Cyclosporine vs. tacrolimus after liver transplantation for primary sclerosing cholangitis - a propensity score-matched intention-to-treat analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is controversy regarding the optimal calcineurin inhibitor type after liver transplant(ation) (LT) for primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). We compared tacrolimus with cyclosporine in a propensity score-matched intention-to-treat analysis based on registries representing nearly all LTs in Europe and the US. METHODS: From the European Liver Transplant Registry (ELTR) and Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), we included adult patients with PSC undergoing a primary LT between 2000-2020. Patients initially treated with cyclosporine were propensity score-matched 1:3 with those initially treated with tacrolimus. The primary outcomes were patient and graft survival rates. RESULTS: The propensity score-matched sample comprised 399 cyclosporine-treated and 1,197 tacrolimus-treated patients with PSC. During a median follow-up of 7.4 years (IQR 2.3-12.8, 12,579.2 person-years), there were 480 deaths and 231 re-LTs. The initial tacrolimus treatment was superior to cyclosporine in terms of patient and graft survival, with 10-year patient survival estimates of 72.8% for tacrolimus and 65.2% for cyclosporine (p <0.001) and 10-year graft survival estimates of 62.4% and 53.8% (p <0.001), respectively. These findings were consistent in the subgroups according to age, sex, registry (ELTR vs. SRTR), time period of LT, MELD score, and diabetes status. The acute rejection rates were similar between groups. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, tacrolimus (hazard ratio 0.72, p <0.001) and mycophenolate use (hazard ratio 0.82, p = 0.03) were associated with a reduced risk of graft loss or death, whereas steroid use was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Tacrolimus is associated with better patient and graft survival rates than cyclosporine and should be the standard calcineurin inhibitor used after LT for patients with PSC. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: The optimal calcineurin inhibitor to use after liver transplantation in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis has yet to be firmly established. Since randomized trials with long follow-up are unlikely to be performed, multicontinental long-term registry data are essential in informing clinical practices. Our study supports the practice of using tacrolimus instead of cyclosporine in the initial immunosuppressive regimen after liver transplantation for patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. The retrospective registry-based design is a limitation.

Propensity Score-Matching Analysis Comparing Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Limited Liver Resections of the Posterosuperior Segments: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic limited liver resections (RLLR) versus laparoscopic limited liver resections (LLLR) of the posterosuperior segments. BACKGROUND: Both laparoscopic and robotic liver resections have been used for tumors in the posterosuperior liver segments. However, the comparative performance and safety of both approaches have not been well examined in the existing literature. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 5446 patients who underwent RLLR or LLLR of the posterosuperior segments (I, IVa, VII, and VIII) at 60 international centers between 2008 and 2021. Data on baseline demographics, center experience and volume, tumor features, and perioperative characteristics were collected and analyzed. Propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis (in both 1:1 and 1:2 ratios) was performed to minimize selection bias. RESULTS: A total of 3510 cases met the study criteria, of whom 3049 underwent LLLR (87%), and 461 underwent RLLR (13%). After PSM (1:1: and 1:2), RLLR was associated with a lower open conversion rate [10 of 449 (2.2%) vs 54 of 898 (6.0%); P =0.002], less blood loss [100 mL [IQR: 50-200) days vs 150 mL (IQR: 50-350); P <0.001] and a shorter operative time (188 min (IQR: 140-270) vs 222 min (IQR: 158-300); P <0.001]. These improved perioperative outcomes associated with RLLR were similarly seen in a subset analysis of patients with cirrhosis-lower open conversion rate [1 of 136 (0.7%) vs 17 of 272 (6.2%); P =0.009], less blood loss [100 mL (IQR: 48-200) vs 160 mL (IQR: 50-400); P <0.001], and shorter operative time [190 min (IQR: 141-258) vs 230 min (IQR: 160-312); P =0.003]. Postoperative outcomes in terms of readmission, morbidity and mortality were similar between RLLR and LLLR in both the overall PSM cohort and cirrhosis patient subset. CONCLUSIONS: RLLR for the posterosuperior segments was associated with superior perioperative outcomes in terms of decreased operative time, blood loss, and open conversion rate when compared with LLLR.

