肝癌肝移植的标准及其与预后的关系

目的 评价肝移植治疗肝细胞癌的价值以及受者选择对病人术后存活的影响.方法 对我院2000年6月至2007年2月实施的63例原发性肝细胞癌肝移植临床资料进行回顾性分析.采用kaplan-meier法进行生存率统计分析.结果 63例原发性肝细胞癌病人肝移植术后1、3、5年累积生存率分别为77.4%、59.3%、48.9%.符合Milan标准、符合UCSF标准和不符合UCSF标准受者,肝移植术后1、3、5年累积生存率分别为93.8%、92.1%、29.2%;80.8%、79.2%、8.3%;80.8%、79.2%、0.符合Milan标准、符合UCSF标准和不符合UCSF标准受者,术后1、2、3年肿瘤累积复发率分别为6.2%、15.5%、19.2%;7.9%、15.9%、20.8%;70.8%、87.5%、91.7%(P＜0.01).但是,符合UCSF标准与符合Milan标准受者移植术后累积生存率和肝癌累积复发率相似(P＞0.05).结论 以UCSF标准筛选肝癌病人进行肝移植不仅扩大了肝癌肝移植的适应证,还可以取得与Milan标准同样的效果.     

12例胆管细胞癌患者肝移植的预后分析

目的分析影响胆管细胞癌患者肝移植预后的肿瘤相关因素，为肝移植受者的选择提供依据。方法12例胆管细胞癌患者接受肝移植治疗，肿瘤Edmondson分级为Ⅲ-Ⅳ级者5例；肿瘤TNM分期超过Ⅱ期者9例；肿瘤累及两叶者5例，无包膜者9例，肝门淋巴结肿大者5例，肝外膈肌浸润1例，门静脉分支有癌栓者1例；个体最大肿瘤直径平均为6．1cm。均行经典原位肝移植。采用Kaplan-Meier生存率分析肝移植术后患者存活率及无瘤存活率，Log-Rank检验各影响因素的组间差异。结果12例术后均得到随访，随访时间7-31．2个月，中位数为18．5个月，受者的存活时间为178-905d，中位数为370d，其0．5、1和2年存活率分别为90．9％、61．4％及24．6％，0．5、1和2年无瘤存活率分别为46．9％、37．5％和0。8例（66．7％，8／12）于肝移植后100．6d肿瘤复发。死亡6例，其中5例死于肿瘤复发。以肝细胞癌施行肝移植的标准（Milan标准、加州大学旧金山分校标准、上海复旦标准者、Pittsburgh标准和超过Pittsburgh标准）来评价，结果符合各标准患者肝移植后的存活率及无瘤存活率的差异均无统计学意义。淋巴结转移或门静脉癌栓、TNM分期为Ⅲ期、Edmondson分级为Ⅲ级、肿瘤累及两叶、肿瘤无包膜及术前糖链抗原19-9≥37kU／L等，可能对预后有一定影响。结论胆管细胞癌患者施行肝移植的预后不佳，应慎重选择，尽量以小肝癌为主，对肿瘤过大、TNM分期为Ⅲ期、肿瘤分布于两叶、无法排除淋巴结转移或门静脉癌栓者，应列为肝移植禁忌证。     

