Conversion of Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for HCC in Advanced Cirrhosis: Clinical Impact and Role of Difficulty Scoring Systems

SIMPLE SUMMARY: It is essential to consider the specific impact that conversion can have in a context where MILR is so positively determinant, that is, hepatocellular carcinoma. It has not yet been specifically investigated what impact conversion may have in case of advanced cirrhosis, which is the central risk factor for specific postoperative complications and the context in which the loss of minimally invasive benefits can be particularly harmful. This study showed that conversion in the setting of advanced cirrhosis can be associated with non-inferior outcomes compared to compensated cirrhosis, provided careful patient selection is applied. Difficulty scoring systems may help in identifying the most appropriate candidates to maintain satisfactory outcomes, even in case of conversion, and become helpful in multidisciplinary treatment decisions. ABSTRACT: Background: Minimally invasive liver resections (MILRs) in cirrhosis are at risk of conversion since cirrhosis and complexity, which can be estimated by scoring systems, are both independent factors for. We aimed to investigate the consequence of conversion of MILR for hepatocellular carcinoma in advanced cirrhosis. Methods: After retrospective review, MILRs for HCC were divided into preserved liver function (Cohort-A) and advanced cirrhosis cohorts (Cohort-B). Completed and converted MILRs were compared (Compl-A vs. Conv-A and Compl-B vs. Conv-B); then, converted patients were compared (Conv-A vs. Conv-B) as whole cohorts and after stratification for MILR difficulty using Iwate criteria. Results: 637 MILRs were studied (474 Cohort-A, 163 Cohort-B). Conv-A MILRs had worse outcomes than Compl-A: more blood loss; higher incidence of transfusions, morbidity, grade 2 complications, ascites, liver failure and longer hospitalization. Conv-B MILRs exhibited the same worse perioperative outcomes than Compl-B and also higher incidence of grade 1 complications. Conv-A and Conv-B outcomes of low difficulty MILRs resulted in similar perioperative outcomes, whereas the comparison of more difficult converted MILRs (intermediate/advanced/expert) resulted in several worse perioperative outcomes for patients with advanced cirrhosis. However, Conv-A and Conv-B outcomes were not significantly different in the whole cohort where “advanced/expert” MILRs were 33.1% and 5.5% in Cohort A and B. Conclusions: Conversion in the setting of advanced cirrhosis can be associated with non-inferior outcomes compared to compensated cirrhosis, provided careful patient selection is applied (patients elected to low difficulty MILRs). Difficulty scoring systems may help in identifying the most appropriate candidates.