Prognostic Impact of Pedicle Clamping during Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases.

Pedicle clamping (PC) during liver resection for colorectal metastases (CRLM) is used to reduce blood loss and allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT). The effect on long-term oncologic outcomes is still under debate. A retrospective analysis of the impact of PC on ABT-demand regarding overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in 336 patients undergoing curative resection for CRLM was carried out. Survival analysis was performed by both univariate and multivariate methods and propensity-score (PS) matching. PC was employed in 75 patients (22%). No increased postoperative morbidity was monitored. While the overall ABT-rate was comparable (35% vs. 37%, p = 0.786), a reduced demand for more than two ABT-units was observed (p = 0.046). PC-patients had better median OS (78 vs. 47 months, p = 0.005) and RFS (36 vs. 23 months, p = 0.006). Multivariate analysis revealed PC as an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR = 0.60; p = 0.009) and RFS (HR = 0.67; p = 0.017). For PC-patients, 1:2 PS-matching (N = 174) showed no differences in the overall ABT-rate compared to no-PC-patients (35% vs. 40%, p = 0.619), but a trend towards reduced transfusion requirement (>2 ABT-units: 9% vs. 21%, p = 0.052; >4 ABT-units: 2% vs. 11%, p = 0.037) and better survival (OS: 78 vs. 44 months, p = 0.088; RFS: 36 vs. 24 months; p = 0.029). Favorable long-term outcomes and lower rates of increased transfusion demand were observed in patients with PC undergoing resection for CRLM. Further prospective evaluation of potential oncologic benefits of PC in these patients may be meaningful.

Multidisciplinary treatment of colorectal liver metastases.

INTRODUCTION: The therapy of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) has undergone significant changes. Extended survival has been observed to be associated with adoption of hepatic resection and improved chemotherapy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: This review summarizes standards, developments and controversies on the management of these patients. Literature search was performed with focus on work published within the last ten years. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Patients with CRLM should undergo surgery whenever possible with careful and experienced patient selection as hepatic resection offers the best long-term prognosis. The multidisciplinary approach has markedly evolved and has increased the number of patients in whom curative-intended surgery is possible. Patients with resectable metastases can undergo upfront surgery or may receive perioperative chemotherapy in selected cases, a decision which is under debate and remains individual. Patients with non-resectable metastases that may become resectable upon conversion treatment should receive polychemotherapy with or without local ablative therapy as pretreatment with the main goal of achieving resectability. In patients with synchronous CRLM, the optimal sequence of treatment remains unclear. Depending on the hepatic tumor burden and its dynamics as well as the type and stage of the primary tumor, simultaneous resection or either the sequential "bowel-first" or reversed "liver-first" approach represent suitable options to achieve complete tumor clearance. CONCLUSIONS: The improvements in the management of CRLM due to multidisciplinary treatment and novel developments are a great example of successfully pushing the boundaries of cure in metastatic cancer. Surgery aiming at complete tumor clearance represents the central instrument to achieve long-term survival.

Thirty-day mortality leads to underestimation of postoperative death after liver resection: A novel method to define the acute postoperative period.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative mortality commonly is defined as death occurring within 30 days of surgery or during hospitalization. After resection for liver malignancies, this definition may result in underreporting, because mortality caused by postoperative complications can be delayed as the result of improved critical care. The aim of this study was to estimate statistically the acute postoperative period (APP) after partial hepatectomy and to compare mortality within this phase to standard timestamps. METHODS: From a prospective database, 784 patients undergoing resection for primary and secondary hepatic malignancies between 2003 and 2013 were reviewed. For estimation of APP, a novel statistical method applying tests for a constant postoperative hazard was implemented. Multivariable mortality analysis was performed. RESULTS: The APP was determined to last for 80 postoperative days (95% confidence interval 40-100 days). Within this period, 55 patients died (7.0%; 80-day mortality). In comparison, 30-day mortality (N = 32, 4.0%) and in-hospital death (N = 39, 5.0%) were relevantly less. No patient died between postoperative days 80 and 90. The causes of mortality within 30 days and from days 30-80 did not greatly differ, especially regarding posthepatectomy liver failure (44% vs 39%, P = .787). Septic complications, however, tended to cause late deaths more frequently (43% vs 25%, P = .255). Comorbidities (Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 3; P = .046), increased preoperative alanine aminotransferase activity (P = .030), and major liver resection (P = .035) were independent risk factors of 80-day mortality. CONCLUSION: After liver resection for primary and secondary malignancies, 90-day rather than 30-day or in-hospital mortality should be used to avoid underreporting of deaths.