Citations

Objective: This study aims at establishing benchmark values for best achievable outcomes following open major anatomic hepatectomy for liver tumors of all dignities. Background: Outcomes after open major hepatectomies vary widely lacking reference values for comparisons among centers, indications, types of resections, and minimally invasive procedures. Methods: A standard benchmark methodology was used covering consecutive patients, who underwent open major anatomic hepatectomy from 44 high-volume liver centers from 5 continents over a 5-year period (2016–2020). Benchmark cases were low-risk non-cirrhotic patients without significant comorbidities treated in high-volume centers (≥30 major liver resections/year). Benchmark values were set at the 75th percentile of median values of all centers. Minimum follow-up period was 1 year in each patient. Results: Of 8044 patients, 2908 (36%) qualified as benchmark (low-risk) cases. Benchmark cutoffs for all indications include R0 resection ≥78%; liver failure (grade B/C) ≤10%; bile leak (grade B/C) ≤18%; complications ≥grade 3 and CCI ® ≤46% and ≤9 at 3 months, respectively. Benchmark values differed significantly between malignant and benign conditions so that reference values must be adjusted accordingly. Extended right hepatectomy (H1, 4-8 or H4-8) disclosed a higher cutoff for liver failure, while extended left (H1-5,8 or H2-5,8) were associated with higher cutoffs for bile leaks, but had superior oncologic outcomes, when compared to formal left hepatectomy (H1-4 or H2-4). The minimal follow-up for a conclusive outcome evaluation following open anatomic major resection must be 3 months. Conclusion: These new benchmark cutoffs for open major hepatectomy provide a powerful tool to convincingly evaluate other approaches including parenchymal-sparing procedures, laparoscopic/robotic approaches, and alternative treatments, such as ablation therapy, irradiation, or novel chemotherapy regimens.

Background— Off-label use of transcatheter aortic and pulmonary valve prostheses for tricuspid valve-in-valve implantation (TVIV) within dysfunctional surgical tricuspid valve (TV) bioprostheses has been described in small reports. Methods and Results— An international, multicenter registry was developed to collect data on TVIV cases. Patient-related factors, procedural details and outcomes, and follow-up data were analyzed. Valve-in-ring or heterotopic TV implantation procedures were not included. Data were collected on 156 patients with bioprosthetic TV dysfunction who underwent catheterization with planned TVIV. The median age was 40 years, and 71% of patients were in New York Heart Association class III or IV. Among 152 patients in whom TVIV was attempted with a Melody (n=94) or Sapien (n=58) valve, implantation was successful in 150, with few serious complications. After TVIV, both the TV inflow gradient and tricuspid regurgitation grade improved significantly. During follow-up (median, 13.3 months), 22 patients died, 5 within 30 days; all 22 patients were in New York Heart Association class III or IV, and 9 were hospitalized before TVIV. There were 10 TV reinterventions, and 3 other patients had significant recurrent TV dysfunction. At follow-up, 77% of patients were in New York Heart Association class I or II ( P <0.001 versus before TVIV). Outcomes did not differ according to surgical valve size or TVIV valve type. Conclusions— TVIV with commercially available transcatheter prostheses is technically and clinically successful in patients of various ages across a wide range of valve size. Although preimplantation clinical status was associated with outcome, many patients in New York Heart Association class III or IV at baseline improved. TVIV should be considered a viable option for treatment of failing TV bioprostheses.

Purpose In 1995, the Children's Cancer Group (CCG) opened a trial for patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma evaluating whether low-dose involved-field radiation therapy (IFRT) improved event-free survival (EFS) for patients achieving a complete response after chemotherapy. We present the long-term study outcome using final data through March 2007. Patients and Methods Between January 1995 and December 1998, 826 eligible patients were enrolled onto CCG 5942. Four hundred ninety-eight patients achieving an initial complete response to chemotherapy were randomly assigned to receive IFRT or no further therapy. EFS and overall survival (OS) were assessed from the date of study entry or random assignment, as appropriate. Results Ten-year EFS and OS rates for the entire cohort were 83.5% and 92.5%, respectively. In an as-treated analysis for randomly assigned patients, the 10-year EFS and OS rates were 91.2% and 97.1%, respectively, for IFRT and 82.9% and 95.9%, respectively, for no further therapy. For EFS and OS comparisons, P = .004 and P = .50, respectively. Bulk disease, “B” symptoms, and nodular sclerosis histology were risk factors for inferior EFS. Conclusion With a median follow-up of 7.7 years, IFRT produced a statistically significant improvement in EFS but no improvement in OS. For individual patients, the relative risks of relapse versus late effects of IFRT must be considered. Patient and disease characteristics and early response assessment will aid in deciding which patients are most likely to benefit from IFRT.

PURPOSE: Current standard therapy for children and adolescents with Hodgkin’s disease includes combination chemotherapy and low-dose involved-field radiation (LD-IFRT). Because radiation may be associated with adverse late effects, the Children’s Cancer Group (CCG) investigated whether radiation could be omitted in patients achieving a complete response to initial chemotherapy without jeopardizing the excellent outcome obtained with combined-modality therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 1995 and December 1998, 829 eligible patients were enrolled onto CCG 5942. A total of 501 patients who achieved an initial complete response after risk-adapted combination chemotherapy were randomized to receive LD-IFRT or no further treatment. Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival were assessed from the date of study entry or the date of randomization, as appropriate. RESULTS: The projected 3-year EFS from study entry for the entire cohort was 87% ± 1.2%. Among patients who achieved a complete response to initial chemotherapy, 92% ± 1.9% of those randomized to receive LD-IFRT were alive and disease free 3 years after randomization, versus 87% ± 2.2% for patients randomized to receive no further therapy (stratified log-rank test; P = .057). With an “as-treated” analysis, 3-year EFS after randomization for the radiation cohort was 93% ± 1.7% versus 85% ± 2.3% for patients receiving no further therapy (stratified log-rank test; P = .0024). Three-year survival estimates for patients treated with and without LD-IFRT were 98% ± 1.1% for patients who received radiation and 99% ± 0.5% for patients who did not receive radiation. CONCLUSION: LD-IFRT after an initial complete response to risk-adapted chemotherapy improved EFS. At this time, there is no survival advantage for LD-IFRT, but follow-up remains short.