肝细胞癌肝移植适应证选择的疗效评估

目的:总结肝癌肝移植不同标准适应证的疗效,探讨影响预后的因素.方法:回顾性分析2002年6月至2007年6月96例肝细胞癌肝移植病例,其中符合米兰(Milan)标准者29例,符合加利福尼亚(UCSF)标准者41例,超过UCSF标准者55例.采用Kaplan-Meier法统计分析不同病例入选标准对肝癌肝移植术后生存率及无瘤生存率的影响,并进行Log-rank和Cox多元回归分析.结果:Milan和UCSF标准内影响长期生存的因素包括肿瘤分化、肿瘤部位、镜下癌栓和TNM分期.Milan标准组术后1、2、3、4年总体生存率分别为92.5%、79.6%、79.6%及53.0%,无瘤生存率分别为90.2%、79.3%、76.3%及51.7%;UCSF标准组术后1、2、3、4年总体生存率分别为92.4%、80.9%、73.0及51.1%,无瘤生存率分别为90.2%、79.8%、71.7%及50.2%;超过UCSF标准组术后1、2、3、4年总体生存率分别为66.3%、39.8%、26.5%及15.9%,无瘤生存率分别为64.4%、31.5%、15.8%及15.8%.Milan、UCSF标准组生存率和无瘤生存率与超过UCSF标准组比较有显著差异(P<0.01),Milan标准组与UCSF标准组间生存率和无瘤生存率无显著差异(P>0.05).结论:与Milan标准相比,UCSF标准显著扩大了肝癌肝移植的适应证范围,更符合作为选择肝癌肝移植病人的标准.     

ChildA级单个直径≤5cm肝细胞肝癌行肝移植与肝切除的预后比较

目的比较ChildA级、单个、直径≤5cm肝细胞肝癌行肝移植与肝切除术的预后。方法回顾性分析笔者所在医院肝移植中心2007～2011年期间行肝切除术及肝移植术的ChildA级、单个、直径≤5cm肝细胞肝癌患者的临床资料,比较2组患者术后无瘤生存率及总体生存率。结果本研究共纳入263例患者,其中肝移植组36例,肝切除组227例。肝移植组与肝切除组患者术后1、3及5年无瘤生存率分别为91．7％、85．3％及81．0％和80．6％、59．8％及50．8％,肝移植组高于肝切除组（P=-0．003）;术后1、3及5年总体生存率分别为100％、87．5％及83．1％和96．9％、83．8％及76．1％,2组间差异无统计学意义伊=0．391）。以肿瘤直径〈3em为标准再予以分析,其肝移植组与肝切除组术后1、3及5年无瘤生存率分别为92．3％、92．3％及92．3％和80．2％、62．5％及50．5％,肝移植组高于肝切除组（P=-0．019）;术后1、3及5年总体生存率分别为100％、91．7％及91．7％和97．7％、87．5％及79．5％,2组间差异也无统计学意义（p0．470）。结论ChildA级、单个、直径≤5cm肝细胞肝癌患者肝切除术后复发率高于肝移植,但两种治疗方式的术后总体生存率相似。     

肝脏移植对23例肝细胞性肝癌的治疗价值研究

目的进一步探讨肝细胞性肝癌肝移植治疗的疗效 ,评价其应用价值。方法对 1999年 2月～ 2 0 0 2年 3月连续实施的 95例肝移植中的 2 3例肝细胞肝癌患者进行随访和回顾性分析 ,探讨肝细胞性肝癌临床病理学因素对肝移植术后生存率和肝癌复发的影响。结果本组肝细胞性肝癌总的复发率为 6 5 % (15 /2 3) ,6个月、12个月的无癌生存率分别为 75 %、5 8%。多元分析表明 ,肝细胞性肝癌的直径与它的复发率有相关性 (P =0 0 2 4 ) ,而其他的临床病理学因素未显示有统计学意义(Wald =5 113,P =0 0 2 4 )。而年龄、性别、癌灶数目、门静脉癌栓形成、TNM分期、术前AFP水平、术前治疗、合并肝硬化等病理学因素则在统计学上未显示有显著意义 (P >0 0 5 )。结论大肝癌是肝移植的相对禁忌证 ,而小肝癌是肝移植的良好适应证     

肝细胞癌肝移植术后长期生存率的影响因素

为研究肝细胞癌原位肝移植术后生存率和无瘤生存率的影响因素,作者收集了1989·1~2005·11意大利Niguarda医院的155例肝细胞癌肝移植病例进行分析。其中116例术前诊断为肝细胞癌,39例肝移植术后病理诊断为肝细胞癌,84%的病例术前符合“米兰”标准,94例病例术前进行了抗肿瘤治疗     

