RESUMEN
Background, Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) via the anus or vagina is an alternative to conventional transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery. NOSE has been shown to be safe and effective, resulting in decreased postoperative pain, analgesia use, and improved recovery, without oncological compromise. We aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of NOSE for combined colectomy with liver metastasectomy. Methods, From July 2022 to April 2024, all cases of laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection and synchronous liver metastasectomy with NOSE were included in the study. Selection criteria included a maximum specimen diameter of less than 5 cm and patient body mass index of less than 35 kg/m2. Results, Over the 22-month duration, four consecutive patients (two males, two females) underwent combined resection with NOSE. Mean age and BMI were 74.8 (range 63-81) years and 20.9 (range 19.5-22.3) kg/m2 respectively. Patient A and D underwent anterior resection for sigmoid cancer, Patient B underwent D3 right hemicolectomy for cecal cancer, and Patient C underwent subtotal colectomy for synchronous cecal and descending colon cancer. All patients underwent liver metastasectomy at the same sitting. Patient A and D had transanal NOSE while Patients B and C underwent transvaginal NOSE. Mean operative time and blood loss was 416 (range 330-535) minutes and 338 (range 50-500) ml respectively. All patients recovered gastrointestinal function within the first two postoperative days. Infected seroma of the liver bed occurred in one patient requiring percutaneous drainage. The average maximum colon tumor diameter was 2.9 (range 1.3-4.0) cm. All resection margins were clear. Mean duration of follow-up was 7.5 (range 2-12) months. Conclusions, Simultaneous colectomy and liver metastasectomy with NOSE for colorectal cancer is feasible and safe in highly selected patients, resulting in good postoperative outcomes. This proof-of-concept analysis paves the way for larger studies to draw definitive conclusions.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for limited resections for pancreatic uncinate lesions is not widely performed but can adequately treat benign or low-grade malignant lesions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of MIS-limited pancreatic resections for patients with suspected pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PNETs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of six consecutive patients who underwent MIS for PNET within a single institution between 2017 and 2022. RESULTS: Six patients underwent limited pancreas-preserving MIS of the uncinate process (uncinectomy or enucleation), of which two were performed through the robotic approach and four through laparoscopic approach. The median operation time was 212.5 (175-338.75) min, and the median blood loss was 50 (50-112.5) ml. The median post-operative hospital length of stay was 5.5 (3.75-11.5) days. Two patients (33.3%) had major post-operative morbidities (Clavien-Dindo ≥Grade 3). There were no open conversions or post-operative mortalities. Five patients had histologically proven Grade 1 neuroendocrine tumours. One was T2 and four were T1. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that limited MIS resections of pancreatic uncinate PNETs are a feasible procedure with good patient outcomes. It offers a safe alternative to radical surgical resections like pancreatoduodenectomies in selected patients with low-grade malignant or benign tumours.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the accuracy of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) calculator in predicting outcomes after hepatectomy for colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastasis in a Southeast Asian population. METHODS: Predicted and actual outcomes were compared for 166 patients undergoing hepatectomy for CRC liver metastasis identified between 2017 and 2022, using receiver operating characteristic curves with area under the curve (AUC) and Brier score. RESULTS: The ACS-NSQIP calculator accurately predicted most postoperative complications (AUC > 0.70), except for surgical site infection (AUC = 0.678, Brier score = 0.045). It also exhibited satisfactory performance for readmission (AUC = 0.818, Brier score = 0.011), reoperation (AUC = 0.945, Brier score = 0.002), and length of stay (LOS, AUC = 0.909). The predicted LOS was close to the actual LOS (5.9 vs. 5.0 days, P = 0.985). CONCLUSION: The ACS-NSQIP calculator demonstrated generally accurate predictions for 30-day postoperative outcomes after hepatectomy for CRC liver metastasis in our patient population.