The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS).

OBJECTIVE: To develop and update evidence-based and consensus-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic pancreatic surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS), including laparoscopic and robotic surgery, is complex and technically demanding. Minimizing the risk for patients requires stringent, evidence-based guidelines. Since the International Miami Guidelines on MIPS in 2019, new developments and key publications have been reported, necessitating an update. METHODS: Evidence-based guidelines on 22 topics in 8 domains were proposed: terminology, indications, patients, procedures, surgical techniques and instrumentation, assessment tools, implementation and training, and artificial intelligence. The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS, September 2022) used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology to assess the evidence and develop guideline recommendations, the Delphi method to establish consensus on the recommendations among the Expert Committee, and the AGREE II-GRS tool for guideline quality assessment and external validation by a Validation Committee. RESULTS: Overall, 27 European experts, 6 international experts, 22 international Validation Committee members, 11 Jury Committee members, 18 Research Committee members, and 121 registered attendees of the 2-day meeting were involved in the development and validation of the guidelines. In total, 98 recommendations were developed, including 33 on laparoscopic, 34 on robotic, and 31 on general MIPS, covering 22 topics in 8 domains. Out of 98 recommendations, 97 reached at least 80% consensus among the experts and congress attendees, and all recommendations were externally validated by the Validation Committee. CONCLUSIONS: The EGUMIPS evidence-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS can be applied in current clinical practice to provide guidance to patients, surgeons, policy-makers, and medical societies.

Microscopic tumor mapping of post-neoadjuvant therapy pancreatic cancer specimens to predict post-surgical recurrence: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although various pathological grading systems are available for evaluating the response of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) to neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), their prognostic value has not been thoroughly validated. This study examined whether microscopic tumor mapping of post-NAT specimens could predict tumor recurrence. METHODS: This prospective study enrolled 52 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy after NAT for PDAC between 2019 and 2021. Microscopic mapping was performed to identify residual tumor loci within the tumor bed using 4 mm2 pixels. Patients were divided into small extent (SE; n = 26) and large extent (LE; n = 26) groups using a cutoff value of 226 mm2. The diagnostic performance for predicting tumor recurrence was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: Carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels were normalised after NAT in more patients in the SE group (SE 21 [80.8%] vs. LE 13 [50.0%]; P = 0.041). Tumor size (P < 0.001), T stage (P < 0.001), positive lymph node yield (P = 0.024), and perineural invasion rate (P = 0.018) were significantly greater in the LE group. The 3-year disease-free survival rate was significantly lower in the LE group (SE 83.3% vs. LE 50.0%, P = 0.004). The area under the ROC curve for mapping extent was 0.743, which was greater than that of the other tumor response scoring systems. CONCLUSIONS: Microscopic tumor mapping of the residual tumor in post-NAT specimens is a significant predictor of post-surgical recurrence, and offers better prognostic performance than the current grading systems.

Evolution of laparoscopic liver resection in the last two decades: lessons from 2000 cases at a referral Korean center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has evolved to become the standard surgical approach in many referral centers worldwide. The aim of this study was to analyze how LLR evolved at a single high-volume referral center since its introduction, more than two decades ago. METHODS: Data from all consecutive LLR between January 2003 and September 2022 at the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital were analyzed. Perioperative outcomes were compared between three time periods, with major technological innovations considered as landmarks: before introduction of laparoscopic-US and CUSA (2003-2006), before (2006-2015) and after (2015-2022) introduction of high-definition scope. RESULTS: During the analyzed time periods the number of technically challenging procedures increased from 39.2 to 61.1% (p < 0.001). The most recent period showed shorter median operation time (from 267.5' to 175', p < 0.001), lower median estimated blood loss (EBL) (from 500 to 300 ml, p < 0.001), lower intraoperative transfusions (from 33.8 to 9.3%, p < 0.001), shorter median postoperative hospital stay (from 12 to 6 days, p < 0.001). The time period, a technical major resection and an underlying liver cirrhosis were found to be the associated with longer operation time (p < 0.001) in the multivariable linear regression analysis, while tumor size, technically major surgeries and liver cirrhosis were associated with higher EBL (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: During the last two decades, the indications for patients undergoing LLR have expanded significantly, including more and more challenging procedures and frail patients. Despite such challenges, perioperative outcomes improved, although technically major procedures, cirrhotic patients and huge tumors have still to be considered challenging situations.

