Roberto Troisi

Recommendations for laparoscopic liver resection: a report from the second international consensus conference held in Morioka.

OBJECTIVE This review aims to assess the impact of implementing dedicated emergency surgical services, in particular acute care surgery, on clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND The optimal model for delivering high-quality emergency surgical care remains unknown. Acute Care Surgery (ACS) is a health care model combining emergency general surgery, trauma, and critical care. It has been adopted across the United States in the management of surgical emergencies. METHOD A systematic review was performed after PRISMA recommendations using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Psych-Info databases. Studies assessing different care models and institutional factors affecting the delivery of emergency general surgery were included. RESULTS Twenty-seven studies comprising 744,238 patients were included in this review. In studies comparing ACS with traditional practice, mortality and morbidity were improved. Moreover, time to senior review, delays to operating theater, and financial expenditure were often reduced. The elements of ACS models varied but included senior clinicians present onsite during office hours and dedicated to emergency care while on-call. Referrals were made to specialist centers with primary surgical assessments taking place on surgical admissions units rather than in the emergency department. Twenty-four-hour access to dedicated emergency operating rooms was also described. CONCLUSIONS ACS models as well as centralized units and hospitals with dedicated emergency operating rooms, access to radiology and intensive care facilities (ITU) are all factors associated with improved clinical and financial outcomes in the delivery of emergency general surgery. There is, however, no consensus on the elements that constitute an ideal ACS model and how it can be implemented into current surgical practice.

Effects of Hemi-Portocaval Shunts For Inflow Modulation on the Outcome of Small-for-Size Grafts in Living Donor Liver Transplantation

Graft hyperperfusion in small‐for‐size grafts (SFSG) is considered the main causal factor of small‐for‐size syndrome (SFSS). We compared SFSG with a graft‐to‐recipient body ratio ≤0.8, with and without graft inflow modulation (GIM) by means of a hemi‐portocaval shunt (HPCS). Thirteen patients underwent adult‐to‐adult living donor liver transplantation (AALDLT): G1, n = 5 [4 right livers (RL) and 1 left liver (LL)] without GIM, and G2, n = 8 (4 RL and 4 LL) with GIM. In G2 patients, portal vein flow (PVF) was significantly reduced by HPCS: 190 ± 70 mL/min/100 g liver in G2 vs. 401 ± 225 ml/min in G1 (p = 0.002). One‐ and 6‐month post‐transplantation graft volume/standard liver volume (GV/SLV) ratio was of 72% and 79.5% in G1; 80% and 101% in G2 (p = ns). SFSS was observed in three G1 recipients (who were retransplanted), but in none of the G2 patients. At 1‐year, patient and graft survival was respectively of 40% and 20% in G1, 87.5% and 75% in G2 (p = 0.024 and 0.03).

Modulation of Portal Graft Inflow: A Necessity in Adult Living-donor Liver Transplantation?

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical significance of modulating the recipient portal inflow (rPVF) through perioperative ligation of the splenic artery in adult living-donor liver transplantation (ALDLTx) by focusing on vascular complications, intractable ascites production, and the prevention of small-for-size syndrome (SFSS). Summary Background DataIn ALDLTx, portal graft flow is enhanced to at least twice the donor value, raising the total liver inflow. Recipient hepatic arterial flow (rHAF) is lower than expected. Portal hyperperfusion of small grafts in larger recipients is thought to be one of the main causes of posttransplant graft dysfunction/SFSS. MethodsSeventeen ALDLTx were reviewed for a minimum of 2 months. Patients were divided retrospectively into two groups: G1 (n = 7), without modulation of rPVF, and G2 (n = 10), with splenic artery ligation to decrease rPVF perioperatively. Donor and recipient hepatic hemodynamics were evaluated against graft function and outcome, including correlations between rPVF, graft weight, graft:recipient body weight ratio, and recipient weight. ResultsFollowing portal and arterial reperfusion, mean rPVF and rPVF/graft weight were much higher than in the donors, whereas mean rHAF and rHAF/graft weight were much lower. No differences were found between groups, except for rPVF and rHAF, which were much more higher and lower, respectively, before splenic artery ligation. In G1 patients, SFSS was seen in two patients and vascular complications occurred in two others. In G2 patients, splenic artery ligation permitted a significant decrease in rPVF, an improvement in rHAF, and the resolution of refractory ascites. Neither SFSS nor vascular complications were seen in G2 patients. ConclusionsWhen a suboptimal graft:recipient body weight ratio is accompanied by high rPVF in ALDLTx, the portal flow should be modulated perioperatively; splenic artery ligation is a simple and safe method that is sufficient to allow this modulation in most patients.

