Comparison of post-hepatectomy long-term survival outcome between non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine and colorectal liver metastases: A population-based propensity-score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatectomy is an established treatment for colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) or neuroendocrine liver metastasis. However, its role in non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NCNNLM) is controversial. This study aims to compare long-term survival outcomes after hepatectomy between NCNNLM and CLM in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

From 2009 to 2018, curative hepatectomy were performed in 964 patients with NCNNLM (n ​= ​133) or CLM (n ​= ​831). Propensity score (PS) matching was performed. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between PS-matched groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors affecting survival.

RESULTS

There were 133 patients in the NCNNLM group and 266 patients in the CLM group. The mortality (1.5 ​% vs 1.5 ​%) and morbidity (19.5 ​% vs 20.3 ​%) rates were comparable between the two groups. There was no statistically significant difference in 5-year overall (48.9 ​% vs 39.8 ​%) and recurrence-free (25.1 ​% vs 23.4 ​%) survival rates between NCNNLM and CLM groups. A high pre-operative serum bilirubin level, severe postoperative complications and multiple tumors were independent prognostic factors for poor survival.

CONCLUSION

Hepatectomy for selected patients with NCNNLM can achieve similar long-term oncological outcomes as those with CLM. High serum bilirubin, severe postoperative complication and multiple tumors are poor prognostic factors for survival.

Comparison of clinical outcome between laparoscopic and open hepatectomy of high difficulty score for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of high difficulty score is technically challenging. There is a lack of clinical evidence to support its applicability in terms of the long-term survival benefits. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes between LLR and the open liver resection of high difficulty score for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2010 to 2020, using Iwate criteria, 424 patients underwent liver resection of high difficulty score by the laparoscopic (n = 65) or open (n = 359) approach. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed between the two groups. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between PS-matched groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors affecting survival.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic group had significantly fewer severe complications (3% vs. 10.8%), and shorter median hospital stays (6 days vs. 8 days) than the open group. Meanwhile, the long-term oncological outcomes were comparable between the two groups, in terms of the tumor recurrence rate (40% vs. 46.1%), the 5-year overall survival rate (75.4% vs. 76.2%), and the 5-year recurrence-free survival rate (50.3% vs. 53.5%). The high preoperative serum alpha-fetoprotein level, multiple tumors, and severe postoperative complications were the independent poor prognostic factors associated with worse overall survival. The surgical approach (Laparoscopic vs. Open) did not influence the survival.

CONCLUSION

LLR of high difficulty score for selected patients with HCC has better short-term outcomes than the open approach. More importantly, it can achieve similar long-term survival outcomes as the open approach.

Minimally invasive versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis of 224 patients

PURPOSE

To compare the peri-operative and long-term survival outcomes of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) (robotic or laparoscopic) with open liver resection (OLR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent liver resection for HCC were reviewed from a prospectively collected database. Outcomes of MILR were compared with those of OLR. A propensity score matching analysis with a ratio of 1:1 was performed to minimise the potential bias in clinical pathological factors.

RESULTS

From January 2003 to December 2017, a total of 705 patients underwent liver resection for HCC. Amongst them, 112 patients received MILR and 593 patients received OLR. After propensity score matching, there were 112 patients in each of the MILR and OLR groups. Patients were matched by age, sex, hepatitis status, presence of cirrhosis, platelet count, albumin level, bilirubin level, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) level, alanine transferase (ALT) level, creatinine level, tumour differentiation, tumour size, tumour number, presence of tumour rupture, presence of vascular invasion, extent of liver resection (minor/major) and difficulty score. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 94.4%, 90.4% and 82.3% in the MILR group vs 95.4%, 80.5% and 71.8% in the open group (p = 0.240). The 1-, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 81.0%, 63.1% and 55.8% in the MILR group vs 79.1%, 58.1% and 45.7 in the open group (p = 0.449). The MILR group demonstrated significantly less blood loss (p < 0.001), less blood transfusion (p = 0.004), lower post-operative complications (p < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001) when compared with the OLR group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data shows MILR yielded superior post-operative outcomes to OLR, with comparable survival outcomes.

