Search

Objectives Multiple clinical trials have established a role for adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Adjuvant FOLFIRINOX increases survival as compared with gemcitabine but with increased toxicity. FOLFOX+nab-paclitaxel (FOLFOX-A) was developed by the Brown University Oncology Research Group (BrUOG) as an alternative to FOLFIRINOX. This phase II trial explored the feasibility and toxicity of adjuvant FOLFOX-A in patients who have completed resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Patients and methods Patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were eligible. The primary objective was to determine the feasibility of adjuvant FOLFOX-A. Patients experiencing grade 2 neuropathy received a 20% reduction of oxaliplatin. Secondary end points were disease-free survival, and overall survival. Results Between June 2014 and October 2018, 25 patients were enrolled following surgical resection. The median number of cycles completed was 9.5. Median disease-free survival was 19.7 months (95% confidence interval, 10.3 to not reached) and median overall survival was 53.5 months (95% confidence interval, 24.2 to not reached). The most common treatment-related grade 3 or greater adverse events were fatigue (58%), nausea (13%), and neutropenia (26%). Fourteen patients had grade 2 neuropathy (58%) and 1 patient (4%) had grade 3 neuropathy. Only 2 patients (8%) had grade 3 diarrhea. Conclusions Adjuvant FOLFOX-A is a feasible multi-agent adjuvant treatment regimen and, with further validation, could be an alternative to FOLFIRINOX.

Common bile duct injury is a feared complication of cholecystectomy, with an incidence of 0.1% to 0.6%. A majority of injuries go unnoticed at index operation, and postoperative diagnosis can be difficult. Patient presentation can vary from vague abdominal pain to uncontrolled sepsis and peritonitis. Diagnostic evaluation typically begins with ultrasound or CT scan in the acute setting, and source control is paramount at time of presentation. In a stable patient, hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid scan can be useful in identifying an ongoing bile leak, which requires intervention. A variety of diagnostic techniques define biliary anatomy. Treatment often requires a multidisciplinary approach.

BACKGROUND: To assess long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted liver resection (RLR) for colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases as compared to a propensity-matched cohort of laparoscopic liver resections (LLR). Although safety and short-term outcomes of RLR have been described and previously compared to LLR, long-term and oncologic data are lacking. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed of all patients who underwent RLR and LLR for CRC metastases at six high-volume centers in the USA and Europe between 2002 and 2017. Propensity matching was used to match baseline characteristics between the two groups. Data were analyzed with a focus on postoperative and oncologic outcomes, as well as long-term recurrence and survival. RESULTS: RLR was performed in 115 patients, and 514 patients underwent LLR. Following propensity matching 115 patients in each cohort were compared. Perioperative outcomes including mortality, morbidity, reoperation, readmission, intensive care requirement, length-of-stay and margin status were not statistically different. Both prematching and postmatching analyses demonstrated similar overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between RLR and LLR at 5 years (61 vs. 60% OS, p = 0.87, and 38 vs. 31% DFS, p = 0.25, prematching; 61 vs. 60% OS, p = 0.78, and 38 vs. 44% DFS, p = 0.62, postmatching). CONCLUSIONS: Propensity score matching with a large, multicenter database demonstrates that RLR for colorectal metastases is feasible and safe, with perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes and survival that are largely comparable to LLR.

Objective. Robotic liver surgery (RLS) has emerged as a feasible alternative to laparoscopic or open resections with comparable perioperative outcomes. Little is known about the oncologic adequacy of RLS. The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term oncologic outcomes for patients undergoing RLS for primary hepatobiliary malignancies. Methods. We performed an international, multicenter, retrospective study of patients who underwent RLS for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CC), or gallbladder cancer (GBC) between 2006 and 2016. Age, gender, histology, resection margin status, extent of surgical resection, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Results. Of the 61 included patients, 34 (56%) had RLS performed for HCC, 16 (26%) for CC, and 11 (18%) for GBC. The majority of resections were nonanatomical or segmental resections (39.3%), followed by central hepatectomy (18%), left-lateral sectionectomy (14.8%), left hepatectomy (13.1%), right hepatectomy (13.1%), and right posterior segmentectomy (1.6%). RO resection was achieved in 94% of HCC, 68% of CC, and 81.8% of GBC patients. Median hospital stay was 5 days, and conversion to open surgery was needed in seven patients (11.5%). Grade III-IV Dindo-Clavien complications occurred in seven patients with no perioperative mortality. Median follow-up was 75 months (95% confidence interval 36-113), and 5-year OS and DFS were 56 and 38%, respectively. When stratified by tumor type, 3-year OS was 90% for HCC, 65% for GBC, and 49% for CC (p = 0.01). Conclusions. RLS can be performed for primary hepatobiliary malignancies with long-term oncologic outcomes comparable to published open and laparoscopic data.

