mL/m² by sequential PVE-HVE. From PVE to HVE, both of FRLV (P < .001) and fFRLV (P = .005) significantly increased. The increased width of fFRLV was larger than that of FRLV after performing HVE. Median growth rate was 71.3 (range: 33.3-80.3) %, which was higher than that of PVE alone (27.0%, range: 6.0-78.0). All-cohort resection rate was 88.3%. Strategy of using fFRLV for the resection limit and performing HVE in patients with insufficient functional volume resulted in no liver failure in all patients who underwent hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential HVE after PVE is feasible and safe, and HVE induced possibility of further liver growth and its functional improvement. Our surgical strategy using fFRLV may be justified.

Surgical Aspects of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is a rare and aggressive malignancy. It originates from the bile ducts and is the second most common primary cancer of the liver. Surgery is considered the only curative treatment of ICC, offering the best chance for long-term survival. The purpose of this article is to review the available literature on ICC, with a focus on the various aspects of the surgical care in this potentially lethal malignancy.

Locoregional Therapy in the Management of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Is There Sufficient Evidence to Guide Current Clinical Practice?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) carries a dismal prognosis and, despite increasing incidence, still lacks effective treatments. In this scenario, locoregional therapies (LRT) are gaining interest as they may be effective at local tumor control and complementary to surgical and non-surgical approaches. In this article, we will review the evolving role of LRT performed by interventional radiologists in the management of iCCA.

RECENT FINDINGS

Accumulating retrospective evidence indicates that ablative therapies and transarterial embolizations are of benefit for iCCA with unresectable disease, demonstrating promising safety profiles and prolonged or comparable survival outcomes compared to systemic therapy and surgery. Additionally, for surgical candidates, portal ± hepatic venous embolization can improve the safety of hepatectomy by inducing preoperative hypertrophy of the non-involved liver lobe. LRTs are playing an increasingly important role in the multimodal treatment of iCCA from various perspectives with reduced toxicity relative to traditional treatments. To expand the scope of applications for LRTs in this setting, future prospective randomized studies are needed to confirm their efficacy and advantage.

Volume and flow modulation strategies to mitigate post-hepatectomy liver failure

INTRODUCTION

Post hepatectomy liver failure is the most common cause of death following major hepatic resections with a perioperative mortality rate between 40% to 60%. Various strategies have been devised to increase the volume and function of future liver remnant (FLR). This study aims to review the strategies used for volume and flow modulation to reduce the incidence of post hepatectomy liver failure.

METHOD

An electronic search was performed of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed databases from 2000 to 2022 using the following search strategy "Post hepatectomy liver failure", "flow modulation", "small for size flow syndrome", "portal vein embolization", "dual vein embolization", "ALPPS" and "staged hepatectomy" to identify all articles published relating to this topic.

RESULTS

Volume and flow modulation strategies have evolved over time to maximize the volume and function of FLR to mitigate the risk of PHLF. Portal vein with or without hepatic vein embolization/ligation, ALPPS, and staged hepatectomy have resulted in significant hypertrophy and kinetic growth of FLR. Similarly, techniques including portal flow diversion, splenic artery ligation, splenectomy and pharmacological agents like somatostatin and terlipressin are employed to reduce the risk of small for size flow syndrome SFSF syndrome by decreasing portal venous flow and increasing hepatic artery flow at the same time.

CONCLUSION

The current review outlines the various strategies of volume and flow modulation that can be used in isolation or combination in the management of patients at risk of PHLF.

Portal vein embolization versus dual vein embolization for management of the future liver remnant in patients undergoing major hepatectomy: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to compare progression to surgery, extent of liver hypertrophy, and postoperative outcomes in patients planned for major hepatectomy following either portal vein embolization (PVE) or dual vein embolization (DVE) for management of an inadequate future liver remnant (FLR).

