Improved outcomes for hepatic trauma in England and Wales over a decade of trauma and hepatobiliary surgery centralisation

Background: Over the last decade trauma services have undergone a reconfiguration in England and Wales. The objective is to describe the epidemiology, management and outcomes for liver trauma over this period and examine factors predicting survival. Methods: Patients sustaining hepatic trauma were identified using the Trauma Audit and Research Network database. Demographics, management and outcomes were assessed between January 2005 and December 2014 and analysed over five, 2-year study periods. Independent predictor variables for the outcome of liver trauma were analysed using multiple logistic regression. Results: 4368 Patients sustained hepatic trauma (with known outcome) between January 2005 and December 2014. Median age was 34 years (interquartile range 23–49). 81% were due to blunt and 19% to penetrating trauma. Road traffic collisions were the main mechanism of injury (58.2%). 241 patients (5.5%) underwent liver-specific surgery. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 16.4%. Improvements were seen in early consultant input, frequency and timing of computed tomography (CT) scanning, use of tranexamic acid and 30-day mortality over the five time periods. Being treated in a unit with an on-site HPB service increased the odds of survival (odds ratio 3.5, 95% confidence intervals 2.7–4.5). Conclusions: Our study has shown that being treated in a unit with an on-site HPB service increased the odds of survival. Further evaluation of the benefits of trauma and HPB surgery centralisation is warranted

Surgical therapy of celiac axis and superior mesenteric artery syndrome

INTRODUCTION Compression syndromes of the celiac artery (CAS) or superior mesenteric artery (SMAS) are rare conditions that are difficult to diagnose; optimal treatment remains complex, and symptoms often persist after surgery. We aim to review the literature on surgical treatment and postoperative outcome in CAS and SMAS syndrome. METHODS A systematic literature review of medical literature databases on the surgical treatment of CAS and SMAS syndrome was performed from 2000 to 2022. Articles were included according to PROSPERO guidelines. The primary endpoint was the failure-to-treat rate, defined as persistence of symptoms at first follow-up. RESULTS Twenty-three studies on CAS (n = 548) and 11 on SMAS (n = 168) undergoing surgery were included. Failure-to-treat rate was 28% for CAS and 21% for SMAS. Intraoperative blood loss was 95 ml (0-217) and 31 ml (21-50), respectively, and conversion rate was 4% in CAS patients and 0% for SMAS. Major postoperative morbidity was 2% for each group, and mortality was described in 0% of CAS and 0.4% of SMAS patients. Median length of stay was 3 days (1-12) for CAS and 5 days (1-10) for SMAS patients. Consequently, 47% of CAS and 5% of SMAS patients underwent subsequent interventions for persisting symptoms. CONCLUSION Failure of surgical treatment was observed in up to every forth patient with a high rate of subsequent interventions. A thorough preoperative work-up with a careful patient selection is of paramount importance. Nevertheless, the surgical procedure was associated with a beneficial risk profile and can be performed minimally invasive

Full robotic versus open ALPPS: a bi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes

Background: In primarily unresectable liver tumors, ALPPS (Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy) may offer curative two-stage hepatectomy trough a fast and extensive hypertrophy. However, concerns have been raised about the invasiveness of the procedure. Full robotic ALPPS has the potential to reduce the postoperative morbidity trough a less invasive access. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of open and full robotic ALPPS. Methods: The bicentric study included open ALPPS cases from the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland and robotic ALPPS cases from the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy from 01/2015 to 07/2022. Main outcomes were intraoperative parameters and overall complications. Results: Open and full robotic ALPPS were performed in 36 and 7 cases. Robotic ALPPS was associated with less blood loss after both stages (418 ± 237 ml vs. 319 ± 197 ml; P = 0.04 and 631 ± 354 ml vs. 258 ± 53 ml; P = 0.01) as well as a higher rate of interstage discharge (86% vs. 37%; P = 0.02). OT was longer with robotic ALPPS after both stages (371 ± 70 min vs. 449 ± 81 min; P = 0.01 and 282 ± 87 min vs. 373 ± 90 min; P = 0.02). After ALPPS stage 2, there was no difference for overall complications (86% vs. 86%; P = 1.00) and major complications (43% vs. 39%; P = 0.86). The total length of hospital stay was similar (23 ± 17 days vs. 26 ± 13; P = 0.56). Conclusion: Robotic ALPPS was safely implemented and showed potential for improved perioperative outcomes compared to open ALPPS in an experienced robotic center. The robotic approach might bring the perioperative risk profile of ALPPS closer to interventional techniques of portal vein embolization/liver venous deprivation

