Comparison of post-hepatectomy long-term survival outcome between non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine and colorectal liver metastases: A population-based propensity-score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hepatectomy is an established treatment for colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) or neuroendocrine liver metastasis. However, its role in non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NCNNLM) is controversial. This study aims to compare long-term survival outcomes after hepatectomy between NCNNLM and CLM in a population-based cohort. METHODS: From 2009 to 2018, curative hepatectomy were performed in 964 patients with NCNNLM (n â€‹= â€‹133) or CLM (n â€‹= â€‹831). Propensity score (PS) matching was performed. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between PS-matched groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors affecting survival. RESULTS: There were 133 patients in the NCNNLM group and 266 patients in the CLM group. The mortality (1.5 â€‹% vs 1.5 â€‹%) and morbidity (19.5 â€‹% vs 20.3 â€‹%) rates were comparable between the two groups. There was no statistically significant difference in 5-year overall (48.9 â€‹% vs 39.8 â€‹%) and recurrence-free (25.1 â€‹% vs 23.4 â€‹%) survival rates between NCNNLM and CLM groups. A high pre-operative serum bilirubin level, severe postoperative complications and multiple tumors were independent prognostic factors for poor survival. CONCLUSION: Hepatectomy for selected patients with NCNNLM can achieve similar long-term oncological outcomes as those with CLM. High serum bilirubin, severe postoperative complication and multiple tumors are poor prognostic factors for survival.

Comparison of clinical outcome between laparoscopic and open hepatectomy of high difficulty score for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of high difficulty score is technically challenging. There is a lack of clinical evidence to support its applicability in terms of the long-term survival benefits. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes between LLR and the open liver resection of high difficulty score for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2010 to 2020, using Iwate criteria, 424 patients underwent liver resection of high difficulty score by the laparoscopic (n = 65) or open (n = 359) approach. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed between the two groups. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between PS-matched groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors affecting survival. RESULTS: The laparoscopic group had significantly fewer severe complications (3% vs. 10.8%), and shorter median hospital stays (6 days vs. 8 days) than the open group. Meanwhile, the long-term oncological outcomes were comparable between the two groups, in terms of the tumor recurrence rate (40% vs. 46.1%), the 5-year overall survival rate (75.4% vs. 76.2%), and the 5-year recurrence-free survival rate (50.3% vs. 53.5%). The high preoperative serum alpha-fetoprotein level, multiple tumors, and severe postoperative complications were the independent poor prognostic factors associated with worse overall survival. The surgical approach (Laparoscopic vs. Open) did not influence the survival. CONCLUSION: LLR of high difficulty score for selected patients with HCC has better short-term outcomes than the open approach. More importantly, it can achieve similar long-term survival outcomes as the open approach.

A case series of emergency pancreaticoduodenectomies: What were their indications and outcomes?

Emergency pancreaticoduodenectomy (EPD) is a rarely performed operation. It is important to know the indications and outcomes of EPD to have a better understanding of its application in clinical practice. A review of eight consecutive cases of EPD was done. Between January 2003 and December 2021, 8 out of 370 patients (2.2%) in a single center received pancreaticoduodenectomy as emergency. There were six males and two females with a median age of 45.5 years. The indications were trauma in three patients, bleeding tumors in two patients, and one patient each in obstructing duodenal tumor, postoperative complication and post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complication. The median operative time and blood loss were 427.5 minutes and 1,825 mL, respectively. There was no operative mortality. Seven patients (87.5%) had postoperative complications. Three patients (37.5%) developed postoperative grade B pancreatic fistula. The median postoperative hospital stay was 23.5 days. Five patients were still alive while three patients survived for 13, 31, and 42 months after the operation. The causes of death were recurrent tumors in two patients, and sepsis in one patient. According to this case series, EPD is associated with increased morbidity and pancreatic fistula, but is still deserved in life-threatening situations and long-term survival is possible after EPD.

Baveno VII criteria identify varices needing treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma of different Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stages.

