Transarterial Chemoembolization Combined With Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Repeat Hepatectomy for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Curative Resection: A 10-Year Single-Center Comparative Study

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in combination with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (TACE-RFA) and repeat hepatectomy in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after curative resection.MethodsThis retrospective study evaluated consecutive medical records of patients who received either TACE-RFA or repeat hepatectomy between January 2010 and May 2021. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and complications were compared.ResultsOf the 2672 patients who received either TACE-RFA or repeat hepatectomy, 111 eligible patients were included in our study, 63 in the TACE-RFA group and 48 in the repeat hepatectomy group. The median OS was 38 months in the TACE-RFA group and 42 months in the repeat hepatectomy group, with no statistically difference between the two groups (P=0.45). Meanwhile, there was also no statistically significant difference in PFS between the two groups (P=0.634). Although both groups achieved similar outcomes, the rate of major complications was significantly higher in the repeat hepatectomy group (P=0.003).ConclusionsPatients with recurrent HCC in the TACE-RFA group and the repeat hepatectomy group had similar OS and PFS regardless of the patient’s tumor diameter, but the TACE-RFA group was safer and more minimally invasive.

Radiofrequency ablation versus repeat hepatectomy in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma in subcapsular location: a retrospective cohort study

Background Repeat hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are widely used to treat early recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) located in the subcapsular region, but the optimal treatment strategy remains to be controversial. Methods A total of 126 RHCC patients in the subcapsular location after initial radical hepatectomy were included in this study between Dec 2014 and Jan 2018. These patients were divided into the RFA group (46 cases) and the repeat hepatectomy group (80 cases). The primary endpoints include repeat recurrence-free survival (rRFS) and overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoint was complications. The propensity-score matching (PSM) was conducted to minimize the bias. Complications were evaluated using the Clavien-Dindo classification, and severe complications were defined as classification of complications of ≥grade 3. Results There were no significant differences in the incidence of severe complications were observed between RFA group and repeat hepatectomy group in rRFS and OS both before (1-, 2-, and 3-year rRFS rates were 65.2%, 47.5%, and 33.3% vs 72.5%, 51.2%, and 39.2%, respectively, P = 0.48; 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 93.5%, 80.2%, and 67.9% vs 93.7%, 75.8%, and 64.2%, respectively, P = 0.92) and after PSM (1-, 2-, and 3-year rRFS rates were 68.6%, 51.0%, and 34.0% vs 71.4%, 42.9%, and 32.3%, respectively, P = 0.78; 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 94.3%, 82.9%, and 71.4% vs 88.6%, 73.8%, and 59.0%, respectively, P = 0.36). Moreover, no significant differences in the incidence of severe complications were observed between the RFA group and repeat hepatectomy group. Conclusion Both repeat hepatectomy and RFA are shown to be effective and safe for the treatment of RHCC located in the subcapsular region.

Left-side vs. right-side hepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: a meta-analysis

Goals We aim to draw a conclusion which type of hepatectomy could be the priority for hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients. Background Surgery is established as only potentially curative treatment for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. However, whether hepatectomy should be preferred to the left-side hepatectomy, which includes left hemihepatectomy, extended left hemihepatectomy, and left trisectionectomy, or right-side hepatectomy, which represents right hemihepatectomy, extended right hemihepatectomy, and right trisectionectomy, is debated. In this meta-analysis, we evaluated and compared the efficacy and safety of left-side hepatectomy and right-side hepatectomy in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Study We systematically retrieved the MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane library and related bibliography up to February 2020. The primary outcome is overall survival, and the secondary outcome includes 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates, morbidity, mortality, R0 resection rate, and operation time. Based on heterogeneity, fixed-effects model or random-effects models were established through meta-analysis. Results Eleven studies (11 cohort studies, totally 1031 patients) were involved in this study. The overall survival of patients who underwent left-side hepatectomy was comparable to that of patients who underwent right-side hepatectomy (hazard ratio, 1.27 [95% confidence interval, 0.98–1.63]). And there was no significant difference observed in 1-year (relative risk, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.89–1.15]), 3-year (relative risk, 0.94 [95% confidence interval, 0.80–1.11]), and 5-year survival (relative risk, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.67–1.01]) rates between the left-side hepatectomy group and the right-side hepatectomy group. Comparing with the right-side hepatectomy cluster, the hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients in the left-side hepatectomy cluster presented better overall postoperative morbidity (relative risk, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.71–0.96]) and major postoperative morbidity (relative risk, 0.73 [95% confidence interval, 0.56–0.95]). The post-hepatectomy liver failure rate (relative risk, 0.22 [95% confidence interval, 0.09–0.56]) and procedure-related mortality (relative risk, 0.41 [95% confidence interval, 0.23–0.70]) in the left-side hepatectomy group were better than those of the right-side hepatectomy group. Besides, the R0 resection rate was similar between the left-side hepatectomy group and the right-side hepatectomy group (relative risk, 0.95 [95% confidence interval, 0.87–1.03]). And the operation time for the left-side hepatectomy was significantly longer than that for the right-side hepatectomy (mean difference, 38.68 [95% confidence interval, 7.41–69.95]). Conclusion Through meta-analysis, we explored the comparable long-term outcomes and better short-term outcomes in the left-side hepatectomy group as is compared to the right-side hepatectomy group of hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients. In this study, the evidence obtained might indicate that the choice of left-side hepatectomy or right-side hepatectomy depends on the site of hilar cholangiocarcinoma in every patient.