Development and validation of a novel nomogram predicting 10-year actual survival after curative hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Although hepatectomy is a curative treatment modality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the associated 10-year long-term actual survival are rarely reported. This study aims to develop and validate a predictive nomogram for 10-year actual survivors with HCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2004 to 2009, 753 patients with curative hepatectomy for HCC (development set, n = 325; validation set, n = 428) were included. In development set, comparison of clinic-pathological data was made between patients surviving ≥10 years and those surviving <10 years. Good independent prognostic factors identified by multivariate analysis were involved in a nomogram development, which was validated internally and externally using validation set.

RESULTS

On multivariate analysis, five independent good prognostic factors for 10-year survival were identified, including young age (OR = 0.943), good ASA status (≤2) (OR = 2.794), higher albumin level (OR = 1.116), solitary tumor (OR = 2.531) and absence of microvascular invasion (OR = 3.367). A novel nomogram was constructed with C-index of 0.801 (95% CI 0.762-0.864). A cut-off point of 167.5 had a sensitivity of 0.794 and specificity of 0.730. Internal validation using bootstrap sampling and external validation using validation set revealed C-index of 0.792 (95% CI, 0.741-0.853) and 0.761 (95% CI, 0.718-0.817).

CONCLUSION

A novel nomogram for 10-year HCC survivor using age, ASA status, preoperative albumin, tumor number and presence of microvascular tumor invasion was developed and validated with high accuracy.

Comparison of long-term survival outcome after curative hepatectomy between selected patients with non-colorectal and colorectal liver metastasis: A propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is an established treatment of choice for colorectal liver metastasis (CLM). However, the role of hepatectomy for non-colorectal liver metastasis (NCLM) is less clear.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

From 2004 to 2017, 264 patients received curative hepatectomy for NCLM (n = 28) and CLM (n = 236). Propensity score (PS) matching was performed between two groups, with respect to the significant confounding factors. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between PS matched groups. Univariate analysis was performed to identify prognostic factors affecting overall and recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

After PS matching, there were 28 patients in NCLM group and 56 patients in CLM group. With a median follow-up of 34 months, there was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival rate between NCLM and CLM groups (62% vs. 39%) (P = 0.370). The 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was also comparable between NCLM and CLM groups (23% vs. 22%) (P = 0.707). Use of pre-operative systemic therapy (hazard ratio: 2.335, CI 1.157-4.712), multifocal tumors (hazard ratio: 1.777, CI 1.010-3.127), tumor size (hazard ratio: 1.135, CI 1.012-1.273), R1 resection (hazard ratio: 2.484, CI 1.194-5.169) and severe complications (hazard ratio: 6.507, CI 1.454-29.124), but not tumor type (NCLM vs. CLM), were associated with poor overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Hepatectomy for NCLM can achieve similar oncological outcomes in selected patients as those with CLM. Significant prognostic factors were identified associating with worse overall survival.

Impact of Intermittent Pringle Maneuver on Long-Term Survival After Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Result from Two Combined Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Hepatectomy remains an important curative treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Intermittent Pringle maneuver (IPM) is commonly applied during hepatectomy for control of bleeding. Whether the ischemia/reperfusion injury brought by IPM adversely affects the operative outcomes is controversial. This study aims to examine whether the application of IPM during hepatectomy affects the long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Two randomized controlled trials (RCT) have been carried out previously to evaluate the short-term outcomes of IPM. The present study represented a post hoc analysis on the HCC patients from the first RCT and all patients from the second RCT, and the long-term outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 88 patients each in the IPM group and the no-Pringle-maneuver (NPM) group. The patient demographics, type and extent of liver resection and histopathological findings were comparable between the two groups. The 1-, 3-, 5-year overall survival in the IPM and NPM groups was 92.0%, 82.0%, 72.1% and 93.2%, 68.8%, 58.1%, respectively (P = 0.030). The 1-, 3-, 5-year disease-free survival in the IPM and NPM groups was 73.6%, 56.2%, 49.7% and 71.6%, 49.4%, 40.3%, respectively (P = 0.366). On multivariable analysis, IPM was a favorable factor for overall survival (P = 0.035). Subgroup analysis showed that a clamp time of 16-30 min (P = 0.024) and cirrhotic patients with IPM (P = 0.009) had better overall survival.

