Feasibility and Short-Term Outcomes in Liver-First Approach: A Spanish Snapshot Study (the RENACI Project).

(1) Background: The liver-first approach may be indicated for colorectal cancer patients with synchronous liver metastases to whom preoperative chemotherapy opens a potential window in which liver resection may be undertaken. This study aims to present the data of feasibility and short-term outcomes in the liver-first approach. (2) Methods: A prospective observational study was performed in Spanish hospitals that had a medium/high-volume of HPB surgeries from 1 June 2019 to 31 August 2020. (3) Results: In total, 40 hospitals participated, including a total of 2288 hepatectomies, 1350 for colorectal liver metastases, 150 of them (11.1%) using the liver-first approach, 63 (42.0%) in hospitals performing <50 hepatectomies/year. The proportion of patients as ASA III was significantly higher in centers performing ≥50 hepatectomies/year (difference: 18.9%; p = 0.0213). In 81.1% of the cases, the primary tumor was in the rectum or sigmoid colon. In total, 40% of the patients underwent major hepatectomies. The surgical approach was open surgery in 87 (58.0%) patients. Resection margins were R0 in 78.5% of the patients. In total, 40 (26.7%) patients had complications after the liver resection and 36 (27.3%) had complications after the primary resection. One-hundred and thirty-two (89.3%) patients completed the therapeutic regime. (4) Conclusions: There were no differences in the surgical outcomes between the centers performing <50 and ≥50 hepatectomies/year. Further analysis evaluating factors associated with clinical outcomes and determining the best candidates for this approach will be subsequently conducted.

Critical appraisal of surgical margins according to KRAS status in liver resection for colorectal liver metastases: Should surgical strategy be influenced by tumor biology?

BACKGROUND: KRAS mutation is a negative prognostic factor for colorectal liver metastases. Several studies have investigated the resection margins according to KRAS status, with conflicting results. The aim of the study was to assess the oncologic outcomes of R0 and R1 resections for colorectal liver metastases according to KRAS status. METHODS: All patients who underwent resection for colorectal liver metastases between 2010 and 2015 with available KRAS status were enrolled in this multicentric international cohort study. Logistic regression models were used to investigate the outcomes of R0 and R1 colorectal liver metastases resections according to KRAS status: wild type versus mutated. The primary outcomes were overall survival and disease-free survival. RESULTS: The analysis included 593 patients. KRAS mutation was associated with shorter overall survival (40 vs 60 months; P = .0012) and disease-free survival (15 vs 21 months; P = .003). In KRAS-mutated tumors, the resection margin did not influence oncologic outcomes. In multivariable analysis, the only predictor of disease-free survival and overall survival was primary tumor location (P = .03 and P = .03, respectively). In KRAS wild-type tumors, R0 resection was associated with prolonged overall survival (74 vs 45 months, P < .001) and disease-free survival (30 vs 17 months, P < .001). The multivariable model confirmed that R0 resection margin was associated with prolonged overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.43, 95% confidence interval: 1.01-2.03) and disease-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.42; 95% confidence interval: 1.06-1.91). CONCLUSIONS: KRAS-mutated colorectal liver metastases showed more aggressive tumor biology with inferior overall survival and disease-free survival after liver resection. Although R0 resection was not associated with improved oncologic outcomes in the KRAS-mutated tumors group, it seems to be of paramount importance for achieving prolonged long-term survival in KRAS wild-type tumors.

Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable colorectal liver metastases: an international multicentre propensity score matched analysis on long-term outcomes according to established prognostic risk scores.

