Efficacy and prognostic factors of repeated hepatectomy for postoperative intrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing initial hepatectomy

Abstract

BackgroundPostoperative recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is associated with low survival rates. While HCC treatment options have expanded substantially, they are accompanied by several challenges. This study assessed the outcomes of repeated hepatectomy (RH) for postoperative intrahepatic recurrence of HCC among patients undergoing initial hepatectomy (IH) as well as independent risk factors for HCC recurrence among patients undergoing repeated hepatectomy (RH).MethodsClinical data from 84 patients undergoing both IH and RH and 66 recurrent HCC patients who had received radiofrequency ablation (RFA) from July 2011 to September 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The following groups were compared: (1) RH Group A (n = 84), (2) IH Group (n = 84, same individuals as RH Group A), (3) RH Group B (n = 45/84 from RH Group A), and (4) RFA Group (n = 66). The clinical pathology and operative characteristics of the patients in RH Group A were compared to those in the IH Group. Meanwhile, the clinical pathology and pre- and post-treatment features of the patients in RH Group B were compared to those in the RFA Group. The tumor-free survival time was compared between patients in RH Group A and the IH Group as well as between patients in RH Group B and the RFA Group. The independent risk factors for the 1-year postoperative tumor-free survival of RH Group A patients were investigated using univariate and multivariate analysis.ResultsMeasures of clinical pathology, including AFP, Child-Pugh score, HBV-DNA, tumor number, liver cirrhosis, tumor differentiation, surgical approach, and TNM stage differed significantly between patients in RH Group A and the IH Group (all P < 0.05), with the exception of tumor number and tumor size (both P > 0.05). No significant differences were found in these measures between the patients in RH Group B and the RFA Group (all P > 0.05). While patients in the RH Group A had a longer operation time than those in the IH Group (4.35 ± 1.25 h vs. 3.55 ± 0.92 h, P < 0.001), the level of intraoperative bleeding was similar (400.00 ± 199.25 ml vs. 359.40 ± 213.37 ml, P = 0.204). RH Group B patients had a longer hospitalization time than those in the RFA Group (6.5 ± 0.8 d vs. 5.5 ± 1.1 d, P < 0.001), however, the difference in hospitalization costs was not statistically significant (29,009 ± 3,806 CNY vs. 29,944 ± 3,752 CNY, P = 0.202). Five-day post-operative serum biomarker levels, including direct bilirubin (DB) and albumin (ALB), were significantly higher in RH Group B than in the RFA Group (all P < 0.05), with the exception of ALT, AST, and total bilirubin (TB) (all P > 0.05). Patients in RH Group A had a lower tumor-free survival time than those in the IH Group (median: 12 vs. 22 months, P < 0.001), and patients in the RH Group B had a significantly higher tumor-free survival time than those in the RFA group (median: 15 months vs. 8 months, P < 0.001). Age ≥50 y, Child-Pugh class A, and negative HBV-DNA were independent risk factors that positively impacted the 1-year postoperative tumor-free survival rate of postoperative intrahepatic recurrent HCC patients undergoing RH (P < 0.001, respectively).ConclusionDue to the potential of harm related to relapse of recurrent HCC for cancer patients, RH is a superior option. RH could offer better outcomes for recurrent HCC patients undergoing IH. Compared with lesion pathology, the better target organ of the liver will be key to ameliorating tumor-free survival for recurrent HCC patients undergoing RH.

A clinical assessment of three-dimensional-printed liver model navigation for thrice or more repeated hepatectomy based on a conversation analysis

“…Repeated hepatectomy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or colorectal liver metastasis is widely accepted to prolong the survival after primary hepatectomy [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. In repeated hepatectomy, precise inspection by intraoperative ultrasonography is quite important but is technically demanding due to intrahepatic air introduced by injury of the liver surface during adhesiotomy and/or changes in the liver shape after a previous hepatectomy [7][8][9][10].…”