BACKGROUND: Baveno VII criteria for predicting varices needing treatment (VNT) have not been tested in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) population. We evaluated Baveno VII consensus for VNT in HCC patients of different stages according to Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stages undergoing curative hepatectomy. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of patients with HCC. Patients underwent transient elastography examination before HCC treatment and received at least one upper endoscopic examination afterwards. Patients were prospectively followed for clinical events including VNT. RESULTS: Six hundred and seventy-three patients (83.1% male, median age 62 years) with HCC of BCLC stage 0 (10%), A (57%), B (17%) and C (15%) were recruited and followed for 47 months. The median (range) LSM was 10.5 (6.9-20.4) kPa; 74% had LSM ≤ 20 kPa and 58% had platelet count ≥150 × 10/L, respectively. VNT occurred in 51 (7.6%) patients. In patients who fulfilled Baveno VII criteria, that is, LSM ≤ 20 kPa and platelet count above 150 × 10/L, only 11 (1.6%) patients had VNT. In all BCLC stages of HCC, the proportion of patients with VNT was below 5%, which support the validity and applicability of Baveno VII criteria in all BCLC stages of HCC. CONCLUSIONS: The Baveno VII criteria are valid and applicable in HCC patients undergoing curative hepatectomy for selecting patients to undergo screening endoscopy for VNT. The validity was consistent across different BCLC stages of HCC.

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.

Minimally invasive versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis of 224 patients.

PURPOSE: To compare the peri-operative and long-term survival outcomes of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) (robotic or laparoscopic) with open liver resection (OLR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Data of patients who underwent liver resection for HCC were reviewed from a prospectively collected database. Outcomes of MILR were compared with those of OLR. A propensity score matching analysis with a ratio of 1:1 was performed to minimise the potential bias in clinical pathological factors. RESULTS: From January 2003 to December 2017, a total of 705 patients underwent liver resection for HCC. Amongst them, 112 patients received MILR and 593 patients received OLR. After propensity score matching, there were 112 patients in each of the MILR and OLR groups. Patients were matched by age, sex, hepatitis status, presence of cirrhosis, platelet count, albumin level, bilirubin level, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) level, alanine transferase (ALT) level, creatinine level, tumour differentiation, tumour size, tumour number, presence of tumour rupture, presence of vascular invasion, extent of liver resection (minor/major) and difficulty score. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 94.4%, 90.4% and 82.3% in the MILR group vs 95.4%, 80.5% and 71.8% in the open group (p = 0.240). The 1-, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 81.0%, 63.1% and 55.8% in the MILR group vs 79.1%, 58.1% and 45.7 in the open group (p = 0.449). The MILR group demonstrated significantly less blood loss (p < 0.001), less blood transfusion (p = 0.004), lower post-operative complications (p < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001) when compared with the OLR group. CONCLUSIONS: Our data shows MILR yielded superior post-operative outcomes to OLR, with comparable survival outcomes.

Asia-Pacific multicentre randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (AP-LAPO trial).

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma is the sixth most common malignancy in the world. Major hepatectomy (resection of greater than or equal to three liver segments) is needed if a tumour is large or close to major blood vessels. Despite low mortality, open major hepatectomy is associated with high rates of tumour recurrence that limits survival. Laparoscopic major hepatectomy has been proposed as an alternative approach with potential oncological benefits. This study compares laparoscopic major hepatectomy with open major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma in a randomized trial. METHODS: The Asia-Pacific multicentre randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (AP-LAPO trial) is an open-labelled multicentre randomized trial to be conducted in five centres in the Asia-Pacific region. The study will test the hypothesis that laparoscopic major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma is associated with less tumour recurrence and better survival compared with open major hepatectomy; the primary outcome being 2-year recurrence-free survival. Secondary outcomes include hospital mortality, postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, time to functional recovery, quality of life, long-term survival, and postoperative serum surgical stress-related cytokines. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The AP-LAPO trial will determine whether laparoscopic major hepatectomy offers oncological benefits to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma compared with open major hepatectomy. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04852211 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov) registered on 21 April 2021. PROTOCOL VERSION: AP-LAPO trial version 01 (1 December 2021).

