The DCD livers were allocated according to the Italian allocation policy, primarily on a regional basis. 19 Superurgent patients and candidates with a model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score ≥30 points were excluded. Most centers preferably selected low-risk recipients and prioritized candidates, for example, with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

No abstract

Introduction: Metaplastic breast cancer (MBC) is a rare condition of breast tumor with different subtypes, considered a disease with worse prognosis; treatments and survival are often unclear and conflicting. Methods: We consecutively collected 153 primary MBCs of different subtypes. Breast surgery, neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment, clinic-pathological factors, number and type of events during follow-up were considered to evaluate overall survival (OS) and invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Results: The majority of MBC was triple-negative (TN) subtype (88.7%), G3 (95.3%), pN0 (70.6%), and with high levels of Ki-67 (93.5%). For OS and IDFS, no significant associations were seen between the different MBC subtypes. The matched triplenegative MBC (TNMBC) and ductal TNBC cohorts had similar prognosis both in terms of OS (p = .411) and IDFS (p = .981). We observed a positive trend for TNMBC patients treated in the adjuvant setting with the cyclofosfamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil protocol for better OS (p = .090) and IDFS (p = .087). A poor or absent response rate was observed in the neoadjuvant setting. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that metaplastic and ductal breast cancers with TN phenotype are similar in terms of overall and disease-free survival. Metaplastic cancers are poorly responsive to neoadjuvant treatment, and in the absence of novel targeted therapies, surgical treatment remains the first choice.

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 < .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 < .001) but a significantly shorter hospital length of stay (median [IQR], 4 [3-6] days vs 10 [7-13] days; P < .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.

Background: Single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) benefits from surgical resection (SR) or US-guided percutaneous ablation (PA), although the best approach is still debated. We evaluated the impact of Li-RADS classification on the oncological outcomes of SR vs. PA as single HCC first-line treatment. Methods: We retrospectively and blindly classified treatment-naïve single HCC that underwent SR or PA between 2010 and 2016 according to Li-RADS protocol. Overall survival (OS), recurrence free survival (RFS) and local recurrence after SR and PA were compared for each Li-RADS subclass before and after propensity-score matching (PS-M). Results: Considering the general population, SR showed better 5-year OS (68.3% vs. 52.2%; p = 0.049) and RFS (42.5% vs. 29.8%; p = 0.002), with lower incidence of local recurrence (8.2% vs. 44.4%; p < 0.001), despite a significantly higher frequency of clinically-relevant complications (12.8% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.002) and a higher Comprehensive Complication Index (12.1 vs. 2.2; p < 0.001). Focusing on different Li-RADS subclasses, we highlighted better 5-year OS (67.1% vs. 46.2%; p = 0.035), RFS (45.0% vs. 27.0% RFS; p < 0.001) and lower incidence of local recurrence (9.7% vs. 48.6%; p < 0.001) after SR for Li-RADS-5 HCCs, while these outcomes did not differ for Li-RADS-3/4 subclasses; such results were confirmed after PS-M. Conclusions: Our analysis suggests a potential prognostic role of Li-RADS classification, supporting SR over PA especially for Li-RADS-5 single HCC.