Large Language Models for Automated Synoptic Reports and Resectability Categorization in Pancreatic Cancer.

Background Structured radiology reports for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) improve surgical decision-making over free-text reports, but radiologist adoption is variable. Resectability criteria are applied inconsistently. Purpose To evaluate the performance of large language models (LLMs) in automatically creating PDAC synoptic reports from original reports and to explore performance in categorizing tumor resectability. Materials and Methods In this institutional review board-approved retrospective study, 180 consecutive PDAC staging CT reports on patients referred to the authors' European Society for Medical Oncology-designated cancer center from January to December 2018 were included. Reports were reviewed by two radiologists to establish the reference standard for 14 key findings and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) resectability category. GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 (accessed September 18-29, 2023) were prompted to create synoptic reports from original reports with the same 14 features, and their performance was evaluated (recall, precision, F1 score). To categorize resectability, three prompting strategies (default knowledge, in-context knowledge, chain-of-thought) were used for both LLMs. Hepatopancreaticobiliary surgeons reviewed original and artificial intelligence (AI)-generated reports to determine resectability, with accuracy and review time compared. The McNemar test, t test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and mixed effects logistic regression models were used where appropriate. Results GPT-4 outperformed GPT-3.5 in the creation of synoptic reports (F1 score: 0.997 vs 0.967, respectively). Compared with GPT-3.5, GPT-4 achieved equal or higher F1 scores for all 14 extracted features. GPT-4 had higher precision than GPT-3.5 for extracting superior mesenteric artery involvement (100% vs 88.8%, respectively). For categorizing resectability, GPT-4 outperformed GPT-3.5 for each prompting strategy. For GPT-4, chain-of-thought prompting was most accurate, outperforming in-context knowledge prompting (92% vs 83%, respectively; P = .002), which outperformed the default knowledge strategy (83% vs 67%, P < .001). Surgeons were more accurate in categorizing resectability using AI-generated reports than original reports (83% vs 76%, respectively; P = .03), while spending less time on each report (58%; 95% CI: 0.53, 0.62). Conclusion GPT-4 created near-perfect PDAC synoptic reports from original reports. GPT-4 with chain-of-thought achieved high accuracy in categorizing resectability. Surgeons were more accurate and efficient using AI-generated reports. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Chang in this issue.

Disease-free survival after pancreatectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: A 17-year single-center experience of 223 patients.

BACKGROUND: Metastasis or recurrence of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) after pancreatectomy is an important source of postsurgical morbidity. This study aimed to define disease-free survival (DFS) in this population. METHODS: Patients who underwent pancreatectomy for pNETs between January 2005 and January 2022 were included. Clinicopathologic and survival data were collected, and the primary endpoint was DFS. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression modeling were performed. RESULTS: Of the 223 patients, 144 (65%) distal/subtotal/partial pancreatectomies, 71 (32%) pancreaticoduodenectomies, 6 (3%) total pancreatectomies, and 2 (1%) enucleations were performed. Of the 223 patients, 45 (20%) experienced disease recurrence or metastasis after index pancreatectomy during the 17 years of the study. Nonfunctional pNETs (162 [73%]) were more common than hormonally functional subtypes. The 2- and 5-year DFSs were 82% and 76%, respectively. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that N1 node positive disease, size of ≥ 4 cm, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, Ki-67 of ≥ 20%, and nonfunctional pNETs are significantly associated with a lower DFS (P < .05). Univariate Cox analysis identified the following predictors to be significantly associated with poorer DFS: larger tumor size (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04-1.28), Ki-67 index of ≥ 20% (HR, 4.93; 95% CI, 2.00-11.44), perineural invasion (HR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.40-7.89), open surgery (HR, 3.34; 95% CI, 1.03-1.33), node-positive disease (HR, 5.27; 95% CI, 2.28-13.26), and increased body mass index (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.17) (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Of note, 1 in 5 patients who underwent resection developed recurrence or metastasis after pancreatectomy. Prognostic predictors of DFS in pNETs could help optimize treatment and enhance follow-up protocols to improve quality and reduce morbidity.

