Defining the surgical management for non-colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is indicated for resectable colorectal liver metastases (CLM), but it is controversial for non-colorectal liver metastases (NCLM). This study aimed to compare survival outcomes of patients with resection of NCLM versus CLM and to identify prognostic factors for resection of NCLM. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent surgical resection of liver metastases at Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong from January 1989 to December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with resected NCLM were compared to those with CLM. Overall and recurrence-free survival were determined. Subgroup analyses with patients grouped according to the year of liver resection, from 1989 to 2004 and from 2005 to 2019, were conducted. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors. RESULTS: Among 674 patients included, 151 (22.4%) had NCLM while 523 (77.6%) had CLM. There were no statistically significant differences in median overall survival (65.2 vs 43.6 months, p = 0.555) and recurrence-free survival (12.5 vs 11.7 months, p = 0.425). The 1-year, 3-year, 5-year and 10-year overall survival rates were 89.8% vs 91.5%, 59.4% vs 58.8%, 50.6% vs 38.7% and 34.1% vs 26.3% in NCLM and CLM groups, respectively. Subgroup analyses demonstrated no statistically significant difference in overall survival between resection of NCLM versus CLM in both time intervals. In the NCLM group, better overall survival was found in liver metastasis of gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) origin (hazard ratio (HR) 0.138, p = 0.003) and with a longer time interval from resection of primary tumour to resection of NCLM (HR 0.982, p = 0.042). Poor prognostic factors were presence of blood transfusion (HR 5.588, p = 0.013) and post-operative complications of Clavien-Dindo Grade IIIa or above (HR 74.853, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical resection of NCLM had comparable survival outcomes with CLM. With appropriate patient selection, the indication of liver resection could be expanded to NCLM.

Long-term survival in colorectal liver metastasis.

INTRODUCTION: Liver resection is the best treatment option for patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). A 10-year follow-up can reflect the true curative potential of resection. This retrospective study investigated factors for long-term survival of CRLM patients. METHOD: Data of patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM without extrahepatic disease from 1990 to 2012 at our hospital were reviewed. Patients who survived for > 10 years were compared with those who survived for < 10 years. RESULTS: Totally, 315 patients were included in the study. They were divided into 2 groups: < 10-year group and > 10-year group. Patients in the < 10-year group had more tumor nodules (P = 0.016), more bilobar involvement (P = 0.004), narrower resection margin (P < 0.001), and worse disease-free and overall survival (P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, low preoperative hemoglobin level, large number of tumor nodules, and bilobar involvement were poor prognostic factors for overall survival, while adjuvant chemotherapy was a favorable factor. Further analysis of patients with bilobar disease showed that perioperative blood transfusion was a poor prognostic factor for overall survival while adjuvant chemotherapy was a favorable one. In patients with multiple bilobar tumor nodules, adjuvant chemotherapy had a positive impact on disease-free survival and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who survived for > 10 years after liver resection for CRLM tended to have normal preoperative hemoglobin level, unilobar disease, fewer tumor nodules, and have received adjuvant chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy favorably affected long-term survival of CRLM patients.

Routine use of ICG to enhance operative safety in emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that ICG fluorescence cholangiography (ICG-FC) helps to identify critical structures during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and hence reduce biliary injuries and conversions. In LC, biliary injury and conversion often happen if the biliary anatomy is misidentified. METHODS: This was a single-center randomized controlled trial from 2017 to 2019. Patients with acute cholecystitis requiring LC were assessed for eligibility for the trial. Patients in the trial were randomized to undergo either conventional LC (conventional arm) or LC with ICG-FC (ICG arm). Conversion rate and biliary injury incidence were outcome measures. RESULTS: Totally 92 patients participated (46 patients in each arm). The median age was 61 years in both arms (p = 0.472). The conventional arm had 22 men and 24 women; the ICG arm had 24 men and 22 women (p = 0.677). The two arms were comparable in all perioperative parameters. The time from ICG injection to surgery was 67 (16-1150) min. Both arms had an 8.7% conversion rate (p = 1.000). The median operative time was 140.5 min in the conventional arm and 149.5 min in the ICG arm (p = 0.086). The complication rate was 15.2% in the former and 10.9% in the latter (p = 0.536), and both had a 2.2% bile leakage rate. The median hospital stay was 3.5d in the former and 4.0d in the latter (p = 0.380). CONCLUSION: ICG-FC did not make any difference in conversion or complication rate. Its routine use in LC is questionable. However, it may be helpful in difficult cholecystectomies and may be used as an adjunct. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with the Institutional Review Board of University of Hong Kong/Hospital Authority Hong Kong West Cluster ( http://www.med.hku.hk/en/research/ethics-and-integrity/human-ethics ). REGISTRATION NUMBER: UW17-492.

