Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cancer after Cholecystectomy in the Elderly.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies evaluating whether recent cholecystectomy is associated with a pancreas cancer diagnosis are limited. We aimed to examine if cholecystectomy was performed more frequently in the year prior to cancer diagnosis than would be expected in a similar non-cancer population. METHODS: SEER-Medicare linked files were used to identify patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Cancer diagnoses were considered to be "timely" if within 2 months of cholecystectomy or "delayed" if 2-12 months after cholecystectomy. Clinical factors and survival outcomes were compared using chi-square and Kaplan-Meier analyses. RESULTS: Rate of cholecystectomy in the year prior to diagnosis of cancer was 1.9% for the cancer group, compared to .4% in the non-cancer group (OR = 4.7, 95% CI 4.4-5.1). Differences in the cancer vs non-cancer cohorts at the time of cholecystectomy included a higher age (74 vs 70, P < .0001), more males (49.9% vs 41.7%, P < .0001), and more frequent open technique (21.0% vs 9.4%, P < .0001). Acute pancreatitis was nearly twice as common in the cancer cohort (19.1%) vs the non-cancer cohort (10.7%), P < .0001. There were no differences between patients who had a timely diagnosis after cholecystectomy compared to a delayed diagnosis with regard to age, gender, comorbidity index, race, or rural/urban designation. The rates of localized disease and subsequent resection were also similar between the delayed and timely groups. Overall unadjusted survival was no different between timely and delayed diagnoses, P = .96. DISCUSSION: Elderly patients diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma are more likely to have had a recent cholecystectomy compared to those without.

Developing sarcopenia during neoadjuvant therapy is associated with worse survival in esophageal adenocarcinoma patients.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia in cancer patients has been associated with mixed postoperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the development of sarcopenia during the neoadjuvant period is predictive of postoperative mortality in esophageal adenocarcinoma patients. METHODS: We queried a prospective database to retrieve the sarcopenic status of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent cross-sectional imaging of the third lumbar vertebra at diagnosis and within 2 months of undergoing an esophagogastrectomy between 2014 and 2022. RESULTS: Of the 71 patients included in the study, 36 (50.7%) presented with sarcopenia at diagnosis. Of the 35 non-sarcopenic patients, 14 (40%) developed sarcopenia during the neo-adjuvant period. Patients who were not sarcopenic at diagnosis but developed sarcopenia preoperatively had significantly worse overall survival than patients sarcopenic at diagnosis and not sarcopenic preoperatively and patients experiencing no change in sarcopenic status (median 18 vs 47 vs 31 months; P = .02). Diagnostic and preoperative sarcopenic status alone were not significantly associated with overall survival (P = .48 and P = .56, respectively). Although 37 (52.1%) patients died, the cause of death was often not cancer-related (54.1%) and included acute respiratory failure, pneumonia, and cardiac arrest. No significant survival difference was observed when stratified by >10% weight loss (P = .9) or large loss in body mass index (P = .8). CONCLUSION: Developing sarcopenia during the neo-adjuvant period may be associated with worse overall survival in patients requiring esophagogastrectomy.

Combined pre-operative risk score predicts pancreatic leak after pancreatic resection.

BACKGROUND: Post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a major complication following pancreatectomy and is currently difficult to predict pre-operatively. This study aims to validate pre-operative risk factors and develop a novel combined score for the prediction of POPF in the pre-operative setting. METHODS: Data were collected from 2016 to 2021 for radiologic main pancreatic duct diameter (MPD), body mass index (BMI), physical status classified by American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), polypharmacy, mean platelet ratio (MPR), comorbidity-polypharmacy score (CPS), and a novel Combined Pancreatic Leak Prediction Score (CPLPS) (derived from MPD diameter, BMI, and CPS) were obtained from pre-operative data and analyzed for their independent association with POPF occurrence. RESULTS: In total, 166 patients who underwent pancreatectomy with pancreatic leak (Grade A, B, and C) occurring in 51(30.7%) of patients. Pre-operative radiologic MPD diameter < 4 mm (p < 0.001), < 5 mm (p < 0.001), < 6 mm (p = 0.001), BMI ≥ 25 (p = 0.009), and ≥ 30 (p = 0.017) were independently associated with the occurrence of pancreatic leak. CPLPS was also predictive of pancreatic leak following pancreatectomy on univariate (p = 0.005) and multivariate analysis (p = 0.036). CONCLUSION: MPD and BMI were independent risk factors predictive for the development of pancreatic leak. CPLPS, was an independent predictor of pancreatic leak following pancreatectomy and could be used to help guide surgical decision making and patient counseling.

