Experience with more than 500 minimally invasive hepatic procedures. Ann Surg. 2008;248:475-486. [PMID: 18791368 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e318185e647]

Early experience of laparoscopic liver resection: A single institution experience with 37 consecutive cases

Backgrounds/Aims

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has evolved and broadened in scope. While open liver resections are currently being performed safely in our hospital, LLRs are being implemented in fewer cases. The aim of this study was to review our initial experience in LLR to assess early outcomes of the procedure.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted for 37 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resections for various indications between January 2014 and July 2017 by a single surgeon who had performed 161 open liver resections and 50 live donor hepatectomies during the same period.

Results

Of 37 laparoscopic liver resections performed, male to female ratio was 23 to 4. Their mean age was 61.4 years. There were 13 cases of wedge resections, 7 cases of left lateral sectionectomy, 9 cases of left hepatectomy, and 8 cases of right hepatectomy. Pathology included hepatocellular carcinoma (n=20), cholangiocarcinoma (n=3), intrahepatic duct stones (n=6), metastatic liver carcinoma (n=6), primary neuroendocrine tumor of liver (n=1), and huge hemangioma (n=1). The mean operation time was 174.7 minutes (range, 40–410 minutes). Mean blood loss was 200.5 ml (range, 10–2200 ml). There were no open-conversion cases. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications except that a case of severe portal vein stenosis in the laparoscopic right hepatectomy occurred postoperatively. The patient underwent reoperation (portal vein resection and anastomosis, stenting). The mean hospital stay was 8.7 days (range, 2–44 days).

Conclusions

Even though our experience in laparoscopic liver resection is still developing, our results are comparable to those of other studies. Therefore, an experienced surgeon in performing open liver resection should be able to perform the laparoscopic liver resection safely.

Comparison of Projective Augmented Reality Concepts to Support Medical Needle Insertion

Augmented reality (AR) is a promising tool to improve instrument navigation in needle-based interventions. Limited research has been conducted regarding suitable navigation visualizations. In this work, three navigation concepts based on existing approaches were compared in a user study using a projective AR setup. Each concept was implemented with three different scales for accuracy-to-color mapping and two methods of navigation indicator scaling. Participants were asked to perform simulated needle insertion tasks with each of the resulting 18 prototypes. Insertion angle and insertion depth accuracies were measured and analyzed, as well as task completion time and participants' subjectively perceived task difficulty. Results show a clear ranking of visualization concepts across variables. Less consistent results were obtained for the color and indicator scaling factors. Results suggest that logarithmic indicator scaling achieved better accuracy, but participants perceived it to be more difficult than linear scaling. With specific results for angle and depth accuracy, our study contributes to the future composition of improved navigation support and systems for precise needle insertion or similar applications.

Feasibility Study of a Newly Developed Hybrid Energy Device Used During Laparoscopic Liver Resection in a Porcine Model

BACKGROUND

Although various devices have been clinically used for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), the best device for liver parenchymal transection remains unknown. Olympus Corp (Tokyo, Japan) developed a laparoscopic hybrid pencil (LHP) device, which is the first electric knife to combine ultrasound and electric energy with a monopolar output. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using the LHP device and to compare it with the laparoscopic monopolar pencil (LMP) and laparoscopic ultrasonic shears (LUS) devices for LLR in a porcine model.

METHODS

Nine male piglets underwent laparoscopic liver lobe transections using each device. The operative parameters were evaluated in the 3 groups (n = 24 lobes) during the acute study period. The imaging findings from contrast-enhanced computed tomography and histopathological findings of autopsy on postoperative day 7 were compared among groups (n = 6 piglets) during the long-term study.

RESULTS

The transection time was shorter ( P = .001); there was less blood loss ( P = .018); and tip cleaning ( P < .001) and instrument changes were less often required ( P < .001) in the LHP group than in the LMP group. The LHP group had fewer instances of bleeding ( P < .001) and coagulator usage ( P < .001) than did the LUS group. In the long-term study, no postoperative adverse events occurred in the 3 groups. The thermal spread and depth of the LHP device were equivalent to those of the LMP and LUS devices (vs LMP: P = .226 and .159; vs LUS: P = 1.000 and .574).

CONCLUSIONS

The LHP device may be an efficient device for LLR if it can be applied to human surgery.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Hepatobiliary

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways target specific areas within perioperative patient care in a multidisciplinary and evidence-based manner. Because of the subsequent positive outcomes associated with its use, ERAS has expanded to most surgical subspecialties, including hepatopancreatobiliary surgery. Although certain concepts are universal to all ERAS protocols, there are unique areas of emphasis pertaining to the hepatopancreatobiliary specialties, which will be highlighted throughout this article. In addition, some of the less frequently discussed aspects of enhanced recovery, including patient-reported outcomes, recovery assessment, cost, and auditing, will be addressed.

Laparoscopic hand-assisted liver resection for tumours in the left lateral section

Context:

The role of the laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) is debatable, and Level-1 data are lacking.

Aims:

The aim of the study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of this approach.

Settings and Design:

This was a retrospective study.

Subjects and Methods:

From 2007 to 2014, patients undergoing LLLS were identified from two institutions.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Continuous variables were compared between groups with Student's t-test or Mann–Whitney test, as appropriate by type of distribution. Categorical variables were compared with Chi-square or Fisher's exact test, depending on the number of observations.

Results:

Thirty-eight patients were included in the study. The mean age was 63.5 + 13 years (range, 31–89), and the mean number of tumours was 1.7 + 1.5. Eleven (29%) patients underwent LLS combined with an additional liver resection (combined resections group). The mean duration of the operation and the mean estimated blood loss were significantly decreased in the LLS group compared to the combined resection group (101 + 71 min vs. 208 + 98 min and 216 + 217 ml vs. 450 + 223 ml; P < 0.05 for both, respectively). The major complications rate was 8% and no mortality occurred.

Conclusions:

In a subset of carefully selected cases, LLLS may provide the benefits of laparoscopy. This does not appear to compromise perioperative morbidity rates. We believe that this approach may serve as a training platform for surgical trainees.

Laboratory test of Single Landmark registration method for ultrasound-based navigation in laparoscopy using an open-source platform

Purpose

Test the feasibility of the novel Single Landmark image-to-patient registration method for use in the operating room for future clinical trials. The algorithm is implemented in the open-source platform CustusX, a computer-aided intervention research platform dedicated to intraoperative navigation and ultrasound, with an interface for laparoscopic ultrasound probes.