Performance validation of the ALPPS risk model

Background: Based on the International ALPPS registry, we have recently proposed two easily applicable risk models (pre-stage1 and 2) for predicting 90-day mortality in ALPPS but a validation of both models has not been performed yet. Methods: The validation cohort (VC) was composed of subsequent cases of the ALPPS registry and cases of centers outside the ALPPS registry. Results: The VC was composed of a total of 258 patients including 70 patients outside the ALPPS registry with 32 cases of early mortalities (12%). Development cohort (DC) and VC were comparable in terms of patient and surgery characteristics. The VC validated both models with an acceptable prediction for the pre-stage 1 (c-statistic 0.64, P = 0.009 vs. 0.77, P < 0.001) and a good prediction for the pre-stage 2 model (c-statistic 0.77, P < 0.001 vs. 0.85, P < 0.001) as compared to the DC. Overall model performance measured by Brier score was comparable between VC and DC for the pre-stage 1 (0.089 vs. 0.081) and pre-stage 2 model (0.079 vs. 0087). Conclusion: The ALPPS risk score is a fully validated model to estimate the individual risk of patients undergoing ALPPS and to assist clinical decision making to avoid procedure-related early mortality after ALPPS

Diagnostic performance of contrast enhanced CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT in suspicious recurrence of biliary tract cancer after curative resection

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Because of the late clinical presentation of biliary tract cancer (BTC), only 10% of patients are eligible for curative surgery. Even among those patients who have undergone curative surgery, most patients develop recurrent cancer. This study is to determine the clinical role of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT during post-operative surveillance of suspected recurrent BTC based on symptoms, laboratory findings and contrast-enhanced CT (ceCT) findings.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We consecutively enrolled 50 patients with BTC who underwent curative surgery. An ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT was obtained for assessment of recurrence based on clinical suspicion during post-operative surveillance. The final confirmation of recurrence was determined pathologically or clinically. When a pathologic confirmation was impossible or inconclusive, a clinical confirmation was used by radiologic correlation with subsequent follow-up ceCT at a minimum of 3-month intervals. Diagnostic efficacy was evaluated by comparing the results of ceCT and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT with the final diagnosis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among the 50 patients, 34(68%) were confirmed to have a recurrence. PET/CT showed higher sensitivity (88% <it>vs</it>. 76%, <it>p </it>= 0.16) and accuracy (82% <it>vs</it>. 66%, <it>p </it>= 0.11) for recurrence compared to ceCT, even though the difference was not significant. The positive (86% <it>vs</it>. 74%, <it>p </it>= 0.72) and negative predictive values for recurrence (73% <it>vs</it>. 47%, <it>p </it>= 0.55) were not significantly different between PET/CT and ceCT. However, an additional PET/CT on ceCT significantly improved the sensitivity than did a ceCT alone (94% [32/34] for PET/CT on ceCT <it>vs</it>. 76% [26/34] for ceCT alone, <it>p </it>= 0.03) without increasing the specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT alone is not more sensitive or specific than ceCT in the detection of recurrent BTC after curative surgery. These results do not reach statistical significance, probably due to the low number of patients. However, an additional ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT on ceCT significantly improves the sensitivity of detecting recurrences.</p

Outcomes of resection for colorectal cancer hepatic metastases stratified by evolving eras of treatment

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background and purpose</p> <p>The outcomes and management of colorectal cancer (CRC) hepatic metastasis have undergone many evolutionary changes. In this study, we aimed to analyze the outcomes of patients with CRC hepatic metastasis in terms of the era of treatment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a retrospective review of 279 patients who underwent liver resection (LR) for CRC hepatic metastases. The prognoses of patients treated pre-2003 (era 1) and post-2003 (era 2) were examined.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the patients included in the study, 210 (75.3%) had CRC recurrence after LR. There was a significant difference in the ratio of CRC recurrence between the 2 eras (82.0% in era 1 <it>vs</it>. 69.5% in era 2; <it>p </it>= 0.008). Analysis of recurrence-free and overall survival rates also showed that the patient outcome was significantly better in the post-2003 era than in the pre-2003 era. Further analysis showed that a significantly higher percentage of patients in era 2 had received modern chemotherapeutic regimens including irinotecan and oxaliplatin, while patients in era 1 were mainly administered fluorouracil and leucovorin for adjuvant chemotherapy. Among patients with CRC recurrence, a significant ratio of those in era 2 underwent surgical resection for recurrent lesions, and these patients had a better survival curve than did patients without resection (34.1% <it>vs</it>. 2.2% for 5-year survival; <it>p </it>< 0.0001).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The incidence of CRC recurrence after LR for hepatic metastasis remains very high. However, the management and outcomes of patients with CRC hepatic metastasis have greatly improved with time, suggesting that the current use of aggressive multimodality treatments including surgical resection combined with modern chemotherapeutic regimens effectively prolongs the life expectancy of these patients.</p