Pursuing living donor liver transplantation improves outcomes of patients with autoimmune liver diseases: An intention-to-treat analysis.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers the opportunity to decrease waitlist time and mortality for patients with autoimmune liver disease (AILD), autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cholangitis, and primary sclerosing cholangitis. We compared the survival of patients with a potential living donor (pLDLT) on the waitlist versus no potential living donor (pDDLT) on an intention-to-treat basis. Our retrospective cohort study investigated adults with AILD listed for a liver transplant in our program between 2000 and 2021. The pLDLT group comprised recipients with a potential living donor. Otherwise, they were included in the pDDLT group. Intention-to-treat survival was assessed from the time of listing. Of the 533 patients included, 244 (43.8%) had a potential living donor. Waitlist dropout was higher for the pDDLT groups among all AILDs (pDDLT 85 [29.4%] vs. pLDLT 9 [3.7%], p < 0.001). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year intention-to-treat survival rates were higher for pLDLT versus pDDLT among all AILDs (95.7% vs. 78.1%, 89.0% vs. 70.1%, and 87.1% vs. 65.5%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, pLDLT was associated with a 38% reduction in the risk of death among the AILD cohort (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.42-0.93 [ p <0.05]), and 60% among the primary sclerosing cholangitis cohort (HR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.22-0.74 [ p <0.05]). There were no differences in the 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-transplant survival between LDLT and DDLT (AILD: 95.6% vs. 92.1%, 89.9% vs. 89.4%, and 89.1% vs. 87.1%, p =0.41). This was consistent after adjusting for covariates (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.56-1.68 [ p >0.9]). Our study suggests that having a potential living donor could decrease the risk of death in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis on the waitlist. Importantly, the post-transplant outcomes in this population are similar between the LDLT and DDLT groups.

Trajectories of patients relisted for liver transplantation.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Recurrent cirrhosis complicates 10-30% of Liver transplants (LT) and can lead to consideration for re-transplantation. We evaluated the trajectories of relisted versus primary listed patients on the waitlist using a competing risk framework. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively examined 1,912 patients listed for LT at our centre between from 2012 to 2020. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess overall survival (OS) by listing type and competing risk analysis Fine-Gray models were used to assess cumulative incidence of transplant by listing type. RESULTS: 1,731 patients were included (104 relisted). 44.2% of relisted patients received exception points vs. 19.8% of primary listed patients (p<0.001). Patients relisted without exceptions, representing those with graft cirrhosis, had the worst OS (HR: 4.17, 95%CI 2.63 - 6.67, p=<0.0001) and lowest instantaneous rate of transplant (HR: 0.56, 95%CI 0.38 - 0.83, p=0.006) than primary listed with exception points. On multivariate analysis listing type, height, bilirubin and INR were associated with cumulative incidence of transplant, while listing type, bilirubin, INR, sodium, creatinine were associated with OS. Within relisted patients, there was a trend towards higher mortality (HR: 1.79, 95%CI 0.91 - 3.52, p=0.08) and low transplant incidence (HR: 0.51, 95%CI 0.22 - 1.15, p=0.07) for graft cirrhosis vs other relisting indications. CONCLUSIONS: Patients relisted for LT are carefully curated and comprise a minority of the waitlist population. Despite their younger age, they have worse liver/kidney function, poor waitlist survival, and decreased transplant incidence suggesting the need for early relisting, while considering standardized exception points.

Should advanced donor age be a deterrent in the utilization of grafts from donation after cardiac death in deceased donor liver transplantation? The Toronto experience.