BACKGROUND: There is still uncertainty regarding the role of perioperative chemotherapy (CTx) in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), especially in those with a low-risk of recurrence. METHODS: Multicentre retrospective analysis of patients with CRLM undergoing liver resection between 2010-2015. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they received perioperative CTx or not and were compared using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. Then, they were stratified according to prognostic risk scores, including: Clinical Risk Score (CRS), Tumour Burden Score (TBS) and Genetic And Morphological Evaluation (GAME) score. RESULTS: The study included 967 patients with a median follow-up of 68 months. After PSM analysis, patients with perioperative CTx presented prolonged overall survival (OS) in comparison with the surgery alone group (82.8 vs 52.5 months, p = 0.017). On multivariable analysis perioperative CTx was an independent predictor of increased OS (HR 0.705, 95%CI 0.705-0.516, p = 0.029). The benefits of perioperative CTx on survival were confirmed in patients with CRS and TBS scores ≤2 (p = 0.022 and p = 0.020, respectively) and in patients with a GAME score ≤1 (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Perioperative CTx demonstrated an increase in OS in patients with CRLM. Patients with a low-risk of recurrence seem to benefit from systemic treatment.

Evaluation of Early Cholecystectomy versus Delayed Cholecystectomy in the Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis.

Objective. To evaluate if early cholecystectomy (EC) is the most appropriate treatment for acute cholecystitis compared to delayed cholecystectomy (DC). Patients and Methods. A retrospective cohort study of 1043 patients was carried out, with a group of 531 EC cases and a group of 512 DC patients. The following parameters were recorded: (1) postoperative hospital morbidity, (2) hospital mortality, (3) days of hospital stay, (4) readmissions, (5) admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), (6) type of surgery, (7) operating time, and (8) reoperations. In addition, we estimated the direct cost savings of implementing an EC program. Results. The overall morbidity of the EC group (29.9%) was significantly lower than the DC group (38.7%). EC demonstrated significantly better results than DC in days of hospital stay (8.9 versus 15.8 days), readmission percentage (6.8% versus 21.9%), and percentage of ICU admission (2.3% versus 7.8%), which can result in reducing the direct costs. The patients who benefited most from an EC were those with a Charlson index > 3. Conclusions. EC is safe in patients with acute cholecystitis and could lead to a reduction in the direct costs of treatment.

Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic digestive surgery: Present and future directions.

Laparoscopic surgery is applied today worldwide to most digestive procedures. In some of them, such as cholecystectomy, Nissen's fundoplication or obesity surgery, laparoscopy has become the standard in practice. In others, such as colon or gastric resection, the laparoscopic approach is frequently used and its usefulness is unquestionable. More complex procedures, such as esophageal, liver or pancreatic resections are, however, more infrequently performed, due to the high grade of skill necessary. As a result, there is less clinical evidence to support its implementation. In the recent years, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery has been increasingly applied, again with little evidence for comparison with the conventional laparoscopic approach. This review will focus on the complex digestive procedures as well as those whose use in standard practice could be more controversial. Also novel robot-assisted procedures will be updated.

How long is antibiotic therapy necessary after urgent cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to analyze surgical site infection (SSI) frequency with different duration antibiotic courses to establish the minimum necessary duration. METHODS: This is an observational study of prospective surveillance of 287 consecutive patients (mean age 67.8 years) operated on for acute cholecystitis of grade II severity in the first 72 h. Postoperative antibiotics had been withdrawn before diagnosis of any infection as an inclusion criterion. Patients were classified into three groups, according to therapy duration: group 1 (0-4 days, n = 45, 15.7 %); group 2 (5-7 days, n = 75, 26.1 %); and group 3 (>7 days, n = 167, 58.2 %). A multivariable analysis of risk infection was performed. RESULTS: Overall SSI frequency in groups 1, 2, and 3 was 2.2, 10.7, and 9 %, respectively. Risk analysis showed an increase in both crude and adjusted relative risks of overall infection in group 2 (crude relative risk (RR): 4.80 (0.62-37.13); adjusted RR, 2.03 (0.20-20.91)) and in group 3 (crude RR, 4.04 (0.55-29.79); adjusted RR, 2.35 (0.28-20.05)) by comparison with group 1, although without statistical significance. As a result, treatment lasting 4 days or less was not associated with overall surgical site infection incidence higher than longer treatment. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic treatment over 4 days after early cholecystectomy provides no advantage in decreasing surgical site infection incidence.

