Comparison of clinical outcome between laparoscopic and open hepatectomy of high difficulty score for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of high difficulty score is technically challenging. There is a lack of clinical evidence to support its applicability in terms of the long-term survival benefits. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes between LLR and the open liver resection of high difficulty score for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2010 to 2020, using Iwate criteria, 424 patients underwent liver resection of high difficulty score by the laparoscopic (n = 65) or open (n = 359) approach. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed between the two groups. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between PS-matched groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors affecting survival. RESULTS: The laparoscopic group had significantly fewer severe complications (3% vs. 10.8%), and shorter median hospital stays (6 days vs. 8 days) than the open group. Meanwhile, the long-term oncological outcomes were comparable between the two groups, in terms of the tumor recurrence rate (40% vs. 46.1%), the 5-year overall survival rate (75.4% vs. 76.2%), and the 5-year recurrence-free survival rate (50.3% vs. 53.5%). The high preoperative serum alpha-fetoprotein level, multiple tumors, and severe postoperative complications were the independent poor prognostic factors associated with worse overall survival. The surgical approach (Laparoscopic vs. Open) did not influence the survival. CONCLUSION: LLR of high difficulty score for selected patients with HCC has better short-term outcomes than the open approach. More importantly, it can achieve similar long-term survival outcomes as the open approach.

Comparison of post-hepatectomy long-term survival outcome between non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine and colorectal liver metastases: A population-based propensity-score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hepatectomy is an established treatment for colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) or neuroendocrine liver metastasis. However, its role in non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NCNNLM) is controversial. This study aims to compare long-term survival outcomes after hepatectomy between NCNNLM and CLM in a population-based cohort. METHODS: From 2009 to 2018, curative hepatectomy were performed in 964 patients with NCNNLM (n â€‹= â€‹133) or CLM (n â€‹= â€‹831). Propensity score (PS) matching was performed. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between PS-matched groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors affecting survival. RESULTS: There were 133 patients in the NCNNLM group and 266 patients in the CLM group. The mortality (1.5 â€‹% vs 1.5 â€‹%) and morbidity (19.5 â€‹% vs 20.3 â€‹%) rates were comparable between the two groups. There was no statistically significant difference in 5-year overall (48.9 â€‹% vs 39.8 â€‹%) and recurrence-free (25.1 â€‹% vs 23.4 â€‹%) survival rates between NCNNLM and CLM groups. A high pre-operative serum bilirubin level, severe postoperative complications and multiple tumors were independent prognostic factors for poor survival. CONCLUSION: Hepatectomy for selected patients with NCNNLM can achieve similar long-term oncological outcomes as those with CLM. High serum bilirubin, severe postoperative complication and multiple tumors are poor prognostic factors for survival.

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib as a first-line agent alone or in combination with an immune checkpoint inhibitor for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.

Background: The RESORCE-III trial demonstrated that advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who progressed on sorafenib and had second-line therapy with regorafenib improved overall survival compared with placebo. Later, immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with antiangiogenetic antibodies has evolved as the preferred first-line treatment for fit patients. We aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of regorafenib as a first-line agent alone or in combination with ICIs in patients with advanced HCC. Methods: We identified 50 patients with advanced HCC treated with regorafenib as a first-line agent. Two patients were lost to follow-up and excluded. Baseline factors, dosing, concomitant use of ICIs, toxicity and outcome of treatment were recorded from electronic medical records. Results: Twenty-six patients received regorafenib as monotherapy and twenty-two received regorafenib + ICI in combination. In the total cohort, the median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 7.7 months and the median overall survival (mOS) was 16.7 months (P=0.02). Objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 were 21% and 73%. In the regorafenib monotherapy group, mPFS was 5.9 months, and mOS was 13.9 months; in the combination group, mPFS was 7.8 months, and mOS was 23.6 months. ORR and DCR were 15% and 65% in the monotherapy group, and 27% and 82% in the combined treatment group, respectively. Conclusions: Regorafenib used in combination with ICIs had a mild safety profile and resulted in improved response and an almost doubling of mOS compared to monotherapy, warranting further prospective evaluation in a randomized study.

