Bariatric surgery in liver cirrhosis.

Introduction: Obesity is frequently associated with its hepatic manifestation, the nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The most effective treatment for morbid obesity is bariatric surgery (BS) also improving NAFLD and liver function. In patients where NAFLD has already progressed to liver cirrhosis, BS can be considered a high-risk procedure. Hence, consideration of the procedure and the most appropriate timing is crucial. Material and Methods: Obese patients suffering from NAFLD who underwent BS from two German University Medical Centers were retrospectively analyzed. Results: Twenty-seven patients underwent BS. Most common procedures were laparoscopic Roux-en-Y-gastric (RYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG). All patients suffered from liver cirrhosis Child A. A preoperative transjugular portosystemic shunt (TIPS) was established in three patients and failed in another patient. Postoperative complications consisted of wound healing disorders (n = 2), anastomotic bleeding (n = 1), and leak from the staple line (n = 1). This patient suffered from intraoperatively detected macroscopic liver cirrhosis. Excess weight loss was 73% and 85% after 1 and 2 years, respectively. Two patients suffered from postoperative aggravation of their liver function, resulting in a higher Child-Pugh score, while three could be removed from the waiting list for a liver transplantation. Conclusion: BS leads to weight loss, both after SG and RYGB, and potential improvement of liver function in liver cirrhosis. These patients need to be considered with care when evaluated for BS. Preoperative TIPS implantation may reduce the perioperative risk in selected patients.

Risk Assessment in High- and Low-MELD Liver Transplantation.

Allocation of liver grafts triggers emotional debates, as those patients, not receiving an organ, are prone to death. We analyzed a high-Model of End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) cohort (laboratory MELD score ≥30, n = 100, median laboratory MELD score of 35; interquartile range 31-37) of liver transplant recipients at our center during the past 10 years and compared results with a low-MELD group, matched by propensity scoring for donor age, recipient age, and cold ischemia time. End points of our study were cumulative posttransplantation morbidity, cost, and survival. Six different prediction models, including donor age x recipient MELD (D-MELD), Difference between listing MELD and MELD at transplant (Delta MELD), donor-risk index (DRI), Survival Outcomes Following Liver Transplant (SOFT), balance-of-risk (BAR), and University of California Los Angeles-Futility Risk Score (UCLA-FRS), were applied in both cohorts to identify risk for poor outcome and high cost. All score models were compared with a clinical-oriented decision, based on the combination of hemofiltration plus ventilation. Median intensive care unit and hospital stays were 8 and 26 days, respectively, after liver transplantation of high-MELD patients, with a significantly increased morbidity compared with low-MELD patients (median comprehensive complication index 56 vs. 36 points [maximum points 100] and double cost [median US$179 631 vs. US$80 229]). Five-year survival, however, was only 8% less than that of low-MELD patients (70% vs. 78%). Most prediction scores showed disappointing low positive predictive values for posttransplantation mortality, such as mortality above thresholds, despite good specificity. The clinical observation of hemofiltration plus ventilation in high-MELD patients was even superior in this respect compared with D-MELD, DRI, Delta MELD, and UCLA-FRS but inferior to SOFT and BAR models. Of all models tested, only the BAR score was linearly associated with complications. In conclusion, the BAR score was most useful for risk classification in liver transplantation, based on expected posttransplantation mortality and morbidity. Difficult decisions to accept liver grafts in high-risk recipients may thus be guided by additional BAR score calculation, to increase the safe use of scarce organs.

Meta-analysis of associating liver partition with portal vein ligation and portal vein occlusion for two-stage hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Discussion is ongoing regarding whether associating liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) or portal vein occlusion is better in staged hepatectomy. The aim of this study was to compare available strategies using a two-stage approach in extended hepatectomy. METHODS: A literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and Embase, and additional articles were identified by hand searching. Data from the international ALPPS registry were extracted. Clinical studies reporting volumetric changes, mortality, morbidity, feasibility of the second stage and tumour-free resection margins (R0) in two-stage hepatectomy were included. RESULTS: Ninety studies involving 4352 patients, including 320 from the ALPPS registry, met the inclusion criteria. Among these, nine studies (357 patients) reported on comparisons with other strategies. In the comparison of ALPPS versus portal vein embolization (PVE), ALPPS was associated with a greater increase in the future liver remnant (76 versus 37 per cent; P < 0·001) and more frequent completion of stage 2 (100 versus 77 per cent; P < 0·001). Compared with PVE, ALPPS had a trend towards higher morbidity (73 versus 59 per cent; P = 0·16) and mortality (14 versus 7 per cent; P = 0·19) after stage 2. In the non-comparative studies, complication rates were 39 per cent in the PVE group, 47 per cent in the portal vein ligation (PVL) group and 70 per cent in the ALPPS group. After stage 2, mortality rates were 5, 7 and 12 per cent respectively. CONCLUSION: ALPPS is associated with greater future liver remnant hypertrophy and a higher rate of completion of stage 2, but this may be at the price of greater morbidity and mortality.

Short Chemotherapy-Free Interval Improves Oncological Outcome in Patients Undergoing Two-Stage Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases.

BACKGROUND: In patients undergoing two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), chemotherapy is discontinued before portal vein occlusion and restarted after curative resection. Long chemotherapy-free intervals (CFI) may lead to tumor progression and poor oncological outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of the length of CFI on oncological outcome in patients undergoing TSH for CRLM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Overall, 74 patients suffering from bilobar CRLM who underwent ALPPS (associating liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy; n = 43) or conventional TSH (n = 31) at two tertiary centers were investigated. The impact of CFI on long-term outcomes was analyzed by univariable and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Preoperative chemotherapy was administered in 91 % (67/74) of patients, and chemotherapy was resumed postoperatively in 69 % (44/64) of patients who completed TSH. The use of postoperative chemotherapy was significantly associated with improved mean overall survival (36 ± 3 vs. 13 ± 3 months; p < 0.001). Overall, the median CFI from surgery to postoperative chemotherapy was 16 weeks (interquartile range 11-31) and was significantly shorter in the ALPPS group when compared with the conventional TSH group (10 vs. 21 weeks; p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed a CFI ≤ 10 weeks as an independent factor associated with improved overall survival (p = 0.006) and disease-free survival (p = 0.010). CONCLUSION: A short CFI is associated with improved oncological outcome in patients undergoing TSH for CRLM. Decreased interstage intervals after ALPPS may facilitate the timely resumption of chemotherapy.