Intra-arterial lipo-prostaglandin E1 infusion for arterial spasm in liver transplantation: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic artery obstruction is a critical consideration in graft outcomes after living donor liver transplantation. We report a case of diffuse arterial vasospasm that developed immediately after anastomosis and was managed with an intra-arterial infusion of lipo-prostaglandin E1 (PGE1). CASE SUMMARY: A 57-year-old male with hepatitis B virus-related liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma underwent ABO-incompatible living donor liver transplant. The grafted hepatic artery was first anastomosed to the recipient's right hepatic artery stump. However, the arterial pulse immediately weakened. Although a new anastomosis was performed using the right gastroepiploic artery, the patient's arterial pulse rate remained poor. We attempted angiographic intervention immediately after the operation; it showed diffuse arterial vasospasms like 'beads on a string'. We attempted continuous infusion of lipo-PGE1 overnight via an intra-arterial catheter. The next day, arterial flow improved without any spasms or strictures. The patient had no additional arterial complications or related sequelae at the time of writing, 1-year post-liver transplantation. CONCLUSION: Angiographic evaluation is helpful in cases of repetitive arterial obstruction, and intra-arterial infusion of lipo-PGE1 may be effective in treating diffuse arterial spasms.

Laparoscopic anatomical versus non-anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in the posterosuperior segments: a propensity score matched analysis.

Background: Since laparoscopic anatomical resection (LAR) for tumors, especially located in the posterosuperior (PS) segments of the liver remains difficult, laparoscopic non-anatomical resection (LNAR) are generally preferred. To compare the clinical outcomes between LAR and LNAR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in the PS segments. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data for 1,029 patients who underwent hepatectomy for HCC between 2004 and 2019. Of 167 patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC in PS segments, 64 underwent LNAR and 103 underwent LAR. Patients were matched one-to-one using propensity score matching (46:46). Results: LNAR was associated with significantly shorter operation time (P=0.001), lower estimated blood loss (P=0.001), lower transfusion rate (P=0.006) and shorter hospital stay (P=0.012) than LAR. The respective 1- ,3-, and 5-year overall survival rates (LAR: 95.3%, 87.1%, and 77.8%; LNAR: 96.7%, 91.6%, and 85.0%; P=0.262) and recurrence-free survival rates (LAR: 75.7%, 70.3%, and 68.9%; LNAR: 81.8%, 58.3%, and 55.3%; P=0.879) were similar. The intrahepatic recurrence rate was significantly higher in LNAR group than in LAR group (78.6% vs. 57.1%, P=0.023), but the post-recurrence treatments differed significantly between the two groups (P=0.016); the re-resection rate was much greater in the LNAR group (45.0% vs. 0%) group. The respective 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-recurrence survival rates were similar in the LAR and LNAR groups (P=0.212). After recurrence, survival in re-resection group was significantly greater than not (P=0.026). Conclusions: LNAR is safe and feasible for HCC located in PS segments, and provided acceptable oncologic outcomes that are comparable to those of LAR. LNAR can be considered for patient with tumor located in PS segment when LAR is not feasible.

Prognostic Effect of Liver Resection in Extended Cholecystectomy for T2 Gallbladder Cancer Revisited: A Retrospective Cohort Study With Propensity Score-matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of liver resection on the prognosis of T2 gallbladder cancer (GBC). BACKGROUND: Although extended cholecystectomy [lymph node dissection (LND) + liver resection] is recommended for T2 GBC, recent studies have shown that liver resection does not improve survival outcomes relative to LND alone. METHODS: Patients with pT2 GBC who underwent extended cholecystectomy as an initial procedure and did not reoperation after cholecystectomy at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between January 2010 and December 2020 were analyzed. Extended cholecystectomy was defined as either LND with liver resection (LND+L group) or LND only (LND group). We conducted 2:1 propensity score matching to compare the survival outcomes of the groups. RESULTS: Of the 197 patients enrolled, 100 patients from the LND+L group and 50 from the LND group were successfully matched. The LND+L group experienced greater estimated blood loss ( P <0.001) and a longer postoperative hospital stay ( P =0.047). There was no significant difference in the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) of the 2 groups (82.7% vs 77.9%, respectively, P =0.376). A subgroup analysis showed that the 5-year DFS was similar in the 2 groups in both T substages (T2a: 77.8% vs 81.8%, respectively, P =0.988; T2b: 88.1% vs 71.5%, respectively, P =0.196). In a multivariable analysis, lymph node metastasis [hazard ratio (HR) 4.80, P =0.006] and perineural invasion (HR 2.61, P =0.047) were independent risk factors for DFS; liver resection was not a prognostic factor (HR 0.68, P =0.381). CONCLUSIONS: Extended cholecystectomy including LND without liver resection may be a reasonable treatment option for selected T2 GBC patients.

