RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Examine portal hypertension (PHT) impact on postoperative and survival outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after liver resection (LR), specifically exploring distinctions between indirect signs and invasive measurements of PHT. BACKGROUND: PHT has historically discouraged LR in individuals with HCC due to the elevated risk of morbidity, including liver decompensation (LD). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using 3 databases to identify prospective-controlled and matched cohort studies until December 28, 2022. Focus on comparing postoperative outcomes (mortality, morbidity, and liver-related complications) and overall survival in HCC patients with and without PHT undergoing LR. Three meta-analysis models were utilized: for aggregated data (fixed-effects inverse variance model), for patient-level survival data (one-stage frequentist meta-analysis with gamma-shared frailty Cox proportional hazards model), and for pooled data (Freeman-Tukey exact and double arcsine method). RESULTS: Nine studies involving 1124 patients were analyzed. Indirect signs of PHT were not significantly associated with higher mortality, overall complications, PHLF or LD. However, LR in patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) ≥10 mm Hg significantly increased the risk of overall complications, PHLF, and LD. Despite elevated risks, the procedure resulted in a 5-year overall survival rate of 55.2%. Open LR significantly increased the risk of overall complications, PHLF, and LD. Conversely, PHT did not show a significant association with worse postoperative outcomes in minimally invasive LR. CONCLUSIONS: LR in the presence of indirect signs of PHT poses no increased risk of complications. Yet, in HVPG ≥10 mm Hg patients, LR increases overall morbidity and liver-related complications risk. Transjugular HVPG assessment is crucial for LR decisions. Minimally invasive approach seems to be vital for favorable outcomes, especially in HVPG ≥10 mm Hg patients.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Hepatectomía , Hipertensión Portal , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Hipertensión Portal/complicaciones , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Hepáticas/complicaciones , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/cirugía , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/mortalidad , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/complicaciones , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Tasa de Supervivencia , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
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
OBJECTIVE: To propose to our community a common language about extreme liver surgery. BACKGROUND: The lack of a clear definition of extreme liver surgery prevents convincing comparisons of results among centers. METHODS: We used a two-round Delphi methodology to quantify consensus among liver surgery experts. For inclusion in the final recommendations, we established a consensus when the positive responses (agree and totally agree) exceeded 70%. The study steering group summarized and reported the recommendations. In general, a five-point Likert scale with a neutral central value was used, and in a few cases multiple choices. Results are displayed as numbers and percentages. RESULTS: A two-round Delphi study was completed by 38 expert surgeons in complex hepatobiliary surgery. The surgeon´s median age was 58 years old (52-63) and the median years of experience was 25 years (20-31). For the proposed definitions of total vascular occlusion, hepatic flow occlusion and inferior vein occlusion, the degree of agreement was 97%, 81% and 84%, respectively. In situ approach (64%) was the preferred, followed by ante situ (22%) and ex situ (14%). Autologous or cadaveric graft for hepatic artery or hepatic vein repair were the most recommended (89%). The use of veno-venous bypass or portocaval shunt revealed the divergence depending on the case. Overall, 75% of the experts agreed with the proposed definition for extreme liver surgery. CONCLUSION: Obtaining a consensus on the definition of extreme liver surgery is essential to guarantee the correct management of patients with highly complex hepatobiliary oncological disease. The management of candidates for extreme liver surgery involves comprehensive care ranging from adequate patient selection to the appropriate surgical strategy.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to establish global benchmark outcomes indicators for L-RPS/H67. BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive liver resections has seen an increase in uptake in recent years. Over time, challenging procedures as laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomies (L-RPS)/H67 are also increasingly adopted. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 854 patients undergoing minimally invasive RPS (MI-RPS) in 57 international centers in 4 continents between 2015 and 2021. There were 651 pure L-RPS and 160 robotic RPS (R-RPS). Sixteen outcome indicators of low-risk L-RPS cases were selected to establish benchmark cutoffs. The 75th percentile of individual center medians for a given outcome indicator was set as the benchmark cutoff. RESULTS: There were 573 L-RPS/H67 performed in 43 expert centers, of which 254 L-RPS/H67 (44.3%) cases qualified as low risk benchmark cases. The benchmark outcomes established for operation time, open conversion rate, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity, 90-day mortality and textbook outcome after L-RPS were 350.8 minutes, 12.5%, 53.8%, 22.9%, 23.8%, 2.8%, 0% and 4% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The present study established the first global benchmark values for L-RPS/H6/7. The benchmark provided an up-to-date reference of best achievable outcomes for surgical auditing and benchmarking.