The Impact of Involved Resection Margin on Recurrence and Survival After Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Periampullary Carcinoma, with Emphasis on Pancreatic Head Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The supposed adverse effect of involved resection margin during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for periampullary carcinoma or pancreatic head carcinoma (CaP) on long-term oncological outcomes is still inconclusive. METHODS: This is a retrospective study on periampullary carcinoma undergoing PD. Patients with R0 (margin clear) resection were compared to patients with R1 (microscopically directly involved margin) resection. Patients with gross involved margin (R2 resection) were excluded. Long-term oncological outcomes measured included incidence and site of recurrent disease, overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). A subgroup analysis was made on patients with CaP. RESULTS: Between January 2003 and December 2019, 203 PD were identified for present study. The incidence of R1 resection was common (12% in periampullary carcinoma and 20% in CaP). In periampullary carcinoma, R1 resection had greater proportion of CaP, lesser proportion of carcinoma of ampulla (CaA), more perineural invasion, more lymph node (LN) metastasis. R1 group had a shorter OS and DFS, but no difference in the incidence and site of recurrent disease. In the subgroup of CaP (91 patients), R1 group did not differ from R0 group except for more LN metastasis. There was no difference in incidence and site of recurrent disease, OS and DFS. On multivariable analysis, R1 resection was not an independent factor for OS and DFS for periampullary carcinoma or for CaP only. CONCLUSION: Involved resection margin was not uncommon. It was not associated with higher incidence of recurrent disease including local recurrence, and was not an independent prognosticator for OS and DFS.

An international multicentre propensity score matched analysis comparing between robotic versus laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy.

BACKGROUND: Left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) is one of the most commonly performed minimally invasive liver resections. While laparoscopic (L)-LLS is a well-established technique, over traditional open resection, it remains controversial if robotic (R)-LLS provides any advantages of L-LLS. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of 997 patients from 21 international centres undergoing L-LLS or R-LLS from 2006 to 2020 was conducted. A total of 886 cases (214 R-LLS, 672 L-LLS) met study criteria. 1:1 and 1:2 propensity score matched (PSM) comparison was performed between R-LLS & L-LLS. Further subset analysis by Iwate difficulty was also performed. Outcomes measured include operating time, blood loss, open conversion, readmission rates, morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Comparison between R-LLS and L-LLS after PSM 1:2 demonstrated statistically significantly lower open conversion rate in R-LLS than L-LLS (0.6% versus 5%, p = 0.009) and median blood loss was also statistically significantly lower in R-LLS at 50 (80) versus 100 (170) in L-LLS (p = 0.011) after PSM 1:1 although there was no difference in the blood transfusion rate. Pringle manoeuvre was also found to be used more frequently in R-LLS, with 53(24.8%) cases versus to 84(12.5%) L-LLS cases (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the other key perioperative outcomes such as operating time, length of stay, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity and 90-day mortality between both groups. CONCLUSION: R-LLS was associated with similar key perioperative outcomes compared to L-LLS. It was also associated with significantly lower blood loss and open conversion rates compared to L-LLS.

Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Comparing Robotic and Laparoscopic Right and Extended Right Hepatectomy.

Importance: Laparoscopic and robotic techniques have both been well adopted as safe options in selected patients undergoing hepatectomy. However, it is unknown whether either approach is superior, especially for major hepatectomy such as right hepatectomy or extended right hepatectomy (RH/ERH). Objective: To compare the outcomes of robotic vs laparoscopic RH/ERH. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this case-control study, propensity score matching analysis was performed to minimize selection bias. Patients undergoing robotic or laparoscopic RH/EHR at 29 international centers from 2008 to 2020 were included. Interventions: Robotic vs laparoscopic RH/ERH. Main Outcomes and Measures: Data on patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and short-term perioperative outcomes were collected and analyzed. Results: Of 989 individuals who met study criteria, 220 underwent robotic and 769 underwent laparoscopic surgery. The median (IQR) age in the robotic RH/ERH group was 61.00 (51.86-69.00) years and in the laparoscopic RH/ERH group was 62.00 (52.03-70.00) years. Propensity score matching resulted in 220 matched pairs for further analysis. Patients' demographics and tumor characteristics were comparable in the matched cohorts. Robotic RH/ERH was associated with a lower open conversion rate (19 of 220 [8.6%] vs 39 of 220 [17.1%]; P = .01) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (median [IQR], 7.0 [5.0-10.0] days; mean [SD], 9.11 [7.52] days vs median [IQR], 7.0 [5.75-10.0] days; mean [SD], 9.94 [8.99] days; P = .048). On subset analysis of cases performed between 2015 and 2020 after a center's learning curve (50 cases), robotic RH/ERH was associated with a shorter postoperative hospital stay (median [IQR], 6.0 [5.0-9.0] days vs 7.0 [6.0-9.75] days; P = .04) with a similar conversion rate (12 of 220 [7.6%] vs 17 of 220 [10.8%]; P = .46). Conclusion and Relevance: Robotic RH/ERH was associated with a lower open conversion rate and shorter postoperative hospital stay compared with laparoscopic RH/ERH. The difference in open conversion rate was associated with a significant decrease for laparoscopic but not robotic RH/ERH after a center had mounted the learning curve. Use of robotic platform may help to overcome the initial challenges of minimally invasive RH/ERH.

