Right Hepatectomy in Patients over 70 Years of Age: An Analysis of Liver Function and Outcome

Background: As a consequence of the increase in life expectancy, hepatobiliary surgeons have to deal with an emerging aged population. We aimed to analyze the liver function and outcome after right hepatectomy (RH) in patients over 70years of age. Methods: From January 2006 to December 2009, we prospectively collected data of 207 consecutive elective hepatectomies. In patients who had RH, cardiac risk was assessed by a dedicated preoperative workup. Liver failure (LF) was defined by the "fifty-fifty” criteria at postoperative day 5 (POD) and morbidity by the Clavien-Dindo classification. Liver function tests (LFTs) and short-term outcome were retrospectively analyzed in patients over (elderly group, EG) and younger (young group, YG) than 70years of age. Results: Eighty-seven consecutive RH were performed during the study period. Indication for surgery included 90% malignancy in 47% of patients requiring preoperative chemotherapy. ASA grade>2 (44 vs. 16%, p=0.027), ischemic heart disease (17 vs. 5%, p=0.076), and preoperative cardiac failure (26 vs. 2%, p<0.001) were more frequent in the EG (n=23) than in the YG (n=64). Both groups were similar regarding rates of normal liver parenchyma, chemotherapy and intraoperative parameters. The overall morbidity rates were comparable, but the serious complication (grades III-V) rate was relatively higher in the EG (39 vs. 25%, p=0.199), particularly in patients with diabetes mellitus (100 vs. 29%, p=0.04) and those who had additional nonhepatic surgery (67 vs. 35%, p=0.110) and transfusions (44 vs. 30%, p=0.523). The 90-day mortality rate was similar (9% in the EG vs. 3% in the YG, p=0.28) and was related to heart failure in the EG. LFTs showed a similar trend from POD 1 to 8, and patients ≥70years of age had no liver failure. Conclusions: Age ≥70years alone is not a contraindication to RH. However, major morbidity is particularly higher in the elderly with diabetes. This high-risk group should be closely monitored in the postoperative course. Liver function is not altered in the elderly patient after R

Long-term Outcome after Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Larger than 10cm

Background: The purpose of the present study was to analyze long-term survival and disease-free survival after liver resection for giant hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)≥10cm compared to HCC<10cm in diameter. The surgical approach in the treatment of giant HCC may achieve long-term survival and disease-free survival comparable to treatment of smaller lesions. Methods: This retrospective analysis was a monocentric study conducted in a tertiary university center. It included 101 patients from 114 consecutive liver resections for HCC, separated into two groups: those with tumors less than 10cm in diameter (small HCC; n=79) and those with tumors larger than 10cm (giant HCC; n=22). The main outcome measures were overall five-year survival, five-year disease-free survival, recurrence rate, perioperative mortality at 30days, surgical complication rate, and re-intervention rate. Results: The two groups were homogeneously distributed, apart from cirrhosis, which was found more frequently in the group with small HCC (77 vs. 41%; p=0.0013). Both median survival (24 vs. 27months; p=0.0085) and overall 5-year survival (21 vs. 45; p=0.04) were significantly poorer in the small HCC group compared to the giant HCC group. There were no differences en terms of recurrence rate, pattern, and timing. Conclusions: Liver resection for HCC larger than 10cm is a valuable option in selected patients, one that provides overall survival and disease-free survival comparable to smaller lesions. Functional reserves of the liver, more than the size of the lesion, may be important in patient selection for surgical resectio

Laparoscopic management of appendicitis and symptomatic cholelithiasis during pregnancy