Background Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma is well described in early cirrhosis. Less is known regarding outcomes with more advanced cirrhosis, and this study aimed to compare these groups. Methods A retrospective review of resections at a high-volume hepatobiliary center over a 15-year period was performed. Primary end-points were 30 and 90-day mortality. Secondary end-points included complications and survival. Results 80 early (Child's A) were compared to 26 advanced (20 Child's B and 6 Child's C) patients. Baseline patient and tumor characteristics were similar except for parameters indicating degree of cirrhosis. Only early cirrhotic patients underwent anatomic hepatectomies (six cases) and median operative times were longer (151 vs 99 min, p = 0.03). Intraoperative blood loss, conversion, R0 resection, length-of-stay and perioperative complications were comparable. 30 and 90-day mortality were statistically similar (2.5 vs 0%, OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.08–36.19 and 2.5 vs 7.7%, OR 0.31 95% CI 0.04–2.30). There was a trend toward longer survival in the early cirrhotic group but this did not reach significance (50 vs 21 months, p = 0.077). Conclusions In carefully selected advanced cirrhotic patients, laparoscopic liver resection may be performed with acceptable outcomes. Though this is not yet well established, further trials may be warranted.

Highlights • Description of a rare liver tumor pathology only previously reported twice in the literature in a single study. • Discussion of the radiologic characteristics of mixed liver tumors and the difficulty of preoperative diagnosis. • Discussion of the complexity of pathologic diagnosis of this mixed liver tumor. • Description of the molecular analysis and mutational profiling that was performed. • A literature review of other reported mixed hepatic tumor types including management and outcomes., Introduction Mixed hepatocellular and cholangiocarcinoma tumors (MHCC) are described in the literature, as are the more rare mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas (MANC) of hepatobiliary origin. Only two cases of tumors with characteristics of all three histologies/phenotypes have been previously described in one Chinese study. Presentation of case Herein we report clinical, microscopic and molecular features of a 25 cm mixed hepatic tumor with hepatocellular, cholangiocarcinoma and neuroendocrine differentiation arising in an otherwise healthy 19-year-old North American Caucasian male without any identifiable risk factors. Discussion The patient underwent multimodality imaging and the tumor was biopsied preoperatively, and it was initially interpreted to be hepatocellular carcinoma fibrolamellar type. A left trisegmentectomy with lymphadenectomy was performed and the tumor was definitively diagnosed based on the surgically resected specimen. Integrated microscopic and molecular features defined the differing biological aggressiveness of growth pattern components. Cases in the literature of MHCC and rare cases of MANC have largely undergone aggressive surgical resection as well, however the majority of studies on mixed hepatic tumors to date reflect Eastern patient cohorts and populations with underlying liver disease, thereby limiting extrapolation on management or outcomes in this case. Conclusion This is one of the only reports of a hepatic tumor arising from hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma and neuroendocrine lineages. Increased awareness of this tumor type may optimize improve future management.

The benefits of minimally invasive approaches in oncologic surgery are increasingly recognized, and laparoscopic liver surgery has become increasingly widespread. In light of the complexity and technical challenges of hepatobiliary procedures, robotic approaches are also employed. The utility, safety, and oncologic integrity of these methods in the management of primary liver cancers are reported. PubMed was used to search the medical literature for studies and articles pertaining to laparoscopic and robotic liver surgery. Studies that particularly addressed hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma were identified and reviewed. Laparoscopic liver surgery, including for major resections, has been shown to be safe in experienced hands without any compromise of oncologic outcomes for either hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Some studies show improved clinical outcomes including shorter hospital stays and lower complication rates when compared to open surgery, particularly for patients with cirrhosis. Robotic liver surgeries seem to have equally acceptable clinical outcomes; however, there is limited data regarding oncologic integrity and considerable additional expense. Laparoscopic and robotic liver resections are both feasible and safe for the management of primary liver tumors. Future studies should aim to clarify specific indications and optimize applications of these approaches.