Short-term postoperative outcomes of lymphadenectomy for cholangiocarcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases in the modern era of liver surgery: Insights from the StuDoQ|Liver registry.

INTRODUCTION: The clinical role of lymphadenectomy (LAD) as part of hepatic resection for malignancies of the liver remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to report on the use cases and postoperative outcomes of liver resection and simultaneous LAD for hepatic malignancies (HM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinicopathological data from patients who underwent surgery at 13 German centers from 2017 to 2022 (n = 3456) was extracted from the StuDoQ|Liver registry of the German Society of General and Visceral Surgery. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed to account for the extent of liver resection and patient demographics. RESULTS: LAD was performed in 545 (16%) cases. The most common indication for LAD was cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), followed by colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). N+ status was found in 7 (8%), 59 (35%), and 56 cases (35%) for HCC, CCA, and CRLM, respectively (p < 0.001). The LAD rate was highest for robotic-assisted resections (28%) followed by open (26%) and laparoscopic resections (13%), whereas the number of resected lymph nodes was equivalent between the techniques (p = 0.303). LAD was associated with an increased risk of liver-specific postoperative complications, especially for patients with HCC. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter registry study, LAD was found to be associated with an increased risk of liver-specific complications. The highest rate of LAD was observed among robotic liver resections.

Impact of complexity in minimally invasive liver surgery on enhanced recovery measures: prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols is crucial for successful liver surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of minimally invasive liver surgery complexity on adherence after implementing an ERAS protocol. METHODS: Between July 2018 and August 2021, a prospective observational study involving minimally invasive liver surgery patients was conducted. Perioperative treatment followed ERAS guidelines and was recorded in the ERAS interactive audit system. Kruskal-Wallis and ANOVA tests were used for analysis, and pairwise comparisons utilized Wilcoxon rank sum and Welch's t-tests, adjusted using Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: A total of 243 patients were enrolled and categorized into four groups based on the Iwate criteria: low (n = 17), intermediate (n = 81), advanced (n = 74) and expert difficulty (n = 71). Complexity correlated with increased overall and major morbidity rate, as well as longer length of stay (all P < 0.001; standardized mean difference = 0.036, 0.451, 0.543 respectively). Adherence to ERAS measures decreased with higher complexity (P < 0.001). Overall adherence was 65.4%. Medical staff-centred adherence was 79.9%, while patient-centred adherence was 38.9% (P < 0.001). Complexity significantly affected patient-centred adherence (P < 0.001; standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.420), but not medical staff-centred adherence (P = 0.098; SMD = 0.315). Postoperative phase adherence showed major differences among complexity groups (P < 0.001, SMD = 0.376), with mobilization measures adhered to less in higher complexity cases. CONCLUSION: The complexity of minimally invasive liver surgery procedures impacts ERAS protocol adherence for each patient. This can be addressed using complexity-adjusted cut-offs and 'gradual adherence' based on the relative proportion of cut-off values achieved.

Correction: Felsenstein M. et al. Perineural Invasion in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC): A Saboteur of Curative Intended Therapies? J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 2367.

In the original publication [...].

Use and accuracy of decision support systems using artificial intelligence for tumor diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: For therapy planning in cancer patients multidisciplinary team meetings (MDM) are mandatory. Due to the high number of cases being discussed and significant workload of clinicians, Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) may improve the clinical workflow. Methods: This review and meta-analysis aims to provide an overview of the systems utilized and evaluate the correlation between a CDSS and MDM. Results: A total of 31 studies were identified for final analysis. Analysis of different cancers shows a concordance rate (CR) of 72.7% for stage I-II and 73.4% for III-IV. For breast carcinoma, CR for stage I-II was 72.8% and for III-IV 84.1%, P≤ 0.00001. CR for colorectal carcinoma is 63% for stage I-II and 67% for III-IV, for gastric carcinoma 55% and 45%, and for lung carcinoma 85% and 83% respectively, all P>0.05. Analysis of SCLC and NSCLC yields a CR of 94,3% and 82,7%, P=0.004 and for adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma in lung cancer a CR of 90% and 86%, P=0.02. Conclusion: CDSS has already been implemented in clinical practice, and while the findings suggest that its use is feasible for some cancers, further research is needed to fully evaluate its effectiveness.