Transferability of Liver Transplantation Experience to Complex Liver Resection for Locally Advanced Hepatobiliary Malignancy-Lessons Learnt From 3 Decades of Single Center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To study the impact of LT experience on the outcome of CLR for locally advanced hepatobiliary malignancy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite evolution in LT knowledge and surgical techniques in the past decades, there is yet data to evaluate the significance of LT experience in performing CLR. METHODS: Postoperative outcome after CLR between 1995 and 2019 were reviewed and correlated with LT experience in a single center with both LT and CLR service. CLR was defined as hepatectomy with vasculobiliary reconstruction, or multivisceral resection, central bisectionectomy (S4/5/8), or associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy. Spearman rank correlation and receiver operating characteristic analysis were used to define the association between CLR-related outcomes and LT experience. RESULTS: With cumulative single-center experience of 1452 LT, 222 CLR were performed during the study period [hepatectomy with biliary (27.0%), or vascular (21.2%) reconstruction, with multivisceral resections (9.9%), with associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (18.5%)] mainly for hepatocellular carcinoma (53.2%), and hilar cholangiocarcinoma (14%). Median tumor size was 7.0 cm. Other features include macrovascular invasion (23.4%), and juxta-visceral invasion (14%). Major postoperative complication rate was 25.2% and mortality rate was 6.3%. CLR-complication rate was inversely associated with LT experience (R = -0.88, P < 0.005). Receiver operator characteristic analysis revealed the cutoff for LT experience to have the greatest influence on CLR was 95 with a sensitivity of 100% and Youden index of 1. Multivariable analysis showed that blood transfusion, prolonged operating time, LT experience < /=95 were associated with major postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: LT experience was complimentary to CLR for locally advanced hepatobiliary malignancy with improved postoperative outcome.

Adjuvant transarterial chemotherapy for margin-positive resection of hepatocellular carcinoma-a propensity score matched analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hepatectomy is a well-established curative treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma. However, the role of adjuvant therapy is controversial. This study examines the efficacy of adjuvant transarterial chemotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: The data of hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing curative hepatectomy was reviewed. Those with adjuvant transarterial chemotherapy were matched with those without using propensity score analysis, by tumour size and number, indocyanine green retention rate, disease staging and Child-Pugh grading. The groups were compared. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent hepatectomy received adjuvant transarterial chemotherapy (TAC group), and were matched with 870 patients who did not (no-TAC group). The groups were largely comparable in patient and disease characteristics, but the TAC group experienced more blood loss, higher transfusion rates, narrower margins and more positive margins. The two groups were found to be comparable in disease-free and overall survival rates. In margin-positive patients, those given TAC survived longer than those without, and margin-positive patients in the TAC group had overall survival rates similar to margin-negative patients in the no-TAC group. CONCLUSIONS: Margin involvement is an adverse factor for survival in HCC. Adjuvant transarterial chemotherapy may offer survival benefits to hepatocellular carcinoma patients with positive surgical margins.

A snapshot of the 2020 conception of anatomic liver resections and their applicability on minimally invasive liver surgery. A preparatory survey for the Expert Consensus Meeting on Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The main aim of this survey was to analyze how liver surgeons perform liver resections and to define their conception of anatomic procedures within the incorporation of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS). METHODS: The survey was distributed among liver surgeons. It mainly focused on personal experience on open and MILS, methods and landmarks, and experience on anatomic resections and Glissonean approach. RESULTS: A total of 445 valid answers from 54 countries was obtained. Surgeons performing MILS mainly have below 10 years of experience (81.8% of responders) and one third has never done complex MILS. New techniques, including indocyanine green demarcation are marginally used (<25%). More than 60% of surgeons do not make a full exposure of hepatic veins during MILS, mainly due to the risk of injury or not considering it to be of utility. Although 88% of responders agreed with the concept of anatomic resection as the "resection along the border/watersheds of each order division identified by the portal vein flow", only 55% of surgeons have ever performed MILS Glissonean approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Liver anatomy is not a static concept. Anatomic resections need training and precision. Standardization of complex anatomic resections by a minimally invasive approach should be encouraged.