The Cross-Sectional Area Ratio of Right-to-Left Portal Vein Predicts the Effect of Preoperative Right Portal Vein Embolization.

Background and Objectives: Preoperative right portal vein embolization (RPVE) is often attempted before right hepatectomy for liver tumors to increase the future remnant liver volume (FRLV). Although many factors affecting FRLV have been discussed, few studies have focused on the ratio of the cross-sectional area of the right portal vein to that of the left portal vein (RPVA/LPVA). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of RPVA/LPVA on predicting FRLV increase after RPVE. Materials and Methods: The data of 65 patients who had undergone RPVE to increase FRLV between 2004 and 2021 were investigated retrospectively. Using computed tomography scans, we measured the total liver volume (TLV), FRLV, the proportion of FRLV relative to TLV (FRLV%), the increase in FRLV% (ΔFRLV%), and RPVA/LPVA twice, immediately before and 2-3 weeks after RPVE; we analyzed the correlations among those variables, and determined prognostic factors for sufficient ΔFRLV%. Results: Fifty-four patients underwent hepatectomy. Based on the cut-off value of RPVA/LPVA, the patients were divided into low (RPVA/LPVA ≤ 1.20, N = 30) and high groups (RPVA/LPVA > 1.20, N = 35). The ΔFRLV% was significantly greater in the high group than in the low group (9.52% and 15.34%, respectively, p < 0.001). In a multivariable analysis, RPVA/LPVA (HR = 20.368, p < 0.001) was the most significant prognostic factor for sufficient ΔFRLV%. Conclusions: RPVE was more effective in patients with higher RPVA/LPVA, which is an easily accessible predictive factor for sufficient ΔFRLV%.

A Prospective Analysis of the Effects of a Powder-Type Hemostatic Agent on the Short-Term Outcomes after Liver Resection.

Background and Objectives: Postoperative bleeding is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality following liver resection. Therefore, it is crucial to minimize bleeding during liver resection and effectively manage it when it occurs. Arista® AH (Becton, Dickinson and Company, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) is a microporous polysaccharide hemosphere (MPH), a new plant-derived polysaccharide powder hemostat that can be applied to the entire surgical field. This study prospectively assessed the effectiveness of Arista for bleeding control when applied intraoperatively to the liver resection surface. Materials and Methods: Data were collected at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital for patients who underwent liver resection owing to malignant hepatocellular carcinoma or benign liver diseases. We compared the outcomes between 45 patients managed with Arista® AH (data were prospectively collected between September 2022 and May 2023) and 156 patients managed without the use of Arista® AH (data were retrospectively collected between January 2021 and December 2021). Results: There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the two groups. The estimated blood loss (EBL) was significantly lower in the Arista® AH group compared with the control group (495.56 ± 672.7 mL vs. 691.9 ± 777.5 mL, p = 0.049). The mean postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the Arista® AH group (5.93 ± 1.88 days vs. 6.94 ± 4.17 days, p = 0.024). The time to Jackson-Pratt drain removal was also significantly shorter in the Arista® AH group (4.64 ± 1.31 days vs. 5.30 ± 2.87 days, p = 0.030). The patient subgroup was divided into four categories based on the type of resection and the presence or absence of cirrhosis. Within the subgroup of major resections in non-cirrhotic patients, the Arista® AH group demonstrated significantly better outcomes compared to the control group, showed lower EBL, reduced need for blood transfusions, decreased volume of drain fluid collected within 48 h, earlier removal of drains, and shorter hospital stays. In contrast, for the other subgroups such as minor resection (both non-cirrhotic and cirrhotic) and major resection with cirrhosis, the differences between the Arista® AH and control groups in various parameters like EBL, blood transfusion rates, drain fluid volume, time to drain removal, and duration of hospital stay were not statistically significant. Conclusions: Arista® AH significantly improved intraoperative blood management and postoperative recovery in patients undergoing liver resection, particularly in non-cirrhotic patients who underwent major resection.

