The role of re-resection in recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: While liver resection is a well-established treatment for primary HCC, surgical treatment for recurrent HCC (rHCC) remains the topic of an ongoing debate. Thus, we investigated perioperative and long-term outcome in patients undergoing re-resection for rHCC in comparative analysis to patients with primary HCC treated by resection. METHODS: A monocentric cohort of 212 patients undergoing curative-intent liver resection for HCC between 2010 and 2020 in a large German hepatobiliary center were eligible for analysis. Patients with primary HCC (n = 189) were compared to individuals with rHCC (n = 23) regarding perioperative results by statistical group comparisons and oncological outcome using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Comparative analysis showed no statistical difference between the resection and re-resection group in terms of age (p = 0.204), gender (p = 0.180), ASA category (p = 0.346) as well as main preoperative tumor characteristics, liver function parameters, operative variables, and postoperative complications (p = 0.851). The perioperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a) and mortality were 21.7% (5/23) and 8.7% (2/23) in rHCC, while 25.4% (48/189) and 5.8% (11/189) in primary HCC, respectively (p = 0.851). The median overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the resection group were 40 months and 26 months, while median OS and RFS were 41 months and 29 months in the re-resection group, respectively (p = 0.933; p = 0.607; log rank). CONCLUSION: Re-resection is technically feasible and safe in patients with rHCC. Further, comparative analysis displayed similar oncological outcome in patients with primary and rHCC treated by liver resection. Re-resection should therefore be considered in European patients diagnosed with rHCC.

Assessing radiation exposure to patients during endovascular treatment of chronic venous obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Post-thrombotic obstruction can be adequately treated by percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting. This procedure is rapidly emerging as a minimally invasive alternative to traditional open surgical operations. However, the patient will be exposed to a significant amount of radiation during preoperative planning and operation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the amount of radiation exposure to patients during venous recanalization. METHODS: All patients undergoing endovenous recanalization from February 2016 to February 2018 were included in this study. The operations were performed in an operating room using a mobile C-arm angiography system. Indirect parameters of cumulative air kerma, kerma-area product, and fluoroscopy time (FT) were recorded concurrently with direct measurements of dose (effective dose [ED]) in the pelvic and neck area using two electronic personal dosimetry devices. The direct measured doses were then correlated with indirect parameters provided by the imaging equipment manufacturers. RESULTS: In total, 78 cases were included in the study. During a median operation time of 154.5 minutes (90-323 minutes), the median FT was 43.7 minutes (15.9-77.7 minutes). Body mass index did not correlate with FT or ED. ED correlated with duration of the intervention (r = 0.59) but better with FT, cumulative air kerma, and kerma-area product (r = 0.76, 0.94, and 1.00, respectively). No patients had evidence of radiation-induced skin injury. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation exposure to patients during endovenous recanalization does not reach the threshold to have a deterministic effect. Indirect parameters of radiation exposure correlated with direct measurements of the ED. Direct dosimetry is likely to be an unnecessary effort for these types of procedures when indirect dose metrics are available.