Expert Consensus Guidelines: How to safely perform minimally invasive anatomic liver resection.

BACKGROUND: The concept of minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (MIALR) is gaining popularity. However, specific technical skills need to be acquired to safely perform MIALR. The "Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (PAM-HBP Surgery Consensus)" was developed as a special program during the 32nd meeting of the Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery (JSHBPS). METHODS: Thirty-four international experts gathered online for the consensus. A Research Committee performed a comprehensive literature review, classifying studies according to the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network method. Based on the literature review and experts' opinions, tentative recommendations were drafted and circulated among experts using online Delphi Rounds. Finally, formulated recommendations were presented online in the Expert Consensus Meeting of the JSHBPS on February 23rd, 2021. The final recommendations were validated and finalized by the 2nd Delphi Round in May 2021. RESULTS: Seven clinical questions were selected, and 22 recommendations were formulated. All recommendations reached more than 85% consensus among experts at the final Delphi Round. CONCLUSIONS: The Expert Consensus Meeting for safely performing MIALR has presented a set of clinical guidelines based on available literature and experts' opinions. We expect these guidelines to have a favorable effect on the safe implementation and development of MIALR.

Minimally invasive anatomic liver resection: Results of a survey of world experts.

BACKGROUND: Although the number of minimally invasive liver resections (MILRs) has been steadily increasing in many institutions, minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (MIALR) remains a complicated procedure that has not been standardized. We present the results of a survey among expert liver surgeons as a benchmark for standardizing MIALR. METHOD: We administered this survey to 34 expert liver surgeons who routinely perform MIALR. The survey contained questions on personal experience with liver resection, inflow/outflow control methods, and identification techniques of intersegmental/sectional planes (IPs). RESULTS: All 34 participants completed the survey; 24 experts (70%) had more than 11 years of experience with MILR, and over 80% of experts had performed over 100 open resections and MILRs each. Regarding the methods used for laparoscopic or robotic anatomic resection, the Glissonean approach (GA) was a more frequent procedure than the hilar approach (HA). Although hepatic veins were considered essential landmarks, the exposure methods varied. The top three techniques that the experts recommended for identifying IPs were creating a demarcation line, indocyanine green negative staining method, and intraoperative ultrasound. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive anatomic liver resection remains a challenging procedure; however, a certain degree of consensus exists among expert liver surgeons.

The Tokyo 2020 terminology of liver anatomy and resections: Updates of the Brisbane 2000 system.

BACKGROUND: The Brisbane 2000 Terminology for Liver Anatomy and Resections, based on Couinaud's segments, did not address how to identify segmental borders and anatomic territories of less than one segment. Smaller anatomic resections including segmentectomies and subsegmentectomies, have not been well defined. The advent of minimally invasive liver resection has enhanced the possibilities of more precise resection due to a magnified view and reduced bleeding, and minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (MIALR) is becoming popular gradually. Therefore, there is a need for updating the Brisbane 2000 system, including anatomic segmentectomy or less. An online "Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (PAM-HBP Surgery Consensus)" was hosted on February 23, 2021. METHODS: The Steering Committee invited 34 international experts from around the world. The Expert Committee (EC) selected 12 questions and two future research topics in the terminology session. The EC created seven tentative definitions and five recommendations based on the experts' opinions and the literature review performed by the Research Committee. Two Delphi Rounds finalized those definitions and recommendations. RESULTS: This paper presents seven definitions and five recommendations regarding anatomic segmentectomy or less. In addition, two future research topics are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The PAM-HBP Surgery Consensus has presented the Tokyo 2020 Terminology for Liver Anatomy and Resections. The terminology has added definitions of liver anatomy and resections that were not defined in the Brisbane 2000 system.

Alpha-Fetoprotein in Predicting Survival of Patients with Ruptured Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Resection.

