Search

Almost half of retroperitoneal (RP) sarcomas are liposarcomas (LPS). The large majority of RP LPS are either well-differentiated LPS (WDLPS) or dedifferentiated LPS (DDLPS), these latter further classified according to grading in G2 and G3 DDLPS. Surgery is the only potentially curative treatment to achieve local control and possibly cure in primary localized disease. Over the last decade, a better delineation of the different histology-specific patterns of failure and the development of nomograms predictors of outcome has led to a better management of these rare tumors, with a special focus on non-surgical treatments. Available evidences - although far from exhaustive - show that radiation therapy might have a role, if any, as neoadjuvant treatment in locally aggressive histologies (i.e. WDLPS and G2 DDLPS), while it does not seem beneficial for histologies with a higher metastatic risk (i.e. G3 DDLPS and leiomyosarcoma). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, instead, can be considered to reduce the risk of distant metastasis while waiting for the results of an ongoing RCT (STRASS-2) evaluating its effect in these tumors. However, given the rarity of these diseases and the subsequent lack of strong evidences to guide treatment, outcome improvement in these patients remains a challenge. Patients' referral to a sarcoma center where a dedicated specialized multidisciplinary team tailor optimal treatment on a case-by-case basis is crucial to ensure these patients the best outcome. Refining available nomograms - e.g including molecular variables - and identifying predictors of response/toxicity to chemotherapy and immunotherapy might be significantly helpful in tailoring treatments to the patient's characteristics. Also, new systemic agents are eagerly awaited for improving the management further.

The improved outcome of extremity soft tissue sarcoma patients surgically treated until 2007 at the authors' institution was previously reported. This study updates the analysis at a later follow-up and extends the patients' cohort to assess changes in outcomes over time for extremity and superficial trunk soft tissue sarcoma (ESTSTS) treated at a single referral center.All consecutive patients with primary localized adult-type ESTSTS surgically treated at the authors' institution between 1987 and 2017 were included and divided into group 1 (1987-2002) and group 2 (2003-2017) according to primary surgery year. Crude cumulative incidence (CCI) of sarcoma-specific mortality (SSM), local recurrence (LR), and distant metastases (DM) were calculated in a competing-risks framework. DM-free survival (DMFS) and post-DM survival were also assessed.The study identified 2382 patients. The median follow-up was 104 months (range, 63-127 months), and the post-DM follow-up was 76 months (range, 37-126 months). Since 2003, an increased adoption of preoperative treatments was observed: the use of chemotherapy, radiotherapy and combined chemoradiotherapy went from 10.5% to 23.7%, from 1.7% to 17.8%, and from 1% to 11.8% respectively. This change in treatment strategies was associated to an improvement in CCI-SSM (27.8% vs 19.5%; P0.001), CCI-LR (14.1 vs 7.5%; P0.001), DMFS (57.9% vs 65.8%; P = 0.004), and post-DM (12.2% vs 20.1%; P = 0.012), but not in CCI-DM.Increased adoption of preoperative treatments and greater availability of medical agents in the recent years were associated to better outcomes. New treatments are eagerly awaited for further improvement of outcome for ESTSTS patients because no major changes have been observed since 2003.

The need for systematic reexcision in patients who underwent unplanned excision (UE) for extremity and superficial trunk soft tissue sarcoma (ESTSTS) has been questioned. We investigated the outcome of patients who underwent reexcision for ESTSTS compared with primarily resected at our institution and the prognostic impact of microscopic residual disease (MR) in the reexcision specimen. Primary ESTSTS patients surgically treated at our institution between 1997 and 2017 were divided in three groups: primarily resected (A), reexcised after macroscopically complete UE (B), and incomplete UE (C). Weighted overall survival (OS), crude cumulative incidence of local relapse (CCI-LR), and distant metastasis (CCI-DM) were calculated and compared. In group B, multivariable models were performed to assess factors associated with the outcomes. A total of 1962 patients were identified: 1076, 697 and 189 in groups A, B, and C, respectively. Overall median follow-up was 85 months. Seven-year weighted-OS was 73.8%, 84.1%, and 80.7% (p < 0.001) for groups A, B, and C respectively. Seven-year CCI-LR and DM were 5.0% and 25.3%, 12.1% and 15.8%, and 13.6% and 29.4% (both p < 0.001) for groups A, B, and C, respectively. At multivariable analysis, the presence MR was associated with LR (p < 0.001) but not with OS nor CCI-DM. UE and the presence of MR at pathology in reexcision specimen are associated to a higher risk of LR but not to a higher risk of DM or lower OS. After macroscopic complete UE, postponing reexcision until a LR occurs may be considered on an individualized basis.