Laparoscopic versus open left lateral segmentectomy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Laparoscopic liver surgery is becoming increasingly common. This cohort study was designed to directly compare perioperative outcomes of the left lateral segmentectomy via laparoscopic and open approach.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Between 2002 and 2006 43 left lateral segmentectomies were performed at King's College Hospital. Those excluded from analysis included previous liver resections, polycystic liver disease, liver cirrhosis and synchronous operations. Of 20 patients analysed, laparoscopic (n = 10) were compared with open left lateral segmentectomy (n = 10). Both groups had similar patient characteristics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Morbidity rates were similar with no wound or chest infection in either group. The conversion rate was 10% (1/10). There was no difference in operating time between the groups (median time 220 minutes versus 179 minutes, p = 0.315). Surgical margins for all lesions were clear. Less postoperative opiate analgesics were required in the laparoscopic group (median 2 days versus 5 days, p = 0.005). The median postoperative in-hospital stay was less in the laparoscopic group (6 days vs 9 days, p = 0.005). There was no mortality.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Laparoscopic left lateral segmentectomy is safe and feasible. Laparoscopic patients may benefit from requiring less postoperative opiate analgesia and a shorter post-operative in-hospital stay.</p

Controversy Over Liver Transplantation or Resection for Neuroendocrine Liver Metastasis: Tumor Biology Cuts the Deal

Background: In patients with neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NELM), liver transplantation (LT) is an alternative to liver resection (LR), although the choice of therapy remains controversial. In this multicenter study, we aim to provide novel insight in this dispute. Methods: Following a systematic literature search, 15 large international centers were contacted to provide comprehensive data on their patients after LR or LT for NELM. Survival analyses were performed with the Kaplan-Meier method, while multivariable Cox regression served to identify factors influencing survival after either transplantation or resection. Inverse probability weighting and propensity score matching was used for analyses with balanced and equalized baseline characteristics. Results: Overall, 455 patients were analyzed, including 230 after LR and 225 after LT, with a median follow-up of 97 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 85-110 months]. Multivariable analysis revealed G3 grading as a negative prognostic factor for LR [hazard ratio (HR)=2.22, 95% CI: 1.04-4.77, P=0.040], while G2 grading (HR=2.52, 95% CI: 1.15-5.52, P=0.021) and LT outside Milan criteria (HR=2.40, 95% CI: 1.16-4.92, P=0.018) were negative prognostic factors in transplanted patients. Inverse probability-weighted multivariate analyses revealed a distinct survival benefit after LT. Matched patients presented a median overall survival (OS) of 197 months (95% CI: 143-not reached) and a 73% 5-year OS after LT, and 119 months (95% CI: 74-133 months) and a 52.8% 5-year OS after LR (HR=0.59, 95% CI: 0.3-0.9, P=0.022). However, the survival benefit after LT was lost if patients were transplanted outside Milan criteria. Conclusions: This multicentric study in patients with NELM demonstrates a survival benefit of LT over LR. This benefit depends on adherence to selection criteria, in particular low-grade tumor biology and Milan criteria, and must be balanced against potential risks of LT

IVC CLAMP: infrahepatic inferior vena cava clamping during hepatectomy - a randomised controlled trial in an interdisciplinary setting

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Intraoperative haemorrhage is a known predictor for perioperative outcome of patients undergoing hepatic resection. While anaesthesiological lowering of central venous pressure (CVP) by fluid restriction is known to reduce bleeding during transection of the hepatic parenchyma its potential side effects remain poorly investigated. In theory it may have negative effects on kidney function and tissue perfusion and bears the risk to result in severe haemodynamic instability in case of profound intraoperative blood loss. The present randomised controlled trial evaluates efficacy and safety of infrahepatic inferior vena cava (IVC) clamping as an alternative surgical technique to reduce CVP during hepatic resection.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The proposed IVC CLAMP trial is a single-centre randomised controlled trial with a two-group parallel design. Patients and outcome-assessors are blinded for the treatment intervention. Patients undergoing elective hepatic resection due to any reason are enrolled in IVC CLAMP. All patients admitted to the Department of General-, Visceral-, and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg for elective hepatic resection are consecutively screened for eligibility and written informed consent is obtained on the day before surgery. The primary objective of this trial is to assess and compare the amount of blood loss during hepatic resection in patients receiving surgical CVP reduction by clamping of the IVC as compared to anaesthesiological CVP without infrahepatic IVC clamping reduction. In addition to blood loss a set of general as well as surgical variables are analysed.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This is a randomised controlled patient and observer blinded two-group parallel trial designed to assess efficacy and safety of infrahepatic IVC clamping during elective hepatectomy.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials NCT00732979</p