An APRI+ALBI Based Multivariable Model as Preoperative Predictor for Posthepatectomy Liver Failure.

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND Clinically significant posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF B+C) remains the main cause of mortality after major hepatic resection. This study aimed to establish an APRI+ALBI, aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio (APRI) combined with albumin-bilirubin grade (ALBI), based multivariable model (MVM) to predict PHLF and compare its performance to indocyanine green clearance (ICG-R15 or ICG-PDR) and albumin-ICG evaluation (ALICE). METHODS 12,056 patients from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database were used to generate a MVM to predict PHLF B+C. The model was determined using stepwise backwards elimination. Performance of the model was tested using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and validated in an international cohort of 2,525 patients. In 620 patients, the APRI+ALBI MVM, trained in the NSQIP cohort, was compared with MVM's based on other liver function tests (ICG clearance, ALICE) by comparing the areas under the curve (AUC). RESULTS A MVM including APRI+ALBI, age, sex, tumor type and extent of resection was found to predict PHLF B+C with an AUC of 0.77, with comparable performance in the validation cohort (AUC 0.74). In direct comparison with other MVM's based on more expensive and time-consuming liver function tests (ICG clearance, ALICE), the APRI+ALBI MVM demonstrated equal predictive potential for PHLF B+C. A smartphone application for calculation of the APRI+ALBI MVM was designed. CONCLUSION Risk assessment via the APRI+ALBI MVM for PHLF B+C increases preoperative predictive accuracy and represents an universally available and cost-effective risk assessment prior to hepatectomy, facilitated by a freely available smartphone app

Innovation for the Sake of Innovation? How Does Robotic Hepatectomy Compare to Laparoscopic or Open Resection for HCC—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Robot-assisted hepatectomy is a novel approach to treat liver tumors. HCC is on the rise as the cause of cancer and mortality and is often preceded by cirrhosis. Robot-assisted hepatectomy has been suggested to offer benefits to cirrhotic patients. We aimed to evaluate current evidence for robot-assisted hepatectomy for HCC and compare it to open and laparoscopic approaches. This systematic review and meta-analysis has been conducted in accordance with most recent PRISMA recommendations and the protocol has been registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022328544). There were no randomized controlled trials available and no study focused on cirrhotic patients exclusively. Robot-assisted hepatectomy was associated with less major complications than the laparoscopic approach, but comparable with open hepatectomy. No difference was seen in overall or minor complications, as well as liver specific or infectious complications. Cumulative survivals were similar in robot-assisted hepatectomy and laparoscopic or open approaches. There is a clear lack of evidence to suggest particular benefits for robot-assisted hepatectomy in cirrhotic patients. Otherwise, the robot-assisted approach has similar complication rates as open or laparoscopic methods. Non-industry driven randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of robot-assisted liver surgery

Routine Postoperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis Offers No Benefit after Hepatectomy—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Prophylactic antibiotics are frequently administered after major abdominal surgery including hepatectomies aiming to prevent infective complications. Yet, excessive use of antibiotics increases resistance in bacteria. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics after hepatectomy (postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, POA). Method: This systematic review and meta-analysis were completed according to the current PRISMA guidelines. The protocol has been registered prior to data extraction (PROSPERO registration Nr: CRD42021288510). MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL were searched for clinical reports on POA in hepatectomy restrictions. A random-effects model was used for synthesis. Methodological quality was assessed with RoB2 and ROBINS-I. GRADE was used for the quality of evidence assessment. Results: Nine comparative studies comprising 2987 patients were identified: six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and three retrospectives. POA did not lead to a reduction in postoperative infective complications or have an effect on liver-specific complications—post-hepatectomy liver failure and biliary leaks. POA over four or more days was associated with increased rates of deep surgical site infections compared to short-term administration for up to two days (OR 1.54; 95% CI [1.17;2.03]; p = 0.03). Routine POA led to significantly higher MRSA incidence as a pathogen (p = 0.0073). Overall, the risk of bias in the studies was low and the quality of evidence moderate. Conclusion: Routine POA cannot be recommended after hepatectomy since it does not reduce postoperative infection or liver-specific complications but contributes to resistance in bacteria. Studies into individualized risk-adapted antibiotic prophylaxis strategies are needed to further optimize perioperative treatment in liver surgery