TY - JOUR
T1 - Hepatectomy for Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma
T2 - Resection Margin Width Does Not Predict Survival
AU - Michelakos, Theodoros
AU - Kontos, Filippos
AU - Sekigami, Yurie
AU - Qadan, Motaz
AU - Cai, Lei
AU - Catalano, Onofrio
AU - Deshpande, Vikram
AU - Patel, Madhukar S.
AU - Yamada, Teppei
AU - Elias, Nahel
AU - Dageforde, Leigh Anne
AU - Kimura, Shoko
AU - Kawai, Tatsuo
AU - Tanabe, Kenneth K.
AU - Markmann, James F.
AU - Yeh, Heidi
AU - Ferrone, Cristina R.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was conducted with support from Harvard Catalyst | The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health Award UL1 TR001102) and financial contributions from Harvard University and its affiliated academic healthcare centers. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, and its affiliated academic healthcare centers, or the National Institutes of Health.
Funding Information:
Lei Cai received funding from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (#81201948), the China Scholarship Council Foundation (#201203170045), and the Natural Science Foundation of Chongqing (#cstc2012jjA0337).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract.
PY - 2021/7
Y1 - 2021/7
N2 - Background: The survival benefit of negative margins for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been demonstrated. However, there is no consensus regarding the optimal resection margin width. We assessed the impact of hepatic resection margin width for solitary HCC on overall (OS), recurrence-free (RFS), and liver-specific recurrence-free survival (LSRFS). Methods: Clinicopathologic data were retrospectively collected for solitary HCC patients who underwent a negative margin hepatectomy (1992–2015). Margin width was categorized in tertiles as “narrow” (≤ 0.3 cm), “intermediate” (0.31–1.0 cm), or “wide” (> 1.0 cm). Survival was compared among groups. Results: Of the 178 included patients, most were male (76%); median age, MELD score, and tumor size were 63 years, 8, and 5.2 cm, respectively; 93% were Child-Pugh class A. Median margin width was 0.5 cm. Median follow-up and OS were 47.8 months and 76.7 months, respectively. There was no significant survival difference among narrow, intermediate, and wide margin groups with a median OS of 53 months (IQR 21–not reached [NR]), 74 months (IQR 14–138), and 97 months (IQR 37–142) (p = 0.87), respectively. Median RFS was 33.0 months; again, there was no difference among narrow, intermediate, and wide margin groups with a median of 31 months (IQR 18–NR), 45 months (IQR 14–NR), and 27 months (IQR 11–NR), respectively (p = 0.66). Median LSRFS was 63.0 months (IQR 14–NR) with no difference among groups (p = 0.87). In multivariate analyses, margin width was not associated with OS (p = 0.77), RFS (p = 0.74), or LSRFS (p = 0.92). Findings were similar in all subgroups analyzed (≤ 5 cm, > 5 cm, microvascular invasion, T1, T2/T3, anatomical or non-anatomical resection, major or minor hepatectomy). Conclusions: Narrow margins appear to be oncologically safe and the feasibility of achieving wide margins should not determine resectability.
AB - Background: The survival benefit of negative margins for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been demonstrated. However, there is no consensus regarding the optimal resection margin width. We assessed the impact of hepatic resection margin width for solitary HCC on overall (OS), recurrence-free (RFS), and liver-specific recurrence-free survival (LSRFS). Methods: Clinicopathologic data were retrospectively collected for solitary HCC patients who underwent a negative margin hepatectomy (1992–2015). Margin width was categorized in tertiles as “narrow” (≤ 0.3 cm), “intermediate” (0.31–1.0 cm), or “wide” (> 1.0 cm). Survival was compared among groups. Results: Of the 178 included patients, most were male (76%); median age, MELD score, and tumor size were 63 years, 8, and 5.2 cm, respectively; 93% were Child-Pugh class A. Median margin width was 0.5 cm. Median follow-up and OS were 47.8 months and 76.7 months, respectively. There was no significant survival difference among narrow, intermediate, and wide margin groups with a median OS of 53 months (IQR 21–not reached [NR]), 74 months (IQR 14–138), and 97 months (IQR 37–142) (p = 0.87), respectively. Median RFS was 33.0 months; again, there was no difference among narrow, intermediate, and wide margin groups with a median of 31 months (IQR 18–NR), 45 months (IQR 14–NR), and 27 months (IQR 11–NR), respectively (p = 0.66). Median LSRFS was 63.0 months (IQR 14–NR) with no difference among groups (p = 0.87). In multivariate analyses, margin width was not associated with OS (p = 0.77), RFS (p = 0.74), or LSRFS (p = 0.92). Findings were similar in all subgroups analyzed (≤ 5 cm, > 5 cm, microvascular invasion, T1, T2/T3, anatomical or non-anatomical resection, major or minor hepatectomy). Conclusions: Narrow margins appear to be oncologically safe and the feasibility of achieving wide margins should not determine resectability.
KW - Hepatectomy
KW - Hepatocellular carcinoma
KW - Margin
KW - Survival
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85089297822&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85089297822&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11605-020-04765-6
DO - 10.1007/s11605-020-04765-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 32779082
AN - SCOPUS:85089297822
SN - 1091-255X
VL - 25
SP - 1727
EP - 1735
JO - Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
JF - Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
IS - 7
ER -