Background: Laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy is a challenging procedure that most surgeons are reluctant to perform. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether laparoscopic appendectomy and cholecystectomy is safe in pregnant women. The management of these situations remains controversial. We report a single center study describing the successful management of 16 patients during pregnancy. Methods: More than 3,356 laparoscopic procedures were performed in our institutions between May 1990 and June 2005. Sixteen of these patients were operated on in the second and third trimester between 22 and 32weeks of estimated gestational age. We performed 11 laparoscopic appendectomies and 5 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. We also reviewed the management and operative technique used in these patients. Results: In this study, the laparoscopic appendectomy or cholecystectomy was performed successfully in all patients. Three patients were in their second trimester, weeks22, 23, and 25, and 13 were in the third trimester, weeks27 (three patients), 28 (five patients), 31 (three patients), and 32 (two patients). No maternal or fetal morbidity occurred. Open laparoscopy was performed safely in all patients and all patients delivered healthy babies. Conclusion: From our experience laparoscopic management of appendicitis and biliary colic during pregnancy is safe, however the second trimester is preferable for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Pregnancy is not a contraindication to the laparoscopic approach to appendicitis or symptomatic cholelithiasis. We believe that laparoscopic operations, when performed by experienced surgeons, are safe and even preferable for the mother and the fetu

A randomized multi-center phase II trial of the angiogenesis inhibitor Cilengitide (EMD 121974) and gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND: Anti-angiogenic treatment is believed to have at least cystostatic effects in highly vascularized tumours like pancreatic cancer. In this study, the treatment effects of the angiogenesis inhibitor Cilengitide and gemcitabine were compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer. METHODS: A multi-national, open-label, controlled, randomized, parallel-group, phase II pilot study was conducted in 20 centers in 7 countries. Cilengitide was administered at 600 mg/m(2 )twice weekly for 4 weeks per cycle and gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m(2 )for 3 weeks followed by a week of rest per cycle. The planned treatment period was 6 four-week cycles. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, quality of life (QoL), effects on biological markers of disease (CA 19.9) and angiogenesis (vascular endothelial growth factor and basic fibroblast growth factor), and safety. An ancillary study investigated the pharmacokinetics of both drugs in a subset of patients. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were randomized. The median overall survival was 6.7 months for Cilengitide and gemcitabine and 7.7 months for gemcitabine alone. The median PFS times were 3.6 months and 3.8 months, respectively. The overall response rates were 17% and 14%, and the tumor growth control rates were 54% and 56%, respectively. Changes in the levels of CA 19.9 went in line with the clinical course of the disease, but no apparent relationships were seen with the biological markers of angiogenesis. QoL and safety evaluations were comparable between treatment groups. Pharmacokinetic studies showed no influence of gemcitabine on the pharmacokinetic parameters of Cilengitide and vice versa. CONCLUSION: There were no clinically important differences observed regarding efficacy, safety and QoL between the groups. The observations lay in the range of other clinical studies in this setting. The combination regimen was well tolerated with no adverse effects on the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of either agent

Right Hepatectomy in Patients over 70 Years of Age: An Analysis of Liver Function and Outcome.

BACKGROUND: As a consequence of the increase in life expectancy, hepatobiliary surgeons have to deal with an emerging aged population. We aimed to analyze the liver function and outcome after right hepatectomy (RH) in patients over 70 years of age. METHODS: From January 2006 to December 2009, we prospectively collected data of 207 consecutive elective hepatectomies. In patients who had RH, cardiac risk was assessed by a dedicated preoperative workup. Liver failure (LF) was defined by the "fifty-fifty" criteria at postoperative day 5 (POD) and morbidity by the Clavien-Dindo classification. Liver function tests (LFTs) and short-term outcome were retrospectively analyzed in patients over (elderly group, EG) and younger (young group, YG) than 70 years of age. RESULTS: Eighty-seven consecutive RH were performed during the study period. Indication for surgery included 90 % malignancy in 47 % of patients requiring preoperative chemotherapy. ASA grade &gt; 2 (44 vs. 16 %, p = 0.027), ischemic heart disease (17 vs. 5 %, p = 0.076), and preoperative cardiac failure (26 vs. 2 %, p &lt; 0.001) were more frequent in the EG (n = 23) than in the YG (n = 64). Both groups were similar regarding rates of normal liver parenchyma, chemotherapy and intraoperative parameters. The overall morbidity rates were comparable, but the serious complication (grades III-V) rate was relatively higher in the EG (39 vs. 25 %, p = 0.199), particularly in patients with diabetes mellitus (100 vs. 29 %, p = 0.04) and those who had additional nonhepatic surgery (67 vs. 35 %, p = 0.110) and transfusions (44 vs. 30 %, p = 0.523). The 90-day mortality rate was similar (9 % in the EG vs. 3 % in the YG, p = 0.28) and was related to heart failure in the EG. LFTs showed a similar trend from POD 1 to 8, and patients ≥70 years of age had no liver failure. CONCLUSIONS: Age ≥70 years alone is not a contraindication to RH. However, major morbidity is particularly higher in the elderly with diabetes. This high-risk group should be closely monitored in the postoperative course. Liver function is not altered in the elderly patient after RH