Left-side vs. right-side hepatectomy for Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A meta-analysis

Goals: We aim to draw a conclusion which type of hepatectomy could be the priority for hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients.Background: Surgery is established as only potentially curative treatment for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. However, whether hepatectomy should be preferred to the left-side hepatectomy, which includes left hemihepatectomy, extended left hemihepatectomy and left trisectionectomy, or right-side hepatectomy, which represents right hemihepatectomy, extended right hemihepatectomy and right trisectionectomy, is debated. In this meta-analysis, we evaluated and compared the efficacy and safety of left-side hepatectomy and right-side hepatectomy in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma.Study: We systematically retrieved the MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane library and related bibliography up to February 2020. The primary outcome is overall survival, and secondary outcomes include 1-, 3-, and 5-Year survival rates, morbidity, mortality, R0 resection rate and operation time. Based on heterogeneity, fixed-effects model or random-effects models were established through meta-analysis.Results: Eleven studies (11 cohort studies, totally 1031 patients) were involved in this study. The overall survival of patients underwent left-side hepatectomy was comparable to that of patients underwent right-side hepatectomy (hazard ratio, 1.27 [95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.63]). And there was no significant difference observed in 1-year (relative risk, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.89-1.15]), 3-year (relative risk, 0.94 [95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.11]), and 5-year survival (relative risk, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.01]) rates between left-side hepatectomy group and the right-side hepatectomy group. Comparing with right-side hepatectomy cluster, the hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients in left-side hepatectomy cluster presented better overall postoperative morbidity (relative risk, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.96]) and major postoperative morbidity (relative risk, 0.73 [95% confidence interval, 0.56-0.95]). The post-hepatectomy liver failure rate (relative risk, 0.22 [95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.56]) and procedure-related mortality (relative risk, 0.41 [95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.70]) in left-side hepatectomy group was better than that of right-side hepatectomy group. Besides, the R0 resection rate was similar between left-side hepatectomy group and right-side hepatectomy group (relative risk, 0.95 [95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.03]). And the operation time for left-side hepatectomy were significantly longer than those for right-side hepatectomy (mean difference, 38.68 [95% confidence interval, 7.41-69.95]).Conclusion: Through meta-analysis, we explored the comparable long-term outcomes and better short-term outcomes in left-side hepatectomy group as is compared to right-side hepatectomy group of hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients. In this study, the evidence obtained might indicate that the choice of left-side hepatectomy or right-side hepatectomy had better depend on the site of hilar cholangiocarcinoma in every patient.

Secretagogin Mediates the Regulatory Effect of Electroacupuncture on Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal Axis Dysfunction in Surgical Trauma

Electroacupuncture (EA) improves hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis disorder by reducing corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) synthesis and release in the paraventricular nucleus (PVN). However, the potential mechanism underlying CRH regulation remains unclear. Secretagogin (SCGN) is closely related to stress and is involved in regulating the release of CRH. We hypothesized that SCGN in the PVN might trigger the HPA system and be involved in EA-mediated modulation of HPA dysfunction caused by surgical trauma. Serum CRH and adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and plasma corticosterone (CORT) levels at 6 h and 24 h after hepatectomy were determined by radioimmunoassay. CRH and SCGN protein levels in the PVN were detected by western blot and immunofluorescence, and CRH and SCGN mRNA levels in the PVN were determined by means of real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and in situ hybridization (ISH). Our studies showed that serum CRH, ACTH, and CORT levels and PVN CRH expression were significantly increased at 6 h and 24 h after hepatectomy in the hepatectomy group compared with the control group, and those in the EA+hepatectomy group were decreased compared with those in the hepatectomy group. The protein and mRNA levels of SCGN in the PVN were also increased after hepatectomy, and their expression in the EA+hepatectomy group was decreased compared with that in the hepatectomy group. When SCGN expression in the PVN was functionally knocked down by a constructed CsCI virus, we found that SCGN knockdown decreased the serum CRH, ACTH, and CORT levels in the SCGN shRNA+hepatectomy group compared with the hepatectomy group, and it also attenuated CRH expression in the PVN. In summary, our findings illustrated that EA normalized HPA axis dysfunction after surgical trauma by decreasing the transcription and synthesis of SCGN.

