Search

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is a rare disease with a poor prognosis. In patients where surgical resection is possible, outcome is influenced by perioperative morbidity and lymph node status. Laparoscopic liver resection is associated with improved clinical and oncological outcomes in primary and metastatic liver cancer compared with open liver resection, but evidence on intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is still insufficient. The primary aim of this study was to compare overall survival for a large series of patients treated for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma by open or laparoscopic approach. Secondary objectives were to compare disease-free survival, predictors of death, and recurrence.Patients treated with laparoscopic or open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from 2000 to 2018 from 3 large international databases were analyzed retrospectively. Each patient in the laparoscopic resection group (case) was matched with 1 open resection control (1:1 ratio), through a propensity score calculated on clinically relevant preoperative covariates. Overall and disease-free survival were compared between the matched groups. Predictors of mortality and recurrence were analyzed with Cox regression, and the Textbook Outcomes were described.During the study period, 855 patients met the inclusion criteria (open liver resection = 709, 82.9%; laparoscopic liver resection = 146, 17.1%). Two groups of 89 patients each were analyzed after propensity score matching, with no significant difference regarding pre- and postoperative variables. Overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 92%, 75%, and 63% in the laparoscopic liver resection group versus 92%, 58%, and 49% in the open liver resection group (P = .0043). Adjusted Cox regression revealed severe postoperative complications (hazard ratio: 10.5, 95% confidence interval [1.01-109] P = .049) and steatosis (hazard ratio: 13.8, 95% confidence interval [1.23-154] P = .033) as predictors of death, and transfusion (hazard ratio: 19.2, 95% confidence interval [4.04-91.4] P.001) and severe postoperative complications (hazard ratio: 4.07, 95% confidence interval [1.15-14.4] P = .030) as predictors of recurrence.The survival advantage of laparoscopic liver resection over open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is equivocal, given historical bias and missing data.

Background Portal vein embolization (PVE) use is nowadays debated due to the risk of technical or biological unresectability after the period of time needed to achieve future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of PVE in a single high-volume hepatobiliary center, with emphasis in the feasibility to achieve tumor resection. Methods Patients undergoing PVE before major hepatectomy at our institution between 1993 and 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Results A total of 431 patients formed the study population. Morbidity and mortality rates of PVE were 16.7% and 0.2% respectively. Morbidity was similar between percutaneous and ileocolic approaches or between histoacryl and ethanol as embolization materials (P > 0.05). On the contrary, the percutaneous ipsilateral approach was associated with significantly less complications than the contralateral approach (10.3% vs 19.4%; P = 0.024). Almost all patients (96%) achieved sufficient FLR volume after embolization, but only 66% finally underwent planned liver resection. Disease progression was the most common cause of unresectability (67%). Patients with extrahepatic biliary tumors experienced significantly higher unresectability rates compared to other entities (45.1% vs 31.4%; P = 0.019). Conclusion PVE was not followed by hepatectomy in 34% of our patients. Biliary tumors displayed the higher dropout rates after PVE and the higher chances of tumor progression preventing curative resection. Although PVE may be performed with acceptable morbidity, PVE-related complications prevented curative resection in 5% of patients. Careful multidisciplinary selection is crucial to avoid PVE overuse in technically resectable patients who will experience a not negligible risk of futile use and non-therapeutic laparotomy.

Background Postoperative hepatic decompensation is a serious complication of liver resection in patients undergoing hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver fibrosis and clinical significant portal hypertension are well-known risk factors for hepatic decompensation. Liver stiffness measurement is a noninvasive method of evaluating hepatic venous pressure gradient and functional hepatic reserve by estimating hepatic fibrosis. Effectiveness of liver stiffness measurement in predicting persistent postoperative hepatic decompensation has not been investigated. Methods Consecutive patients with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma were recruited prospectively and liver stiffness measurement of nontumoral liver was measured using FibroScan. Hepatic venous pressure gradient was measured intraoperatively by direct puncture of portal vein and inferior vena cava. Hepatic venous pressure gradient ≥10 mm Hg was defined as clinically significant portal hypertension. Primary outcome was persistent hepatic decompensation defined as the presence of at least one of the following: unresolved ascites, jaundice, and/or encephalopathy >3 months after hepatectomy. Results One hundred and six hepatectomies, including 22 right hepatectomy (20.8%), 3 central hepatectomy (2.8%), 12 left hepatectomy (11.3%), 11 bisegmentectomy (10.4%), 30 unisegmentectomy (28.3%), and 28 partial hepatectomy (26.4%) were performed in patients for hepatocellular carcinoma (84 men and 22 women with median age of 67.5 years; median model for end-stage liver disease score of 8). Ninety-day mortality was 4.7%. Nine patients (8.5%) developed postoperative hepatic decompensation. Multivariate logistic regression bootstrapped at 1,000 identified liver stiffness measurement (P = .001) as the only preoperative predictor of postoperative hepatic decompensation. Area under receiver operating characteristic curve for liver stiffness measurement and hepatic venous pressure gradient was 0.81 (95% confidence interval, 0.506–0.907) and 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.646–0.917), respectively. Liver stiffness measurement ≥22 kPa had 42.9% sensitivity and 92.6% specificity and hepatic venous pressure gradient ≥10 mm Hg had 28.6% sensitivity and 96.3% specificity. Conclusion In selected patients undergoing liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, transient elastography is an easy and effective test to predict persistent hepatic decompensation preoperatively.