Concordance of a decision algorithm and multidisciplinary team meetings for patients with liver cancer-a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDMs), also known as tumor conferences, are a cornerstone of cancer treatments. However, barriers such as incomplete patient information or logistical challenges can postpone tumor board decisions and delay patient treatment, potentially affecting clinical outcomes. Therapeutic Assistance and Decision algorithms for hepatobiliary tumor Boards (ADBoard) aims to reduce this delay by providing automated data extraction and high-quality, evidence-based treatment recommendations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: With the help of natural language processing, relevant patient information will be automatically extracted from electronic medical records and used to complete a classic tumor conference protocol. A machine learning model is trained on retrospective MDM data and clinical guidelines to recommend treatment options for patients in our inclusion criteria. Study participants will be randomized to either MDM with ADBoard (Arm A: MDM-AB) or conventional MDM (Arm B: MDM-C). The concordance of recommendations of both groups will be compared using interrater reliability. We hypothesize that the therapy recommendations of ADBoard would be in high agreement with those of the MDM-C, with a Cohen's kappa value of ≥ 0.75. Furthermore, our secondary hypotheses state that the completeness of patient information presented in MDM is higher when using ADBoard than without, and the explainability of tumor board protocols in MDM-AB is higher compared to MDM-C as measured by the System Causability Scale. DISCUSSION: The implementation of ADBoard aims to improve the quality and completeness of the data required for MDM decision-making and to propose therapeutic recommendations that consider current medical evidence and guidelines in a transparent and reproducible manner. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The project was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin. REGISTRATION DETAILS: The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (trial identifying number: NCT05681949; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05681949 ) on 12 January 2023.

Impact of Smoking, Body Weight, Diabetes, Hypertension and Kidney Dysfunction on Survival in Pancreatic Cancer Patients-A Single Center Analysis of 2323 Patients within the Last Decade.

In addition to being risk factors for pancreatic cancer, parameters such as smoking, diabetes, or obesity might also act as potential prognostic factors for the survival of patients initially diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. By implementing one of the largest retrospective study cohorts of 2323 pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients treated at a single high-volume center, potential prognostic factors for survival were evaluated on the basis of 863 cases. Since parameters such as smoking, obesity, diabetes, and hypertension can cause severe chronic kidney dysfunction, the glomerular filtration rate was also considered. In the univariate analyses, albumin (p < 0.001), active smoking (p = 0.024), BMI (p = 0.018), and GFR (p = 0.002) were identified as metabolic prognostic markers for overall survival. In multivariate analyses, albumin (p < 0.001) and chronic kidney disease stage 2 (GFR < 90 mL/min/1.37 m2; p = 0.042) were identified as independent metabolic prognostic markers for survival. Smoking presented a nearly statistically significant independent prognostic factor for survival with a p-value of 0.052. In summary, low BMI, status of active smoking, and reduced kidney function at the time of diagnosis were associated with lower overall survival. No prognostic association could be observed for presence of diabetes or hypertension.

Internal drainage for interdisciplinary management of anastomotic leakage after pancreaticogastrostomy.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) may occur after pancreatic head resection, also in the setting of pancreato-gastric reconstruction. For adequate complication management, a variety of non-standardized treatments are available. Still, data on clinical evaluation of endoscopic methods remain scarce. Based on our interdisciplinary experience on endoscopic treatment of retro-gastric fluid collections after left-sided pancreatectomies, we developed an innovative endoscopic concept with internal peri-anastomotic stent placement for patients with anastomotic leakage and/or peri-anastomotic fluid collection. METHODS: Over the period of 6 years (2015-2020) we retrospectively evaluated 531 patients after pancreatic head resections at the Department of Surgery, Charité-Unversitätsmedizin Berlin. Of these, 403 received reconstruction via pancreatogastrostomy. We identified 110 patients (27.3%) with anastomotic leakage and/or peri-anastomotic fluid collection and could define four treatment groups which received either conservative treatment (C), percutaneous drainage (PD), endoscopic drainage (ED), and/or re-operation (OP). Patients were grouped in a step-up approach for descriptive analyses and in a stratified, decision-based algorithm for comparative analyses. The study's primary endpoints were hospitalization (length of hospital stay) and clinical success (treatment success rate, primary/secondary resolution). RESULTS: We characterized an institutional, post-operative cohort with heterogenous complication management following pancreato-gastric reconstruction. The majority of patients needed interventional treatments (n = 92, 83.6%). Of these, close to one-third (n = 32, 29.1%) were treated with endoscopy-guided, peri-anastomotic pigtail stents for internal drainage as either primary, secondary and/or tertiary treatment modality. Following a decision-based algorithm, we could discriminate superior primary-(77,8% vs 53.7%) and secondary success rates (85.7% vs 68.4%) as well as earlier primary resolutions (11.4 days, 95%CI (5.75-17.13) vs 37.4 days, 95%CI (27.2-47.5)] in patients receiving an endoscopic compared to percutaneous management. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the importance of endoscopy-guided approaches for adequate treatment of anastomotic leakage and/or peri-anastomotic fluid collections after pancreatoduodenectomy. We herein report a novel, interdisciplinary concept for internal drainage in the setting of pancreato-gastric reconstruction.