Propensity Score-matched Analysis Comparing Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Minor Liver Resections of the Anterolateral Segments: an International Multi-center Study of 10,517 Cases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of robotic minor liver resections (RMLR) versus laparoscopic (L) MLR of the anterolateral segments. BACKGROUND: Robotic liver surgery has been gaining prominence over the years with increasing usage for a myriad of hepatic resections. Robotic liver resections(RLR) has demonstrated non-inferiority to laparoscopic(L)LR while illustrating advantages over conventional laparoscopy especially for technically difficult and major LR. However, the advantage of RMLR for the anterolateral(AL) (segments II, III, IVb, V and VI) segments, has not been clearly demonstrated. METHODS: Between 2008 to 2022, 15,356 of 29,861 patients from 68 international centres underwent robotic(R) or laparoscopic minor liver resections (LMLR) for the AL segments Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed for matched analysis. RESULTS: 10,517 patients met the study criteria of which 1,481 underwent RMLR and 9,036 underwent LMLR. A PSM cohort of 1,401 patients in each group were identified for analysis. Compared to the LMLR cohort, the RMLR cohort demonstrated significantly lower median blood loss (75ml vs. 100ml, P<0.001), decreased blood transfusion (3.1% vs. 5.4%, P=0.003), lower incidence of major morbidity (2.5% vs. 4.6%, P=0.004), lower proportion of open conversion (1.2% vs. 4.5%, P<0.001), shorter post operative stay (4 days vs. 5 days, P<0.001), but higher rate of 30-day readmission (3.5% vs. 2.1%, P=0.042). These results were then validated by a 1:2 PSM analysis. In the subset analysis for 3,614 patients with cirrhosis, RMLR showed lower median blood loss, decreased blood transfusion, lower open conversion and shorter post operative stay than LMLR. CONCLUSION: RMLR demonstrated statistically significant advantages over LMLR even for resections in the AL segments although most of the observed clinical differences were minimal.

Harmonizing Definitions and Perspectives in Extreme Liver Surgery: A Delphi Experts Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To propose to our community a common language about extreme liver surgery. BACKGROUND: The lack of a clear definition of extreme liver surgery prevents convincing comparisons of results among centers. METHODS: We used a two-round Delphi methodology to quantify consensus among liver surgery experts. For inclusion in the final recommendations, we established a consensus when the positive responses (agree and totally agree) exceeded 70%. The study steering group summarized and reported the recommendations. In general, a five-point Likert scale with a neutral central value was used, and in a few cases multiple choices. Results are displayed as numbers and percentages. RESULTS: A two-round Delphi study was completed by 38 expert surgeons in complex hepatobiliary surgery. The surgeon´s median age was 58 years old (52-63) and the median years of experience was 25 years (20-31). For the proposed definitions of total vascular occlusion, hepatic flow occlusion and inferior vein occlusion, the degree of agreement was 97%, 81% and 84%, respectively. In situ approach (64%) was the preferred, followed by ante situ (22%) and ex situ (14%). Autologous or cadaveric graft for hepatic artery or hepatic vein repair were the most recommended (89%). The use of veno-venous bypass or portocaval shunt revealed the divergence depending on the case. Overall, 75% of the experts agreed with the proposed definition for extreme liver surgery. CONCLUSION: Obtaining a consensus on the definition of extreme liver surgery is essential to guarantee the correct management of patients with highly complex hepatobiliary oncological disease. The management of candidates for extreme liver surgery involves comprehensive care ranging from adequate patient selection to the appropriate surgical strategy.

Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy/H67: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to establish global benchmark outcomes indicators for L-RPS/H67. BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive liver resections has seen an increase in uptake in recent years. Over time, challenging procedures as laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomies (L-RPS)/H67 are also increasingly adopted. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 854 patients undergoing minimally invasive RPS (MI-RPS) in 57 international centers in 4 continents between 2015 and 2021. There were 651 pure L-RPS and 160 robotic RPS (R-RPS). Sixteen outcome indicators of low-risk L-RPS cases were selected to establish benchmark cutoffs. The 75th percentile of individual center medians for a given outcome indicator was set as the benchmark cutoff. RESULTS: There were 573 L-RPS/H67 performed in 43 expert centers, of which 254 L-RPS/H67 (44.3%) cases qualified as low risk benchmark cases. The benchmark outcomes established for operation time, open conversion rate, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity, 90-day mortality and textbook outcome after L-RPS were 350.8 minutes, 12.5%, 53.8%, 22.9%, 23.8%, 2.8%, 0% and 4% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The present study established the first global benchmark values for L-RPS/H6/7. The benchmark provided an up-to-date reference of best achievable outcomes for surgical auditing and benchmarking.

Factors Associated with and Impact of Open Conversion in Laparoscopic and Robotic Minor Liver Resections: An International Multicenter Study of 10,541 Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the increasing widespread adoption and experience in minimally invasive liver resections (MILR), open conversion occurs not uncommonly even with minor resections and as been reported to be associated with inferior outcomes. We aimed to identify risk factors for and outcomes of open conversion in patients undergoing minor hepatectomies. We also studied the impact of approach (laparoscopic or robotic) on outcomes. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of 20,019 patients who underwent RLR and LLR across 50 international centers between 2004-2020. Risk factors for and perioperative outcomes of open conversion were analysed. Multivariate and propensity score-matched analysis were performed to control for confounding factors. RESULTS: Finally, 10,541 patients undergoing either laparoscopic (LLR; 89.1%) or robotic (RLR; 10.9%) minor liver resections (wedge resections, segmentectomies) were included. Multivariate analysis identified LLR, earlier period of MILR, malignant pathology, cirrhosis, portal hypertension, previous abdominal surgery, larger tumor size, and posterosuperior location as significant independent predictors of open conversion. The most common reason for conversion was technical issues (44.7%), followed by bleeding (27.2%), and oncological reasons (22.3%). After propensity score matching (PSM) of baseline characteristics, patients requiring open conversion had poorer outcomes compared with successful MILR cases as evidenced by longer operative times, more blood loss, higher requirement for perioperative transfusion, longer duration of hospitalization and higher morbidity, reoperation, and 90-day mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple risk factors were associated with conversion of MILR even for minor hepatectomies, and open conversion was associated with significantly poorer perioperative outcomes.

Impact of Liver Cirrhosis, Severity of Cirrhosis, and Portal Hypertension on the Difficulty and Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Major Liver Resections for Primary Liver Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) offer potential benefits such as reduced blood loss and morbidity compared with open liver resections. Several studies have suggested that the impact of cirrhosis differs according to the extent and complexity of resection. Our aim was to investigate the impact of cirrhosis on the difficulty and outcomes of MILR, focusing on major hepatectomies. METHODS: A total of 2534 patients undergoing minimally invasive major hepatectomies (MIMH) for primary malignancies across 58 centers worldwide were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score (PSM) and coarsened exact matching (CEM) were used to compare patients with and without cirrhosis. RESULTS: A total of 1353 patients (53%) had no cirrhosis, 1065 (42%) had Child-Pugh A and 116 (4%) had Child-Pugh B cirrhosis. Matched comparison between non-cirrhotics vs Child-Pugh A cirrhosis demonstrated comparable blood loss. However, after PSM, postoperative morbidity and length of hospitalization was significantly greater in Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, but these were not statistically significant with CEM. Comparison between Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis demonstrated the latter had significantly higher transfusion rates and longer hospitalization after PSM, but not after CEM. Comparison of patients with cirrhosis of all grades with and without portal hypertension demonstrated no significant difference in all major perioperative outcomes after PSM and CEM. CONCLUSIONS: The presence and severity of cirrhosis affected the difficulty and impacted the outcomes of MIMH, resulting in higher blood transfusion rates, increased postoperative morbidity, and longer hospitalization in patients with more advanced cirrhosis. As such, future difficulty scoring systems for MIMH should incorporate liver cirrhosis and its severity as variables.

