ICG-Fluorescence Imaging for Margin Assessment During Minimally Invasive Colorectal Liver Metastasis Resection.

Importance: Unintended tumor-positive resection margins occur frequently during minimally invasive surgery for colorectal liver metastases and potentially negatively influence oncologic outcomes. Objective: To assess whether indocyanine green (ICG)-fluorescence-guided surgery is associated with achieving a higher radical resection rate in minimally invasive colorectal liver metastasis surgery and to assess the accuracy of ICG fluorescence for predicting the resection margin status. Design, Setting, and Participants: The MIMIC (Minimally Invasive, Indocyanine-Guided Metastasectomy in Patients With Colorectal Liver Metastases) trial was designed as a prospective single-arm multicenter cohort study in 8 Dutch liver surgery centers. Patients were scheduled to undergo minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) resections of colorectal liver metastases between September 1, 2018, and June 30, 2021. Exposures: All patients received a single intravenous bolus of 10 mg of ICG 24 hours prior to surgery. During surgery, ICG-fluorescence imaging was used as an adjunct to ultrasonography and regular laparoscopy to guide and assess the resection margin in real time. The ICG-fluorescence imaging was performed during and after liver parenchymal transection to enable real-time assessment of the tumor margin. Absence of ICG fluorescence was favorable both during transection and in the tumor bed directly after resection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was the radical (R0) resection rate, defined by the percentage of colorectal liver metastases resected with at least a 1 mm distance between the tumor and resection plane. Secondary outcomes were the accuracy of ICG fluorescence in detecting margin-positive (R1; <1 mm margin) resections and the change in surgical management. Results: In total, 225 patients were enrolled, of whom 201 (116 [57.7%] male; median age, 65 [IQR, 57-72] years) with 316 histologically proven colorectal liver metastases were included in the final analysis. The overall R0 resection rate was 92.4%. Re-resection of ICG-fluorescent tissue in the resection cavity was associated with a 5.0% increase in the R0 percentage (from 87.4% to 92.4%; P < .001). The sensitivity and specificity for real-time resection margin assessment were 60% and 90%, respectively (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.751; 95% CI, 0.668-0.833), with a positive predictive value of 54% and a negative predictive value of 92%. After training and proctoring of the first procedures, participating centers that were new to the technique had a comparable false-positive rate for predicting R1 resections during the first 10 procedures (odds ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.44-4.24). The ICG-fluorescence imaging was associated with changes in intraoperative surgical management in 56 (27.9%) of the patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, ICG-fluorescence imaging was associated with an increased rate of tumor margin-negative resection and changes in surgical management in more than one-quarter of the patients. The absence of ICG fluorescence during liver parenchymal transection predicted an R0 resection with 92% accuracy. These results suggest that use of ICG fluorescence may provide real-time feedback of the tumor margin and a higher rate of complete oncologic resection.

A nationwide assessment of hepatocellular adenoma resection: Indications and pathological discordance.

Hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs) are benign liver tumors associated with bleeding or malignant transformation. Data on the indication for surgery are scarce. We analyzed indications and outcome of patients operated for HCAs < 50 mm compared to HCAs ≥ 50 mm. Changes in final postoperative diagnosis were assessed. We performed a retrospective study that included patients who underwent resection for (suspected) HCAs in the Netherlands from 2014 to 2019. Indication for resection was analyzed and stratified for small (<50 mm) and large (≥50 mm) tumors. Logistic regression analysis was performed on factors influencing change in tumor diagnosis. Out of 222 patients who underwent surgery, 44 (20%) patients had a tumor <50 mm. Median age was 46 (interquartile range [IQR], 33-56) years in patients with small tumors and 37 (IQR, 31-46) years in patients with large tumors ( p  = 0.016). Patients with small tumors were more frequently men (21% vs. 5%, p  = 0.002). Main indications for resection in patients with small tumors were suspicion of (pre)malignancy (55%), (previous) bleeding (14%), and male sex (11%). Patients with large tumors received operations because of tumor size >50 mm (52%), suspicion of (pre)malignancy (28%), and (previous) bleeding (5.1%). No difference was observed in HCA-subtype distribution between small and large tumors. Ninety-six (43%) patients had a postoperative change in diagnosis. Independent risk factors for change in diagnosis were tumor size <50 mm (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.4; p  < 0.01), male sex (aOR, 3.7; p  = 0.03), and lack of hepatobiliary contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) (aOR, 1.8; p  = 0.04). Resection for small (suspected) HCAs was mainly indicated by suspicion of (pre)malignancy, whereas for large (suspected) HCAs, tumor size was the most prevalent indication. Male sex, tumor size <50 mm, and lack of hepatobiliary CE-MRI were independent risk factors for postoperative change in tumor diagnosis.

Surgeons' assessment versus risk models for predicting complications of hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery (HPB-RISC): a multicenter prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies advise the use of risk models when counseling patients for hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery, but studies comparing these models to the surgeons' assessment are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess whether risk prediction models outperform surgeons' assessment for the risk of complications in HPB surgery. METHODS: This prospective study included adult patients scheduled for HPB surgery in three centers in the UK and the Netherlands. Primary outcome was the rate of postoperative major complications. Surgeons assessed the risk prior to surgery while blinded for the formal risk scores. Risk prediction models were retrieved via a systematic review and risk scores were calculated. For each model, discrimination and calibration were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 349 patients were included. The rate of major complications was 27% and in-hospital mortality 3%. Surgeons' assessment resulted in an AUC of 0.64; 0.71 for liver and 0.56 for pancreas surgery (P = 0.020). The AUCs for nine existing risk prediction models ranged between 0.57 and 0.73 for liver surgery and between 0.51 and 0.57 for pancreas surgery. CONCLUSION: In HPB surgery, existing risk prediction models do not outperform surgeons' assessment. Surgeons' assessment outperforms most risk prediction models for liver surgery although both have a poor predictive performance for pancreas surgery. REGISTRATION INFORMATION: REC reference number (13/SC/0135); IRAS ID (119370). TRIALREGISTER.NL: NTR4649.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Observational cohort studies have suggested that minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is associated with better short-term outcomes compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP), such as less intraoperative blood loss, lower morbidity, shorter length of hospital stay, and reduced total costs. Confounding by indication has probably influenced these findings, given that case-matched studies failed to confirm the superiority of MIDP. This accentuates the need for multicenter randomized controlled trials, which are currently lacking. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIDP compared with ODP even in an enhanced recovery setting. METHODS: LEOPARD is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, superiority trial in all 17 centers of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. A total of 102 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant or malignant disease will be randomly allocated to undergo MIDP or ODP in an enhanced recovery setting. The primary outcome is time (days) to functional recovery, defined as all of the following: independently mobile at the preoperative level, sufficient pain control with oral medication alone, ability to maintain sufficient (i.e. >50%) daily required caloric intake, no intravenous fluid administration and no signs of infection. Secondary outcomes are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life and costs. DISCUSSION: The LEOPARD trial is designed to investigate whether MIDP reduces the time to functional recovery compared with ODP in an enhanced recovery setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register, NTR5188 . Registered on 9 April 2015.