Background/Aim: Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) had been used as a prognostic factor in hepatocellular carcinoma but it was unknown what level of AFP could predict the survival of patients with ruptured hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) after resection. This retrospective study was to identify the best cutoff value of AFP for this prediction.Methods: Data of patients having hepatectomy for rHCC from 1989 to 2015 were reviewed. The receiver operating characteristic curve and Youden's index were used to identify the cutoff value of AFP affecting survival. The patients were then divided into two groups by the cutoff for comparison.Results: Totally 114 patients were included. An AFP level of 256 ng/ml was found to affect survival (area under curve 63.1%, 95% confidence interval 0.514-0.748, p = 0.027; sensitivity 0.6, specificity 0.706). The 114 patients were divided into Group A (AFP < 256 ng/ml, n = 56) and Group B (AFP ≥ 256 ng/ml, n = 58). The median AFP level was 13.0 ng/ml (range, 2-253 ng/ml) in Group A and 11206.5 ng/ml (range, 259-481,000 ng/ml) in Group B (p < 0.001). Group A had a larger proportion of patients receiving transarterial embolization at the time of rupture, and the time to hepatectomy was longer in this group. Patients in Group B had more blood loss, more complications, larger tumors, and more cases of macrovascular/microvascular invasion. Overall survival (p = 0.013) and disease-free survival (p = 0.024) were significantly better in Group A. On multivariate analysis, AFP ≥ 256 ng/ml was an independent risk factor for overall survival.Conclusion: AFP ≥ 256 ng/ml had an adverse impact on the survival of patients with rHCC after resection.

Liver transplantation for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases: the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association consensus guidelines.

Colorectal cancer is a prevalent disease worldwide, with more than 50% of patients developing metastases to the liver. Despite advances in improving resectability, most patients present with non-resectable colorectal liver metastases requiring palliative systemic therapy and locoregional disease control strategies. There is a growing interest in the use of liver transplantation to treat non-resectable colorectal liver metastases in well selected patients, leading to a surge in the number of studies and prospective trials worldwide, thereby fuelling the emerging field of transplant oncology. The interdisciplinary nature of this field requires domain-specific evidence and expertise to be drawn from multiple clinical specialities and the basic sciences. Importantly, the wider societal implication of liver transplantation for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases, such as the effect on the allocation of resources and national transplant waitlists, should be considered. To address the urgent need for a consensus approach, the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association commissioned the Liver Transplantation for Colorectal liver Metastases 2021 working group, consisting of international leaders in the areas of hepatobiliary surgery, colorectal oncology, liver transplantation, hepatology, and bioethics. The aim of this study was to standardise nomenclature and define management principles in five key domains: patient selection, evaluation of biological behaviour, graft selection, recipient considerations, and outcomes. An extensive literature review was done within the five domains identified. Between November, 2020, and January, 2021, a three-step modified Delphi consensus process was undertaken by the workgroup, who were further subgrouped into the Scientific Committee, Expert Panel, and Transplant Centre Representatives. A final consensus of 44 statements, standardised nomenclature, and a practical management algorithm is presented. Specific criteria for clinico-patho-radiological assessments with molecular profiling is crucial in this setting. After this, the careful evaluation of biological behaviour with bridging therapy to transplantation with an appropriate assessment of the response is required. The sequencing of treatment in synchronous metastatic disease requires special consideration and is highlighted here. Some ethical dilemmas within organ allocation for malignant indications are discussed and the role for extended criteria grafts, living donor transplantation, and machine perfusion technologies for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases are reviewed. Appropriate immunosuppressive regimens and strategies for the follow-up and treatment of recurrent disease are proposed. This consensus guideline provides a framework by which liver transplantation for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases might be safely instituted and is a meaningful step towards future evidenced-based practice for better patient selection and organ allocation to improve the survival for patients with this disease.