METHODS

An electronic search was performed of MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed databases using both medical subject headings (MeSH) and truncated word searches. Articles comparing PVE with DVE up to January 2022 were included. Articles comparing sequential DVE were excluded. ORs, risk ratios, and mean difference (MD) were calculated using fixed and random-effects models for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eight retrospective studies including 523 patients were included in the study. Baseline characteristics between the groups, specifically, age, sex, BMI, indication for resection, and baseline FLR (ml and per cent) were comparable. The percentage increase in hypertrophy was larger in the DVE group, 66 per cent in the DVE group versus 27 per cent in the PVE group, MD 39.07 (9.09, 69.05) (P = 0.010). Significantly fewer patients failed to progress to surgery in the DVE group than the PVE group, 13 per cent versus 25 per cent respectively OR 0.53 (0.31, 0.90) (P = 0.020). Rates of post-hepatectomy liver failure 13 per cent versus 22 per cent (P = 0.130) and major complications 20 per cent versus 28 per cent (Clavien-Dindo more than IIIa) (P = 0.280) were lower. Perioperative mortality was lower with DVE, 1 per cent versus 10 per cent (P = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

DVE seems to produce a greater degree of hypertrophy of the FLR than PVE alone which translates into more patients progressing to surgery. Higher quality studies are needed to confirm these results.

Resectability of bilobar liver tumours after simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization versus portal vein embolization alone: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many patients with bi-lobar liver tumours are not eligible for liver resection due to an insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). To reduce the risk of posthepatectomy liver failure and the primary cause of death, regenerative procedures intent to increase the FLR before surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of the available literature and outcomes on the effectiveness of simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization (PVE/HVE) versus portal vein embolization (PVE) alone.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase up to September 2022. The primary outcome was resectability and the secondary outcome was the FLR volume increase.

RESULTS

Eight studies comparing PVE/HVE with PVE and six retrospective PVE/HVE case series were included. Pooled resectability within the comparative studies was 75 per cent in the PVE group (n = 252) versus 87 per cent in the PVE/HVE group (n = 166, OR 1.92 (95% c.i., 1.13-3.25)) favouring PVE/HVE (P = 0.015). After PVE, FLR hypertrophy between 12 per cent and 48 per cent (after a median of 21-30 days) was observed, whereas growth between 36 per cent and 67 per cent was reported after PVE/HVE (after a median of 17-31 days). In the comparative studies, 90-day primary cause of death was similar between groups (2.5 per cent after PVE versus 2.2 per cent after PVE/HVE), but a higher 90-day primary cause of death was reported in single-arm PVE/HVE cohort studies (6.9 per cent, 12 of 175 patients).

CONCLUSION

Based on moderate/weak evidence, PVE/HVE seems to increase resectability of bi-lobar liver tumours with a comparable safety profile. Additionally, PVE/HVE resulted in faster and more pronounced hypertrophy compared with PVE alone.

Transarterial Radioembolization to Impact Liver Volumetry: When and How

Inadequate volume of the future liver remnant (FLR) renders many patients with liver malignancies not amenable to surgical resection. Depending on the health of the liver and the patient in general, an FLR of 25-40% is required to avoid acute post-hepatectomy liver failure. Transarterial radioembolization (TARE) of a diseased liver lobe leads to atrophy of the embolized lobe and compensatory hypertrophy of the contralateral lobe. Although the absolute degree of FLR hypertrophy seems to be comparable to portal vein embolization, the kinetic of hypertrophy is much slower after radioembolization. However, TARE has the unique advantages of simultaneously offering local tumor control, possibly downstaging disease, and providing biological test of time. Progressions in technique and personalized dosimetry allow for more predictable ablative treatment of liver malignancies and preparation for major liver surgery. This article provides an overview of the existing literature, discusses the evidence, and considers possible criteria for patient selection.

