| 1. |
- Hasselgren, Kristina, et al.
(author)
-
ALPPS Improves Survival Compared With TSH in Patients Affected of CRLM Survival Analysis From the Randomized Controlled Trial LIGRO
- 2021
-
In: Annals of Surgery. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0003-4932 .- 1528-1140. ; 273:3, s. 442-448
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: To evaluate the oncological outcome for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) randomized to associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) or 2-stage hepatectomy (TSH). Background: TSH with portal vein occlusion is an established method for patients with CRLM and a low volume of the future liver remnant (FLR). ALPPS is a less established method. The oncological outcome of these methods has not been previously compared in a randomized controlled trial. Methods: One hundred patients with CRLM and standardized FLR (sFLR) <30% were included and randomized to resection by ALPPS or TSH, with the option of rescue ALPPS in the TSH group, if the criteria for volume increase was not met. The first radiological follow-up was performed approximately 4 weeks postoperatively and then after 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months. At all the follow-ups, the remaining/recurrent tumor was noted. After the first follow-up, chemotherapy was administered, if indicated. Results: The resection rate, according to the intention-to-treat principle, was 92% (44 patients) for patients randomized to ALPPS compared with 80% (39 patients) for patients randomized to TSH (P = 0.091), including rescue ALPPS. At the first postoperative follow-up, 37 patients randomized to ALPPS were assessed as tumor free in the liver, and also 28 patients randomized to TSH (P = 0.028). The estimated median survival for patients randomized to ALPPS was 46 months compared with 26 months for patients randomized to TSH (P = 0.028). Conclusions: ALPPS seems to improve survival in patients with CRLM and sFLR <30% compared with TSH.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Sparrelid, Ernesto, et al.
(author)
-
How should liver hypertrophy be stimulated? A comparison of upfront associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) and portal vein embolization (PVE) with rescue possibility
- 2021
-
In: Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition. - : AME Publishing Company. - 2304-3881 .- 2304-389X. ; 10:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The role of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) in comparison to portal vein embolization (PVE) is debated. The aim of this study was to compare successful resection rates (RR) with upfront ALPPS vs. PVE with rescue ALPPS on demand and to compare the hypertrophy of the liver between ALPPS and PVE plus subsequent rescue ALPPS. Methods: A retrospective analysis of all patients treated with PVE for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) or ALPPS (any diagnosis, rescue ALPPS included) at five Scandinavian university hospitals during the years 2013-2016 was conducted. A Chi-square test and a Mann-Whitney U test were used to assess the difference between the groups. A successful RR was defined as liver resection without a 90-day mortality. Results: A total of 189 patients were included. Successful RR was in 84.5% of the patients with ALPPS upfront and in 73.3% of the patients with PVE and rescue ALPPS on demand (P=0.080). The hypertrophy of the future liver remnants (FLRs) with ALPPS upfront was 71% (48-97%) compared to 96% (82-113%) after PVE and rescue ALPPS (P=0.010). Conclusions: Upfront ALPPS offers a somewhat higher successful RR than PVE with rescue ALPPS on demand. The sequential combination of PVE and ALPPS leads to a higher overall degree of hypertrophy than upfront ALPPS.
|
|
| 9. |
- van Hilst, Jony, et al.
(author)
-
Minimally Invasive versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma (DIPLOMA)
- 2019
-
In: Annals of Surgery. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0003-4932 .- 1528-1140. ; 269:1, s. 10-17
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: The aim of this study was to compare oncological outcomes after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).Background: Cohort studies have suggested superior short-term outcomes of MIDP vs. ODP. Recent international surveys, however, revealed that surgeons have concerns about the oncological outcomes of MIDP for PDAC.Methods: This is a pan-European propensity score matched study including patients who underwent MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP for PDAC between January 1, 2007 and July 1, 2015. MIDP patients were matched to ODP patients in a 1:1 ratio. Main outcomes were radical (R0) resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival.Results: In total, 1212 patients were included from 34 centers in 11 countries. Of 356 (29%) MIDP patients, 340 could be matched. After matching, the MIDP conversion rate was 19% (n = 62). Median blood loss [200 mL (60–400) vs 300 mL (150–500), P = 0.001] and hospital stay [8 (6–12) vs 9 (7–14) days, P < 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (18% vs 21%, P = 0.431) and 90-day mortality (2% vs 3%, P > 0.99) were comparable for MIDP and ODP, respectively. R0 resection rate was higher (67% vs 58%, P = 0.019), whereas Gerota's fascia resection (31% vs 60%, P < 0.001) and lymph node retrieval [14 (8–22) vs 22 (14–31), P< 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Median overall survival was 28 [95% confidence interval (CI), 22–34] versus 31 (95% CI, 26–36) months (P = 0.929).Conclusions: Comparable survival was seen after MIDP and ODP for PDAC, but the opposing differences in R0 resection rate, resection of Gerota's fascia, and lymph node retrieval strengthen the need for a randomized trial to confirm the oncological safety of MIDP.
|
|