Multi-institutional review of adverse events associated with irreversible electroporation in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Irreversible electroporation is a novel approach for treating locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. However, this ablative technique is not without risk and has the potential to precipitate adverse events. The aim of this study was to delineate risk factors that increase this risk, as well as to elucidate the risk profile associated with irreversible electroporation in the setting of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. METHODS: A review of our prospective multi-institutional database from December 2015 to March 2022 of patients with locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma who underwent irreversible electroporation was analyzed for adverse events. These were then compared with a control population of patients undergoing pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: Adverse events occurred in 51 patients of the 201 patients treated with irreversible electroporation compared with 78 of the 200 patients treated with pancreatectomy. The irreversible electroporation group had a significantly greater incidence of postoperative ascites in stage 3C patients. The most common complications in the irreversible electroporation group were infectious (n = 13), gastrointestinal bleed (n = 11), and ascites (n = 7). Multivariate analysis demonstrated increased risk of severe (grade ≥3) adverse events in the irreversible electroporation cohort who received high dose, neoadjuvant radiation (hazard ratio, 2.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-5.4), irreversible electroporation electrodes bracketing the superior mesenteric artery, superior mesenteric vein, and portal venous vein (hazard ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-3.4), and who had a bile duct stent in place for >6 months (hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-5.6). There were similar rates of 90-day mortality in both groups, irreversible electroporation 2.4% vs pancreatectomy 2.8%. CONCLUSION: This study revealed a 25% rate of adverse events associated with irreversible electroporation in locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, which was significantly less (P = .004) than the 39% rate of adverse events associated with pancreatectomy in early-stage disease. Certain unique adverse events in the irreversible electroporation group have been established and should be understood in the care of these patients.

Interval Sentinel Lymph Nodes With the Use of Routine Lymphoscintigraphy in Extremity Melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: Lymphoscintigraphy (LS) helps identify drainage to interval (epitrochlear or popliteal) lymph node basins for extremity melanomas. This study evaluated how often routine LS evaluation identified an interval sentinel lymph node (SLN) and how often that node was found to have metastasis. METHODS: A single institution, retrospective study identified patients with an extremity melanoma who underwent routine LS and SLN biopsy over a 25-y period. Comparisons of factors associated with the identification of interval node drainage and tumor status were made. RESULTS: In 634 patients reviewed, 5.7% of patients drained to an interval SLN. Of those biopsied, 29.2% were positive for micrometastases. Among patients with biopsies of both the traditional and interval nodal basins, nearly 20% had positive interval nodes with negative SLNs in the traditional basin. Sex, age, thickness, ulceration, and the presence of mitotic figures were not predictive of identifying an interval node on LS, nor for having disease in an interval node. Anatomic location of the primary melanoma was the only identifiable risk factor, as no interval nodes were identified in melanomas of the thigh or upper arm (P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Distal extremity melanomas have a moderate risk of mapping to an interval SLN. Routine LS should be considered in these patients, especially as these may be the only tumor-positive nodes. However, primary extremity melanomas proximal to the epitrochlear or popliteal nodal basins do not map to interval nodes, and improved savings and workflow could be realized by selectively omitting routine LS in such patients.

