Risk score to predict biliary leakage after elective liver resection. BJS 2018; 105: 128-139.
Published: 13th November 2017
Authors: K. Mohkam, O. Farges, E. Vibert, O. Soubrane, R. Adam, F.‐R. Pruvot et al.
Biliary leakage remains a major cause of morbidity after liver resection. Previous prognostic studies of posthepatectomy biliary leakage (PHBL) lacked power, population homogeneity, and model validation. The present study aimed to develop a risk score for predicting severe PHBL.
In this multicentre observational study, patients who underwent liver resection without hepaticojejunostomy in one of nine tertiary centres between 2012 and 2015 were randomly assigned to a development or validation cohort in a 2 : 1 ratio. A model predicting severe PHBL (International Study Group of Liver Surgery grade B/C) was developed and further validated.
A total of 2218 procedures were included. PHBL of any severity and severe PHBL occurred in 141 (6·4 per cent) and 92 (4·1 per cent) patients respectively. In the development cohort (1475 patients), multivariable analysis identified blood loss of at least 500 ml, liver remnant ischaemia time 45 min or more, anatomical resection including segment VIII, transection along the right aspect of the left intersectional plane, and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy as predictors of severe PHBL. A risk score (ranging from 0 to 5) was built using the development cohort (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) 0·79, 95 per cent c.i. 0·74 to 0·85) and tested successfully in the validation cohort (AUROC 0·70, 0·60 to 0·80). A score of at least 3 predicted an increase in severe PHBL (19·4
The present risk score reliably predicts severe PHBL. It represents a multi‐institutionally validated prognostic tool that can be used to identify a subset of patients at high risk of severe PHBL after elective hepatectomy.Full text
You may also be interested in
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy response influences outcomes in non‐colorectal, non‐neuroendocrine liver metastases.
Authors: A. M. Lucchese, A. N. Kalil, A. Ruiz, V. Karam, O. Ciacio, G. Pittau et al.
Notes: Multimodal therapy works
Authors: B. Groot Koerkamp, W. R. Jarnagin
Validation of at least 1 mm as cut‐off for resection margins for pancreatic adenocarcinoma of the body and tail.
Authors: T. Hank, U. Hinz, I. Tarantino, J. Kaiser, W. Niesen, F. Bergmann et al.
Notes: Validating 1mm for R0
Development and validation of a difficulty score to predict intraoperative complications during laparoscopic liver resection.
Authors: M. C. Halls, G. Berardi, F. Cipriani, L. Barkhatov, P. Lainas, S. Harris et al.
Notes: Helps improve selection for laparoscopic liver resection
Meta‐analysis comparing upfront surgery with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 946-958.
Authors: E. Versteijne, J. A. Vogel, M. G. Besselink, O. R. C. Busch, J. W. Wilmink, J. G. Daams et al.
Notes: Improved survival with neoadjuvant treatment
Authors: G. A. Margonis, K. Sasaki, S. Gholami, Y. Kim, N. Andreatos, N. Rezaee et al.
Notes: Predicts survival
Reappraisal of classification of distal cholangiocarcinoma based on tumour depth. BJS 2018; 105: 867-875.
Authors: H. Aoyama, T. Ebata, M. Hattori, M. Takano, H. Yamamoto, M. Inoue et al.
Notes: Better for T staging
Prediction of major complications after hepatectomy using liver stiffness values determined by magnetic resonance elastography.
Authors: N. Sato, A. Kenjo, T. Kimura, R. Okada, T. Ishigame, Y. Kofunato et al.
Notes: liver stiffness predicts complications
Prognostic impact of perihepatic lymph node metastases in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases.
Authors: M. Okuno, C. Goumard, T. Mizuno, S. Kopetz, K. Omichi, C.‐W. D. Tzeng et al.
Notes: Bad sign of advanced disease
Randomized clinical trial
Randomized clinical trial of the effect of a fibrin sealant patch on pancreatic fistula formation after pancreatoduodenectomy. BJS 2018; 105: 811-819.
Authors: M. Schindl, R. Függer, P. Götzinger, F. Längle, M. Zitt, S. Stättner et al.
Notes: Not effective in reducing complications
Trends in use of lymphadenectomy in surgery with curative intent for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. BJS 2018; 105: 857-866.
Authors: X.‐F. Zhang, J. Chakedis, F. Bagante, Q. Chen, E. W. Beal, Y. Lv et al.
Notes: Lymphadenectomy is important
Meta‐analysis of an artery‐first approach versus standard pancreatoduodenectomy on perioperative outcomes and survival. BJS 2018; 105: 628-636.
Authors: N. Ironside, S. G. Barreto, B. Loveday, S. V. Shrikhande, J. A. Windsor, S. Pandanaboyana et al.
Notes: Benefits to artery‐first approach