BACKGROUND: Advanced donor age paired with donation after cardiac death (DCD) increases the risk of transplantation, precluding widespread use of grafts from such donors worldwide. Our aim was to analyze outcomes of liver transplantation using grafts from older DCD donors and donation after brain death (DBD) donors. METHODS: Patients who underwent liver transplantation using grafts from deceased donors between January 2016 and December 2021 were included in the study. Short-and long-term outcomes were analyzed for 4 groups of patients: those who received DCD and DBD grafts from younger (< 50 yr) and older (≥ 50 yr) donors. RESULTS: Of the 807 patients included in the analysis, 44.7% (n = 361) of grafts were received from older donors, with grafts for older DCD donors comprising 4.7% of the total cohort (n = 38). Patients who received grafts from older donors had a lower incidence of biliary strictures than those who received grafts from younger donors (7.9% v. 20.0% for DCD donation, p = 0.14, and 4.9% v. 6.8% for DBD donation, p = 0.34), with a significantly lower incidence of ischemic-type biliary strictures in patients who received grafts from older versus younger DCD donors (2.6% v. 18.0%, p = 0.04). There was no difference in 1- and 3-year graft survival rates among patients who received grafts from older and younger DCD donors (92.1% v. 90.8% and 80.2% v. 80.9%, respectively) and those who received grafts from older and younger DBD donors (90.1% v. 93.2% and 85.3% v. 84.4%, respectively) (p = 0.85). Pretransplantation admission to the intensive care unit (hazard ratio [HR] 9.041, p < 0.001) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (HR 2.197, p = 0.02) were found to significantly affect survival of grafts from older donors. CONCLUSION: Donor age alone should not be the criterion to determine the acceptability of grafts in liver transplantation. With careful selection criteria, older DCD donors could make a valuable contribution to expanding the liver donor pool, with grafts that produce comparable results to those obtained with standard-criteria grafts.

Performance evaluation of a North American center using the established global benchmark for laparoscopic liver resections: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The global benchmark cut-offs were set for laparoscopic liver resection procedures: left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy. We aimed to compare the performance of our North American center with the established global benchmarks. METHODS: This is a single-center study of adults who underwent laparoscopic liver resection between 2010 to 2022 at the Toronto General Hospital. Fourteen benchmarking outcomes were assessed: operation time, intraoperative blood transfusion, estimated blood loss, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood loss ≥1000mL, open-conversion, postoperative length of stay, return to operation, postoperative morbidity, postoperative major-morbidity, 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, R1 resection, and failure to rescue. Low-risk benchmark cases were defined as follows: patients aged 18 to 70 years, American Society of Anesthesiologist score ≤ 2, tumor size <10 cm, and Child-Pugh score ≤A. Cases involving bilio-enteric anastomosis, hilar dissection, or concomitant major procedures were excluded from the low-risk category. Cases that did not meet the criteria for low-risk selection were considered high-risk cases. RESULTS: A total of 178 laparoscopic liver resection cases were analyzed (109 left lateral sectionectomies, 45 left hepatectomies, 24 right hepatectomies). Forty-four (25%) cases qualified as low-risk cases (23 left lateral sectionectomies, 16 left hepatectomies, 5 right hepatectomies). The postoperative major morbidity and 90-day mortality after left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy for the low-risk cases were 0%, 0%, and 0%, and 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. For the high-risk cases post-2017, the outcomes in the same order were 0%, 0%, and 12%; 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. For the high-risk cases operated pre2017, the outcomes in the same order were 9%∗, 16%∗, and 18%; 2%∗, 0%, and 9%∗ (asterisks indicate not meeting the global cut-off), respectively. CONCLUSION: A North American center was able to achieve outcomes comparable to the established global benchmark for laparoscopic liver resection.

Outcomes of pancreas transplantation in patients with underlying inflammatory bowel disease: a retrospective case series.

