Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4-1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 5-6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1 (3.3-4.8), 3.9 (2.6-5.1) and 3.6 (2.0-5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5 (0.9-2.1)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2-8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6-2.0), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomies offer some perioperative advantages, including fewer complications and shorter hospital stay, without increasing the blood loss volume and mortality. Whether these results can anticipate the outcomes in future randomized controlled trials has not been determined.

Background Although the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system has been largely adopted in clinical practice, recent studies have emphasized the need for further refinement and subclassification of this system. Methods Patients who underwent hepatectomy with curative intent for BCLC‐0, ‐A or ‐B hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) between 2000 and 2017 were identified using a multi‐institutional database. The tumour burden score (TBS) was calculated, and overall survival (OS) was examined in relation to TBS and BCLC stage. Results Among 1053 patients, 63 (6·0 per cent) had BCLC‐0, 826 (78·4 per cent) BCLC‐A and 164 (15·6 per cent) had BCLC‐B HCC. OS worsened incrementally with higher TBS (5‐year OS 77·9, 61 and 39 per cent for low, medium and high TBS respectively; P < 0·001). No differences in OS were noted among patients with similar TBS, irrespective of BCLC stage (61·6 versus 58·9 per cent for BCLC‐A/medium TBS versus BCLC‐B/medium TBS, P = 0·930; 45 versus 13 per cent for BCLC‐A/high TBS versus BCLC‐B/high TBS, P = 0·175). Patients with BCLC‐B HCC and a medium TBS had better OS than those with BCLC‐A disease and a high TBS (58·9 versus 45 per cent; P = 0·005). On multivariable analysis, TBS remained associated with OS among patients with BCLC‐A (medium TBS: hazard ratio (HR) 2·07, 95 per cent c.i. 1·42 to 3·02, P < 0·001; high TBS: HR 4·05, 2·40 to 6·82, P < 0·001) and BCLC‐B (high TBS: HR 3·85, 2·03 to 7·30; P < 0·001) HCC. TBS could also stratify prognosis among patients in an external validation cohort (5‐year OS 79, 51·2 and 28 per cent for low, medium and high TBS respectively; P = 0·010). Conclusion The prognosis of patients with HCC varied according to the BCLC stage but was largely dependent on the TBS.

Objective: The aim of this study was to define robust benchmark values for the surgical treatment of perihilar cholangiocarcinomas (PHC) to enable unbiased comparisons. Background: Despite ongoing efforts, postoperative mortality and morbidity remains high after complex liver surgery for PHC. Benchmark data of best achievable results in surgical PHC treatment are however still lacking. Methods: This study analyzed consecutive patients undergoing major liver surgery for PHC in 24 high-volume centers in 3 continents over the recent 5-year period (2014–2018) with a minimum follow-up of 1 year in each patient. Benchmark patients were those operated at high-volume centers (≥50 cases during the study period) without the need for vascular reconstruction due to tumor invasion, or the presence of significant co-morbidities such as severe obesity (body mass index ≥35), diabetes, or cardiovascular diseases. Benchmark cutoff values were derived from the 75th or 25th percentile of the median values of all benchmark centers. Results: Seven hundred eight (39%) of a total of 1829 consecutive patients qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cut-offs included: R0 resection ≥57%, postoperative liver failure (International Study Group of Liver Surgery): ≤35%; in-hospital and 3-month mortality rates ≤8% and ≤13%, respectively; 3-month grade 3 complications and the CCI: ≤70% and ≤30.5, respectively; bile leak-rate: ≤47% and 5-year overall survival of ≥39.7%. Centers operating mostly on complex cases disclosed better outcome including lower post-operative liver failure rates (4% vs 13%; P = 0.002). Centers from Asia disclosed better outcomes. Conclusion: Surgery for PHC remains associated with high morbidity and mortality with now the availability of benchmark values covering 21 outcome parameters, which may serve as key references for comparison in any future analyses of individuals, group of patients or centers.