Critical appraisal of TNM versus HKU staging system for postoperative prognostic evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor-node-metastasis staging system (AJCC 8th) has been launched with modifications in T staging. The University of Hong Kong liver cancer staging system (HKUSS) has been proven to better categorize hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) into different T stages. This study aimed to compare the two systems' predictive ability for HCC recurrence after primary surgical resection. METHODS: Patients who had primary, curative resection for HCC between 1989 and 2017 were reviewed. The Kaplan-Meier plot was used to estimate disease-free survival (DFS), and the log-rank test was used for survival comparison between subgroups. The two systems' prediction of recurrence was evaluated by the Cox regression model. RESULTS: Totally 1,815 patients were included. With AJCC 8th, the 5-year DFS was 58.9% for T1a, 52.3% for T1b, 30% for T2, 16.9% for T3, and 14.4% for T4. No survival difference was demonstrated between T1a and T1b (P=0.668) or between T3 and T4 (P=0.562). With HKUSS, the 5-year DFS was 57.7% for T1, 43.4% for T2, 28.9% for T3, and 15.7% for T4. The T staging in HKUSS showed significant survival differences (T1 vs. T2, T2 vs. T3, and T3 vs. T4; P<0.001). Using receiver operating characteristic curves to show the recurrence status in the two systems, HKUSS had the largest area under curve (AUC) (HKUSS: AUC =0.655, SE 0.014, P<0.001, 95% CI, 0.628-0.681; AJCC 8th: AUC =0.652, SE 0.013, P<0.001, 95% CI, 0.625-0.677). CONCLUSIONS: HKUSS showed better categorization of HCC. In the context of primary surgical resection, HKUSS may be more appropriate for stratification of patients with HCC with various T stages, and thus the choice of staging system when primary surgical resection is considered for patients of HCC.

Role of C11-FDG dual-tracer PET-CT scan in metastatic screening of hepatocellular carcinoma-a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to identify predictive factors for positron emission tomography (PET)-detected hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) metastasis and a cost-effective approach to preoperative PET-computed tomography (CT) for detecting metastasis. METHODS: Clinicopathological and survival data of HCC patients having PET-CT with 18F-fludeoxyglucose (FDG) and 11C-acetate (ACT) following contrast-enhanced CT/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for preoperative tumor staging were reviewed. Binary logistic regression was performed to identify predictive factors for PET-detected metastasis. A cost-benefit analysis model was built for the incurred costs and the impact of PET-CT findings on treatment strategy was studied. RESULTS: Totally 152 patients were analyzed. Dual-tracer PET-CT detected metastasis in 17 patients (11%). By multivariate analysis, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL [relative risk (RR): 4.30, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.41-13.15, P=0.011] and bilobar disease (RR: 3.94, 95% CI: 1.24-12.52, P=0.014) were independent predictive factors for PET-detected metastasis. PET-CT findings altered the treatment strategy for 12 patients (7.9%); three partial hepatectomies, eight episodes of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and one episode of ablation were avoided, with an estimated cost-saving of US $91,000, $150,000 and $10,600 respectively. Had the PET-CT been performed only for patients with AFP ≥400 ng/mL or bilobar disease (n=74), metastasis would have been confirmed in 14 patients (18.9%), and the cost-saving per patient was estimated at US $1,070. CONCLUSIONS: Dual-tracer PET-CT is cost-effective and useful for preoperative HCC staging in patients with AFP ≥400 ng/mL or bilobar disease. Its routine use in preoperative workup for all HCC patients is not recommended. Unilobar disease with AFP <400 ng/mL can achieve good negative predictive value for PET-detected metastasis. Screening patients with either factor can avoid unnecessary procedures and is thus cost-effective for preoperative HCC workup.

Relevance of chemotherapy and margin status in colorectal liver metastasis.

PURPOSE: This retrospective, single-center study aimed to investigate the importance of chemotherapy and to come up with the optimal liver resection margin length for patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). METHODS: Patients who had undergone any form of liver resection for CRLM were reviewed and analyzed. The analyses were broken down into three parts: (1) overall effect of chemotherapy, (2) effect of chemotherapy with positive/negative resection margin, and (3) result of discriminative analysis with optimal margin length analysis. RESULTS: In total, 381 patients were studied. Among them, 279 received chemotherapy whereas 102 did not. Survival was significantly better in patients with chemotherapy (5-year, 43.6% vs. 25.8%) (p < 0.001). Patients who received chemotherapy (n = 93) with negative margins had better survival than patients (n = 8) with positive margins (5-year, 28.1% vs. 0%) (p = 0.019). On multivariate analysis, margin involvement was the poor prognostic factor for survival. Patients who had chemotherapy (n = 238) with negative margin showed a trend of better survival than patients (n = 41) with positive margins (5-year, 45.7% vs. 29.3%) (p = 0.085). Patients (n = 93) with negative margin and no chemotherapy and patients (n = 41) with positive margin and chemotherapy had comparable survival at 5 years (p = 0.422). On multivariate analysis, tumor number was the prognostic factor for survival. By the discriminant method, 1.09 cm (sensitivity 0.242, specificity 0.718) was determined as the cut-off for optimal margin length. Patients who had margin ≥ 1.09 cm (n = 81) enjoyed significantly better survival (5-year, 54.3% vs. 33.5%) (p = 0.041). On multivariate analysis, margin length ≥ 1.09 cm was the prognostic factor for favorable survival. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated the important effect of perioperative chemotherapy and negative margin liver resection in management of patients suffered from CRLM.

