There has been a high incidence of tumor recurrence after liver transplantation for primary hepatic malignancy. Nevertheless, a small but significant palliation has been possible with this approach, even in patients who eventually died of recurrence. Two patients with incidental malignancies in their excised livers apparently have been cured. Further gains will be possible only with extremely discriminating selection of prospective recipients. © 1982 Société Internationale de Chirurgie

Goran B. G. Klintmalm

J. Terblanche

R.Y. Calne

Shunzaburo Iwatsuki

T.E. Starzl

Thomas E. Starzl

PubMed

Iwatsuki, S

Klintmalm, GBG

Starzl, TE

Name not available

Total hepatectomy and liver replacement (orthotopic liver transplantation) for primary hepatic malignancy

Crossref

D-Scholarship@Pitt

World J. Surg. 6, 81-85, 1982 1ft" "',' ,',.,", W>rIdJoumal ~ of Surgery Total Hepatectomy and Liver Replacement (Orthotopic Liver Transplantation) for Primary Hepatic Malignancy Shunzaburo Iwatsuki, M.D., Goran B.G. Klintmalm, M.D., and Thomas E. Starzl, M.D., Ph.D. Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, School of Medicine and the Veterans Administration Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. U.S.A. There has been a high incidence of tumor recurrence after liver transplantation for primary hepatic malignancy. Nev-ertheless, a small but significant palliation has been possi-ble with this approach, even in patients who eventually died of recurrence. Two patients with incidental malignancies in their excised livers apparently have been cured. Further gains will be possible only with extremely discriminating selection of prospective recipients. When orthotopic liver transplantation was first done on a human in 1963, it was thought that primary liver malignancy which could not be treat-ed with conventional techniques of subtotal liver resection would be an unequivocal indication for total hepatectomy and liver replacement (orthotop-ic liver transplantation) [1]. However, the high recurrence rate of the original liver malignancies partly invalidated this expectation [1-3]. A recent review of our 24 orthotopic liver transplantations performed in the presence of primary liver malig-nancy has provided a more definitive idea of what can be achieved with this approach. Case Material During the 18-year period from March, 1963 to September, 1980, a total of 184 patients underwent Supported by research projects from the Veterans Administration; by U.S. Public Health Service Grant Nos. AM 17260 and AM-07772; and by Grant Nos. RR-00051 and RR-00069 from the General Clinical Research Centers Program of the Division of Research Resources, National Institutes of Health. Reprint requests: Dr. Shunzaburo Iwatsuki, Depart-ment of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, 1084 Scaife Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, U.S.A. orthotopic liver transplantation. Twenty-four of the recipients had transplantation in the presence of a primary liver malignancy, and they were divided into 3 groups for analysis. Group I consisted of 3 patients who had liver replacement for what was thought to be end-stage non-neoplastic liver dis-ease, but who were found to have an incidental primary liver malignancy. Group II consisted of 8 patients who received liver replacement because of primary liver malignancy, but who died within 30 days from early postoperative complications. Group III consisted of 13 patients who received liver replacement because of liver malignancy and who survived more than 2 months. In this group, it was possible to make meaningful observations about tumor recurrence. Age, sex, diagnosis, survival, tumor recurrence, and main causes of death of all 3 groups of patients are listed in Tables 1, 2, and 3. The patients' ages ranged from 19 months to 68 years (mean, 31 years). There were 12 males and 12 females. Fifteen of the 24 patients had hepatoma, 5 had carcinoma of intrahepatic bile ducts (Klatskin-type tumor), and one each had cholangiocarcinoma, hepatoblastoma, hemangioendothelial sarcoma, and sarcoma of un-determined cell type. Results Group I Two (OT 33, OT 142) of the 3 