Validation of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) society recommendations for liver surgery: a prospective, observational study.

Background: Twenty-three recommendations were summarized by the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) society for liver surgery. The aim was to validate the protocol especially with regard to adherence and the impact on morbidity. Methods: Using the ERAS Interactive Audit System (EIAS), ERAS items were evaluated in patients undergoing liver resection. Over a period of 26 months, 304 patients were prospectively enrolled in an observational study (DRKS00017229). Of those, 51 patients (non-ERAS) were enrolled before and 253 patients (ERAS) after the implementation of the ERAS protocol. Perioperative adherence and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: Overall adherence increased from 45.2% in the non-ERAS group to 62.7% in the ERAS group (P<0.001). This was associated with significant improvements in the preoperative and postoperative phase (P<0.001), rather than in the outpatient and intraoperative phase (both P>0.05). Overall complications decreased from 41.2% (n=21) in the non-ERAS group to 26.5% (n=67) in the ERAS group (P=0.0423), which was mainly due to the reduction of grade 1-2 complications from 17.6% (n=9) to 7.6% (n=19) (P=0.0322). As for patients undergoing open surgery, implementation of ERAS lead to a reduction of overall complications in patients scheduled for minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) (P=0.036). Conclusions: Implementation of the ERAS protocol for liver surgery according to the ERAS guidelines of the ERAS Society reduced Clavien-Dindo grade 1-2 complications particularly in patients who underwent MILS. The ERAS guidelines are beneficial for the outcome, while adherence to the various items has not yet been satisfactorily defined.

Feasibility and Efficacy of Adjuvant Chemotherapy With Gemcitabine After Liver Transplantation for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma - A Multi-Center, Randomized, Controlled Trial (pro-duct001).

Background: Liver transplantation (LT) is considered a therapeutic option for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) within defined criteria. It remains uncertain whether patients can safely receive adjuvant chemotherapy after LT. Methods: We performed a prospective, multi-center, randomized, non-blinded two-arm trial (pro-duct001). Patients after LT for unresectable PHC within defined criteria were randomized to adjuvant gemcitabine (LT-Gem group) and LT alone (LT alone group). The primary objective was to investigate if adjuvant chemotherapy is feasible in ≥ 85% of patients after LT. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients completing the 24 weeks course of adjuvant chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and disease-free (DFS), and complication rates. Results: Twelve patients underwent LT for PHC, of which six (50%) were eligible for randomization (LT-Gem: three patients, LT alone: three patients). Two out of three patients discontinued adjuvant chemotherapy after LT due to intolerance. The study was prematurely terminated due to slow enrollment. One patient with PHC had underlying primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). Tumor-free margins could be achieved in all patients. In both the LT-Gem and the LT alone group, the cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS and DFS rates were 100%, 100%, 67%, and 100%, 67% and 67%, respectively. Conclusions: This prospective, multi-center study was prematurely terminated due to slow enrollment and a statement on the defined endpoints cannot be made. Nevertheless, long-term survival data are consistent with available retrospective data and confirm defined criteria for LT. Since more evidence of LT per se in unresectable PHC is urgently needed, a prospective, non-randomized follow-up study (pro-duct002) has since been launched.

Perineural Invasion in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC): A Saboteur of Curative Intended Therapies?

