Dataset Information

Minimally Invasive versus Open Liver Resection for Stage I/II Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

ABSTRACT: Minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) is increasingly used as a surgical treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, there is no large scale data to compare the effectiveness of MILR in comparison to open liver resection (OLR). We identified patients with stage I or II HCC from the National Cancer Database using propensity score matching techniques. Overall, 1931 (66%) and 995 (34%) patients underwent OLR or MILR between 2010 and 2015. After propensity matching, 5-year OS was similar in the MILR and OLR group (51.7% vs. 52.8%, p = 0.766). MILR was associated with lower 90-day mortality (5% vs. 7%, p = 0.041) and shorter length of stay (4 days vs. 5 days, p < 0.001), but higher rates of positive margins (6% vs. 4%, p = 0.001). An operation at an academic institution was identified as an independent preventive factor for a positive resection margin (OR 0.64: 95% CI 0.43-0.97) and 90-day mortality (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.41-0.91). MILR for HCC is associated with similar overall survival to OLR, with the benefit of improved short term postoperative outcomes. The increased rate of positive margins after MILR requires further investigation, as do the differences in perioperative outcomes between academic and nonacademic institutions.

SUBMITTER: Birgin E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8507639 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Minimally Invasive versus Open Liver Resection for Stage I/II Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Birgin Emrullah E Kaslow Sarah R SR Hetjens Svetlana S Correa-Gallego Camilo C Rahbari Nuh N NN

Cancers 20210925 19

Minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) is increasingly used as a surgical treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, there is no large scale data to compare the effectiveness of MILR in comparison to open liver resection (OLR). We identified patients with stage I or II HCC from the National Cancer Database using propensity score matching techniques. Overall, 1931 (66%) and 995 (34%) patients underwent OLR or MILR between 2010 and 2015. After propensity matching, 5-ye ...[more]

PMID: 34638285

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of liver transplantation (LT) and liver resection (LR) among patients with stage I and II hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).MethodsSEER 18 registry from 2004 to 2015 was retrieved for this study. We included 1,765 and 1,746 cases with stage I-II (AJCC, 7th) HCC in the multivariable analyses and instrumental variable (IV) analyses, respectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) was further carried out to ensure comparability. Propensity score to receive LT was adjusted by stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and standardized mortality ratio weighting (SMRW) methods. In addition, IV analysis was performed to adjust both measured and unmeasured confounding factors.ResultsWe identified 1,000 (56.7%) and 765 (43.3%) patients treated with LR and LT, respectively. In the multivariable adjusted cohort, after adjusting potential confounders, patients undergoing LT offered significant prognostic advantages over LR in overall survival (OS, P < 0.001) and disease-free survival (DSS, P < 0.001). The instrument variable in this study is LT rates in various Health Service Areas (HSAs). Results from the IV analysis showed that cases treated with LT had significantly longer OS (P = 0.001) and DSS (P < 0.001). In IV analysis stratified by clinicopathologic variables, the treatment effect of LT vs. LR in OS was consistent across all subgroups. Regarding DSS in IV analyses, the subgroup analyses observed that LT had better DSS across all subgroups, except for similar results in the older patients (interaction P value = 0.039) and the non-White patients (interaction P value = 0.041). In the propensity-matched cohort, patients with LT still had better OS (P < 0.001) and DSS (P < 0.001) in comparison to cases who underwent LR. In both IPTW and SMRW cohorts, patients who underwent LT had better OS (both P values < 0.001) and DSS (both P values < 0.001).ConclusionsLT provided a survival benefit for cases with stage I-II HCC. These results indicated that if LT rate was to increase in the future, average long-term survival may also increase. However, for some special populations such as the elderly patients, owing to the similar outcomes between LT and LR, the selection of LT should be cautious.

Project description:BackgroundLaparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has increased. However, the long-term outcomes of LLR for HCCs should be validated further. Besides, the validity of laparoscopic minor liver resection in difficult segments (1, 4a, 7, 8) (LMLR-DS) and laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) for HCCs need to be studied.MethodsA total of 1773 HCC patients were collected: 683 received LLR and 1090 received OLR. Propensity score matching (PSM) with 1:1 ratio was used to eliminate the selection bias. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared. In subgroup analyses, the validity of LMLR-DS or LMH for HCCs was studied.ResultsAfter PSM, 567 patients were in LLR or OLR group. LLR had lower intraoperative blood-loss and shorter postoperative hospital-stays than OLR. The postoperative complications were lower in LLR group (23.8% vs. 32.8%, P=0.001). The Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) had no significant difference between LLR and OLR groups (P=0.973, P=0.812). The cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year OR rates were 87.9%, 68.9%, and 57.7% for LLR group, and 85.9%, 68.8%, 58.8% for OLR group. The cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS rates were 73.0%, 51.5%, 40.6% for LLR group, and 70.3%, 49.0%, 42.4% for OLR group. In subgroup analyses, 178 patients were in LMLR-DS or open surgery (OMLR-DS) group after PSM. LMLR-DS had lower intraoperative blood-loss and shorter postoperative hospital-stays than OMLR-DS. The postoperative complications were lower in LMLR-DS group. The OS and DFS had no difference between LMLR-DS and OMLR-DS groups. The cumulative 5-year OR and DFS rates were 61.6%, 43.9% for LMLR-DS group, and 66.5%, 47.7% for OMLR-DS group. In another subgroup analyses, 115 patients were in LMH or open major hepatectomy (OMH) group. LMH had lower blood-loss and shorter postoperative hospital-stays than OMH. The complications, OS and DFS had no significantly differences between two groups. The cumulative 5-year OR and DFS rates were 44.3%, 29.9% for LMH group, and 44.7%, 33.2% for OMH group.ConclusionsLLR for HCCs showed better short-term outcomes and comparable long-term outcomes with OLR, even for patients who received LMLR-DS or LMH. LLR could be reliable and recommended for HCC treatment.

Dataset Information

Minimally Invasive versus Open Liver Resection for Stage I/II Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Publications

Minimally Invasive versus Open Liver Resection for Stage I/II Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets