Background: The enhanced view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) approach is becoming increasingly more widely accepted as a promising technique in the treatment of ventral hernia. However, evidence is still lacking regarding the perioperative, postoperative and long-term outcomes of this technique. The aim of this meta-analysis is to summarize the current available evidence regarding the perioperative and short-term outcomes of ventral hernia repair using eTEP. Study design: A systematic search was performed of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science electronic databases to identify studies on the laparoscopic or robotic-enhanced view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) approach for the treatment of ventral hernia. A pooled meta-analysis was performed. The primary end point was focused on short-term outcomes regarding perioperative characteristics and postoperative parameters. Results: A total of 13 studies were identified involving 918 patients. Minimally invasive eTEP resulted in a rate of surgical site infection of 0% [95% CI 0.0–1.0%], a rate of seroma of 5% [95% CI 2.0–8.0%] and a rate of major complications (Clavien–Dindo III–IV) of 1% [95% CI 0.0–3.0%]. The rate of intraoperative complications was 2% [95% CI 0.0–4.0%] with a conversion rate of 1.0% [95% CI 0.0–3.0%]. Mean hospital length of stay was 1.77 days [95% CI 1.21–2.24]. After a median follow-up of 6.6 months (1–24), the rate of recurrence was 1% [95% CI 0.0–1.0%]. Conclusion: Minimally invasive eTEP is a safe and effective approach for ventral hernia repair, with low reported intraoperative complications and good outcomes.

Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly used to treat locally advanced (T3–4 Nx–2 M0) colon cancer due to its potential advantages over the standard approach of upfront surgery. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse data from comparative studies to assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on oncological outcomes. Methods: A systematic review was conducted by searching the MEDLINE and Scopus databases. The search encompassed RCTs, propensity score-matched studies, and controlled prospective studies published up to 1 April 2023. As a primary objective, overall survival and disease-free survival were compared. As a secondary objective, perioperative morbidity, mortality, and complete resection were compared using the DerSimonian and Laird models. Results: A total of seven studies comprising a total of 2120 patients were included. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a reduction in the hazard of recurrence (HR 0.73, 95% c.i. 0.59 to 0.90; P = 0.003) and death (HR 0.67, 95% c.i. 0.54 to 0.83; P < 0.001) compared with upfront surgery. Additionally, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly associated with higher 5-year overall survival (79.9% versus 72.6%; P < 0.001) and disease-free survival (73.1% versus 64.5%; P = 0.028) rates. No significant differences were observed in perioperative mortality (OR 0.97, 95% c.i. 0.28 to 3.33), overall complications (OR 0.95, 95% c.i. 0.77 to 1.16), or anastomotic leakage/intra-abdominal abscess (OR 0.88, 95% c.i. 0.60 to 1.29). However, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a lower risk of incomplete resection (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.49 to 0.99). Conclusion: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with a reduced hazard of recurrence and death, as well as improved overall survival and disease-free survival rates, compared with upfront surgery in patients with locally advanced colon cancer.

Gemcitabine/cisplatin (GemCis) was the long-standing first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs). Following positive results from the TOPAZ-01 and KEYNOTE-966 trials, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with chemotherapy are now the standard of care. We aim to compare the efficacy of first-line therapies for advanced BTCs. Our systematic review included studies from five databases focusing on English-language articles published between January 2010 and June 2024. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that featured GemCis in a treatment arm for treatment-naive adults with advanced BTCs. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival. We conducted a one-stage meta-analysis using reconstructed survival data, Cox-based models, and restricted mean survival time (RMST). After screening 8,797 studies, 17 RCTs were selected, involving a total of 4,584 patients. Of these, 2,140 (46.7%) received GemCis. The majority (68.9%) were diagnosed with intrahepatic or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and 80% had metastatic disease at the time of treatment. The pooled median OS in the GemCis group was 11.6 months (95% CI 11.3–12.2 months). GemCis plus pembrolizumab (hazard ratio [HR] 0.99, 95% CI 0.98–0.99; p <0.001), GemCis plus durvalumab (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97–0.99; p = 0.015), GemCis plus S-1 (HR 0.97 95% CI 0.95–0.99; p <0.001), and GemCis plus nab-paclitaxel (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.98–0.99; p <0.001) demonstrated superior OS compared with GemCis alone. These combinations also showed increases in RMST by +1.1, +2.5, +2.8, and +2.1 months, respectively. In terms of progression-free survival, GemCis with ICIs (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78–0.94; p <0.001), GemCis plus S-1 (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96–0.99; p = 0.003), and GemCis plus nab-paclitaxel (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97–0.99; p <0.001) also demonstrated superiority, with corresponding RMST increases of +0.7, +1.9, and +2.5 months, respectively. Despite incremental advancements, a breakthrough in advanced BTC treatment remains elusive. Further improvements in treatment efficacy may require biomarker identification to optimize combinational therapies for better patient selection. This study analyzed recent RCTs, including KEYNOTE-966, TOPAZ-1, NIFE, and SWOG 1815, involving 4,584 patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. A meta-analysis of 17 treatment arms, using reconstructed survival data, confirmed the modest survival benefit of GemCis plus ICIs, supporting its guideline adoption. The findings, however, highlight the need for biomarker identification and better patient selection.