Patient Selection and Outcomes of Laparoscopic Microwave Ablation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic microwave ablation (MWA) of hepatocellular carcinoma is underutilized and predictors of survival in this setting are not well characterized. METHODS: The prognostic value of clinicopathologic variables was evaluated on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) by univariate and multivariate analyses. The aim of this study was to evaluate a preferred laparoscopic MWA approach in HCC patients that are not candidates for percutaneous ablation and further classify clinicopathologic factors that may predict survival outcomes following operative MWA in the setting of primary HCC. RESULTS: 184 patients with HCC (median age 66, (33-86), 70% male) underwent laparoscopic MWA (N = 162, 88% laparoscopic) compared to 12% undergoing open MWA (N = 22). Median PFS was 29.3 months (0.2-170) and OS was 44.2 months (2.8-170). Ablation success was confirmed in 100% of patients. Ablation recurrence occurred in 3% (6/184), and local/hepatic recurrence occurred in 34%, at a median time of 19 months (9-18). Distant progression was noted in 8%. Median follow up was 34.1 months (6.4-170). Procedure-related complications were recorded in six (9%) patients with one 90-day mortality. Further, >1 lesion, AFP levels ≥ 80 ng/mL, and an "invader" on pre-operative radiology were associated with increased risk of progression (>1 lesion HR 2.92, 95% CI 1.06 -7.99, p = 0.04, AFP ≥ 80 ng/mL HR 4.16, 95% CI 1.71-10.15, p = 0.002, Invader HR 3.16, 95% CI 1.91-9.15, p = 0.002 ) and mortality (>1 lesion HR 3.62, 95% CI 1.21-10.81, p = 0.02], AFP ≥ 80 ng/mL HR 2.87, 95% CI 1.12-7.35, p = 0.01, Invader HR 3.32, 95% CI 1.21-9.81, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative lesion number, AFP ≥ 80 ng/mL, and an aggressive imaging characteristic (Invader) independently predict PFS and OS following laparoscopic operative MWA.

Laparoscopic microwave ablation versus percutaneous microwave ablation of hepatic malignancies: Efficacy and recurrence-free survival outcomes in patients.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic thermal ablation has been found to be effective and equivalent to resection in certain liver histologies. Of the 16,000 annual liver ablations performed in the United States, only 13% (2,080 ablations) are performed laparoscopically. The laparoscopic technique remains underused even with the benefits of improved staging and better access to tumors. The purpose of this study is to compare laparoscopic microwave ablation versus percutaneous microwave ablation in terms of efficacy and recurrence-free survival outcomes in patients with hepatic malignancies. METHODS: A comparative analysis was performed on 275 patients (289 ablation procedures) who underwent laparoscopic microwave ablation or percutaneous microwave ablation between February 2011 and May 2021. Ablation success was confirmed postprocedure and recurrence was monitored at follow-up via contrast-enhanced computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging and/or computed tomography/positron emission tomography. RESULTS: The groups were similar for sex, age, body mass index, location of tumor, size of tumor, and number of tumors. Ablation success was 100% in both groups. Local recurrence was significant (5%: laparoscopic microwave ablation vs 22%: percutaneous microwave ablation, P = .002) and same-lobe recurrence (21%: laparoscopic microwave ablation vs 24%: percutaneous microwave ablation) was lower in the laparoscopic microwave ablation group. Median recurrence-free survival was 15.8 months for the laparoscopic microwave ablation group and 5.6 months for the percutaneous microwave ablation group (P = .0002). Overall, 90-day complications were lower in the laparoscopic microwave ablation group (11%) compared with the percutaneous microwave ablation group (21%) (P = .11). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgical ablation is a critical surgical skill that must be taught in fellowship. Laparoscopic microwave ablation leads to better tumor specific outcomes and oncologic outcomes demonstrating clinical efficacy in the treatment of hepatic malignancies compared with percutaneous microwave ablation.

Continuous manual agitation significantly improves temperature distribution during closed hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: Results of a porcine model.

