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.

Prospective Study of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Waitlist for Liver Transplant.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There are no prospective data on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as a bridge to liver transplantation for HCC. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SBRT as bridging therapy, with comparison with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). APPROACH AND RESULTS: Patients were prospectively enrolled for SBRT under a standardized protocol from July 2015 and compared with a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent TACE or HIFU from 2010. The primary endpoint was tumor control rate at 1 year after bridging therapy. Secondary endpoints included cumulative incidence of dropout, toxicity, and posttransplant survival. During the study period, 150 patients were evaluated (SBRT, n = 40; TACE, n = 59; HIFU, n = 51). The tumor control rate at 1 year was significantly higher after SBRT compared with TACE and HIFU (92.3%, 43.5%, and 33.3%, respectively; P = 0.02). With competing risk analysis, the cumulative incidence of dropout at 1 and 3 years after listing was lower after SBRT (15.1% and 23.3%) compared with TACE (28.9% and 45.8%; P = 0.034) and HIFU (33.3% and 45.1%; P = 0.032). Time-to-progression at 1 and 3 years was also superior after SBRT (10.8%, 18.5% in SBRT, 45%, 54.9% in TACE, and 47.6%, 62.8% in HIFU; P < 0.001). The periprocedural toxicity was similar, without any difference in perioperative complications and patient and recurrence-free survival rates after transplant. Pathological complete response was more frequent after SBRT compared with TACE and HIFU (48.1% vs. 25% vs. 17.9%, respectively; P = 0.037). In multivariable analysis, tumor size <3 cm, listing alpha-fetoprotein <200 ng/mL, Child A, and SBRT significantly reduced the risk of dropout. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT was safe, with a significantly higher tumor control rate, reduced the risk of waitlist dropout, and should be used as an alternative to conventional bridging therapies.

ALPPS Versus Portal Vein Embolization for Hepatitis-related Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Changing Paradigm in Modulation of Future Liver Remnant Before Major Hepatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term outcome of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) for hepatitis-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: ALPPS has been advocated for future liver remnant (FLR) augmentation in liver metastasis or noncirrhotic liver tumors in recent years. Data on the effect of ALPPS in chronic hepatitis or cirrhosis-related HCC remained scarce. METHODS: Data for clinicopathological details, portal hemodynamics, and oncological outcome were reviewed for ALPPS and compared with portal vein embolization (PVE). Tumor immunohistochemistry for PD-1, VEGF, and AFP was evaluated in ALPPS and compared with PVE and upfront hepatectomy (UH). RESULTS: From 2002 to 2018, 148 patients with HCC (hepatitis B: n = 136, 92.0%) underwent FLR modulation (ALPPS, n = 46; PVE: n = 102). One patient with ALPPS and 33 patients with PVE failed to proceed to resection (resection rate: 97.8% vs 67.7%, P < 0.001). Among those who had resections, 65 patients (56.5%) had cirrhosis. ALPPS induced absolute FLR volume increment by 48.8%, or FLR estimated total liver volume ratio by 12.8% over 6 days. No difference in morbidity (20.7% vs 30.4%, P = 0.159) and mortality (6.5% vs 5.8%, P = 1.000) with PVE was observed. Chronic hepatitis and intraoperative indocyanine green clearance rate ≤39.5% favored adequate FLR hypertrophy in ALPPS. Five-year overall survival for ALPPS and PVE was 46.8% and 64.1% (P = 0.234). Tumor immunohistochemical staining showed no difference in expression of PD-1, V-EGF, and AFP between ALPPS, PVE, and UH. CONCLUSIONS: ALPPS conferred a higher resection rate in hepatitis-related HCC with comparable short- and long-term oncological outcome with PVE.

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.

