Patients with HCC-CC have similar survival to patients undergoing a transplant for HCC. Preoperative diagnosis of HCC-CC should not prompt the exclusion of these patients from transplant option.

A retrospective cohort multicenter study was conducted to analyze the risk factors for tumor recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) in cirrhotic patients found to have an intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) on pathology examination. We also aimed to ascertain whether there existed a subgroup of patients with single tumors ≤2 cm (“very early”) in which results after LT can be acceptable. Twenty‐nine patients comprised the study group, eight of whom had a “very early” iCCA (four of them incidentals). The risk of tumor recurrence was significantly associated with larger tumor size as well as larger tumor volume, microscopic vascular invasion and poor degree of differentiation. None of the patients in the “very early” iCCA subgroup presented tumor recurrence compared to 36.4% of those with single tumors >2 cm or multinodular tumors, p = 0.02. The 1‐, 3‐ and 5‐year actuarial survival of those in the “very early” iCCA subgroup was 100%, 73% and 73%, respectively. The present is the first multicenter attempt to ascertain the risk factors for tumor recurrence in cirrhotic patients found to have an iCCA on pathology examination. Cirrhotic patients with iCCA ≤2 cm achieved excellent 5‐year survival, and validation of these findings by other groups may change the current exclusion of such patients from transplant programs.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Many patients with bi-lobar liver tumours are not eligible for liver resection due to an insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). To reduce the risk of posthepatectomy liver failure and the primary cause of death, regenerative procedures intent to increase the FLR before surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of the available literature and outcomes on the effectiveness of simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization (PVE/HVE) versus portal vein embolization (PVE) alone. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase up to September 2022. The primary outcome was resectability and the secondary outcome was the FLR volume increase. Results Eight studies comparing PVE/HVE with PVE and six retrospective PVE/HVE case series were included. Pooled resectability within the comparative studies was 75 per cent in the PVE group (n = 252) versus 87 per cent in the PVE/HVE group (n = 166, OR 1.92 (95% c.i., 1.13–3.25)) favouring PVE/HVE (P = 0.015). After PVE, FLR hypertrophy between 12 per cent and 48 per cent (after a median of 21–30 days) was observed, whereas growth between 36 per cent and 67 per cent was reported after PVE/HVE (after a median of 17–31 days). In the comparative studies, 90-day primary cause of death was similar between groups (2.5 per cent after PVE versus 2.2 per cent after PVE/HVE), but a higher 90-day primary cause of death was reported in single-arm PVE/HVE cohort studies (6.9 per cent, 12 of 175 patients). Conclusion Based on moderate/weak evidence, PVE/HVE seems to increase resectability of bi-lobar liver tumours with a comparable safety profile. Additionally, PVE/HVE resulted in faster and more pronounced hypertrophy compared with PVE alone.