Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases:a population-based study

Introduction: In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, and outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Methods: This population-based study included all patients who underwent minor liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2021. Factors associated with MILR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to compare outcomes between minor MILR and minor open liver resections. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan–Meier analysis on patients operated until 2018. Results: Of 4,488 patients included, 1,695 (37.8%) underwent MILR. PSM resulted in 1,338 patients in each group. Implementation of MILR increased to 51.2% in 2021. Factors associated with not performing MILR included treatment with preoperative chemotherapy (aOR 0.61 CI:0.50–0.75, p &lt; 0.001), treatment in a tertiary referral hospital (aOR 0.57 CI:0.50–0.67, p &lt; 0.001), and larger diameter and number of CRLM. Significant hospital variation was observed in use of MILR (7.5% to 93.0%). After case-mix correction, six hospitals performed fewer, and six hospitals performed more MILRs than expected. In the PSM cohort, MILR was associated with a decrease in blood loss (aOR 0.99 CI:0.99–0.99, p &lt; 0.01), cardiac complications (aOR 0.29, CI:0.10–0.70, p = 0.009), IC admissions (aOR 0.66, CI:0.50–0.89, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (aOR CI:0.94–0.99, p &lt; 0.01). Five-year OS rates for MILR and OLR were 53.7% versus 48.6%, p = 0.21. Conclusion: Although uptake of MILR is increasing in the Netherlands, significant hospital variation remains. MILR benefits short-term outcomes, while overall survival is comparable to open liver surgery. Graphical abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.].</p

A nationwide assessment of hepatocellular adenoma resection:Indications and pathological discordance

Hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs) are benign liver tumors associated with bleeding or malignant transformation. Data on the indication for surgery are scarce. We analyzed indications and outcome of patients operated for HCAs 50 mm (52%), suspicion of (pre)malignancy (28%), and (previous) bleeding (5.1%). No difference was observed in HCA-subtype distribution between small and large tumors. Ninety-six (43%) patients had a postoperative change in diagnosis. Independent risk factors for change in diagnosis were tumor size <50 mm (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.4; p < 0.01), male sex (aOR, 3.7; p = 0.03), and lack of hepatobiliary contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) (aOR, 1.8; p = 0.04). Resection for small (suspected) HCAs was mainly indicated by suspicion of (pre)malignancy, whereas for large (suspected) HCAs, tumor size was the most prevalent indication. Male sex, tumor size <50 mm, and lack of hepatobiliary CE-MRI were independent risk factors for postoperative change in tumor diagnosis

Trends and overall survival after combined liver resection and thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases:a nationwide population-based propensity score-matched study

Background: In colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) patients, combination of liver resection and ablation permit a more parenchymal-sparing approach. This study assessed trends in use of combined resection and ablation, outcomes, and overall survival (OS). Methods: This population-based study included all CRLM patients who underwent liver resection between 2014 and 2022. To assess OS, data was linked to two databases containing date of death for patients treated between 2014 and 2018. Hospital variation in the use of combined minor liver resection and ablation versus major liver resection alone in patients with 2–3 CRLM and ≤3 cm was assessed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to evaluate outcomes. Results: This study included 3593 patients, of whom 1336 (37.2%) underwent combined resection and ablation. Combined resection increased from 31.7% in 2014 to 47.9% in 2022. Significant hospital variation (range 5.9–53.8%) was observed in the use of combined minor liver resection and ablation. PSM resulted in 1005 patients in each group. Major morbidity was not different (11.6% vs. 5%, P = 1.00). Liver failure occurred less often after combined resection and ablation (1.9% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.017). Five-year OS rates were not different (39.3% vs. 33.9%, P = 0.145). Conclusion: Combined resection and ablation should be available and considered as an alternative to resection alone in any patient with multiple metastases.</p

Prognostic value of total tumor volume in patients with colorectal liver metastases:A secondary analysis of the randomized CAIRO5 trial with external cohort validation

Background:This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of total tumor volume (TTV) for early recurrence (within 6 months) and overall survival (OS) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), treated with induction systemic therapy followed by complete local treatment.Methods: Patients with initially unresectable CRLM from the multicenter randomized phase 3 CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) who received induction systemic therapy followed by local treatment were included. Baseline TTV and change in TTV as response to systemic therapy were calculated using the CT scan before and the first after systemic treatment, and were assessed for their added prognostic value. The findings were validated in an external cohort of patients treated at a tertiary center. Results:In total, 215 CAIRO5 patients were included. Baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV were significantly associated with early recurrence (P = 0.005 and P = 0.040, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P = 0.024 and P = 0.006, respectively), whereas RECIST1.1 was not prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.88) and OS (P = 0.35). In the validation cohort (n = 85), baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV remained prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.041 and P = 0.021, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P &lt; 0.0001 and P = 0.012, respectively), and showed added prognostic value over conventional clinicopathological variables (increase C-statistic, 0.06; 95 % CI, 0.02 to 0.14; P = 0.008). Conclusion: Total tumor volume is strongly prognostic for early recurrence and OS in patients who underwent complete local treatment of initially unresectable CRLM, both in the CAIRO5 trial and the validation cohort. In contrast, RECIST1.1 did not show prognostic value for neither early recurrence nor OS.</p