超出Milan标准肝癌肝移植患者术后预防性化疗的价值

目的 探讨超出Milan标准肝癌肝移植患者术后预防性化疗的价值.方法 回顾性分析2001年4月至2007年7月243例超出Milan标准肝癌肌移植患者的临床资料,其中预防性化疗162例,未化疗81例.结果 预防性化疗与未化疗患者术后1、3年生存率(78.5%、63.7%和56.6%、39.1%)以及无瘤生存率(76.8%、52.5%和69.3%、64.7%)比较差异无统计学意义(X2=3.084,0.444,P>0.05).Cox风险比例分析显示,对无大血管侵犯的肝癌肝移植患者,术后足否化疗不是影响生存率的独立因素;对有大血管侵犯的肝癌肝移植患者,术后是否化疗是影响生存率的独立因素.结论 对于超出Milan标准且伴有大血管侵犯的肝癌肝移植患者,术后早期预防性化疗可以延缓肿瘤复发,明显提高疗效.     

肝癌肝移植适应证标准——验证及再思考

目的对不同的原发性肝细胞癌(肝癌)肝移植适应证标准进行评价与验证。方法 2001年至2007年上海七家肝移植中心施行的肝癌肝移植病例共948例,采用Kaplan-Meier法分析符合米兰标准、加利福尼亚标准和上海复旦标准的肝癌肝移植患者的术后4年总体生存率及无复发生存率,并作比较。结果符合米兰标准(369例)、加利福尼亚标准(470例)和上海复旦标准(554例)的患者的术后4年总体生存率及无复发生存率分别为65.8%和74.1%、66.0%和73.6%、63.9%和70.4%。三种标准的总体生存率及无复发生存率比较差异无统计学意义(均为P0.05)。与符合米兰标准的病例相比,超出米兰标准但符合上海复旦标准的185例,其术后4年生存率及无复发生存率分别为61.5%、65.0%,比较差异亦无统计学意义(均为P0.05)。结论上海复旦标准适度扩大了肝癌肝移植适应证范围且生存率满意,可能更符合中国国情。     

补救性肝移植的疗效

目的探讨补救陛肝移植的适应证及其临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2003年10月至2006年3月中山大学附属第三医院35例肝癌肝切除术后行肝移植患者的临床资料。比较补救性肝移植组（19例）和超补救性肝移植组（16例）患者的手术情况、术后并发症及预后等指标。计数和计量资料分别采用X^2和t检验,非正态分布采用秩和检验,Kaplan-Meier法进行生存分析,生存率的比较采用Log-rank检验。结果补救性肝移植组和超补救性肝移植组患者的无肝期、冷缺血时间、手术时间、术中出血量、术中输注红细胞量、术中输注新鲜冰冻血浆量、肝移植并发症发生率、再移植率分别为（32±9）rain、（8．0±2．1）h、（7．6±1．5）h、2300ml、8U、23U、6／19、2／19和（34±7）min、（7．4±2．3）h、（7．4±2．0）h、2750ml、12U、20U、4／16、1／16,两组比较,差异无统计学意义（t=0．726,-0．804,-0．366,Z=-0．348,-0．549,-0．149,）（X^2=0．184,0．203,P〉0．05）。补救性肝移植组和超补救性肝移植组患者围术期死亡率、术后肿瘤复发率分别为0、2／19和4／16、9／16,两组比较,差异有统计学意义（X^2=5．363,8．426,P〈0．05）。补救性肝移植组和超补救性肝移植组患者1、3、5年累积生存率分别为100％、84％、84％和75％、33％、33％;1、3、5年无瘤生存率分别为100％、89％、89％和48％、29％、19％,两组比较,差异有统计学意义（X^2=11．58,19．31,P〈0．05）。结论补救性肝移植是肝癌治疗过程中的一种有效策略,米兰标准是目前补救性肝移植的最佳适应证。     