The value of analyzing textbook outcomes after laparoscopic hepatectomy-a narrative review.

Background and Objective: Guidelines are required because of the wide variability in care provided to patients with similar characteristics and similar medical conditions. Quality indicators were developed many years ago to assess the quality of care provided by hospitals. Since then, it has become evident that a composite set of factors can better characterize the patient's quality of care. The objectives of this review were to analyze the textbook outcomes (TO) applied in surgery, focusing on laparoscopic hepatectomy. Methods: Data pertaining to quality indicators used in hospitals and their surgical applications were retrieved from medical literature by searching PubMed and Google Scholar for articles published between 1912 and 2022. Search terms included quality indicators, outcome indicators, TOs, TOs after surgery, TOs after hepatectomy, and clinical indicators. Key Content and Findings: Since their inception, TO have been applied to various procedures and their impacts on patients have been assessed. TO and their implications have been studied for a variety of surgical procedures and were recently extended to laparoscopic hepatectomy. TO of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy and right hemihepatectomy were recently assessed, and benchmark values have been defined. TO are useful tools for assessing hospital performance and for optimizing the outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy. Conclusions: At present, TO only consider surgeon-related factors. However, it is important to include the patient's perspective when defining TO. Although TO were recently applied to laparoscopic hepatectomy, there is still a need to further evaluate their application in this setting. Achieving TO was shown to have a positive impact on long-term outcomes and this needs to be studied for different liver resection procedures.

Impact of Drain Position on Drain Fluid Amylase, Fluid Collection and Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula after Distal Pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: The current definition for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is based on the drain fluid amylase (DFA), and drains must be positioned adequately. We investigated the impact of DFA level, drain position and fluid collection after distal pancreatectomy (DP). METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 516 patients who underwent DP between June 2004 and December 2018. Patients were excluded if DP was not main procedure, DFA was not measured, postoperative computed tomography (CT) was not performed, or drains were removed before CT. Demographic and perioperative data were analyzed in 422 eligible patients. RESULTS: Of 422 patients, 49(11.6%) had clinically relevant (CR)-POPF and 102(24.2%) had a malpositioned drain. There was no difference in CR-POPF rate between the high and low DFA groups (12.6% vs 10.7%, P = 0.649). Drain malposition was more frequently associated with symptomatic fluid collection and CR-POPF than well-positioned drains. Male sex, high body mass index, transfusion, and drain malposition were CR-POPF risk factors. In subgroup analysis, drain malposition was also an independent risk factor for CR-POPF in the low DFA group. CONCLUSIONS: After DP, the incidence of CR-POPF in the high and low DFA groups was similar and drain malposition increased the risk of CR-POPF. Thus, the ISGPS definition of POPF based on DFA levels is limited in DP, and DFA levels should be interpreted together with the drain position.

Validation of the Anatomical and Biological Definitions of Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer According to the 2017 International Consensus for Survival and Recurrence in Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Upfront Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The International Consensus Criteria (ICC) (2017) redefined patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC) according to anatomical, biological, and conditional aspects. However, these new criteria have not been validated comprehensively. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to validate the anatomical and biological definitions of BR-PDAC for oncological outcomes in patients with resectable (R) and BR-PDAC undergoing upfront surgery. METHODS: A total of 404 patients who underwent upfront surgery for R- and BR-PDAC from 2004 to 2020 were included. The patients were classified according to the ICC as follows: resectable (R) (n = 259), anatomical borderline (BR-A) (n = 43), biological borderline (BR-B) (n = 81), and anatomical and biologic borderline (BR-AB) (n = 21). RESULTS: Compared with the R and BR-B groups, the BR-A and BR-AB groups had higher postoperative complication rates (16.5% and 27.2% vs 32.5% and 33.4%; P < 0.001) and significantly lower R0 resection rates (85.7% and 80.2% vs 65.1% and 61.9%; P = 0.003). In contrast, compared with the R and BR-A groups, the BR-B (32.1%) and BR-AB (57.1%) groups had higher early recurrence rates (within postoperative 6 months) (16.5% and 25.6% vs 32.1% and 57.1%; P < 0.001) and significantly lower 3-year recurrence-free survival rates (36.1% and 20.7% vs 12.1% and 7.8%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Anatomically defined BR-PDAC was associated with a higher risk of margin-positive resection and postoperative complication rates, while biologically defined BR-PDAC was associated with higher early recurrence rates and lower survival rates. Thus, the anatomical and biological definitions are useful in predicting the prognosis and determining the usefulness of neoadjuvant therapy.