Despite having emerged as a definitive treatment for diabetes mellitus (DM), pancreas transplantation remains a formidable surgical task owing to complications like graft pancreatitis, enteric leaks, and rejection. This becomes more challenging in the setting of underlying bowel pathology, such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which has a strong immune-genomic association of co-existence with DM. Risk of anastomotic leaks, dose adjustments of immunosuppressants and biologicals, and management of IBD flares constitute some of the major perioperative challenges calling for a protocol-based, systematic, multidisciplinary approach. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective case series of patients between January 1996 and July 2021, with all patients being followed up until December 2021. All consecutive patients with end-stage DM who underwent pancreas transplantation (alone, simultaneous with kidney transplantation or after kidney transplantation) and had pre-existing IBD were included in the study. A Comparison of 1-, 5-, 10-year survival was done with pancreas transplant recipients without underlying IBD using Kaplan-Meir curves. Results: Of the total 630 pancreas transplants performed between 1996 and 2021, eight patients had IBD, mostly Crohn's disease. Following pancreas transplantation, two of the eight patients had duodenal leaks, with one a requiring graft pancreatectomy. The 5-year graft survival rate for the cohort was 75% compared to 81.6% for the overall cohort of patients undergoing pancreas transplantation (P=0.48) with a median graft survival of 48.4 months compared to 68.1 months in the latter (P=0.56). Conclusion: The findings of the series provide a snapshot of the outcome of pancreas transplantation in the background of IBD, suggesting a graft and overall patient survival rates comparable with pancreas transplantation in patients without underlying IBD, with further validation of the findings required in a larger cohort of patients in the future.

Machine learning-based mortality prediction models using national liver transplantation registries are feasible but have limited utility across countries.

Many countries curate national registries of liver transplant (LT) data. These registries are often used to generate predictive models; however, potential performance and transferability of these models remain unclear. We used data from 3 national registries and developed machine learning algorithm (MLA)-based models to predict 90-day post-LT mortality within and across countries. Predictive performance and external validity of each model were assessed. Prospectively collected data of adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who underwent primary LTs between January 2008 and December 2018 from the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry (Canada), National Health Service Blood and Transplantation (United Kingdom), and United Network for Organ Sharing (United States) were used to develop MLA models to predict 90-day post-LT mortality. Models were developed using each registry individually (based on variables inherent to the individual databases) and using all 3 registries combined (variables in common between the registries [harmonized]). The model performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. The number of patients included was as follows: Canada, n = 1214; the United Kingdom, n = 5287; and the United States, n = 59,558. The best performing MLA-based model was ridge regression across both individual registries and harmonized data sets. Model performance diminished from individualized to the harmonized registries, especially in Canada (individualized ridge: AUROC, 0.74; range, 0.73-0.74; harmonized: AUROC, 0.68; range, 0.50-0.73) and US (individualized ridge: AUROC, 0.71; range, 0.70-0.71; harmonized: AUROC, 0.66; range, 0.66-0.66) data sets. External model performance across countries was poor overall. MLA-based models yield a fair discriminatory potential when used within individual databases. However, the external validity of these models is poor when applied across countries. Standardization of registry-based variables could facilitate the added value of MLA-based models in informing decision making in future LTs.

Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) as a Source of Liver Grafts: Honouring the Ultimate Gift.

OBJECTIVE: To report the clinical outcomes of liver transplants from donors after medical assistance in dying (MAiD) versus donors after cardiac death (DCD) and deceased brain death (DBD). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: In North America, the number of patients needing liver transplants exceeds the number of available donors. In 2016, MAiD was legalized in Canada. METHODS: All patients undergoing deceased donor liver transplantation at Toronto General Hospital between 2016 and 2021 were included in the study. Recipient perioperative and postoperative variables and donor physiological variables were compared among 3 groups. RESULTS: Eight hundred seven patients underwent deceased donor liver transplantation during the study period, including DBD (n=719; 89%), DCD (n=77; 9.5%), and MAiD (n=11; 1.4%). The overall incidence of biliary complications was 6.9% (n=56), the most common being strictures (n=55;6.8%), highest among the MAiD recipients [5.8% (DBD) vs. 14.2% (DCD) vs. 18.2% (MAiD); P =0.008]. There was no significant difference in 1 year (98.4% vs. 96.4% vs. 100%) and 3-year (89.3% vs. 88.7% vs. 100%) ( P =0.56) patient survival among the 3 groups. The 1- and 3- year graft survival rates were comparable (96.2% vs. 95.2% vs. 100% and 92.5% vs. 91% vs. 100%; P =0.37). CONCLUSION: With expected physiological hemodynamic challenges among MAiD and DCD compared with DBD donors, a higher rate of biliary complications was observed in MAiD donors, with no significant difference noted in short-and long-term graft outcomes among the 3 groups. While ethical challenges persist, good initial results suggest that MAiD donors can be safely used in liver transplantation, with results comparable with other established forms of donation.