Left-Side vs. Right-Side Hepatectomy for Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

Goals: We aim to draw a conclusion which side of hepatectomy could be the priority for hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients.Background: Surgery is established as only potentially curative treatment for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. However, whether hepatectomy should be preferred to the left-side hepatectomy, which contains left hemihepatectomy, extended left hemihepatectomy and left trisectionectomy, or right-side hepatectomy, which represents right hemihepatectomy, extended right hemihepatectomy and right trisectionectomy, is debated. In this meta-analysis, we evaluated and compared the efficacy and safety of left-side hepatectomy and right-side hepatectomy in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma.Study: We systematically retrieved the MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane library and related bibliography up to February 2020. The primary outcome is overall survival, and secondary outcomes include 1-, 3-, and 5-Year survival rates, morbidity, mortality, R0 resection rate and operation time. Based on heterogeneity, fixed-effects model or random-effects models were established through meta-analysis.Results: Eleven studies (11 cohort studies, totally 1031 patients) were involved in this study. The overall survival of patients underwent left-side hepatectomy was comparable to that of patients underwent right-side hepatectomy (hazard ratio, 1.27 [95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.63]). And there was no significant difference observed in 1-year (relative risk, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.89-1.15]), 3-year (relative risk, 0.94 [95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.11]), and 5-year survival (relative risk, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.01]) rates between left-side hepatectomy group and the right-side hepatectomy group. Comparing with right-side hepatectomy cluster, the hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients in left-side hepatectomy cluster presented better overall postoperative morbidity (relative risk, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.96]) and major postoperative morbidity (relative risk, 0.73 [95% confidence interval, 0.56-0.95]). The post-hepatectomy liver failure rate (relative risk, 0.22 [95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.56]) and procedure-related mortality (relative risk, 0.41 [95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.70]) in left-side hepatectomy group was better than that of right-side hepatectomy group. Besides, the R0 resection rate was similar between left-side hepatectomy group and right-side hepatectomy group (relative risk, 0.95 [95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.03]). And the operation time for left-side hepatectomy were significantly longer than those for right-side hepatectomy (mean difference, 38.68 [95% confidence interval, 7.41-69.95]).Conclusion: Through meta-analysis, we explored the comparable long-term outcomes and better short-term outcomes in left-side hepatectomy group as is compared to right-side hepatectomy group of hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients. In this study, the evidence obtained might indicate that the choice of left-side hepatectomy or right-side hepatectomy had better depend on the specific situation of every patients of hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

Intention to Treat Laparoscopic Versus Open Hemi-Hepatectomy: A Paired Case-Matched Comparison Study

Background: The benefits of laparoscopic hemi-hepatectomy compared to open hemi-hepatectomy are not clear. Objective: This study aims to share our experience with the laparoscopic hemi-hepatectomy compared to an open approach. Methods: A total of 40 consecutive laparoscopically started hemi-hepatectomy (intention-to-treat analysis) cases between August 2012 and October 2015 were matched against open cases using the following criteria: laterality of surgery and pathology (essential criteria); American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, pre-operative bilirubin, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, additional procedures, portal vein embolization, and presence of cirrhosis/fibrosis on histology (secondary criteria); age and gender (tertiary criteria). Hand-assisted and extended hemi-hepatectomy cases were excluded from the study. The two groups were compared for blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, morbidity, mortality, and oncological outcomes. All complications were quantified using the Clavien–Dindo classification. Results: Two groups were well matched (p = 1.00). In the two groups, 10 patients had left and 30 had right hemi-hepatectomy. Overall conversion rate was 15%. Median length of hospital and high dependency unit stay was less in the intention to treat laparoscopic hemi-hepatectomy group: 6 versus 8 days, p = 0.025 and 1 versus 2 days, p = 0.07. Median operative time was longer in the intention to treat laparoscopic hemi-hepatectomy group: 420 min (range: 389.5–480) versus 305 min (range: 238.8–348.8; p = 0.001). Intra-operative blood loss was equivalent, but the overall blood transfusions were higher in the intention to treat laparoscopic hemi-hepatectomy (50 vs 29 units, p = 0.36). The overall morbidity (18 vs 20 patients, p = 0.65), mortality (2.5%), and the positive resection margin status were similar (18% vs 21%, p = 0.76). The 1- (87.5% vs 92.5%, p = 0.71) and 3-year survival (70% vs 72.5%, p = 1.00) was also similar. Conclusions: We observed lower hospital and high dependency unit stay in the laparoscopic group. However, the laparoscopic approach was associated with longer operating time and a non-significant increase in blood transfusion requirements. There was no difference in morbidity, mortality, re-admission rate, and oncological outcomes.

Assessment of Liver Function Using Pharmacokinetic Parameters of Gd-EOB-DTPA: Experimental Study in Rat Hepatectomy Model

Objectives. To determine whether the pharmacokinetic parameters of Gd-EOB-DTPA can identify the difference in liver function in a rat hepatectomy model. Methods. A total of 56 eight-week-old male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into the following groups: control group without hepatectomy (n=16), 70% hepatectomy group (n=14), and 90% hepatectomy group (n=26). On postoperative day 2, Gd-EOB-DTPA (0.1 mmol/kg) was injected intravenously and serial blood samples were obtained. Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using a noncompartmental method. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way analysis of variance and post hoc pairwise group comparisons. Results. After excluding 6 rats that died unexpectedly, blood samples were obtained from 16, 14, and 20 rats in the control group, 70% hepatectomy group, and 90% hepatectomy group. There was a significant increase in area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to the time of the last measurable concentration between the 70% and 90% hepatectomy group (P<0.001). The volume of distribution at steady state was significantly decreased between the control and 70% hepatectomy group (P<0.001). The clearance was significantly different in all pairwise group comparisons (P<0.001). Conclusions. The vascular clearance of Gd-EOB-DTPA can identify the difference in liver function in a rat hepatectomy model.

Role of surgery for gastric cancer with liver limited multiple metastases.

170 Background: Although it has been suggested that surgery provides favorable outcome for gastric cancer (GC) patients (pts) with liver limited multiple metastases (LLM), the survival benefit of surgery comparing to systemic chemotherapy (CTx) has yet to be elucidated, especially in pts with LLM. The aim of this study was to explore the role of surgery for GC with LLM. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data of consecutive GC pts with LLM who underwent hepatectomy or received systemic CTx as initial therapy at Shizuoka Cancer Center between Dec. 2004 and Dec. 2015. Inclusion criteria were as follows: ECOG PS 0-1; histologically proven adenocarcinoma; synchronous or metachronous LLM; 2 or 3 LLM technically resectable disease; no prior CTx or radiotherapy Pts who were refractory to adjuvant CTx were excluded. Results: Nine of 24 pts who met the inclusion criteria underwent hepatectomy, and 15 pts received CTx. Pts’ background who received hepatectomy versus (vs) CTx was as follows: median age (range), 74 (64-81) vs 59 (42-76) years; male/female, 8/1 vs 14/1 pts; Histology intestinal/diffuse, 9/0 vs 10/5 pts; HER2 positive/negative/unknown 0/0/9 vs 2/5/8 pts; number of liver metastases 2/3, 9/0 vs 9/6; unilobar/bilobar, 5/4 vs 5/10 pts. In hepatectomy group, all 9 pts underwent radical hepatectomy (with gastrectomy for synchronous metastases), and 3 pts received adjuvant CTx. No in-hospital death or severe complication was observed. In CTx group, 11 pts received fluoropyrimidine plus cisplatin therapy, and trastuzumab was combined in 2 pts with HER2 positive tumor. Three pts underwent radical hepatectomy after CTx. Eight pts in hepatectomy group had recurrence. Recurrent sites were remnant liver (7), lymph node (1), and peritoneum (2). With median follow-up time of 47.9 months, median progression free survival was 8.0 months in hepatectomy group and 27.9 months in CTx group (p = 0.02). In CTx group, 3 pts who underwent subsequent radical hepatectomy after CTx had no recurrence or death. Median overall survival was 24.1 months in hepatectomy group and 38.4 months in CTx group (p = 0.15). Conclusions: Initial surgery for GC pts with LLM did not show survival benefit. But radical hepatectomy subsequent to CTx may associate with preferable outcome.