Is laparoscopic liver resection suitable for selected patients with BCLC stage B HCC? A propensity score-matched analysis

BackgroundThe optimal treatment for patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial given the variability of tumour status within this group of patients. This aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) to transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in a subset of selected patients with BCLC stage B HCC.MethodsPatients with resectable BCLC stage B HCC who underwent treatment between April 2015 and October 2018 were identified for further analysis. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to minimize effect of confounding factors. Perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups and multivariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors related to the overall survival (OS).ResultsFrom a total of 224 patients 70 were included into each group after PSM. The overall and major morbidity were comparable between the LLR and TACE groups (P = 0.700 and P = 0.500 after PSM, respectively). The OS in LLR group was significantly better than that in the TACE group (P < 0.001). Tumor number ≥4, the diameter of the biggest tumor >5 cm, and patients who underwent TACE were independent predictors of poorer OS.ConclusionsLLR for selected patients with BCLC stage B HCC is safe and feasible and has improved survival as compared to TACE.     

Is laparoscopic hepatectomy superior to open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma?

The low perioperative morbidity and shorter hospital stay associated with laparoscopic hepatectomy have made it an often-used option at many liver centers, despite the fact that many patients with hepatocellular carcinoma have cirrhosis, which makes the procedure more difficult and dangerous. Type of surgical procedure proves not to be a primary risk factor for poor outcomes after hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, the available evidence clearly shows that laparoscopic hepatectomy is an effective alternative to the open procedure for patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma, even in the presence of cirrhosis. Whether the same is true for patients with intermediate or advanced disease is less clear, since laparoscopic major hepatectomy remains a technically demanding procedure.     

Gas embolism in laparoscopic hepatectomy: what is the optimal pneumoperitoneal pressure for laparoscopic major hepatectomy?

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has become popular as a surgical treatment for liver diseases, and numerous recent studies indicate that it is safe and has advantages in selected patients. Because of the magnified view offered by the laparoscope under pneumoperitoneal pressure, LH results in less bleeding than open laparotomy. However, gas embolism is an important concern that has been discussed in the literature, and experimental studies have shown that LH is associated with a high incidence of gas embolism. Major hepatectomies are done laparoscopically in some centers, even though the risk of gas embolism is believed to be higher than for minor hepatectomy due to the wide transection plane with dissection of major hepatic veins and long operative time. At many high-volume centers, LH is performed at a pneumoperitoneal pressure less than 12 mmHg, and reports indicate that the rate of clinically severe gas embolism is low. However, more studies will be necessary to elucidate the optimal pneumoperitoneal pressure and the incidence of gas embolism during LH.     

Does liver cirrhosis have an impact on the results of different hepatic inflow occlusion methods in laparoscopic liver resection? a propensity score analysis

BackgroundFew studies have analyzed the impact of liver cirrhosis on different hepatic inflow occlusion methods in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). Intermittent Pringle (IP) was compared to continuous hemihepatic vascular inflow occlusion (CHVIO) in LLR in patients with or without cirrhosis.MethodsPatients who underwent LLR at the West China Hospital of Sichuan University form January 2015 to October 2017 were grouped according to occlusion methods and severity of cirrhosis. A matched propensity score analysis was performed.ResultsAmong patients without cirrhosis, there were no significant differences in blood loss (238 ± 30 ml VS 265 ± 46 ml, P = 0.653), operative time (228 ± 9 min VS 265 ± 20 min, P = 0.437) or other postoperative results between the IP and CHVIO groups after propensity score matching. Among patients with cirrhosis, blood loss (279 ± 24 ml VS 396 ± 35 ml, P = 0.012) and operative time (237 ± 11 min VS 285 ± 24 min, P = 0.041) were significantly lower in the IP group, while postoperative liver function did not significantly differ between the two groups after propensity score matching.ConclusionsIn patients without cirrhosis, IP is as efficient and as safe as CHVIO in cirrhotic patients. IP offers the advantages of shorter operative time and less blood loss and does not result in worse postoperative liver function.     

Fully laparoscopic left hepatectomy – a technical reference proposed for standard practice compared to the open approach: a retrospective propensity score model

Background

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) may be an alternative to open (OLH). There are several original variations in the technical aspects of LLH, and no accepted standard. The aim of this study is to assess the safety and effectiveness of the technique developed at Henri Mondor Hospital since 1996.

Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients: a propensity score–matched analysis

BackgroundPancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is complex procedure with high morbidity in the elderly. This retrospective study aimed to compare post-operative outcomes in patients ≥75 years of age who underwent robot-assisted (RA)PD and open PD.MethodsWe analyzed 2502 patients ≥75 years of age who underwent PD from 2015 to 2018 in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. RAPD and open PD patients were propensity score matched 1:5 to assess the 30-day outcomes of interest: postoperative complications, length of stay, discharge destination, and readmissions.ResultsOf 725 matched patients, 110 underwent RAPD, 615 OPD, and 12 were converted to an open operation. Post-operative outcomes were largely similar between cohorts. RAPD was associated a shorter length of stay (median 8 days, interquartile range [IQR] 6 to 11) than OPD (median 8 days, IQR 7 to 13) (p = 0.003). However, RAPD was associated with more readmissions (28.1% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.02).ConclusionsRAPD in patients ≥75 years of age appears to be safe and has a similar complication profile to open PD. Randomized or well-designed prospective matched studies are needed to confirm these findings.     

Is activity restriction appropriate for patients with hereditary spherocytosis? A population-based analysis

Patients with hereditary spherocytosis (HS) are often thought to have an increased risk of blunt splenic injury (BSI) from trauma due to splenomegaly. We aim to quantify this risk. Using a population-based database consisting of all injury-related admissions in Canada from 2001 to 2010, we identified patients with BSI and HS based on the discharge diagnoses. Intercensal population estimates were used to derive rates of BSI. The HS population at risk for BSI was estimated based on population rates of HS obtained from the literature. Rates of BSI in the HS population were estimated and the relative rates of BSI were calculated to compare the populations with and without HS. There were 10,106 patients with BSI over 202,405,788 person-years of observation, yielding an overall rate of BSI in the general population of 5.0 BSI per 100,000 person-years. Of these BSI patients, only two had a history of HS. Population rates of HS in the literature range from 1 in 2,000 to 5,000, corresponding to a low estimate of 2.0 and a high estimate of 4.9 BSI per 100,000 person-years in the HS population. The relative rate of BSI in the population with HS compared to the population without HS ranged from a low of 0.4 (95 % CI 0.1–1.4) to a high of 1.0 (0.1–3.6). The rate of BSI in the HS patient population appears not to differ significantly from those in the general population.     

Intentional R1 resection of liver metastases: A new treatment paradigm for patients with advanced colorectal cancer based on a propensity score–Matched case-control analysis

BackgroundClinical outcomes of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients after an incomplete microscopic (R1) resection of liver metastases may not differ from those following a microscopically margin negative (R0) resection, when the latest is not feasible because of anatomic issues. We aimed at comparing the clinical outcomes of CRC patients with an intentional R1 or with a R0 resection of liver metastases.MethodsAll patients with advanced in CRC and liver metastases consecutively treated by liver resection between February 2005 and January 2019 at in the department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary Surgery of Henri Mondor University Hospital (Créteil, France) were included in this retrospective case-control study. Overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) were compared between patients who underwent an intentional (pre-operative decision) R1 resection (iR1) to those who had a R0 resection of liver metastases. To account for confounding, comparison between the 2 groups was performed after adjustment using propensity score analysis.ResultsTwenty-six CRC patients treated by iR1 resection of liver metastases were compared to 98 patients treated by R0 resection. Median OS reached 39 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 25-67] and 63 months [95% CI: 52-76] in the iR1 and R0 groups, respectively. After adjustment by inverse probability of treatment weighting, patients’ OS and EFS did not differ significantly between the iR1 and R0 groups (hazard ratio (HR): 1.19 [0.54-2.62] and 1.67 [0.93-3.03]), respectively.ConclusioniR1 resection of liver metastases in advanced CRC patients is an acceptable therapeutic strategy, when R0 resection is not feasible.     

Does laparoscopic intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis decreases surgical site infection rate? A propensity score-matched cohort study

Aim

Foreshortened mesentery or thick abdominal wall constitutes a rationale for laparoscopic intracorporeal ileocolic anastomoses (ICA). The aim of this study was to compare intracorporeal to extracorporeal ICA in terms of surgical site infections in patients with Crohn’s ileitis and overweight patients with right colon tumors.

Method

This was a prospective propensity score-matched cohort study enrolling consecutive patients with Crohn’s terminal ileitis and overweight patients with right colon tumors undergoing elective laparoscopic right colon resection with intracorporeal or extracorporeal ICA. Propensity score matching with a 1:1 ratio was employed to compare diagnosis-matched patients for age, BMI, ASA, and previous abdominal surgery.