recipients who had concomitant incidental primary liver malignancy are still alive and well without any evidence of -- ----- ---0364-2313/82/0006-008\ $01.00 © 1982 Societe Internationale de Chirurgie 82 World J. Surg. Vol. 6, No.1, January 1982 Table 1. Fate of 3 patients who received liver replacement primarily for end-stage benign liver disease, but who were found to have primary liver malignancy as well (Group I). Patient/age (yr)/sex OT 33 3/F OT 80 7/F OT 142 5/F Primary indication for transplant Biliary atresia Biliary atresia Alpha-I antitrypsin deficiency Incidentally found liver malignancy Hepatoma Hepatoma Hepatoblastoma Survival Alive more than II years Postoperative death Alive at 3 years Tumor recurrence No No Main cause of death Cardiac arrest Table 2. Fate of 8 patients who received liver replacement for indication of primary liver malignancy, but did not survive long enough after operation to permit observation of the course of the malignancy (Group 10. ---- - - .- --------------- ----------- ----Patient/age (yr)/sex OT 2 48/M OT 3 68/M OT 4 52/M OT 5 29/F OT 6 29/M OT 7 24/F OT 25 45/M OT 79 60/M Diagnosis Hepatoma and cirrhosis Adenocarcinoma of bile duct (Klatskin tumor) Cholangiocarcinoma Hepatoma Hepatoma Hepatoma Hepatoma Carcinoma of bile duct (Klatskin tumor) Survival 21 days 8 days 5 days 24 days 7 days 17 days 29 days 19 days Metastases at autopsy and location No No Bone, lung, kidney, lymph nodes No No No No No Main cause of death Pulmonary emboli, sepsis Sepsis, pulmonary emboli, gastro-intestinal bleeding Pulmonary emboli, hepatic failure, pulmonary edema Sepsis, bile peritonitis, hepatic failure Hepatic failure, sepsis Pneumonitis Bile peritonitis, sepsis, hepatic failure Hepatic failure due to biliary obstruction ----- ----------------- ----- --------Table 3. Fate of 13 patients who received liver replacement for indication of primary liver malignancy and who lived long enough to ---------Patient/age Recurrence Metastases of (yr)/sex Diagnosis first detected Location of first recurrence homograft - ------- --- -----OT 8 P/dF Hepatoma 3 mos Lungs Yes OT 14 16/F Hepatoma 13 mos Diaphragm. liver, retroperitoneal space Yes OTIS 43/M Hepatoma. cirrhosis 2 mos LUngs Yes OT23 151M Hepatoma I mos Lungs Yes OT 26 II/F Biliary atresia, hepatoma 3 mos Lungs No OT 45 53/M Hemangioendothelial sarcoma 2V, mos Lungs, liver Yes OT 78 48/M Adenocarcinoma of bile duct (Klatskin tumor) 21 mos Liver, bile duct Yes OT 90 4I1M Cholangiocarcinoma of bile duct (Klatskin tumor) 42 mos Bile duct Yes OT 102 51/P Cholangiocarcinoma of bile duct (Klatskin tumor) No No No OT III 9/F Congenital tyrosinemia, hepatoma, cirrhosis No No No OT 114 27/F Sarcoma (undetermined cell type) of liv- Residual tumor No er invading diaphragm, metastasis to at transplant right lung and peritoneum OT 121 32/F Hepatoma No No No OT I72 241M Hepatoma No No No S. Iwatsuki et al.: Liver Transplantation for Hepatic Cancer tumor recurrence, one (OT 142) after 3 years and the other (OT 33) after more than 11 years. The third patient (OT 80) died from cardiac arrest just after the transplant operation; careful postmortem search for residual tumor failed to show any spread of tumor outside the liver (Table 1). Group II These 8 patients (liver replacement for known pri-mary liver malignancy but with death during the first 30 postoperative days) were not suitable for assessment of tumor recurrence, but their postmor-tem examinations were used to determine residual tumor unknowingly left after total hepatectomy. Preoperatively, all 8 were thought to be free of extrahepatic tumors. At autopsy, only 1 patient (OT4) had residual neoplasm. This patient survived only 5 days after liver replacement and the postmor-tem examination revealed cholangiocarcinoma in the lung, vertebra, kidney, and some abdominal lymph nodes. The remaining 7 patients were tumor-free insofar as this could be determined from com-plete postmortem examination (Table 2). Thus, screening for candidacy had been grossly accurate in 87.5% of the cases with only 1 error out of 8 cases. permit observations about the course of the malignancy (Group llI). Treatment of