Patterns of Distribution of Hepatic Nodules (Single, Satellites or Multifocal) in Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Prognostic Impact After Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the clinicopathological features and survival after surgery of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) according to the patterns of distribution of hepatic nodules. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a multi-institutional series of 259 patients with resected ICC was carried out. Patients were further classified according to the pattern of distribution of hepatic nodules: single tumors (type I), single tumors with satellites in the same liver segment (type II), or multifocal tumors (type III). RESULTS: Overall, 64.5% of patients had type I, 21.9% had type II, and 13.5% had type III. The 5-year overall survival rate was 49.4, 34.2, and 9.9% for types I, II, and III, respectively (p < 0.001). A multivariate survival analysis identified the following independent prognostic factors: pattern types II and III (p = 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively), size ≥ 50 mm (p = 0.021), lymph node (LN) metastases (p = 0.005), and R1 resections (p = 0.019). We stratified survival for each type of pattern according to the other prognostic factors identified in the multivariate analysis. N0 and R0 patients with type II and III tumors had encouraging long-term results. Conversely, patients with LN metastases and R1 resections had poor prognosis, particularly patients with type III tumors. CONCLUSION: ICC has distinct patterns of distribution with different prognoses that should be considered when making therapeutic decisions. Patients with type III tumors had a significantly worse prognosis, and the benefits of upfront surgery should be carefully evaluated.

Liver Resection for Neuroendocrine Tumor Liver Metastases Within Milan Criteria for Liver Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The role of liver transplant (LT) for neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NELM) has not been completely defined. While international guidelines included LT as a potential treatment for highly selected patients with advanced NELM, recently, LT has been proposed as an alternative curative treatment for NELM for patients meeting restrictive criteria (Milan criteria). METHODS: Using a multi-institutional cohort of patients undergoing liver resection for NELM, the long-term outcomes of patients meeting Milan criteria (resected NET drained by the portal system, stable disease/response to therapies for at least 6 months, metastatic diffusion to < 50% of the total liver volume, a confirmed histology of low-grade, and ≤ 60 years) were investigated. RESULTS: Among the 238 patients included in the study, 28 (12%) patients met the Milan criteria for LT with a 5-year OS of 83%. Furthermore, among patients meeting Milan criteria, subsets of patients with favorable clinic-pathological characteristics had 5-year OS rates greater than 90% including G1 patients (5-year OS, 92%), patients undergoing minor liver resection (5-year OS, 94%), patients with low number of NELM (1-2 NELM), and small tumor size (< 3 cm) (for both groups of patients, 5-year OS, 100%). CONCLUSIONS: In our series, only 12% of patients met Milan criteria, and the 5-year OS after liver resection for this small selected group of patients was comparable with that reported in the literature for patients undergoing LT for NELM within Milan criteria. While LT might be the optimal treatment for patients with unresectable NELM, surgical resection should be the first option for patients with resectable NELM.