Introduction: Patients with a single small Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) may be definitively treated by Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with a very low rate of peri-operative morbidity. However, results are still controversial comparing RFA to Liver Resection (LR). Methods: All consecutive patients treated by RFA or LR for a single untreated small HCC on liver cirrhosis between January 2006-December 2016 were enrolled. Patients were matched 1:1 basing on: age, MELD-score, platelet count, nodule's diameter, HCV status, α-fetoprotein level, and Albumin-Bilirubin score. First analysis compered LR to RFA. Second analysis compared Laparoscopic LR (LLR) to RFA. Results: Of 484 patients with single small HCC, 91 patients were selected for each group after a 1:1 propensity score matching (PS-M). The 5-years OS was 70% and 60% respectively for LR and RFA group (P = 0.666). The 5-year RFS was 36% and 21% respectively for LR and RFA group (P < 0.001). Patients treated by LR had a significantly longer hospital stay and higher complications rate. Comparing 50 cases of LLR and 50 of RFA, the 5-years OS was 79% and 56% respectively for LLR and RFA group (P = 0.22). The 5-year RFS was 54% and 19% respectively for LR and RFA group (P < 0.001). Post-operative complications were not significantly different. Conclusions: LLR confers similar peri-operative complications rate compared to RFA. LLR should be considered as a first-line approach for the treatment of a single small HCC as it combines the effectiveness of open LR and the safety profile of RFA

e23557 Background: To investigate the outcome of patients affected by soft tissue sarcomas (STS) of the extremities and trunk wall who underwent unplanned excision (UE) and the prognostic impact of microscopic residual tumor at re-excision. Methods: All consecutive patients affected by primary STS of the extremity and trunk wall operated at Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori from Jan 1997 to Dec 2017 were included and divided in 3 groups: patients primarily resected at our institution (group A), patients undergoing re-excision after macroscopically complete UE (group B) and patients undergoing completion resection after macroscopically incomplete UE (group C). Inverse probability treatment weighted overall survival (OS), crude cumulative incidence of local relapse (CCI-LR) and of distant metastasis (CCI-DM) were calculated and compared. Histological subgroup curves were drawn and multivariable models were performed in group B. Results: 1965 patients were identified; 1079, 679 and 189 in group A, B and C respectively. Median follow-up was 84.41 months. 7-yrs OS was 0.74, 0.84 and 0.81 (p < .001) for group A, B and C respectively; 7-yrs CCI-LR and DM were 0.05 and 0.25, 0.12 and 0.16, 0.14 and 0.29 (p < .001 for both) for group A, B and C respectively. In group B, microscopic residual tumor was present in 26.9% of the surgical specimens, but this figure varied broadly among the histologic subtypes (being the lowest in Solitary Fibrous Tumor, 7.7%, and the highest in Myxofibrosarcoma [MFS], 46.5%). At multivariable analysis, age (for OS only), grade, size and histology were associated to OS and CCI-DM; while age, presence of residual tumor (p < .001) and grade to CCI-LR. Of note, Myxoid liposarcoma (MLPS) and MFS showed the highest CCI-LR in presence of residual disease (18.6% vs 1.3% and 24.7% vs 7.2% respectively). Conclusions: Patients who underwent UE had a risk of LR twice as high as those primarily resected at a referral institution. However, this higher risk was not associated to a higher risk of DM or worse OS. In patients undergoing re-excision after macroscopic complete UE the presence of residual tumor was associated to a higher LR risk, again with no association with DM or OS. Despite the probable presence of a residual selection bias, it is possible that postponing re-excision after macroscopic complete UE doesn’t impact on the outcome. However, higher caution should be exerted for MLPS and MFS, given the higher probability of local relapse when microscopic residual tumor is found in the surgical specimen.

