What possible treatments for liver cirrhosis patients with a small hepatocellular carcinoma?

UNDERLYING LIVER DISEASE: Most cases of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) develop in subjects with an underlying chronic liver disease, primarily hepatitis C infection. The underlying liver disease greatly limits treatment possibilities due to the restrictions on surgery or the risk of recurrence even when surgical resection, chemoembolization or alcoholization appears to be successful. IN CASE OF NORMAL LIVER FUNCTION: Percutaneous destruction of the tumor with alcoholization or radiofrequency techniques can be effective against HCC tumors measuring less than 3 cm. Access is however sometimes limited, leading to partial destruction and risk of local recurrence. When the patient's liver functions are compatible with surgery, resection of the tumor and its adjacent portal segment has been found to be effective against tumors measuring 3 to 5 cm. TRANSPLANTATION: Liver transplantation is by far the most effective treatment for HCC, treating both the carcinoma and the underlying liver disease. Indications are however limited to patients with at most 3 tumors measuring less than 3 cm with no portal involvement and who can be expected to tolerate the major surgery. In addition, the absence of tumoral extension while waiting for transplantation is an important factor.     

Extended hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: is it justified?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the perioperative outcomes and long-term survival of extended hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Hepatic resection is a well-established treatment for HCC in cirrhotic patients with preserved liver function and limited disease. However, the role of extended hepatic resection (more than four segments) for HCC in cirrhotic patients has not been elucidated. METHODS: Between 1993 and 2000, 45 consecutive patients with histologically confirmed cirrhosis underwent right or left extended hepatectomy for HCC (group A). Perioperative outcomes and long-term survival of these patients were compared with 161 patients with HCC and cirrhosis who underwent hepatic resection of a lesser extent in the same period (group B). All clinicopathologic and follow-up data were collected prospectively. RESULTS: Group A patients had significantly higher intraoperative blood loss, longer operation time, and longer hospital stay than group B. However, the two groups were similar in overall morbidity and hospital mortality. There were no significant differences in the incidence of liver failure or other complications. The resection margin width was similar between the two groups. Despite significantly larger tumor size in group A compared with group B, long-term survival was comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Extended hepatic resection for HCC can be performed in selected cirrhotic patients with acceptable morbidity, mortality, and long-term survival that are comparable to those of lesser hepatic resection. Extended hepatectomy for large HCC extending from one lobe to the other or central HCC critically related to the hepatic veins is justifiable in cirrhotic patients with preserved liver function and adequate liver remnant.     

Could radiofrequency ablation replace liver resection for small hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with compensated cirrhosis? A 5-year follow-up

Purpose

Treating hepatocellular carcinoma involves many different specialists and requires multidisciplinary management. In light of the current discussion on the role of ablative therapy, the aim of this study is to compare patients who undergo hepatic resection to those treated with radiofrequency ablation.

Methods

The procedures have been conducted in two institutes following the same methodologies. Ninety-six patients with Child–Pugh class A cirrhosis, single or multinodular hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and a diameter less than or equal to 3 cm, have been included in this retrospective study: 52 patients have been treated by surgical resection and 44 by radiofrequency ablation. Patient characteristics, survival and disease-free survival have all been analysed.

Results

Disease-free survival was longer in the resection group in comparison to the radiofrequency group with a median disease-free time of 48 versus 34 months, respectively (P?=?0.04, hazard ratio?=?1.5, 95 % confidence interval?=?0.9–2.5). In the resection group, median survival was 54 months with a survival rate at 1, 3 and 5 years of 100, 98 and 46.2 %. In the radiofrequency group, median survival was 40 months with 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rate of 95.5, 68.2 and 36.4 %.

Conclusion

The current study shows that for small HCC in the presence of compensated cirrhosis, surgical resection gives better results than radiofrequency, both in terms of overall survival, as well as disease-free survival. Further evidence is required to clarify the role of ablative therapy as a curative treatment and whether it can replace surgery.     

Is it safe to perform esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients combined with liver cirrhosis?

Patients with liver cirrhosis undergoing gastrointestinal surgery still suffer from high operative morbid-mortality despite advancements in surgical critical care. The objective of this study is to see if this same relationship applies to patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer. From 1993 to 2003, sixteen esophageal cancer patients with liver cirrhosis were operated on. They were all male with a mean age of 51.5 years. According to the Child-Pugh classification, 10 patients were Child 'A', 4 patients Child 'B' and Child 'C' in 2 patients. The surgical procedure was through an Ivor-Lewis esophagogastrectomy with intra-thoracic anastomosis. Major morbidity included: 4 respiratory failure, 2 acute renal failure, 3 pneumonia, and one in each of the patients with gastrointestinal bleeding and hepatic failure. The mean follow up among the survivors was 19.1 months. The hospital mortality was 25% (4/16). Using the rate according to Child classification, the mortality rates were: A: 1/10 (10%), B: 2/4 (50%) and C: 2/2 (100%). We conclude that patients with liver cirrhosis in Child-Pugh A could tolerate esophagectomy with an acceptable risk. However, patients with a more advanced state of liver dysfunction are at higher risk for esophagogastrectomy. Careful patient selection and meticulous peri-operative care is warranted in those embarking on surgical resection.     

