Annals of surgical oncology · 2023
Analysis of the Extent of Liver Oncological Extended Resection for Incidental Gallbladder Cancer: How Much Is Too Much?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vega Eduardo A, Mellado Sebastian, Chirban Ariana M, Panettieri Elena, Sanhueza Marcel, Mege Rosemarie, Diaz Cristian, Brañes Alejandro, Briceño Eduardo, Viñuela Eduardo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Liver resection is pivotal in treating incidental gallbladder cancer (IGBC). However, the adequate volume of liver resection remains controversial.
METHODS: A cross-sectional retrospective analysis was performed on resected IGBC patients between 1999 and 2018. Morbidity was evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. The theoretical volume of a 2-cm and 1.5-cm wedge liver resection was calculated (105 cm3 and 77.5 cm3, respectively) and used as reference. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.
RESULTS: Among 111 patients re-resected for IGBC, 84 provided sufficient data to calculate liver resection volume. Patients with a resection volume ≥ 105 cm3 had a higher rate of overall morbidity (P = 0.001) and length of stay (P = 0.012), with no difference in mortality. There was no significant difference in OS according to residual cancer or T-category. A resection volume ≥ 77.5 cm3 was more frequent in T ≥ 3 than in T1-2 patients (P = 0.026), and residual cancer was higher (P = 0.041) among patients with ≥ 77.5 cm3 resected. Cox multivariate regression showed that residual cancer (HR = 11.47, P < 0.001), perineural/lymphovascular invasion (HR = 2.48, P = 0.021), and Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa morbidity (HR = 5.03, P = 0.003) predict worse OS, but not liver volume resection.
CONCLUSION: There are no significant differences in OS based on resected liver volume of IGBC, when R0 is achieved. There is a significant difference in morbidity and length of stay when liver wedges are ≥ 105 cm3, which is lost when analyzed by Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa. A 77.5-105 cm3 resection is indicated in ≥ T3 patients, minimizing morbidity risk, while addressing concerns of overall survival.
METHODS: A cross-sectional retrospective analysis was performed on resected IGBC patients between 1999 and 2018. Morbidity was evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. The theoretical volume of a 2-cm and 1.5-cm wedge liver resection was calculated (105 cm3 and 77.5 cm3, respectively) and used as reference. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.
RESULTS: Among 111 patients re-resected for IGBC, 84 provided sufficient data to calculate liver resection volume. Patients with a resection volume ≥ 105 cm3 had a higher rate of overall morbidity (P = 0.001) and length of stay (P = 0.012), with no difference in mortality. There was no significant difference in OS according to residual cancer or T-category. A resection volume ≥ 77.5 cm3 was more frequent in T ≥ 3 than in T1-2 patients (P = 0.026), and residual cancer was higher (P = 0.041) among patients with ≥ 77.5 cm3 resected. Cox multivariate regression showed that residual cancer (HR = 11.47, P < 0.001), perineural/lymphovascular invasion (HR = 2.48, P = 0.021), and Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa morbidity (HR = 5.03, P = 0.003) predict worse OS, but not liver volume resection.
CONCLUSION: There are no significant differences in OS based on resected liver volume of IGBC, when R0 is achieved. There is a significant difference in morbidity and length of stay when liver wedges are ≥ 105 cm3, which is lost when analyzed by Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa. A 77.5-105 cm3 resection is indicated in ≥ T3 patients, minimizing morbidity risk, while addressing concerns of overall survival.