Background The extent of liver resection for tumours is limited by the expected functional reserve of the future liver remnant (FRL), so hypertrophy may be induced by portal vein embolization (PVE), taking 6 weeks or longer for growth. This study assessed the hypothesis that simultaneous embolization of portal and hepatic veins (PVE/HVE) accelerates hypertrophy and improves resectability. Methods All centres of the international DRAGON trials study collaborative were asked to provide data on patients who had PVE/HVE or PVE on 2016–2019 (more than 5 PVE/HVE procedures was a requirement). Liver volumetry was performed using OsiriX MD software. Multivariable analysis was performed for the endpoints of resectability rate, FLR hypertrophy and major complications using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) statistics, regression, and Kaplan–Meier analysis. Results In total, 39 patients had undergone PVE/HVE and 160 had PVE alone. The PVE/HVE group had better hypertrophy than the PVE group (59 versus 48 per cent respectively; P = 0.020) and resectability (90 versus 68 per cent; P = 0.007). Major complications (26 versus 34 per cent; P = 0.550) and 90-day mortality (3 versus 16 per cent respectively, P = 0.065) were comparable. Multivariable analysis confirmed that these effects were independent of confounders. Conclusion PVE/HVE achieved better FLR hypertrophy and resectability than PVE in this collaborative experience.

Background: The extent of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting response has varied globally. The European and African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA), the premier representative body for practicing HPB surgeons in Europe and Africa, conducted this survey to assess the impact of COVID-19 on HPB surgery. Methods: An online survey was disseminated to all E-AHPBA members to assess the effects of the pandemic on unit capacity, management of HPB cancers, use of COVID-19 screening and other aspects of service delivery. Results: Overall, 145 (25%) members responded. Most units, particularly in COVID-high countries (>100,000 cases) reported insufficient critical care capacity and reduced HPB operating sessions compared to COVID-low countries. Delayed access to cancer surgery necessitated alternatives including increased neoadjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer and colorectal liver metastases, and locoregional treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma. Other aspects of service delivery including COVID-19 screening and personal protective equipment varied between units and countries. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound adverse impact on the delivery of HPB cancer care across the continents of Europe and Africa. The findings illustrate the need for safe resumption of cancer surgery in a "new" normal world with screening of patients and staff for COVID-19.

Objective: To test the degree of agreement in selecting therapeutic options for patients suffering from colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) among surgical experts around the globe. Summary/Background: Only few areas in medicine have seen so many novel therapeutic options over the past decades as for liver tumors. Significant variations may therefore exist regarding the choices of treatment, even among experts, which may confuse both the medical community and patients. Methods: Ten cases of CRLM with different levels of complexity were presented to 43 expert liver surgeons from 23 countries and 4 continents. Experts were defined as experienced surgeons with academic contributions to the field of liver tumors. Experts provided information on their medical education and current practice in liver surgery and transplantation. Using an online platform, they chose their strategy in treating each case from defined multiple choices with added comments. Inter-rater agreement among experts and cases was calculated using free-marginal multirater kappa methodology. A similar, but adjusted survey was presented to 60 general surgeons from Asia, Europe, and North America to test their attitude in treating or referring complex patients to expert centers. Results: Thirty-eight (88%) experts completed the evaluation. Most of them are in leading positions (92%) with a median clinical experience of 25 years. Agreement on therapeutic strategies among them was none to minimal in more than half of the cases with kappa varying from 0.00 to 0.39. Many general surgeons may not refer the complex cases to expert centers, including in Europe, where they also engage in complex liver surgeries. Conclusions: Considerable inconsistencies of decision-making exist among expert surgeons when choosing a therapeutic strategy for CRLM. This might confuse both patients and referring physicians and indicate that an international high-level consensus statements and widely accepted guidelines are needed.

Background: Hepatopancreatoduodenectomy (HPD) is an aggressive operation for treatment of advanced bile duct and gallbladder cancer associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality, and uncertain oncological benefit in terms of survival. Few reports on HPD from Western centers exist.The purpose of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy for HPD in European centers.Method: Members of the European-African HepatoPancreatoBiliary Association were invited to report all consecutive patients operated with HPD for bile duct or gallbladder cancer between January 2003 and January 2018. The patient and tumor characteristics, perioperative and survival outcomes were analyzed. Results: In total, 66 patients from 19 European centers were included in the analysis. 90-day mortality rate was 17% and 13% for bile duct and gallbladder cancer respectively. All factors predictive of perioperative mortality were patient and disease-specific. The three-year overall survival excluding 90-day mortality was 80% for bile duct and 30% for gallbladder cancer (P = 0.013). In multivariable analysis R0-resection had a significant impact on overall survival. Conclusion:HPD, although being associated with substantial perioperative mortality, can offer a survival benefit in patient subgroups with bile duct cancer and gallbladder cancer. To achieve negative resection margins is paramount for an improved survival outcome.

Background: Pancreatic surgery is associated with considerable morbidity and, consequently, offers a large and complex field for research. To prioritize relevant future scientific projects, it is of utmost importance to identify existing evidence and uncover research gaps. Thus, the aim of this project was to create a systematic and living Evidence Map of Pancreatic Surgery. Methods: PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were systematically searched for all randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews on pancreatic surgery. Outcomes from every existing randomized controlled trial were extracted, and trial quality was assessed. Systematic reviews were used to identify an absence of randomized controlled trials. Randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews on identical subjects were grouped according to research topics. A web-based evidence map modeled after a mind map was created to visualize existing evidence. Metaanalyses of specific outcomes of pancreatic surgery were performed for all research topics with more than 3 randomized controlled trials. For partial pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy, pooled benchmarks for outcomes were calculated with a 99% confidence interval. The evidence map undergoes regular updates. Results: Out of 30,860 articles reviewed, 328 randomized controlled trials on 35,600 patients and 332 systematic reviews were included and grouped into 76 research topics. Most randomized controlled trials were from Europe (46%) and most systematic reviews were from Asia (51%). A living meta-analysis of 21 out of 76 research topics (28%) was performed and included in the web-based evidence map. Evidence gaps were identified in 11 out of 76 research topics (14%). The benchmark for mortality was 2% (99% confidence interval: 1%e2%) for partial pancreatoduodenectomy and <1% (99% confidence interval: 0%e1%) for distal pancreatectomy. The benchmark for overall complications was 53% (99%confidence interval: 46%e61%) for partial pancreatoduodenectomy and 59% (99% confidence interval: 44%e80%) for distal pancreatectomy. Conclusion:The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery Evidence Map of Pancreatic Surgery, which is freely accessible via www.evidencemap.surgery and as a mobile phone app, provides a regularly updated overview of the available literature displayed in an intuitive fashion. Clinical decision making and evidence-based patient information are supported by the primary data provided, as well as by living meta-analyses. Researchers can use the systematic literature search and processed data for their own projects, and funding bodies can base their research priorities on evidence gaps that the map uncovers.

No abstract

Liver resection remains one of the most technically challenging surgical procedure in abdominal surgery due to the complex anatomical arrangement in the liver and its rich blood supply that constitutes about 20% of the cardiac output per cycle. The challenge for resection in cirrhotic livers is even higher because of the impact of surgical stress and trauma imposed on borderline liver function and the impaired ability for liver regeneration in cirrhotic livers. Nonetheless, evolution and advancement in surgical techniques as well as knowledge in perioperative management of liver resection has led to a substantial improvement in surgical outcome in recent decade. The objective of this article was to provide updated information on the recent developments in liver surgery, from preoperative evaluation, to technicality of resection, future liver remnant augmentation and finally, postoperative management of complications.❖ < 10% at 15min for trisectionectomy or bisectorectomy of liver ❖ 10-19% for hemihepatectomy, right sided sectorectomy ❖ 20-29% for segmentectomy ❖ 30-39% for limited resection (eg wedge resection) ❖ > 40% for enucleation

vein embolization and staging laparoscopy should be considered in selected patients. Additional evidence is needed to fully define the role of orthotopic liver transplant. Portal and lymph node involvement worsen the prognosis and long-term survival, and surgery is the only option that can lengthen it. Improvements in adjuvant therapy are essential for improving long-term outcome. Furthermore, the lack of effective chemotherapy drugs and radiotherapy approaches leads us to can consider R1 resection as an option, because operated patients have a longer survival rate than those who not undergo surgery. INTRODUCTIONCarcinomas arising from the confluence of the hepatic ducts were first described by Altemeier et al [1] . Klatskin [2] Alejandro Serrablo, Luis Tejedor Outcome of surgical resection in Klatskin tumors TOPIC HIGHLIGHT AbstractCholangiocarcinomas are the second most frequent primary hepatic malignancy, and make up from 5% to 30% of malignant hepatic tumours. Hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCC) is the most common type, and accounts for approximately 60% to 67% of all cholangiocarcinoma cases. There is not a staging system that permits us to compare all series and extract some conclusions to increase the long-survival rate in this dismal disease. Neither the extension of resection, according to the sort of HCC, is a closed topic. Some authors defend limited resection (mesohepatectomy with S1, S1 plus S4b-S5, local excision for papillary tumours, etc .) while others insist in the compulsoriness of an extended hepatic resection with portal vein bifurcation removed to reach cure. As there is not an ideal adjuvant therapy, R1 resection can be justified to prolong the survival rate. Morbidity and mortality rates changed along the last decade, but variability is the rule, with morbidity and mortality rates ranging from 14% to 76% and from 0% to 19%, respectively. Conclusion: Surgical resection continues to be the main treatment of HCC. Negative resection margins achieved with major hepatic resections are associated with improved outcome. Preresectional management with biliary drainage, portal José M Ramia, MD, PhD, Series Editor