Prognostic Effect of Liver Resection in Extended Cholecystectomy for T2 Gallbladder Cancer Revisited: A Retrospective Cohort Study With Propensity Score-matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of liver resection on the prognosis of T2 gallbladder cancer (GBC). BACKGROUND: Although extended cholecystectomy [lymph node dissection (LND) + liver resection] is recommended for T2 GBC, recent studies have shown that liver resection does not improve survival outcomes relative to LND alone. METHODS: Patients with pT2 GBC who underwent extended cholecystectomy as an initial procedure and did not reoperation after cholecystectomy at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between January 2010 and December 2020 were analyzed. Extended cholecystectomy was defined as either LND with liver resection (LND+L group) or LND only (LND group). We conducted 2:1 propensity score matching to compare the survival outcomes of the groups. RESULTS: Of the 197 patients enrolled, 100 patients from the LND+L group and 50 from the LND group were successfully matched. The LND+L group experienced greater estimated blood loss ( P <0.001) and a longer postoperative hospital stay ( P =0.047). There was no significant difference in the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) of the 2 groups (82.7% vs 77.9%, respectively, P =0.376). A subgroup analysis showed that the 5-year DFS was similar in the 2 groups in both T substages (T2a: 77.8% vs 81.8%, respectively, P =0.988; T2b: 88.1% vs 71.5%, respectively, P =0.196). In a multivariable analysis, lymph node metastasis [hazard ratio (HR) 4.80, P =0.006] and perineural invasion (HR 2.61, P =0.047) were independent risk factors for DFS; liver resection was not a prognostic factor (HR 0.68, P =0.381). CONCLUSIONS: Extended cholecystectomy including LND without liver resection may be a reasonable treatment option for selected T2 GBC patients.

Surgical Outcomes of Pancreatectomy with Resection of the Portal Vein and/or Superior Mesenteric Vein and Jejunal Vein for Pancreatic Head Cancer: A Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and survival benefits of portal vein and/or superior mesenteric vein (PV/SMV) resection with jejunal vein resection (JVR) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Few studies have shown the surgical outcome and survival of pancreatic resection with JVR, and treatment strategies for patients with PDAC suspected of jejunal vein (JV) infiltration remain unclear. METHODS: In total, 1260 patients who underwent pancreatectomy with PV/ SMV resection between 2013 and 2016 at 50 facilities were included; treatment outcomes were compared between the PV/SMV group (PV/ SMV resection without JVR; n = 824), PV/SMV-J1 V group (PV/SMV resection with first jejunal vein resection; n = 394), and PV/SMV-J2,3 V group (PV/SMV resection with second jejunal vein or later branch resection; n = 42). RESULTS: Postoperative complications and mortality did not differ between the three groups. The postoperative complication rate associated with PV/ SMV reconstruction was 11.9% in PV/SMV group, 8.6% in PV/SMV-J1 V group, and 7.1% in PV/SMV-J2,3V group; there were no significant differences among the three groups. Overall survival did not differ between PV/SMV and PV/SMV-J1 V groups (median survival; 29.2 vs 30.9 months, P = 0.60). Although PV/SMV-J2,3 V group had significantly shorter survival than PV/SMV group who underwent upfront surgery ( P = 0.05), no significant differences in overall survival of patients who received preoperative therapy. Multivariate survival analysis revealed that adjuvant therapy and R0 resection were independent prognostic factors in all groups. CONCLUSION: PV/SMV resection with JVR can be safely performed and may provide satisfactory overall survival with the pre-and postoperative adjuvant therapy.