(1) Background: Perineural invasion (PNI) is a common characteristic of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and is present in most resection margins. We hypothesized that curative pancreatic tumor resection with long-term survival could only be achieved in PNI-negative patients. (2) Material and Methods: A retrospective investigation of PDAC patients who underwent curative-intended surgery during the period 2008 to 2019 was performed at our institution. (3) Results: We identified 571 of 660 (86.5%) resected patients with well-annotated reports and complete datasets. Of those, 531 patients (93%) exhibited tumors with perineural invasion (Pn1), while 40 (7%) were negative for PNI (Pn0). The majority of patients in the Pn1 group presented advanced tumor stage and positive lymph node infiltration. Patients in the Pn0 group showed an improved disease-free and long-term survival compared to the Pn1 group (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis of all R0-resected patients indicated improved long-term survival and disease-free survival of R0 Pn0 patients when compared to R0 Pn1 patients (p < 0.001). (4) Conclusion: Our study confirmed that Pn0 improves the long-term survival of PDAC-resected cancer patients. Furthermore, PNI significantly challenges the long-term survival of formally curative (R0) resected patients. We provide new insights into the dynamics of PNI in pancreatic cancer patients which are needed to define subgroups of patients for risk stratification and multimodal treatment strategies.

Robotic vs. laparoscopic liver surgery: a single-center analysis of 600 consecutive patients in 6 years.

BACKGROUND: While laparoscopic liver surgery has become a standard procedure, experience with robotic liver surgery is still limited. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate safety and feasibility of robotic liver surgery and compare outcomes with conventional laparoscopy. METHODS: We here report the results of a single-center, prospective, post-marketing observational study (DRKS00017229) investigating the safety and feasibility of robotic liver surgery. Baseline characteristics, surgical complexity (using the IWATE score), and postoperative outcomes were then compared to laparoscopic liver resections performed at our center between January 2015 and December 2020. A propensity score-based matching (PSM) was applied to control for selection bias. RESULTS: One hundred twenty nine robotic liver resections were performed using the da Vinci Xi surgical system (Intuitive) in this prospective study and were compared to 471 consecutive laparoscopic liver resections. After PSM, both groups comprised 129 cases with similar baseline characteristics and surgical complexity. There were no significant differences in intraoperative variables, such as need for red blood cell transfusion, duration of surgery, or conversion to open surgery. Postoperative complications were comparable after robotic and laparoscopic surgery (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a: 23% vs. 19%, p = 0.625); however, there were more bile leakages grade B-C in the robotic group (17% vs. 7%, p = 0.006). Length of stay and oncological short-term outcomes were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: We propose robotic liver resection as a safe and feasible alternative to established laparoscopic techniques. The object of future studies must be to define interventions where robotic techniques are superior to conventional laparoscopy.

Textbook outcome after major hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma - definitions and influencing factors.

PURPOSE: The concept of "textbook outcome" (TO) as composite quality measure depicting the ideal surgical has not yet been defined for patients undergoing major hepatectomy (MH) for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC). This study sought to propose a uniform definition through a systematic literature review as well as to identify patient- or procedure-related factors influencing TO. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we analyzed all patients undergoing MH for PHC at our department between January 2005 and August 2019. After conducting a systematic literature search, we defined TO as the absence of 90-day mortality and major complications, no hospital readmission within 90 days after discharge, and no prolonged hospital stay (<75. percentile). A binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors influencing TO. RESULTS: Of 283 patients, TO was achieved in 67 (24%) patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that preoperative biliary drainage was associated with a decreased (OR= 0.405, 95% CI: 0.194-0.845, p=0.016) and left-sided-resection (OR= 1.899, 95% CI: 1.048-3.440, p=0.035) with increased odds for TO. Overall survival (OS) and DFS (disease-free survival) did not differ significantly between the outcome groups (OS: p=0.280, DFS: p=0.735). However, there was a trend towards better overall survival, especially in the late course with TO. CONCLUSION: Our analysis proposed a uniform definition of TO after MH for PHC. We identified left hepatectomy as an independent factor positively influencing TO. In patients where both right- and left-sided resections are feasible, this underlines the importance of a careful selection of patients who are scheduled for right hepatectomy.