Development and Validation of a Difficulty Scoring System for Laparoscopic Liver Resection to Treat Hepatolithiasis.

Background and Objectives: A difficulty scoring system was previously developed to assess the difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for liver tumors; however, we need another system for hepatolithiasis. Therefore, we developed a novel difficulty scoring system (nDSS) and validated its use for predicting postoperative outcomes. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study. We used clinical data of 123 patients who underwent LLR for hepatolithiasis between 2003 and 2021. We analyzed the data to determine which indices were associated with operation time or estimated blood loss (EBL) to measure the surgical difficulty. We validated the nDSS in terms of its ability to predict postoperative outcomes, namely red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, postoperative hospital stay (POHS), and major complications defined as grade ≥IIIa according to the Clavien−Dindo classification (CDC). Results: The nDSS included five significant indices (range: 5−17; median: 8). The RBC transfusion rate (p < 0.001), POHS (p = 0.002), and major complication rate (p = 0.002) increased with increasing nDSS score. We compared the two groups of patients divided by the median nDSS (low: 5−7; high: 8−17). The operation time (210.7 vs. 240.7 min; p < 0.001), EBL (281.9 vs. 702.6 mL; p < 0.001), RBC transfusion rate (5.3% vs. 37.9%; p < 0.001), POHS (8.0 vs. 13.3 days; p = 0.001), and major complication rate (8.8% vs. 25.8%; p = 0.014) were greater in the high group. Conclusions: The nDSS can predict the surgical difficulty and outcomes of LLR for hepatolithiasis and may help select candidates for the procedure and surgical approach.

Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Centrally Located Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Background and Objectives: The feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma (cHCC 1 cm of the hilum, major hepatic veins, and inferior vena cava) is still controversial. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LLR for cHCC and compare the perioperative outcomes with those of open liver resection (OLR). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 110 patients who underwent LLR (n = 59) or open liver resection (OLR) (n = 51) for cHCC between January 2004 and September 2018. LLR group was divided into the following two subgroups according to the date of operation: Group 1 (n = 19) and Group 2 (n = 40), to account for the advancement in the laparoscopic techniques. Results: No mortality within 3 months was observed. There were no significant differences in operation time (285 vs. 280 min; p = 0.938) and postoperative complication rate (22.0% vs. 27.5%; p = 0.510) between both groups. However, intraoperative blood loss (500 vs. 700 mL; p < 0.001), transfusion rate (10.2% vs. 31.4%; p = 0.006), and hospital stay (6 vs. 10 days; p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the LLR group than in the OLR group. In the LLR group, Group 2, showed a shorter hospital stay than Group 1 (6 vs. 8 days; p = 0.006). There were improvements in the operation time (280 vs. 360 min; p = 0.036) and less intraoperative blood loss (455 vs. 500 mL; p = 0.075) in Group 2. Conclusions: We demonstrated that LLR can be safely performed in highly selected patients with cHCC.

A scoring system to predict the risk of major complications after laparoscopic liver resection in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The safety of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in elderly patients is a matter of concern because the reduced physiologic reserve increases the risk of postoperative complications. However, there are few score systems for predicting complications after LLR in elderly patients. The aim of this study is to propose a new simplified scoring system based on the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) to predict major complications after LLR in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 257 consecutive patients aged ≥ 65 years who underwent LLR for HCC between 2004 and 2019. The GNRI formula was 1.489 × serum albumin (g/L) + 41.7 × present weight/ideal weight (kg). A scoring system to predict the risk of major complications was developed by assigning points to each risk factor equal to its regression coefficient determined in the multivariable analysis. Major complications were defined as complications of Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher. RESULTS: Of the 257 patients, 219 patients were finally included in this study. Major complications occurred after LLR in 24 patients (10.9%). Multivariable analysis showed that the GNRI (hazard ratio [HR] 3.396, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.242-9.288, P = 0.017), Child-Turcotte-Pugh score (HR 2.191, 95% CI 1.400-8.999, P = 0.036), major liver resection (HR 2.683, 95% CI 1.082-7.328, P = 0.050), and intraoperative transfusion (HR 1.802, 95% CI 1.428-7.591, P = 0.022) were independent predictors of major postoperative complications. These variables were assigned points based on their HRs, and the resulting 10-point model showed good discrimination (area under the curve 0.756, 95% CI 0.649-0.836, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The scoring system outperformed the GNRI for predicting major complications after LLR in elderly patients with HCC.