经导管动脉化疗栓塞在肝细胞癌骨转移治疗中的应用初探

目的初步探讨经动脉化疗栓塞术（TACE）治疗原发性肝细胞癌（HCC）骨转移瘤的应用价值。方法收集中山大学附属第一医院伴有骨转移瘤的HCC患者15例,3例（20．0％）为多发性骨转移,12例（80．0％）为单发转移。TACE治疗骨转移瘤前后行影像学检查,以目测模拟法（VAS法）对局部疼痛程度进行分级,治疗后随访3个月以上。结果所有患者成功行局部骨转移灶TACE治疗,术中无并发症。15例患者术前VAS评分均在7分以上,术后局部疼痛均有不同程度缓解。按VAS评分标准,1个月后随访完全缓解3例,明显缓解7例,轻度缓解5例。治疗后3个月疼痛缓解的有效率为80．0％,至6个月时总体有效率仍达58．3％。影像学评价的治疗有效率达86．7％。TACE后1个月5例患者AFP下降〉50％,8例下降〉30％,2例下降〉20％。术后3个月生存率为100％,6个月生存率为80％。结论TACE可有效控制肝细胞癌骨转移灶的局部生长、缓解疼痛,有助于患者生存质量的提高。     

Liver transplantation criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma should be expanded: a 22-year experience with 467 patients at UCLA

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and the impact of current staging criteria on long term survival. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: HCC is becoming an increasingly common indication for OLT. Medicare approves OLT only for HCCs meeting the Milan criteria, thus limiting OLT for an expanding pool of potential liver recipients. We analyzed our experience with OLT for HCC to determine if expansion of criteria for OLT for HCC is warranted. METHODS:: All patients undergoing OLT for HCC from 1984 to 2006 were evaluated. Outcomes were compared for patients who met Milan criteria (single tumor < opr =5 cm, maximum of 3 total tumors with none >3 cm), University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) criteria (single tumor <6.5 cm, maximum of 3 total tumors with none >4.5 cm, and cumulative tumor size <8 cm), or exceeded UCSF criteria. RESULTS: A total of 467 transplants were performed for HCC. At mean follow up of 6.6 +/- 0.9 years, recurrence rate was 21.2%, and overall 1, 3, and 5-year survival was 82%, 65%, and 52%, respectively. Patients meeting Milan criteria had similar 5-year post-transplant survival to patients meeting UCSF criteria by preoperative imaging (79% vs. 64%; P = 0.061) and explant pathology (86% vs. 71%; P = 0.057). Survival for patients with tumors beyond UCSF criteria was significantly lower and was below 50% at 5 years. Multivariate analysis showed that tumor number (P < 0.001), lymphovascular invasion (P < 0.001), and poor differentiation (P = 0.002) independently predicted poor survival. CONCLUSIONS: This largest single institution experience with OLT for HCC demonstrates prolonged survival after liver transplantation for tumors beyond Milan criteria but within UCSF criteria, both when classified by preoperative imaging and by explant pathology. Measured expansion of OLT criteria is justified for tumors not exceeding the UCSF criteria.     

Hepatic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Meeting Milan Criteria in Child-Turcotte-Pugh Class A Patients With Cirrhosis

This study evaluated whether hepatic resection is a reasonable strategy as an initial treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) meeting Milan criteria in patients with compensated cirrhosis. From the database of 435 consecutive patients with resection of HCC between July 1994 and May 2007, 213 patients were found to have Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A cirrhosis and HCC meeting Milan criteria, as shown by preoperative image studies. We examined long-term survivals and patterns of recurrence after hepatic resection among those patients. Overall survival rates at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years were 92%, 78%, 69%, and 52%, respectively, and 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year disease-free survival rates were 79%, 57%, 44%, and 19%, respectively. Pathological review indicated that 36/213 patients (16.9%) had another nodule and/or gross vascular invasion. Microvascular invasion, tumor size, and histological grade of cirrhosis were independent risk factors for recurrence. Sixty percent of recurrent cases met the Milan criteria. The six patients who underwent living donor salvage liver transplantation (OLT) for intrahepatic recurrence were alive without recurrence at a median of 24 (range = 8-31) months. These favorable data suggest that hepatic resection is a good option for small HCCs in patients with compensated cirrhosis; and salvage OLT may be reserved for patients with recurrences.     