Robotic versus open pancreatic surgery: a propensity score-matched cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Robotic pancreatic surgery (RPS) is associated with high intraoperative costs compared to open pancreatic surgery (OPS). However, it remains unclear whether several advantages of RPS such as reduced surgical trauma and a shorter postoperative recovery time could lead to a reduction in total costs outweighing the intraoperative costs. The study aimed to compare patients undergoing OPS and RPS with regards to cost-effectiveness in a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis. METHODS: Patients undergoing OPS and RPS between 2017 and 2019 were included in this monocentric, retrospective analysis. The controlling department provided financial data (costs and revenues, net loss/profit). A propensity score-matched analysis was performed or OPS and RPS (matching criteria: age, American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) score, gender, body mass index (BMI), and type of pancreatic resection) with a caliper 0.2. RESULTS: In total, 272 eligible OPS cases were identified, of which 252 met all inclusion criteria and were thus included in the further analysis. The RPS group contained 92 patients. The matched cohorts contained 41 patients in each group. Length of hospital stay (LOS) was significantly shorter in the RPS group (12 vs. 19 days, p = 0.003). Major postoperative morbidity (Dindo/Clavien ≥ 3a) and 90-day mortality did not differ significantly between OPS and RPS (p > 0.05). Intraoperative costs were significantly higher in the RPS group than in the OPS group (7334€ vs. 5115€, p < 0.001). This was, however, balanced by other financial categories. The overall cost-effectiveness tended to be better when comparing RPS to OPS (net profit-RPS: 57€ vs. OPS: - 2894€, p = 0.328). Binary logistic regression analysis revealed major postoperative complications, longer hospital stay, and ASA scores < 3 were linked to the risk of net loss (i.e., costs > revenue). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical outcomes of RPS were similar to those of OPS. Higher intraoperative costs of RPS are outweighed by advantages in other categories of cost-effectiveness such as decreased lengths of hospital stay.

Feasibility of robotic-assisted pancreatic resection in patients with previous minor abdominal surgeries: a single-center experience of the first three years.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery is limited to specialized high-volume centers and selected patient cohorts. Especially for patients with a history of previous abdominal surgeries, the standard procedure remains open surgery due to the fear of complications caused by abdominal adhesions. METHODS: Clinical data of all consecutive patients undergoing robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery using the daVinci Xi system (Intuitive Surgical) at our center (Department of Surgery, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany) were collected prospectively and further analyzed from October 2017 to October 2020. Prior abdominal surgeries were specified according to the surgical approach and localization. In univariate and multivariate analysis, baseline and perioperative parameters of patients with a history of prior abdominal surgeries (PS) were compared to those of patients with no history of prior abdominal surgeries (NPS). RESULTS: Out of 131 patients undergoing robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery, 62 (47%) had a history of abdominal surgery. Previous procedures included most often appendectomy (32%) followed by gynecological surgery (29%) and cholecystectomy (27%). 24% of PS had received multiple surgeries prior to the robotic-assisted pancreatic resections. Baseline characteristics and comorbidities were comparable between the groups. We did not detect differences in the duration of surgery (262 min), conversion rates (10%), and postoperative complications between NPS and PS. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), and in-house mortality showed no significant differences between the two groups. Multivariate analysis revealed male sex and high BMI as a potential predictive factor for severe postoperative complications. Other characteristics like the type of pancreatic resection, ASA, and underlying malignancy showed no difference in the multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We propose robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery to be safe and feasible for patients with a history of minor prior abdominal surgery. Hence, each patient should individually be evaluated for a minimally invasive approach regardless of a history of previous operations.

Factors associated with failure to rescue after major hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: A 15-year single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: The management of complications after major hepatectomy in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma may not always be successful, leading to failure to rescue. The present study seeks to identify independent risk factors for failure to rescue after major hepatectomy in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the postoperative course of all consecutive patients who underwent major hepatectomy in a curative intent for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma between 2005 and 2019 at our department. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for failure to rescue. RESULTS: Of 287 patients, 186 (65%) had major complications (Dindo-Clavien grade ≥IIIa), of which 142 (76%) were grade IIIa to IVb (rescue group). Failure to rescue (FTR group, Dindo-Clavien grade V) occurred in 44 of 186 patients (24%). Age >65 years (odds ratio = 4.001, 95% confidence interval 1.025-15.615, P = .046) and right-sided resection (odds ratio = 17.040, 95% confidence interval 1.926 - 150.782, P = .011) were independently associated with failure to rescue. Preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels >100 kU/mL as well as preoperative chemotherapy appear to increase odds for failure to rescue as well; however, the association was short of statistical significance (P = .070 and .079, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients as well as patients undergoing right-sided hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma with high preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels are at high risk for failure to rescue. Thus, patients should be assessed critically preoperatively. Postoperatively, close monitoring, especially of patients who are at risk, is mandatory.

Prognostic and Predictive Molecular Markers in Cholangiocarcinoma.