Techniques of Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy: Glissonian Approach and a Parenchymal Transection Technique.

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) have been widely accepted as a treatment option for liver tumors. They offer several advantages over open liver resections, including less blood loss, reduced wound pain, and shorter hospital stays with a comparable oncological outcome. However, laparoscopic resection of lesions in the right posterior section of the liver is challenging due to difficulties in bleeding control and visualizing the surgical field. In the past, laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS) was still in the exploration phase, with undefined risks in the Second International Consensus Conference on LLR in 2014. However, recent technological advancements and increased surgical experience have shown that LRPS can be safe and feasible. It has been found to reduce hospital stay and blood loss compared to open surgery. This manuscript aims to provide a detailed description of the steps involved in LRPS. The key factors contributing to our success in this challenging procedure include proper liver retraction and exposure, the use of an intrahepatic Glissonian approach for inflow control, a technique called the 'ultrasonic scalpel mimic Cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator (CUSA)' for parenchymal transection, early identification of the right hepatic vein, and meticulous bleeding control using bipolar diathermy.

The Hong Kong consensus recommendations on the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cystic lesions.

Background: The finding of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL) on incidental imaging is becoming increasingly common. International studies report a prevalence of 2.2-44.7% depending on the population, imaging modality and indication for imaging, and the prevalence increases with age. Patients with PCL are at risk of developing pancreatic cancer, a disease with a poor prognosis. This publication summarizes recommendations for the diagnosis and management of PCL and post-operative pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) from a group of local specialists. Methods: Clinical evidence was consolidated from narrative reviews and consensus statements formulated during two online meetings in March 2022. The expert panel included gastroenterologists, hepatobiliary surgeons, oncologists, radiologists, and endocrinologists. Results: Patients with PCL require careful investigation and follow-up due to the risk of malignant transformation of these lesions. They should undergo clinical investigation and pancreas-specific imaging to classify lesions and understand the risk profile of the patient. Where indicated, patients should undergo pancreatectomy to excise PCL. Following pancreatectomy, patients are at risk of PEI, leading to gastrointestinal dysfunction and malnutrition. Therefore, such patients should be monitored for symptoms of PEI, and promptly treated with pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT). Patients with poor response to PERT may require increases in dose, addition of a proton pump inhibitor, and/or further investigation, including tests for pancreatic function. Patients are also at risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus after pancreatectomy; they should be screened and treated with insulin if indicated. Conclusions: These statements are an accurate summary of our approach to the diagnosis and management of patients with PCL and will be of assistance to clinicians treating these patients in a similar clinical landscape.

Pure laparoscopic liver resection versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score and multivariate analysis.

Background: In treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), both laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) provided similar short-term advantages. However, there was no robust clinical trial comparing the efficacy of LLR and RFA especially for small HCC. This study aimed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of LLR and RFA for patients with small HCC using a propensity score matching analysis to minimize potential selection bias. Factors affecting survival were then identified with multivariate analysis. Methods: All patients underwent RFA or LLR for small HCC [defined as Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage 0 or A, size ≤3 cm, ≤3 nodules on contrast CT scan or MRI with no evidence of macrovascular invasion] from April 2005 to August 2020 were included. Propensity score matching was conducted to match patients in the LLR group and RFA group. Prognostic indicators, i.e., age, gender, tumor size, tumor number, Child's grading, albumin, bilirubin, platelet count, international normalized ratio, alpha-fetoprotein level and presence of cirrhosis on imaging were chosen for propensity score calculation. The demographic data, tumor characteristics, operative data, post-operative outcomes and survival data of the two groups were compared. A multivariate analysis based on Cox regression was used to identify factors associated with survival. Results: Median follow-up was 34 months. LLR and RFA had similar overall survival (91.8% vs. 79.2% at 5-year, P=0.060); while the LLR had a significantly better disease-free survival (49.0% vs. 30.3% at 5-year, P=0.002) and local recurrence-free survival (96.0% vs. 63.7% at 5-year, P<0.001) when compared with the RFA. Multivariate analysis showed that treatment received by patient (LLR vs. RFA), prothrombin time and platelet counts were significantly associated with disease-free survival. On the other hand, the only factor associated with local recurrence-free survival was the treatment received by patient. Conclusions: Both RFA and LLR are safe and feasible treatment options for patients with small HCC. LLR should be considered for patients with preserved liver function with a better disease-free survival; while RFA offered a comparable overall survival with less surgical trauma and shorter hospital stay.