Analysis of Survival Benefits of Living Versus Deceased Donor Liver Transplant in High Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and Hepatorenal Syndrome.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous recommendations suggested living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) should not be considered for patients with Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) > 25 and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). APPROACH AND RESULTS: Patients who were listed with MELD > 25 from 2008 to 2017 were analyzed with intention-to-treat (ITT) basis retrospectively. Patients who had a potential live donor were analyzed as ITT-LDLT, whereas those who had none belonged to ITT-deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) group. ITT-overall survival (OS) was analyzed from the time of listing. Three hundred twenty-five patients were listed (ITT-LDLT n = 212, ITT-DDLT n = 113). The risk of delist/death was lower in the ITT-LDLT group (43.4% vs. 19.8%, P < 0.001), whereas the transplant rate was higher in the ITT-LDLT group (78.3% vs. 52.2%, P < 0.001). The 5-year ITT-OS was superior in the ITT-LDLT group (72.6% vs. 49.5%, P < 0.001) for patients with MELD > 25 and patients with both MELD > 25 and HRS (56% vs. 33.8%, P < 0.001). Waitlist mortality was the highest early after listing, and the distinct alteration of slope at survival curve showed that the benefits of ITT-LDLT occurred within the first month after listing. Perioperative outcomes and 5-year patient survival were comparable for patients with MELD > 25 (88% vs. 85.4%, P = 0.279) and patients with both MELD > 25 and HRS (77% vs. 76.4%, P = 0.701) after LDLT and DDLT, respectively. The LDLT group has a higher rate of renal recovery by 1 month (77.4% vs. 59.1%, P = 0.003) and 3 months (86.1% vs, 74.5%, P = 0.029), whereas the long-term estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was similar between the 2 groups. ITT-LDLT reduced the hazard of mortality (hazard ratio = 0.387-0.552) across all MELD strata. CONCLUSIONS: The ITT-LDLT reduced waitlist mortality and allowed an earlier access to transplant. LDLT in patients with high MELD/HRS was feasible, and they had similar perioperative outcomes and better renal recovery, whereas the long-term survival and eGFR were comparable with DDLT. LDLT should be considered for patients with high MELD/HRS, and the application of LDLT should not be restricted with a MELD cutoff.

A simplified prediction model for early intrahepatic recurrence after hepatectomy for patients with unilobar hepatocellular carcinoma without macroscopic vascular invasion: An implication for adjuvant therapy and postoperative surveillance.

BACKGROUND: An accurate prediction model of early recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after hepatectomy is important to ascertain the postoperative adjuvant treatment and surveillance. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study including 1125 patients with HCC underwent curative hepatic resection. They were randomly divided into training (n = 562) and validation (n = 563) sets. Early intrahepatic recurrence within 18 months from surgery is the primary outcome. In the training set, a prediction scoring model (Recurrent Liver Cancer Score RLCS) was developed, which was legitimised in the validation set. RESULTS: RLCS was developed based on four clinicopathologic risk factors (serum alpha fetoprotein, tumor size, multiple tumors or satellite nodules, and microvascular invasion). Low-risk and high-risk groups had statistically significant differences in early recurrence rates (18% vs. 43.8%). The 5-year recurrence-free survival rates of low risk and high risk groups were 52.9% and 27.8%, respectively. This model showed good calibration and discriminatory ability in the validation set (c-index of 0.647). CONCLUSION: RLCS is a user-friendly prediction scoring model which can accurately predict the occurrence of early intrahepatic recurrence of HCC. It establishes the basis of postoperative adjuvant treatment and surveillance in future studies.

Liver transplantation using hepatitis B core positive grafts with antiviral monotherapy prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The impact of hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) positive liver grafts on survival and the risk of de novo hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection after liver transplantation (LT) remain controversial. Therefore, we aimed to analyze this risk and the associated outcomes in a large cohort of patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective study that included all adults who underwent LT at Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, between 2000 and 2015. Data were retrieved from a prospectively collected database. Antiviral monotherapy prophylaxis was given for patients receiving grafts from anti-HBc positive donors. RESULTS: A total of 964 LTs were performed during the study period, with 416 (43.2%) anti-HBc positive and 548 (56.8%) anti-HBc negative donors. The median follow-up time was 7.8 years. Perioperative outcomes (hospital mortality, complications, primary nonfunction and delayed graft function) were similar between the 2 groups. The 1-, 5- and 10-year graft survival rates were comparable in anti-HBc positive (93.3%, 85.3% and 76.8%) and anti-HBc negative groups (92.5%, 82.9% and 78.4%, p = 0.944). The 1-, 5- and 10-year patient survival rates in anti-HBc positive group were 94.2%, 87% and 79% and were similar to the anti-HBc negative group (93.5%, 84% and 79.7%, p = 0.712). One-hundred and eight HBsAg negative recipients received anti-HBc positive grafts, of whom 64 received lamivudine and 44 entecavir monotherapy prophylaxis. The risk of de novo HBV was 3/108 (2.8%) and all occurred in the lamivudine era. There were 659 HBsAg-positive patients and 308 (46.7%) received anti-HBc positive grafts. The risk of HBV recurrence was similar between the 2 groups. Donor anti-HBc status did not impact on long-term patient and graft survival, or the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after LT. CONCLUSIONS: De novo HBV was exceedingly rare especially with entecavir prophylaxis. Anti-HBc positive grafts did not impact on perioperative and long-term outcomes after transplant. LAY SUMMARY: The risk of de novo hepatitis B infection after liver transplantation was rare when using hepatitis B core positive liver grafts with entecavir monotherapy prophylaxis. Hepatitis B core antibody status did not impact on perioperative and long-term outcomes after liver transplantation. This provides support for the clinical use of hepatitis B core positive liver grafts when required.