The use of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has progressively spread in the last 10 years. Several studies have shown the superiority of LLR to open liver resection (OLR) in term of perioperative outcomes. With this review, we aim to systematically assess short-term and long-term major outcomes in patients who underwent LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in order to illustrate the advantages of minimally invasive liver surgery. Through an advanced PubMed research, we selected all retrospective, prospective, and comparative clinical trials reporting short-term and long-term outcomes of any series of patients with diagnosis of HCC who underwent laparoscopic or robotic resection. Reviews, meta-analyses, or case reports were excluded. None of the patients included in this review has received a previous locoregional treatment for the same tumor nor has undergone a laparoscopic-assisted procedure. We considered morbidity and mortality for evaluation of major short-term outcomes, and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) for evaluation of long-term outcomes. A total of 1,501 patients from 17 retrospective studies were included, 15 studies compare LLR with OLR. Propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis was used in 11 studies (975 patients). The majority of the studies included patients with good liver function and a single HCC. Cirrhosis at pathology ranged from 33% to 100%. Overall mortality and morbidity ranges were 0-2.4% and 4.9-44% respectively, with most of the complications being Clavien-Dindo grade I or II (range: 3.9-23.3% vs. 0-9.52% for Clavien I-II and ≥ III respectively). The median blood loss ranged from 150 to 389 mL; the range of the median duration of surgery was 134-343 minutes. The maximum rate of conversion was 18.2%. The median duration of hospitalization ranged from 4 to 13 days. The ranges of overall survival rates at 1-, 3- and 5-year were 72.8-100%, 60.7-93.5% and 38-89.7% respectively. The ranges of disease free survival rates at 1-, 3- and 5-year were 45.5-91.5%, 20-72.2% and 19-67.8% respectively. The benefits of LLR in term of complication rate, blood loss, and duration of hospital stay make this procedure an advantageous alternative to OLR, especially for cirrhotic patients in whom the use of LLR reduces the risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure. The limits of LLR can be overcome by robotic surgery, which could therefore be preferred. Further benefits of minimally invasive surgery derive from its ability to reduce the formation of adhesions in view of a salvage liver transplant. In conclusion, the results of this review seem to confirm the safety and feasibility of LLR for HCC as well as its superiority to OLR according to perioperative outcomes.

Background Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has gained significant popularity over the last 10 years. First experiences of LLR compared to open liver resection (OLR) reported a similar survival and a better safety profile for LLR. Materials and methods This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of all consecutive patients treated by liver resection for HCC on liver cirrhosis between January 2005 and March 2017. The choice of procedure (LLR vs OLR) was generally based on tumor localization, history of previous upper abdominal surgery and patient's preference. The type of resection and indication for surgery were unrelated to the adopted technique. Based on pre-operative variables and confirmed cirrhosis, a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) model was developed to compare outcomes of LLR and OLR in patients with HCC. Outcomes of interest included morbidity, mortality and long-term cure potential. Results After-PSM, the LLR group demonstrated better perioperative results including: lower complication rate (50.7% in OLR vs 29.3% in LLR, p = 0.0035), significantly lower intra-operative blood loss (200 ml in OLR vs 150 ml in LLR, p = 0.007) and shorter hospital length of stay (median 9 days in OLR vs 7 days in LLR, p = 0.0018). Moreover there was no significant difference between the two groups in 3-year survival (76%, CI: 60%–86% in LLR vs 68%, CI: 55%–79% in OLR, p = 0.32) or recurrence-free survival rates (44%, CI: 28%–58%, vs 44%, CI: 31%–57%, p = 0.94). Conclusions Minor LLR appeared significantly safer compared to minor OLR for HCC. LLR was associated with fewer post-operative complication, lower operative blood loss and a shorter hospital stay along with similar survival and recurrence-free survival rates