Effect of postoperative administration of nafamostat mesilate on posthepatectomy liver failure.

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether the administration of nafamostat mesilate (NM) reduces the risk of posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) in patients undergoing hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the 1114 patients who underwent hepatectomy for HCC between 2004 and 2020. NM was selectively administered to patients undergoing major hepatectomy with an estimated blood loss of >500 mL. NM group was administered via intravenous of 20 mg of NM from immediately after surgery until postoperative day 4. We performed 1:1 propensity score matching and included 56 patients in each group. PHLF was defined according to the International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS). RESULTS: The incidence of PHLF was lower in the NM group than control group (P = 0.018). The mean peak total bilirubin (P = 0.006), aspartate transaminase (P = 0.018), and alanine aminotransferase (P = 0.018) levels postoperatively were significantly lower in the NM group. The mean hospital stays (P = 0.012) and major complication rate (P = 0.023) were also significantly lower in the NM group. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic administration of NM reduced the risks of complication and decreased the frequency of PHLF after hepatectomy. A further prospective study is needed to verify our findings.

Association between achieving textbook outcomes and better survival after laparoscopic liver resection in the anterolateral segments in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The quality of surgical procedures are assessed by textbook outcomes (TO). Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is considered a standard treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the anterolateral segments of the liver. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the factors affecting achievement of TO for LLR and its impact on survival. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent LLR for lesions located in the anterolateral segments (n = 309). Patients were divided into TO and non-TO group. RESULTS: A TO was achieved in 55.0% of patients (n = 170). In multivariable analysis, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score ≥ 10 (odds ratio[OR] 3.076; 95% confidence interval[CI] 1.134-8.342), absence of diabetes mellitus (OR: 2.325; 95% CI: 1.227-4.407) and thrombocytopenia (OR: 2.115; 95% CI: 1.134-8.342) were independently associated with not achieving TO. The 5-year overall (82.9% vs 72.8%, P = .017) and recurrence-free (48.8% vs 35.4%; P = .036) survival rates were significantly greater in the TO group than in the non-TO group. CONCLUSION: The MELD score, thrombocytopenia, and hypoalbuminemia were independent risk factors influencing the achievement of TO. TO influences the short- and long-term outcomes after LLR for HCC.

Risk factors and long-term implications of unplanned conversion during laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma located in anterolateral liver segments.

Purpose: The impact of conversion on perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes is controversial. Thus, we compared these outcomes between laparoscopic (Lap), unplanned conversion (Conversion), and planned open (Open) liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in anterolateral (AL) liver segments and aimed to identify risk factors for unplanned conversion. Methods: We retrospectively studied 374 patients (Lap, 299; Open, 62; Conversion, 13) who underwent liver resection for HCC located in AL segments between 2004 and 2018. Results: Compared to the Lap group, the Conversion group showed greater values for operation time (p < 0.001), blood loss (p = 0.021), transfusion rate (p = 0.009), postoperative complication rate (p = 0.008), and hospital stay (p = 0.040), with a lower R0 resection rate (p < 0.001) and disease-free survival (p = 0.001). Compared with the Open group, the Conversion group had a longer operation time (p = 0.012) and greater blood loss (p = 0.024). Risk factors for unplanned conversion were large tumor size (odds ratio [OR], 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.74; p = 0.020), multiple tumors (OR, 5.95; 95% CI, 1.45-24.39; p = 0.013), and other organ invasion (OR, 15.32; 95% CI, 1.80-130.59; p = 0.013). Conclusion: In conclusion, patients who experienced unplanned conversion during LLR for HCC located in AL segments showed poor perioperative and long-term outcomes compared to those who underwent planned laparoscopic and open liver resection. Therefore, open liver resection should be considered in patients with risk factors for unplanned conversion.