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is the second most common primary liver cancer and subsumes a heterogeneous group of malignant tumors arising from the intra- or extrahepatic biliary tract epithelium. A rising mortality from CCA has been reported worldwide during the last decade, despite significant improvement of surgical and palliative treatment. Over 50% of CCAs originate from proximal extrahepatic bile ducts and constitute the most common CCA entity in the Western world. Clinicopathological characteristics such as lymph node status and poor differentiation remain the best-studied, but imperfect prognostic factors. The identification of prognostic molecular markers as an adjunct to traditional staging systems may not only facilitate the selection of patients who would benefit the most from surgical, adjuvant or palliative treatment strategies, but may also be helpful in defining the aggressiveness of the disease and identifying patients at high-risk for tumor recurrence. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of currently known molecular prognostic and predictive markers and their role in CCA.

Treatment of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma-A Multidisciplinary Approach.

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC) is distinguished as an entity from perihilar and distal cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma. Recently, molecular profiling and histopathological features have allowed further classification. Due to the frequent delay in diagnosis, the prognosis for iCC remains poor despite major technical advances and multimodal therapeutic approaches. Liver resection represents the therapeutic backbone and only curative treatment option, with the functional residual capacity of the liver and oncologic radicality being deciding factors for postoperative and long-term oncological outcome. Furthermore, in selected cases and depending on national guidelines, liver transplantation may be a therapeutic option. Given the often advanced tumor stage at diagnosis or the potential for postoperative recurrence, locoregional therapies have become increasingly important. These strategies range from radiofrequency ablation to transarterial chemoembolization to selective internal radiation therapy and can be used in combination with liver resection. In addition, adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapies as well as targeted therapies and immunotherapies based on molecular profiles can be applied. This review discusses multimodal treatment strategies for iCC and their differential use.

Complexity-Adjusted Learning Curves for Robotic and Laparoscopic Liver Resection: A Word of Caution.

Background: Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) has a high variance in the type of resection and complexity, which has been underestimated in learning curve studies in the past. The aim of this work was to evaluate complexity-adjusted learning curves over time for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR). Methods: Cumulative sum analysis (CUSUM) and complexity adjustment were performed using the Iwate score for LLR and RLR (n = 647). Lowest point of smoothed data was used to capture the cutoff of the increase in complexity. Data were collected retrospectively at the Department of Surgery of the Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin. Results: A total of 132 RLR and 514 LLR were performed. According to the complexity-adjusted CUSUM analysis, the initial learning phase was reached after 117 for LLR and 93 procedures for RLR, respectively. With increasing experience, the rate of (extended) right hemihepatectomy multiplied from 8.4% to 18.9% for LLR (P = 0.031) and from 21.6% to 58.3% for RLR (P < 0.001). Complication rates remained comparable between both episodes for LLR and RLR (T1 vs T2, P > 0.05). The complexity-adjusted CUSUM analysis demonstrated for blood transfusion, conversion, and operative time an increase during the learning phase (T1), while a steady state was reached in the following (T2). Conclusions: The learning phase for MILS after adjusting for complexity is about 4 times longer than assumed in previous studies, which should urge caution.

Right-sided resection with standard or selective portal vein resection in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Standard portal vein resection (PVR) has been proposed to improve oncological outcomes in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC), however it potentially introduces an increased risk of morbidity. The policy in Amsterdam UMC(AMC) is to resect the portal vein bifurcation selectively when involved, while in Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, standard PVR is performed with right trisectionectomy. The objective of this study was to analyze postoperative outcomes and survival after standard or selective PVR for PHC. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed including PHC-patients undergoing right-sided resection in Amsterdam (2000-2018) and Berlin (2005-2015). Primary outcomes were 90-day mortality, severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo≥3), and overall survival (OS). A propensity score comparison (1:1 ratio) was performed corrected for age/sex/ASA/jaundice/tumor diameter/N-stage/Bismuth-Corlette type-IV. RESULTS: A total of 251 patients who underwent right-sided resection for PHC were evaluated: 87 in the selective (Amsterdam) and 164 in the standard PVR-group (Berlin). Major differences in baseline characteristics were observed, with higher ASA and AJCC-stage in the standard PVR-group (Berlin). Severe morbidity and 90-day mortality were comparable before matching (selective/Amsterdam:68% and 19%, standard/Berlin:61% and 17%,p = 0.284 and p = 0.746, respectively). After propensity score matching, both short term outcomes and OS were comparable (selective/Amsterdam (n = 45) 33 months (95%CI:20-45), standard/Berlin (n = 45) 31 months (95%CI:24-38,p = 0.747)). CONCLUSION: In this combined cohort, standard PVR was not associated with increased severe morbidity or mortality. After propensity score matching, survival was comparable after selective (Amsterdam) and standard PVR (Berlin).