recurrent tumor Organs ultimately involved 83 Group III Thirteen patients had liver replacement for known primary liver malignancy and survived after trans-plantation for more than 2 months. Ten patients had recurrence of the original tumor and 7 of them died of the malignancy (Table 3). An eighth patient developed a single pulmonary metastasis, but her death after 3 months was from infection and gastro-intestinal hemorrhage. A ninth patient who original-ly had congenital tyrosinemia and hepatoma died of portal vein thrombosis after 3 months. She had metastases in the lung and abdominal lymph nodes. The tenth patient represented an extraordinary ex-ample of tumor quiescence or even involution. The primary liver tumor was removed at transplanta-tion, but there were fine miliary metastases on the pleura and peritoneum. She is still well after more than 4 years. The tumor was examined by patholo-gists at the University of Colorado, St. Mary's Hospital and Medical School (London), the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (District of Colum-bia), and the University of Southern California. All agreed that the tumor was malignant and the major-ity opinion was sarcoma of unknown subclassifica-tion. Minority opinions were sclerosing cholangio-carcinoma, sclerosing angiosarcoma, and mixed tumor of the liver. Time of death Main causes of death ----------------------- ----------------_ .. _------Chemotherapy, radiation, debulking of abdominal mass Radiation Brains, lungs, liver. other abdominal organs Diaphragm. retroperitoneal space, liver, pancreas Lungs, liver, diaphragm Brain, lungs, liver. retroperitoneal space Lung Brain, lungs, liver, spleen, pericardi-14 mos 15 mos 12 mos 5 mas 3 mos um, peritoneum, stomach, pancreas, 3 mas kidney Liver, bile duct at reoperation. No autopsy 25 mos Bile duct, liver, duodenum at reopera- 54 mas tion. No autopsy None 3 mos Microscopic metastasis in the lung and 3 mas para-aortic lymph nodes at autopsy Grossly fine intra-abdominal and pul-monary metastases at operation Alive 52 which have been quiescent greater mas than 4 years None None 6 mos Alive 10 mos Carcinomatosis Carcinomatosis: infection and duode-nal fistula after retransplantation Carcinomatosis Carcinomatosis Gastrointestinal hemorrhage, intra-abdominal sepsis Sarcomatosis Tumor recurrence Tumor recurrence Systemic candidiasis with brain abscess Portal vein thrombosis, pyelophlebitis, cardiac arrest during attempted 2nd transplant Brain injury after falling from bed, ina-nition, and pneumonia ----------- - ----- -------------------.-- -----------84 ~ Total Hepatectomy & Transplant (N = 24) (30 day operative death included) " - Total Hepatectomy & Transplant (N = 15) '" (30 day operative death excluded) 80 " .. - ... Subtotal Hepatectomy (N = 30) " (30 day operative death included) '",-" " <P-'" ro 60 > K~ ::> Vl " .......... _-------~ .. 40 i3 (,) « 20 OL-______ -L ______ ~i-------~------1y 2y Fig. 1. Actuarial survival of 24 patients with primary liver malignancy treated by total hepatectomy and transplant (open circle with solid line), and of 15 patients excluding operative deaths (closed circle with solid line) in compari-son to the survival of 30 patients with primary liver malignancy treated by subtotal hepatectomy (closed cir-cle with broken line). The timing and location of the recurrences in these 10 patients are shown in Table 3. V sually , metastases were evident within a few months. The most commonly involved organ was the liver homo-graft (7 patients), followed by the lung and brain (3 patients each). Recurrences were seen with all of the tumor types. "Cures" were obtained only with hepatoma and hepatoblastoma, but long survival with known metastases was seen after treatment of bile duct carcinoma and a sarcoma. Two of the 3 patients who did not develop metastases died after 3 and 6 months, respectively. Their follow-ups may have been too short for microscopic recurrences to become evident. The third patient is living after 10 months (Table 3). The 9 patients who died from early postoperative complications within a month accounted for an overall operative mortality of 37.5%. One of these