Results

Overall, 453 patients were enrolled: 233 intracorporeal vs. 220 extracorporeal. Propensity score matching left 195 intracorporeal and 195 extracorporeal patients comparable for age (p?=?0.294), gender (p?=?0.683), ASA (p?=?0.545), BMI (p?=?0.079), previous abdominal surgery (p?=?0.348), and diagnosis (p?=?0.301). Conversion rates (5.1 vs. 3.6%; p?=?0.457) and intraoperative complications (1 vs. 2.1%; p?=?0.45) were similar. Overall morbidity (5.1 vs. 12.8%; p?=?0.008) and re-intervention rates (3.1 vs. 8.7%; p?=?0.029) were significantly higher in extracorporeal patients. Anastomotic leak rates (0.5 vs. 1.5%; p?=?0.623) did not differ. Incisional SSI rate was significantly higher in extracorporeal patients (p?=?0.01).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic intracorporeal ICA reduced incisional SSI rates as compared to its extracorporeal counterpart.

     

Does denosumab offer survival benefits? —Our experience with denosumab in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Denosumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody to RANK ligand used to prevent skeletal-related events of bone metastases in solid tumors. We are reporting the clinical outcomes in our NSCLC patients who received RANKL inhibitor in combination with ICIs.MethodsThis observational study used retrospective data from a tertiary cancer center from 2015–2020. Stage IV non-small cell lung cancer patients who received denosumab within 30 days of ICIs (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, ipilimumab) were included. Kaplan-Meier curves were obtained for survival analysis.ResultsWe identified 69 patients and all had skeletal metastases, and 37.7% had brain metastases. Median OS was 6.3 months and median PFS was 2.8 months, with overall response rate (ORR) of 18.8% and disease control rate (DCR) of 40.6%. Median OS in patients with concomitant denosumab and ICIs more than 3 months was 11.5 months, comparing to 3.6 months in patients with <3 months of concomitant therapy (P=0.0005). OS and PFS did not differ with respect to brain metastases or number of skeletal metastases. However, the duration of ICIs and denosumab overlap was associated with improved OS and PFS. Among the 18.8% of patients who achieved complete response (CR) and partial response (PR), six-month survival rate was 100% and one-year survival rate was 69.2%. Most of the patients tolerated denosumab well, and hypocalcemia was the most commonly reported side effect.ConclusionsPatients receiving combination therapy did not perform poorly comparing to published studies despite of poor prognostic features such as brain metastases and numerous skeletal metastases. Although we did notice potential benefit of the longer duration of concomitant use of ICI and denosumab, future prospective clinical trials are needed to evaluate the synergistic effect of RANKL inhibitors/ICI and if duration of RANKL inhibitors matters.     

Laparoscopic or open approaches for posterosuperior and anterolateral liver resections? A propensity score based analysis of the degree of advantage

BackgroundBenefits over the open technique are demonstrated for laparoscopic liver resections. Whether the degree of advantage is different for anterolateral and posterosuperior resections is investigated in this retrospective study.MethodsLaparoscopic anterolateral and posterosuperior resections (Lap-AL/Lap-PS) were compared with open (Open-AL/Open-PS) after propensity score matching. Mean/median differences of relevant parameters were calculated after bootstrap sampling. The degree of advantage was compared between anterolateral and posterosuperior resections and expressed as delta of differences (Δ-difference).Results239 Lap-AL were compared with 239 matched Open-AL, and 176 Lap-PS with 176 matched Open-PS. Lap-AL showed reduced blood loss, morbidity, time to orally-controlled pain, mobilization and total stay; Lap-PS showed reduced blood loss, transfusions, morbidity, time to orally-controlled pain, mobilization, functional recovery and total stay. The degree of advantage of Lap-PS resulted significantly greater than Lap-AL blood loss (Δ-difference: 101 mL, p 0.017), transfusions (Δ-difference: 6.3%, p 0.008), morbidity (Δ-difference: 7.6%, p 0.034), time to orally-controlled pain (Δ-difference: 1 day, p 0.020) and functional recovery (Δ-difference: 1 day, p 0.042).ConclusionsWhile both resulting in benefit, the advantage of laparoscopy is greater for posterosuperior than anterolateral resections. Despite their technical difficulty, these should be considered among the most worthwhile laparoscopic liver resections.     