Long-Term Survival Outcome Between Living Donor and Deceased Donor Liver Transplant for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Intention-to-Treat and Propensity Score Matching Analyses.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies comparing outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) showed conflicting results, and most studies measured survival outcomes from the time of liver transplantation (LT). METHOD: This retrospective study was aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of HCC patients listed for LT using intention-to-treat (ITT) and propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Clinicopathological data were retrieved from a prospectively collected database. RESULTS: From 1995 to 2014, 375 HCC patients were listed for LT. ITT-LDLT group had 188 patients, whereas ITT-DDLT group had 187 patients. Twenty-seven patients (14.4%) and 122 patients (65.2%) were delisted from LDLT and DDLT waitlist, respectively. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were significantly better in ITT-LDLT group than ITT-DDLT group (94.1 vs. 77.5%, 81.4 vs. 48.7% and 75.9 vs. 40.8%). High alphafetoprotein (AFP) and ITT-DDLT treatment arm were independent poor prognostic factors affecting overall survival. LDLT group (n = 161) had more young patients, poorer liver function, higher AFP, more tumors outside Milan/UCSF criteria, when compared with DDLT group (n = 85). After PSM, the 1-, 3- and 5-year overall (95.4 vs. 98.5%, 80.0 vs. 92.3% and 73.4 vs. 84.4%) and recurrence-free (87.7% vs. 90.8%, 76.9% vs. 83.1% and 72.2% vs. 81.5%) survival rates were comparable between the matched LDLT and the matched DDLT group, respectively. CONCLUSION: Survival benefit of LDLT was observed for HCC patients with ITT analysis. Despite a more advanced tumor stage, overall and recurrence-free survival rates were comparable between LDLT and DDLT using PSM analysis.

Long-term survival comparison between primary transplant and upfront curative treatment with salvage transplant for early stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Whether primary liver transplantation (PLT) or upfront curative treatment with salvage liver transplantation (SLT) is a better treatment option for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial. This study aims to compare the long-term survival starting from the time of primary treatment between the two approaches for early HCC using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. METHODS: From 1995 to 2014, 175 patients with early HCC undergoing either PLT (n = 149) or SLT (n = 26) were retrospectively reviewed in a prospectively collected database. Patients' demographic data, tumor characteristics, short-term and long-term outcome were compared between two groups after PSM. RESULTS: After matching, the baseline characteristics were comparable between mPLT group (n = 45) and mSLT group (n = 25). The tumor recurrence rate after transplant was significantly higher in mSLT group than mPLT group (28% vs. 15.6%). Calculating from the time of primary treatment, the 1, 3, and 5-year overall survival rates were comparable between mPLT group (97.8%, 91.1% and 86.3%) and mSLT group (100%, 95% and 85%). However, the 1, 3, and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were significantly better in mPLT group than mSLT group (95.6% vs. 90%, 86.6% vs. 80% and 84.3% vs. 70%). SLT approach and high pre-treatment serum alpha-fetoprotein level (>200 Î·g/mL) were poor prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival after transplant. CONCLUSIONS: PLT may be a better treatment option for early HCC, whereas SLT approach for HCC should be cautiously considered under the circumstance of organ shortage.

