Literature DB >> 35693403

Validation study of postoperative liver failure and mortality risk scores after liver resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

Takehiro Noji1, Satoko Uemura1, Jimme K Wiggers2, Kimitaka Tanaka1, Yoshitsugu Nakanishi1, Toshimichi Asano1, Toru Nakamura1, Takahiro Tsuchikawa1, Keisuke Okamura1, Pim B Olthof2,3, William R Jarnagin4, Thomas M van Gulik2, Satoshi Hirano1.   

Abstract

Background: Surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHCC) remains a challenging procedure with high morbidity and mortality. The Academic Medical Center (Amsterdam UMC) and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center proposed a postoperative mortality risk score (POMRS) and post-hepatectomy liver failure score (PHLFS) to predict patient outcomes. This study aimed to validate the POMRS and PHLFS for PHCC patients at Hokkaido University.
Methods: Medical records of 260 consecutive PHCC patients who had undergone major hepatectomy with extrahepatic bile duct resection without pancreaticoduodenectomy at Hokkaido University between March 2001 and November 2018 were evaluated to validate the PHLFS and POMRS.
Results: The observed risks for PHLF were 13.7%, 24.5%, and 39.8% for the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups, respectively, in the study cohort. A receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed that the PHLFS had moderate predictive value, with an analysis under the curve (AUC) value of 0.62. Mortality rates based on the POMRS were 1.7%, 5%, and 5.1% for the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups, respectively. The ROC analysis demonstrated an AUC value of 0.58. Conclusions: This external validation study showed that for PHLFS the threshold for discrimination in an Eastern cohort was reached (AUC >0.6), but it would require optimization of the model before use in clinical practice is acceptable. The POMRS were not applicable in the eastern cohort. Further external validation is recommended. 2022 Hepatobiliary Surgery and Nutrition. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHCC); post operative mortality score; post-hepatectomy liver failure score (PHLFS); validation study

Year:  2022        PMID: 35693403      PMCID: PMC9186189          DOI: 10.21037/hbsn-20-660

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr        ISSN: 2304-3881            Impact factor:   8.265


  37 in total

1.  The Predictive Value of Indocyanine Green Clearance in Future Liver Remnant for Posthepatectomy Liver Failure Following Hepatectomy with Extrahepatic Bile Duct Resection.

Authors:  Yukihiro Yokoyama; Tomoki Ebata; Tsuyoshi Igami; Gen Sugawara; Takashi Mizuno; Junpei Yamaguchi; Masato Nagino
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  A Clear Difference Between the Outcomes After a Major Hepatectomy With and Without an Extrahepatic Bile Duct Resection.

Authors:  Takehiro Takagi; Yukihiro Yokoyama; Toshio Kokuryo; Tomoki Ebata; Masahiko Ando; Masato Nagino
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Significance of Vascular Resection and Reconstruction in Surgery for Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: With Special Reference to Hepatic Arterial Resection and Reconstruction.

Authors:  Ryusei Matsuyama; Ryutaro Mori; Yohei Ota; Yuki Homma; Takafumi Kumamoto; Kazuhisa Takeda; Daisuke Morioka; Jiro Maegawa; Itaru Endo
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 4.  Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a surgeon's viewpoint on current topics.

Authors:  Masato Nagino
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 7.527

5.  East or West, Who Grades Liver Failure After Liver Resection for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma Best?

Authors:  Pim B Olthof; Robert J S Coelen; Thomas M van Gulik
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage is the most suitable preoperative biliary drainage method in the management of patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Hiroshi Kawakami; Masaki Kuwatani; Manabu Onodera; Shin Haba; Kazunori Eto; Nobuyuki Ehira; Hiroaki Yamato; Taiki Kudo; Eiichi Tanaka; Satoshi Hirano; Satoshi Kondo; Masahiro Asaka
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-08-11       Impact factor: 7.527

Review 7.  Mechanism of impaired hepatic regeneration in cholestatic liver.

Authors:  Yukihiro Yokoyama; Masato Nagino; Yuji Nimura
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg       Date:  2007-03-27

8.  Postoperative Mortality after Liver Resection for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: Development of a Risk Score and Importance of Biliary Drainage of the Future Liver Remnant.

Authors:  Jimme K Wiggers; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Kasia P Cieslak; Alexandre Doussot; David van Klaveren; Peter J Allen; Marc G Besselink; Olivier R Busch; Michael I D'Angelica; Ronald P DeMatteo; Dirk J Gouma; T Peter Kingham; Thomas M van Gulik; William R Jarnagin
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2016-04-05       Impact factor: 6.113

9.  Surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma from a viewpoint of age: Is it beneficial to octogenarians in an aging society?

Authors:  Kumiko Akashi; Tomoki Ebata; Takashi Mizuno; Yukihiro Yokoyama; Tsuyoshi Igami; Junpei Yamaguchi; Shunsuke Onoe; Masato Nagino
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 3.982

10.  Forty consecutive resections of hilar cholangiocarcinoma with no postoperative mortality and no positive ductal margins: results of a prospective study.

Authors:  Satoshi Kondo; Satoshi Hirano; Yoshiyasu Ambo; Eiichi Tanaka; Shunichi Okushiba; Toshiaki Morikawa; Hiroyuki Katoh
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  1 in total

1.  The efficiency of postoperative liver failure and mortality risk scores after liver resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Qingbo Feng; Wenwei Liao; Jiaxin Li; Yong Zeng
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2022-08       Impact factor: 8.265

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.