METHODS: From 2002 to 2011, 60.15% of 823 patients developed recurrence after hepatectomy for HCC. One hundred and two patients with recurrence underwent RFA (n = 42) or TACE (n = 60) for tumour size ≤5 cm and number of lesions ≤ 3 when tumours were not resectable or transplantable. Those with renal impairment, portal vein thrombosis and poor liver reserve were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival, which was determined using log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier plots performed. Categorical data were analysed using the chi-square test and continuous variable were analysed using the Mann-Whitney U-test.
RESULTS: Demographics and primary tumour characteristics were similar in both groups (P > 0.05). Overall survival (OS) after an initial hepatectomy and salvage treatment for recurrence was similar (P > 0.05) in both groups with a 5-year OS after salvage treatment for RFA and TACE at 24.1% and 25.7%, respectively. For patients with the second recurrence after salvage treatment, an interchangeable treatment strategy of RFA and TACE conferred a better survival outcome than a stand-alone treatment with RFA or TACE (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: RFA and TACE may be equally effective for intrahepatic recurrence after hepatectomy when the tumour size is ≤ 5 cm and ≤ 3 lesions when re-resection or salvage transplantation is not considered feasible.
Summary: The first Asia Pacific consensus meeting on laparoscopic liver resection for HCC was held in July 2016 in Hong Kong. A group of expert liver surgeons with experience in both open and laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC convened to formulate recommendations on the role and perspective of laparoscopic liver resection for primary liver cancer. The recommendations consolidate the most recent evidence pertaining to laparoscopic hepatectomy together with the latest thinking of practicing clinicians involved in laparoscopic hepatectomy, and give detailed guidance on how to deploy the treatment effectively for patients in need.
Key Message: The panel of experts gathered evidence and produced recommendations providing guidance on the safe practice of laparoscopic hepatectomy for patients with HCC and cirrhosis. The inherent advantage of the laparoscopic approach may result in less blood loss if the procedure is performed in experienced centers. The laparoscopic approach to minor hepatectomy, particularly left lateral sectionectomy, is a preferred practice for HCC at experienced centers. Laparoscopic major liver resection for HCC remains a technically challenging operation, and it should be carried out in centers of excellence. There is emerging evidence that laparoscopic liver resection produces a better oncological outcome for HCC when compared with radiofrequency ablation, particularly when the lesions are peripherally located. Augmented features in laparoscopic liver resection, including indocyanine green fluorescence, 3D laparoscopy, and robot, will become important tools of surgical treatment in the near future. A combination of all of these features will enhance the experience of the surgeons, which may translate into better surgical outcomes. This is the first consensus workforce on laparoscopic liver resection for HCC, which is a unique condition that occurs in the Asia Pacific region.
METHODS: Using the Qualtrics XM and WJX platforms, questionnaires were sent online to MAFLD-ICD-11 coding collaborators, authors of papers, and relevant association members.
RESULTS: A total of 890 international experts in various fields from 61 countries responded to the survey. We also achieved full coverage of provincial-level administrative regions in China. 77.1% of respondents agreed that MAFLD should be represented in ICD-11 by updating NAFLD, with no significant regional differences (77.3% in Asia and 76.6% in non-Asia, p = 0.819). Over 80% of respondents agreed or somewhat agreed with the need to assign specific codes for progressive stages of MAFLD (i.e. steatohepatitis) (92.2%), MAFLD combined with comorbidities (84.1%), or MAFLD subtypes (i.e., lean, overweight/obese, and diabetic) (86.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: This global survey by a collaborative panel of clinical, coding, health management and policy experts, indicates agreement that MAFLD should be coded in ICD-11. The data serves as a foundation for corresponding adjustments in the ICD-11 revision.