Better liver transplant outcomes by donor interventions?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Donor risk factors and events surrounding donation impact the quantity and quality of grafts generated to meet liver transplant waitlist demands. Donor interventions represent an opportunity to mitigate injury and risk factors within donors themselves. The purpose of this review is to describe issues to address among donation after brain death, donation after circulatory determination of death, and living donors directly, for the sake of optimizing relevant outcomes among donors and recipients. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies on donor management practices and high-level evidence supporting specific interventions are scarce. Nonetheless, for donation after brain death (DBD), critical care principles are employed to correct cardiocirculatory compromise, impaired tissue oxygenation and perfusion, and neurohormonal deficits. As well, certain treatments as well as marginally prolonging duration of brain death among otherwise stable donors may help improve posttransplant outcomes. In donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD), interventions are performed to limit warm ischemia and reverse its adverse effects. Finally, dietary and exercise programs have improved donation outcomes for both standard as well as overweight living donor (LD) candidates, while minimally invasive surgical techniques may offer improved outcomes among LD themselves. SUMMARY: Donor interventions represent means to improve liver transplant yield and outcomes of liver donors and grafts.

Machine perfusion of the liver and bioengineering.

With the increasing number of accepted candidates on waiting lists worldwide, there is an urgent need to expand the number and the quality of donor livers. Dynamic preservation approaches have demonstrated various benefits, including improving liver function and graft survival, and reducing liver injury and post-transplant complications. Consequently, organ perfusion techniques are being used in clinical practice in many countries. Despite this success, a proportion of livers do not meet current viability tests required for transplantation, even with the use of modern perfusion techniques. Therefore, devices are needed to further optimise machine liver perfusion - one promising option is to prolong machine liver perfusion for several days, with ex situ treatment of perfused livers. For example, stem cells, senolytics, or molecules targeting mitochondria or downstream signalling can be administered during long-term liver perfusion to modulate repair mechanisms and regeneration. Besides, today's perfusion equipment is also designed to enable the use of various liver bioengineering techniques, to develop scaffolds or for their re-cellularisation. Cells or entire livers can also undergo gene modulation to modify animal livers for xenotransplantation, to directly treat injured organs or to repopulate such scaffolds with "repaired" autologous cells. This review first discusses current strategies to improve the quality of donor livers, and secondly reports on bioengineering techniques to design optimised organs during machine perfusion. Current practice, as well as the benefits and challenges associated with these different perfusion strategies are discussed.

Utilization of livers donated after circulatory death for transplantation - An international comparison.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Liver graft utilization rates are a hot topic due to the worldwide organ shortage and the increasing number of transplant candidates on waiting lists. Liver perfusion techniques have been introduced in several countries, and may help to increase the organ supply, as they potentially enable the assessment of livers before use. METHODS: Liver offers were counted from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors (Maastricht type III) arising during the past decade in eight countries, including Belgium, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, the UK, and the US. Initial type-III DCD liver offers were correlated with accepted, recovered and implanted livers. RESULTS: A total number of 34,269 DCD livers were offered, resulting in 9,780 liver transplants (28.5%). The discard rates were highest in the UK and US, ranging between 70 and 80%. In contrast, much lower DCD liver discard rates, e.g. between 30-40%, were found in Belgium, France, Italy, Spain and Switzerland. In addition, we observed large differences in the use of various machine perfusion techniques, as well as in graft and donor risk factors. For example, the median donor age and functional donor warm ischemia time were highest in Italy, e.g. >40 min, followed by Switzerland, France, and the Netherlands. Importantly, such varying risk profiles of accepted DCD livers between countries did not translate into large differences in 5-year graft survival rates, which ranged between 60-82% in this analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, DCD liver discard rates across the eight countries were high, although this primarily reflects the situation in the Netherlands, the UK and the US. Countries where in situ and ex situ machine perfusion strategies were used routinely had better DCD utilization rates without compromised outcomes. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: A significant number of Maastricht type III DCD livers are discarded across Europe and North America today. The overall utilization rate among eight Western countries is 28.5% but varies significantly between 18.9% and 74.2%. For example, the median DCD-III liver utilization in five countries, e.g. Belgium, France, Italy, Switzerland, and Spain is 65%, in contrast to 24% in the Netherlands, UK and US. Despite this, and despite different rules and strategies for organ acceptance and preservation, 1- and 5-year graft survival rates remain fairly similar among all participating countries. A highly varying experience with modern machine perfusion technology was observed. In situ and ex situ liver perfusion concepts, and application of assessment tools for type-III DCD livers before transplantation, may be a key explanation for the observed differences in DCD-III utilization.

