BACKGROUND: The regenerative capacities of the liver and improvements in surgical techniques have expanded the possibilities of resectability. Liver resection is often the only curative treatment for primary and secondary malignancies, despite the risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). This serious complication (with a 50% mortality rate) can be avoided by better assessment of liver volume and function of the future liver remnant (FLR).
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to understand and assess clinical, biological, and imaging predictors of PHLF risk, as well as the various hypertrophy techniques, to achieve an adequate FLR before hepatectomy.
METHODS: We reviewed the state of the art in liver regeneration and FLR hypertrophy techniques.
RESULTS: The use of new biological scores (such as the aspartate aminotransferase/platelet ratio index + albumin-bilirubin [APRI+ALBI] score), concurrent utilization of 99mTc-mebrofenin scintigraphy (HBS), or dynamic hepatocyte contrast-enhanced MRI (DHCE-MRI) for liver volumetry helps predict the risk of PHLF. Besides portal vein embolization, there are other FLR optimization techniques that have their indications in case of risk of failure (e.g., associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy, liver venous deprivation) or in specific situations (transarterial radioembolization).
CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to standardize volumetry and function measurement techniques, as well as FLR hypertrophy techniques, to limit the risk of PHLF.

The history of liver surgery is a tale of progressive resolution of issues presenting one after another from ancient times to the present days when dealing with liver ailments. The perfect knowledge of human liver anatomy and physiology and the development of a proper liver resective surgery require time and huge efforts and, mostly, the study and research of giants of their own times, whose names are forever associated with anatomical landmarks, thorough descriptions, and surgical approaches. The control of parenchymal bleeding after trauma and during resection is the second issue that surgeons have to resolve. A good knowledge of intra and extrahepatic vascular anatomy is a necessary condition to develop techniques of vascular control, paving the way to liver transplantation. Last but not least, the issue of residual liver function after resection requires advanced techniques of volume redistribution through redirection of blood inflow. These are the same problems any young surgeon would face when approaching liver surgery for the first time. Therefore, obtaining a wide picture of historical evolution of liver surgery could be a great starting point to serve as an example and a guide.

BACKGROUND: In daily clinical practice, different future liver remnant (FLR) modulation techniques are increasingly used to allow a liver resection in patients with insufficient FLR volume. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and perioperative safety of portal vein ligation (PVL), portal vein embolization (PVE), liver venous deprivation (LVD) and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS).
METHODS: A literature search for studies comparing liver resections following different FLR modulation techniques was performed in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central, and pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: Overall, 23 studies comprising 1557 patients were included. LVD achieved the greatest increase in FLR (17.32 %, 95% CI 2.49-32.15), while ALPPS was most effective in preventing dropout before the completion hepatectomy (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.15-0.55). PVL tended to be associated with a longer time to completion hepatectomy (MD 5.78 days, 95% CI -0.67-12.23). Liver failure occurred less frequently after LVD, compared to PVE (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14-0.87) and ALPPS (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.85).
CONCLUSIONS: ALPPS and LVD seem superior to PVE and PVL in terms of achieved FLR increase and subsequent treatment completion. LVD was associated with lower rates of post hepatectomy liver failure, compared to both PVE and ALPPS. A summary of the protocol has been prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022321474).

BACKGROUND: Post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) is one of the main causes of postoperative mortality and is challenging to predict early in patients after liver resection. Some studies suggest that the postoperative serum phosphorus might predict outcomes in these patients.
OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic literature review on hypophosphatemia and evaluate it as a prognostic factor for PHLF and overall morbidity.
METHODS: This systematic review was performed according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement. A study protocol for the review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database. PubMed, Cochrane and Lippincott Williams & Wilkins databases were systematically searched up to March 31, 2022 for studies analyzing postoperative hypophosphatemia as a prognostic factor for PHLF, overall postoperative morbidity and liver regeneration. The quality assessment of the included cohort studies was performed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS: After final assessment, nine studies (eight retrospective and one prospective cohort study) with 1677 patients were included in the systematic review. All selected studies scored ≥ 6 points according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Cutoff values of hypophosphatemia varied from < 1 mg/dL to ≤ 2.5 mg/dL in selected studies with ≤ 2.5 mg/dL being the most used defining value. Five studies analyzed PHLF, while the remaining four analyzed overall complications as a main outcome associated with hypophosphatemia. Only two of the selected studies analyzed postoperative liver regeneration, with reported better postoperative liver regeneration in cases of postoperative hypophosphatemia. In three studies hypophosphatemia was associated with better postoperative outcomes, while six studies revealed hypophosphatemia as a predictive factor for worse patient outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Changes of the postoperative serum phosphorus level might be useful for predicting outcomes after liver resection. However, routine measurement of perioperative serum phosphorus levels remains questionable and should be evaluated individually.