Is transarterial chemoembolization necessary before liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma?

BACKGROUND: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) before liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been proposed to prevent tumor progression, thus decreasing tumor recurrence and increasing survival. METHODS: We studied 46 patients undergoing LT for HCC who were divided in 2 groups--group A with pretransplant TACE (18 patients [39.1%]) and group B without pretransplant TACE (28 patients [60.9%])--and compared postoperative and long-term results between the 2 groups. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences in morbidity, transfusion needles, and postoperative time between-and no acute arterial or portal complication in-the 2 groups. There were no statistical differences in tumor recurrence (16.7 % vs 36.4 %, P=.16) with regard to pathway (mainly extrahepatic) or time. In group A patients, mean survival was 89.3+/-21.7 months with 1-, 3-, and 5-year actuarial survival rates of 83.3%, 60.5%, and 60.5%, respectively. In group B patients, mean survival was 75.1+/-19.1 months with 1-, 3-, and 5-year actuarial survival rates of 77.2%, 58.7%, and 38.1%, respectively. The differences in mean survival were not statistically significant (PX .56), nor was 5-year disease-free survival, which was 54% in group A and 39.5% in group B (P=.8). CONCLUSIONS: TACE is a safe procedure for candidates on the wait list who are scheduled for LT to treat HCC. Although TACE does not correlate with increased intraoperative difficulties or postoperative complications, it does not significantly improve tumor recurrence and survival.     

Lung transplantation for patients older than 65 years: is it a feasible option?

Background

Advanced age has been a relative contraindication to lung transplantation. However, the exact age limit for this procedure has not yet been established. The aim of this work is to present our experience with this particular group.

Methods

This retrospective review included medical charts of patients who underwent lung transplantation at our institution from January 2004 to February 2009: namely, 112 cadaveric lung transplants with 12 patients (10.7%) >65 years old.

Results

There were 9 male patients and the overall mean age was 68 years (range 66-72). The indications were pulmonary fibrosis in 8 and emphysema in 4 cases. Four patients had mild coronary artery disease and 4 systemic hypertension. All of the procedures were unilateral and only 2 required extracorporeal circulation. Only 5 patients received blood product transfusions intraoperatively; the mean ischemic time was 222 minutes. Four patients developed primary graft dysfunction, the mean requirement for mechanical ventilation was 30 hours, and the mean intensive care unit stay, 11 days. Postoperative complications were respiratory infections (n = 8), catheter-related infection (n = 1), atrial fibrillation (n = 2). The mean hospital stay was 28 days and the 1-year survival was 75%.

Conclusion

Lung transplantation is a feasible option for well-selected patients with end-stage pulmonary disease who are >65 years old. Our study reinforces the modern trend for unilateral procedures in this situation.     

An active liver transplant programme for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients: is it justified?

Even at an early stage, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis is often deemed unresectable because of limited liver reserve. In these circumstances, liver transplantation (LTx) offers some hope for palliation or cure. The results of LTx for selected cirrhotic patients with HCC were analysed. The outcomes were compared with those of patients who underwent LTx for other forms of hepatic malignancy and those who underwent LTx for non-malignant conditions. Four hundred and eighty LTx were performed in 441 patients between January 1986 and December 1998. Twenty-eight LTx recipients (25 males, 3 females) of mean age 51 (14 63) yr had cirrhosis and HCC. Twenty-seven patients had underlying predisposing conditions (11 had hepatitis B, 10 had hepatitis C, 2 had hepatitis B and C, 1 had haemochromatosis, 1 had autoimmune hepatitis, 1 had alcoholic cirrhosis and 1 had alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency). In 22 patients, HCC was diagnosed pre-LTx, and in 6 patients, the cancers were discovered incidentally. The average tumour size and number were 2.8 (0.4-11.5) cm and 1.3 (1-4), respectively. Two patients with known HCC died during and shortly after the LTx operation. Of the other patients, 3 died; 1 died of HCC recurrence 18 months post-LTx, 1 died of graft failure from recurrent hepatitis C and 1 died of fungal sepsis. Twenty-three (82%) patients survived to 22.5 (0.5-96) months post-LTx without HCC recurrence and with 1- and 3-yr actuarial patient survival rates of 87 and 76%, respectively. Equivalent survival rates of patients who underwent LTx for other malignancies (n = 11) were 82 and 46% (p = NS), and for those who underwent LTx for benign causes (n = 402), they were 77 and 73% (p = NS). All 15 patients with known HCC, who met the selection criteria now in use, survived. LTx can result in prolonged. cancer-free survival in a good proportion of patients with cirrhosis and HCC, particularly when the cancers are incidental, or when diagnosed pre-LTx, conforming to established selection criteria. An active LTx programme for this group of patients is justified.     