A retrospective comparative study of robotic distal pancreatectomy with or without splenic vessel and spleen preservation.

BACKGROUND: Robotic distal pancreatectomy has been accepted to be safe and effective for pancreatic tail lesion. Whether spleen preservation by preserving the splenic vessels with robot assistance is feasible and beneficial remains controversial. Here we would like to compare the operative outcomes of robotic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy (DPS) with robotic spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy by means of splenic vessel preservation (SVP). METHODS: Between March 2011 and September 2019, 56 consecutive patients undergoing robotic distal pancreatectomy were identified, with 28 patients in each group. Patient demographics, histopathology findings and operative outcomes were prospectively collected and compared between the two groups. A subgroup analysis was made after excluding malignant and pancreatic lesions >6 cm in the DPS group. RESULTS: The two groups had similar conversion rate, blood loss, morbidity and pancreatic fistula rate. There was no operative mortality. The SVP group had shorter median operative time (245 vs 303.5 min, P = 0.019) and shorter median hospital stay (5 vs 6 days, P = 0.019) than the DPS group. However, all malignant lesions occurred in the DPS group and lesion size in DPS group was significantly larger. After matching, there were 28 SVP and 15 DPS. The histopathology findings and lesion size became comparable. The SVP group still had shorter operative time (245 vs 290 min, P = 0.022) and shorter hospital stay (5 vs 7 days, P = 0.014) than the DPS group. CONCLUSION: Apart from avoiding risk of overwhelming postsplenectomy sepsis, robotic SVP had additional advantage of shorter operative time and shorter hospital stay than robotic DPS.

Liver stiffness measurement predicts short-term and long-term outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after curative liver resection.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Hepatocellular carcinoma is one of the commonest cancer in the world. Despite curative resection, recurrence remains the largest challenge. Many risk factors were identified for predicting recurrence, including liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. Transient elastography (Fibroscan) is an accurate tool in measuring liver fibrosis. This study aimed to evaluate the use of preoperative liver stiffness measurement (LSM), with Fibroscan in predicting long-term recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after curative resection. METHOD: A prospective cohort study was conducted from February 2010 - June 2017 in Prince of Wales hospital. All consecutive patients with HCC undergone hepatectomy were included. Demographic factors, preoperative LSM, tumor characteristics and operative details were assessed. Primary outcome and secondary outcome were overall survival and disease free survival at 1 year, 3 year and 5 year respectively. RESULTS: A total of 401 cases were included. Patients with LSM ≥12kPa had significantly lower 5-year overall survival rate (75.1% vs 57.3%, p < 0.001) and disease free survival rate (45.8% vs. 26.7%, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, pre-operative creatinine and vascular invasion of tumor were significant factors in predicting early recurrence (p = 0.012 and p = 0.004). LSM ≥12kPa were the only significant factor in predicting late recurrence (p = 0.048). CONCLUSION: Pre-operative liver stiffness measurement could predict the late recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after curative resection.

Comparison of Survival Outcomes in Transarterial Ethanol Ablation and Liver Resection for Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma ≤ 5 cm in Patients Stratified by Liver Function.

PURPOSE: To compare the survival outcomes of patients treated with transarterial ethanol ablation (TEA) with those treated with liver resection (LR) for solitary HCC less than 5 cm in diameter, in patients stratified according to liver function using ALBI grade. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study approved by the Institutional Committee included all treatment-naïve patients with solitary HCC (≤ 5 cm) and Child-Pugh score 5, and who had received TEA (33 patients) or LR (192 patients) between 2004 and 2012. Treatment outcomes were compared between patients treated with TEA and LR after a period of at least 7 years of follow-up. Comparison was repeated for those patients with ALBI grade 2 or 3. RESULTS: Both overall survival (OS, months) and recurrence-free survival (RFS months) were significantly longer in the LR group (OS: LR 129.7[119.5, 140], TEA 69.1[55.9, 82.3], P < 0.0001; RFS: LR 91.3[43.5, 139.1], TEA 13.8 [11, 16.5], P < 0.0001). In patients with ALBI grade 2 or 3, there was no significant difference between the groups in OS or RFS (OS: LR 43.1[0, 91.2], TEA 55.4 [43.7, 67.2], P = 0.65; RFS: LR 17.8 [11.4, 24.2], TEA 11.9 [6.7, 17.1], P = 0.132). Transient epigastric discomfort and low-grade fever without consequence occurred in 8 patients (8/33 or 24.2%) in the TEA group. CONCLUSION: The overall survival after LR for HCCs ≤ 5 cm was superior to that after TEA but similar when compared in patients with ALBI grade 2 or 3, the ALBI grade is useful for patient selection for TEA or LR for HCCs ≤ 5 cm.