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) offer potential benefits such as reduced blood loss and morbidity compared with open liver resections. Several studies have suggested that the impact of cirrhosis differs according to the extent and complexity of resection. Our aim was to investigate the impact of cirrhosis on the difficulty and outcomes of MILR, focusing on major hepatectomies. METHODS: A total of 2534 patients undergoing minimally invasive major hepatectomies (MIMH) for primary malignancies across 58 centers worldwide were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score (PSM) and coarsened exact matching (CEM) were used to compare patients with and without cirrhosis. RESULTS: A total of 1353 patients (53%) had no cirrhosis, 1065 (42%) had Child-Pugh A and 116 (4%) had Child-Pugh B cirrhosis. Matched comparison between non-cirrhotics vs Child-Pugh A cirrhosis demonstrated comparable blood loss. However, after PSM, postoperative morbidity and length of hospitalization was significantly greater in Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, but these were not statistically significant with CEM. Comparison between Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis demonstrated the latter had significantly higher transfusion rates and longer hospitalization after PSM, but not after CEM. Comparison of patients with cirrhosis of all grades with and without portal hypertension demonstrated no significant difference in all major perioperative outcomes after PSM and CEM. CONCLUSIONS: The presence and severity of cirrhosis affected the difficulty and impacted the outcomes of MIMH, resulting in higher blood transfusion rates, increased postoperative morbidity, and longer hospitalization in patients with more advanced cirrhosis. As such, future difficulty scoring systems for MIMH should incorporate liver cirrhosis and its severity as variables.
Asunto(s)
Hipertensión Portal , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/complicaciones , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Hepatectomía/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/cirugía , Cirrosis Hepática/complicaciones , Cirrosis Hepática/cirugía , Cirrosis Hepática/patología , Laparoscopía/métodos , Hipertensión Portal/etiología , Hipertensión Portal/cirugía , Tiempo de Internación , Puntaje de PropensiónRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Despite the increasing widespread adoption and experience in minimally invasive liver resections (MILR), open conversion occurs not uncommonly even with minor resections and as been reported to be associated with inferior outcomes. We aimed to identify risk factors for and outcomes of open conversion in patients undergoing minor hepatectomies. We also studied the impact of approach (laparoscopic or robotic) on outcomes. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of 20,019 patients who underwent RLR and LLR across 50 international centers between 2004-2020. Risk factors for and perioperative outcomes of open conversion were analysed. Multivariate and propensity score-matched analysis were performed to control for confounding factors. RESULTS: Finally, 10,541 patients undergoing either laparoscopic (LLR; 89.1%) or robotic (RLR; 10.9%) minor liver resections (wedge resections, segmentectomies) were included. Multivariate analysis identified LLR, earlier period of MILR, malignant pathology, cirrhosis, portal hypertension, previous abdominal surgery, larger tumor size, and posterosuperior location as significant independent predictors of open conversion. The most common reason for conversion was technical issues (44.7%), followed by bleeding (27.2%), and oncological reasons (22.3%). After propensity score matching (PSM) of baseline characteristics, patients requiring open conversion had poorer outcomes compared with successful MILR cases as evidenced by longer operative times, more blood loss, higher requirement for perioperative transfusion, longer duration of hospitalization and higher morbidity, reoperation, and 90-day mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple risk factors were associated with conversion of MILR even for minor hepatectomies, and open conversion was associated with significantly poorer perioperative outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Conversión a Cirugía Abierta , Hepatectomía , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Hepatectomía/métodos , Hepatectomía/mortalidad , Laparoscopía/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Conversión a Cirugía Abierta/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Anciano , Estudios de Seguimiento , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Factores de Riesgo , Tempo Operativo , Pronóstico , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly used to treat locally advanced (T3-4 Nx-2 M0) colon cancer due to its potential advantages over the standard approach of upfront surgery. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse data from comparative studies to assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on oncological outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching the MEDLINE and Scopus databases. The search encompassed RCTs, propensity score-matched studies, and controlled prospective studies published up to 1 April 2023. As a primary objective, overall survival and disease-free survival were compared. As a secondary objective, perioperative morbidity, mortality, and complete resection were compared using the DerSimonian and Laird models. RESULTS: A total of seven studies comprising a total of 2120 patients were included. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a reduction in the hazard of recurrence (HR 0.73, 95% c.i. 0.59 to 0.90; P = 0.003) and death (HR 0.67, 95% c.i. 0.54 to 0.83; P < 0.001) compared with upfront surgery. Additionally, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly associated with higher 5-year overall survival (79.9% versus 72.6%; P < 0.001) and disease-free survival (73.1% versus 64.5%; P = 0.028) rates. No significant differences were observed in perioperative mortality (OR 0.97, 95% c.i. 0.28 to 3.33), overall complications (OR 0.95, 95% c.i. 0.77 to 1.16), or anastomotic leakage/intra-abdominal abscess (OR 0.88, 95% c.i. 0.60 to 1.29). However, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a lower risk of incomplete resection (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.49 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with a reduced hazard of recurrence and death, as well as improved overall survival and disease-free survival rates, compared with upfront surgery in patients with locally advanced colon cancer.
