Background: The oncologic advantage of anatomic resection (AR) for primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical advantages of AR for primary HCC by using propensity score-matching and by assessing treatment strategies for recurrence after surgery.
Methods: The study reviewed data of patients who underwent AR or non-anatomic resection (NAR) for solitary HCC (≤ 5 cm) in two institutions between 2004 and 2017. Surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups in a propensity score-adjusted cohort. The time-to-interventional failure (TIF), defined as the elapsed time from resection to unresectable/unablatable recurrence, also was evaluated.
Results: The inclusion criteria were met by 250 patients: 77 patients (31%) with AR and 173 patients (69%) with NAR. In the propensity score-matched populations (AR, 67; NAR, 67), the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) for AR was better than for NAR (62% vs 35%; P = 0.005). No differences, however, were found in the 5-year overall survival between the two groups (72% vs 78%; P = 0.666). The 5-year TIF rates for the NAR group (60%) also were similar to those for the AR group (66%) (P = 0.413). In the cohort of 67 patients, curative repeat resection or ablation therapy was performed more frequently for the NAR patients (42%) than for the AR patients (10%) (P < 0.001).
Conclusion: For solitary HCC, AR decreases recurrence after the initial hepatectomy. However, aggressive curative-intent interventions for recurrence compensate for the impaired RFS, even for patients undergoing NAR.
© 2021. Society of Surgical Oncology.