Right-side versus left-side hepatectomy for the treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma: A comparative study

Abstract

Background: Radical resection is the only curative treatment for patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma. While left-side hepatectomy (LH) may have an oncological disadvantage over right-side hepatectomy (RH) owing to the contiguous anatomical relationship between right hepatic inflow and biliary confluence, a small future liver remnant after RH could cause worse surgical morbidity and mortality. We retrospectively compared surgical morbidity and long-term outcome between RH and LH to determine the optimal surgical strategy for the treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Methods: This study considered 83 patients who underwent surgical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma between 2010 and 2017. Among them, 57 patients undergoing curative-intent surgery including liver resection were enrolled for analysis-33 in the RH group and 27 in the LH group. Prospectively collected clinicopathologic characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and long-term survival were evaluated. Results: Portal vein embolization was more frequently performed in the RH group than in the LH group (18.2% vs. 0%, P = 0.034). The proportion of R0 resection was comparable in both groups (75.8% vs. 75.0%, P = 0.948). The 5-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates did not differ between the groups (37.7% vs. 41.9%, P = 0.500, and 26.3% vs. 33.9%, P = 0.580, respectively). The side of liver resection did not affect long-term survival. In multivariate analysis, transfusion (odds ratio, 3.12 [1.42-6.87], P = 0.005) and post-hepatectomy liver failure (≥ grade B, 4.62 [1.86-11.49], P = 0.001) were independent risk factors for overall survival. Conclusions: We recommend deciding the side of liver resection according to the possibility of achieving radical resection considering the anatomical differences between RH and LH.