Comparison between short and long-term outcomes after minimally invasive versus open primary liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma: A 1:1 matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) versus open liver resection (OLR) for nonrecurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Review of 204 MILR and 755 OLR without previous LR performed between 2005 and 2018. 1:1 coarsened exact matching (CEM) and 1:1 propensity-score matching (PSM) were performed. RESULTS: Overall, 190 MILR were well-matched with 190 OLR by PSM and 86 MILR with 86 OLR by CEM according to patient baseline characteristics. After PSM and CEM, MILR was associated with a significantly longer operation time [230 min (interquartile range [IQR], 145-330) vs. 160 min (IQR, 125-210), p < .001] [215 min (IQR, 135-295) vs. 153.5 min (120-180), p < .001], shorter postoperative stay [4 days (IQR, 3-6) vs. 6 days (IQR, 5-8), p = .001)] [4 days (IQR, 3-5) vs. 6 days (IQR, 5-7), p = .004] and lower postoperative morbidity [40 (21%) vs. 67 (35.5%), p = .003] [16 (18.6%) vs. 27 (31.4%), p = .036] compared to OLR. MILR was also associated with a significantly longer median time to recurrence (70 vs. 40.3 months, p = .014) compared to OLR after PSM but not CEM. There was no significant difference in terms of overall survival and recurrence-free survival. CONCLUSION: MILR is associated with superior short-term postoperative outcomes and with at least equivalent long-term oncological outcomes compared to OLR for HCC.

Prediction of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence Beyond Milan Criteria After Resection: Validation of a Clinical Risk Score in an International Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to validate a previously reported recurrence clinical risk score (CRS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Salvage transplantation after hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) resection is limited to patients who recur within Milan criteria (MC). Predicting recurrence patterns may guide treatment recommendations. METHODS: An international, multicenter cohort of R0 resected HCC patients were categorized by MC status at presentation. CRS was calculated by assigning 1 point each for initial disease beyond MC, multinodularity, and microvascular invasion. Recurrence incidences were estimated using competing risks methodology, and conditional recurrence probabilities were estimated using the Bayes theorem. RESULTS: From 1992 to 2015, 1023 patients were identified, of whom 613 (60%) recurred at a median follow-up of 50 months. CRS was well validated in that all 3 factors remained independent predictors of recurrence beyond MC (hazard ratio 1.5-2.1, all P < 0.001) and accurately stratified recurrence risk beyond MC, ranging from 19% (CRS 0) to 67% (CRS 3) at 5 years. Among patients with CRS 0, no other factors were significantly associated with recurrence beyond MC. The majority recurred within 2 years. After 2 years of recurrence-free survival, the cumulative risk of recurrence beyond MC within the next 5 years for all patients was 14%. This risk was 12% for patients with initial disease within MC and 17% for patients with initial disease beyond MC. CONCLUSIONS: CRS accurately predicted HCC recurrence beyond MC in this international validation. Although the risk of recurrence beyond MC decreased over time, it never reached zero.

Critical Appraisal of the Impact of Individual Surgeon Experience on the Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomies: Collective Experience of Multiple Surgeons at a Single Institution.

BACKGROUND: Presently, there are limited studies analyzing the learning experience of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies (MIDPs) and these frequently focused on a single surgeon or institution learning curve. This study aims to critically analyze the impact of individual surgeon experience on the outcomes of MIDP based on the collective experiences of multiple surgeons at a single institution. METHODS: A retrospective review of 90 consecutive MIDP from 2006 to 2018 was performed. These cases were performed by 13 surgeons over various time periods. The cohort was stratified into 4 groups according to individual surgeon experience. The case experience of these surgeons was as follows: <5 cases (n=8), 6 to 10 cases (n=2), 11 to 15 cases (n=2), and 30 cases (n=1). RESULTS: The distribution of the 90 cases were as follows: experience <5 cases (n=44), 6 to 10 cases (n=20), 11 to 15 cases (n=11), and 15 cases (n=15). As individual surgeons gained increasing experience, this was significantly associated with increasingly difficult resections performed, increased frequency of the use of robotic assistance and decreasing open conversion rates (20.5% vs. 100% vs. 9.1% vs. 0%, P=0.038). There was no significant difference in other perioperative outcomes. These findings suggest that the outcomes of MIDP in terms of open conversion rate could be optimized after 15 cases. Subset analyses suggested that the learning curve for MIDP of low difficulty was only 5 cases. CONCLUSION: MIDP can be safely adopted today and the individual surgeon learning curve for MIDP of all difficulties in terms of open conversion rate can be overcome after 15 cases.