The Risk of Going Small: Lowering GRWR and Overcoming Small-For-Size Syndrome in Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) according to various graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR). BACKGROUND: The standard GRWR in LDLT is >0.8%. Our center accepted predicted GRWR ≥0.6% in selected patients. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent LDLT from 2001 to 2017 were included. Patients were stratified according to actual GRWR (Group 1:GRWR ≤0.6%; Group 2: 0.6%0.8%). RESULTS: There were 545 LDLT (group 1 = 39; group 2 = 159; group 3 = 347) performed. Pretransplant predicted GRWR showed good correlation to actual GRWR (R2 = 0.834) and these figures differed within a ±â€Š10%margin (P = 0.034) using an equivalence test. There were more left lobe grafts in group 1 (33.3%) than group 2 (10.7%) and 3 (2.9%). Median donor age was <35 years and steatosis >10% was rare.There was no difference in postoperative complication, vascular and biliary complication rate between groups. Over one-fifth (20.5%) of group 1 patients required portal flow modulation (PFM) and was higher than group 2 (3.1%) and group 3 (4%) (P = 0.001). Twenty-six patients developed small-for-size syndrome (SFSS): 5 of 39 (12.8%) in group 1 and 21 of 159 (13.2%) in group 2 and none in group 3 (P < 0.001). There were 2 hospital mortalities; otherwise, the remaining patients [24/26 (92.3%)] survive with a functional liver graft. The 5-year graft survival rates were 85.4% versus 87.8% versus 84.7% for group 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = 0.718). GRWR did not predict worse survivals in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Graft size in LDLT can be lowered to 0.6% after careful recipient selection, with low incidence of SFSS and excellent outcomes. Accurate graft weight prediction, donor-recipient matching, meticulous surgical techniques, appropriate use of PFM, and vigilant perioperative care is important to the success of such approach.

Long-Term Survival Outcome Between Living Donor and Deceased Donor Liver Transplant for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Intention-to-Treat and Propensity Score Matching Analyses.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies comparing outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) showed conflicting results, and most studies measured survival outcomes from the time of liver transplantation (LT). METHOD: This retrospective study was aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of HCC patients listed for LT using intention-to-treat (ITT) and propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Clinicopathological data were retrieved from a prospectively collected database. RESULTS: From 1995 to 2014, 375 HCC patients were listed for LT. ITT-LDLT group had 188 patients, whereas ITT-DDLT group had 187 patients. Twenty-seven patients (14.4%) and 122 patients (65.2%) were delisted from LDLT and DDLT waitlist, respectively. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were significantly better in ITT-LDLT group than ITT-DDLT group (94.1 vs. 77.5%, 81.4 vs. 48.7% and 75.9 vs. 40.8%). High alphafetoprotein (AFP) and ITT-DDLT treatment arm were independent poor prognostic factors affecting overall survival. LDLT group (n = 161) had more young patients, poorer liver function, higher AFP, more tumors outside Milan/UCSF criteria, when compared with DDLT group (n = 85). After PSM, the 1-, 3- and 5-year overall (95.4 vs. 98.5%, 80.0 vs. 92.3% and 73.4 vs. 84.4%) and recurrence-free (87.7% vs. 90.8%, 76.9% vs. 83.1% and 72.2% vs. 81.5%) survival rates were comparable between the matched LDLT and the matched DDLT group, respectively. CONCLUSION: Survival benefit of LDLT was observed for HCC patients with ITT analysis. Despite a more advanced tumor stage, overall and recurrence-free survival rates were comparable between LDLT and DDLT using PSM analysis.

Long term survival analysis of hepatectomy for neuroendocrine tumour liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Liver is the commonest site for metastasis in patients with neuroendocrine tumour (NET). A vast majority of treatment strategies including liver directed nonsurgical therapy, liver directed surgical therapy, and nonliver directed therapy have been proposed. In this study we aim to investigate the outcome of liver resection in neuroendocrine tumour liver metastases (NELM). METHOD: 293 patients had hepatectomy for liver metastasis in our hospital between June 1996 and December 2010. Twelve patients were diagnosed to have NET in their final pathology and their data were reviewed. RESULTS: The median ages of the patients were 48.5 years (range 20-71 years). Eight of the patients received major hepatectomy. Four patients received minor hepatectomy. The median operation time was 418 minutes (range 195-660 minutes). The median tumor size was 8.75 cm (range 0.9-21 cm). There was no hospital mortality. The overall one-year and three-year survivals were 91.7% and 55.6%. The one-year and three-year disease-free survivals were 33.3% and 16.7%. CONCLUSION: Hepatectomy is an effective and safe treatment for NELM. Reasonable outcome on long term overall survival and disease-free survival can be achieved in this group of patients with a low morbidity rate.