Long-term outcomes of retransplantation after live donor liver transplantation: A Western experience.

BACKGROUND: Despite most liver transplants in North America being from deceased donors, the number of living donor liver transplants has increased over the last decade. Although outcomes of liver retransplantation after deceased donor liver transplantation have been widely published, outcomes of retransplant after living donor liver transplant need to be further elucidated. METHOD: We aimed to compare waitlist outcomes and survival post-retransplant in recipients of initial living or deceased donor grafts. Adult liver recipients relisted at University Health Network between April 2000 and October 2020 were retrospectively identified and grouped according to their initial graft: living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplant. A competing risk multivariable model evaluated the association between graft type at first transplant and outcomes after relisting. Survival after retransplant waitlisting (intention-to-treat) and after retransplant (per protocol) were also assessed. Multivariable Cox regression evaluated the effect of initial graft type on survival after retransplant. RESULTS: A total of 201 recipients were relisted (living donor liver transplants, n = 67; donor liver transplants, n = 134) and 114 underwent retransplant (living donor liver transplants, n = 48; deceased donor liver transplants, n = 66). The waitlist mortality with an initial living donor liver transplant was not significantly different (hazard ratio = 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-1.10; P = .08). Both unadjusted and adjusted graft loss risks were similar post-retransplant. The risk-adjusted overall intention-to-treat survival after relisting (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.32; P = .30) and per protocol survival after retransplant (hazard ratio:1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-4.19; P = .40) were equivalent in those who initially received a living donor liver transplant. CONCLUSION: Patients requiring relisting and retransplant after either living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplantation experience similar waitlist and survival outcomes.

Pancreas transplantation with grafts obtained from donation after cardiac death or donation after brain death results in comparable outcomes.

Introduction: Pancreas organ shortages and long recipient waitlist times are critical components that limit recipients from receiving a pancreas transplant. Over the last decade, our center has been using donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors as an adjunct to donation after brain death (DBD) donors to expand the organ pool. The aim of this study was to compare recipient and graft survival between DCD and DBD recipients. Methods: A retrospective single center propensity matched analysis (2011-2020) of 32 DCD vs 96 DBD pancreas transplants was performed. Results: 8-year recipient survival was similar between DCD and DBD groups (87.4% vs 92.7%, p=0.35) as was simultaneous kidney and pancreas transplant (SPK) 8-year kidney (88.9 vs 96.9%, p=0.219) and pancreas graft survival (77.4% vs 86.7%, p=0.344). There was no difference in vascular thrombosis rate between DCD and DBD pancreas grafts (3.1% vs 7.3%, p=0.73). DCD kidneys had a higher rate of DGF vs DBD kidneys (28.1% vs 6.3%, p=0.004), without any significant difference in long term kidney failure (12.5% vs 8.3%, p=0.5). Discussion: Recipients of DCD grafts demonstrate equivalent long-term patient and graft survival compared to DBD recipients for pancreas transplantation. Increased utilization of well selected DCD donors is a safe strategy to increase the donor pool.

Transplant surgeons' perspective on antimicrobial stewardship: Experience with TransQIP.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) have been shown to reduce the rates of antimicrobial resistance and improve morbidity and mortality in surgical patients. ASPs have largely been underutilized in solid organ transplant programs, and the current state of ASPs in transplantation is reviewed. Continued implementation of ASPs would likely significantly benefit transplant patients. Furthermore, coupling ASPs with robust programmatic metrics (such as transplant-specific NSQIP) will hopefully lead to improved outcomes including morbidity and mortality of solid organ transplant recipients.