Posttransplant Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance: A Cost-effectiveness and Cost-utility Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Assess cost-effectiveness and -utility associated with posttransplant HCC surveillance compared to standard follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite lack of prospective clinical data, expert consensus recommends posttransplant surveillance to detect HCC recurrence in a latent phase, while it might be amenable to curative-intent therapy. METHODS: A Markov-based transition model was created to estimate life expectancy and quality-of-life among liver transplant patients undergoing HCC surveillance. Models were built for 2 cohorts: 1 undergoing HCC surveillance with contrast-enhanced computed tomography of chest and abdomen and serum alpha-fetoprotein analysis and the other receiving standard posttransplant follow-up. Primary model outputs included LY and QALY gains, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and incremental cost-utility ratio. Willingness-to-pay for a QALY gain (cost-effectiveness threshold) was used to estimate efficiency. RESULTS: Surveillance was marginally more effective versus no surveillance, resulting in means of 0.069 LYs and 0.026 QALYs gained. Costs for surveillance were increased by an average of 988.32€, resulting in incremental cost-effectiveness ratio 14,410.15€/LY and incremental cost-utility ratio 37,547.97€/QALY. Surveillance did not seem cost-effective in our setting, considering willingness-to-pay threshold of 25,000€/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated surveillance might be cost-effective in 42% of cases, but degree of uncertainty in the analysis was high. CONCLUSIONS: Performing posttransplant HCC surveillance offers marginal clinical benefits and increases costs. Although expert consensus supports surveillance, results of this decision analysis raise doubt regarding the utility of such recommendations and support ongoing need for prospective clinical trials.

Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Liver Resections: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: To establish global benchmark outcomes indicators after laparoscopic liver resections (L-LR). BACKGROUND: There is limited published data to date on the best achievable outcomes after L-LR. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 11,983 patients undergoing L-LR in 45 international centers in 4 continents between 2015 and 2020. Three specific procedures: left lateral sectionectomy (LLS), left hepatectomy (LH), and right hepatectomy (RH) were selected to represent the 3 difficulty levels of L-LR. Fifteen outcome indicators were selected to establish benchmark cutoffs. RESULTS: There were 3519 L-LR (LLS, LH, RH) of which 1258 L-LR (40.6%) cases performed in 34 benchmark expert centers qualified as low-risk benchmark cases. These included 659 LLS (52.4%), 306 LH (24.3%), and 293 RH (23.3%). The benchmark outcomes established for operation time, open conversion rate, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity, and 90-day mortality after LLS, LH, and RH were 209.5, 302, and 426 minutes; 2.1%, 13.4%, and 13.0%; 3.2%, 20%, and 47.1%; 0%, 7.1%, and 10.5%; 11.1%, 20%, and 50%; 0%, 7.1%, and 20%; and 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study established the first global benchmark outcomes for L-LR in a large-scale international patient cohort. It provides an up-to-date reference regarding the "best achievable" results for L-LR for which centers adopting L-LR can use as a comparison to enable an objective assessment of performance gaps and learning curves.