Long-term survival comparison between primary transplant and upfront curative treatment with salvage transplant for early stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Whether primary liver transplantation (PLT) or upfront curative treatment with salvage liver transplantation (SLT) is a better treatment option for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial. This study aims to compare the long-term survival starting from the time of primary treatment between the two approaches for early HCC using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. METHODS: From 1995 to 2014, 175 patients with early HCC undergoing either PLT (n = 149) or SLT (n = 26) were retrospectively reviewed in a prospectively collected database. Patients' demographic data, tumor characteristics, short-term and long-term outcome were compared between two groups after PSM. RESULTS: After matching, the baseline characteristics were comparable between mPLT group (n = 45) and mSLT group (n = 25). The tumor recurrence rate after transplant was significantly higher in mSLT group than mPLT group (28% vs. 15.6%). Calculating from the time of primary treatment, the 1, 3, and 5-year overall survival rates were comparable between mPLT group (97.8%, 91.1% and 86.3%) and mSLT group (100%, 95% and 85%). However, the 1, 3, and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were significantly better in mPLT group than mSLT group (95.6% vs. 90%, 86.6% vs. 80% and 84.3% vs. 70%). SLT approach and high pre-treatment serum alpha-fetoprotein level (>200 Î·g/mL) were poor prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival after transplant. CONCLUSIONS: PLT may be a better treatment option for early HCC, whereas SLT approach for HCC should be cautiously considered under the circumstance of organ shortage.

Impact of split completeness on future liver remnant hypertrophy in associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) in hepatocellular carcinoma: Complete-ALPPS versus partial-ALPPS.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggested that associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy with a partial split could effectively induce the same degree of future liver remnant hypertrophy as a complete split in non-cirrhotic and non-cholestatic livers with better postoperative safety profiles. Our aim was to evaluate if the same phenomenon could be applied to hepatitis-related chronic liver diseases. METHODS: In the study, 25 patients who underwent associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy from October 2013 to January 2016 for hepatocellular carcinoma were analyzed. Partial-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (n = 12) was defined as 50-80% of the transection surface split and complete-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (n = 13) was split down to inferior vena cava. Perioperative outcomes stratified by split completeness were evaluated. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in operating times and blood loss for stage I and II operations between complete-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy and partial-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy. All patients underwent stage II operation without any inter-stage complications. Complete split induced greater future liver remnant hypertrophy than partial split (hypertrophy rate: 31.2 vs 17.5 mL/day, P = .022) with more pronounced effect in chronic hepatitis (P = .007) than cirrhosis (P = .283). Complete-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy was more likely to attain a future liver remnant/estimated standard liver volume ratio >35% within 10 days (76.9% vs 33.3%, P = .024) and proceed to stage II within 14 days after stage I (100% vs 58.4%, P = .009). The overall postoperative morbidity (≥grade 3a) after stage II was 16% (complete versus partial split: 7.7% vs 25%, P = .238) and hospital mortality after stage II was 8% (complete versus partial split: 0% vs 16.7%, P = .125). CONCLUSION: Complete-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy induced more rapid future liver remnant hypertrophy than partial-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy without increased perioperative risk in chronic liver diseases.

Prognostic influence of spontaneous tumor rupture on hepatocellular carcinoma after interval hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous tumor rupture (STR) is a life-threatening complication of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Yet, interval partial hepatectomy (PH) is feasible in selected patients after hemostasis for the rupture event. Little is known, however, about the extent of negative prognostic impact STR had on these patients after resection. Our aim was to determine the impact of STR on the oncologic outcome of interval PH for ruptured HCC, and the prognostic value of STR on the current tumor node metastasis (TNM) classification. STUDY DESIGN: From 1989 to 2010, 84 of 364 patients (23%) with STR received staged PH. Clinicopathologic variables associated with STR were identified by logistic regression analysis and ruptured tumor size with prognostic impact was determined by receiver operating characteristic analysis. Comparison of survival curves was performed after stratification by the American Joint Committee on Cancer/TNM, 7th edition. RESULTS: Ruptured HCC had substantially worse survival than nonruptured tumor (5-year overall survival: 22.3% vs 53.4% P < .001). Anti-HCV status (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.225 confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.175-8.847, P = .023), platelet count (HR: 1.003, CI 1.0001-1.006, P = .042), tumor size (HR: 1.089, CI 1.025-1.156, P = .006) and microvascular invasion (HR 2.377, CI 1.255-4.502, P = .008) were independently associated with STR. When stratified by the TNM system after excluding STR as a component of T-staging, ruptured HCC had worse survival outcomes than nonruptured HCC in T1-T2 disease and tumors ≤10 cm only. A receiver operating characteristic analysis confirmed that STR had no additional adverse prognostic impact over other tumor features when size > 10 cm (area under curve 0.65, P < .001). CONCLUSION: STR affects the outcome of PH for T1-T2 disease or tumor ≤10 cm only. Assigning all resectable ruptured tumors to T4 may overestimate the severity of disease.