Current Perspectives on the Surgical Management of Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) represents nearly 15% of all primary liver cancers and 2% of all cancer-related deaths worldwide. Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) accounts for 50-60% of all CCA. First described in 1965, pCCAs arise between the second-order bile ducts and the insertion of the cystic duct into the common bile duct. CCA typically has an insidious onset and commonly presents with advanced, unresectable disease. Complete surgical resection is technically challenging, as tumor proximity to the structures of the central liver often necessitates an extended hepatectomy to achieve negative margins. Intraoperative frozen section can aid in assuring negative margins and complete resection. Portal lymphadenectomy provides important prognostic and staging information. In specialized centers, vascular resection and reconstruction can be performed to achieve negative margins in appropriately selected patients. In addition, minimally invasive surgical techniques (e.g., robotic surgery) are safe, feasible, and provide equivalent short-term oncologic outcomes. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy followed by liver transplantation provides a potentially curative option for patients with unresectable disease. New trials are needed to investigate novel chemotherapies, immunotherapies, and targeted therapies to better control systemic disease in the adjuvant setting and, potentially, downstage disease in the neoadjuvant setting.

Imaging-guided interventions modulating portal venous flow: evidence and controversies

Portal hypertension is defined by an increase in the portosystemic venous gradient. In most cases, increased resistance to portal blood flow is the initial cause of elevated portal pressure. More than 90% of cases of portal hypertension are estimated to be due to advanced chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, a non-pharmacological treatment for portal hypertension, involve the placement of a stent between the portal vein and the hepatic vein or inferior vena cava which helps bypass hepatic resistance. Portal hypertension may also be a result of extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis or compression. In these cases, percutaneous portal vein recanalisation restores portal trunk patency, thus preventing portal hypertension-related complications. Any portal blood flow impairment leads to progressive parenchymal atrophy and triggers hepatic regeneration in preserved areas. This provides the rationale for using portal vein embolisation to modulate hepatic volume in preparation for extended hepatic resection. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive evidence-based review of the rationale for, and outcomes associated with, the main imaging-guided interventions targeting the portal vein, as well as to discuss the main controversies around such approaches.

To Systematically Evaluate and Analyze the Efficacy and Safety of Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization (TACE) in the Treatment of Primary Liver Cancer

The efficacy and safety of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) are systematically evaluated in the treatment of primary liver cancer, which provides a reference for clinical practice and more in-depth research. Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and WanFang Data, supplemented by other searches, collected all randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing TACE combined with TACE alone for HCC. The meta-analysis, after selecting the literature, extracting data, and evaluating the methodological quality of the included studies following the inclusion criteria, was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. There was statistical difference in 3-year survival rate of TACE combined with heat treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (OR = 1.72,95%CI (1.22,2.41), P=0.002, I2 = 0%, and Z = 3.12), total effective rate (OR = 1.91,95%CI (1.31,2.78), P=0.0008, I2 = 0%, and Z = 3.37), quality-of-life improvement rate (OR = 2.29,95%CI (1.62,3.23), P < 0.00001, I2 = 83%, and Z = 3.37), and complication rate (OR = 2.29,95%CI (1.62,3.23), P < 0.00001, I2 = 83%, and Z = 3.37). Compared with TACE alone, TACE combined with hyperthermia can significantly improve the survival rate and recent efficacy of patients, improve the quality of life, and have a trend to reduce the incidence of toxicity. However, its long-term efficacy and more comprehensive safety need to be verified by more sample and high-quality RCT.

Percutaneous liver venous deprivation: outcomes in heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

To evaluate liver venous deprivation (LVD) outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) heavily pretreated with systemic and hepatic arterial infusion pump (HAIP) chemotherapies that had an anticipated insufficient future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy after portal vein embolization (PVE).

METHODS

PVE was performed with liquid embolics using a transsplenic or ipsilateral transhepatic approach. Simultaneously and via a trans-jugular approach, the right hepatic vein was embolized with vascular plugs. Liver volumetry was assessed on computed tomography before and 3-6 weeks after LVD.

