Santhalingam Jegatheeswaran

Experimental and clinical evidence for modification of hepatic ischaemia–reperfusion injury by N-acetylcysteine during major liver surgery

BACKGROUND Hepatic ischaemia-reperfusion (I/R) injury occurs in both liver resectional surgery and in transplantation. The biochemistry of I/R injury involves short-lived oxygen free radicals. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is a thiol-containing synthetic compound used in the treatment of acetaminophen toxicity. The present study is a detailed overview of the experimental and clinical evidence for the use of NAC as a pharmaco-protection agent in patients undergoing major liver surgery or transplantation. METHODS A computerized search of the Medline, Embase and SCI databases for the period from 1st January 1988 to 31st December 2008 produced 40 reports. For clinical studies, the quality of reports was assessed according to the criteria reported by the Cochrane communication review group. RESULTS Nineteen studies evaluated NAC in experimental liver I/R injury. NAC was administered before induction of ischaemia in 13. The most widely used concentration was 150 mg/kg by intravenous bolus. Fifteen studies report an improvement in outcome, predominantly a reduction in transaminase. Seven studies used an isolated perfused liver model with all showing improvement (predominantly an improvement in bile production after N-acetylcysteine). Two out of four transplantation models showed an improvement in hepatic function. Clinical studies in transplantation show a modest improvement in transaminase levels with no beneficial effect on either patient or graft survival. CONCLUSION N-acetylcysteine, given before induction of a liver I/R injury in an experimental model can ameliorate liver injury. Clinical outcome data are limited and there is currently little evidence to justify use either in liver transplantation or in liver resectional surgery.

The liver-first approach to the management of colorectal cancer with synchronous hepatic metastases - a systematic review.

IMPORTANCE To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of the liver-first approach to the management of patients with colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases. OBJECTIVE To review current evidence for the liver-first approach to the management of patients with colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases. EVIDENCE REVIEW PubMed, EMBASE, the Science Citation Index, the Social Sciences Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, and the Derwent Innovations Index were searched for the period from January 2000 to May 2012 using terms describing colorectal cancer, liver metastases, and surgery. A predefined protocol for data extraction was used to retrieve data on the design of each study including demographic profile, distribution of primary and hepatic metastatic disease, management of chemotherapy, surgery, the sequence of intervention, disease progression, the numbers completing treatment algorithm, and outcome and survival. FINDINGS The literature search identified 417 articles, of which 4 cohort study reports described the liver-first approach and reported survival data. There was good agreement between studies on the sequence of treatment using the liver-first approach. The preferred algorithm was systemic chemotherapy, followed by liver resection, then chemoradiotherapy for those patients with rectal lesions, and colorectal resection as the last operative step. Two protocols provided further adjuvant chemotherapy after colorectal resection. Of 121 patients starting treatment, 90 (74%) completed the specified treatment protocol. Disease progression during the protocol period occurred in 23 patients (19%). There was wide variation in survival despite apparently similar protocols. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The liver-first approach for patients with colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases is possible but is associated with a wide range of survival outcomes, despite protocol similarities between studies. There is a need for a well-designed clinical trial comparing this liver-first approach with the classic (bowel-first) approach.

Impact of portal vein embolization on long-term survival of patients with primarily unresectable colorectal liver metastases (Br J Surg 2010; 97: 240-250).

The Editors welcome topical correspondence from readers relating to articles published in the Journal. Responses should be sent electronically via the BJS website (www.bjs.co.uk). All letters will be reviewed and, if approved, appear on the website. A selection of these will be edited and published in the Journal. Letters must be no more than 250 words in length. Copyright

Contemporary management of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma in a nontransplant hepatopancreatobiliary center.

Background Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHCC) is a rare tumor with a poor prognosis. Outcomes may be optimized by centralization. Recent trends suggest further improvement by localization to transplant centers. This study examines outcomes from the management of PHCC in a nontransplant hepatopancreatobiliary center. Methods Data were collected prospectively from patients undergoing treatment for PHCC from October 1999 to May 2011. Twenty-four patients underwent surgery. A further 54 patients had inoperable PHCC. Outcome data are reported. Results Twenty-two of 24 patients required liver resection with histological R0 status in 12 (50%). In-hospital mortality occurred in two (8%). The mean survival of patients undergoing resection was 39 (95% CI: 16–61) months. The mean survival of nonresected patients was 5 (95% CI: 3–7) months (P<0.0001; log-rank; Mantel–Cox test). Conclusion Currently acceptable standards of holistic care for patients with PHCC can be provided in a nontransplant regional hepatopancreatobiliary center. Further centralization may improve resection volumes and allow more patients to benefit from extended liver resection techniques.

The Practical Management of Chronic Pancreatitis: A Multidisciplinary Symposium Held at the Annual Meeting of the Pancreatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, Manchester 2016

Aim: This study is about a questionnaire survey of delegates attending the chronic pancreatitis symposium at the 2016 meeting of the Pancreatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland and seeks a multidisciplinary “snapshot” overview of practice. Methods: A questionnaire was developed with multidisciplinary input. Questions on access to specialist care, methods of diagnosis and treatment including specific scenarios were incorporated. Eighty-three (66%) of 125 delegates effectively participated in this survey. Results: Twenty-four (29%) had neither a chronic pancreatitis MDT in their hospital nor a chronic pancreatitis referral MDT. Most frequently utilised diagnostic modalities were CT, MR and EUS with no respondents utilising duodenal intubation tests. Initial treatment was provided through non-opiate analgesia by 69 (93%), through the use of opiates by 56 (76%) and through the use of co-analgesics by 49 (66%). Fifty two (68%) routinely referred patients with alcohol-related disease for counselling. Preferred treatment for large duct disease without mass was endoscopic therapy. In older patients with a mass, pancreaticoduodenectomy was preferred. Conclusion: This is a small study likely to be skewed by sampling bias but is thought to be the first multidisciplinary survey of the management of chronic pancreatitis in the United Kingdom and Ireland. The results show a need for comprehensive access to specialist pancreatitis MDT care and there remains substantial variation in management.