Liver Resection vs Nonsurgical Treatments for Patients With Early Multinodular Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Importance: The 2022 Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer algorithm currently discourages liver resection (LR) for patients with multinodular hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presenting with 2 or 3 nodules that are each 3 cm or smaller. Objective: To compare the efficacy of liver resection (LR), percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA), and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with multinodular HCC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study is a retrospective analysis conducted using data from the HE.RC.O.LE.S register (n = 5331) for LR patients and the ITA.LI.CA database (n = 7056) for PRFA and TACE patients. A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) method was applied to balance data and potential confounding factors between the 3 groups. Included were patients from multiple centers from 2008 to 2020; data were analyzed from January to December 2023. Interventions: LR, PRFA, or TACE. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were calculated. Cox MAIC-weighted multivariable analysis and competing risk analysis were used to assess outcomes. Results: A total of 720 patients with early multinodular HCC were included, 543 males (75.4%), 177 females (24.6%), and 350 individuals older than 70 years (48.6%). There were 296 patients in the LR group, 240 who underwent PRFA, and 184 who underwent TACE. After MAIC, LR exhibited 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of 89.11%, 70.98%, and 56.44%, respectively. PRFA showed rates of 94.01%, 65.20%, and 39.93%, while TACE displayed rates of 90.88%, 48.95%, and 29.24%. Multivariable Cox survival analysis in the weighted population showed a survival benefit over alternative treatments (PRFA vs LR: hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% CI, 1.07-1.86; P = .01; TACE vs LR: HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.29-2.68; P = .001). Competing risk analysis confirmed a lower risk of cancer-related death in LR compared with PRFA and TACE. Conclusions and Relevance: For patients with early multinodular HCC who are ineligible for transplant, LR should be prioritized as the primary therapeutic option, followed by PRFA and TACE when LR is not feasible. These findings provide valuable insights for clinical decision-making in this patient population.

Liver Transplantation from Elderly Donors (≥85 Years Old).

BACKGROUND: Despite the ongoing trend of increasing donor ages in liver transplantation (LT) setting, a notable gap persists in the availability of comprehensive guidelines for the utilization of organs from elderly donors. This study aimed to evaluate the viability of livers grafts from donors aged ≥85 years and report the post-LT outcomes compared with those from "ideal" donors under 40 years old. METHODS: Conducted retrospectively at a single center from 2005 to 2023, this study compared outcomes of LTs from donors aged ≥85 y/o and ≤40 y/o, with the propensity score matching to the recipient's gender, age, BMI, MELD score, redo-LT, LT indication, and cause of donor death. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients received grafts from donors ≥85 y/o and were compared to 349 liver grafts from donors ≤40 y/o. Prior to PSM, the 5-year overall survival was 63% for the elderly group and 77% for the young group (p = 0.002). After PSM, the 5-year overall survival was 63% and 73% (p = 0.1). A nomogram, developed at the time of graft acceptance and including HCC features, predicted 10-year survival after LT using a graft from a donor aged ≥85. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of organ scarcity, elderly donors emerge as a partial solution. Nonetheless, without proper selection, LT using very elderly donors yields inferior long-term outcomes compared to transplantation from very young donors ≤40 y/o. The resulting nomogram based on pre-transplant criteria allows for the optimization of elderly donor/recipient matching to achieve satisfactory long-term results, in addition to traditional matching methods.

Complex Hepatectomy Under Total Vascular Exclusion of the Liver Preserving the Caval Flow with Portal Hypothermic Perfusion and Temporary Portacaval Shunt: A Proof of Concept.