Validation of the Anatomical and Biological Definitions of Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer According to the 2017 International Consensus for Survival and Recurrence in Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Upfront Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The International Consensus Criteria (ICC) (2017) redefined patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC) according to anatomical, biological, and conditional aspects. However, these new criteria have not been validated comprehensively. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to validate the anatomical and biological definitions of BR-PDAC for oncological outcomes in patients with resectable (R) and BR-PDAC undergoing upfront surgery. METHODS: A total of 404 patients who underwent upfront surgery for R- and BR-PDAC from 2004 to 2020 were included. The patients were classified according to the ICC as follows: resectable (R) (n = 259), anatomical borderline (BR-A) (n = 43), biological borderline (BR-B) (n = 81), and anatomical and biologic borderline (BR-AB) (n = 21). RESULTS: Compared with the R and BR-B groups, the BR-A and BR-AB groups had higher postoperative complication rates (16.5% and 27.2% vs 32.5% and 33.4%; P < 0.001) and significantly lower R0 resection rates (85.7% and 80.2% vs 65.1% and 61.9%; P = 0.003). In contrast, compared with the R and BR-A groups, the BR-B (32.1%) and BR-AB (57.1%) groups had higher early recurrence rates (within postoperative 6 months) (16.5% and 25.6% vs 32.1% and 57.1%; P < 0.001) and significantly lower 3-year recurrence-free survival rates (36.1% and 20.7% vs 12.1% and 7.8%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Anatomically defined BR-PDAC was associated with a higher risk of margin-positive resection and postoperative complication rates, while biologically defined BR-PDAC was associated with higher early recurrence rates and lower survival rates. Thus, the anatomical and biological definitions are useful in predicting the prognosis and determining the usefulness of neoadjuvant therapy.

Is surgical resection justified for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with distant abdominal organ metastasis? A position paper by experts in pancreatic surgery at the Joint Meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) & the Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) 2022 in Kyoto.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a typical refractory malignancy, and many patients have distant organ metastases at diagnosis, such as liver metastasis and peritoneal dissemination. The standard treatment for unresectable PDAC with distant organ metastasis (UR-M) is chemotherapy, but the prognosis remained poor. However, with recent dramatic developments in chemotherapy, the prognosis has gradually improved, and some patients have experienced marked shrinkage or disappearance of their metastatic lesions. With this trend, attempts have been made to resect a small number of metastases (so-called oligometastases) in combination with the primary tumor or to resect the primary and metastatic tumor in patients with a favorable response to anti-cancer treatment after a certain period of time (so-called conversion surgery). An international consensus meeting on surgical treatment for UR-M PDAC was held during the Joint Congress of the 26th Meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) and the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) in Kyoto in July 2022. The presenters showed their indications for and results of surgical treatment for UR-M PDAC and discussed their advantages and disadvantages with the experts. Although these reports were limited to a small number of patients, findings suggest that these surgical treatments for patients with UR-M PDAC who have had a significant response to chemotherapy may contribute to a prognosis of prolonged survival. We hope that this article summarizing the discussion and agreements at the meeting will serve as the basis for future trials and guidelines.

"Conversion surgery" for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A position paper by the study group at the joint meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) & Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) 2022.