The Risk of Going Small: Lowering GRWR and Overcoming Small-For-Size Syndrome in Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) according to various graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR). BACKGROUND: The standard GRWR in LDLT is >0.8%. Our center accepted predicted GRWR ≥0.6% in selected patients. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent LDLT from 2001 to 2017 were included. Patients were stratified according to actual GRWR (Group 1:GRWR ≤0.6%; Group 2: 0.6%0.8%). RESULTS: There were 545 LDLT (group 1 = 39; group 2 = 159; group 3 = 347) performed. Pretransplant predicted GRWR showed good correlation to actual GRWR (R2 = 0.834) and these figures differed within a ±â€Š10%margin (P = 0.034) using an equivalence test. There were more left lobe grafts in group 1 (33.3%) than group 2 (10.7%) and 3 (2.9%). Median donor age was <35 years and steatosis >10% was rare.There was no difference in postoperative complication, vascular and biliary complication rate between groups. Over one-fifth (20.5%) of group 1 patients required portal flow modulation (PFM) and was higher than group 2 (3.1%) and group 3 (4%) (P = 0.001). Twenty-six patients developed small-for-size syndrome (SFSS): 5 of 39 (12.8%) in group 1 and 21 of 159 (13.2%) in group 2 and none in group 3 (P < 0.001). There were 2 hospital mortalities; otherwise, the remaining patients [24/26 (92.3%)] survive with a functional liver graft. The 5-year graft survival rates were 85.4% versus 87.8% versus 84.7% for group 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = 0.718). GRWR did not predict worse survivals in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Graft size in LDLT can be lowered to 0.6% after careful recipient selection, with low incidence of SFSS and excellent outcomes. Accurate graft weight prediction, donor-recipient matching, meticulous surgical techniques, appropriate use of PFM, and vigilant perioperative care is important to the success of such approach.

Hepatitis B Virus Seropositivity Is a Poor Prognostic Factor of Pediatric Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Population-Based Study in Hong Kong and Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a rare hepatic malignancy in children. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a key predisposing factor in endemic regions but its impact on outcome has not been studied. We aim to evaluate the prognostic implication of HBV seropositivity and role of cancer surveillance in children with HCC from East Asian populations with national HBV vaccination. METHODS: Review of population-based databases for patients (< 18 years old) diagnosed with HCC from 1993 to 2017 in two Southeast Asian regions with universal HBV vaccination (instituted since 1988 and 1987 in Hong Kong and Singapore, respectively). RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were identified (Hong Kong, 28; Singapore, 11). Thirty were male; median age at diagnosis was 10.8 years (range, 0.98-16.6). Abdominal pain was the commonest presentation while five patients were diagnosed through surveillance for underlying condition. Alpha-fetoprotein was raised in 36 patients (mean, 500,598 ng/ml). Nineteen had bilobar involvement, among the patients in whom pretreatment extent of disease (PRETEXT) staging could retrospectively be assigned, 3 had stage I, 13 had stage II, 4 had stage III, and 11 had stage IV disease. Seventeen had distant metastasis. HBsAg was positive in 19 of 38 patients. Two patients had fibrolamellar HCC. Upfront management involved tumor resection in 16 (liver transplantation, 2), systemic chemotherapy in 21, interventional procedures in 6 [transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), 5, radiofrequency ablation (RFA), 1], and radiotherapy in 4 (selective internal radiation, 3, external beam radiation, 1). Five-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were 15.4 ± 6.0 and 26.1 ± 7.2%, respectively. Patient's HBsAg positivity, metastatic disease and inability to undergo definitive resection represent poor prognostic factors in univariate and multivariable analyses. Patients diagnosed by surveillance had significantly better outcome. CONCLUSION: Pediatric HCC has poor outcome. HBV status remains relevant in the era of universal HBV vaccination. HBV carrier has inferior outcome and use of surveillance may mitigate disease course.