RESULTS

Twelve consecutive CRLM patients that underwent LVD before right hepatectomy or trisectionectomy were included, all previously treated with systemic chemotherapy for a mean of 11.9 months. Six patients had additional HAIP. After embolization, FLR ratio increased from 28.7% ± 5.9 to 42.2% ± 9.0 (P < 0.01). Mean kinetic growth rate (KGR) was 3.56%/week ± 2.3, with a degree of hypertrophy (DH) of 13.8% ± 7.1. In the HAIP subgroup, mean KGR and DH were respectively 3.58%/week ± 2.8 and 14.3% ± 8.7. No severe complications occurred. Ten patients reached surgery after 39 days ± 7.5.

CONCLUSION

In heavily pretreated patients, LVD safely stimulated a rapid and effective FLR hypertrophy, with a resultant high rate of resection.

Treatment of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma-A Multidisciplinary Approach

Simple Summary

This review discusses multimodality treatment strategies for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC). Surgical resection remains the only potentially curative therapeutic option and the central cornerstone of treatment. Adjuvant systemic treatment will be recommended after resection or in the palliative setting. Increasing knowledge of phenotypic subclassification and molecular profiling allows investigation of targeted therapies as (neo-)adjuvant treatment. High-dose brachytherapy, internal radiation therapy, and transarterial chemoembolization are among the interventional treatment options being evaluated for unresectable iCC. Given the multiple options of multidisciplinary management, any treatment strategy should be discussed in a multidisciplinary tumor board and treatment should be directed by a specialized treatment center.

Abstract

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC) is distinguished as an entity from perihilar and distal cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma. Recently, molecular profiling and histopathological features have allowed further classification. Due to the frequent delay in diagnosis, the prognosis for iCC remains poor despite major technical advances and multimodal therapeutic approaches. Liver resection represents the therapeutic backbone and only curative treatment option, with the functional residual capacity of the liver and oncologic radicality being deciding factors for postoperative and long-term oncological outcome. Furthermore, in selected cases and depending on national guidelines, liver transplantation may be a therapeutic option. Given the often advanced tumor stage at diagnosis or the potential for postoperative recurrence, locoregional therapies have become increasingly important. These strategies range from radiofrequency ablation to transarterial chemoembolization to selective internal radiation therapy and can be used in combination with liver resection. In addition, adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapies as well as targeted therapies and immunotherapies based on molecular profiles can be applied. This review discusses multimodal treatment strategies for iCC and their differential use.

Induction of Robust Future Liver Remnant Hypertrophy Before Hepatectomy With a Modified Liver Venous Deprivation Technique Using a Trans-venous Access for Hepatic Vein Embolization

Purpose: Hepatic and/or portal vein embolization are performed before hepatectomy for patients with insufficient future liver remnant and usually achieved with a trans-hepatic approach. The aim of the present study is to describe a modified trans-venous liver venous deprivation technique (mLVD), avoiding the potential risks and limitations of a percutaneous approach to hepatic vein embolization, and to assess the safety, efficacy, and surgical outcome after mLVD. Materials and Methods: Retrospective single-center institutional review board-approved study. From March 2016 to June 2019, consecutive oncologic patients with combined portal and hepatic vein embolization were included. CT volumetric analysis was performed before and after mLVD to assess liver hypertrophy. Complications related to mLVD and surgical outcome were obtained from medical records. Results: Thirty patients (62.7 ± 14.5 years old, 20 men) with liver metastasis (60%) or primary liver cancer (40%) underwent mLVD. Twenty-one patients (70%) had hepatic vein anatomic variants. Technical success of mLVD was 100%. Four patients had complications (three minor and one major). FLR hypertrophy was 64.2% ± 51.3% (mean ± SD). Twenty-four patients (80%) underwent the planned hepatectomy and no surgery was canceled as a consequence of mLVD complications or insufficient hypertrophy. Fifty percent of patients (12/24) had no or mild complications after surgery (Clavien-Dindo 0-II), and 45.8% (11/24) had more serious complications (Clavien-Dindo III-IV). Thirty-day mortality was 4.2% (1/24). Conclusion: mLVD is an effective method to induce FLR hypertrophy. This technique is applicable in a wide range of oncologic situations and in patients with complex right liver vein anatomy.