Pregnant patient with acute abdominal pain and previous bariatric surgery

Pregnant women who previously had bariatric surgery may develop acute abdominal pain during pregnancy. Two patients, 38-year-old twin primigravida (gestational age of 24+6 weeks) and a 26-year-old woman (gestational age of 24+0 weeks), both of whom had laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery previously, developed abdominal pain. The patients both had diffuse abdominal pain in combination with normal blood tests and imaging. Patient B had undergone laparoscopy at another centre after 5 weeks of gestation for internal herniation. After referral to our multidisciplinary bariatric-obstetric-neonatal (MD-BON) team, diagnostic laparoscopy was advised as internal herniation was deemed possible. In both patients, internal herniation was indeed found in Petersen's space and jejunal mesenteric defect, which was closed using laparoscopic surgery. Both women delivered healthy offspring afterwards. The presence of an MD-BON team allows for an increased awareness of potential long-term complications associated with earlier bariatric surgery in pregnancy

Abdominal pain in a pregnant woman who had gastric reduction surgery:Risks associated with a history of bariatric surgery

Een nadeel van bariatrische chirurgie is dat de ingreep een risico geeft op complicaties op de lange termijn. Tijdens de zwangerschap kunnen deze complicaties leiden tot ernstige foetale en maternale morbiditeit en mortaliteit.1 In deze klinische les beschrijven we aan de hand van twee casussen het belang van multidisciplinaire expertise bij een zwangere patiënte met buikpijn door complicaties van eerdere bariatrische chirurgie.Patiënt A, een 38-jarige primigravida die 3 jaar eerder een laparoscopische ‘Roux-en-Y gastric bypass’ (RYGB) had ondergaan, was elders opgenomen met postprandiale buikpijn bij een tweelingzwangerschap met een amenorroeduur van 24/6 weken. Patiënte was normotensief, had een licht pijnlijke, niet-geprikkelde buik en een niet-afwijkend bloedbeeld. Het ongeboren kind was in goede conditie en er waren geen tekenen van dreigende vroeggeboorte. Differentiaaldiagnostisch werd gedacht aan obstipatie, galsteenlijden en inwendige herniatie van de dunne darm. Er werd een echo abdomen gemaakt waarop geen aanwijzingen waren voor galstenen of stuwing van de galwegen. Tevens ...In Nederland ondergaan jaarlijks ongeveer 6500 vrouwen in de vruchtbare levensfase een bariatrische operatie, waarbij de ‘Roux-en-Y gastric bypass’ (RYGB) de meest uitgevoerde operatie is. Gewichtsverlies na bariatrische chirurgie leidt tot een reductie van cardiovasculaire risico’s, verbeterde fertiliteit en vermindering van obesitas-gerelateerde complicaties tijdens de zwangerschap. Toch zijn er ook nadelen, zoals blijkt uit deze klinische les

Buikpijn bij een zwangere die een maagverkleining heeft gehad: de risico's van bariatrische chirurgie op de lange termijn

Een nadeel van bariatrische chirurgie is dat de ingreep een risico geeft op complicaties op de lange termijn. Tijdens de zwangerschap kunnen deze complicaties leiden tot ernstige foetale en maternale morbiditeit en mortaliteit.1 In deze klinische les beschrijven we aan de hand van twee casussen het belang van multidisciplinaire expertise bij een zwangere patiënte met buikpijn door complicaties van eerdere bariatrische chirurgie. Patiënt A, een 38-jarige primigravida die 3 jaar eerder een laparoscopische ‘Roux-en-Y gastric bypass’ (RYGB) had ondergaan, was elders opgenomen met postprandiale buikpijn bij een tweelingzwangerschap met een amenorroeduur van 24/6 weken. Patiënte was normotensief, had een licht pijnlijke, niet-geprikkelde buik en een niet-afwijkend bloedbeeld. Het ongeboren kind was in goede conditie en er waren geen tekenen van dreigende vroeggeboorte. Differentiaaldiagnostisch werd gedacht aan obstipatie, galsteenlijden en inwendige herniatie van de dunne darm. Er werd een echo abdomen gemaakt waarop geen aanwijzingen waren voor galstenen of stuwing van de galwegen. Tevens ..

Personalised perioperative care by e-health after intermediate-grade abdominal surgery: a multicentre, single-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Item does not contain fulltex

The impact of a multi-hospital network on the inequality in odds of receiving resection or ablation for synchronous colorectal liver metastases

Background: This study investigates whether inequalities in the utilization of resection and/or ablation for synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM) between patients diagnosed in expert and non-expert hospitals changed since a multi-hospital network started. Materials and methods: Patients diagnosed with SCLM between 2009 and 2020 were included. The likelihood of receiving ablation and/or resection was analyzed in the prenetwork (2009–2012), startup (2013–2016), and matured-network (2017–2020) periods. Results: Nationwide, 13.981patients were diagnosed between 2009 and 2020, of whom 1.624 were diagnosed in the network. Of patients diagnosed in the network’s expert hospitals, 36.7% received ablation and/or resection versus 28.3% in nonexpert hospitals (p &lt; 0.01). The odds ratio (OR) of receiving ablation and/or resection for patients diagnosed in expert versus nonexpert hospitals increased from 1.38 (p = 0.581, pre-network), to 1.66 (p = 0.108, startup), to 2.48 (p = 0.090, matured-network). Nationwide, the same trend occurred (respectively OR 1.41, p = 0.011; OR 2.23, p &lt; 0.001; OR 3.20, p &lt; 0.001). Conclusions: Patients diagnosed in expert hospitals were more likely to receive ablation and/or resection for SCLM than patients diagnosed in non-expert hospitals. This difference increased over time despite the startup of a multi-hospital network. Establishing a multi-hospital network did not have an effect on reducing the existing unequal odds of receiving specialized treatment. Synopsis: Specialized oncology treatments are increasingly provided through multi-hospital networks. However, scant empirical evidence on the effectiveness of these networks exists. This study analyzes whether a regional multi-hospital network was able to improve equal access to specialized oncology treatments