Low utilization of adult-to-adult LDLT in Western countries despite excellent outcomes: International multicenter analysis of the US, the UK, and Canada.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers an opportunity to decrease the liver transplant waitlist and reduce waitlist mortality. We sought to compare donor and recipient characteristics and post-transplant outcomes after LDLT in the US, the UK, and Canada. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicenter cohort-study of adults (≥18-years) who underwent primary LDLT between Jan-2008 and Dec-2018 from three national liver transplantation registries: United Network for Organ Sharing (US), National Health Service Blood and Transplantation (UK), and the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry (Canada). Patients undergoing retransplantation or multi-organ transplantation were excluded. Post-transplant survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariable adjustments were performed using Cox proportional-hazards models with mixed-effect modeling. RESULTS: A total of 2,954 living donor liver transplants were performed (US: n = 2,328; Canada: n = 529; UK: n = 97). Canada has maintained the highest proportion of LDLT utilization over time (proportion of LDLT in 2008 - US: 3.3%; Canada: 19.5%; UK: 1.7%; p <0.001 - in 2018 - US: 5.0%; Canada: 13.6%; UK: 0.4%; p <0.001). The 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival was 92.6%, 82.8%, and 70.0% in the US vs. 96.1%, 89.9%, and 82.2% in Canada vs. 91.4%, 85.4%, and 66.7% in the UK. After adjustment for characteristics of donors, recipients, transplant year, and treating transplant center as a random effect, all countries had a non-statistically significantly different mortality hazard post-LDLT (Ref US: Canada hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-1.01, p = 0.05; UK hazard ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.59-2.02, p = 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: The use of LDLT has remained low in the US, the UK and Canada. Despite this, long-term survival is excellent. Continued efforts to increase LDLT utilization in these countries may be warranted due to the growing waitlist and differences in allocation that may disadvantage patients currently awaiting liver transplantation. LAY SUMMARY: This multicenter international comparative analysis of living donor liver transplantation in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada demonstrates that despite low use of the procedure, the long-term outcomes are excellent. In addition, the mortality risk is not statistically significantly different between the evaluated countries. However, the incidence and risk of retransplantation differs between the countries, being the highest in the United Kingdom and lowest in the United States.

Is Biannual Surveillance for Pancreatic Cancer Sufficient in Individuals With Genetic Syndromes or Familial Pancreatic Cancer?

BACKGROUND: Individuals with a family history of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC) or with a germline mutation in a PC susceptibility gene are at increased risk of developing PC. These high-risk individuals (HRIs) may benefit from PC surveillance. METHODS: A PC surveillance program was developed to evaluate the detection of premalignant lesions and early-stage PCs using biannual imaging and to determine whether locally advanced or metastatic PCs develop despite biannual surveillance. From January 2013 to April 2020, asymptomatic HRIs were enrolled and followed with alternating MRI and endoscopic ultrasound every 6 months. RESULTS: Of 75 HRIs, 43 (57.3%) had a germline mutation in a PC susceptibility gene and 32 (42.7%) had a familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) pedigree. Branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMNs) were identified in 26 individuals (34.7%), but only 2 developed progressive lesions. One patient with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (PJS) developed locally advanced PC arising from a BD-IPMN. Whole-genome sequencing of this patient's PC and of a second patient with PJS-associated PC from the same kindred revealed biallelic inactivation of STK11 in a KRAS-independent manner. A review of 3,853 patients from 2 PC registries identified an additional patient with PJS-associated PC. All 3 patients with PJS developed advanced PC consistent with the malignant transformation of an underlying BD-IPMN in <6 months. The other surveillance patient with a progressive lesion had FPC and underwent resection of a mixed-type IPMN that harbored polyclonal KRAS mutations. CONCLUSIONS: PC surveillance identifies a high prevalence of BD-IPMNs in HRIs. Patients with PJS with BD-IPMNs may be at risk for accelerated malignant transformation.

