Literature DB >> 25234023

Survival Benefit of Liver Transplantation Versus Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Impact of MELD Score.

Alessandro Vitale1, Teh-la Huo, Alessandro Cucchetti, Yun-Hsuan Lee, Michael Volk, Anna Chiara Frigo, Matteo Cescon, Francesco Tuci, Antonio Daniele Pinna, Umberto Cillo.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We sought to measure the impact of model for end stage liver disease (MELD) score, tumor staging, and microvascular invasion (MVI) on the relative survival benefit of liver transplantation (LT) versus liver resection (LR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
METHODS: The study population comprised 1,106 HCC patients with cirrhosis undergoing LR from one Eastern (n = 424) and two Western (n = 682) surgical units. Exclusion criteria were very large (>10 cm) tumors, macrovascular invasion, and metastases. We identified three tumor stages: stage I (within Milan, n = 806), stage II (beyond Milan within Up-to-7, n = 123), and stage III (beyond Milan and Up-to-7, n = 177). Patient survival after LR was compared to that predicted after LT by the Metroticket calculator in relationship with staging, MVI, and MELD score using Monte Carlo simulation.
RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-three patients (26 %) with a MELD score of ≥10 had an acceptable 5-year survival after LR of 47 %, while that of patients with a low MELD score was 67 % (p < 0.0001). Mean 5-year LT benefit was -4.50 months (95 % confidence interval [CI] -4.73 to -4.27) for patients with a MELD score of <10, and 0.81 months (95 % CI 0.58 to 1.04) for those with a MELD score of ≥10. MELD score and MVI were the strongest predictors of transplant survival benefit. LT reached a survival benefit, versus LR only in HCC patients with a MELD score of ≥10 and without MVI (3.08 months, 95 % CI 2.78 to 3.39), whatever the tumor stage.
CONCLUSIONS: LT proved to be harmful in patients with resectable HCC with a low MELD score (<10) or with aggressive tumors (with MVI). As a result of a shortage of donors, only selected resectable tumors with a MELD score of ≥10 should be considered for transplantation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25234023     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-4099-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  19 in total

1.  The unreliability of continuous postoperative lactate monitoring after extended hepatectomies: single center experience.

Authors:  Duilio Pagano; Alessandro Tropea; Davide Cintorino; Antonio Biondi; Marco Spada; Salvatore Gruttadauria
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2015-02-21

Review 2.  Asia-Pacific clinical practice guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: a 2017 update.

Authors:  Masao Omata; Ann-Lii Cheng; Norihiro Kokudo; Masatoshi Kudo; Jeong Min Lee; Jidong Jia; Ryosuke Tateishi; Kwang-Hyub Han; Yoghesh K Chawla; Shuichiro Shiina; Wasim Jafri; Diana Alcantara Payawal; Takamasa Ohki; Sadahisa Ogasawara; Pei-Jer Chen; Cosmas Rinaldi A Lesmana; Laurentius A Lesmana; Rino A Gani; Shuntaro Obi; A Kadir Dokmeci; Shiv Kumar Sarin
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 6.047

Review 3.  Transplantation for hepatocellular cancer: pushing to the limits?

Authors:  Quirino Lai; Alessandro Vitale
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2018-09-14

Review 4.  New horizons in ablation therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Jacob Freedman; Henrik Nilsson; Eduard Jonas
Journal:  Hepat Oncol       Date:  2015-11-06

5.  Saudi Association for the Study of Liver diseases and Transplantation practice guidelines on the diagnosis and management of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Saleh A Alqahtani; Faisal M Sanai; Ashwaq Alolayan; Faisal Abaalkhail; Hamad Alsuhaibani; Mazen Hassanain; Waleed Alhazzani; Abdullah Alsuhaibani; Abdullah Algarni; Alejandro Forner; Richard S Finn; Waleed K Al-Hamoudi
Journal:  Saudi J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 2.485

6.  Liver transplantation for the solitary intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma less than 2 cm in diameter.

Authors:  Nobuhisa Akamatsu; Yoshihiro Sakamoto; Kiyoshi Hasegawa
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 7.293

Review 7.  Selection of patients with hepatocellular cancer: a difficult balancing between equity, utility, and benefit.

Authors:  Alessandro Vitale; Quirino Lai
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-09-21

Review 8.  Therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma: overview, clinical indications, and comparative outcome evaluation-part one: curative intention.

Authors:  Joseph H Yacoub; Christine C Hsu; Thomas M Fishbein; David Mauro; Andrew Moon; Aiwu R He; Mustafa R Bashir; Lauren M B Burke
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-04-09

Review 9.  Liver transplantation for hepatobiliary malignancies: a new era of "Transplant Oncology" has begun.

Authors:  Taizo Hibi; Osamu Itano; Masahiro Shinoda; Yuko Kitagawa
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 2.549

10.  Comparison of five models for end-stage liver disease in predicting the survival rate of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Ying-Fen Hong; Zhan-Hong Chen; Xiao-Kun Ma; Xing Li; Dong-Hao Wu; Jie Chen; Min Dong; Li Wei; Tian-Tian Wang; Dan-Yun Ruan; Ze-Xiao Lin; Jing-Yun Wen; Qu Lin; Chang-Chang Jia; Xiang-Yuan Wu
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2015-11-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.