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Asia Sudoriental , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Tiempo de Internación , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Pueblos del Sudeste AsiáticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were conducted. Surface under cumulative ranking area values, mean difference, odds ratio, and 95% credible intervals were calculated for all outcomes. Cluster analysis was performed to determine the most cost-effective clustering approach. Costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, and costs-efficacy were the primary outcomes assessed, with postoperative overall morbidity, mortality, and length of stay associated with total costs for open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection. RESULTS: Laparoscopic liver resection incurred the lowest total costs (laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection: mean difference -2,529.84, 95% credible intervals -4,192.69 to -884.83; laparoscopic liver resection versus robotic liver resection: mean difference -3,363.37, 95% credible intervals -5,629.24 to -1,119.38). Open liver resection had the lowest procedural costs but incurred the highest hospitalization costs compared to laparoscopic liver resection and robotic liver resection. Conversely, robotic liver resection had the highest total and procedural costs but the lowest hospitalization costs. Robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection had a significantly reduced length of stay than open liver resection and showed less postoperative morbidity. Laparoscopic liver resection resulted in the lowest readmission and liver-specific complication rates. Laparoscopic liver resection and robotic liver resection demonstrated advantages in costs-morbidity efficiency. While robotic liver resection offered notable benefits in mortality and length of stay, these were balanced against its highest total costs, presenting a nuanced trade-off in the costs-mortality and costs-efficacy analyses. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic liver resection represents a more cost-effective option for hepatectomy with superior postoperative outcomes and shorter length of stay than open liver resection. Robotic liver resection, though costlier than laparoscopic liver resection, along with laparoscopic liver resection, consistently exceeds open liver resection in surgical performance.
Asunto(s)
Hepatectomía , Laparoscopía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hepatectomía/economía , Hepatectomía/métodos , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/métodos , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Metaanálisis en Red , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study compared the cost-effectiveness of open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP), and robotic (RDP) distal pancreatectomy (DP). METHODS: Studies reporting the costs of DP were included in a literature search until August 2023. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, and surface under cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) values, mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated for outcomes of interest. Cluster analysis was performed to examine the similarity and classification of DP approaches into homogeneous clusters. A decision model-based cost-utility analysis was conducted for the cost-effectiveness analysis of DP strategies. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies with 29,164 patients were included in the analysis. Among the three groups, LDP had the lowest overall costs, while ODP had the highest overall costs (LDP vs. ODP: MD - 3521.36, 95% CrI - 6172.91 to - 1228.59). RDP had the highest procedural costs (ODP vs. RDP: MD - 4311.15, 95% CrI - 6005.40 to - 2599.16; LDP vs. RDP: MD - 3772.25, 95% CrI - 4989.50 to - 2535.16), but incurred the lowest hospitalization costs. Both LDP (MD - 3663.82, 95% CrI - 6906.52 to - 747.69) and RDP (MD - 6678.42, 95% CrI - 11,434.30 to - 2972.89) had significantly reduced hospitalization costs compared to ODP. LDP and RDP demonstrated a superior profile regarding costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, costs-efficacy, and costs-utility compared to ODP. Compared to ODP, LDP and RDP cost $3110 and $817 less per patient, resulting in 0.03 and 0.05 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively, with positive incremental net monetary benefit (NMB). RDP costs $2293 more than LDP with a negative incremental NMB but generates 0.02 additional QALYs with improved postoperative morbidity and spleen preservation. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests that LDP and RDP are more cost-effective options compared to ODP at various willingness-to-pay thresholds. CONCLUSION: LDP and RDP are more cost-effective than ODP, with LDP exhibiting better cost savings and RDP demonstrating superior surgical outcomes and improved QALYs.
