Analysis of Liver Resection Versus Liver Transplantation on Outcome of Small Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma and Combined Hepatocellular‐Cholangiocarcinoma in the Setting of Cirrhosis

Sha Meng,Seogsong Jeong,Qiang Xia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.25758

2020-01-01

Liver Transplantation

Abstract:Potential conflict of interest: Nothing to report. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant 81902379) and the Cultivation Foundation of Renji Hospital (grant PY2018‐III‐01). To the Editor: We read with great interest the recent article by De Martin et al.(1) regarding the analysis of liver transplantation (LT) versus liver resection (LR) for patients with cirrhosis with small intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) and combined hepatocellular‐cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC‐CCA). The authors retrospectively evaluated a total of 75 patients with cirrhosis who were confirmed iCCA/cHCC‐CCA ≤5 cm and compared them by different operation types of LT or LR. Surprisingly, 49 LT patients had a significantly better 5‐year recurrence‐free survival compared with patients in the LR group (75% versus 36%; P = 0.004). The overall survival was also comparable between 2 groups. The results are encouraging for patients suffering iCCA/cHCC‐CCA with limited therapies, and the findings may suggest an expansion of the criteria of LT. The authors also analyzed a subgroup of patients with tumors >2 cm but <5 cm. Consistent with previous results, a favorable outcome was also confirmed in LT patients with a 5‐year recurrence‐free survival of 74%. In addition, tumor differentiation was found to be independently associated with tumor recurrence. On the basis of these findings, the authors concluded that LT could provide a better strategy for patients with cirrhosis with iCCA/cHCC‐CCA <5 cm. We appreciate the well‐designed research that evaluates LT for cholangiocarcinoma. However, certain points need to be further discussed when interpreting the results. First of all, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for liver tumors has been acknowledged as one of the locoregional treatments that inhibits active tumor cells, induces tumor necrosis, and reduces vascular metastasis.(2) However, a significantly higher rate of preoperative TACE treatment was found in the LT group (P = 0.005). This may provide potential benefits for LT patients in evaluating posttransplant outcomes. Second, there is increasing evidence showing that the biological stability of a tumor appears to be more important for prognosis than tumor size and number. Lunsford et al.(3) reported that patients with iCCA who showed tumor stability on preoperative neoadjuvant therapy benefited from LT. In the present study, a longer interval was revealed between tumor diagnosis and operation in patients receiving LT. However, neither tumor growth nor falling outside the French alpha‐fetoprotein criteria was reported in these patients, who demonstrated tumor stability rather than tumor category as defined only by tumor size. This subgroup of patients should be further evaluated in detail. Another important issue is related to lymph node status, which is an important factor impacting patient survival after operation for cholangiocarcinoma.(4) The absence of lymph node metastasis has been listed as one of the standards for LT in hilar cholangiocarcinoma.(5) However, because of a lack of diagnosis of iCCA/cHCC‐CCA before transplant, the authors did not routinely perform lymphadenectomy in the present study. Therefore, future studies should include lymph node dissection during LT to confirm whether positive nodes affect the prognosis in LT for small iCCA/cHCC‐CCA. In conclusion, the recommendation of LT for patients with cirrhosis with iCCA/cHCC‐CCA <5 cm needs further exploration in larger, prospective studies with careful evaluation in tumor biological stability and lymph node status. We believe that in selected patients with iCCA/cHCC‐CCA, LT could provide a favorable prognosis.