Colon cancer is a common medical condition, the established treatment for which involves surgical resection followed by chemotherapy. However, a contemporary shift has led to the investigation of an alternative treatment sequence known as neoadjuvant chemotherapy, wherein chemotherapy precedes the surgery. This study critically assesses the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared with the standard treatment approach of surgery followed by chemotherapy. A systematic review of medical databases was undertaken to identify pertinent research publications on this subject matter. In total, seven studies encompassing data from 2120 patients were included in the analysis. Employing a meta-analysis methodology to synthesize the collective data from these studies, it was revealed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy was linked to higher rates of 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival, alongside a diminished hazard of both recurrence and death. Furthermore, no discernible differences in surgical complications or perioperative mortality were evident across the compared approaches.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias del Colon , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Humanos , Neoplasias del Colon/mortalidad , Neoplasias del Colon/cirugía , Neoplasias del Colon/patología , Neoplasias del Colon/tratamiento farmacológico , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Colectomía , Tasa de Supervivencia , Supervivencia sin EnfermedadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver surgery is increasingly used for more challenging procedures. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and oncological safety of laparoscopic right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases after portal vein embolization. METHODS: This was an international retrospective multicentre study of patients with colorectal liver metastases who underwent open or laparoscopic right and extended right hepatectomy after portal vein embolization between 2004 and 2020. The perioperative and oncological outcomes for patients who underwent laparoscopic and open approaches were compared using propensity score matching. RESULTS: Of 338 patients, 84 patients underwent a laparoscopic procedure and 254 patients underwent an open procedure. Patients in the laparoscopic group less often underwent extended right hepatectomy (18% versus 34.6% (P = 0.004)), procedures in the setting of a two-stage hepatectomy (42% versus 65% (P < 0.001)), and major concurrent procedures (4% versus 16.1% (P = 0.003)). After propensity score matching, 78 patients remained in each group. The laparoscopic approach was associated with longer operating and Pringle times (330 versus 258.5 min (P < 0.001) and 65 versus 30 min (P = 0.001) respectively) and a shorter length of stay (7 versus 8 days (P = 0.011)). The R0 resection rate was not different (71% for the laparoscopic approach versus 60% for the open approach (P = 0.230)). The median disease-free survival was 12 (95% c.i. 10 to 20) months for the laparoscopic approach versus 20 (95% c.i. 13 to 31) months for the open approach (P = 0.145). The median overall survival was 28 (95% c.i. 22 to 48) months for the laparoscopic approach versus 42 (95% c.i. 35 to 52) months for the open approach (P = 0.614). CONCLUSION: The advantages of a laparoscopic over an open approach for (extended) right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases after portal vein embolization are limited.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Embolización Terapéutica , Hepatectomía , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Vena Porta , Humanos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Laparoscopía/métodos , Masculino , Femenino , Vena Porta/cirugía , Embolización Terapéutica/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Puntaje de Propensión , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios de Factibilidad , Tiempo de InternaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming more useful as a decision-making and outcomes predictor tool. We have developed AI models to predict surgical complexity and the postoperative course in laparoscopic liver surgery for segments 7 and 8. METHODS: We included patients with lesions located in segments 7 and 8 operated by minimally invasive liver surgery from an international multi-institutional database. We have employed AI models to predict surgical complexity and postoperative outcomes. Furthermore, we have applied SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to make the AI models interpretable. Finally, we analyzed the surgeries not converted to open versus those converted to open. RESULTS: Overall, 585 patients and 22 variables were included. Multi-layer Perceptron (MLP) showed the highest performance for predicting surgery complexity and Random Forest (RF) for predicting postoperative outcomes. SHAP detected that MLP and RF gave the highest relevance to the variables "resection type" and "largest tumor size" for predicting surgery complexity and postoperative outcomes. In addition, we explored between surgeries converted to open and non-converted, finding statistically significant differences in the variables "tumor location," "blood loss," "complications," and "operation time." CONCLUSION: We have observed how the application of SHAP allows us to understand the predictions of AI models in surgical complexity and the postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic liver surgery in segments 7 and 8.