A prospective randomised, open-labeled, trial comparing sirolimus-containing versus mTOR-inhibitor-free immunosuppression in patients undergoing liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

BackgroundThe potential anti-cancer effects of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are being intensively studied. To date, however, few randomised clinical trials (RCT) have been performed to demonstrate anti-neoplastic effects in the pure oncology setting, and at present, no oncology endpoint-directed RCT has been reported in the high-malignancy risk population of immunosuppressed transplant recipients. Interestingly, since mTOR inhibitors have both immunosuppressive and anti-cancer effects, they have the potential to simultaneously protect against immunologic graft loss and tumour development. Therefore, we designed a prospective RCT to determine if the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus can improve hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)-free patient survival in liver transplant (LT) recipients with a pre-transplant diagnosis of HCC.Methods/DesignThe study is an open-labelled, randomised, RCT comparing sirolimus-containing versus mTOR-inhibitor-free immunosuppression in patients undergoing LT for HCC. Patients with a histologically confirmed HCC diagnosis are randomised into 2 groups within 4-6 weeks after LT; one arm is maintained on a centre-specific mTOR-inhibitor-free immunosuppressive protocol and the second arm is maintained on a centre-specific mTOR-inhibitor-free immunosuppressive protocol for the first 4-6 weeks, at which time sirolimus is initiated. A 21/2 -year recruitment phase is planned with a 5-year follow-up, testing HCC-free survival as the primary endpoint. Our hypothesis is that sirolimus use in the second arm of the study will improve HCC-free survival. The study is a non-commercial investigator-initiated trial (IIT) sponsored by the University Hospital Regensburg and is endorsed by the European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association; 13 countries within Europe, Canada and Australia are participating.DiscussionIf our hypothesis is correct that mTOR inhibition can reduce HCC tumour growth while simultaneously providing immunosuppression to protect the liver allograft from rejection, patients should experience less post-transplant problems with HCC recurrence, and therefore could expect a longer and better quality of life. A positive outcome will likely change the standard of posttransplant immunosuppressive care for LT patients with HCC.Trial RegisterTrial registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00355862(EudraCT Number: 2005-005362-36)

International experience for laparoscopic major liver resection

Although minor laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) appear as standardized procedures, major LLRs are still limited to few expert teams. The aim of this study was to report the combined data of 18 international centers performing major LLR. Variables evaluated were number and type of LLR, surgical indications, number of synchronous colorectal resections, details on technical points, conversion rates, operative time, blood loss and surgical margins. From 1996 to 2014, a total of 5388 LLR were carried out including 1184 major LLRs. The most frequent indication for laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) was colorectal liver metastases (37.0%). Seven centers used hand assistance or hybrid approach selectively for LRH mostly at the beginning of their experience. Seven centers apply Pringles maneuver routinely. The conversion rate for all major LLRs was 10% and mean operative time was 291 min. Mean estimated blood loss for all major LLR was 327 ml and negative surgical margin rate was 96.5%. Major LLRs still remain challenging procedures requiring important experience in both laparoscopy and liver surgery. Stimulating the younger generation to learn and accomplish these techniques is the better way to guarantee further development of this surgical field.

Sirolimus Use in Liver Transplant Recipients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Phase 3 Trial.

Background We investigated whether sirolimus-based immunosuppression improves outcomes in liver transplantation (LTx) candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods In a prospective-randomized open-label international trial, 525 LTx recipients with HCC initially receiving mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor–free immunosuppression were randomized 4 to 6 weeks after transplantation into a group on mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor–free immunosuppression (group A: 264 patients) or a group incorporating sirolimus (group B: 261). The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS); intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was conducted after 8 years. Overall survival (OS) was a secondary endpoint. Results Recurrence-free survival was 64.5% in group A and 70.2% in group B at study end, this difference was not significant (P = 0.28; hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.62; 1.15). In a planned analysis of RFS rates at yearly intervals, group B showed better outcomes 3 years after transplantation (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.48-1.00). Similarly, OS (P = 0.21; HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.58-1.13) was not statistically better in group B at study end, but yearly analyses showed improvement out to 5 years (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.49-1.00). Interestingly, subgroup (Milan Criteria-based) analyses revealed that low-risk, rather than high-risk, patients benefited most from sirolimus; furthermore, younger recipients (age ⩽60) also benefited, as well sirolimus monotherapy patients. Serious adverse event numbers were alike in groups A (860) and B (874). Conclusions Sirolimus in LTx recipients with HCC does not improve long-term RFS beyond 5 years. However, a RFS and OS benefit is evident in the first 3 to 5 years, especially in low-risk patients. This trial provides the first high-level evidence base for selecting immunosuppression in LTx recipients with HCC.