patients was from Group I and the other 8 from Group II. The 2 remaining patients from Group I are still alive after 3 and 11 years. The 7 patients who died from metastases were all in Group III. Long survival (maximum, 52 months) was sporadically seen even after recurrence was first known. The only patients thought to be definitely free of tumor are the 2 long survivors of Group I who had incidental tumors. It is as yet too early (10 months post-transplantation) for more than a hopeful prog-nosis in 1 Group III patient who had a hepatoma. World J. Surg. Vol. 6, No.1, January 1982 Actuarial survival curves were constructed of the total group of 24 recipients and of 15 patients who survived more than 1 month after transplantation (Fig. 1). Excluding the early deaths. the 15 who survived had 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival of 53%, 38%, and 29%, respectively. Discussion These results were compared to those of 30 patients with primary liver malignancy treated with subtotal hepatectomy (20 had right trisegmentectomy) dur-ing the same period. The I-month mortality was 6.7% in the subtotal hepatectomy group, and the survival (uncorrected for operative mortality as was done in the transplant series) was 77%, 56%, and 52% at 1. 2 and 3 years, respectively (Fig. 1). Thus, the salvage in the transplantation series was distinctly inferior to that in patients who had conventional subtotal hepatic resection, and the only definite cures were in the 2 patients with incidental hepatic malignancies. A third patient has had quiescent tumor for more than 4 years. Nevertheless, an unduly pessimistic attitude about transplantation for malignancy is not fully warranted. A significant, although small. salvage was possible in those recipients who survived oper-ation despite advanced stages of malignancy usually present. This was particularly striking in the hand-ful of patients who lived for meaningful periods in spite of eventually lethal recurrences. Most of their postoperative lives were spent outside the hospital. Caine and Williams have maintained an optimis-tic attitude for primary hepatic malignancy [4]. Their position is defensible, provided there is ex-tremely discriminating case selection. To us there is no strong reason at present to consider any of the categories of liver tumors to be either especially advantageous or disadvantageous in the consider-ation of candidacy. A persuasive case can be made for treating intrahepatic duct cell carcinomas (Klatskin tumors) with alternative palliative tech-niques such as V-tube drainage and radiation [5]. Resume La recidive tumorale aprcs transplantation hepa-tique pour cancer du foie est frequente cependant ce mode de traitement est susceptible d'entrainer une amelioration de l'etat du malade meme s'il meurt de recidive. Deux malades qui ont subi une transplantation hepatique sont apparemment gueris. Il sera possible d'ameliorer les resultats de la transplantation hepatique pour tumeur maligne S. Iwatsuki et at.: Liver Transplantation for Hepatic Cancer primitive du foie en selectionnant les cas a operer avec precision. References 1. Starzl, T .E.: Experience in Hepatic Transplantation. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders Co., 1969, pp. 1-553 2. StarzL T.E., Porter, K.A., Putnum, C.W., Schroter. G.P.J., Halgrimson, C.G., Weil, R., III, Hoelscher, 85 M., Reid, H.A.S.: Orthotopic liver transplantation in ninety-three patients. Surg. Gynecol. Obstet. 142:487, 1976 3. Starzl, T.E., Koep, L.J., Halgrimson, e.G., Hood, J., Schroter, G.P.J., Porter, K.A., Weil, R., III: Fifteen years of clinical liver transplantation. Gastroenterol-ogy 77:375, 1979 4. Caine, R.Y., Williams, R.: Liver transplantation. Curr. Probl. Surg. 16:1, 1978 5. Terblanche, J., Koep, L.J., Starzl, T.E.: Liver trans-plantation. Med. Clin. North Am. 63:507, 1979 

http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/3863/1/31735062114438.pdf

Total hepatectomy and liver replacement (orthotopic liver transplantation) for primary hepatic malignancy

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Name not available

Crossref

D-Scholarship@Pitt

Name not available