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Hepatectomía , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Anciano , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Tempo Operativo , AdultoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Although several studies report that the robotic approach is more costly than laparoscopy, the cost-effectiveness of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is still an issue. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the RDP and LDP approaches across several Spanish centres. METHODS: This study is an observational, multicenter, national prospective study (ROBOCOSTES). For one year from 2022, all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were included, and clinical, QALY, and cost data were prospectively collected. The primary aim was to analyze the cost-effectiveness between RDP and LDP. RESULTS: During the study period, 80 procedures from 14 Spanish centres were analyzed. LDP had a shorter operative time than the RDP approach (192.2 min vs 241.3 min, p = 0.004). RDP showed a lower conversion rate (19.5% vs 2.5%, p = 0.006) and a lower splenectomy rate (60% vs 26.5%, p = 0.004). A statistically significant difference was reported for the Comprehensive Complication Index between the two study groups, favouring the robotic approach (12.7 vs 6.1, p = 0.022). RDP was associated with increased operative costs of 1600 euros (p < 0.031), while overall cost expenses resulted in being 1070.92 Euros higher than the LDP but without a statistically significant difference (p = 0.064). The mean QALYs at 90 days after surgery for RDP (0.9534) were higher than those of LDP (0.8882) (p = 0.030). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20,000 and 30,000 euros, there was a 62.64% and 71.30% probability that RDP was more cost-effective than LDP, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The RDP procedure in the Spanish healthcare system appears more cost-effective than the LDP.
Asunto(s)
Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos , Humanos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/métodos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Hígado/cirugía , Hígado/anatomía & histología , Laparoscopía/métodosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Involvement of the inferior vena cava (IVC) and hepatic veins has been considered a relative contraindication to hepatic resection for primary and metastatic liver tumors. However, patients affected by tumors extending to the IVC have limited therapeutic options and suffer worsening of quality of life due to IVC compression. METHODS: Cases of primary and metastatic liver tumors with vena cava infiltration from 10 international centers were collected (7 European, 1 US, 2 Brazilian, 1 Indian) were collected. Inclusion criteria for the study were major liver resection with concomitant vena cava replacement. Clinical data and short-term outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-six cases were finally included in the study. Median tumor max size was 98 mm (range: 25-250). A biliary reconstruction was necessary in 28% of cases, while a vascular reconstruction other than vena cava in 34% of cases. Median operative time was 462 min (range: 230-750), with 750 median ml of estimated blood loss and a median of one pRBC transfused intraoperatively (range: 0-27). Median ICU stay was 4 days (range: 1-30) with overall in-hospital stay of 15 days (range: 3-46), postoperative CCI score of 20.9 (range: 0-100), 12% incidence of PHLF grade B-C. Five patients died in a 90-days interval from surgery, one due to heart failure, one due to septic shock, and three due to multiorgan failure. With a median follow-up of 17 months (interquartile range: 11-37), the estimated 5 years overall survival was 48% (95% CI: 27-66%), and 5-year cumulative incidence of tumor recurrence was 55% (95% CI: 33-73%). CONCLUSIONS: Major liver resections with vena cava replacement can be performed with satisfactory results in expert HPB centers. This surgical strategy represents a feasible alternative for otherwise unresectable lesions and is associated with favorable prognosis compared to nonoperative management, especially in patients affected by intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.