What is the pancreatic duct size limit for a safe duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy? A retrospective study.

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains a dreadful complication. Duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy (DTMPJ) is a commonly performed anastomosis after PD. This study aims to evaluate whether there is a size limit of pancreatic duct below which POPF rate increases significantly after DTMPJ. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed from a database with prospectively collected data on consecutive patients undergoing DTMPJ. RESULTS: Between the years 2003 and 2019, a total of 288 patients with DTMPJ were recruited. POPF occurred in 56.3% of the patients, of which 43.8% were biochemical leak, 8.7% were grade B, and 1.4% were grade C. Overall operative morbidity was 51.4%, of which 19.1% were major complications. Five patients (1.7%) died within 90 days of operation. Patients with grade B/C POPF had significantly soft pancreas (p < 0.001), smaller duct size (p = 0.031), and a diagnosis of carcinoma of the pancreas (p = 0.027). When a clinically significant POPF rate was analysed based on the pancreatic duct diameter, pancreatic duct size ≤ 1 mm had the highest POPF rate (35.7%). There was a significant difference in POPF rate between adjacent ductal diameter ≤ 1 mm and > 1 mm to 2 mm (35.7% vs 13.3%; p = 0.040). Multivariable analysis showed that for the soft pancreas, pancreatic duct diameter ≤ 1 mm was the only significant predictive factor for POPF (p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: DTMPJ can be safely performed for pancreatic duct > 1 mm without significantly increased POPF risk.

Novel use of the falciform ligament for reconstruction of the inferior vena cava and its tributary.

Tumor invasion into the inferior vena cava (IVC) and hepatic vein (HV) is challenging in cancer surgery with curative intent. Appropriate techniques for venous reconstruction are essential. We have described in detail a novel technique of fashioning an interposition tube graft using the falciform ligament to reconstruct the IVC and HV. The falciform ligament maintains all the benefits of an autologous tissue graft, with the added advantage of its flexibility in customizing graft dimensions. Its use in IVC and HV reconstruction has rarely been reported. The short-term outcomes with this tube graft are promising.

Development and validation of a novel nomogram predicting 10-year actual survival after curative hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Although hepatectomy is a curative treatment modality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the associated 10-year long-term actual survival are rarely reported. This study aims to develop and validate a predictive nomogram for 10-year actual survivors with HCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2004 to 2009, 753 patients with curative hepatectomy for HCC (development set, n = 325; validation set, n = 428) were included. In development set, comparison of clinic-pathological data was made between patients surviving ≥10 years and those surviving <10 years. Good independent prognostic factors identified by multivariate analysis were involved in a nomogram development, which was validated internally and externally using validation set. RESULTS: On multivariate analysis, five independent good prognostic factors for 10-year survival were identified, including young age (OR = 0.943), good ASA status (≤2) (OR = 2.794), higher albumin level (OR = 1.116), solitary tumor (OR = 2.531) and absence of microvascular invasion (OR = 3.367). A novel nomogram was constructed with C-index of 0.801 (95% CI 0.762-0.864). A cut-off point of 167.5 had a sensitivity of 0.794 and specificity of 0.730. Internal validation using bootstrap sampling and external validation using validation set revealed C-index of 0.792 (95% CI, 0.741-0.853) and 0.761 (95% CI, 0.718-0.817). CONCLUSION: A novel nomogram for 10-year HCC survivor using age, ASA status, preoperative albumin, tumor number and presence of microvascular tumor invasion was developed and validated with high accuracy.