Methods

The Single Landmark method is compared to fiducial landmark on an IOUSFAN (Kyoto Kagaku Co., Ltd., Japan) soft tissue abdominal phantom and T2 magnetic resonance scans of it.

Results

The experiments show that the accuracy of the Single Landmark registration is good close to the registered point, increasing with the distance from this point (12.4 mm error at 60 mm away from the registered point). In this point, the registration accuracy is mainly dominated by the accuracy of the user when clicking on the ultrasound image. In the presented set-up, the time required to perform the Single Landmark registration is 40% less than for the FLRM.

Conclusion

The Single Landmark registration is suitable for being integrated in a laparoscopic workflow. The statistical analysis shows robustness against translational displacements of the patient and improvements in terms of time. The proposed method allows the clinician to accurately register lesions intraoperatively by clicking on these in the ultrasound image provided by the ultrasound transducer. The Single Landmark registration method can be further combined with other more accurate registration approaches improving the registration at relevant points defined by the clinicians.

Status and perspective of laparoscopic repeat liver resection

Liver resection (LR) is now actively applied to intrahepatic recurrence of liver metastases and hepatocellular carcinoma. Although indications of laparoscopic LR (LLR) have been expanded, there are increased risks of intraoperative complications and conversion in repeat LLR. Controversy still exists for the indication. There are 16 reports of small series to date. These studies generally reported that repeat LLR has better short-term outcomes than open (reduced bleedings, less or similar morbidity and shorter hospital stay) without compromising the long-term outcomes. The fact that complete adhesiolysis can be avoided in repeat LLR is also reported. In the comparison of previous procedures, it is reported that the operation time for repeat LLR was shorter for the patients previously treated with LLR than open. Furthermore, it is speculated that LLR for minor repeat LR of cirrhotic liver can be minimized the deterioration of liver function by LR. However, further experience and evaluation of anatomical resection or resections exposing major vessels as repeat LLR, especially after previous anatomical resection, are needed. There should be a chance to prolong the overall survival of the patients by using LLR as a powerful local therapy which can be applied repeatedly with minimal deterioration of liver function.

The inflammatory response to stress and angiogenesis in liver resection for colorectal liver metastases: a randomized controlled trial comparing open versus laparoscopic approach

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the surgical stress response following laparoscopic and open liver resection for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM).

METHODS

Patients with CRLM were prospectively randomized to receive open or laparoscopic liver resection (NCT03131778). Blood samples were drawn preoperatively and 24 h after resection. The serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) and IL-8 levels were measured. Furthermore, the mRNA levels of angiogenesis-related factors (vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] and HIF-1) and inflammation-related factors (COX-2 and MMP-9) in both tumor tissue and normal liver parenchyma were detected.

RESULTS

Twenty patients for each arm were included. Size of metastasis, type of resection, and neoadjuvant therapy were comparable between groups. Postoperative stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group. Higher levels of IL-6 were observed after the operation in both open and laparoscopic groups, although no differences in the post-operative levels between the groups was noted. Similarly, there were no significant differences in the mRNA expression of VEGF, HIF-1, MMP-9, and COX-2 between the treatment groups. No differences were observed in terms of overall survival and disease free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The immunological effects of treatment were similar between the groups. Thus, the laparoscopic approach does not seem to significantly influence the surgical stress and tumor related factors in patients suffering from colorectal liver metastases.

Robot-assisted liver surgery in a general surgery unit with a "Referral Centre Hub&Spoke Learning Program". Early outcomes after our first 70 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate safety, feasibility and short-term outcomes of our first 70 consecutive patients treated by robotic-assisted liver resection after a reversal proctoring between a high HPB volume centre and our well-trained center in minimally invasive General Surgery. Six surgeons were involved in this Hub&Spoke learning program.

METHODS

From September 2012 to December 2016, 70 patients underwent robotic-assisted liver resections (RALR). We treated 18 patients affected by colorectal and gastric cancer with synchronous liver lesions suspected for metastases in a one-stage robotic-assisted procedure. For the first 20 procedures we had a tutor in the operatory room, who was present also in the next most difficult procedures.

RESULTS

The 30- and 90-day mortality rate was zero with an overall morbidity rate of 10.1%. Associated surgical procedures were performed in about 65,7% of patients. The observed conversion rate was 10%. The results of the first 20 cases were similar to the next 50 showing a shortned learning curve.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive robot-assisted liver resection is a safe technique; it allows overcoming many limits of conventional laparoscopy. This innovative, time-enduring Hub&Spoke may allow patients to undergo a proper standard of care also for complex surgical procedures, without the need of reaching referral centres.

Laparoscopic extended liver resection: are postoperative outcomes different?

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is becoming increasingly common in specialized centers, data regarding laparoscopic extended major hepatectomies (LEMH) and their outcomes are limited. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes of LEMH to standard LMH.

METHODS

All patients who underwent purely laparoscopic anatomical right or left hepatectomy and right or left trisectionectomy between February 1998 and January 2016 are enrolled. Demographic, clinicopathological, and perioperative factors were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Perioperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes in LEMH were compared to those of standard LMH.

RESULTS

Among 195 patients with LMH, 47 (24.1%) underwent LEMH, colorectal liver metastases representing 66.7% of all indications. Preoperative portal vein embolization was undertaken in 31 (15.9%) patients. Despite more frequent vascular clamping, blood loss was higher in LEMH group (400 vs. 214 ml; p = 0.006). However, there was no difference in intraoperative transfusion requirements. Thirty-one patients experienced liver failure with no differences between LMH and LEMH groups. Postoperative mortality was comparable in the two groups [3 (2.5%) LMH patients vs. 2 (5%) LEMH patients (p = 0.388)]. Overall morbidity was higher in the LEMH group [49 LMH patients (41.5%) vs. 24 LEMH patients (60%) (p = 0.052)]. Patients treated with left LEMH experienced more biliary leakage (p = 0.011) and more major pulmonary complications (p = 0.015) than left LMH.

CONCLUSION

LEMH is feasible at the price of important morbidity, with manageable and acceptable outcomes. These exigent procedures require high-volume centers with experienced surgeons.

Initial experience with purely laparoscopic living-donor right hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

There may be concerns about purely laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (PLDRH) compared with open donor right hepatectomy, especially when performed by surgeons accustomed to open surgery. This study aimed to describe technical tips and pitfalls in PLDRH.

