Impact of Anatomical Versus Non-anatomical Liver Resection on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes for Patients with Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to examine the impact of anatomical resection (AR) versus non-anatomical resection (NAR) on the survival outcomes in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC).Patients and MethodsData on 702 consecutive patients who underwent either AR (n=319) or NAR (n=383) for ICC were reviewed. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) following AR versus NAR was compared using propensity score matching (PSM). Subgroups of patients who benefited from AR versus NAR were examined after being stratified by the 8th TNM staging of ICC.ResultsAR and NAR had similar complication rates (26.6% vs. 25.1%, p=0.634). AR was associated with better 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS and OS rates compared with NAR after PSM (58.1%, 35.7% and 28.1% vs. 44.1%, 23.9% and 18.0%; 72.9%, 45.7% and 36.0% vs. 62.0%, 30.8% and 25.3%; both p=0.002). On multivariate analysis, NAR was associated with worse DFS and OS than AR [hazard ratio (HR) 1.461 and 1.488; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.184-1.804 and 1.189-1.863, respectively]. Stratified analysis demonstrated similar outcomes following AR versus NAR for ICC at stages IA, II with vascular invasion, and III with visceral peritoneum perforation, local extrahepatic invasion and nodal metastasis, while NAR was associated with worse DFS and OS versus AR for stages IB (HR 1.897 and 2.321; 95% CI 1.179-3.052 and 1.376-3.914, respectively) or II ICC without vascular invasion (2.071 and 2.077; 95% CI 1.239-3.462 and 1.205-3.579, respectively).ConclusionsAR was associated with better survival outcomes compared with NAR in ICC patients with stage IB or II tumors without vascular invasion.