Alpha-Fetoprotein as a Modifier of Anatomic Criteria for Transplantation of HCC Patients

BackgroundThe current listing criteria (Milan, University of California San Francisco [UCSF]) for orthotropic liver transplants (OLT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients emphasize the anatomic features of the tumor such as size, burden, and multiplicity. Recent reports showed that patients with large tumors may have equivalent survival to Milan criteria patients. This suggests that differences in biologic behavior of tumors may contribute to the outcome.AimThe aim of this article is to understand the impact of biologic modifiers such as alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) on survival in both Milan and UCSF HCC patients.MethodsWe reviewed all liver transplants reported to the United Network for Organ Sharing between 2002 and 2013. We analyzed the survival of patients transplanted for HCC who fit the Milan criteria and those transplanted with tumors beyond Milan and within UCSF criteria. We tested various AFP level cutoffs in both groups in relationship to the 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates below and above the proposed cutoffs.ResultsSurvival difference was significant between Milan patients with AFP ≤ 2500 ng/mL and those with AFP > 2500 ng/mL (59.1% vs 37.4%; P < .001). The mean 5-year survival was 55% for beyond Milan within UCSF patients with AFP ≤ 150 ng/mL and 35.7% for those with AFP > 150 ng/mL (P = .003).ConclusionAFP level should be incorporated in the selection criteria for HCC patients considered for OLT. Milan patients with an AFP level exceeding 2500 ng/mL have reduced survival. Patients with tumors beyond Milan and within UCSF criteria whose AFP ≤ 150 ng/mL achieve acceptable 5-year survival and are good candidates for OLT.     

Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after transplantation: use of a pathological score on explanted livers to predict recurrence.

Milan and University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) criteria are used to select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for liver transplantation (LT). Recurrent HCC is a significant cause of death. There is no widely accepted pathological assessment strategy to predict recurrent HCC after transplantation. This study compares the pathology of patients meeting Milan and UCSF criteria and develops a pathological score and nomogram to assess the risk of recurrent HCC after transplantation. All explanted livers with HCC from our center over the 18-yr period 1985 to 2003 were assessed for multiple pathological features and relevant clinical data were recorded; multivariate analysis was performed to determine features associated with recurrent HCC. Using pathological variables that independently predicted recurrent HCC, a pathological score and nomogram were developed to determine the probability of recurrent HCC. Of 75 cases analyzed, 50 (67%) met Milan criteria, 9 (12%) met only UCSF criteria and 16 (21%) met neither criteria based on explant pathology. There were 20 cases of recurrent HCC and the mean follow-up was 8 yr. Recurrent HCC was more common (67 vs. 12%; P < 0.001) and survival was lower (15 vs. 83% at 5 yr; 15 vs. 55% at 8 yr; P < 0.001) with those who met only UCSF criteria, compared to those who met Milan criteria. Cryptogenic cirrhosis (25 vs. 5%; P = 0.015), preoperative AFP >1,000 ng/mL (20 vs. 0%; P < 0.001) and postoperative OKT3 use (40 vs. 15%; P = 0.017) were more common among patients with recurrent HCC. While microvascular invasion was the strongest pathological predictor of recurrent HCC, tumor size >or=3 cm (P = 0.004; odds ratio [OR] = 7.42), nuclear grade (P = 0.044; OR = 3.25), microsatellitosis (P = 0.020; OR = 4.82), and giant/bizarre cells (P = 0.028; OR = 4.78) also predicted recurrent HCC independently from vascular invasion. The score and nomogram stratified the risk of recurrent HCC into 3 tiers: low (<5%), intermediate (40-65%), and high (>95%). In conclusion, compared to patients meeting Milan criteria, patients who meet only UCSF criteria have a worse survival and an increased rate of recurrent HCC with long-term follow-up, as well as more frequent occurrence of adverse histopathological features, such as microvascular invasion. Application of a pathological score and nomogram could help identify patients at increased risk for tumor recurrence, who may benefit from increased surveillance or adjuvant therapy.     