Acute cholecystitis in high surgical risk patients: percutaneous cholecystostomy or emergency cholecystectomy?

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) is an alternative treatment in acute cholecystitis (AC) in high-risk or elderly patients although its advantage over emergency cholecystectomy has not yet been established. STUDY DESIGN: AC prospective database analysis in high-risk patients treated by PC (group 1, 29 patients) or emergency cholecystectomy (group 2, 32 patients). Surgical risk was estimated by physiological POSSUM, Charlson, Apache II, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores. RESULTS: The groups showed homogeneity concerning age and surgical risk. PC allowed AC resolution in 19 patients (70.4%), but 8 (29.6%) needed emergency cholecystectomy. Morbidity and mortality rates were 31% and 17.2%, respectively. Mortality was significantly associated with ASA IV (P = .01). In group 2, the morbidity rate was 28.1% without mortality. There was no statistical difference in morbidity (P = .6) although mortality was significantly higher in group 1 (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: PC seems of little benefit and ought to be left for those very old patients with surgical contraindication.

Radiological and pathological assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma response to radiofrequency. A study on removed liver after transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The real efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in destroying hepatocellular carcinoma is not completely known, nor is the ability of computed tomography (CT) to precisely assess response. Our aims were to analyze pathological response, tumor size influence, and CT response evaluation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 30 hepatocellular carcinoma nodules treated by RFA before liver transplant (LT) in 28 patients. Pathological study of the whole removed liver was then performed and the tumor response was classified as complete, incomplete, or absent. The biggest nodule diameter was estimated by CT or ultrasound. The procedure was carried out percutaneously in all but 3 patients, and in those 3 it was done surgically. RESULTS: The pathological response was complete in 14 nodules (46.7%) and incomplete in 16 (53.3%). The differences in mean preoperative diameter between cases with complete and incomplete response were not significant (p = 0.3). We found that small tumors were not always completely destroyed, whereas bigger tumors could be successfully deleted. There was no clear association between any location and better or poorer response. The detection of RFA incomplete response by means of CT scan had 50% sensitivity and 100% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, RFA can achieve some degree of tumor destruction in every treated case of hepatocellular carcinoma, the complete response rate being slightly lower than half. We have not found any association of response with tumor size or interval RFA-transplant. Second, CT had not enough sensitivity to assess RFA response of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Perforated peptic ulcer treated by simple closure and Helicobacter pylori eradication.

Simple closure followed by Helicobacter pylori (Hp) eradication has become the most used procedure in perforated ulcer treatment. However, its efficacy and safety are still to be determined. To assess recurrence and re-perforation rates, and as a secondary objective, to analyze Hp infection rates in perforated ulcer patients and controls, we conducted a prospective study. Ninety-two consecutive patients (ages: 19-96 years) were operated on between 1996 and 2002, and treated by simple closure followed by Hp eradication and NSAID avoidance. The data were prospectively collected in a database. Hp infection was diagnosed in 68 patients (73.9%). Thirty-four patients (37%) consumed nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and 23 (25%) had both Hp infection and NSAID antecedents. The perforation was gastric in 4 cases and pre-pyloric, pyloric or duodenal in 88. There were postoperative complications in 24 patients (26%) and 4 patients died (4.3%). Hp eradication was shown in 46 patients. There was clinical ulcer recurrence in 4 (4.3%); in 3 of them recurrence manifested as re-perforation, all in gastric locations. Overall relapse and re-perforation 1-year crude rates were 6.1% and 4.1%, respectively. Crude rates for non-gastric ulcer recurrence were 0 at 1 year and 2.6% at 2 years and for non-gastric ulcer re-perforation rates were 0 at 1 and 2 years. This therapeutic strategy is associated with a low rate of recurrence and no re-perforations in case of duodenal, pyloric, or pre-pyloric perforated ulcers, but it is not acceptable for perforated gastric ulcers.