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), which progresses locally and surrounds major vessels, has historically been deemed unresectable. Surgery alone failed to provide curative resection and improve overall survival. With the advancements in treatment, reports have shown favorable results in LAPC after undergoing successful chemotherapy therapy or chemoradiation therapy followed by surgical resection, so-called "conversion surgery", at experienced high-volume centers. However, recognizing significant regional and institutional disparities in the management of LAPC, an international consensus meeting on conversion surgery for LAPC was held during the Joint Congress of the 26th Meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) and the 53rd Annual Meeting of Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) in Kyoto in July 2022. During the meeting, presenters reported the current best multidisciplinary practices for LAPC, including preoperative modalities, best systemic treatment regimens and durations, procedures of conversion surgery with or without vascular resections, biomarkers, and genetic studies. It was unanimously agreed among the experts in this meeting that "cancer biology is surpassing locoregional anatomical resectability" in the era of effective multiagent treatment. The biology of pancreatic cancer has yet to be further elucidated, and we believe it is essential to improve the treatment outcomes of LAPC patients through continued efforts from each institution and more international collaboration. This article summarizes the agreement during the discussion amongst the experts in the meeting. We hope that this will serve as a foundation for future international collaboration and recommendations for future guidelines.

Validation of original, alternative, and updated alternative fistula risk scores after open and minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy in an Asian patient cohort.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to validate and compare the performance of the original fistula risk scores (o-FRS), alternative (a-FRS), and updated alternative FRS (ua-FRS) after open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in an Asian patient cohort. METHODS: Data of 597 consecutive patients who underwent PD (305 OPD, 274 LPD) were collected from two tertiary centers. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). RESULTS: The overall AUC values of o-FRS, a-FRS, and ua-FRS were 0.67, 0.69, and 0.68, respectively, which were lower than those of the Western validation. Three FRS systems had similar AUC values in the overall and OPD groups, whereas ua-FRS had a higher AUC than o-FRS in the LPD group. The accuracy of ua-FRS (47.2%) was higher than that of o-FRS (39.0%) and a-FRS (19.5%) overall, but low specificity and low positive predictive value were observed regardless of the operative type across the three FRS systems. In the multivariate analysis, pathology, estimated blood loss, and body mass index were not independent risk factors for CR-POPF in the OPD and LPD groups. CONCLUSIONS: Current FRS systems have some limitations, including a relatively lower performance in an Asian cohort, low positive predictive values, and inclusion of insignificant risk factors.

Impact of Drain Position on Drain Fluid Amylase, Fluid Collection and Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula after Distal Pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: The current definition for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is based on the drain fluid amylase (DFA), and drains must be positioned adequately. We investigated the impact of DFA level, drain position and fluid collection after distal pancreatectomy (DP). METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 516 patients who underwent DP between June 2004 and December 2018. Patients were excluded if DP was not main procedure, DFA was not measured, postoperative computed tomography (CT) was not performed, or drains were removed before CT. Demographic and perioperative data were analyzed in 422 eligible patients. RESULTS: Of 422 patients, 49(11.6%) had clinically relevant (CR)-POPF and 102(24.2%) had a malpositioned drain. There was no difference in CR-POPF rate between the high and low DFA groups (12.6% vs 10.7%, P = 0.649). Drain malposition was more frequently associated with symptomatic fluid collection and CR-POPF than well-positioned drains. Male sex, high body mass index, transfusion, and drain malposition were CR-POPF risk factors. In subgroup analysis, drain malposition was also an independent risk factor for CR-POPF in the low DFA group. CONCLUSIONS: After DP, the incidence of CR-POPF in the high and low DFA groups was similar and drain malposition increased the risk of CR-POPF. Thus, the ISGPS definition of POPF based on DFA levels is limited in DP, and DFA levels should be interpreted together with the drain position.

Development and Validation of a Prognostic Classification Model Predicting Postoperative Adverse Outcomes in Older Surgical Patients Using a Machine Learning Algorithm: Retrospective Observational Network Study.