Asunto(s)
Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Vena Cava Inferior , Humanos , Vena Cava Inferior/cirugía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Masculino , Hepatectomía/métodos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/mortalidad , Anciano , Adulto , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The effect of radiologic splenic vessels involvement (RSVI) on the survival of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) located in the body and tail of the pancreas is controversial, and its influence on postoperative morbidity after distal pancreatectomy (DP) is unknown. This study aimed to determine the influence of RSVI on postoperative complications, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients undergoing DP for PAC. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study of DP was conducted at 7 hepatopancreatobiliary units between January 2008 and December 2018. Patients were classified according to the presence of RSVI. A Clavien-Dindo grade of >II was considered to represent a major complication. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients were included in the analysis. Moreover, 47 patients had vascular infiltration: 4 had arterial involvement, 10 had venous involvement, and 33 had both arterial and venous involvements. The rates of major complications were 20.8% in patients without RSVI, 40.0% in those with venous RSVI, 25.0% in those with arterial RSVI, and 30.3% in those with both arterial and venous RSVIs (P = .024). The DFS rates at 3 years were 56% in the group without RSVI, 50% in the group with arterial RSVI, and 16% in the group with both arterial and venous RSVIs (P = .003). The OS rates at 3 years were 66% in the group without RSVI, 50% in the group with arterial RSVI, and 29% in the group with both arterial and venous RSVIs (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: RSVI increased the major complication rates after DP and reduced the OS and DFS. Therefore, it may be a useful prognostic marker in patients with PAC scheduled to undergo DP and may help to select patients likely to benefit from neoadjuvant treatment.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Pancreatectomía/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adenocarcinoma/diagnóstico por imagen , Adenocarcinoma/cirugía , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/diagnóstico por imagen , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirugía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Liver regeneration is essential for the preservation of homeostasis and survival. Bile acids (BAs)-mediated signaling is necessary for liver regeneration, but BAs levels need to be carefully controlled to avoid hepatotoxicity. We studied the early response of the BAs-fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19) axis in healthy individuals undergoing hepatectomy for living donor liver transplant. We also evaluated BAs synthesis in mice upon partial hepatectomy (PH) and acute inflammation, focusing on the regulation of cytochrome-7A1 (CYP7A1), a key enzyme in BAs synthesis from cholesterol. METHODS: Serum was obtained from twelve human liver donors. Mice underwent 2/3-PH or sham-operation. Acute inflammation was induced with bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in mice fed control or antoxidant-supplemented diets. BAs and 7α-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one (C4) levels were measured by HPLC-MS/MS; serum FGF19 by ELISA. Gene expression and protein levels were analyzed by RT-qPCR and western-blot. RESULTS: Serum BAs levels increased after PH. In patients with more pronounced hypercholanemia, FGF19 concentrations transiently rose, while C4 levels (a readout of CYP7A1 activity) dropped 2 h post-resection in all cases. Serum BAs and C4 followed the same pattern in mice 1 h after PH, but C4 levels also dropped in sham-operated and LPS-treated animals, without marked changes in CYP7A1 protein levels. LPS-induced serum C4 decline was attenuated in mice fed an antioxidant-supplemented diet. CONCLUSIONS: In human liver regeneration FGF19 upregulation may constitute a protective response from BAs excess during liver regeneration. Our findings suggest the existence of post-translational mechanisms regulating CYP7A1 activity, and therefore BAs synthesis, independent from CYP7A1/Cyp7a1 gene transcription.