Propensity-score Matched and Coarsened-exact Matched Analysis Comparing Robotic and Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study of 4822 Cases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes between robotic major hepatectomy (R-MH) and laparoscopic major hepatectomy (L-MH). BACKGROUND: Robotic techniques may overcome the limitations of laparoscopic liver resection. However, it is unknown whether R-MH is superior to L-MH. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of patients undergoing R-MH or L-MH at 59 international centers from 2008 to 2021. Data on patient demographics, center experience volume, perioperative outcomes, and tumor characteristics were collected and analyzed. Both 1:1 propensity-score matched (PSM) and coarsened-exact matched (CEM) analyses were performed to minimize selection bias between both groups. RESULTS: A total of 4822 cases met the study criteria, of which 892 underwent R-MH and 3930 underwent L-MH. Both 1:1 PSM (841 R-MH vs. 841 L-MH) and CEM (237 R-MH vs. 356 L-MH) were performed. R-MH was associated with significantly less blood loss {PSM:200.0 [interquartile range (IQR):100.0, 450.0] vs 300.0 (IQR:150.0, 500.0) mL; P = 0.012; CEM:170.0 (IQR: 90.0, 400.0) vs 200.0 (IQR:100.0, 400.0) mL; P = 0.006}, lower rates of Pringle maneuver application (PSM: 47.1% vs 63.0%; P < 0.001; CEM: 54.0% vs 65.0%; P = 0.007) and open conversion (PSM: 5.1% vs 11.9%; P < 0.001; CEM: 5.5% vs 10.4%, P = 0.04) compared with L-MH. On subset analysis of 1273 patients with cirrhosis, R-MH was associated with a lower postoperative morbidity rate (PSM: 19.5% vs 29.9%; P = 0.02; CEM 10.4% vs 25.5%; P = 0.02) and shorter postoperative stay [PSM: 6.9 (IQR: 5.0, 9.0) days vs 8.0 (IQR: 6.0 11.3) days; P < 0.001; CEM 7.0 (IQR: 5.0, 9.0) days vs 7.0 (IQR: 6.0, 10.0) days; P = 0.047]. CONCLUSIONS: This international multicenter study demonstrated that R-MH was comparable to L-MH in safety and was associated with reduced blood loss, lower rates of Pringle maneuver application, and conversion to open surgery.

Development of a model to predict the risk of early graft failure after adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation: An ELTR study.

Graft survival is a critical end point in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT), where graft procurement endangers the lives of healthy individuals. Therefore, ALDLT must be responsibly performed in the perspective of a positive harm-to-benefit ratio. This study aimed to develop a risk prediction model for early (3 months) graft failure (EGF) following ALDLT. Donor and recipient factors associated with EGF in ALDLT were studied using data from the European Liver Transplant Registry. An artificial neural network classification algorithm was trained on a set of 2073 ALDLTs, validated using cross-validation, tested on an independent random-split sample (n=518), and externally validated on United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research data. Model performance was assessed using the AUC, calibration plots, and decision curve analysis. Graft type, graft weight, level of hospitalization, and the severity of liver disease were associated with EGF. The model ( http://ldlt.shinyapps.io/eltr_app ) presented AUC values at cross-validation, in the independent test set, and at external validation of 0.69, 0.70, and 0.68, respectively. Model calibration was fair. The decision curve analysis indicated a positive net benefit of the model, with an estimated net reduction of 5-15 EGF per 100 ALDLTs. Estimated risks>40% and<5% had a specificity of 0.96 and sensitivity of 0.99 in predicting and excluding EGF, respectively. The model also stratified long-term graft survival ( p <0.001), which ranged from 87% in the low-risk group to 60% in the high-risk group. In conclusion, based on a panel of donor and recipient variables, an artificial neural network can contribute to decision-making in ALDLT by predicting EGF risk.