Recurrent pyogenic cholangitis - an independent poor prognostic indicator for resectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A propensity score matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent pyogenic cholangitis (RPC) is a known risk factor for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), whether it represents a poor prognostic factor remains controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the post-hepatectomy oncological outcomes of patients with ICC and coexisting RPC. METHOD: A retrospective analysis with propensity score matching (PSM) was performed for comparison between ICC patient with and without RPC. RESULTS: There were 143 patients with ICC with a median follow-up of 21 months. RPC was diagnosed in 18% of patients. The time from RPC diagnosis to ICC diagnosis was 137(47-481) months. The 3-year disease-free (DFS) and overall survival for the whole population was 34% and 43% respectively. Preoperative child score, elevated carcinoembryonic antigen, presence of microvascular invasion, multiple tumours, presence of postoperative complications and RPC were independent factors for DFS and OS. After PSM, 60 ICC patients who did not have RPC were compared with 20 ICC patients with RPC. Patients with RPC had significantly worse median DFS (10 vs 23 months, P = 0.020) and OS (15 vs 45 months, P = 0.004) when compared to the patients without RPC. CONCLUSION: RPC represents a poor prognostic factor affecting outcomes after hepatectomy for patients with ICC.

The role of radiofrequency ablation to liver transection surface in patients with close tumor margin of HCC during hepatectomy-a case matched study.

BACKGROUND: To review the outcome of using radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for patients with close resection margin during hepatectomy. METHODS: From Oct 2004 to Sept 2013, 862 patients received hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong. Fourteen patients received additional RFA because of close resection margin (<1 cm) during the operation for HCC. The result of 28 patients with close liver resection margin was selected for comparison. The two groups of patients were matched in terms of tumor size, tumor number, stage of disease and magnitude of resection. RESULTS: In the RFA group (n=14), the median age of the patients was 58.5 (range, 25-78 years). The median tumor size was 2.25 cm (range, 1.2-12 cm). In the resection alone group (n=28), the median age for the patients was 61 (range, 36-79 years). The median tumor size was 2.7 cm (range, 1-11 cm). There was no difference in terms of liver function assessment between the two groups. There was no RFA related complication recorded during the study period. There was no hospital mortality in both groups. The 1- and 3-year disease free survival was 38.3% and 25.5% respectively in the RFA group vs. 57.4% and 39.3% respectively in the liver resection alone group (P=0.563). The 1- and 3-year overall survival was 81.5% and 69.8% respectively in the RFA group vs .88.4% and 59.9% respectively in the liver resection alone group (P=0.83). CONCLUSIONS: RFA to hepatectomy resection surface in patients with close margin is a safe treatment option but its effectiveness on prevention of local recurrence has yet to be confirmed.

Long-term outcomes of entecavir monotherapy for chronic hepatitis B after liver transplantation: Results up to 8 years.

Long-term antiviral prophylaxis is required to prevent hepatitis B recurrence for patients with chronic hepatitis B after liver transplantation. We determined the long-term outcome of 265 consecutive chronic hepatitis B liver transplant recipients treated with entecavir monotherapy without hepatitis B immune globulin. Viral serology, viral load, and liver biochemistry were performed at regular intervals during follow-up. The median duration of follow-up was 59 months. The cumulative rates of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) seroclearance were 90% and 95% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. At 1, 3, 5, and 8 years, 85%, 88%, 87.0%, and 92% were negative for HBsAg, respectively, and 95%, 99%, 100%, and 100% had undetectable hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA, respectively. Fourteen patients remained persistently positive for HBsAg, all of whom had undetectable HBV DNA. There was no significant difference in liver stiffness for those who remained HBsAg-positive compared to those who achieved HBsAg seroclearance (5.5 versus 5.2 kPa, respectively; P = 0.52). The overall 9-year survival was 85%. There were 37 deaths during the follow-up period, of which none were due to hepatitis B recurrence. CONCLUSION: Long-term entecavir monotherapy is highly effective at preventing HBV reactivation after liver transplantation for chronic hepatitis B, with a durable HBsAg seroclearance rate of 92%, an undetectable HBV DNA rate of 100% at 8 years, and excellent long-term survival of 85% at 9 years. (Hepatology 2017;66:1036-1044).

Impact of split completeness on future liver remnant hypertrophy in associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) in hepatocellular carcinoma: Complete-ALPPS versus partial-ALPPS.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggested that associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy with a partial split could effectively induce the same degree of future liver remnant hypertrophy as a complete split in non-cirrhotic and non-cholestatic livers with better postoperative safety profiles. Our aim was to evaluate if the same phenomenon could be applied to hepatitis-related chronic liver diseases. METHODS: In the study, 25 patients who underwent associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy from October 2013 to January 2016 for hepatocellular carcinoma were analyzed. Partial-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (n = 12) was defined as 50-80% of the transection surface split and complete-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (n = 13) was split down to inferior vena cava. Perioperative outcomes stratified by split completeness were evaluated. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in operating times and blood loss for stage I and II operations between complete-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy and partial-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy. All patients underwent stage II operation without any inter-stage complications. Complete split induced greater future liver remnant hypertrophy than partial split (hypertrophy rate: 31.2 vs 17.5 mL/day, P = .022) with more pronounced effect in chronic hepatitis (P = .007) than cirrhosis (P = .283). Complete-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy was more likely to attain a future liver remnant/estimated standard liver volume ratio >35% within 10 days (76.9% vs 33.3%, P = .024) and proceed to stage II within 14 days after stage I (100% vs 58.4%, P = .009). The overall postoperative morbidity (≥grade 3a) after stage II was 16% (complete versus partial split: 7.7% vs 25%, P = .238) and hospital mortality after stage II was 8% (complete versus partial split: 0% vs 16.7%, P = .125). CONCLUSION: Complete-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy induced more rapid future liver remnant hypertrophy than partial-associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy without increased perioperative risk in chronic liver diseases.

Prognostic influence of spontaneous tumor rupture on hepatocellular carcinoma after interval hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous tumor rupture (STR) is a life-threatening complication of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Yet, interval partial hepatectomy (PH) is feasible in selected patients after hemostasis for the rupture event. Little is known, however, about the extent of negative prognostic impact STR had on these patients after resection. Our aim was to determine the impact of STR on the oncologic outcome of interval PH for ruptured HCC, and the prognostic value of STR on the current tumor node metastasis (TNM) classification. STUDY DESIGN: From 1989 to 2010, 84 of 364 patients (23%) with STR received staged PH. Clinicopathologic variables associated with STR were identified by logistic regression analysis and ruptured tumor size with prognostic impact was determined by receiver operating characteristic analysis. Comparison of survival curves was performed after stratification by the American Joint Committee on Cancer/TNM, 7th edition. RESULTS: Ruptured HCC had substantially worse survival than nonruptured tumor (5-year overall survival: 22.3% vs 53.4% P < .001). Anti-HCV status (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.225 confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.175-8.847, P = .023), platelet count (HR: 1.003, CI 1.0001-1.006, P = .042), tumor size (HR: 1.089, CI 1.025-1.156, P = .006) and microvascular invasion (HR 2.377, CI 1.255-4.502, P = .008) were independently associated with STR. When stratified by the TNM system after excluding STR as a component of T-staging, ruptured HCC had worse survival outcomes than nonruptured HCC in T1-T2 disease and tumors ≤10 cm only. A receiver operating characteristic analysis confirmed that STR had no additional adverse prognostic impact over other tumor features when size > 10 cm (area under curve 0.65, P < .001). CONCLUSION: STR affects the outcome of PH for T1-T2 disease or tumor ≤10 cm only. Assigning all resectable ruptured tumors to T4 may overestimate the severity of disease.

Long term survival analysis of hepatectomy for neuroendocrine tumour liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Liver is the commonest site for metastasis in patients with neuroendocrine tumour (NET). A vast majority of treatment strategies including liver directed nonsurgical therapy, liver directed surgical therapy, and nonliver directed therapy have been proposed. In this study we aim to investigate the outcome of liver resection in neuroendocrine tumour liver metastases (NELM). METHOD: 293 patients had hepatectomy for liver metastasis in our hospital between June 1996 and December 2010. Twelve patients were diagnosed to have NET in their final pathology and their data were reviewed. RESULTS: The median ages of the patients were 48.5 years (range 20-71 years). Eight of the patients received major hepatectomy. Four patients received minor hepatectomy. The median operation time was 418 minutes (range 195-660 minutes). The median tumor size was 8.75 cm (range 0.9-21 cm). There was no hospital mortality. The overall one-year and three-year survivals were 91.7% and 55.6%. The one-year and three-year disease-free survivals were 33.3% and 16.7%. CONCLUSION: Hepatectomy is an effective and safe treatment for NELM. Reasonable outcome on long term overall survival and disease-free survival can be achieved in this group of patients with a low morbidity rate.