Objective: To compare the outcomes of the transhepatic hilar approach and conventional approach for surgical treatment of Bismuth types III and IV perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 82 patients who underwent surgical resection of Bismuth types III and IV perihilar cholangiocarcinoma from 2008 to 2016. The transhepatic hilar approach and conventional approach was used in 36 (43.9%) and 46 (56.1%) patients, respectively. Postoperative complications and overall survival were compared between the two approaches.
Results: Similar clinical features were observed between the patients treated by the conventional approach and those treated by the transhepatic hilar approach. The transhepatic hilar approach was associated with less intraoperative bleeding and a lower percentage of Clavien grade 0 to II complications than the conventional approach. However, the transhepatic hilar approach was associated with a higher R0 resection rate and better overall survival. Multivariate analysis showed that using the transhepatic hilar approach, the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center classification, and R0 resection were independent risk factors for patient survival.
Conclusion: The transhepatic hilar approach might be the better choice for surgical resection of Bismuth types III and IV perihilar cholangiocarcinoma because it is associated with lower mortality and improved survival.
Keywords: Bismuth; Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma; complication; surgical resection; survival; transhepatic hilar approach.