BACKGROUND: Older adults are at an increased risk of postoperative morbidity. Numerous risk stratification tools exist, but effort and manpower are required. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a predictive model of postoperative adverse outcomes in older patients following general surgery with an open-source, patient-level prediction from the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics for internal and external validation. METHODS: We used the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership common data model and machine learning algorithms. The primary outcome was a composite of 90-day postoperative all-cause mortality and emergency department visits. Secondary outcomes were postoperative delirium, prolonged postoperative stay (≥75th percentile), and prolonged hospital stay (≥21 days). An 80% versus 20% split of the data from the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital (SNUBH) and Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH) common data model was used for model training and testing versus external validation. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with a 95% CI. RESULTS: Data from 27,197 (SNUBH) and 32,857 (SNUH) patients were analyzed. Compared to the random forest, Adaboost, and decision tree models, the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator logistic regression model showed good internal discriminative accuracy (internal AUC 0.723, 95% CI 0.701-0.744) and transportability (external AUC 0.703, 95% CI 0.692-0.714) for the primary outcome. The model also possessed good internal and external AUCs for postoperative delirium (internal AUC 0.754, 95% CI 0.713-0.794; external AUC 0.750, 95% CI 0.727-0.772), prolonged postoperative stay (internal AUC 0.813, 95% CI 0.800-0.825; external AUC 0.747, 95% CI 0.741-0.753), and prolonged hospital stay (internal AUC 0.770, 95% CI 0.749-0.792; external AUC 0.707, 95% CI 0.696-0.718). Compared with age or the Charlson comorbidity index, the model showed better prediction performance. CONCLUSIONS: The derived model shall assist clinicians and patients in understanding the individualized risks and benefits of surgery.

Comparative Study of Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Single Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma Located in Left Lateral Segments of the Liver.

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now widely recognized as the primary surgical option for hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) smaller than 3 cm located in the left lateral segment of the liver. Nevertheless, there is a scarcity of studies comparing laparoscopic liver resection with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in these cases. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively compared the short- and long-term outcomes of Child-Pugh class A patients who underwent LLR (n = 36) or RFA (n = 40) for a newly diagnosed single small (≤3 cm) HCC located in the left lateral segment of the liver. Results: Overall survival (OS) was not significantly different between the LLR and RFA groups (94.4% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.075). However, disease-free survival (DFS) was better in the LLR group than in the RFA group (p < 0.001), with 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS rates of 100%, 84.5%, and 74.4%, respectively, in the LLR group vs. 86.9%, 40.2%, and 33.4%, respectively, in the RFA group. The hospital stay was significantly shorter in the RFA group than in the LLR (2.4 vs. 4.9 days, p < 0.001). The overall complication rate was higher in the RFA group than in the LLR group (15% vs. 5.6%). In patients with an α-fetoprotein level of ≥20 ng/mL, the 5-year OS (93.8% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.031) and DFS (68.8% vs. 20.0%, p = 0.002) rates were greater in the LLR group. Conclusions: LLR showed superior OS and DFS compared to RFA in patients with a single small HCC situated in the left lateral segment of the liver. LLR can be considered for patients with an α-fetoprotein level of ≥20 ng/mL.

Comparison of Open versus Laparoscopic Approaches in Salvage Hepatectomy for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Radiofrequency Ablation.

Background and Objectives: Although radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is widely used as an effective local treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), evidence on salvage hepatectomy for local recurrence after RFA is limited. This study aims to compare open and laparoscopic approaches in salvage hepatectomy for recurrent HCC after RFA. Materials and Methods: Among patients who underwent hepatectomy between January 2004 and August 2022 at a single tertiary referral center, 55 patients who underwent salvage hepatectomy for marginal recurrence after RFA were selected. An open approach was used in 23 (41.8%) patients, while 32 (58.2%) patients underwent laparoscopic surgery. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: Major hepatectomy was more often performed in the open group (9 [39.1%] vs. 4 [12.5%], p = 0.022). Intraoperative blood loss was also greater in the open group (450 (325-750) vs. 300 (200-600), p = 0.034). Operation time (p = 0.144) and postoperative morbidity rates (p = 0.639) were similar, and there was no postoperative mortality in either group. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in the open group compared to the laparoscopy group (8 (6-11) days vs. 5 (4-7) days, p = 0.028). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates showed no difference between the two groups (44.6% vs. 62.5%, 16.5% vs. 13.5%, and 8.3% vs. 13.5%, respectively; p = 0.154). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates between the two groups were also similar (85.7% vs. 96.8%, 79.6% vs. 86.0%, and 79.6% vs. 79.4%, respectively; p = 0.480). Conclusions: Laparoscopic salvage hepatectomy shows oncologic outcomes comparable to the open approach with faster postoperative recovery rates. Considering that recurrence rates are high after RFA, the laparoscopic approach should be considered as a first-line option in selected patients.