Asunto(s)
Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Laparoscopía , Metaanálisis en Red , Pancreatectomía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Pancreatectomía/economía , Pancreatectomía/métodos , Humanos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/métodos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic liver surgery (RLS) and laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) in various settings. BACKGROUND: Clear advantages of RLS over LLS have rarely been demonstrated, and the associated costs of robotic surgery are generally higher than those of laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, the exact role of the robotic approach in minimally invasive liver surgery remains to be defined. METHODS: In this international retrospective cohort study, the outcomes of patients who underwent RLS and LLS for all indications between 2009 and 2021 in 34 hepatobiliary referral centers were compared. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare both approaches across several types of procedures: (1) minor resections in the anterolateral (2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6) or (2) posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8), and (3) major resections (≥3 contiguous segments). Propensity score matching was used to mitigate the influence of selection bias. The primary outcome was textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS), previously defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥grade 2, postoperative bile leak ≥grade B, severe morbidity, readmission, and 90-day or in-hospital mortality with the presence of an R0 resection margin in case of malignancy. The absence of a prolonged length of stay was added to define TOLS+. RESULTS: Among the 10.075 included patients, 1.507 underwent RLS and 8.568 LLS. After propensity score matching, both groups constituted 1.505 patients. RLS was associated with higher rates of TOLS (78.3% vs 71.8%, P < 0.001) and TOLS+ (55% vs 50.4%, P = 0.026), less Pringle usage (39.1% vs 47.1%, P < 0.001), blood loss (100 vs 200 milliliters, P < 0.001), transfusions (4.9% vs 7.9%, P = 0.003), conversions (2.7% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), overall morbidity (19.3% vs 25.7%, P < 0.001), and microscopically irradical resection margins (10.1% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.015), and shorter operative times (190 vs 210 minutes, P = 0.015). In the subgroups, RLS tended to have higher TOLS rates, compared with LLS, for minor resections in the posterosuperior segments (n = 431 per group, 75.9% vs 71.2%, P = 0.184) and major resections (n = 321 per group, 72.9% vs 67.5%, P = 0.086), although these differences did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: While both produce excellent outcomes, RLS might facilitate slightly higher TOLS rates than LLS.
Asunto(s)
Hepatectomía , Laparoscopía , Puntaje de Propensión , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Femenino , Masculino , Laparoscopía/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Hepatopatías/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (L-DH) has seen a rise in uptake in recent years following the popularization of minimally invasive modality for major hepatobiliary surgery. Our study aimed to determine the safety and compare the perioperative outcomes of L-DH with open donor hepatectomy (O-DH) and laparoscopic non donor hepatectomy (L-NDH) based on our single institution experience. METHODS: Eighty of 113 laparoscopic hemi-hepatectomies performed between 2015 and 2022 met study inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 were L-DH. PSM in a 1:2 ratio of L-DH versus L-NDH and 1:1 ratio of L-DH versus O-DH were performed, identifying patients with similar baseline clinicopathological characteristics. RESULTS: After 2:1 matching, the L-DH cohort were significantly younger (P < 0.001) and had lower ASA scores (P < 0.001) than the L-NDH cohort. L-DH was associated with a longer median operating time (P < 0.001) and shorter median postoperative stay (P < 0.001) than L-NDH. After 1:1 matching, there were no significant differences in baseline demographic between the L-DH and O-DH cohorts. L-DH was associated with lower median blood loss (P = 0.040) and shorter length of stay compared to O-DH (P = 0.004). There were no significant differences in recipient outcomes for both cohorts. CONCLUSION: L-DH can be adopted safely by surgeons experienced in L-NDH and ODH. It is associated with decreased blood loss and shorter length of stay compared to O-DH.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Trasplante de Hígado , Humanos , Hepatectomía , Donadores Vivos , Hígado , Tempo Operativo , Tiempo de Internación , Estudios Retrospectivos , Complicaciones PosoperatoriasRESUMEN