METHODS

Data from donors who underwent PLDRH at Seoul National University Hospital between December 2015 and July 2017 were analysed retrospectively. Endpoints analysed included intraoperative events and postoperative complications. All operations were performed by a single surgeon with considerable experience in open living donor hepatectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 26 donors underwent purely laparoscopic right hepatectomy in the study interval. No donor required transfusion during surgery, whereas two underwent reoperation. In two donors, the dissection plane at the right upper deep portion of the midplane was not correct. One donor experienced portal vein injury during caudate lobe transection, and one developed remnant left hepatic duct stenosis. One donor experienced remnant portal vein angulation owing to a different approach angle, and one experienced arterial damage associated with the use of a laparoscopic energy device. One donor had postoperative bleeding due to masking of potential bleeding foci owing to intra-abdominal pressure during laparoscopy. Two donors experienced right liver surface damage caused by a xiphoid trocar.

CONCLUSION

Purely laparoscopic donor hepatectomy differs from open donor hepatectomy in terms of angle and caudal view. Therefore, surgeons experienced in open donor hepatectomy must gain adequate experience in laparoscopic liver surgery and make adjustments when performing PLDRH.

The feasibility and efficacy of pure laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Repeat hepatectomy is often required for hepatocellular carcinoma and metastatic tumors. However, this procedure is technically challenging, so laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) has not been widely adopted. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of LRH compared with open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) and laparoscopic primary hepatectomy (LPH).

METHODS

We introduced laparoscopic hepatectomy at our institution in April 2014. We performed 127 LPH (LPH group) and 33 LRH procedures (LRH group) from April 2014 to April 2017; 37 patients underwent ORH from January 2010 to April 2017 (ORH group). This study retrospectively compared the patient characteristics and short-term outcomes of the LRH and ORH groups as well as the LRH and LPH groups.

RESULTS

There were no conversions to open surgery in the LRH group. In comparing the LRH and ORH groups, there were no significant differences in patient characteristics except for the type of approach to the previous hepatectomy (p = 0.004) and indocyanine green retention rate at 15 min (median 12.5 vs. 8.75%, p = 0.026). The LRH group had less blood loss (median 30 mL vs. 652 mL; p < 0.001), less intraoperative transfusion (6.1 vs. 32.4%; p = 0.006), and shorter postoperative hospital stays (median 6.5 days vs. 9.0 days; p < 0.001). There were no differences with regard to operation time, severe postoperative complications, and mortality. In comparing the LRH and LPH groups, there was a significant difference only in past history of abdominal surgery (100 vs. 61.4%; p < 0.001). In the short-term outcomes, the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LRH group (median 6.5 days vs. 7 days; p = 0.033), and the other results were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LRH is feasible and useful for repeat hepatectomy, achieving good short-term outcomes.

Surgical outcome of laparoscopic hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: A matched case-control study with propensity score matching

Background:

Although the number of reports on laparoscopic hepatic resection (LHR) has increased, studies of long-term outcomes regarding tumor recurrence and patient survival compared to the conventional open approach are limited. We evaluated the long-term survival and feasibility of LHR in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Patients and Methods:

A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of patients who underwent hepatic resection for primary HCC between August 2000 and December 2013. The patients were divided into the LHR or open hepatic resection (OHR) groups. To control for selection bias in the two groups, propensity score matching was used at a 1:1 ratio based on the following covariates: Child–Pugh grade, tumour size, tumour number and tumour location. Following propensity score matching, thirty patients were included in the LHR group and thirty were included in the OHR group.

Results:

The respective disease-free survival rates at 1 year, 3 years and 5 years were 78.4%, 61.1% and 38.9%, respectively, for the LHR group, and 89.3%, 57.5% and 47.9%, respectively, for the OHR group (P = 0.89). Also, the overall survival rates at 1 year, 3 years and 5 years were 96.4%, 68.2% and 62.5%, respectively, for the LHR group and 100.0%, 95.8% and 72.3%, respectively, for the OHR group (P = 0.44).

Conclusions:

According to our study, using propensity score matching, LHR for HCC is safe, feasible and comparative, with good oncologic results.

Advances and challenges in laparoscopic surgery in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the fifth most common malignancy and the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. From the wide variety of treatment options, surgical resection and liver transplantation are the only therapeutic ones. However, due to shortage of liver grafts, surgical resection is the most common therapeutic modality implemented. Owing to rapid technological development, minimally invasive approaches have been incorporated in liver surgery. Liver laparoscopic resection has been evaluated in comparison to the open technique and has been shown to be superior because of the reported decrease in surgical incision length and trauma, blood loss, operating theatre time, postsurgical pain and complications, R0 resection, length of stay, time to recovery and oral intake. It has been reported that laparoscopic excision is a safe and feasible approach with near zero mortality and oncologic outcomes similar to open resection. Nevertheless, current indications include solid tumors in the periphery < 5 cm, especially in segments II through VI, while according to the consensus laparoscopic major hepatectomy should only be performed by surgeons with high expertise in laparoscopic and hepatobiliary surgery in tertiary centers. It is necessary for a surgeon to surpass the 60-cases learning curve observed in order to accomplish the desirable outcomes and preserve patient safety. In this review, our aim is to thoroughly describe the general principles and current status of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, as well as future prospects.

The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic hepatectomy in obese patients

BACKGROUND

Obesity is generally reported to increase the risk of surgical complications. There have been few reports of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) in obese patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of (1) LH versus open hepatectomy (OH) in obese patients and (2) LH in obese patients versus LH in non-obese patients.

METHODS

We introduced LH at our institution in April 2014. LH was performed in 63 obese patients and 108 non-obese patients from April 2014 to May 2017. OH was performed in 79 obese patients from January 2010 to May 2017. This study retrospectively compared the short-term outcomes of the LH obese group with those of the OH obese group and the LH non-obese group.

RESULTS

In patient characteristics, the LH obese group included a significantly higher percentage of patients with liver cirrhosis than the OH obese group. The LH obese group had fewer patients with a history of abdominal surgery but more with liver cirrhosis than the LH non-obese group. For short-term outcomes, the LH obese group had significantly less blood loss, fewer intraoperative transfusions, fewer positive surgical margins, and shorter postoperative hospital stays than the OH obese group. In contrast, only operation time was significantly different (longer) in the LH obese group than in the LH non-obese group. There were no significant differences in morbidity or mortality between the LH obese group and either the OH obese or the LH non-obese groups.

