Navigating Complex Challenges: Preoperative Assessment and Surgical Strategies for Liver Resection in Patients with Fibrosis or Cirrhosis.

This review explores the intricacies of evaluating cirrhotic patients for liver resection while exploring how to extend surgical intervention to those typically excluded by the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) criteria guidelines by focusing on the need for robust preoperative assessment and innovative surgical strategies. Cirrhosis presents unique challenges and complicates liver resection due to the altered physiology of the liver, portal hypertension, and liver decompensation. The primary objective of this review is to discuss the current approaches in assessing the suitability of cirrhotic patients for liver resection and aims to identify which patients outside of the BCLC criteria can safely undergo liver resection by highlighting emerging strategies that can improve surgical safety and outcomes.

Debulking Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastasis Conveys Survival Benefit.

(1) Background: Despite advances in surgical technique and systemic chemotherapy, some patients with multifocal, bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remain unresectable. These patients may benefit from surgical debulking of liver tumors in combination with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone. (2) Methods: A retrospective study including patients evaluated for curative intent resection of CRLM was performed. Patients were divided into three groups: those who underwent liver resection with recurrence within 6 months (subtotal debulked, SD), those who had the first stage only of a two-stage hepatectomy (partially debulked, PD), and those never debulked (ND). Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank test were performed to assess the median survival of each group. (3) Results: 174 patients underwent liver resection, and 34 patients recurred within 6 months. Of the patients planned for two-stage hepatectomy, 35 underwent the first stage only. Thirty-two patients were never resected. Median survival of the SD, PD, and ND groups was 31 months, 31 months, and 19.5 months, respectively (p = 0.012); (4) Conclusions: Patients who underwent a debulking of CRLM demonstrated a survival benefit compared to patients who did not undergo any surgical resection. This study provides support for the evaluation of intentional debulking versus palliative chemotherapy alone in a randomized trial.

Liver regeneration after portal and hepatic vein embolization improves overall survival compared with portal vein embolization alone: mid-term survival analysis of the multicentre DRAGON 0 cohort.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare 3-year overall survival after simultaneous portal (PVE) and hepatic vein (HVE) embolization versus PVE alone in patients undergoing liver resection for primary and secondary cancers of the liver. METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective study, all DRAGON 0 centres provided 3-year follow-up data for all patients who had PVE/HVE or PVE, and were included in DRAGON 0 between 2016 and 2019. Kaplan-Meier analysis was undertaken to assess 3-year overall and recurrence/progression-free survival. Factors affecting survival were evaluated using univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: In total, 199 patients were included from 7 centres, of whom 39 underwent PVE/HVE and 160 PVE alone. Groups differed in median age (P = 0.008). As reported previously, PVE/HVE resulted in a significantly higher resection rate than PVE alone (92 versus 68%; P = 0.007). Three-year overall survival was significantly higher in the PVE/HVE group (median survival not reached after 36 months versus 20 months after PVE; P = 0.004). Univariable and multivariable analyses identified PVE/HVE as an independent predictor of survival (univariable HR 0.46, 95% c.i. 0.27 to 0.76; P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Overall survival after PVE/HVE is substantially longer than that after PVE alone in patients with primary and secondary liver tumours.

Laparoscopic Parenchymal-Sparing Hepatectomy: the New Maximally Minimal Invasive Surgery of the Liver-a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies (PSH) are liver resections with preservation of as much liver parenchyma as possible. PSH can be performed laparoscopically (LPSH), but access to the posterosuperior segments is difficult and they are challenging when there are multiple bilobar lesions; the procedure may require repositioning and may be long and cumbersome. The objective of this systematic review is to analyze the feasibility and limitations of laparoscopic PSH in the literature. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Resections were categorized by segment(s), and data regarding operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, and R0 resection were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 351 studies screened for relevance, 48 studies were reviewed. Ten publications fulfilled inclusion criteria, reporting data from 579 patients undergoing LPSH. The most common indication was CRLM (58%) followed by hepatocellular carcinoma (16%). Only 92 patients were reported to have resections of more than one tumor; the maximum number of lesions resected was seven. Of resected lesions, 21.5% were located in the cranial segments. Mean operating time was 335.2 min, estimated blood loss was 462 cc, and hospital stay was 7.6 days. Conversion rate was 9.7%, and complications occurred in 19.4% of cases. No perioperative mortality was reported. R0 resections were achieved in 87.7% of cases. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic PSH is performed and reported, but the data quality is low so far. The main limitation of LPSH is the low number of lesions resected, especially for bilobar, metastatic disease. Prospective reports with tumor-specific oncological data are desirable.

Human challenge studies: a review of adequacy of reporting methods and results.

Since the 1940s, researchers have purposefully infected healthy adult humans with pathogenic organisms to study how these pathogens cause disease and can be treated and prevented. 'Challenge studies' can be safe, ethical, extremely informative and an efficient use of resources during the clinical development of vaccines, but knowledge of this form of clinical research trial is not widespread. A review of the human challenge literature was performed to determine whether common elements of challenge studies can be identified in the articles published to date. The review demonstrated incomplete reporting of study characteristics deemed necessary for the correct interpretation and application of human challenge study results and for the accurate replication of study methodology. An unofficial extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement is proposed.