Comparison of long-term survival outcome after curative hepatectomy between selected patients with non-colorectal and colorectal liver metastasis: A propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Liver resection is an established treatment of choice for colorectal liver metastasis (CLM). However, the role of hepatectomy for non-colorectal liver metastasis (NCLM) is less clear. PATIENTS AND METHOD: From 2004 to 2017, 264 patients received curative hepatectomy for NCLM (n = 28) and CLM (n = 236). Propensity score (PS) matching was performed between two groups, with respect to the significant confounding factors. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between PS matched groups. Univariate analysis was performed to identify prognostic factors affecting overall and recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: After PS matching, there were 28 patients in NCLM group and 56 patients in CLM group. With a median follow-up of 34 months, there was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival rate between NCLM and CLM groups (62% vs. 39%) (P = 0.370). The 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was also comparable between NCLM and CLM groups (23% vs. 22%) (P = 0.707). Use of pre-operative systemic therapy (hazard ratio: 2.335, CI 1.157-4.712), multifocal tumors (hazard ratio: 1.777, CI 1.010-3.127), tumor size (hazard ratio: 1.135, CI 1.012-1.273), R1 resection (hazard ratio: 2.484, CI 1.194-5.169) and severe complications (hazard ratio: 6.507, CI 1.454-29.124), but not tumor type (NCLM vs. CLM), were associated with poor overall survival. CONCLUSION: Hepatectomy for NCLM can achieve similar oncological outcomes in selected patients as those with CLM. Significant prognostic factors were identified associating with worse overall survival.

Robotic versus open hemihepatectomy: a propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive approach has been increasingly applied in liver resection. However, laparoscopic major hepatectomy is technically demanding and is practiced only in expert centers around the world. Conversely, use of robot may help to overcome the difficulty and facilitate major hepatectomy. METHODS: Between September 2010 and March 2019, 151 patients received robotic hepatectomy for various indications in our center. 36 patients received robotic hemihepatectomy: 26 left hepatectomy and 10 right hepatectomy. During the same period, 737 patients received open hepatectomy and out of these, 173 patients received open hemihepatectomy. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS: After matching, there were 36 patients each in the robotic and open group. The two groups were comparable in demographic data, type of hemihepatectomy, underlying pathology, size of tumor, and background cirrhosis. Conversion was needed in 3 patients (8.3%) in the robotic group. There was no operative mortality. The operative blood loss and resection margin were similar. Though not significantly different, there was a higher rate of complications in the robotic group (36.1% vs. 22.2%) and this difference was mostly driven by higher intra-abdominal collection (16.7% vs. 5.6%) and bile leak (5.6% vs. 2.8%). Operative time was significantly longer (400.8 ± 136.1 min vs 255.4 ± 74.4 min, P < 0.001) but the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (median 5 days vs 6.5 days, P = 0.040) in the robotic group. When right and left hepatectomy were analyzed separately, the advantage of shorter hospital stay remained in left but not right hepatectomy. For patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, there was no difference between the two groups in 5-year overall and disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: Compared with the open approach, robotic hemihepatectomy has longer operation time but shorter hospital stay. Thus, use of robot is feasible and effective in hemihepatectomy with the benefit of shorter hospital stay.

Single-center experience on actual mid-term (≥5 years) and long-term (≥10 years) survival outcome in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after curative hepatectomy: A bimodal distribution.

Analysis for actual mid-term (≥5 years) and long-term (≥10 years) survivors with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following curative hepatectomy are rarely reported in the literature.This retrospective study aims to study the mid- and long-term survival outcome and associated prognostic factors following curative hepatectomy for HCC in a tertiary referral center.The clinical data of 325 patients who underwent curative hepatectomy for HCC were reviewed. They were stratified into 3 groups for comparison (Group 1, overall survival <5 years; Group 2, overall survival ≥5, and <10 years; Group 3, overall survival ≥10 years). Favorable independent prognostic factors for mid- and long-term survival were analyzed.A bimodal distribution of actual survival outcome was observed, with short-term (<5 years) survival of 52.7% (n = 171), mid-term survival of 18.1% (n = 59), and long-term survival of 29.2% (n = 95). Absence of microvascular invasion (OR 3.690, 95% CI: 1.562-8.695) was independent good prognostic factor for mid-term survival. Regarding long-term overall survival, young age (OR 1.050, 95% CI: 0.920-0.986), ASA grade ≤2 (OR 3.746, 95% CI: 1.325-10.587), high albumin level (OR 1.008, 95% CI: 0.920-0.986), solitary tumor (OR 3.289, 95% CI: 1.149-7.625) and absence of microvascular invasion (OR 4.926, 95% CI: 2.192-11.111) were independent good prognostic factors.Curative hepatectomy results in bimodal actual survival outcome with favorable long-term survival rate of 29.2%. Favorable independent prognostic factors (age, ASA grade, albumin level, tumor number, and microvascular invasion) are identified for overall survival.