CONCLUSION

LH in obese patients is safe and effective.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Hepatic Resection for Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma Less Than 5 cm in Cirrhotic Patients: A Randomized Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Current literature is lacking level 1 evidence for surgical and oncologic outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy. Aim was to compare feasibility, safety, and surgical and oncologic efficiency of laparoscopic versus open liver resection (OLR) in management of solitary small (<5 cm) peripheral HCC in Child A cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to either OLR group (25 patients) or laparoscopic liver resection (LRR) group (LRR: 25 patients). All were treated with curative intent aiming at achieving R0 resection using radiofrequency-assisted technique.

RESULTS

LLR had significantly less operative time (120.32 ± 21.58 versus 146.80 ± 16.59 minutes, P < .001) and shorter duration of hospital stay (2.40 ± 0.58 versus 4.28 ± 0.79 days, P < .001), with comparable overall complications (25 versus 28%, P = .02). LLR had comparative resection time (66.56 ± 23.80 versus 59.56 ± 14.74 minutes, P = .218), amount of blood loss (250 versus 230 mL, P = .915), transfusion rate (P = 1.00), and R0 resection rate when compared with OLR. After median follow-up of 34.43 (31.67-38.60) months, LLR achieved similar adequate oncological outcome of OLR, no local recurrence, with no significant difference in early recurrence or number of de novo lesions (P = .49). One-year and 3-year disease free survival (DFS) rates, 88% and 59%, in the LLR were comparable to corresponding rates of 84% and 54% in OLR (P = .9).

CONCLUSION

LLR is superior to the OLR with significantly shorter duration of hospital stay and does not compromise the oncological outcomes.

Systematic review of the feasibility and future of laparoscopic liver resection for difficult lesions

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now performed widely, but is difficult to accomplish in some anatomical locations, such as the posterosuperior segments (S7 and S8) and caudate lobe (S1). An international survey revealed that lesions in these locations are less frequently indicated for LLR than those in other segments. Recent reports from experienced centers document several case series and present technical tips for treating such lesions. The lateral approach using intercostal (transdiaphragmatic) trocars was reported to be useful for lesions in the posterosuperior segments with a semi- to full-decubitus position. The thoracoscopic approach was also reported to be useful for lesions just under the diaphragm dome, but the tumor location and patient selection should be considered carefully because pneumoperitoneum pressure and Pringle's maneuver cannot be applied. Several case series have described the feasibility of LLR for caudate lobe lesions, with similar operative outcomes to lesions in the posterosuperior segments, but this demands technical expertise. The caudal view of laparoscopy is advantageous for approaching the caudate lobe. We conducted a systematic review to clarify the feasibility of LLR for difficult lesions and discuss its current and future status.

Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS): surgical techniques and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Right posterior sectionectomy is one of the most technically challenging laparoscopic liver resections. Currently, there is limited published data regarding the technique and results required to better understand its safety and feasibility.

AIM

To report our experience, results and techniques, highlighting a variety of tips and tricks to facilitate this resection. A video is attached for technical demonstration.

METHODS

Retrospective review of prospectively maintained databases from June 2006 to June 2016. Three different techniques were used: resection following hilar inflow control, inflow control at Rouviere's sulcus and resection with intra parenchymal control.

RESULTS

29 LRPS were performed over a 10-year period. Median operative time was 240 min (150-480). Pringle's manoeuvre was performed in 19 (65.5%) with a median total duration of 35 (20-75) min. Median perioperative blood loss was 600 (100-2500) ml. Additional liver resections were performed in 16 (55.1%). There were two(6.9%) laparoscopic to open conversions. Median postoperative hospital stay was 5 (2-30) days. The median size of the tumour resected was 25 (10-54) mm with median number of resected lesions were 2 (1-4), median free resection margin was 9.5 (1-45) mm, margins were infiltrated (R1) in two (6.7%) cases. There was one death within 30-days (3.4%).

CONCLUSION

LRPS is feasible, efficient and safe. However, it is a technically challenging procedure and requires advance skills in liver and laparoscopic surgery. Surgeons should be familiar with a variety of approaches as each offers different advantages depending on the location and nature of the lesion, surgical preference and intraoperative findings.

Pure Laparoscopic Versus Open Right Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients With Cirrhosis: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to describe our experience with pure laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) and to compare its outcomes with those of open right hepatectomy (ORH) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with liver cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has been reported as a safe and effective approach for the management of liver cancer; however, its outcomes have not been evaluated in a large cohort of HCC patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 152 patients who underwent pure LRH (n = 37) or ORH (n = 115) between June 2008 and July 2015 at the Asan Medical Center in Seoul, Korea. We performed 1:1 propensity score matching between the LRH and ORH groups. Subsequently, 33 patients were included in each group.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the LRH and ORH groups regarding the rate of complications (P = 0.053). However, the mean comprehensive complication index, which accounts for the severity of complications, was significantly lower in the LRH group (0.63 vs 4.42; P = 0.025). There were no significant differences between the LRH and ORH groups regarding 2-year disease-free survival rate or 2-year overall survival rate (P = 0.645 and P = 0.090, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Even in patients with cirrhosis, pure LRH is not less safe than the traditional open approach. The oncological outcomes of HCC were also comparable between the two groups. In selected patients, pure LRH for HCC appears to represent a viable alternative to ORH.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases in Elderly and Octogenarian Patients: A Multicenter Propensity Score Based Analysis of Short- and Long-term Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases in the elderly.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has been associated with less morbidity and similar oncological outcomes to open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). It has been reported that these benefits continue to be observed in elderly patients. However, in previous studies, patients over 70 or 75 years were considered as a single, homogenous population raising questions regarding the true impact of the laparoscopic approach on this diverse group of elderly patients.

METHOD

Prospectively maintained databases of all patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM in 5 tertiary liver centers were included. Those over 70-years old were selected for this study. The cohort was divided in 3 subgroups based on age. A comparative analysis was performed after the implementation of propensity score matching on the 2 main cohorts (laparoscopic and open groups) and also on the study subgroups.

