Tumor recurrence after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: recurrence pathway and prognostic factors.

INTRODUCTION: Liver transplantation (OLT) has been advocated as a good management option for patients with carcinoma hepatocellular (HCC). More recurrences are extrahepatic due to many pathological factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 1986 to December 2003, we performed 95. OLTs for HCC including 73% men of mean age of 54.7 years and 25.3% not filling Mazzaferro's criteria. RESULTS: The recurrence incidence was 15.8% (n = 15), including only extrahepatic lesions in 11 (mainly lung recurrence, seven) and hepatic plus extrahepatic in four. Main late mortality was due to tumor recurrence (n = 12, 33.3%). No differences were observed among sex, preoperative chemoembolization, age, Child, Okuda, etiology, or satellite nodules. A greater incidence of tumor recurrence was observed with a preoperative biopsy (45.5% vs 5.9%, P = .0001); and alpha fetoprotein (AFP) > 200 ng/mL (37.5% vs 13.3%, P = .08); known HCC (25.5% vs 3.1%, P = .008); vascular invasion (42.1% vs 10.3%, P = .001); > 5 cm single nodule (50% vs 13%, P = .004); more than three nodules (50% vs 13.9%, P = .01); moderately to poorly differentiated tumors (37.5% vs 12.7%, P = .01); pTNM IV (50% vs 8.7%, P = .0001); and not meeting Milan criteria (40.9% vs 9.2%, P = .001). These are the same factors for extrahepatic recurrence. For hepatic recurrence the prognostic factors were: vascular invasion (15.8% vs 1.5%, P = .008), more than three nodules (25% vs 2.5%, P = .004), moderately to poorly differentiated tumors (18.8% vs 1.4%, P = .003), pTNM IV (16.7% vs 1.4%, P = .006), and not meeting Milan criteria (13.6% vs 1.5%, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence incidence with Milan criteria was less than 10%, mainly extrahepatic (lung). Prognostic factors for tumor recurrence were pathological features, namely vascular invasion, more than three nodules, size larger than 5 cm, moderately to poorly differentiated tumors, pTNM IV stage. The use of preoperative chemoembolization did not decrease the recurrence rate. A preoperative biopsy increased the incidence of extrahepatic recurrence.

Does preoperative fine needle aspiration-biopsy produce tumor recurrence in patients following liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma?

INTRODUCTION: Liver transplantation (OLT) has been advocated for patients with carcinoma hepatocellular (HCC). A preoperative biopsy (fine needle aspiration biopsy) [FNA] facilitates preoperative diagnosis of adverse pathological factors: vascular invasion or histologicalic differentiation. But a biopsy may cause abdominal dissemination and be related to a higher incidence of recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 1986 to December 2003, we performed 95 OLT for HCC. We divided them in two groups: group A without FNA-biopsy (67.9%) and group B with FNA-biopsy (32.1%). RESULTS: We obtained the diagnosis of HCC in only 15 patients (57.6%). In two patients an OLT was avoided due to the presence of abdominal dissemination at the time of transplant. Recurrence incidence was higher among group B patients (5.9% vs 31.8%; P = .003) due to extrahepatic recurrence (2% vs 27.3%; P = .003). No differences were observed in morbidity or mortality. The two groups were homogeneous in epidemiological and pathological variables except: sex distribution, Child status, AFP level, tumor size, and pTNM stage. If we compare recurrence rates in the two groups attending to these nonhomogeneous variables, it was significantly higher among patients with tumors larger than 3 cm, pTNM I-III stage, Child B-C, AFP >200 ng/mL, and males or females. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative liver biopsy is associated with a larger incidence of tumor recurrence, so we believe that it is not necessary prior to an OLT for HCC.

Short- and long-term outcomes after living donor liver transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Living donor liver transplantation was first described as a way to alleviate the organ shortage. Extensive studies of both the prospective donor and the recipient are necessary to ensure successful outcome. In this paper we describe our results in 28 living donor liver transplantations from the perspective of the donor and the recipient. METHODS: A prospective, longitudinal, observational, comparative study was conducted from April 1995 to October 2004, including 28 living donor liver transplantations. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up time of 25.6 +/- 20.58 months, all donors are alive, showing normal liver function tests. All of them have been reincorporated into their normal lives. At the end of the study and after a mean follow-up time of 21.2 +/- 14.3 months, 86.3% of the adult recipients are alive. Actuarial recipient survivals at 6, 12, and 36 months were 86.36%. Actuarial mean survival time was 44 months (95% CI, 37 to 51). At the end of the study, 77.3% of the grafts are functioning. Actuarial graft survivals at 6, 12, and 36 months were 77.27%. Actuarial mean graft survival time was 32 months (95% CI, 25 to 39). The main complications were hepatic artery thrombosis (n = 2) and small for-size syndrome (n = 2). At a mean follow-up of 20.33 +/- 7.74 months, all pediatric recipients are alive. Actuarial recipient survivals at 12 and 36 months were 100% and actuarial graft survivals were 80%. CONCLUSIONS: Living donor liver transplantation may increase the liver graft pool, and therefore reduce waiting list mortality. Nevertheless caution must be deserved to avoid surgical morbidity and mortality in with the donor the recipient.