BACKGROUND: Debate persists regarding the need for shaking during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Studies assessing the thermal behaviors of the perfusate throughout the abdomen during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy are limited. METHODS: A closed hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy technique was performed in an institutional International Animal Care and Use Committee approved porcine model targeting a 41°C outflow temperature. Continuous temperature monitoring was conducted. Abdominal shaking was performed for 60 second intervals and temperatures were allowed to equilibrate without shaking between intervals. Temperature distributions and changes due to shaking were evaluated. These findings were validated against human subjects' data. RESULTS: The experimental procedure was conducted in 2 different animals and with 6 total shaking intervals assessed. Without shaking, temperatures were highly variable ranging between 38.0 to 42.2°C. Shaking the abdomen reduced the mean range of temperatures across all locations observed from 3.9°C to 0.8°C (P < .01). The locations of the most divergent temperatures varied based on perfusion cannula position. The point of minimum temperature heterogeneity was achieved in 28.3 (19.1-37.5) seconds. After shaking stopped, heterogeneity equal to the baseline measurements was seen on average within 25.7 (13.3-38.0) seconds. The outflow catheter differed from the system mean temperature by 1.4°C and from the coldest-reading probe by 2.8°C and outperformed the inflow catheter for all time points. With shaking these were significantly reduced to 0.4°C (P < .01) and 0.6°C (P < .01). The patient data mirrored that of the pig data. CONCLUSION: Shaking significantly reduces temperature variability within the abdomen during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, and significantly improves the ability of the outflow catheter to estimate internal temperatures.

Impact of margin accentuation with intraoperative irreversible electroporation on local recurrence in resected pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rates of local recurrence and margin positivity in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer after pancreatectomy with or without irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation. METHODS: Prospective data for preoperative stages IIB (borderline resectable) and III were evaluated, with 75 patients undergoing pancreatectomy with irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation compared to 71 patients who underwent pancreatectomy alone from March 2010 to November 2020. RESULTS: Both irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation and pancreatectomy-alone groups were similar for body mass index, Charleston comorbidity index, and sex. The irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation group had significantly greater preoperative stage III (irreversible electroporation 83% vs pancreatectomy alone 51%; P = .0001), with similar tumor location (head 64% vs 72%) and tumor size (median 2.9 vs 2.8). Neoadjuvant/induction chemotherapy and prior radiation therapy was similar in both groups (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 89% vs 72%). Surgical therapy included a greater percentage of pancreaticoduodenectomy in the pancreatectomy-alone group. Despite greater stage and greater percentage of margin positivity (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 27% vs 20%; P = not significant), rates of local recurrence were similar. The mean disease-free interval for local recurrence from time of diagnosis was similar (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 15.8 vs 16.5 pancreatectomy alone; P = not significant) and time of treatment (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 9.4 vs 10.5 months; P = not significant). Overall survival was improved with the irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation group, with a mean of 34.2 months versus 27.9 months in the pancreatectomy-alone group. CONCLUSION: Irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation is safe and effective in stages IIB and III pancreatic adenocarcinomas that are technically resectable. Despite higher margin positivity rates, the time to local recurrence and the effects of recurrence were the same in the pancreatectomy-alone group.

Using machine learning to preoperatively stratify prognosis among patients with gallbladder cancer: a multi-institutional analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is an aggressive malignancy associated with a high risk of recurrence and mortality. We used a machine-based learning approach to stratify patients into distinct prognostic groups using preperative variables. METHODS: Patients undergoing curative-intent resection of GBC were identified using a multi-institutional database. A classification and regression tree (CART) was used to stratify patients relative to overall survival (OS) based on preoperative clinical factors. RESULTS: CART analysis identified tumor size, biliary drainage, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) levels, and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as the factors most strongly associated with OS. Machine learning cohorted patients into four prognostic groups: Group 1 (n = 109): NLR ≤1.5, CA19-9 ≤20, no drainage, tumor size <5.0 cm; Group 2 (n = 88): NLR >1.5, CA19-9 ≤20, no drainage, tumor size <5.0 cm; Group 3 (n = 46): CA19-9 >20, no drainage, tumor size <5.0 cm; Group 4 (n = 77): tumor size <5.0 cm with drainage OR tumor size ≥5.0 cm. Median OS decreased incrementally with CART group designation (59.5, 27.6, 20.6, and 12.1 months; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: A machine-based model was able to stratify GBC patients into four distinct prognostic groups based only on preoperative characteristics. Characterizing patient prognosis with machine learning tools may help physicians provide more patient-centered care.

Drug-Eluting Bead, Irinotecan Therapy of Unresectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma (DELTIC) with Concomitant Systemic Gemcitabine and Cisplatin.