Objective: Examine portal hypertension (PHT) impact on postoperative and survival outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after liver resection (LR), specifically exploring distinctions between indirect signs and invasive measurements of PHT. Background: PHT has historically discouraged LR in individuals with HCC due to the elevated risk of morbidity, including liver decompensation (LD). Methods: A systematic review was conducted using 3 databases to identify prospective-controlled and matched cohort studies until December 28, 2022. Focus on comparing postoperative outcomes (mortality, morbidity, and liver-related complications) and overall survival in HCC patients with and without PHT undergoing LR. Three meta-analysis models were utilized: for aggregated data (fixed-effects inverse variance model), for patient-level survival data (one-stage frequentist meta-analysis with gamma-shared frailty Cox proportional hazards model), and for pooled data (Freeman–Tukey exact and double arcsine method). Results: Nine studies involving 1124 patients were analyzed. Indirect signs of PHT were not significantly associated with higher mortality, overall complications, PHLF or LD. However, LR in patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) ≥10 mm Hg significantly increased the risk of overall complications, PHLF, and LD. Despite elevated risks, the procedure resulted in a 5-year overall survival rate of 55.2%. Open LR significantly increased the risk of overall complications, PHLF, and LD. Conversely, PHT did not show a significant association with worse postoperative outcomes in minimally invasive LR. Conclusions: LR in the presence of indirect signs of PHT poses no increased risk of complications. Yet, in HVPG ≥10 mm Hg patients, LR increases overall morbidity and liver-related complications risk. Transjugular HVPG assessment is crucial for LR decisions. Minimally invasive approach seems to be vital for favorable outcomes, especially in HVPG ≥10 mm Hg patients.

Radioembolization (RE) may help local control and achieve tumor reduction while hypertrophies healthy liver and provides a test of time. For liver transplant (LT) candidates, it may attain downstaging for initially non-candidates and bridging during the waitlist. Methods: Patients diagnosed with HCC and ICC treated by RE with further liver resection (LR) or LT between 2005–2020 were included. All patients selected were discarded for the upfront surgical approach for not accomplishing oncological or surgical safety criteria after a multidisciplinary team assessment. Data for clinicopathological details, postoperative, and survival outcomes were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. Results: A total of 34 patients underwent surgery following RE (21 LR and 13 LT). Clavien–Dindo grade III-IV complications and mortality rates were 19.0% and 9.5% for LR and 7.7% and 0% for LT, respectively. After RE, for HCC and ICC patients in the LR group, 10-year OS rates were 57% and 60%, and 10-year DFS rates were 43.1% and 60%, respectively. For HCC patients in the LT group, 10-year OS and DFS rates from RE were 51.3% and 43.3%, respectively. Conclusion: Liver resection after RE is safe and feasible with optimal short-term outcomes. Patients diagnosed with unresectable or high biological risk HCC or ICC, treated with RE, and rescued by LR may achieve optimal global and DFS rates. On the other hand, bridging or downstaging strategies to LT with RE in HCC patients show adequate recurrence rates as well as long-term survival.

Background: Recent studies have associated laparoscopic surgery with better overall survival (OS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). The potential benefits of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) over open liver resection (OLR) have not been demonstrated in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC). Methods: A systematic review of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases was performed to search studies comparing OS and perioperative outcome for patients with resectable iCC. Propensity-score matched (PSM) studies published from database inception to May 1, 2022 were eligible. A frequentist, patient-level, one-stage meta-analysis was performed to analyze the differences in OS between LLR and OLR. Second, intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes were compared between the two approaches by using a random-effects DerSimonian-Laird model. Results: Six PSM studies involving data from 1.042 patients (530 OLR vs. 512 LLR) were included. LLR in patients with resectable iCC was found to significantly decrease the hazard of death (stratified hazard ratio [HR]: 0.795 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.638–0.992]) compared with OLR. Moreover, LLR appears to be significantly associated with a decrease in intraoperative bleeding (− 161.47 ml [95% CI − 237.26 to − 85.69 ml]) and transfusion (OR = 0.41 [95% CI 0.26–0.69]), as well as with a shorter hospital stay (− 3.16 days [95% CI − 4.98 to − 1.34]) and a lower rate of major (Clavien-Dindo ≥III) complications (OR = 0.60 [95% CI 0.39–0.93]). Conclusions: This large meta-analysis of PSM studies shows that LLR in patients with resectable iCC is associated with improved perioperative outcomes and, being conservative, yields similar OS outcomes compared with OLR.