A scoring system to predict the risk of major complications after laparoscopic liver resection in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The safety of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in elderly patients is a matter of concern because the reduced physiologic reserve increases the risk of postoperative complications. However, there are few score systems for predicting complications after LLR in elderly patients. The aim of this study is to propose a new simplified scoring system based on the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) to predict major complications after LLR in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 257 consecutive patients aged ≥ 65 years who underwent LLR for HCC between 2004 and 2019. The GNRI formula was 1.489 × serum albumin (g/L) + 41.7 × present weight/ideal weight (kg). A scoring system to predict the risk of major complications was developed by assigning points to each risk factor equal to its regression coefficient determined in the multivariable analysis. Major complications were defined as complications of Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher. RESULTS: Of the 257 patients, 219 patients were finally included in this study. Major complications occurred after LLR in 24 patients (10.9%). Multivariable analysis showed that the GNRI (hazard ratio [HR] 3.396, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.242-9.288, P = 0.017), Child-Turcotte-Pugh score (HR 2.191, 95% CI 1.400-8.999, P = 0.036), major liver resection (HR 2.683, 95% CI 1.082-7.328, P = 0.050), and intraoperative transfusion (HR 1.802, 95% CI 1.428-7.591, P = 0.022) were independent predictors of major postoperative complications. These variables were assigned points based on their HRs, and the resulting 10-point model showed good discrimination (area under the curve 0.756, 95% CI 0.649-0.836, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The scoring system outperformed the GNRI for predicting major complications after LLR in elderly patients with HCC.

A Case-Matched Analysis of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Located in Posterosuperior Segments of the Liver According to Adaption of Developed Techniques.

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for the hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in posterosuperior (PS) segment is technically demanding, but has been overcome by accumulated experiences and technological improvements. We analyzed peri-and post-operative results before and after the adaptation of the enhanced techniques. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 246 patients who underwent LLR for HCC in PS segments from September 2003 to December 2019. According to the introduction of advanced techniques including intercostal trocars, Pringle maneuver, and semi-lateral French position, the patients were divided into Group 1 (n = 43), who underwent LLR from September 2003 to December 2011, and Group 2 (n = 203), who underwent LLR from January 2012 to December 2019. Among these cases, 136 patients (Group 1 = 34, Group 2 = 102) were selected by case-matched analysis using perioperative variables. Results: Mean operation time (362 min vs. 291 min) and hospital stay (11 days vs. 8 days, p = 0.023) were significantly longer in Group 1 than Group 2. Otherwise, disease-free survival (DFS) rate was shorter and resection margin (1.3 mm vs. 0.7 mm, p = 0.034) were smaller in Group 2 than Group 1. However, there was no difference in type of complication (p = 0.084), severity of complication graded by the Clavien-Dindo grade system (p = 0.394), and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates (p = 0.986). In case-matched analysis, operation time (359 min vs. 266 min p = 0.002) and hospital stay (11.5 days vs. 8.0 days, p = 0.032) were significantly different, but there was no significant difference in resection margin, DFS, and OS. Conclusions: The adaptation of improved techniques has reduced the complexity of LLR in PS segments.

Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Centrally Located Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Background and Objectives: The feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma (cHCC 1 cm of the hilum, major hepatic veins, and inferior vena cava) is still controversial. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LLR for cHCC and compare the perioperative outcomes with those of open liver resection (OLR). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 110 patients who underwent LLR (n = 59) or open liver resection (OLR) (n = 51) for cHCC between January 2004 and September 2018. LLR group was divided into the following two subgroups according to the date of operation: Group 1 (n = 19) and Group 2 (n = 40), to account for the advancement in the laparoscopic techniques. Results: No mortality within 3 months was observed. There were no significant differences in operation time (285 vs. 280 min; p = 0.938) and postoperative complication rate (22.0% vs. 27.5%; p = 0.510) between both groups. However, intraoperative blood loss (500 vs. 700 mL; p < 0.001), transfusion rate (10.2% vs. 31.4%; p = 0.006), and hospital stay (6 vs. 10 days; p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the LLR group than in the OLR group. In the LLR group, Group 2, showed a shorter hospital stay than Group 1 (6 vs. 8 days; p = 0.006). There were improvements in the operation time (280 vs. 360 min; p = 0.036) and less intraoperative blood loss (455 vs. 500 mL; p = 0.075) in Group 2. Conclusions: We demonstrated that LLR can be safely performed in highly selected patients with cHCC.

Development and Validation of a Difficulty Scoring System for Laparoscopic Liver Resection to Treat Hepatolithiasis.

Background and Objectives: A difficulty scoring system was previously developed to assess the difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for liver tumors; however, we need another system for hepatolithiasis. Therefore, we developed a novel difficulty scoring system (nDSS) and validated its use for predicting postoperative outcomes. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study. We used clinical data of 123 patients who underwent LLR for hepatolithiasis between 2003 and 2021. We analyzed the data to determine which indices were associated with operation time or estimated blood loss (EBL) to measure the surgical difficulty. We validated the nDSS in terms of its ability to predict postoperative outcomes, namely red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, postoperative hospital stay (POHS), and major complications defined as grade ≥IIIa according to the Clavien−Dindo classification (CDC). Results: The nDSS included five significant indices (range: 5−17; median: 8). The RBC transfusion rate (p < 0.001), POHS (p = 0.002), and major complication rate (p = 0.002) increased with increasing nDSS score. We compared the two groups of patients divided by the median nDSS (low: 5−7; high: 8−17). The operation time (210.7 vs. 240.7 min; p < 0.001), EBL (281.9 vs. 702.6 mL; p < 0.001), RBC transfusion rate (5.3% vs. 37.9%; p < 0.001), POHS (8.0 vs. 13.3 days; p = 0.001), and major complication rate (8.8% vs. 25.8%; p = 0.014) were greater in the high group. Conclusions: The nDSS can predict the surgical difficulty and outcomes of LLR for hepatolithiasis and may help select candidates for the procedure and surgical approach.

Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of jejunal varix of the afferent loop after pancreatoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Jejunal varix is a concerning late complication after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) due to the risk of recurrent and intractable bleeding. Our aim was to investigate the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of jejunal varix after PD. METHODS: A total of 709 patients who underwent PD between 2007 and 2017 were included. Preoperative and postoperative CT images were reviewed to evaluate the development of portal vein (PV) stenosis (≥50%) and jejunal varices. RESULTS: Jejunal varix developed in 83 (11.7%) patients at a median of 12 months after PD. Eighteen (21.7%) patients experienced variceal bleeding. PV stenosis (P < 0.001; odds ratio [OR] 33.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 15.6-66.7) and PV/superior mesenteric vein resection (P = 0.028; OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1-4.7) were independent risk factors for jejunal varix. Of the nine patients who underwent stent placement for PV stenosis before the formation of jejunal varices, none experienced variceal bleeding. By contrast, 18 (27.3%) of the 135 patients without PV stent placement experienced at least one episode of variceal bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of jejunal varix was substantial after PD. PV stenosis was a strong risk factor for jejunal varix. Early PV stent placement and maintaining stent patency could reduce the risk of variceal bleeding in patients with PV stenosis.