Pure laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma with liver F4 cirrhosis without routine Pringle maneuver - A propensity analysis in a single center.

BACKGROUND: /Aim: Laparoscopic hepatectomy has been gaining popularity but its evidence in major hepatectomy for cirrhotic liver is lacking. We studied the long-term outcomes of the pure laparoscopic approach versus the open approach in major hepatectomy without Pringle maneuver in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cirrhosis using the propensity score analysis. METHODS: We reviewed patients diagnosed with HCC and cirrhosis who underwent major hepatectomy as primary treatment. The outcomes of patients who received the laparoscopic approach were compared with those of propensity-case-matched patients (ratio, 4:1) who received the open approach. The matching was made on the following factors: tumor size, tumor number, age, sex, hepatitis serology, HCC staging, comorbidity, and liver function. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients underwent pure laparoscopic major hepatectomy for HCC with cirrhosis. Ninety-six patients who underwent open major hepatectomy were matched by propensity scores. The laparoscopic group had less median blood loss (300 ml vs 645 ml, p = 0.001), shorter median hospital stay (6 days vs 10 days, p = 0.002), and lower rates of overall complication (12.5% vs 39.6%, p = 0.012), pulmonary complication (4.2% vs 25%, p = 0.049) and pleural effusion (p = 0.026). The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year overall survival rates in the laparoscopic group vs the open group were 95.2%, 89.6% and 89.6% vs 87.5%, 72.0% and 62.8% (p = 0.211). Correspondingly, the disease-free survival rates were 77.1%, 71.2% and 71.2% vs 75.8%, 52.7% and 45.5% (p = 0.422). CONCLUSIONS: The two groups had similar long-term survival. The laparoscopic group had favorable short-term outcomes. Laparoscopic major hepatectomy without routine Pringle maneuver for HCC with cirrhosis is a safe treatment option at specialized centers.

Defining the optimal bilirubin level before hepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In the management of operable hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HC) patients with hyperbilirubinemia, preoperative biliary drainage is a measure to bring down the bilirubin to a certain level so as to avoid adverse postoperative outcomes that would otherwise result from hyperbilirubinemia. A cutoff value of bilirubin level in this context is needed but has not been agreed upon without controversy. This retrospective study aimed to identify a cutoff of preoperative bilirubin level that would minimize postoperative morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Data of patients having hepatectomy with curative intent for HC were analyzed. Discriminative analysis was performed to identify the preoperative bilirubin level that would make a survival difference. The identified level was used as the cutoff to divide patients into two groups. The groups were compared. RESULTS: Ninety patients received hepatectomy with curative intent for HC. Their median preoperative bilirubin level was 23 µmol/L. A cutoff preoperative bilirubin level of 75 µmol/L was derived from Youden's index (sensitivity 0.333; specificity 0.949) and confirmed to be optimal by logistic regression (relative risk 9.250; 95% confidence interval 1.932-44.291; p = 0.005), with mortality shown to be statistically different at 90 days (p = 0.008). Patients were divided into Group A (≤75 µmol/L; n = 82) and Group B (> 75 µmol/L; n = 8). Group B had a higher preoperative bilirubin level (p < 0.001), more intraoperative blood loss (3.12 vs 1.4 L; p = 0.008), transfusion (100% vs 42.0%; p = 0.011) and replacement (2.45 vs 0.0 L; p < 0.001), more postoperative renal complications (p = 0.036), more in-hospital deaths (50% vs 8.5%; p = 0.004), and more 90-day deaths (50% vs 9.8%; p = 0.008). Group A had a longer follow-up period (p = 0.008). The groups were otherwise comparable. Disease-free survival was similar between groups (p = 0.142) but overall survival was better in Group A (5-year, 25.2% vs 0%; p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, preoperative bilirubin level and intraoperative blood replacement were risk factors for 90-day mortality. CONCLUSION: A cutoff value of preoperative bilirubin level of 75 µmol/L is suggested, as the study showed that a preoperative bilirubin level ≤ 75 µmol/L resulted in significantly less blood replacement necessitated by blood loss during operation and significantly better patient survival after surgery.