Few studies have assessed the clinical implications of the combination of different prognostic indicators for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of resected hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic factors in HCC patients for OS and DFS outcomes and establish a nomogram-based prognostic model to predict the DFS of HCC. A multicenter, retrospective European study was conducted through the collection of data on 413 consecutive treated patients with a first diagnosis of HCC between January 2010 and December 2020. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify all independent risk factors for OS and DFS outcomes. A nomogram prognostic staging model was subsequently established for DFS and its precision was verified internally by the concordance index (C-Index) and externally by calibration curves. For OS, multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated Child-Pugh B7 score (HR 4.29; 95% CI 1.74-10.55; p = 0.002) as an independent prognostic factor, along with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage ≥ B (HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.07-3.54; p = 0.029), microvascular invasion (MVI) (HR 2.54; 95% CI 1.38-4.67; p = 0.003), R1/R2 resection margin (HR 1.57; 95% CI 0.85-2.90; p = 0.015), and Clavien-Dindo Grade 3 or more (HR 2.73; 95% CI 1.44-5.18; p = 0.002). For DFS, multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated BCLC stage ≥ B (HR 2.15; 95% CI 1.34-3.44; p = 0.002) as an independent prognostic factor, along with multiple nodules (HR 2.04; 95% CI 1.25-3.32; p = 0.004), MVI (HR 1.81; 95% CI 1.19-2.75; p = 0.005), satellite nodules (HR 1.63; 95% CI 1.09-2.45; p = 0.018), and R1/R2 resection margin (HR 3.39; 95% CI 2.19-5.25; < 0.001). The C-Index of the nomogram, tailored based on the previous significant factors, showed good accuracy (0.70). Internal and external calibration curves for the probability of DFS rate showed optimal consistency and fit well between the nomogram-based prediction and actual observations. MVI and R1/R2 resection margins should be considered as significant OS and DFS predictors, while satellite nodules should be included as a significant DFS predictor. The nomogram-based prognostic model for DFS provides a more effective prognosis assessment for resected HCC patients, allowing for individualized treatment plans.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Pronóstico , Nomogramas , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Márgenes de EscisiónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the outcomes of high-volume, medium-volume, and low-volume hospitals performing hepatic resections using a network meta-analysis. METHODS: A literature search until June 2023 was conducted across major databases to identify studies comparing outcomes in high-volume, medium-volume, and low-volume hospitals for liver resection. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, and surface under cumulative ranking area values, odds ratio, and mean difference with 95% credible intervals were reported for postoperative mortality, failure-to-rescue, morbidity, length of stay, and hospital costs. RESULTS: Twenty studies comprising 248,707 patients undergoing liver resection were included. For the primary mortality outcome, overall and subgroup analyses were performed: group I: high-volume = 5 to 20 resections/year; group II: high-volume = 21 to 49 resections/year; group III: high-volume ≥50 resections/year. Results demonstrated a significant association between hospital volume and mortality (overall-high-volume versus medium-volume: odds ratio 0.66, 95% credible interval 0.49-0.87; high-volume versus low-volume: odds ratio 0.52, 95% credible interval 0.41-0.65; group I-high-volume versus low-volume: odds ratio 0.34, 95% credible interval 0.22-0.50; medium-volume versus low-volume: odds ratio 0.56, 95% credible interval 0.33-0.92; group II-high-volume versus low-volume: odds ratio 0.67, 95% credible interval 0.45-0.91), as well as length of stay (high-volume versus low-volume: mean difference -1.24, 95% credible interval -2.07 to -0.41), favoring high-volume hospitals. No significant difference was observed in failure-to-rescue, morbidity, or hospital costs across the 3 groups. CONCLUSION: This study supports a positive relationship between hospital volume and surgical outcomes in liver resection. Patients from high-volume hospitals experience superior outcomes in terms of lower postoperative mortality and shorter lengths of stay than medium-volume and low-volume hospitals.
Asunto(s)
Hepatectomía , Hospitales de Alto Volumen , Humanos , Teorema de Bayes , Hepatectomía/métodos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitales , Hígado , Metaanálisis en RedRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Validated Intraoperative Bleeding (VIBe) Scale could be used to aid assessment of intraoperative bleeding and guide the use of hemostatic products. The aim of this survey was to determine if the VIBe scale would serve as a generalizable and relevant tool for hepatopancreatobiliary(HPB) surgeons and trainees. METHODS: A standardized online VIBe training module was conducted on 67 respondents from 25 countries, after which they used the VIBe scale to score videos depicting different severities of intraoperative bleeding. Interobserver agreement was assessed using Kendall's coefficient of concordance. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement was excellent amongst all respondents with a Kendall's W of 0.923. Sub-analyses showed a difference based on seniority and level of experience: Attendings/Consultants(0.947) vs Fellows/Residents(0.879); Increasing years of practice >10(0.952) vs <10 years practice(0.890). There was excellent concordance regardless of surgical volume, percentage of procedures performed minimally invasively, area of sub-specialty, and previous involvement with VIBe surveys. CONCLUSION: This international survey in the field of HPB surgery across surgeons of various levels of experience showed that the VIBe scale could serve as an excellent tool to assess the severity of bleeding. This scale would also be useful in guiding the use and choice of hemostatic adjuncts to achieve hemostasis.