Staging laparoscopy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: is it useful?

Background

Staging laparoscopy (SL) is not regularly performed for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). It may change treatment strategy, preventing unnecessary open exploration. An additional advantage of SL is possible biopsy of the nontumorous liver to assess fibrosis/cirrhosis. This study aimed to determine whether SL for patients with HCC still is useful.

Methods

Patients with HCC who underwent SL between January 1999 and December 2011 were analyzed. Their demographics, preoperative imaging studies, surgical findings, and histology were assessed.

Results

The 56 patients (34 men and 22 women; mean age, 60 ± 14 years) in this study underwent SL for assessment of extensive disease or metastases. For two patients, SL was unsuccessful because of intraabdominal adhesions. For four patients (7.1 %), SL showed unresectability because of metastases (n = 1), tumor progression (n = 1), or severe cirrhosis in the contralateral lobe (n = 2). An additional five patients did not undergo laparotomy due to disease progression detected on imaging after SL. Exploratory laparotomy for the remaining 47 patients showed 6 (13 %) additional unresectable tumors due to advanced tumor (n = 5) or nodal metastases (n = 1). Consequently, the yield of SL was 7 % (95 % confidence interval (CI), 3–17 %), and the accuracy was 27 % (95 % CI, 11–52 %). A biopsy of the contralateral liver was performed for 45 patients who underwent SL, leading to changes in management for 4 patients (17 %) with cirrhosis.

Conclusions

The overall yield of SL for HCC was 7 %, and the accuracy was 27 %. When accurate imaging methods are available and additional percutaneous liver biopsy is implemented as a standard procedure in the preoperative workup of patients with HCC, the benefit of SL will become even less.     

Laparoscopic adrenalectomy using the lateral retroperitoneal approach: Is it a safe and feasible treatment option for pheochromocytomas larger than 6 cm?

Objectives

To evaluate the surgical feasibility of laparoscopic adrenalectomy using the lateral retroperitoneal approach for the treatment of large pheochromocytomas, and to identify the preoperative risk factors for intraoperative hypertension.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 51 patients who underwent laparoscopic adrenalectomy using the lateral retroperitoneal approach for the treatment of pheochromocytomas. Patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes were analyzed and compared between the two study groups based on tumor size: group A (n = 27, ≤6 cm) and group B (n = 24, ?6 cm).

Results

There was no significant difference in preoperative characteristics between the two groups except for tumor size (P = 0.001) and urinary metanephrine (P = 0.011). Group B patients required longer operating time (P = 0.008), had a greater estimated blood loss (P = 0.001) and hemoglobin change (P = 0.002). However, no significant differences were observed in perioperative complications and mortality. Multivariate analysis showed that symptomatic pheochromocytomas (P = 0.004) and tumor size (P = 0.007) were significant risk factors for intraoperative hypertension.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic adrenalectomy using the lateral retroperitoneal approach for pheochromocytomas can be regarded as a treatment option, even for tumors measuring >6 cm. Symptomatic pheochromocytomas and large tumor size seem to represent risk factors for intraoperative hypertension.

     

Can we expand the indications for liver transplantation among hepatocellular carcinoma patients with increased tumor size?

INTRODUCTION: Due to the scarcity of donors and the fact that size is the main prognostic factor, Milan criteria have been used since 1996 to select hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients for liver transplantation. In 2001 UCSF criteria showed that including layer tumors did not reduce the survival results. The objective of this paper was to evaluate whether HCC tumor sizes exceeding the Milan criteria adversely influence survival rates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between May 1988 and July 2001, 53 patients were transplanted due to HCC and cirrhosis. The etiology of cirrhosis was HCV in 23 cases and HBV in 6. In 11 cases the HCC were incidental by discovered namely, a mean/ diameter of 1.8 cm (versus 2.6 cm in nonincidental HCC). Sixty-two percent of tumors met the Milan criteria, and 68% the USCF criteria. RESULTS: The actuarial survival was 79% at 1 year and 62% at 5 years. The survival of patients with incidental HCC was 82% at 1 year and 82% at 5 years, which is better than the survival of those with nonincidental HCC (78% at 1 year and 57% at 5 years, P<.05). According to Milan criteria, the survival patients with early tumors was 82% at 1 year and 68% at 5 years, and for advanced tumors (NS), 75% and 54%, respectively. Comparison of early versus advanced tumors according to UCSF criteria showed survivals of 84% versus 64% at 1 year (P<.05) and 67% versus 48% at 5 years (P<.05), respectively. CONCLUSION: Increasing the HCC size among LT according to the California criteria did not reduce survival rates compared with the Milan criteria.