The impact of Milan criteria on liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: first 15 years' experience of the Hungarian Liver Transplant Program

In addition to hepatitis C, hepatocellular carcinoma.¹ is a leading indication for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The indications for OLT in HCC remains a topic of debate. The successful Milan criteria are still accepted as the gold standard to select candidates with a good chance for long-term survival.² The Hungarian Liver Transplant Program launched in 1995 reached 45 OLT/year in 2010. ^{[3] and [4]} Among 412 first OLTs, there were 49 cases of a malignant tumor, including 41 among which the indication was the tumor. Of the 412 patients, 154 (37.4%) were hepatitic C virus (HCV) positive, including 29 with HCC and 23 cases in which HCC was the indication itself. Half of the HCC patients were within the Milan criteria;¹⁵ 50% exceeded the criteria.¹⁴ We observed a solitary HCC in 36% of cases: 2 foci in 18%; 3 in 7%, 4 in 14%, and ≥5 in 25%. Only 12 patients underwent a “down-staging” treatment before OLT: 8 radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and 4 transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year patient survivals were 62%, 54%, and 43%, respectively in HCC/HCV-positive patients and they were 74%, 67%, and 61% among non-HCC HCV-positive subjects. The cumulative HCC patient survival rates of 64%, 64%, and 53% among Milan criteria were superior to those of 57%, 40%, and 27% among subjects exceeding the Milan criteria (P = .01). Pre-OLT “down-staging” treatment increased the 1-year patient survival from 64% to 70%; however, it did not affect the long-term results. Among items of the Milan criteria tumor size had less impact on outcomes then number of foci. The majority of cases who exceeded the Milan criteria had been transplanted before 2003. Our results suggested that the Milan criteria should be applied for the selection of candidates in order to promise good survival after OLT for HCC.     

Outcome of Liver Transplantation in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients at Siriraj Hospital

Background

Liver transplantation (LT) is one of the standard treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and the outcomes have become better after introduction of strict patient selection, such as the Milan criteria. However, several expanded criteria, such as the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria, have demonstrated similar survival outcomes. The aim of this study was to verify survival outcomes of LT for HCC at Siriraj Hospital.

肝移植治疗肝癌的受者选择杭州标准在亲属活体供肝移植中的应用价值

目的 探讨肝移植治疗肝癌的受者选择杭州标准在亲属活体供肝移植中的应用价值,及其对术后存活的影响.方法 回顾分析43例亲属活体供肝移植受者的临床资料.按照是否符合米兰标准、Up-To-Seven标准及杭州标准将受者分组,比较各组纳入受者的例数、术后总体存活率及无瘤存活率.结果 符合杭州标准的受者例数比米兰标准增加了61.5 %(8/13),比Up-to-Seven标准增加了23.5 %(4/17).符合米兰标准的受者(13例)术后1、3年总体存活率和无瘤存活率分别为100 %、80.0 %和84.6 %、84.6 %;符合Up-to-Seven标准的受者(17例)术后1、3年总体存活率和无瘤存活率分别为100 %、75.2 %和87.5 %、81.2 %;符合杭州标准的受者(21例)术后1、3年总体存活率和无瘤存活率分别为100 %、80.0 %和89.5 %、84.2 %.3组间总体存活率和无瘤存活率的比较,差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 杭州标准能将更多的肝癌患者纳入肝移植,且不影响术后总体存活率和无瘤存活率,是筛选肝癌患者接受亲属活体肝移植的有效标准.