Asunto(s)
Hemostáticos , Cirujanos , Humanos , Cirujanos/educación , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Competencia ClínicaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation remains the optimal treatment for multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, due to resource constrains, other therapeutic modalities such as liver resection (LR), are frequently utilized. LR, however, has to be balanced against potential morbidity and mortality along with the risks of early recurrence leading to futile surgery. In this study, we evaluated preoperative factors, including inflammatory indices, in predicting early (< 1 year) recurrence in patients who underwent LR for multifocal HCC. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of 250 consecutive patients with multifocal HCC who underwent LR. RESULTS: After exclusion of 10 patients with 30-day/in-hospital mortality, 240 were included of which 134 (55.8%) developed early recurrence. Hepatitis B/C aetiology, 3/ > more hepatic nodules and elevated alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥ 200 ng/ml were significant independent preoperative predictors of early recurrence. The early recurrence rate was 72.1% when 2 out of 3 significant predictive factors were present. The conglomerate of all 3 factors predicted early recurrence of 100% with a statistically significant association between number of predictive factors and early recurrence (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Better patient selection via the use of preoperative predictive factors of early recurrence such as hepatitis B/C aetiology, ≥ 3 nodules and elevated AFP ≥ 200 ng/ml may assist in identifying patients in whom LR is deemed futile and improve resource allocation.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Hepatitis B , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/patología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , alfa-Fetoproteínas , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/cirugía , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos , HepatectomíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Our primary objective was to determine if receiving intraoperative blood transfusion was a significant prognostic factor for overall and recurrence-free survival after curative resection of hepatic cellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODOLOGY: Between 2001 and 2018, 1092 patients with histologically proven primary HCC who underwent curative liver resection were retrospectively reviewed. Primary study endpoints were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). The main analysis was undertaken using propensity-score matching (PSM) to minimize confounding and selection biases in the comparison of patients with or without transfusion. RESULTS: There were 220 patients who received and 666 patients who did not receive intraoperative blood transfusion. The PSM cohort consisted of 163 pairs of patients. After PSM, the only perioperative outcome that appeared to significantly affect whether patients would receive blood transfusion was median blood loss (p = 0.001). In the PSM cohort, whether patients received blood transfusion was neither associated with OS (p = 0.759) nor RFS (p = 0.830). When the volume of blood transfusion was analyzed as a continuous variable, no significant dose-response relationship between blood transfusion volume and HR for OS and RFS was noted. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative blood transfusion had no significant impact on the survival outcomes in patients who receive curative resection in primary HCC.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/patología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Hepatectomía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Transfusión Sanguínea , Puntaje de Propensión , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , PronósticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram, the predictive scoring system of Yamamoto et al, and the 3-point transfusion risk score of Lemke et al are models used to determine the probability of receiving intraoperative blood transfusion in patients undergoing liver resection. However, the external validity of these models remains unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate their predictive performance in an external cohort of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. We also aimed to identify predictors of blood transfusion and develop a new predictive model for blood transfusion. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of our prospective database of 1,081 patients undergoing liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma from 2001 to 2018. The predictive performance of current prediction models was evaluated using C statistics. Demographic and clinical variables as predictors of blood transfusion were assessed. Using logistic regression, an alternative model was created. RESULTS: The Lemke transfusion risk score performed better than the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram (0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.66-0.73 vs 0.66, 95% liver resection 0.62-0.69) (P < .001). The model from Yamamoto et al performed comparably with no statistically significant differences found through pairwise comparison. In our alternative model, hemoglobin level, albumin level, liver resection type, and tumor size were independent predictors of blood transfusion. The new HATS model obtained a C statistic of 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.71-0.78), performing significantly better than the previous 3 models (P ≤ 0.001 for all). CONCLUSION: The existing Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Yamamoto et al, and Lemke et al had nomograms with the suboptimal accuracy of predicting risk of intraoperative blood transfusion in patients undergoing liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. The proposed HATS model was more accurate at predicting patients at risk of blood transfusion.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Albúminas , Transfusión Sanguínea , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/patología , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/cirugía , Hemoglobinas , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Nomogramas , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Objective: We aimed to prognosticate survival after surgical resection of HCC stratified by stage with amalgamation of the modified Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system and location of tumour. Methods: This single-institutional retrospective cohort study included patients with HCC who underwent surgical resection between 1st January 2000 to 30th June 2016. Participants were divided into 6 different subgroups: A-u) Within MC with Unilobar lesions; A-b) Within MC + Bilobar lesions; B1-u) Out of MC + within Up-To-7 + Unilobar lesions; B1-b) Out of MC + within Up-to-7 + Bilobar lesions; B2-u) Out of MC + Out of Up-To-7 + Unilobar lesions; B2-b) Out of MC + Out of Up-To-7 + Bilobar lesions. A separate survival analysis was conducted for solitary HCC lesions according to three subgroups: A-S (Within MC); B1-S (Out of MC + within Up-To-7); B2-S (Out of MC + out of Up-To-7). Results: A total of 794 of 1043 patients with surgical resection for HCC were analysed. Groups A-u (64.6%), A-b (58.4%) and B1-u (56.2%) had 5-year cumulative overall survival (OS) rates above 50% after surgical resection and median OS exceeding 60 months (P = 0.0001). The 5-year cumulative recurrence-free survival rates (RFS) were 40.4% (group A-u), 38.2% (group A-b), 36.3% (group B1-u), 24.6% (group B2-u), and 7.3% (group B2-b)(P=0.0001). For solitary lesions, the 5-year OS for the subgroups were A-S (65.1%), B1-S (56.0%) and B2-S (47.1%) (P = 0.0003). Compared to A-S, there was also a significant trend towards relatively poorer OS as the lesion sizes increased in B1-S (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.03-2.08) and B2-S (HR 1.65, 95% CI 1.25-2.18). Conclusion: We adopted a novel approach combining the modified BCLC B sub-classification and dispersion of tumour to show that surgical resection in intermediate stage HCC can be robustly prognosticated. We found that size prognosticates resection outcomes in solitary tumours.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed to compare outcomes after living donor right hepatectomy via the following techniques: conventional open (Open), mini-laparotomy (Minilap), hybrid (Hybrid), totally laparoscopic (Lap), and robotic living donor right hepatectomy (Robotic). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Scopus were searched from inception to August 2021 for comparative studies of patients who underwent living donor right hepatectomy. RESULTS: Nineteen studies comprising 2,261 patients were included. Operation time was longer in Lap versus Minilap and Open (mean difference 65.09 min, 95% confidence interval 3.40-126.78 and mean difference 34.81 minutes, 95% confidence interval 1.84-67.78), and in Robotic versus Hybrid, Lap, Minilap, and Open (mean difference 144.72 minutes, 95% confidence interval 89.84-199.59, mean difference 113.24 minutes, 95% confidence interval 53.28-173.20, mean difference 178.33 minutes, 95% confidence interval 105.58-251.08 and mean difference 148.05 minutes, 95% confidence interval 97.35-198.74, respectively). Minilap and Open were associated with higher blood loss compared to Lap (mean difference 258.67 mL, 95% confidence interval 107.00-410.33 and mean difference 314.11 mL, 95% confidence interval 143.84-484.37) and Robotic (mean difference 205.60 mL, 95% confidence interval 45.92-365.28 and mean difference 261.04 mL, 95% confidence interval 84.26-437.82). Open was associated with more overall complications compared to Minilap (odds ratio 2.60, 95% confidence interval 1.11-6.08). Recipient biliary complication rate was higher in Minilap and Open versus Hybrid (odds ratio 3.91, 95% confidence interval 1.13-13.55 and odds ratio 11.42, 95% confidence interval 2.27-57.49), and lower in Open versus Minilap (OR 0.07, 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.34). CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive donor right hepatectomy via the various techniques is safe and feasible when performed in high-volume centers, with no major differences in donor complication rates and comparable recipient outcomes once surgeons have mounted the learning curve.