Dynamic risk profiling of HCC recurrence after curative intent liver resection.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Following liver resection (LR) for HCC, the likelihood of survival is dynamic, in that multiple recurrences and/or metastases are possible, each having variable impacts on outcomes. We sought to evaluate the natural progression, pattern, and timing of various disease states after LR for HCC using multistate modeling and to create a practical calculator to provide prognostic information for patients and clinicians. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Adult patients undergoing LR for HCC between January 2000 and December 2018 were retrospectively identified at a single center. Multistate analysis modeled post-LR tumor progression by describing transitions between distinct disease states. In this model, the states included surgery, intrahepatic recurrence (first, second, third, fourth, fifth), distant metastasis with or without intrahepatic recurrence, and death. Of the 486 patients included, 169 (34.8%) remained recurrence-free, 205 (42.2%) developed intrahepatic recurrence, 80 (16.5%) developed distant metastasis, and 32 (7%) died. For an average patient having undergone LR, there was a 33.1% chance of remaining disease-free, a 31.0% chance of at least one intrahepatic recurrence, a 16.3% chance of distant metastasis, and a 19.8% chance of death within the first 60 months post-LR. The transition probability from surgery to first intrahepatic recurrence, without a subsequent state transition, increased from 3% (3 months) to 17.4% (30 months) and 17.2% (60 months). Factors that could modify these probabilities included tumor size, satellite lesions, and microvascular invasion. The online multistate model calculator can be found on https://multistatehcc.shinyapps.io/home/. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to standard single time-to-event estimates, multistate modeling provides more realistic prognostication of outcomes after LR for HCC by taking into account many postoperative disease states and transitions between them. Our multistate modeling calculator can provide meaningful data to guide the management of patients undergoing postoperative surveillance and therapy.

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity score matched analysis of a high-volume North American center.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resections for malignancy are increasing worldwide, and yet data from North America are lacking. We aimed to assess the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection and open liver resection as a treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Patients undergoing liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma between January 2008 and December 2019 were retrospectively studied. A propensity score matching was performed using patient demographics, laboratory parameters, etiology of liver disease, liver function, and tumor characteristics. Primary outcomes included overall survival and cumulative incidence of recurrence. Kaplan-Meier and competing risk cumulative incidence were used for survival analyses. Multivariable Cox regression and Fine-Gray proportional hazard regression were performed to determine hazard for death and recurrence, respectively. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-one patients were identified (laparoscopic liver resection: 110; open liver resection: 281). After propensity score matching, 149 patients remained (laparoscopic liver resection: 57; open liver resection: 92). There were no significant differences between groups with regard to extent of hepatectomy performed and tumor characteristics. The laparoscopic liver resection group experienced a lower proportion of ≥Clavien-Dindo grade III complications (14% vs 29%; P = .01). In the matched cohort, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rate in the laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection group was 90.9%, 79.3%, 70.5% vs 91.3%, 88.5%, 83.1% (P = .26), and the cumulative incidence of recurrence 31.1%, 59.7%, 62.9% vs 18.9%, 40.6%, 49.2% (P = .06), respectively. CONCLUSION: This study represents the largest single institutional study from North America comparing long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection and open liver resection as a treatment for primary hepatocellular carcinoma. The combination of reduced short-term complications and equivalent long-term oncologic outcomes favor the laparoscopic approach when feasible.

Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma - Novel Benchmark Values for Surgical and Oncological Outcomes From 24 Expert Centers.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to define robust benchmark values for the surgical treatment of perihilar cholangiocarcinomas (PHC) to enable unbiased comparisons. BACKGROUND: Despite ongoing efforts, postoperative mortality and morbidity remains high after complex liver surgery for PHC. Benchmark data of best achievable results in surgical PHC treatment are however still lacking. METHODS: This study analyzed consecutive patients undergoing major liver surgery for PHC in 24 high-volume centers in 3 continents over the recent 5-year period (2014-2018) with a minimum follow-up of 1 year in each patient. Benchmark patients were those operated at high-volume centers (≥50 cases during the study period) without the need for vascular reconstruction due to tumor invasion, or the presence of significant co-morbidities such as severe obesity (body mass index ≥35), diabetes, or cardiovascular diseases. Benchmark cutoff values were derived from the 75th or 25th percentile of the median values of all benchmark centers. RESULTS: Seven hundred eight (39%) of a total of 1829 consecutive patients qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cut-offs included: R0 resection ≥57%, postoperative liver failure (International Study Group of Liver Surgery): ≤35%; in-hospital and 3-month mortality rates ≤8% and ≤13%, respectively; 3-month grade 3 complications and the CCI: ≤70% and ≤30.5, respectively; bile leak-rate: ≤47% and 5-year overall survival of ≥39.7%. Centers operating mostly on complex cases disclosed better outcome including lower post-operative liver failure rates (4% vs 13%; P = 0.002). Centers from Asia disclosed better outcomes. CONCLUSION: Surgery for PHC remains associated with high morbidity and mortality with now the availability of benchmark values covering 21 outcome parameters, which may serve as key references for comparison in any future analyses of individuals, group of patients or centers.

Trends in indications and outcomes of liver transplantation in Canada: A multicenter retrospective study.

The liver transplantation (LT) landscape is continuously evolving. We sought to evaluate trends in indications for LT in Canada and the impact of primary liver disease on post-LT outcomes using a national transplant registry. Adult patients who underwent a primary LT between 2000 and 2018 were retrospectively identified in the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry. Outcomes included post-LT patient and graft survival. A total of 5,722 LTs were identified. The number of LT per year increased from 251 in 2000 to 349 in 2018. The proportion of patients transplanted for HCV decreased from 31.5% in 2000 to 3.4% in 2018. In contrast, the percentage of transplants for HCC increased from 2.3% in 2000 to 32.4% in 2018, and those performed for NASH increased from 0.4% in 2005 to 12.6% in 2018. Year of transplant (per 1 year) was protective for both patient (HR:0.96,95%CI:0.94-0.97; P < 0.001) and graft survival (HR:0.97, 95%CI: 0.96-0.99; P = 0.001). Post-LT outcomes have improved over time in this nationwide analysis spanning 18 years. Moreover, trends in the indications for LT have changed, with HCC becoming the leading etiology. The decrease in the proportion of HCV patients and increase in those with NASH has implications on the evolving management of LT patients.

Laparoscopic Subtotal Cholecystectomy for the Difficult Gallbladder: A Safe Alternative.

BACKGROUND: The safe completion of cholecystectomy is dependent on proper identification and secure closure of the cystic duct. Effecting this closure poses a great challenge when inflammatory changes obscure the anatomy. Subtotal cholecystectomy allows for near complete removal of the gallbladder and complete evacuation of the stones while avoiding dissection in the hazardous area. OBJECTIVES: To describe experience with laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy. METHODS: Subtotal cholecystectomy was performed when the critical view of safety could not be achieved. Surgical technique was similar in all cases and included opening the Hartmann's pouch, removing stones obstructing the gallbladder outlet, and identifying the opening of the cystic duct, as well as circumferential transection of the gallbladder neck, closure of the gallbladder stump, and excision of the gallbladder fundus. Data retrieved from patient charts included demographics, pre-operative history, operative and postoperative course, and late complications. No bile duct injuries were observed in this series. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients underwent laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy (2010-2018). Ten patients were operated during the acute course of the disease and 43 electively. Acute cholecystitis was the leading cause for gallbladder removal. Cholecystostomy tube was placed in 18 patients during acute hospitalization. The gallbladder remnant was closed and a drain was placed in most patients. Of the 53 patients, 42 had an uneventful postoperative course. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy is an effective surgical technique to avoid bile duct injury when the cystic duct cannot safely be identified. Subtotal cholecystectomy has acceptable morbidity and obviates the need for conversion in these difficult cases.