Abstract：

Objective To investigate the clinical value of Hangzhou Criteria in selection of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC)for living donor liver transplantation(LDLT)and their effects on recipient's post-transplant survival.Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 43 patients with HCC who underwent LDLT in our center.All of the recipients were classified into subgroups according to Milan Criteria,Up-to-Seven Criteria and Hangzhou Criteria,and post-transplant total survival rate and tumor-free survival rate were compared among the criteria.Results The number of patients within Hangzhou Criteria was 61.5 %(8/13)more than that within Milan Criteria and 23.5 %(4/17)more than that within Up-to-Seven Criteria.The 1-,and 3-years total survival rate and tumor-free survival rate of the recipients within Milan Criteria(n=13)were 100 %,80.0 % and 84.6 %,84.6 %,those of the recipients within Up-to-Seven Criteria(n=17)were 100 %,75.2 % and 87.5 %,81.2 %,and those of the recipients within Hangzhou Criteria(n=21)were 100 %,80.0 % and 89.5 %,84.2 %,respectively.There was no significant difference among the three criteria in total survival rate and tumor-free survival rate(P>0.05).Conclusion Hangzhou Criteria further enrolled more liver transplantation candidates without decline of total survival rate and tumor-free survival.It is a more effective selection of HCC recipients for LDLT.     

Response to Transarterial Chemoembolization in Candidates With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Within Milan Criteria Does not Predict Post-Transplant Disease-Free Survival

Introduction

Few groups have studied the impact of pretransplant transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in the outcomes of liver transplant recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We verified whether response to TACE in HCC candidates impacts post-transplant disease-free survival.

Methods

This a single center retrospective study of patients who underwent liver transplantation from 2006–2013. Included were those transplanted due to HCC within the Milan criteria who were treated with TACE in the pre-transplant period. Response to TACE followed the modified RECIST (mRECIST) criteria. Disease free-survival was the main endpoint of the study.

Results

We included 187 patients in this study. The population had an average age of 57.5 years, predominantly formed by men (82.5%), with an average IMC of 26.7, MELD of 13, with viral hepatitis as main cause of liver disease. Average waiting time was 253 days and follow-up was 27.3 months. Based on response to TACE, 3-year disease-free survival was 84.1% for those with complete response to TACE, 84.1% for those with partial response to TACE, 85.7% for those with stable disease and 100% for patients with progressive disease. Multivariate analysis did not identify response to TACE as a predictor of disease-free post-transplant survival.

Conclusions

Response to TACE in candidates with HCC within Milan criteria does not predict post-transplant disease-free survival.     

肝移植治疗原发性肝癌103例疗效观察

目的 比较不同受体选择标准肝癌肝移植的远期疗效,分析肝痛肝移植术后肿瘤复发相关因素.方法 总结北京佑安医院2004年4月至2008年3月间的103例肝癌肝移植的临床资料,按照肿瘤的特征将其分为3组:符合米兰标准组(A组)、超出米兰标准但满足UCSF标准组(B组)和超出UCSF标准组(C组),比较3组的总体生存率及无瘤生存率,并分析影响远期预后的相关因素.结果 103例肝癌肝移植总体1、2、3年存活率分别为84.0%、70.5%和60.2%.其中A组50例,1、2、3年生存率和无瘤生存率分别为93.4%、83.8%、73.2%和97.3%、93.9%、88.7%;B组17例,1、2、3年生存率和无瘤生存率分别为93.3%、79.4%、66.2%和86.7%、79.4%、66.2%;C组36例,1、2、3年生存率和无瘤牛存率分别为67.0%、45.5%、34.1%和65.8%、50.0%、41.7%.远期生存率A组与B组比较无差异(P=0.631),A组、B组与C组比较具有统计学差异(P值分别为0.001,0.045).结论 米兰标准是肝癌肝移植最佳适应证,超出米兰标准但满足UCSF标准也可获得满意的远期疗效;肿瘤的分期和微血管侵犯是影响远期预后的风险因素.