CONCLUSION

IPM provided a better overall survival after hepatectomy for patients with HCC. Such survival benefit was noted in cirrhotic patients, and the beneficial duration of clamp was 16-30 min.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00730743 and NCT01759901 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ).

Does Intermittent Pringle Maneuver Increase Postoperative Complications After Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma? A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

In a previous study, we have shown that intermittent Pringle maneuver (IPM) might increase postoperative complications after hepatectomy for various indications. Complications which thought to be related to IPM were ascites, pleural effusion, wound infection and intra-abdominal collection. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that applying IPM during hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) could increase postoperative complications.

METHODS

Between January 2013 and October 2016, eligible patients who received elective open hepatectomy for HCC were randomized to have IPM or no Pringle maneuver (NPM). Occurrence of various types of postoperative complications was specifically looked for. A routine postoperative day 5 abdominal ultrasound examination and chest X-ray were done to detect and grade any radiological ascites, pleural effusion and intra-abdominal collection.

RESULTS

Fifty IPM and 50 NPM patients with histological proven HCC were recruited for final analysis. Demographics and operative parameters were comparable between the two groups. The postoperative complication rates were similar (IPM 36.0 vs. NPM 28.0%, P = 0.391). However, in the IPM group, more patients developed radiological posthepatectomy ascites (42.0 vs. 22.0%, P = 0.032) and pleural effusion (66.0 vs. 38.0%, P = 0.005). In patients with histologically proven cirrhosis, there were 28 IPM and 25 NPM patients. Again, there was no difference in postoperative complication rate but more radiological posthepatectomy ascites and pleural effusion in the IPM group.

CONCLUSION

This trial was not able to detect a difference in postoperative complications whether IPM was applied or not, but use of IPM was associated with more subclinical ascites and pleural effusion. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01759901).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01759901.

Robotic Liver Resection For Primary Hepatolithiasis: Is It Beneficial?

BACKGROUND

Primary hepatolithiasis is a disease characterized by primary biliary ductal abnormality with stone formation predominantly within the intrahepatic bile ducts. Its management is difficult, but liver resection has emerged as a promising treatment option.

METHODS

Robotic liver resection (RLR) has been adopted in our center for the management of patients with hepatolithiasis. The operative and short-term outcomes of this cohort of patients were compared with a historical cohort of patients using open approach (OLR). A subgroup analysis was performed for left lateral sectionectomy.

RESULTS

Between September 2010 and April 2015, 15 RLRs were performed on patients with primary hepatolithiasis. The historical cohort consisted of 42 OLRs with operation done between January 2005 and January 2014. No differences were found in patient demographics, disease characteristics, or types of resection. No operative deaths occurred, and no difference was seen in complication rates. RLR had significantly less blood loss (100 vs. 235 ml; p = 0.011) and shorter hospital stays (6 vs. 8 days; p = 0.003). After a median follow-up of 19.4 months for RLRs and 79.2 months for OLRs (p < 0.001), there were no differences in residual stone rate, recurrent stone rate, or rate of recurrent cholangitis. Subgroup analysis of lateral sectionectomy (10 RLRs vs. 27 OLRs) revealed similar outcomes, i.e., less blood loss and shorter hospital stays in RLR.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic liver resection reduces blood loss and shortens hospital stays compared with OLR. A longer follow-up is needed to assess the long-term outcomes of RLR regarding prevention of recurrent stones and cholangitis.