Alternative Surgical Policy for Central Liver Tumors

Major hepatectomies have not negligible morbidity and mortality. However, when tumors invade middle hepatic vein (MHV) at caval confluence trisectionectomy (TS) is generally performed, and central hepatectomy or mesohepatectomy (MH) (Segments 4, 5 and 8), is considered by some authors to be the conservative alternative to the previously cited approach. Between these two surgical interventions there is not, up to now, any evidence that one of them should be clearly preferred; anyway both are mojor resections. We previously reported that a surgical approach based on ultrasound-guided hepatectomy might minimize the need for major resection, whose rates of morbidity and mortality are not negligible. This policy could be useful also for disclosing new, more conservative, and better tolerated approaches for tumors invading the MHV at caval confluence in alternative to MH and TS. This study analyses the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of ultrasound-guided resections applied to these patients enrolled prospectively from a cohort of consecutive patients who undergo hepatectomy for tumors.

Inclusion criteria

• Patients carriers of HCC or colorectal cancer liver metastases (CLM) who have macroscopic signs of vascular invasion (preoperative imaging and/IOUS) of the MHV close to the hepato-caval confluence (within 4 cm) demanding for that MHV resection.

Minimum follow-up for patients' inclusion was established at 6-months from surgery.

Exclusion criteria

• Patients carriers of tumors occupying entirely the right paramedian section and the segment 4, for whom at least a MH would have been compulsorily carried out.