The remarkable capacity of regeneration of the liver is well known, although the involved mechanisms are far from being understood. Furthermore, limits concerning the residual functional mass of the liver remain critical in both fields of hepatic resection and transplantation. The aim of the present study was to review the surgical experiments regarding liver regeneration in pigs to promote experimental methodological standardization. The Pubmed, Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Studies evaluating liver regeneration through surgical experiments performed on pigs were included. A total of 139 titles were screened, and 41 articles were included in the study, with 689 pigs in total. A total of 29 studies (71% of all) had a survival design, with an average study duration of 13 days. Overall, 36 studies (88%) considered partial hepatectomy, of which four were an associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS). Remnant liver volume ranged from 10% to 60%. Only 2 studies considered a hepatotoxic pre-treatment, while 25 studies evaluated additional liver procedures, such as stem cell application, ischemia/reperfusion injury, portal vein modulation, liver scaffold application, bio-artificial, and pharmacological liver treatment. Only nine authors analysed how cytokines and growth factors changed in response to liver resection. The most used imaging system to evaluate liver volume was CT-scan volumetry, even if performed only by nine authors. The pig represents one of the best animal models for the study of liver regeneration. However, it remains a mostly unexplored field due to the lack of experiments reproducing the chronic pathological aspects of the liver and the heterogeneity of existing studies.

Today, there is still debate on the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NeoChem) on liver regeneration (LivReg). The objectives of this study were to assess the impact of NeoChem and its characteristics (addition of bevacizumab, number of cycles and time from end of NeoChem) on post-hepatectomy LivReg.
Studies reporting LivReg in patients submitted to liver resection were included. Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched. Only studies comparing NeoChem vs no chemotherapy or comparing chemotherapy characteristics from 1990 to present were included. Two researchers individually screened the identified records registered in a predesigned database. Primary outcome was future liver remnant regeneration rate (FLR3). Bias of the studies was evaluated with the ROBINS-I tool, and quality of evidence with the GRADE system. Data was presented as mean difference or standard mean difference.
Eight studies with a total of 681 patients were selected. Seven were retrospective and one prospective comparative cohort studies. In patients submitted to major hepatectomy, NeoChem did not have an impact on LivReg (MD 3.12, 95% CI -2,12-8.36, p 0,24). Adding bevacizumab to standard NeoChem was associated with better FLR3 (SMD 0.45, 95% CI 0.19-0.71, p 0.0006).
The main drawback of this review is the retrospective nature of the available studies. NeoChem does not have a negative impact on postoperative LivReg in patients submitted to liver resection. Regimens with bevacizumab seem to be associated with better postoperative LivReg rates when compared to standard NeoChem.

