Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in elderly patients: a propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is a first-line curative option for hepatocellular carcinoma, but its role is still unclear in elderly patients. The aim of our study was to compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: The study included 665 consecutive hepatocellular carcinoma liver resection cases in patients with ≥70 years of age treated in eight European hospital centres. Patients were divided into laparoscopic and open liver resection groups. Perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between these groups. RESULTS: After a 1:1 propensity score matching, 219 patients were included in each group. Clavien-Dindo grades III/IV (6 vs. 20%, p = 0.04) were lower in the laparoscopic than in the open matched group. Hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic than in the open matched group (5 vs. 7 days, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between laparoscopic and open groups regarding overall survival and disease-free survival at 1-, 3- and 5- year periods. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma is associated with good short-term outcomes in patients with ≥70 years of age compared to open liver resection. Laparoscopic liver resection is safe and feasible in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Laparoscopic surgery versus radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of single hepatocellular carcinoma ≤3 cm in the elderly: a propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) represented potential treatments for patients with a single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) smaller than 3 cm. As the aging population soared, our study aimed to examine the advantage/drawback balance for these treatments, which should be reassessed in elderly patients. METHODS: A multicentric retrospective study compared 184 elderly patients (aged >70 years) (86 patients underwent LLR and 98 had RFA) with single ≤3 cm HCC, observed from January 2009 to January 2019. RESULTS: After propensity score matching (PSM), the estimated 1- and 3-year overall survival rates were 96.5 and 87.9% for the LLR group, and 94.6 and 68.1% for the RFA group (p = 0.001) respectively. The estimated 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 92.5 and 67.4% for the LLR group, and 68.5 and 36.9% for the RFA group (p = 0.001). Patients with HCC of anterolateral segments were more often treated with laparoscopic resection (47 vs. 36, p = 0.04). The median operative time in the resection group was 205 min and 25 min in the RFA group (p = 0.01). Length of hospital stay was 5 days in the resection group and 3 days in the RFA group (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Despite a longer length of hospital stay and operative time, LLR guarantees a comparable postoperative course and a better overall and disease-free survival in elderly patients with single HCC (≤3 cm), located in anterolateral segments.

Emergency surgery for splenic flexure cancer: results of the SFC Study Group database.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of surgical treatment for splenic flexure carcinomas (SFCs) in emergency settings remains unexplored. This study aims to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of different alternatives for emergency SFC resection. METHOD: This multicenter retrospective study was based on the SFC Study Group database. For the present analysis, SFC patients were selected if they had received emergency surgical resection with curative intent between 2000 and 2018. Extended right colectomy (ERC), left colectomy (LC), and segmental left colectomy (SLC) were evaluated and compared. RESULTS: The study sample was composed of 90 SFC patients who underwent emergency ERC (n = 55, 61.1%), LC (n = 18, 20%), or SLC (n = 17, 18.9%). Bowel obstruction was the most frequent indication for surgery (n = 75, 83.3%), and an open approach was chosen in 81.1% of the patients. A higher incidence of postoperative complications was observed in the ERC group (70.9%) than in the LC (44.4%) and SLC groups (47.1%), with a significant procedure-related difference for severe postoperative complications (Dindo-Clavien ≥ III; adjusted odds ratio for ERC vs. LC:7.23; 95% CI 1.51-34.66; p = 0.013). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 8 (11.2%) patients, with no differences between the groups (p = 0.902). R0 resection was achieved in 98.9% of the procedures, and ≥ 12 lymph nodes were retrieved in 92.2% of patients. Overall and disease-free survival rates at 5 years were similar between the groups and were significantly associated with stage pT4 and the presence of synchronous metastases. CONCLUSION: In the emergency setting, ERC and open surgery are the most frequently performed procedures. ERC is associated with increased odds of severe postoperative complications when compared to more conservative SFC resections. Nonetheless, all the alternatives seem to provide similar pathologic and long-term outcomes, supporting the oncological safety of more conservative resections for emergency SFCs.

Surgical Treatment of Colon Cancer of the Splenic Flexure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

This is a systematic review and meta-analysis on the surgical treatments of splenic flexure carcinomas (SFCs). Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched from January 1990 to May 2016. Studies of at least 5 patients comparing extended right colectomy (ERC) versus left colectomy (LC) and/or laparoscopy versus open surgery for SFCs were retrieved and analyzed. Overall, 12 retrospective studies were selected, including 569 patients. ERC was performed in 23.2% of patients, whereas LC in 76.8%. Pooled data suggested that ERC and LC had similar oncologic quality of resection and postoperative outcomes. Laparoscopy was used in 50.6% of patients (conversion rate: 2.5%) and it was associated with significantly shorter time to oral diet, fewer postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stay than open surgery. In conclusion, the optimal extent of SFC surgical resection, that is, ERC or LC remains under debate. However, laparoscopy provides better postoperative outcomes and fewer postoperative complications than open surgery.

[Multidisciplinary management of localized rectal cancer]. / Prise en charge multidisciplinaire du cancer localisé du rectum.

Rectal cancer remains a frequent pathology, with a good prognosis, according to a proper management. During the last decades, we have been confronted with important improvements, notably regarding the diagnosis and the treatment. In the era of highly specialized medicine, it is clear that the management must be multidisciplinary, incorporating not only the surgeon, the oncologist and the radiation oncologist, but also the radiologist, the gastroenterologist, and the pathologist. We aim to review the recent concepts and the future developments in the management of rectal cancer.

Le cancer du rectum demeure une pathologie fréquente, dont le pronostic est heureusement bon. Ces dernières décennies, nous avons été confrontés à plusieurs avancées importantes, que ce soit au niveau du diagnostic ou du traitement. Sa prise en charge fait partie intégrante de la médecine hautement spécialisée, et il est devenu clair que l'approche se doit d'être multidisciplinaire, incorporant aussi bien le chirurgien, l'oncologue et le radio-oncologue, que le radiologue, le gastroentérologue et le pathologue. Dans cet article, les concepts récents ainsi que les perspectives futures sont analysés.

Minimally invasive surgery versus percutaneous radio frequency ablation for the treatment of single small (≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with single small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be managed by surgical resection or radio frequency ablation (RFA), with similar recurrence and survival rates. Recently, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been introduced in liver surgery, and the advantage/drawback balance between surgery and RFA needs reassessment. METHODS: Patients with Child-Pugh class A or B cirrhosis, and with single 1-3 cm HCC, undergoing MIS (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or RFA from July 1998 to December 2012 were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 45 patients underwent MIS, and 60 underwent RFA. Groups were not statistically different regarding type of underlying liver disease, HCC size, and AFP. However, RFA patients showed worse liver synthetic function with lower albumin and higher bilirubin serum levels, and higher ASA scores. Patients with HCC in segments 2-6 were more often treated by MIS. The incidence of complications was similar between groups (RFA: 6/60, 10 % vs. MIS: 5/45, 11 %, p = 0.854), and there was no measurable difference in the rate of procedure-related blood transfusions (RFA: 1/60, 1.7 % vs. MIS: 3/45, 6.7 %, p = 0.185). Local recurrence was only detected after RFA (11.7 %, p = 0.056, log-rank). Overall survival was higher in the MIS group (p = 0.042), with median survivals of 100 ± 13.5 versus 68 ± 15.9 months. CONCLUSION: The present data need further validation. Selected patients with single ≤3-cm HCCs can be safely treated by MIS, without increased risk of perioperative complication, and with a lower risk of local recurrence. MIS should be especially favoured in patients with peripheral HCCs in segments 2-6, and/or when a histological assessment is desirable.