Cancer patients with acute coronary syndrome have non-superior bleeding risk compared to patients with similar characteristics – a propensity score analysis from the ProACS registry

IntroductionThe management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in malignancy is challenging due to higher bleeding risk.MethodsWe analyzed patients with cancer (active or in the previous five years) prospectively included in the ProACS registry between 2010 and 2019. Our aim was to assess safety (major bleeding, primary endpoint) and secondary efficacy endpoints (in-hospital mortality and combined in-hospital mortality, reinfarction and ischemic stroke) of ACS treatment. Propensity score matching analysis (1:1) was further performed to better understand predictors of outcomes.ResultsWe found 934 (5%) cancer patients out of a total of 18 845 patients with ACS. Cancer patients had more events: major bleeding (2.9% vs. 1.5%), in-hospital mortality (5.8% vs. 3.4%) and the combined endpoint (7.4% vs. 4.9%). The primary endpoint was related to cancer diagnosis (OR 1.97), previous bleeding (OR 7.09), hemoglobin level (OR 4.94), atrial fibrillation (OR 3.50), oral anticoagulation (OR 3.67) and renal dysfunction. Mortality and the combined secondary endpoint were associated with lower use of invasive coronary angiography and antiplatelet and neurohormonal blocker therapy. After propensity score matching (350 patients), there were no statistically significant differences in endpoints between the populations.ConclusionBleeding risk was not significant higher in the cancer population compared to patients with similar characteristics, nor were mortality or ischemic risk. The presence of cancer should not preclude simultaneous ACS treatment.     

Prophylactic antithrombotic therapy for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus with or without antiphospholipid antibodies: do the benefits outweigh the risks? A decision analysis

BACKGROUND: A high incidence of both arterial and venous thromboembolic events has been reported in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but the risks and benefits of primary prophylactic antithrombotic therapy have not been assessed. We measured the clinical benefit of 3 antithrombotic regimens in patients with SLE without antiphospholipid antibodies, with anticardiolipin antibodies, or with lupus anticoagulant. METHODS: A Markov decision analysis was used to evaluate prophylactic aspirin therapy, prophylactic oral anticoagulant therapy, and observation. Input data were obtained by literature review. Clinical practice was simulated in a hypothetical cohort of patients with SLE who had not experienced any previous episode of arterial or venous thromboembolic events. For each strategy, we measured numbers of thromboembolic events prevented and major bleeding episodes induced, and quality-adjusted survival years. RESULTS: Prophylactic aspirin therapy was the preferred strategy in all settings, the number of prevented thrombotic events exceeding that of induced bleeding episodes. In the baseline analysis (40-year-old patients with SLE), the gain in quality-adjusted survival years achieved by prophylactic aspirin compared with observation ranged from 3 months in patients without antiphospholipid antibodies to 11 months in patients with anticardiolipin antibodies or lupus anticoagulant. Prophylactic oral anticoagulant therapy provided better results than prophylactic aspirin only in patients with lupus anticoagulant and an estimated bleeding risk of 1% per year or less. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic aspirin should be given to all patients with SLE to prevent both arterial and venous thrombotic manifestations, especially in patients with antiphospholipid antibodies. In selected patients with lupus anticoagulant and a low bleeding risk, prophylactic oral anticoagulant therapy may provide a higher utility.     

Who benefits the most from basic health insurances? Income-related equity analysis for patients with chronic diseases in China

Background

To relieve patients' financial burden, China has established three basic health insurances: Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance (UEBMI), Urban Resident Basic Medical Insurance (URBMI), and the New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme (NRCMS). However, because the insured rich have more opportunity to access health care, more subsidies might be paid to them rather than the poor. We analysed the income-related benefit equity of health insurance for patients with chronic diseases to investigate who benefits most from government health insurance in China.

Can we expand the indications for laparoscopic liver resection? A systematic review and meta‐analysis of laparoscopic liver resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and chronic liver disease

Liver resection (LR) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and chronic liver disease (CLD) poses a high risk of serious postoperative complications and multicentric metachronous lesions requiring repeated treatment. The efficacy of laparoscopic LR (LLR) for such patients has yet to be established. The objective of this study is to test the outcomes of LLR for HCC with the aim of considering potential expansion of the indications for LLR. We performed a systematic review of the pertinent English‐language literature. Our search yielded four meta‐analyses and 23 comparative studies of LLR for HCC. On the basis of the findings from these studies and our newly conducted meta‐analysis, the possibility for expanding the indications for LLR to HCC was examined. The studies show that LLR (vs open) for HCC generally yields better short‐term outcomes without compromising long‐term outcomes, and that incidences of postoperative ascites and liver failure are decreased with LLR. Several studies show the benefits of LLR for patients with severe CLD and for repeat surgery. Reductions of postoperative ascites and liver failure are among the advantages of LLR. These characteristics of LLR may allow us to expand the indications of LLR to HCC with CLD. © Japanese Society of