RESULTS

A total of 775 patients were included in the study. After propensity score matching 225 patients were comparable in each of the main groups. Lower blood loss (250 vs 400 mL, P = 0.001), less overall morbidity (22% vs 39%, P = 0.001), shorter High Dependency Unit (2 vs. 6 days, P = 0.001), and total hospital stay (5 vs. 8 days, P = 0.001) were observed after laparoscopic liver resection. Comparable rates of R0 resection (88% vs 88%, P = 0.999), median recurrence-free survival (33 vs 27 months, P = 0.502), and overall survival (51 vs 45 months, P = 0.671) were observed. The advantages seen with the laparoscopic approach were reproduced in the 70 to 74-year old subgroup; however there was a gradual loss of these advantages with increasing age.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients over 70 years of age laparoscopic liver resection, for colorectal liver metastases, offers significant lower morbidity, and a shorter hospital stay with comparable oncological outcomes when compared with open liver resection. However, the benefits of the laparoscopic approach appear to fade with increasing age, with no statistically significant benefits in octogenarians except for a lower High Dependency Unit stay.

Laparoscopic versus robotic surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma: the first 46 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma has a growing incidence worldwide, and represents a leading cause of death in patients with cirrhosis. Nowadays, minimally invasive approaches are spreading in every field of surgery and in liver surgery as well.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed demographics, clinical, and pathologic characteristics and short-term outcomes of patients who had undergone minimally invasive resections for hepatocellular carcinoma at our institution between June 2012 and May 2016.

RESULTS

No significant differences in demographics and comorbidities were found between patients in the laparoscopic (n = 24) and robotic (n = 22) groups, except for the rates of cirrhotic patients (91.7% and 68.2%, respectively, P = 0.046). Perioperative data analysis showed that the operative time (mean, 211 and 318 min, respectively, P < 0.001) was the only parameter in favor of laparoscopy. Conversely, robotic-assisted resections were related to less Clavien I-II postoperative complications (22 cases versus 13 cases; P = 0.03). As regards resection margins, the two groups were similar with no statistically significant differences in rates of disease-free resection margins.

CONCLUSIONS

A modern hepatobiliary center should offer both open and minimally invasive approaches to liver disease to provide the best care for each patient, according to the individual comorbidities, risk factors, and personal quality of life expectations. Our results show that the robotic approach is a reliable tool for accurate oncologic surgery, comparable to the laparoscopic approach. Robotic surgery also allows the surgeon to safely approach liver segments that are difficult to resect in laparoscopy, namely segments I-VII-VIII.

Early experience with totally laparoscopic major hepatectomies: single institution experience with 31 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Totally laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is a technically challenging procedure with limited studies mainly from high-volume expert centers reported. In this study, we report our initial experience with totally LMH.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospective database of 340 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection at a single institution was conducted. Thirty-one consecutive patients who underwent attempted totally LMH between March 2011 to December 2016 were identified. Major hepatectomies were defined as resection of ≥3 contiguous segments which included only right/left hepatectomies, extended hepatectomies or central hepatectomies.

RESULTS

The procedures included 11 right hepatectomies, one extended right hepatectomy, nine left hepatectomies (two including middle hepatic vein), two extended left hepatectomies, two left hepatectomies with caudate lobe and six central hepatectomies. The median tumor size was 40 (range, 12-100) mm and the median operation time was 435 (range, 245-585) min. Median blood loss was 500 (range, 100-1900) mls and 10 (32.3%) patients required blood transfusion. There were three (9.7%) open conversions of which two occurred during the first five cases. There was one (3.2%) major (>grade 2) morbidity and there were no 30-day/in-hospital mortalities or reoperations. The median postoperative stay was 5 (range, 3-14) days.

CONCLUSION

Our initial experience confirms the feasibility and safety of LMH. There was an increase in the number and proportion of LMH performed at our institution over time.

Outcome after laparoscopic and open resections of posterosuperior segments of the liver

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection of posterosuperior (PS) segments of the liver is hindered by limited visualization and curvilinear resection planes. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after open and laparoscopic liver resections of PS segments.

METHODS

Patients who underwent minor open liver resection (OLR) and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) between 2006 and 2014 were identified from the institutional databases of seven tertiary referral European hepatobiliary surgical units. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to match groups for known confounders. Perioperative outcomes including complications were assessed using the Dindo-Clavien classification, and the comprehensive complication index was calculated. Survival was analysed with the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Some 170 patients underwent OLR and 148 had LLR. After propensity score-matched analysis, 86 patients remained in both groups. Overall postoperative complication rates were significantly higher after OLR compared with LLR: 28 versus 14 per cent respectively (P = 0·039). The mean(s.d.) comprehensive complication index was higher in the OLR group, although the difference was not statistically significant (26·7(16·6) versus 18·3(8·0) in the LLR group; P = 0·108). The mean(s.d.) duration of required analgesia and the median (range) duration of postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the LLR group: 3·0(1·1) days versus 1·6(0·8) days in the OLR group (P < 0·001), and 6 (3-44) versus 4 (1-11) days (P < 0·001), respectively. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rates for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (37 per cent for OLR versus 30 per cent for LLR; P = 0·534) and those with colorectal liver metastases (36 versus 36 per cent respectively; P = 0·440) were not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

LLR of tumours in PS segments is feasible in selected patients. LLR is associated with fewer complications and does not compromise survival compared with OLR.

Evolution and revolution of laparoscopic liver resection in Japan

Due to important technological developments and improved endoscopic techniques, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now considered the approach of choice and is increasingly performed worldwide. Recent systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of observational data reported that LLR was associated with less bleeding, fewer complications, and no oncological disadvantage; however, no prospective randomized trials have been conducted. LLR will continue to evolve as a surgical approach that improves patient's quality of life. LLR will not totally supplant open liver surgery, and major LLR remains to be technically challenging procedure. The success of LLR depends on individual learning curves and adherence to surgical indications. A recent study proposed a scoring system for stepwise application of LLR, which was based on experience at high‐volume Japanese centers. A cluster of deaths after major LLR was sensationally reported by the Japanese media in 2014. In response, the Japanese Society of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Surgery conducted emergency data collection on operative mortality. The results demonstrated that mortality was not higher than that for open procedures except for hemi‐hepatectomy with biliary reconstruction. An online prospective registry system for LLR was established in 2015 to be transparent for patients who might potentially undergo treatment with this newly developed, technically demanding surgical procedure.

Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: Current State in Japan Based on the 4th Nationwide Questionnaire

Purpose. Since laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) became covered by national health insurance in April 2010 in Japan, the numbers of applied cases and institutions performing it have increased and the indication has expanded. We surveyed the current state and safety of LH in Japan. Methods. A questionnaire survey was performed in 41 institutions related to the Japanese Endoscopic Liver Surgery Study Group and 747 institutions certified by the Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, and responses concerning all 2962 cases of LH performed by August 2011 were obtained. Results. The surgical procedure employed was hemihepatectomy in 234 (8%), segmentectomy in 88 (3%), left lateral segmentectomy in 434 (15%), segmentectomy in 156 (5%), and partial resection in 1504 (51%) cases. The approach was pure laparoscopy in 1835 (63%), hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery in 201 (7%), and laparoscopy-assisted surgery in 926 (31%). Regarding perioperative complications, surgery was switched to laparotomy in 59 (2.0%), reoperation was performed in 4 (0.1%), and surgery-related death occurred in 2 (0.07%). Intraoperative accidents occurred in 68 (2.3%), and postoperative complications developed in 94 (3.2%). Conclusions. When the selection of cases is appropriate, LH for liver diseases can be safely performed.

Robotics in hepatobiliary surgery-initial experience, first reported case series from India

•

Utility of robotic system for heterogenous mix of hepatobiliary cases.

•

Ability of robotic system to perform complex hepatobiliary cases.

•

Advantages of minimal access surgery but at a higher cost.

Introduction

Robotic surgical system's ability to perform complex hepatobiliary surgeries is gaining momentum with outcomes similar to open surgery and advantages of minimal access surgery. The authors present their initial experience of a heterogenous spectrum of robotic hepatobiliary cases and the first reported case series from India.

Methods

Retrospective review of hepatobiliary cases done robotically from February 2015 to January 2016 was done.

Results

The series has ten patients; with median age of 45 years (range 15–72). Etiologies were choledochal cyst type IVa, benign lower end common bile duct stricture (biliary reconstruction group); incidental gallbladder carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, recurrent pyogenic cholangitis, polycystic liver disease, hemangioma, liver metastases, hydatid cyst (resection group). Median operative duration was 510 min; one patient needed intra-operative blood transfusion and there were no conversions to open surgery. One patient developed bile leak which was managed by biliary stenting and another thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura during post-operative period. Median length of hospital stay was 6 days with average cost of robotic surgery being $1700 USD more for major hepatectomy and $900 USD more for biliary reconstruction compared to open procedure.

Conclusion

This initial series adds to existing data on the feasibility of robotic hepatobiliary cases with inherent advantages of minimal invasive surgery, however with limitation of availability and use of devices like cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator (CUSA) and higher operative cost.

Infrahepatic inferior vena cava clamping with Pringle maneuvers for laparoscopic extracapsular enucleation of giant liver hemangiomas

Background

This study aimed to determine the feasibility of the extracapsular enucleation method for giant liver hemangiomas by infrahepatic inferior vena cava (IVC) clamping and the Pringle maneuver to control intraoperative bleeding under laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Methods

From January 2012 to January 2016, 36 patients underwent laparoscopic extracapsular enucleation of giant liver hemangiomas. Patients were divided into two groups: infrahepatic IVC clamping + Pringle maneuvers group (IVCP group, n = 15) and the Pringle maneuvers group (Pringle group, n = 21). Operative parameters, postoperative laboratory tests, and morbidity and mortality were analyzed.

Results

The mean size of liver hemangiomas was 13.3 cm (range 10–25 cm). Infrahepatic IVC clamping + the Pringle maneuvers with laparoscopic extracapsular enucleation significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss (586.7 vs 315.3 mL, p < 0.001) and transfusion rates (23.8 vs 6.7%, p = 0.001), compared with the Pringle maneuver alone. The gallbladder was retained in both groups. The mean arterial pressure (MAP) in Pringle group remained virtually stable before and after clamping of hepatic portal, while it was significantly decreased after IVC clamping in IVCP group than that pre-clamping (p < 0.001). The heart rate of all patients was significantly increased after clamping when compared to pre-clamping heart rates (p < 0.001). Once vascular occlusion was released, MAP returned to normal levels within a few minutes. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications between two groups. The vascular occlusion techniques in both groups had no serious effect on postoperative of hepatic and renal function.

Conclusions

Extracapsular enucleation with infrahepatic IVC clamping + the Pringle maneuver is a safe and effective surgical treatment to control bleeding for giant liver hemangiomas in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

The First Case of Total Laparoscopic Living Donor Right Hemihepatectomy in Mainland China and Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Total laparoscopic living donor right hemihepatectomy (LDRH) has been successfully performed in several transplant centers. Here we report the first LDRH performed in mainland China and review current literature, focusing on perioperative donor evaluation and surgical procedure to secure donor safety.

METHODS

A 47-year-old man volunteered for living donation to his wife who suffered from sclerosing cholangitis-related liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Donor height is 165 cm and weight is 65 kg, whereas the body mass index is 23.9. The CT volume evaluation showed that the graft-to-body weight ratio was 1.42%, and the remnant liver volume was 36.3% for right graft without middle hepatic vein (MHV). The anatomy of hepatic vein, artery, portal vein, and bile duct was normal. Preoperative liver function tests were normal.

RESULTS

Intraoperative biopsy result showed minimal steatosis. A transection was performed along the right side of the MHV. Two branches of MHV (V5 and V8) were <5 mm in diameter, and there was no need for reconstruction in the back table. Hilar dissection was meticulously performed. Right portal vein, hepatic artery, and bile duct were transected above the bifurcation. The right hepatic vein was transected by a laparoscopic linear stapler. The real graft volume was 660 mL, with a revised graft-to-body weight ratio of 1.14%. Warm ischemia time was about 4 minutes. The donor's postoperative course was uneventful.

CONCLUSIONS

Total LDRH has been proven to be technically feasible in selected adult donors. Following increased experience, it might be a safe and minimally invasive option for adult donors.

Surgical resection of localized hepatocellular carcinoma: patient selection and special consideration

Localized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) refers to a solitary or few tumors located within either the left or right hemiliver without evidence of bilobar or extrahepatic spread. This term encompasses a heterogeneous morphology with no regard to stage of prognosis of the disease. Surgical resection remains the mainstay of curative treatment for the localized HCC. Various biochemical and radiological tests constitute an indispensible part of preoperative assessment. Emergence of laparoscopic hepatectomy has brought liver resection into a new era. Improved understanding of the pathophysiology of HCC allows more aggressive surgical resection without compromising outcomes. New insights into the management of special situations, such as ruptured HCC, pyogenic transformation of HCC, and HCC with portal vein tumor thrombus, rekindle the hopes of curative resection in these terminal events. Amalgamating salvage liver transplantation into the surgical management of resectable HCC has revolutionized the treatment paradigm of this deadly disease.