Social Media for the Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary community (#SoMe4HPB): connecting a specialized online group for scientific and clinical knowledge dissemination

BACKGROUND

Social media has an increasingly important role in scientific communication, clinical discussions and knowledge distribution. While several surgical disciplines have taken to internet for increased connectivity, there is currently little knowledge about the social media activity in the field of hepatopancreatobiliary surgery. We aimed to evaluate the implementation and use of a specific HPB hashtag and Twitter handle.

METHODS

The hashtag and Twitter handle (#SoMe4HPB; @hpb_so) were initiated on February 2019. We evaluated the response during the initial 15 months by applying NodeXL to trace activity.

RESULTS

The Twitter handle had 1388 followers (by May 7, 2020) and had generated 855 tweets and retweets. A total of 1120 mentions of 182 accounts were recorded in original tweets by @hpb_so. The largest global reach was recorded in December 2019 (254.000 people). Pancreatic cancer was the subject of 15% of all posts, liver malignancies of 12% of all posts and minimally invasive surgery of 8%.

CONCLUSION

The Social Media for the Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary community (#SoMe4HPB) and its associated Twitter handle @hpb_so had a well-built inception followed by a progressive development connecting individuals interested in HPB Surgery internationally. The involvement of more actors is required in order to fully attain its scientific dissemination role.

The evolution of surgery for colorectal liver metastases: A persistent challenge to improve survival

Only a few decades ago, the opinion that colorectal liver metastases were a palliative diagnosis changed. In fact, previously, the prevailing view was strongly resistant against resecting colorectal liver metastases. Constant technical improvement of liver surgery and, much later, effective chemotherapy allowed for a successful wider application of surgery. The clinical use of portal vein embolization was the starting signal of regenerative liver surgery, where insufficient liver volume can be expanded to an extent where safe resection is possible. Today, a number of these techniques including portal vein ligation, associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy, and bi-embolization (portal and hepatic vein) can be successfully used to address an insufficient future liver remnant in staged resections. It turned out that the road to success is embedding surgery in a well-orchestrated oncological concept of controlling systemic disease. This concept was the prerequisite that meant liver transplantation could enter the treatment strategy for colorectal liver metastases, ending up with a 5-year overall survival of 80% in highly selected cases. In particular, techniques combining principles of 2-stage hepatectomy and liver transplantation, such as "resection and partial liver segment 2-3 transplantation with delayed total hepatectomy" (RAPID) are on the rise. These techniques enable the use of partial liver grafts with primarily insufficient liver volume. All this progress also prompted a number of innovative local therapies to address recurrences ultimately transferring colorectal liver metastases from instantly deadly into a chronic disease in some cases.

Induction of liver hypertrophy for extended liver surgery and partial liver transplantation: State of the art of parenchyma augmentation-assisted liver surgery

Background

Liver surgery and transplantation currently represent the only curative treatment options for primary and secondary hepatic malignancies. Despite the ability of the liver to regenerate after tissue loss, 25–30% future liver remnant is considered the minimum requirement to prevent serious risk for post-hepatectomy liver failure.

Purpose

The aim of this review is to depict the various interventions for liver parenchyma augmentation–assisting surgery enabling extended liver resections. The article summarizes one- and two-stage procedures with a focus on hypertrophy- and corresponding resection rates.

Conclusions

To induce liver parenchymal augmentation prior to hepatectomy, most techniques rely on portal vein occlusion, but more recently inclusion of parenchymal splitting, hepatic vein occlusion, and partial liver transplantation has extended the technical armamentarium. Safely accomplishing major and ultimately total hepatectomy by these techniques requires integration into a meaningful oncological concept. The advent of highly effective chemotherapeutic regimen in the neo-adjuvant, interstage, and adjuvant setting has underlined an aggressive surgical approach in the given setting to convert formerly “palliative” disease into a curative and sometimes in a “chronic” disease.