Asunto(s)
Hepatectomía , Laparoscopía , Laparotomía , Donadores Vivos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Hepatectomía/métodos , Humanos , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Laparotomía/efectos adversos , Tiempo de Internación , Metaanálisis en Red , Tempo Operativo , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To study the complications of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HALLDN) with an emphasis on complications occurring early after hospital discharge up to 120 days after surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively categorized complications using the Clavien-Dindo classification in 3002 HALLDNs performed at 1 center from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2019. In addition to overall summaries, modeling was used to identify correlates of complications before and after living donation. RESULTS: Of these donors, 87% were White, 59% were female, the mean age was 45 years (range, 18-77 years), 30.3% had a body mass index of at least 30, and 36.3% had previous abdominopelvic surgery. There were no deaths related to the surgery. The incidence of major complications (intraoperative complications plus Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III postoperatively) was 2.5% (n=74). The overall complication rate was 12.4% (n=371), including 15 intraoperative, 76 postoperative before discharge, and 280 after discharge to 120 days. Reoperation was required in 1.8% of patients (n=54), and all but 1 of these were incision-related problems. Seventy-six percent of all complications occurred after discharge, including 85% of the reoperations. For major complications, no risk factor was found. Risk factors for any complication included paramedian incision (hazard ratio [HR], 2.54; 95% CI, 1.49 to 4.34; P<.001); a history of abdominopelvic surgery (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.76; P=.01), male sex (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.76; P=.01), non-White race (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.88; P=.02), and early era of the experience. CONCLUSION: Most major complications of HALLDN occur after discharge, suggesting that close follow-up is warranted and that the current literature may underestimate the true incidence.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscópía Mano-Asistida , Trasplante de Riñón , Femenino , Laparoscópía Mano-Asistida/efectos adversos , Humanos , Trasplante de Riñón/efectos adversos , Donadores Vivos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nefrectomía/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the outcomes of curative liver resection (LR) in octogenarian patients, analysed cancer-specific survival (CSS) with HCC-related death or explored the age-varying effect of HCC-related death in elderly patients undergoing LR. We aim to determine the effect of age on the short and long-term outcomes of LR for HCC. METHODOLOGY: Between 2000 and 2018, 1,092 patients with primary HCC who underwent LR with curative intent were retrospectively reviewed. The log-rank test and Gray's test were used to assess the equality of survivor functions and competing risk-adjusted cumulative incidence functions between patients in the three age categories respectively. Regression adjustment was used to control for confounding bias via a Principal Component Analysis. Quantile, Firth logistic, Cox, and Fine-Gray competing risk regression were used to analyse continuous, binary, time-to-event, and cause-specific survival respectively. Restricted cubic splines were used to illustrate the dose-effect relationship between age and patient outcomes. RESULTS: The study comprised of 764 young patients (<70 years), 278 septuagenarians (70-79 years old) and 50 octogenarians (≥80 years). Compared to young patients, octogenarians had significantly lower 5-year OS(62.1% vs 37.7%, p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in 1-year RFS(73.1% vs 67.0%, p = 0.774) or 5-year CSS (5.4% vs 15.2%, p = 0.674). Every 10-year increase in age was significantly associated with an increase length of stay (p < 0.001), postoperative complications (p = 0.004) and poorer OS(p = 0.018) but not significantly associated with major complications (p = 0.279), CSS(p = 0.338) or RFS(p = 0.941). CONCLUSION: Age by itself was associated with OS after LR for HCC but was not a significant risk factor for HCC-related death.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Humanos , Pronóstico , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is being adopted increasingly worldwide. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of patients who underwent MIDP versus open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent a DP in our institution between 2005 and 2019 was performed. Propensity score matching based on relevant baseline factors was used to match patients in the ODP and MIDP groups in a 1:1 manner. Outcomes reported include operative duration, blood loss, postoperative length of stay, morbidity, mortality, postoperative pancreatic fistula rates, reoperation and readmission. RESULTS: In total, 444 patients were included in this study. Of 122 MIDP patients, 112 (91.8%) could be matched. After matching, the median operating time for MIDP was significantly longer than ODP [260 min (200-346.3) vs 180 (135-232.5), p < 0.001], while postoperative stay for MIDP was significantly shorter [median 6 days (5-8) versus 7 days (6-9), p = 0.015]. There were no significant differences noted in any of the other outcomes measured. Over time, we observed a decrease in the operation times of MIDP performed at our institution. CONCLUSION: Adoption of MIDP offers advantages over ODP in terms of a shorter postoperative hospital stay, without an increase in morbidity and/or mortality but at the expense of a longer operation time.