BACKGROUND: Unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) carries a poor prognosis, and currently there are moderately established chemotherapeutic [gemcitabine/cisplatin (Gem/Cis)] treatments to prolong survival. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of irinotecan drug-eluting beads (DEBIRI) therapy by transarterial infusion in combination with systemic therapy in unresectable ICC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized phase II study (Clin Trials: NCT01648023-DELTIC trial) of patients with ICC randomly assigned to Gem/Cis with DEBIRI or Gem/Cis alone. The primary endpoint was response rate. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population comprised 48 patients: 24 treated with Gem/Cis and DEBIRI and 22 with Gem/Cis alone (2 screen failures). The two groups were similar with respect to the extent of liver involvement (35% versus 38%) and presence of extrahepatic disease (29% versus 14%, p = 0.12). Median numbers of chemotherapy cycles were similar (6 versus 6), as were rates of grade 3/4 adverse events (34% for the Gem/Cis-DEBIRI group versus 36% for the Gem/Cis group). The overall response rate was significantly greater in the Gem/Cis-DEBIRI arm versus the Gem/Cis arm at 2 (p < 0.04), 4 (p < 0.03), and 6 months (p < 0.05). There was significantly more downsizing to resection/ablation in the Gem/Cis-DEBIRI arm versus the Gem/Cis arm (25% versus 8%, p < 005), and there was improved median progression-free survival [31.9 (95% CI 8.5-75.3) months versus 10.1 (95% CI 5.3-13.5) months, p = 0.028] and improved overall survival [33.7 (95% CI 13.5-54.5) months versus 12.6 (95% CI 8.7-33.4) months, p = 0.048]. CONCLUSION: Combination Gem/Cis with DEBIRI is safe, and leads to significant improvement in downsizing to resection, improved progression-free survival, and overall survival.

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a reliable contraindication to resection in the modern era?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to present radiologically designated LAPC found to be resectable upon surgical exploration and evaluate the outcomes of such resections. METHODS: Sequential LAPC patients between 2013 and 2019 were staged and underwent resection were included in the analysis of both perioperative and long-term outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients with radiologically-designated LAPC underwent surgical resection after chemotherapy with a median follow-up of 31.7 m,75% underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. The margin positivity and local recurrence rates were 21.4% and 35.7%, respectively. When compared to the 30 BRPC controls, the LAPC group had a higher rates of an arterial resection (11vs.1; p = 0.002), but the groups were similar with regard to all other preoperative and intraoperative variables (p < 0.05). Perioperative morbidity rates were similar (25.9%vs21.4%; p = 0.53). The LAPC and BRPC groups were also equivalent with respect to median recurrence-free survival (9.0mo; 95%CI 6.3, 11.7vs.8.3mo; 95%CI 5.4, 11.2) and median overall survival (19.9mo; 95%CI 17.0, 22.7 vs. 19.9mo; 95%CI 14.8, 25.1), respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite a radiologic designation of locally advanced pancreatic cancer, certain subtypes of LAPC warrant surgical exploration provided the operative surgeon is prepared for major arterial and/or venous resection. Pancreatectomy in these patients has acceptable morbidity and oncologic outcomes, similar to patients who are radiologically borderline resectable.

Final Analysis of a Phase 2 Trial of Once Weekly Hypofractionated Whole Breast Irradiation for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: We hypothesize that 5-fraction once weekly hypofractionated (WH) whole breast irradiation (WBI) would be safe and effective after breast-conserving surgery for medically underserved patients with breast cancer. We report the protocol-specified primary endpoint of in-breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) at 5 years. METHODS AND MATERIALS: After provided informed consent, patients were treated with WH-WBI after breast-conserving surgery were followed prospectively on an institutional review board-approved protocol. Women included in this study had stage 0-II breast cancer treated with negative surgical margins and met prespecified criteria for being underserved. WH-WBI was 28.5 or 30 Gy delivered to the whole breast with no elective coverage of lymph nodes. The primary endpoint was IBTR at 5 years. Secondary endpoints were distant disease-free survival, recurrence-free survival, overall survival, adverse events, and cosmesis. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-eight patients received WH-WBI on protocol from 2010 to 2015. Median follow-up was 5.5 years (range, 0.2-10.0 years). Stage distribution was 22% ductal carcinoma in situ, 68% invasive pN0, and 10% invasive pN1. Twenty-eight percent of patients had grade 3 tumors, 10% were estrogen receptor negative, and 24% required adjuvant chemotherapy. There were 6 IBTR events. The 5-, 7-, and 10-year risks of IBTR for all patients were 2.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-6.34), 4.7% (95% CI, 1.4-11.0) and 7.2% (95% CI, 2.4-15.8), respectively. The 5-, 7-, and 10-year rates of distant disease-free survival were 96.4%, 96.4%, and 86.4%; the recurrence-free survival rates were 95.8%, 93.6%, and 80.7%; and the overall survival rates were 96.7%, 88.6%, and 76.7%, respectively. Improvement in IBTR-free time was seen in ductal carcinoma in situ, lobular histology, low-grade tumors, T1 stage, Her2-negative tumors, and receipt of a radiation boost to the lumpectomy bed. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative WH-WBI has favorable disease-specific outcomes that are comparable to those seen with conventional and moderately hypofractionated radiation techniques. WH-WBI could improve access to care for underserved patients with stage 0-II breast cancer.