BACKGROUND: Several treatments induce liver hypertrophy for patients with liver malignancies but insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). Herein, the aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of existing surgical techniques using network meta-analysis (NMA).
METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from databases for abstracts and full-text articles published from database inception through Feb 2022. The primary outcome was the efficacy of different procedures, including standardized FLR (sFLR) increase, time to hepatectomy, resection rate, and R0 resection margin. The secondary outcome was the safety of different treatments, including the rate of Clavien-Dindo≥3a and 90-day mortality.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), three prospective trials (PTs), and twenty-one retrospective trials (RTs), and a total number of 2075 patients were recruited in this study. NMA demonstrated that the Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) had much higher sFLR increase when compared to portal vein embolization (PVE) (55.25%, 95% CI 45.27-65.24%), or liver venous deprivation(LVD) (43.26%, 95% CI 22.05-64.47%), or two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) (30.53%, 95% CI 16.84-44.21%), or portal vein ligation (PVL) (58.42%, 95% CI 37.62-79.23%). ALPPS showed significantly shorter time to hepatectomy when compared to PVE (-32.79d, 95% CI -42.92-22.66), or LVD (-34.02d, 95% CI -47.85-20.20), or TSH (-22.85d, 95% CI -30.97-14.72), or PVL (-43.37d, 95% CI -64.11-22.62); ALPPS was considered as the highest resection rate when compared to TSH (OR=6.09; 95% CI 2.76-13.41), or PVL (OR =3.52; 95% CI 1.16-10.72), or PVE (OR =4.12; 95% CI 2.19-7.77). ALPPS had comparable resection rate with LVD (OR =2.20; 95% CI 0.83-5.86). There was no significant difference between them when considering the R0 marge rate. ALPPS had a higher Clavien-Dindo≥3a complication rate and 90-day mortality compared to other treatments, although there were no significant differences between different procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: ALPPS demonstrated a higher regeneration rate, shorter time to hepatectomy, and higher resection rate than PVL, PVE, or TSH. There was no significant difference between them when considering the R0 marge rate. However, ALPPS developed the trend of higher Clavien-Dindo≥3a complication rate and 90-day mortality compared to other treatments.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: The small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) is characterized by prolonged hyperbilirubinemia, coagulopathy, and/or encephalopathy caused by a small liver graft that cannot sustain the metabolic demands of the recipient after a partial liver transplant (PLT). Models of PLT in pigs are excellent for studying this syndrome. This review aimed to identify the different porcine models of SFSS in the literature and compare their technical aspects and therapeutics methods focused on portal inflow modulation (PIM).
METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the porcine experimental model and SFSS. The MEDLINE-PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, LILACS, and SciELO databases were electronically searched and updated until June 20, 2021. The MeSH terms used were \'\'ORGAN SIZE\'\' AND \'\'LIVER TRANSPLANTATION\".
RESULTS: Thirteen SFSS porcine models were reported. Four were performed with portocaval shunt to PIM and 3 with mesocaval shunt to PIM. A few studies focused on clinical therapeutics to PIM; a study described somatostatin infusion to avoid SFSS. Initially, studies on PIM showed its potentially beneficial effects without mentioning the minimum portal flow that permits liver regeneration. However, an excessive portal diversion could be detrimental to this process.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of porcine models on SFSS resulted in a better understanding of its pathophysiology and led to the establishment of various types of portal modulation, surgical techniques with different complexities, and pharmaceutical strategies such as somatostatin, making clear that without reducing the portal vein pressure the outcomes are poor. With the improvement of these techniques, SFSS can be avoided.

Liver involvement after abdominal blunt trauma must be expected, and in up to 30% of cases, spleen, kidney, and pancreas injuries may coexist. Whenever hemodynamics conditions do not contraindicate the overcoming of the ancient dogma according to which exploratory laparotomy should be performed after every major abdominal trauma, a CT scan has to clarify the liver lesions so as to determine the optimal management strategy. Except for complete vascular avulsion, no liver trauma grade precludes nonoperative management. Every attempt to treat the injured liver by avoiding a strong surgical approach may be considered. Each time, a nonoperative management (NOM) consisting of a basic \"wait and see\" attitude combined with systemic support and blood replacement are inadequate. Embolization should be considered to stop the bleeding. Percutaneous drainage of collections, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with papilla sphincterotomy or stent placement and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) may avoid, or at least delay, surgical reconstruction or resection until systemic and hepatic inflammatory remodeling are resolved. The pathophysiological principle sustaining these leanings is based on the opportunity to limit the further release of cell debris fragments acting as damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) and the following stress response associated with the consequent immune suppression after trauma. The main goal will be a faster recovery combined with limited cell death of the liver through the ischemic events that may directly follow the trauma, exacerbated by hemostatic procedures and surgery, in order to reduce the gross distortion of a regenerated liver.