Robotic major hepatectomy: Is there a learning curve?

BACKGROUND

Robotic hepatectomy has been suggested as a safe and effective management of liver disease. However, no large case series have documented the learning curve for robotic major hepatectomy.

METHOD

We conducted a retrospective study for robotic major hepatectomy performed by the same operative team between January 2012 and October 2015 and evaluated the learning curve for operation time using the cumulative sum method, presented as cumulative sum_{operation time}.

RESULTS

Overall, there were 183 robotic hepatectomies, 92 of which were performed in patients who underwent robotic major hepatectomy: left hemihepatectomy was performed in 32 (34.8%) patients, right hemihepatectomy in 41 (44.6%), left trisectionectomy in 3 (3.3%), right trisectionectomy in 6 (6.5%), and 8-5-4 trisegmentectomy in 10 (10.8%). The median duration of surgery was 434 minutes (142-805 minutes) and the median blood loss was 195 mL (50-2,000 mL). Fifty-nine percent of patients had malignancies, and those with advanced stages of cancer had more blood loss during an operation. The cumulative sum_{operation time} model of robotic major hepatectomy suggested that the learning curve comprised 3 characteristic phases: initial (phase 1, 15 patients), intermediate (phase 2, 25 patients), and mature (phase 3, 52 patients). The learning effects were underlined by shorter operation time and hospital stay after phase 1 and less blood loss after phase 2.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest series regarding robotic major hepatectomy. Our findings suggest that a solid training program based on the learning curve should be considered for beginners of robotic hepatectomy. Participants should evaluate the evolution of our minimally invasive hepatectomy before considering our robotic experience.

Hepatic Vein Injuries During Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has now been widely performed in experienced centers. However, hepatic vein injury (HVI) during LH is especially dangerous, because it may cause conversion, air embolization, fatal hemorrhaging, or even death.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Perioperative characteristics of 4 patients who underwent LH suffering HVI were recorded, including 2 for right HVIs, 1 for middle HVI, and 1 for left HVI. Ultrasonic shears was used for liver mobilization. Linear stapler was adopted to cut off hepatic vein. A 4-0 prolene was used to repair HVI.

RESULTS

In case 1 laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy was performed for hepatic hemangioma. The root of right hepatic vein was injured. Repairing time was about 10 minutes and hemorrhaging was about 150 mL. In case 2 laparoscopic segmentectomy for S7 and S8 was performed for hepatic hemangioma. The right hepatic vein was injured. Repairing time was about 8 minutes and hemorrhaging was about 220 mL. In case 3 laparoscopic trisegmentectomy for S2-S4+S5, S8 was performed for hepatic echinococcosis. The middle hepatic vein was injured. Repairing time was about 8 minutes and hemorrhaging was about 110 mL. In case 4 laparoscopic left lateral segmentectomy was performed for hepatocellular carcinoma. The left hepatic vein was injured. Repairing time was about 7 minutes and hemorrhaging was about 80 mL. All the HVIs were successfully repaired by a 4-0 #20 prolene. No complications were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Skillful stitching, experienced surgeons, and smooth cooperation can effectively handle HVI. However, conversion to laparotomy should be performed timely if uncontrolled hemorrhaging occurs, to ensure patients' safety.

Prediction of postoperative liver regeneration from clinical information using a data-led mathematical model

Although the capacity of the liver to recover its size after resection has enabled extensive liver resection, post-hepatectomy liver failure remains one of the most lethal complications of liver resection. Therefore, it is clinically important to discover reliable predictive factors after resection. In this study, we established a novel mathematical framework which described post-hepatectomy liver regeneration in each patient by incorporating quantitative clinical data. Using the model fitting to the liver volumes in series of computed tomography of 123 patients, we estimated liver regeneration rates. From the estimation, we found patients were divided into two groups: i) patients restored the liver to its original size (Group 1, n = 99); and ii) patients experienced a significant reduction in size (Group 2, n = 24). From discriminant analysis in 103 patients with full clinical variables, the prognosis of patients in terms of liver recovery was successfully predicted in 85-90% of patients. We further validated the accuracy of our model prediction using a validation cohort (prediction = 84-87%, n = 39). Our interdisciplinary approach provides qualitative and quantitative insights into the dynamics of liver regeneration. A key strength is to provide better prediction in patients who had been judged as acceptable for resection by current pragmatic criteria.

Short-term and middle-term evaluation of laparoscopic hepatectomies compared with open hepatectomies: A propensity score matching analysis

AIM

To compare short-term results between laparoscopic hepatectomy and open hepatectomy using a propensity score matching.

METHODS

A patient in the laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) group was randomly matched with another patient in the open liver resection (OLR) group using a 1:1 allocated ratio with the nearest estimated propensity score. Patients of the LLR group without matches were excluded. Matching criteria included age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, potential co-morbidities, hepatopathies, size and number of nodules, preoperative chemotherapy, minor or major liver resections. Intraoperative and postoperative data were compared in both groups.

RESULTS

From January 2012 to January 2015, a total of 241 hepatectomies were consecutively performed, of which 169 in the OLR group (70.1%) and 72 in the LLR group (29.9%). The conversion rate was 9.7% (n = 7). The mortality rate was 4.2% in the OLR group and 0% in the LLR group. Prior to and after propensity score matching, there was a statistically significant difference favorable to the LLR group regarding shorter operative times (185 min vs 247.5 min; P = 0.002), less blood loss (100 mL vs 300 mL; P = 0.002), a shorter hospital stay (7 d vs 9 d; P = 0.004), and a significantly lower rate of medical complications (4.3% vs 26.4%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resections seem to yield better short-term and mid-term results as compared to open hepatectomies and could well be considered a privileged approach and become the gold standard in carefully selected patients.

Prospective cohort study of laparoscopic and open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with a diameter of 5 cm or less is well recognized. The role of laparoscopy in treating large HCC (5-10 cm) remains controversial. This prospective cohort study was undertaken to assess the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic hepatectomy for large HCC and to compare this approach with open hepatectomy.

METHODS

Patients with a solitary HCC (diameter 5-10 cm) who underwent open or laparoscopic hepatectomy were enrolled in a prospective observational study from January 2012 to April 2015. Perioperative and follow-up data were analysed.