Asunto(s)
Ácidos y Sales Biliares , Colesterol 7-alfa-Hidroxilasa , Factores de Crecimiento de Fibroblastos , Hepatectomía , Regeneración Hepática , Humanos , Animales , Ácidos y Sales Biliares/metabolismo , Ácidos y Sales Biliares/biosíntesis , Factores de Crecimiento de Fibroblastos/metabolismo , Factores de Crecimiento de Fibroblastos/sangre , Factores de Crecimiento de Fibroblastos/genética , Regeneración Hepática/efectos de los fármacos , Colesterol 7-alfa-Hidroxilasa/metabolismo , Colesterol 7-alfa-Hidroxilasa/genética , Ratones , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Hígado/metabolismo , Ratones Endogámicos C57BL , Trasplante de Hígado , Lipopolisacáridos/farmacologíaRESUMEN
Background: It is well known that laparoscopic liver surgery can offer advantages over open liver surgery in selected patients. However, what type of procedures can benefit most from a laparoscopic approach has been investigated poorly thus far. The aim of this study is thus to define the extent of advantages of laparoscopic over open liver surgery for lesions in the anterolateral (AL) and posterosuperior (PS) segments. Methods: In this international multicentre retrospective cohort study, laparoscopic and open minor liver resections for lesions in the AL and PS segments were compared after propensity score matching. The differential benefit of laparoscopy over open liver surgery, calculated using bootstrap sampling, was compared between AL and PS resections and expressed as a Delta of the differences. Results: After matching, 3,040 AL and 2,336 PS resections were compared, encompassing open and laparoscopic procedures in a 1:1 ratio. AL and PS laparoscopic liver resections were more advantageous in comparison to open in terms of blood loss, transfusion rate, complications, and length of stay. However, AL resections benefitted more from laparoscopy than PS in terms of overall and severe complications (D-difference were 4.8%, P=0.046 and 3%, P=0.046) and blood loss (D-difference was 195 mL, P<0.001). Similar results were observed in the subset for high-volume centres, while in recent years no significant differences were found in the differential benefit between AL and PS segments. Conclusions: The advantage of laparoscopic over open liver surgery is greater in the AL segments than in the PS segments.
RESUMEN
(1) Background: The liver-first approach may be indicated for colorectal cancer patients with synchronous liver metastases to whom preoperative chemotherapy opens a potential window in which liver resection may be undertaken. This study aims to present the data of feasibility and short-term outcomes in the liver-first approach. (2) Methods: A prospective observational study was performed in Spanish hospitals that had a medium/high-volume of HPB surgeries from 1 June 2019 to 31 August 2020. (3) Results: In total, 40 hospitals participated, including a total of 2288 hepatectomies, 1350 for colorectal liver metastases, 150 of them (11.1%) using the liver-first approach, 63 (42.0%) in hospitals performing <50 hepatectomies/year. The proportion of patients as ASA III was significantly higher in centers performing ≥50 hepatectomies/year (difference: 18.9%; p = 0.0213). In 81.1% of the cases, the primary tumor was in the rectum or sigmoid colon. In total, 40% of the patients underwent major hepatectomies. The surgical approach was open surgery in 87 (58.0%) patients. Resection margins were R0 in 78.5% of the patients. In total, 40 (26.7%) patients had complications after the liver resection and 36 (27.3%) had complications after the primary resection. One-hundred and thirty-two (89.3%) patients completed the therapeutic regime. (4) Conclusions: There were no differences in the surgical outcomes between the centers performing <50 and ≥50 hepatectomies/year. Further analysis evaluating factors associated with clinical outcomes and determining the best candidates for this approach will be subsequently conducted.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Iatrogenic bile duct injury (BDI) during cholecystectomy is associated with a complex and heterogeneous management owing to the burden of morbidity until their definitive treatment. This study aimed to define the textbook outcomes (TOs) after BDI with the purpose to indicate the ideal treatment and to improve it management. METHODS: We collected data from patients with an BDI between 1990 and 2022 from 27 hospitals. TO was defined as a successful conservative treatment of the iatrogenic BDI or only minor complications after BDI or patients in whom the first repair resolves the iatrogenic BDI without complications or with minor complications. RESULTS: We included 808 patients and a total of 394 patients (46.9%) achieved TO. Overall complications in TO and non-TO groups were 11.9% and 86%, respectively (P < .001). Major complications and mortality in the non-TO group were 57.4% and 9.2%, respectively. The use of end-to-end bile duct anastomosis repair was higher in the non-TO group (23.1 vs 7.8, P < .001). Factors associated with achieving a TO were injury in a specialized center (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.01; 95% CI, 2.68-5.99; P < .001), transfer for a first repair (aOR, 5.72; 95% CI, 3.51-9.34; P < .001), conservative management (aOR, 5.00; 95% CI, 1.63-15.36; P = .005), or surgical management (aOR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.50-4.00; P < .001). CONCLUSION: TO largely depends on where the BDI is managed and the type of injury. It allows hepatobiliary centers to identify domains of improvement of perioperative management of patients with BDI.