Laparoscopic management of appendicitis and symptomatic cholelithiasis during pregnancy

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy is a challenging procedure that most surgeons are reluctant to perform. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether laparoscopic appendectomy and cholecystectomy is safe in pregnant women. The management of these situations remains controversial. We report a single center study describing the successful management of 16 patients during pregnancy. METHODS: More than 3,356 laparoscopic procedures were performed in our institutions between May 1990 and June 2005. Sixteen of these patients were operated on in the second and third trimester between 22 and 32 weeks of estimated gestational age. We performed 11 laparoscopic appendectomies and 5 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. We also reviewed the management and operative technique used in these patients. RESULTS: In this study, the laparoscopic appendectomy or cholecystectomy was performed successfully in all patients. Three patients were in their second trimester, weeks 22, 23, and 25, and 13 were in the third trimester, weeks 27 (three patients), 28 (five patients), 31 (three patients), and 32 (two patients). No maternal or fetal morbidity occurred. Open laparoscopy was performed safely in all patients and all patients delivered healthy babies. CONCLUSION: From our experience laparoscopic management of appendicitis and biliary colic during pregnancy is safe, however the second trimester is preferable for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Pregnancy is not a contraindication to the laparoscopic approach to appendicitis or symptomatic cholelithiasis. We believe that laparoscopic operations, when performed by experienced surgeons, are safe and even preferable for the mother and the fetu

A multicenter randomized clinical trial of primary anastomosis or Hartmann's procedure for perforated left colonic diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcome after Hartmann's procedure (HP) versus primary anastomosis (PA) with diverting ileostomy for perforated left-sided diverticulitis. BACKGROUND: The surgical management of left-sided colonic perforation with purulent or fecal peritonitis remains controversial. PA with ileostomy seems to be superior to HP; however, results in the literature are affected by a significant selection bias. No randomized clinical trial has yet compared the 2 procedures. METHODS: Sixty-two patients with acute left-sided colonic perforation (Hinchey III and IV) from 4 centers were randomized to HP (n = 30) and to PA (with diverting ileostomy, n = 32), with a planned stoma reversal operation after 3 months in both groups. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary end point was the overall complication rate. The study was discontinued following an interim analysis that found significant differences of relevant secondary end points as well as a decreasing accrual rate (NCT01233713). RESULTS: Patient demographics were equally distributed in both groups (Hinchey III: 76% vs 75% and Hinchey IV: 24% vs 25%, for HP vs PA, respectively). The overall complication rate for both resection and stoma reversal operations was comparable (80% vs 84%, P = 0.813). Although the outcome after the initial colon resection did not show any significant differences (mortality 13% vs 9% and morbidity 67% vs 75% in HP vs PA), the stoma reversal rate after PA with diverting ileostomy was higher (90% vs 57%, P = 0.005) and serious complications (Grades IIIb-IV: 0% vs 20%, P = 0.046), operating time (73 minutes vs 183 minutes, P < 0.001), hospital stay (6 days vs 9 days, P = 0.016), and lower in-hospital costs (US \$16,717 vs US \$24,014) were significantly reduced in the PA group. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first randomized clinical trial favoring PA with diverting ileostomy over HP in patients with perforated diverticulitis