Liver Hanging Maneuver: importante técnica cirúrgica nas grandes ressecções hepáticas / Liver Hanging Maneuver: important surgical technique in the large liver resections

Introdução/Objetivos: O Colangiocarcinoma é o segundo tumor hepático maligno mais prevalente, apresentando prognóstico reservado quando não é passível de ressecção, já que esta é sua única possibilidade de cura. Visando melhores resultados na terapêutica cirúrgica, além de critérios adequados de ressecabilidade, é impreterível a técnica cirúrgica mais segura e eficaz. Atualmente, observa-se que o uso da Liver Hanging Maneuver (LHM), como componente da técnica de abordagem anterior (AA) das grandes ressecções hepáticas, tem conferido a essas, maior viabilidade, já que permite: menor hemorragia; menor manipulação e ruptura tumoral; maior estabilidade na manipulação da Veia Cava Inferior (VCI); reduzido dano isquêmico ao fígado remanescente e melhor sobrevivência aos pacientes com tumor hepático. Relato de Caso: Paciente do sexo feminino, 58 anos submetida a uma trisetorectomia com abordagem anterior e uso da Liver Hanging Maneuver devido a um colangiocarcinoma intrahepático. Resultados: Boa evolução pós-operatória e atualmente está com dois anos de seguimento ambulatorial. Apresentamos os aspectos técnicos da “Liver Hanging Maneuver”. Conclusão: Técnica segura que aumenta a viabilidade das grandes ressecções hepáticas, principalmente nos casos de tumores intra-hepáticos grandes, como no caso discutido nesse relato.Descritores: Neoplasias hepáticas, Colangiocarcinoma, Carcinoma hepatocelular, Ductos biliares intra-hepáticos; Hepatectomia/métodos AbstractIntroduction/Purpose: Cholangiocarcinoma is the second most prevalent hepatic tumor presenting a reserved prognosis when is not amenable to resection, because this treatment is the only possibility of cure. Seeking for better surgical outcomes, beyond of adequate resectability criteria, the safety and most effective surgical technique is fundamental. Nowadays, it is observed that the use of Liver Hanging Maneuver as a component of the anterior approach techinique of large liver resections has conferred to these greater viability, since it allows: less haemorrhage; less tumoral manipulation and rupture; better haemodynamic stability by avoiding any twisting of the inferior vena cava; reduced ischemic damage of the liver remnant, and better survival for patients with hepatic tumor. Case report: 58-year-old patient, female, did submit to a trisetorectomy due to intrahepatic cholangiocarcioma with the use of the Liver Hanging maneuver. Results: Good postoperative evolution and currently has two years follow-up. We introduce the technical aspects of Liver Hanging Maneuver. Conclusion: A safe technique that increases the viability of large hepatic resections, especially in cases of large intrahepatic tumors, as in the case discussed in this report.Keywords: Liver neoplasms; Cholangiocarcinoma; Carcinoma, hepatocellular; Bile ducts, intrahepatic; Hepatectomy/methods

Feasibility of a national expert panel to determine resectability in patients with initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM).

3562 Background: Decision on optimal treatment strategy for CRLM remains complex because uniform (un)resectability criteria are lacking. We hypothesize that the use of an expert panel can improve the identification of patients with potentially resectable CRLM. The Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG) Expert Panel was established in conjunction with the CAIRO5 study (Huiskens J et al. BMC Cancer 2015), a multicenter, randomized, phase-3 trial, investigating optimal systemic induction treatment in patients with initially unresectable CRLM. Here, we present the feasibility of this panel. Methods: The DCCG Expert Panel consists of 13 liver surgeons and 4 radiologists. Consensus was reached on predefined (un)resectability criteria at baseline. An online platform allowed resectability-assessment by 3 surgeons in case of inter-surgeon agreement, and 5 surgeons if they disagreed. CRLM were assessed as 1) resectable 2) potentially resectable, or 3) permanently unresectable. Patients with initially unresectable CRLM were evaluated at baseline and subsequently every 2 months as long as CRLM were considered potentially resectable. Results: Overall, 397 panel evaluations in 183 patients were analyzed. Median time to panel conclusion was 7 days (IQR 5-11 days) and 204 (51%) evaluations showed inter-surgeon disagreement, with major disagreement (resectable versus permanently unresectable) in 24 (14%) and 12 (29%) evaluations after 2 and 4 months of systemic treatment. Ultimately, 84 (79%) patients with resectable CRLM underwent resection and 23 (27%) resections included portal vein embolization or 2-stage procedures. In resectable CRLM with inter-surgeon agreement versus disagreement, R0 resection was achieved in 39 (75%) versus 28 (52%) patients, p = 0.013. Median time to recurrence was similar between resections with panel agreement versus disagreement, 8 versus 6 months, p = 0.447. Conclusions: This study shows the feasibility of a national Liver Expert Panel for prospective resectability assessment of patients with initially unresectable CRLM. High inter-surgeon disagreement supports the use of a panel. We aim to further validate the panel with outcome parameters. Clinical trial information: NCT02162563.

Preoperative evaluation with computed tomography (CT) of the resectability of mesenteric lymph node metastases in small intestine neuroendocrine neoplasms (si-NENs): New criteria for clinicians and surgeons.

212 Background: The 2016 European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society consensus guidelines update recommends resection of the primary tumor and all mesenteric lymph-nodes for all patients with si-NENs, both with curative and palliative purposes. Current resectability criteria are based on the degree of involvement of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) by the metastatic lymph nodes. The aim of this work was to test these criteria for the evaluation of our patients; we included as additional criteria the degree of involvement of the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) and peritoneum, two features not covered by current literature. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the pre-operative CT-scans of all patients with si-NENs operated at IEO (European Institute of Oncology) between 2008 and April 2018. A first analysis classified tumors as “resectable” or “unresectable” according to SMA involvement. A second analysis classified tumors as resectable or unresectable according to SMA involvement, SMV involvement (infiltration of the peripheral or proximal portion) and peritoneal involvement (presence or absence of fibrosis and retraction of the mesentery). We finally reviewed all surgery reports assessing radicality and completeness of the operation. Results: Abdominal CT-scan were available for analysis in 42 out of 47 operated patients. According to the first analysis, all three tumors classified as unresectable underwent incomplete resection, whereas out of the 39 tumors classified as resectable, six received an incomplete resection and 33 were completely resected. According to the second analysis, the nine tumors classified as unresectable underwent an incomplete resection, whereas 33 tumors classified as resectable were completely resected. Conclusions: Our retrospective analysis confirmed that SMA involvement may be useful to evaluate the resectability of the primary tumor and mesenteric lymph nodes. Furthermore, it suggested that the additional evaluation of the SMV and peritoneum involvement can allow to identify further cases of tumors for which complete resection is not possible.