Perioperative treatment with steroids has a positive impact on the liver function of patients who undergo liver resection, without increasing the risk of complications.

Introduction: It remains unclear which of surgery or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the more effective treatment for small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare survival between patients undergoing surgery (surgery group) and patients undergoing RFA (RFA group). Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial involving 49 institutions in Japan. Patients with Child-Pugh scores ≤ 7, largest HCC diameter ≤ 3 cm, and ≤ 3 HCC nodules were considered eligible. The co-primary endpoints were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). The current study reports the final result of RFS, and the follow-up of OS is still ongoing. Results: During 2009–2015, 308 patients were registered. After excluding ineligible patients, the surgery and RFA groups included 150 and 151 patients, respectively. Baseline factors did not differ significantly between the groups. In both groups, 90% of patients had solitary HCC. The median largest HCC diameter was 1.8 cm (interquartile range, 1.5–2.2 cm) in the surgery group and 1.8 cm (interquartile range, 1.5–2.3 cm) in the RFA group. The median procedure duration (274 versus 40 minutes, P<0.01) and the median duration of hospital stay (17 days versus 10 days, P<0.01) were longer in the surgery group than in the RFA group. RFS did not differ significantly between the groups as the median RFS was 3.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6–5.1) years in the surgery group and 3.0 (95% CI, 2.4–5.6) years in the RFA group (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.67–1.25; P=0.58). Discussion/Conclusion: Our study did not show which of surgery or RFA is the better treatment option for small HCC.

Objective:To propose an algorithm for resecting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the caudate lobe.Background:Owing to a deep location, resection of HCC originating in the caudate lobe is challenging, but a plausible guideline enabling safe, curable resection remains unknown.Methods:We developed an algorithm based on sublocation or size of the tumor and liver function to guide the optimal procedure for resecting HCC in the caudate lobe, consisting of 3 portions (Spiegel, process, and caval). Partial resection was prioritized to remove Spiegel or process HCC, while total resection was aimed to remove caval HCC depending on liver function.Results:According to the algorithm, we performed total (n = 43) or partial (n = 158) resections of the caudate lobe for HCC in 174 of 201 patients (compliance rate, 86.6%), with a median blood loss of 400 (10–4530) mL. Postoperative morbidity (Clavien grade ≥III b) and mortality rates were 3.0% and 0%, respectively. After a median follow-up of 2.6 years (range, 0.5–14.3), the 5-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates were 57.3% and 15.3%, respectively. Total and partial resection showed no significant difference in overall survival (71.2% vs 54.0% at 5 yr; P = 0.213), but a significant factor in survival was surgical margin (58.0% vs 45.6%, P = 0.034). The major determinant for survival was vascular invasion (hazard ratio 1.7, 95% CI 1.0–3.1, P = 0.026).Conclusions:Our algorithm-oriented strategy is appropriate for the resection of HCC originating in the caudate lobe because of the acceptable surgical safety and curability.

The '3 × 3 rule' (drain-fluid bilirubin level below 3 mg/dl on day 3 after operation) is an accurate criterion for removal of prophylactically placed abdominal drains in liver resection.

No abstract