Background. Liver transplantation cures hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) if within conventional selection criteria. Expanded criteria are elusive. Loco-regional treatments pursue tumor downstaging from outside Milan criteria to within criteria. No trial investigated HCC-downstaging strategy to expand transplant eligibility. Methods. This multi-center trial aimed at comparing successfully downstaged HCC followed by transplantation vs. non-transplant therapies. Eligible patients had good liver function (Child-Pugh A-B7), HCC beyond Milan, 5-year estimated post-transplant survival ≥50%, no macrovascular or extrahepatic spread. Only partial-complete responses according to modified-RECIST were randomized 1:1 after 3 months observation period, during which sorafenib was allowed. Co-endpoints were survival and timeto-tumor event. We used Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, Cox regression for intention-to-treat analysis. Survival benefit was the difference between groups mean survival time. Organ allocation policy changed over time and limited patients' accrual to 4 years. After 4 additional years conditional power calculation estimated the probability that the final results would be statistically significant in the remaining study, given the data observed. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01387503. Findings. 74 patients were enrolled between March 2011 to March 2015: 29 dropped-out pre-randomization. Downstaging median duration was 6 months (1-17). Success-rate was 73%. Progression during observation was 17%. 45 patients were randomized: 23 transplanted vs. 22 controls. Median followup was 71 months (IQR 60-85). 5-year overall survival was 77.5% (95%CI 61.9-97.1%) in transplants vs. 31.2% (95%CI: 16.6-58.5%) in controls (Cox hazard ratio [HR] 0.22, 95%CI: 0.08-0.61; p=0.004). 5-year tumor eventfree survival was 76.8 (95%CI: 60.8-96.9%) vs. 18.3% (95%CI: 7.1-47.0%) in controls (HR: 0.14, 95%CI: 0.05-0.38; p<0001). 5-year survival-benefit favored transplantation by 14.5 months (95%CI: 3.6-25.3; p=0.009). The trial retained a conditional power of 98.6%. Interpretation. After effective and sustained downstaging of eligible HCCs beyond Milan criteria, liver transplantation is superior to nontransplant therapies. Post-downstaging tumor response should contribute to HCC transplant criteria expansion. Funding. Italian Ministry of Health

Background: The benefit of surgical intervention for cancer should be estimated in relation to the life expectancy of the general population. The aim of this study was to provide a measure of relative survival after hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).Methods: Consecutive patients with liver cirrhosis and HCC who underwent hepatectomy were divided into age quartiles for analysis. Short-and mid-term survival rates were used to estimate survival until death for all patients, in relation to age and other co-variables. Years of life lost (YLL) were estimated using a reference cohort, derived from the general population matched for sex, age and year of diagnosis.Results: Some 919 patients were included in the study. The following age quartiles were identified: less than 60 years (229 patients), 60-66 years (230), 67-70 years (231) and over 70 years (229). Postoperative mortality rates were similar between age quartiles, as were survival rates up to 3 years (P = 0⋅404). A statistically significant reduction in 5-10-year survival rates was observed with ageing (P = 0⋅001). Relative survival calculation showed that the youngest age quartile (less than 60 years) experienced the longest entire postoperative lifespan (15⋅6 years) but also the greatest number of YLL (11⋅0 years). Patients aged over 70 years had the shortest entire postoperative lifespan (6⋅4 years) but also the smallest number of YLL (3⋅7 years).Conclusion: Although survival after liver resection for HCC is shortest in elderly patients, relative survival estimates suggest that hepatectomy can be of benefit in these patients, with a small loss of the entire individual lifespan.

ImportanceLong-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery remain a hotly debated topic in surgical oncology, but sparse data have been published thus far.ObjectiveTo analyze short- and long-term outcomes of robotic liver resection (RLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from Western high-volume centers to assess the safety, reproducibility, and oncologic efficacy of this technique.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study evaluated the outcomes of patients receiving RLR vs open liver resection (OLR) for HCC between 2010 and 2020 in 5 high-volume centers. After 1:1 propensity score matching, a group of patients who underwent RLR was compared with a validation cohort of OLR patients from a high-volume center that did not perform RLR.Main Outcomes and MeasuresA retrospective analysis was performed of prospectively maintained databases at 2 European and 2 US institutions of patients who underwent RLR for HCC between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2020. The main outcomes were safety and feasibility of RLR for HCC and its oncologic outcomes compared with a European OLR validation cohort. A 2-sided P &amp;lt; .05 was considered significant.ResultsThe study included 398 patients (RLR group: 125 men, 33 women, median [IQR] age, 66 [58-71] years; OLR group: 315 men, 83 women; median [IQR] age, 70 [64-74] years), and 106 RLR patients were compared with 106 OLR patients after propensity score matching. The RLR patients had a significantly longer operative time (median [IQR], 295 [190-370] minutes vs 200 [165-255] minutes, including docking; P &amp;lt; .001) but a significantly shorter hospital length of stay (median [IQR], 4 [3-6] days vs 10 [7-13] days; P &amp;lt; .001) and a lower number of admissions to the intensive care unit (7 [6.6%] vs 21 [19.8%]; P = .002). Incidence of posthepatectomy liver failure was significantly lower in the RLR group (8 [7.5%] vs 30 [28.3%]; P = .001), with no cases of grade C failure. The 90-day overall survival rate was comparable between the 2 groups (RLR, 99.1% [95% CI, 93.5%-99.9%]; OLR, 97.1% [95% CI, 91.3%-99.1%]), as was the cumulative incidence of death related to tumor recurrence (RLR, 8.8% [95% CI, 3.1%-18.3%]; OLR, 10.2% [95% CI, 4.9%-17.7%]).Conclusions and RelevanceThis study represents the largest Western experience to date of full RLR for HCC. Compared with OLR, RLR performed in tertiary centers represents a safe treatment strategy for patients with HCC and those with compromised liver function while achieving oncologic efficacy.

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess safety and efficacy of pancreatic duct occlusion (PDO) with neoprene-based glue in selected patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) at high risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Background Data: PD is the reference standard approach for tumors of the pancreaticoduodenal region. POPF is the most relevant complication after PD. PDO has been proposed as an alternative to anastomosis to manage the pancreatic stump. Methods: A single-center, prospective, nonrandomized trial enrolled 100 consecutive PD for cancer. Patients at high risk for POPF according to Fistula Risk Score (FRS) >15% (≥6 points) were treated with PDO using neoprene glue (study cohort); patients with FRS ≤15% (≤5 points) received pancreaticojejunal anastomosis (PJA: control cohort). Primary endpoint was complication rate grade ≥3 according to Dindo–Clavien Classification (DCC). Other postoperative outcomes were monitored (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03738787). Results: Fifty-one patients underwent PDO and 49 PJA. DCC ≥3, postoperative mortality, and POPF grade B-C were 25.5% versus 24.5% (P = 0.91), 5.9% versus 2% (P = 0.62), and 11.8% versus 16.3% (P = 0.51) in the study versus control cohort, respectively. At 1 and 3 years, new-onset diabetes was diagnosed in 13.7% and 36.7% of the study cohort versu 4.2% and 12.2% in controls (P = 0.007). Conclusions: PDO with neoprene-based glue is a safe technique that equalizes early outcome of selected patients at high risk of POPF to those at low risk undergoing PJA. Neoprene-based PDO, however, triples the risk of diabetes at 1 and 3 years.

In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, sorafenib dose adjustments based on inducing tolerability of relevant adverse events prolong drug exposure and maximize survival.