Preventing Futile Liver Resection: A Risk-Based Approach to Surgical Selection in Major Hepatectomy for Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Early recurrence following liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer generally portends poor survival. We sought to identify factors associated with early disease recurrence after major hepatectomy for metastatic colorectal cancer in order to improve patient selection and prevent futile hepatectomy. METHODS: Sequential major (four or more segments) liver resections performed for metastatic colorectal cancer between 1995 and 2019 were selected from our prospectively maintained database. Univariate analyses, multivariable regression modelling, and survival analyses were used to identify predictors of futile resection (recurrence within 6 months of hepatectomy). RESULTS: Of 259 patients included, the median age was 61.3 years (interquartile range [IQR] 15.3) and the median number of liver tumors was 3.0 (IQR 2.0); 78.0% of patients received prehepatectomy chemotherapy. Surgeries were right (56.4%), left (19.3%), and extended hepatectomy (24.3%). Futile resection occurred in 26 (12.6%) patients. Margin positivity was similar in the futile resection group compared with the non-futile resection group (11.5% vs. 11.4%). Extrahepatic disease that disappeared with chemotherapy was present in 23.1% of patients with a futile resection and 7.2% of those without (p = 0.019). After multivariable regression, the factors predictive of futile resection were extrahepatic disease (odds ratio [OR] 5.6; p = 0.004), more than three liver lesions (OR 4.9; p = 0.001), and extended hepatectomy (OR 2.6; p = 0.038). Notably, 70.8% of futile recurrences occurred within the liver remnant and 20.8% were pulmonary metastases. Overall survival was 11.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.1-16.2) for the futile resection cohort versus 45.6 (95% CI 39.1-52.1) for non-futile hepatectomies (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Futile hepatic resection can be predicted based on preoperative factors and carries a poor prognosis. Improved risk stratification for futility will aid in patient selection and treatment discussions.

Hepatopancreatobiliary readmission score out performs administrative LACE+ index as a predictive tool of readmission.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the LACE + readmission index to a novel hepatopancreatobiliary readmission risk score (HRRS) in predicting post-operative hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) cancer patient readmissions. METHODS: A retrospective review of 104 postoperative HPB cancer patients from January 2017 to July of 2019 was performed. Univariable and multivariable analyses were utilized. RESULTS: The LACE + index did not predict 30-day (OR 1.01, 95% CI, 0.97-1.05, p = 0.81, c-statistic = 0.52) or 90-day (OR 1.02, 95% CI, 0.98-1.05, p = 0.43) readmission. Patients readmitted within 30 days had significantly increased HRRS scores compared to those who were not (0 vs 34, p < 0.001). A single unit increase in HRRS corresponded to a 6.5% increased risk of readmission; (OR 1.065, 95% CI, 1.038-1.094, p < 0.0001). HRRS independently predicted 30-day (OR 1.07, 95% CI, 1.04-1.11, p < 0.0001) and 90-day postoperative readmission (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.08, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: HRRS better predicts postoperative readmissions for HPB surgical patients compared to LACE+. Accurate assessment of postoperative readmission must include readmission scores focused on clinically relevant perioperative parameters.