BACKGROUND: Hypothermic liver perfusion decreases ischemia/reperfusion injury during hepatectomy under standard total vascular exclusion (TVE) of the liver. This surgery needs venovenous bypass and is hampered by high morbi-mortality. TVE preserving the inferior vena cava (IVC) flow is hemodynamically well tolerated but remains limited in duration when performed under liver normothermia. The objective of this study was to report the results of TVE preserving the caval flow, modified to allow hypothermic liver perfusion and obviate splanchnic congestion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The technique, indicated for tumors abutting large tributaries of the hepatic veins but sparing their roots in IVC and the latter, was applied when TVE was anticipated to last for ≥ 60 min. It combines continuous TVE preserving the IVC flow with hypothermic liver perfusion and temporary portacaval shunt (PCS). Results are given as median (range). RESULTS: Vascular control was achieved in 13 patients with excellent hemodynamical tolerance. PCS was direct or via an interposed synthetic graft (five and eight cases, respectively). Liver temperature dropped to 16.5 (6-24) °C under perfusion of 2 (2-4) L of cold perfusate. TVE lasted 67 (54-125) min and 4.5 (0-8) blood units were transfused. Resection was major in nine cases and was complete in all cases. Five complications occurred in four patients, and the 90-day mortality rate was zero. CONCLUSIONS: This technique maintains stable hemodynamics and combines the advantages of in situ or ex situ standard TVE with hypothermic liver perfusion, without their inherent prolongation of ischemia time and need for venovenous bypass.

What Is the Role of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery in Treating Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Cirrhosis?

Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) has been slowly introduced in the past two decades and today represents a major weapon in the fight against HCC, for several reasons. This narrative review conveys the major emerging concepts in the field. The rise in metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD)-related HCC means that patients with significant cardiovascular risk will benefit more profoundly from MILS. The advent of efficacious therapy is leading to conversion from non-resectable to resectable cases, and therefore more patients will be able to undergo MILS. In fact, resection outcomes with MILS are superior compared to open surgery both in the short and long term. Furthermore, indications to surgery may be further expanded by its use in Child B7 patients and by the use of laparoscopic ablation, a curative technique, instead of trans-arterial approaches in cases not amenable to radiofrequency. Therefore, in a promising new approach, multi-parametric treatment hierarchy, MILS is hierarchically superior to open surgery and comes second only to liver transplantation.

Liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation or trans-arterial chemoembolization for early-stage (BCLC A) oligo-nodular hepatocellular carcinoma: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The 2022 Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) algorithm does not recommend liver resection (LR) in BCLC A patients with oligo-nodular (two or three nodules ≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This sharply contrasts with the therapeutic hierarchy concept, implying a precise treatment order exists within each BCLC stage. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of LR versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) in BCLC A patients. METHODS: A meta-analysis adhering to PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook was performed. All RCT, cohort and case-control studies that compared LR versus RFA or TACE in oligo-nodular BCLC A HCC published between January 2000 and October 2023 were comprehensively searched on PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and China Biology Medicine databases. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 3 and 5 years. Risk ratio (RR) was computed as a measure of treatment effect (OS and DFS benefit) to calculate common and random effects estimates for meta-analyses with binary outcome data. RESULTS: 2601 patients from 14 included studies were analysed (LR = 1227, RFA = 686, TACE = 688). There was a significant 3- and 5-year OS benefit of LR over TACE (RR = 0.55, 95% c.i. 0.44 to 0.69, P < 0.001 and RR 0.57, 95% c.i. 0.36 to 0.90, P = 0.030, respectively), while there was no significant 3- and 5-year OS benefit of LR over RFA (RR = 0.78, 95% c.i. 0.37 to 1.62, P = 0.452 and RR 0.74, 95% c.i. 0.50 to 1.09, P = 0.103, respectively). However, a significant 3- and 5-year DFS benefit of LR over RFA was found (RR = 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.54 to 0.93, P = 0.020 and RR 0.82, 95% c.i. 0.72 to 0.95, P = 0.015, respectively). A single study comparing LR and TACE regarding DFS showed a significant superiority of LR. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale quality of studies was high in eight (57%) and moderate in six (43%). CONCLUSIONS: In BCLC A oligo-nodular HCC patients, LR should be preferred to RFA or TACE (therapeutic hierarchy concept). Additional comparative cohort studies are urgently needed to increase the certainty of this evidence.