Once-Daily Prolonged-Release Tacrolimus (ADVAGRAF) Versus Twice-Daily Tacrolimus (PROGRAF) in Liver Transplantation

The efficacy and safety of dual‐therapy regimens of twice‐daily tacrolimus (BID; Prograf) and once‐daily tacrolimus (QD; Advagraf) administered with steroids, without antibody induction, were compared in a multicenter, 1:1‐randomized, two‐arm, parallel‐group study in 475 primary liver transplant recipients. A double‐blind, double‐dummy 24‐week period was followed by an open extension to 12 months posttransplant. The primary endpoint, event rate of biopsy‐proven acute rejection (BPAR) at 24 weeks, was 33.7% for tacrolimus BID versus 36.3% for tacrolimus QD (Per‐protocol set; p = 0.512; treatment difference 2.6%, 95% confidence interval −7.3%, 12.4%), falling within the predefined 15% noninferiority margin. At 12 months, BPAR episodes requiring treatment were similar for tacrolimus BID and QD (28.1% and 24.7%). Twelve‐month patient and graft survival was 90.8% and 85.6% for tacrolimus BID and 89.2% and 85.3% for tacrolimus QD. Adverse event (AE) profiles were similar for both tacrolimus BID and QD with comparable incidences of AEs and serious AEs. Tacrolimus QD was well tolerated with similar efficacy and safety profiles to tacrolimus BID.

The value of laparoscopic liver surgery for solid benign hepatic tumors

BackgroundLaparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has gained wide acceptance for various liver resection procedures, mainly for benign diseases. However, only small series have been reported from a few selected centers.MethodsBetween January 2001 and January 2006, a total of 629 liver resections were performed at our institution. The indication was solid benign liver tumor in 56 (8.9%) patients. LLR was performed in 20 (35.7%) cases. Data from the LLR group were compared with those from a consecutive control group undergoing open liver surgery (OS) for similar indications in a matched-pair analysis during the same period. The pairs were matched as closely as possible for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, indication for resection, and type and location of the lesions. The endpoint was to investigate overall morbidity and outcome.ResultsAll patients but one are alive and well after a mean follow-up of 35 months (range 10–60 months). Conversion laparotomy was required in two out of 20 (10%) cases for uncontrolled bleeding (one requiring temporary hemodialysis). LLR was characterized by faster time to first oral intake and shorter hospital stay compared to OS (p = 0.001 and 0.008, respectively). Incisional hernias (25%) were only recorded in the OS (p = 0.047 vs. LLR). Overall morbidity was 45% in OS versus 20% in LLR (p = 0.3).ConclusionsLLR significantly reduced time to oral intake, hospital stay, and incisional hernias compared to OS. Bleeding is a major risk and should be carefully considered when resecting benign tumors. In the hands of expert surgeons, LLR may become the gold standard for the resection of benign liver tumors located in the anterior and lateral sectors and for minor hepatic resections.

Robot assistance in liver surgery: a real advantage over a fully laparoscopic approach? Results of a comparative bi-institutional analysis

Laparoscopic liver resection (LAPR) is safe and feasible with a better postoperative course as compared to open resections. Robot‐assisted liver surgery (ROBR) is a potential alternative to LAPR. In this study we compare outcomes between ROBR and LAPR.

Early immunosuppression withdrawal after living donor liver transplantation and donor stem cell infusion

Long‐term results of organ transplantation are still limited by serious side effects of immunosuppressive drugs. A major issue, therefore, is to elaborate novel therapeutic protocols allowing withdrawal or minimization of immunosuppressive therapy after transplantation. We report on 3 patients prospectively enrolled in an original protocol designed to promote graft acceptance in living donor liver transplantation, using posttransplant conditioning with high doses of antithymocyte globulin followed by injection of donor‐derived stem cells. In 2 patients, early immunosuppression withdrawal was possible, without subsequent graft deterioration. In these 2 cases, in vitro studies showed indices of immunological tolerance as assessed by specific hyporesponsiveness to donor alloantigens in mixed lymphocytes culture. In the third patient, acute rejection rapidly occurred after discontinuation of immunosuppression, and minimal immunosuppression has to be maintained during long‐term follow‐up. In this case, a clearly distinct immunoreactive profile was observed as compared to tolerant patients, as no specific modulation of the antidonor response was observed in vitro. Of note, no macrochimerism could be detected in any of the 3 patients during the follow‐up. In conclusion, these clinical observations demonstrated that, despite the absence of macrochimerism, donor stem cells infusion combined with recipient conditioning may allow early immunosuppression withdrawal or minimization after liver transplantation. Liver Transpt 12:1523–1528, 2006.