Laparoscopic vs open liver re-resection for cirrhotic patients with post-hepatectomy hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence: A comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Repeated liver resection is an effective treatment for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, few studies have compared the outcome of laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) and open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) for recurrent HCC, and few of those have included cirrhotic patients. AIM: To compare short-term and long-term outcomes of cirrhotic patients with LRH and ORH for recurrent HCC. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the clinical records retrieved from a prospectively collected database of all patients who underwent hepatectomy for post-hepatectomy recurrent HCC at our institute between May 2006 and June 2021. Cases of recurrent HCCs larger than 7 cm were excluded. Patient demographics, operative details, perioperative outcomes, pathologic details, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) data of LRH and ORH were compared. RESULTS: Data from 29 patients with LRH and 22 with ORH were compared. The LRH group showed significantly better outcomes for blood loss (median 300 mL vs 750 mL, P = 0.013) and length of hospital stay (median 5 d vs 7 d, P = 0.003). The 1-, 3- and 5-year OS rates in the LRH group were 100.0%, 60.0% and 30.0%, respectively; the corresponding rates in the ORH group were 81.8%, 36.4% and 18.2% (P = 0.336). The 1-, 3- and 5-year DFS rates in the LRH group were 68.2%, 27.3% and 4.5%, respectively; the corresponding rates in the ORH group were 31.3%, 6.3% and 6.3% (P = 0.055). There were no significant differences in overall and DFS between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic re-resection should be considered for patients presenting with recurrent HCC less than or equal to 7 cm after previous hepatectomy.

Prognostic factors of survival and a new scoring system for liver resection of colorectal liver metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic resection has become the preferred treatment of choice for colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) patients. AIM: To identify the prognostic factors and to formulate a new scoring system for management of CLM. METHODS: Clinicopathologic and long-term survival data were analyzed to identify the significant predictors of survival by univariate and multivariate analyses with the Cox model. A clinical score was constructed based on the analysis results. RESULTS: Three factors of worse overall survival were identified in the multivariate analysis. They were number of liver metastases ≥ 5, size of the largest liver lesion ≥ 4 cm, and the presence of nodal metastasis from the primary tumor. These three factors were chosen as criteria for a clinical risk score for overall survival. The clinical score highly correlated with median overall survival and 5-year survival (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Priority over surgical resection should be given to the lowest score groups, and alternative oncological treatment should be considered in patients with the highest score.

Long-term survival outcome of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Long-term survival is the most important outcome measurement of a curative oncological treatment. For hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the long-term disease-free and overall survival of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is shown to be non-inferior to the current standard of open liver resection (OLR). Some studies have reported a superior long-term oncological outcome in LLR when compared to OLR. It has been argued that improvement of visualization and instrumentation and reduced operative blood loss and perioperative blood transfusion may contribute to reduced risk of postoperative tumor recurrence. On the other hand, since most of the comparative studies of the oncological outcomes of LLR and OLR for HCC are non-randomized, it remained inconclusive as to whether LLR confers additional survival benefit compared to OLR. Despite the paucity of level 1 evidence, the practice of LLR for HCC has gained wide-spread acceptance due to the reproducible improvements in the perioperative outcomes and non-inferior oncological outcomes demonstrated by large-scaled, matched comparative studies. Meta-analyses of the outcomes of these studies by multiple systematic reviews have also returned noncontradictory conclusions. On the basis of a theoretical advantage of LLR over OLR in preventing tumor recurrence, the current review aims to dissect from the current meta-analyses and comparative studies any evidence of such superiority.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity case-matched analysis of the long-term survival.

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: Despite the widespread popularity of laparoscopic surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) remains in evolution. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤7 cm. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with HCC treated by hepatectomy from October 2000 to May 2019 were included. Excluding tumors larger than 7 cm, 1:2 propensity score matching was performed between laparoscopic and open hepatectomies. The perioperative outcomes, 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: Forty-five patients who underwent LLR were matched to 90 open hepatectomy (OH) during the same period. LLR group had shorter median hospital stay (5 days vs. 9 days, p=0.00) but required longer operative time (326.0 minutes vs. 272.5 minutes, p=0.018) than the OH group. The 5-year overall survival was better in the LLR group (84.9% vs. 61.1%; p=0.036), though there was no significant difference in the 5-year disease free survival (20.0% vs. 22.2%, p=0.613). The rate of R0 resection was comparable between the 2 groups with a slightly better margin distance in the LLR (5 mm vs. 3 mm, p=0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic liver resection is safe and feasible for cirrhotic patients with HCC size up to 7 cm. It has better short-term outcomes and comparable perioperative blood loss and complication rates. The resection margin is not jeopardized and the 5-year overall and disease-free survivals are comparable with the open group.

Highlights of the Third Expert Forum of Asia-Pacific Laparoscopic Hepatectomy; Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgeons of Asia (ELSA) Visionary Summit 2017.

The application of laparoscopy for liver surgery is rapidly increasing and the past few years have demonstrated a shift in paradigm with a trend towards more extended and complex resections. The development of instruments and technical refinements with the effective use of magnified caudal laparoscopic views have contributed to the ability to overcome the limitation of laparoscopic liver resection. The Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgeons of Asia (ELSA) Visionary Summit 2017 and the 3rd Expert Forum of Asia-Pacific Laparoscopic Hepatectomy organized hepatobiliary pancreatic sessions in order to exchange surgical tips and tricks and discuss the current status and future perspectives of laparoscopic hepatectomy. This report summarizes the oral presentations given at the 3rd Expert Forum of Asia-Pacific Laparoscopic Hepatectomy.

Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomy: Use of the Cumulative Sum Method.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has now become a worldwide practice. However, the adoption of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) was slow. We report our center's experience in laparoscopic major resections. METHOD: A total of 156 LLRs from 2002 to 2014 were studied. The clinical parameters of LMHs were compared with those of minor resections. The learning curve of LMHs was investigated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis of operative time. Subgroup analysis of right posterior sectionectomies against anterolateral hepatectomies was conducted. RESULTS: Among the 156 LLRs, 49 (31%) were LMHs. CUSUM analysis showed that operative time improved after the 25th LMH. Beyond that proportion of pure laparoscopic LMHs increased (18/25 vs. 24/24, P=0.005); Pringle maneuver was not required (4/25 vs. 0/24, P=0.041). Blood loss (800 vs. 500 mL, P=0.034) and transfusion rate (13/25 to 3/24, P=0.003) improved in latter LMHs. Right posterior sectionectomies had significantly more blood loss than anterolateral LMHs (500 vs. 1500 mL, P=0.034). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic major resection is safe and feasible; operative outcomes improved after overcoming the learning curve. Right posterior sectionectomy, however, should be further evaluated for its cost-effectiveness.

Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy for Malignant Lesions: An Anatomic Approach.

BACKGROUND: Good indications for laparoscopic hepatectomy are still considered to be tumors located over anterolateral segments of the liver. Tumors located over the right posterior section are considered to be difficult for laparoscopic resection. In this case series, we present our experience on laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patient data were prospectively collected. Data on patient demographics, tumor characteristics, operative data, and postoperative outcome were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: During the period of May 2010-May 2014, we performed 13 laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomies. The diagnoses were hepatocellular carcinoma in 11 patients, of which 2 were cases of colorectal liver metastasis. Median operative time was 381 minutes, and median blood loss was 1500 mL. Significant bleeding occurred in the first 5 patients. The median size of the tumor resected was 3.7 cm, and the median resection margin was 8.7 mm. Four of the 13 patients (30.8%) were cirrhotic on histological examination. There was no postoperative mortality. Median hospital stay was 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy is technically demanding. A proper inflow and outflow control is mandatory for proper anatomical resection. This surgical principle should not be compromised in the era of laparoscopic hepatectomy.