RESULTS

Some 128 patients underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy and 207 had an open hepatectomy. One and two perioperative deaths were reported in the laparoscopic and open groups respectively. Laparoscopic hepatectomy was converted to an open procedure in 12 (9·4 per cent) of 128 patients. More patients in the laparoscopic group underwent an anatomical hepatectomy than in the open group (45·3 versus 21·7 per cent; P = 0·001). The postoperative complication rate was 20·3 per cent for the laparoscopic group versus 35·7 per cent for the open group (P = 0·003). Mean(s.d.) duration of hospital stay was 11·4(3·1) and 15·8(7·7) days respectively (P < 0·001). One- and 3-year overall survival rates in the laparoscopic and open groups were 94·4 versus 93·6 per cent (P = 0·875), and 81·4 versus 82·2 per cent (P = 0·802), respectively. One- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 89·4 versus 88·7 per cent (P = 0·825), and 67·3 versus 66·7 per cent (P = 0·902), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic hepatectomy is safe and feasible for the treatment of patients with large HCC.

An Improved Surgical Technique for Pure Laparoscopic Left Hemihepatectomy: Ten Years Experience in a Tertiary Center

Background: This study details our experience with an improved surgical technique involving the hepatic pedicle during laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH).

Methods: We describe an improved laparoscopic technique to extraparenchymally divide the left hepatic pedicle. A retrospective analysis of all of the patients who underwent laparoscopic liver procedures between 2002 and 2012 was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups, an early LLH group (ELLH group) and a recent LLH group (RLLH group), based on the surgical approach used for the left hepatic pedicle.

Results: A total of 72 cases of LLH (26 ELLH and 46 RLLH) were identified. The RLLH group exhibited a shorter median operative time, median length of hospital stay, and lower median blood loss compared to the ELLH group (182, 162.5–223.7 versus 232.5, 200–357.5 minutes, P < .01; 5, 4.2–7 versus 7, 6–8.7 days, P < .05; 150, 100–257.5 versus 300, 200–337.5 mL, P < .05, respectively). No perioperative mortality was observed.

Conclusions: This study confirms that our improved surgical technique for LLH is practical, safe, and effective. The main advantage of this method compared to other techniques is the possibility of attaining rapid and precise control of vascular inflow, thus facilitating LLH.

Laparoscopic Pringle maneuver: how we do it?

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is technically possible with new devices which allow a relatively bloodless liver parenchymal transection. Despite, the main concern remains intraoperative hemorrhage. Currently, perioperative excessive blood loss during LLR is difficult to control with necessity of laparotomy conversion. Moreover, major blood loss requires transfusion and increases postoperative morbidity and mortality. When in-flow is limited by the hepatic pedicle clamping, it reduces intraoperative blood loss. The Pringle maneuver, first described in 1908, is the simplest method of inflow occlusion and currently can be achieved during LLR. The purpose of this note was to describe two different modalities of Pringle maneuver used by two different teams during LLR.

The First Case Report of Robotic Multivisceral Resection for Synchronous Liver Metastasis from Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor: A Case Report and Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Surgery for liver metastases in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET) improves overall survival rate. We present the first case report for robotic multivisceral resection of distal pancreas, spleen, and left liver for metastatic PNET.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We present a case of 52-year-old female diagnosed with PNET in the pancreatic neck metastatic to the liver, responding to somatostatin and bland embolization, who underwent surgical debulking using da Vinci robotic platform. Intraoperative Doppler ultrasound was used to define the vascular distribution and tumor extension. The parenchymal liver transection was performed with vessel sealer. The distal pancreas and the spleen were approached medial to lateral and resected in an en-bloc fashion. The left liver inflow, outflow, and splenic artery and vein were transected with vascular stapler device.

RESULTS

Da Vinci robot-assisted multivisceral resection has been performed with good postoperative outcome. Operative time was 369 minutes and the estimated blood loss was 100 mL. The patient had a short hospital stay with quick recovery and good outcome at 5 months follow-up after the surgery.

DISCUSSION

Liver metastases in PNETs are considered an adverse factor. Aggressive surgical management is a mainstay. The laparoscopic approach to pancreatic or hepatic surgery is difficult in inexperienced hands with steep learning curve. The recent robotic system seems to overcome many limitations. This is the first case of robotic multivisceral resection for synchronous liver metastasis from PNET. Concurrent primary tumor resection with hepatectomy offers potential curative intention.

Comparative Short-term Benefits of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: 9000 Cases and Climbing

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of worldwide literature on laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and compare short-term outcomes against open liver resections (OLR) by meta-analyses.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

There are no updated pooled data since 2009 about the current status and short-term outcomes of LLR worldwide.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All English language publications on LLR were screened. Descriptive worldwide data and short-term outcomes were obtained. Separate analyses were performed for minor-only and major-only resection series, and series in which minor/major resections were not differentiated. Apparent case duplications were excluded.

RESULTS

A set of 463 published manuscripts were reviewed. One hundred seventy-nine single-center series were identified that accounted for 9527 LLR cases worldwide. Minor-only, major-only, and combined major-minor series were 61, 18, and 100, respectively, including 32, 8, and 43 comparative series, respectively. Of the total 9527 LLR cases reported, 6190 (65%) were for malignancy and 3337 (35%) were for benign indications. There were 37 deaths reported (mortality rate = 0.4%). From the meta-analysis comparing case-matched LLR to OLR (N = 2900 cases), there was no increased mortality and significantly less complications, transfusions, blood loss, and hospital stay observed in LLR vs OLR.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest review of LLR available to date with over 9000 cases published. It confirms growing safety when performed in selected patients and by trained surgeons, and suggests that LLR may offer improved patient short-term outcomes compared with OLR. Improved levels of evidence, standardized reporting of outcomes, and assuring proper training are the next challenges of laparoscopic liver surgery.

Current status of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is becoming widely accepted for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy and minor laparoscopic liver resection are now considered standard approaches, especially for tumors located in the anterolateral segments of the liver. Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy in adult donors is also gaining acceptance for child liver transplantation in many centers. Major LLRs, including left hepatectomy and right hepatectomy, have been recently attempted. Laparoscopic donor hepatectomy is becoming more popular owing to increasing demand from young living donors who appreciate its minimal invasiveness and excellent cosmetic outcomes. Several centers have performed total laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation. Many meta-analyses have shown that LLR is better than open liver resection in terms of short-term outcomes, principally cosmetic outcomes. Although no randomized control trials have compared LLR with open liver resection, the long-term oncologic outcomes were similar for both procedures in recent case-matched studies.