Nonmalignant portal vein thrombi in patients with cirrhosis consist of intimal fibrosis with or without a fibrin-rich thrombus.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication of cirrhosis. The exact pathophysiology remains largely unknown, and treatment with anticoagulants does not lead to recanalization of the portal vein in all patients. A better insight into the structure and composition of portal vein thrombi may assist in developing strategies for the prevention and treatment of PVT. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Sixteen prospectively and 63 retrospectively collected nonmalignant portal vein thrombi from patients with cirrhosis who underwent liver transplantation were included. Histology, immunohistochemistry, and scanning electron microscopy were used to assess structure and composition of the thrombi. Most recent CT scans were reanalyzed for thrombus characteristics. Clinical characteristics were related to histological and radiological findings. All samples showed a thickened, fibrotic tunica intima. Fibrin-rich thrombi were present on top of the fibrotic intima in 9/16 prospective cases and in 21/63 retrospective cases. A minority of the fibrotic areas stained focally positive for fibrin/fibrinogen (16% of cases), von Willebrand factor (VWF; 10%), and CD61 (platelets, 21%), while most of the fibrin-rich areas stained positive for those markers (fibrin/fibrinogen, 100%; VWF, 77%; CD61, 100%). No associations were found between clinical characteristics including estimated thrombus age and use of anticoagulants and presence of fibrin-rich thrombi. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that PVT in patients with cirrhosis consists of intimal fibrosis with an additional fibrin-rich thrombus in only one-third of cases. We hypothesize that our observations may explain why not all portal vein thrombi in patients with cirrhosis recanalize by anticoagulant therapy.

Impact of Tumor Size on the Difficulty of Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study.

INTRODUCTION: Although tumor size (TS) is known to affect surgical outcomes in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), its impact on laparoscopic major hepatectomy (L-MH) is not well studied. The objectives of this study were to investigate the impact of TS on the perioperative outcomes of L-MH and to elucidate the optimal TS cutoff for stratifying the difficulty of L-MH. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of 3008 patients who underwent L-MH at 48 international centers. A total 1396 patients met study criteria and were included. The impact of TS cutoffs was investigated by stratifying TS at each 10-mm interval. The optimal cutoffs were determined taking into consideration the number of endpoints which showed a statistically significant split around the cut-points of interest and the magnitude of relative risk after correction for multiple risk factors. RESULTS: We identified 2 optimal TS cutoffs, 50 mm and 100 mm, which segregated L-MH into 3 groups. An increasing TS across these 3 groups (≤ 50 mm, 51-100 mm, > 100 mm), was significantly associated with a higher open conversion rate (11.2%, 14.7%, 23.0%, P < 0.001), longer operating time (median, 340 min, 346 min, 365 min, P = 0.025), increased blood loss (median, 300 ml,  ml, 400 ml, P = 0.002) and higher rate of intraoperative blood transfusion (13.1%, 15.9%, 27.6%, P < 0.001). Postoperative outcomes such as overall morbidity, major morbidity, and length of stay were comparable across the three groups. CONCLUSION: Increasing TS was associated with poorer intraoperative but not postoperative outcomes after L-MH. We determined 2 TS cutoffs (50 mm and 10 mm) which could optimally stratify the surgical difficulty of L-MH.

Risk Factors and Outcomes of Open Conversion During Minimally Invasive Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study on 3880 Procedures Comparing the Laparoscopic and Robotic Approaches.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the advances in minimally invasive (MI) liver surgery, most major hepatectomies (MHs) continue to be performed by open surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors and outcomes of open conversion during MI MH, including the impact of the type of approach (laparoscopic vs. robotic) on the occurrence and outcomes of conversions. METHODS: Data on 3880 MI conventional and technical (right anterior and posterior sectionectomies) MHs were retrospectively collected. Risk factors and perioperative outcomes of open conversion were analyzed. Multivariate analysis, propensity score matching, and inverse probability treatment weighting analysis were performed to control for confounding factors. RESULTS: Overall, 3211 laparoscopic MHs (LMHs) and 669 robotic MHs (RMHs) were included, of which 399 (10.28%) had an open conversion. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that male sex, laparoscopic approach, cirrhosis, previous abdominal surgery, concomitant other surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score 3/4, larger tumor size, conventional MH, and Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification III procedures were associated with an increased risk of conversion. After matching, patients requiring open conversion had poorer outcomes compared with non-converted cases, as evidenced by the increased operation time, blood transfusion rate, blood loss, hospital stay, postoperative morbidity/major morbidity and 30/90-day mortality. Although RMH showed a decreased risk of conversion compared with LMH, converted RMH showed increased blood loss, blood transfusion rate, postoperative major morbidity and 30/90-day mortality compared with converted LMH. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple risk factors are associated with conversion. Converted cases, especially those due to intraoperative bleeding, have unfavorable outcomes. Robotic assistance seemed to increase the feasibility of the MI approach, but converted robotic procedures showed inferior outcomes compared with converted laparoscopic procedures.