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Pancreatectomía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Puntaje de Propensión , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Access to the liver transplant waitlist for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) depends on tumour presentation, biology, and response to treatments. The Milan Criteria (MC) represent the benchmark for expanded criteria that incorporate additional prognostic factors. The purpose of this study was to determine the added value of skeletal muscle index (SMI) in HCC patients beyond the MC. METHOD: Patients with HCC that were transplanted beyond the MC were included in this retrospective multicentre study. SMI was quantified using the Computed Tomography (CT) within 3 months prior to transplantation. Cox regression models were used to identify predictors of overall survival (OS). The discriminative performance of SMI extended Metroticket 2.0 and AFP models was also assessed. RESULTS: Out of 889 patients transplanted outside the MC, 528 had a CT scan within 3 months prior to liver transplantation (LT), of whom 176 (33%) were classified as sarcopenic. The median time between assessment of the SMI and LT was 1.8 months (IQR: 0.77-2.67). The median follow-up period was 5.1 95% CI [4.7-5.5] years, with a total of 177 recorded deaths from any cause. In a linear regression model with SMI as the dependent variable, only male gender (8.55 95% CI [6.51-10.59], P < 0.001) and body mass index (0.74 95% CI [0.59-0.89], P < 0.001) were significant. Univariable survival analysis of patients with sarcopenia versus patients without sarcopenia showed a significant difference in OS (HR 1.44 95% CI [1.07 - 1.94], P = 0.018). Also the SMI was significant (HR 0.98 95% CI [0.96-0.99], P = 0.014). The survival difference between the lowest SMI quartile versus the highest SMI quartile was significant (log-rank: P = 0.005) with 5 year OS of 57% and 71%, respectively. Data from 423 patients, describing 139 deaths, was used for multivariate analysis. Both sarcopenia (HR 1.45 95% CI [1.02 - 2.05], P = 0.036) and SMI were (HR 0.98 95% CI [0.95-0.99], P = 0.035) significant. On the survival scale this translates to a 5 year OS difference of 11% between sarcopenia and no sarcopenia. Whereas for SMI, this translates to a survival difference of 8% between first and third quartiles for both genders. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we can conclude that higher muscle mass contributes to a better long-term survival. However, for individual patients, low muscle mass should not be considered an absolute contra-indication for LT as its discriminatory performance was limited.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Trasplante de Hígado , Sarcopenia , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/cirugía , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/patología , Músculo Esquelético/patología , Sarcopenia/patologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) are noninvasive surrogates for hepatic steatosis and fibrosis, respectively, and could help identify extended criteria donors in liver transplantation (LT). We aimed to determine the accuracy of CAP/LSM in deceased donors along with post-LT changes. METHODS: Accuracy of preprocurement CAP/LSM to grade/stage steatosis/fibrosis was determined using liver biopsy as reference. Transplant outcomes, including primary nonfunction (PNF) and early allograft dysfunction, were recorded. Recipients underwent CAP/LSM as outpatients. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve and regression models were constructed to analyze data. RESULTS: We prospectively evaluated 160 allografts (138 transplanted). Same-probe paired baseline/post-LT CAP was 231 dB/m (181-277)/225 (187-261) (P = 0.61), and LSM 7.6 kPa (6.3-10.8)/5.9 (4.6-8.7) (P = 0.002), respectively. CAP reading was affected by BMI and LSM by ALT, race and bilirubin. Although CAP did not correlate with steatosis from frozen sections (ρ = 0.08, P = 0.47), it correlated with steatosis from permanent sections (ρ = 0.32, P < 0.001) and with oil red O histomorphometry (ρ = 0.35, P = 0.001). CAP identified moderate-to-severe steatosis with an areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve curve of 0.79 (0.66-0.91), for a negative predictive value of 100% at a cutoff value of 230 dB/m. LSM correlated with fibrosis staging (ρ = 0.22, P = 0.007) and it identified discarded allografts with advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis. Patients with no to minimal fibrosis had an LSM of 7.6 (6-10.1) kPa. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are proof-of-concept of the utility of CAP/LSM during organ procurement. Establishing the precise role of these noninvasive tools in the organ allocation process mandates confirmatory studies.