Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Dear Editor
Recently, we read the paper titled “Laparoscopic versus open repeat liver resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma in hepatectomy patients: inverse probability of treatment weighting” reported by Eun Sung Jeong et al. published in Updates in Surgery [1]. Laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) and open repeat liver resection (ORLR) in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were compared, and they found that patients in the LRLR group achieved better short-term outcomes than those in the ORLR group. Although their findings seem convincing and interesting, a few questions may deserve further discussion.
Certainly, LRLR could shorten the postoperative hospital stay, and this study proposed that patients who underwent LRLR could obtain better short-term oncologic outcomes [1]. This was an interesting phenomenon in the clinic, because in our subconscious, the short-term outcomes were comparable in these two treatments. However, the sample was relatively small in this study. In our opinion, the primary tumor pathological features in the first operation also make sense, which may affect the short-term outcomes in the situation of tumor recurrence. In our center, we evaluated recurrent tumors combined with the primary tumor features at the first operation, such as the size of the tumor, the number of tumors, and the MVI status of the pathology. What we mentioned above was the independent risk factors for HCC. [2,3,4,5,6] Thus, we should take the first operation situation into consideration before making a decision on recurrent HCC. In this study, the number of patients who received laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in the LRLR group was higher than that in the ORLR group at the first operation (64.0% VS 32.0%, p = 0.024). The tumor situation at first operation may be significantly different for these patients, because the tumor size or location would affect the method of hepatectomy [6, 7].
Generally, another important risk factor for recurrent HCC is the time of tumor recurrence. In previous studies, the long-term outcomes of tumor recurrence within 1 year after hepatectomy were worse than those of tumor recurrence beyond 1 year after liver resection [8]. Therefore, it was necessary to compare the time of tumor recurrence when we analyzed the different treatments for recurrent HCC. On the other hand, in this study, the location of the tumor recurrence was different, which might present a different message for the tumor. The prevalent hypothesis was multicentric occurrence (MO) and intrahepatic metastasis (IM). [8] MO indicates de-novo carcinogenesis and IM indicates primary cancer relapse. The different tumor recurrence types would result in different outcomes. IM indicated a tumor with more aggression, resulting in a high risk of recurrence, although the patient had undergone resection again. Thus, the authors should add the comparison of the pathological diagnose in first operation and second operation for these patients, respectively, to identify the tumor origins, if possible, we could perform the genetic test to clarify the tumor origins. In summary, although LRLR could obtain a better short-term outcome in this study, we could not ignore other risk factors, especially the tumor status at the first operation and the pathological diagnosis in these patients. Therefore, we should take the first operation situation into consideration when we make a decision on recurrent HCC.
Data availability
This study is a letter for the editor, no data.
References
Jeong ES, Kim JM, Lim M, Yang J, Kwon JE, Choi GS, Joh JW (2022) Laparoscopic versus open repeat liver resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma in hepatectomy patients: inverse probability of treatment weighting. Updates Surg 74(2):527–534
Ma KW, She WH, Cheung TT, Chan ACY, Dai WC, Fung JYY et al (2019) Validated nomogram for the prediction of disease-free survival after hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma within the Milan criteria: individualizing a surveillance strategy. Surg Today 49(6):521–528
Lin S, Ye F, Rong W, Song Y, Fan W, Liu Y et al (2019) Nomogram to assist in surgical plan for hepatocellular carcinoma: a prediction model for microvascular invasion. J Gastroint Surg. 23(2):2382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-019-04140-0
Ma KW, She WH, Cheung TT, Chan ACY, Dai WC, Fung JYY et al (2019) Validated nomogram for the prediction of disease-free survival after hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma within the Milan criteria: individualizing a surveillance strategy. Surg Today 49(6):521–528
Imura S, Teraoku H, Yoshikawa M, Ishikawa D, Shinichiro Yanada Y et al (2018) Potential predictive factors for microvascular invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma classified within the Milan criteria. Int Clin Oncol 23(1):98–103
Wang YY, Zhong JH, Hai-Feng X, Gang X, Wang LJ, Da X et al (2018) A modified staging of early and intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma based on single tumour >7 cm and multiple tumours beyond up-to-seven criteria. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15074
Goh BKP, Teo JY, Chan CY, Lee SY, Cheow PC, Chung AYF (2017) Laparoscopic repeat liver resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma. ANZ J Surg 87(10):E143–E146
Zhang X, Li C, Wen T, Yan L, Li B, Yang J, Wang W, Xu M, Lu W, Jiang L (2015) Appropriate treatment strategies for intrahepatic recurrence after curative resection of hepatocellular carcinoma initially within the Milan criteria: according to the recurrence pattern. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 27(8):933–940
Funding
This study was supported by grants from the National Sciences (2012ZX10002-016) and Technology Major Project of China(2012ZX10002-017), provided by JY Yang, providing to collect the data. And the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81400636), Sichuan Province Key Research and Development Project (2019YFS0203), and the Key Project of Clinical Research Incubation in West China Hospital of Sichuan University (2020HXFH028), provided by L Jiang, to support the study designing, interpretation, writing the manuscript, and scientific language editing, respectively.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
JLZ and LJ contributed to study conception and design; JLZ, CHZ, and JL performed the research; JLZ and CHZ drafted the manuscript; LJ did critical revision. All the authors have read and approved the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Research involving human participants and/or animal rights and informed consent
The research dosen't involve human participants.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, C., Zheng, J. & Jiang, L. Treatments for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: laparoscopic or open repeat liver resection, how to make a decision?. Updates Surg 75, 1045–1046 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-023-01503-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-023-01503-w