E-AHPBA-ESSO-ESSR Innsbruck consensus guidelines for preoperative liver function assessment before hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality after liver surgery. Standardized assessment of preoperative liver function is crucial to identify patients at risk. These European consensus guidelines provide guidance for preoperative patient assessment. METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was used to achieve consensus. The expert panel consisted of hepatobiliary surgeons, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and hepatologists. The guideline process was supervised by a methodologist and reviewed by a patient representative. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. Evidence assessment and statement development followed Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. RESULTS: Based on 271 publications covering 4 key areas, 21 statements (at least 85 per cent agreement) were produced (median level of evidence 2- to 2+). Only a few systematic reviews (2++) and one RCT (1+) were identified. Preoperative liver function assessment should be considered before complex resections, and in patients with suspected or known underlying liver disease, or chemotherapy-associated or drug-induced liver injury. Clinical assessment and blood-based scores reflecting liver function or portal hypertension (for example albumin/bilirubin, platelet count) aid in identifying risk of PHLF. Volumetry of the future liver remnant represents the foundation for assessment, and can be combined with indocyanine green clearance or LiMAx® according to local expertise and availability. Functional MRI and liver scintigraphy are alternatives, combining FLR volume and function in one examination. CONCLUSION: These guidelines reflect established methods to assess preoperative liver function and PHLF risk, and have uncovered evidence gaps of interest for future research.

Liver surgery is an effective treatment for liver tumours. Liver failure is a major problem in patients with a poor liver quality or having large operations. The treatment options for liver failure are limited, with high death rates. To estimate patient risk, assessing liver function before surgery is important. Many methods exist for this purpose, including functional, blood, and imaging tests. This guideline summarizes the available literature and expert opinions, and aids clinicians in planning safe liver surgery.

European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) Consensus Report on Downstaging, Bridging and Immunotherapy in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Liver transplantation offers the best chance of cure for most patients with non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although not all patients with HCC are eligible for liver transplantation at diagnosis, some can be downstaged using locoregional treatments such as ablation and transarterial chemoembolization. These aforementioned treatments are being applied as bridging therapies to keep patients within transplant criteria and to avoid them from dropping out of the waiting list while awaiting a liver transplant. Moreover, immunotherapy might have great potential to support downstaging and bridging therapies. To address the contemporary status of downstaging, bridging, and immunotherapy in liver transplantation for HCC, European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) convened a dedicated working group comprised of experts in the treatment of HCC to review literature and to develop guidelines pertaining to this cause that were subsequently discussed and voted during the Transplant Learning Journey (TLJ) 3.0 Consensus Conference that took place in person in Prague. The findings and recommendations of the working group on Downstaging, Bridging and Immunotherapy in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma are presented in this article.

European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT) Consensus Statement on Outcome Measures in Liver Transplantation According to Value-Based Health Care.

Liver transplantation is a highly complex, life-saving, treatment for many patients with advanced liver disease. Liver transplantation requires multidisciplinary teams, system-wide adaptations and significant investment, as well as being an expensive treatment. Several metrics have been proposed to monitor processes and outcomes, however these lack patient focus and do not capture all aspects of the process. Most of the reported outcomes do not capture those outcomes that matter to the patients. Adopting the principles of Value-Based Health Care (VBHC), may provide an opportunity to develop those metrics that matter to patients. In this article, we present a Consensus Statement on Outcome Measures in Liver Transplantation following the principles of VBHC, developed by a dedicated panel of experts under the auspices of the European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) Guidelines' Taskforce. The overarching goal is to provide a framework to facilitate the development of outcome measures as an initial step to apply the VMC paradigm to liver transplantation.