Laparoscopic major hepatectomy: a systematic literature review and comparison of 3 techniques. Ann Surg. 2013;257:205-213. [PMID: 23263192 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e31827da7fe]

Laparoscopic liver hanging maneuver through the retrohepatic tunnel on the right side of the inferior vena cava combined with a simple vascular occlusion technique for laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy

Background

Laparoscopic hepatectomy has been performed in many hospitals, with the development of the laparoscopic operation technique. However, performing complex laparoscopic hepatectomy, such as right hemihepatectomy, is still a challenge. The aim of this study was to describe the application of a simple vascular occlusion technique and new liver hanging maneuver (LHM) in complex laparoscopic hepatectomy, which are both advocated by Chen Xiaoping for open hepatectomy.

Methods

The clinical data of 29 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy (LRH) from October 2014 to October 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. During operation, the vascular occlusion technique without hilus dissection and LHM through the retrohepatic avascular tunnel on the right side of the inferior vena cava were used.

Result

All 29 operations were successfully performed laparoscopically, while adopting Chen’s methods. The study consisted of 23 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, four patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and two patients with hepatic metastasis of colonic carcinoma. The tumor size was 12.4 ± 1.9 cm. The operation time of LRH was 190.3 ± 49.9 min. The intraoperative blood loss of LRH was 281.7 ± 117.8 mL; five patients required blood transfusion, and the amount of blood transfusion was 300.0 ± 89.4 mL. No case was converted to open surgery, and no death occurred. All resulted in R0 resections. The median free margin was 20.1 ± 10.8 mm. The time of postoperative oral diet intake was 2.10 ± 0.96 days. The complication rate was 17.2%. The average hospital stay after operation was 10.0 ± 2.9 days.

Conclusion

Complex hepatectomy is a bloodless procedure that can be performed under a laparoscope safely using Chen’s methods of vascular occlusion technique and LHM.

Predictors and implications of unplanned conversion during minimally invasive hepatectomy: an analysis of the ACS-NSQIP database

BACKGROUND

Minimally-invasive hepatectomy (MIH) is increasingly utilized; however, predictors and outcomes for patients requiring conversion to an open procedure have not been adequately studied.

METHODS

The 2014-15 ACS-NSQIP database was analyzed. Unplanned conversion was compared to successful MIH and elective open hepatectomy.

RESULTS

Among 6918 hepatectomies, 1062 (15.4%) underwent attempted MIH: 989 laparoscopic, 73 robotic. Conversion occurred in 203 (19.1%). Compared to successful MIH, patients requiring unplanned conversion experienced higher rates of complications (34.5% vs 14.6%, p<0.001), including bile leaks (7.4% vs 2.8%, p=0.002), organ space infection (6.4% vs 2.9%, p=0.016), UTI (4.9% vs 1.2%, p=0.002), perioperative bleeding (21.2% vs 6.1%, p<0.001), DVT (3.0% vs 0.8%, p=0.024), and sepsis (5.9% vs 1.9%, p=0.001). Conversion led to greater LOS (5 days vs 3 days, p<0.001) and 30-day mortality (3.0% vs 0.5%, p=0.005). Compared to elective open hepatectomy, conversion was associated with greater perioperative bleeding (21.2% vs 15.3%, p = 0.037). On multivariate analysis, major hepatectomy (OR 2.21, p<0.001), concurrent ablation (OR 1.79, p=0.020), and laparoscopic approach (vs. robotic) (OR 3.22, p=0.014) were associated with conversion.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of this national database revealed unplanned conversion during MIH is associated with greater morbidity and mortality. MIH should be approached cautiously in patients requiring major hepatectomy.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Liver Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal pathway developed to overcome the deleterious effect of perioperative stress after major surgery. In colorectal surgery, ERAS pathways reduced perioperative morbidity, hospital stay and costs. Similar concept should be applied for liver surgery. This study presents the specific ERAS Society recommendations for liver surgery based on the best available evidence and on expert consensus.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed on ERAS for liver surgery by searching EMBASE and Medline. Five independent reviewers selected relevant articles. Quality of randomized trials was assessed according to the Jadad score and CONSORT statement. The level of evidence for each item was determined using the GRADE system. The Delphi method was used to validate the final recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 157 full texts were screened. Thirty-seven articles were included in the systematic review, and 16 of the 23 standard ERAS items were studied specifically for liver surgery. Consensus was reached among experts after 3 rounds. Prophylactic nasogastric intubation and prophylactic abdominal drainage should be omitted. The use of postoperative oral laxatives and minimally invasive surgery results in a quicker bowel recovery and shorter hospital stay. Goal-directed fluid therapy with maintenance of a low intraoperative central venous pressure induces faster recovery. Early oral intake and mobilization are recommended. There is no evidence to prefer epidural to other types of analgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

The current ERAS recommendations were elaborated based on the best available evidence and endorsed by the Delphi method. Nevertheless, prospective studies need to confirm the clinical use of the suggested protocol.

Hand-assisted Approach as a Model to Teach Complex Laparoscopic Hepatectomies: Preliminary Results

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are limited and scarce models to teach complex liver resections by laparoscopy. The aim of this study is to present a hand-assisted technique to teach complex laparoscopic hepatectomies for fellows in liver surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Laparoscopic hand-assisted approach for resections of liver lesions located in posterosuperior segments (7, 6/7, 7/8, 8) was performed by the trainees with guidance and intermittent intervention of a senior surgeon. Data as: (1) percentage of time that the senior surgeon takes the surgery as main surgeon, (2) need for the senior surgeon to finish the procedure, (3) necessity of conversion, (4) bleeding with hemodynamic instability, (5) need for transfusion, (6) oncological surgical margins, were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 12 cases of complex laparoscopic liver resections were performed by the trainee. All cases included deep lesions situated on liver segments 7 or 8. The senior surgeon intervention occurred in a mean of 20% of the total surgical time (range, 0% to 50%). A senior intervention >20% was necessary in 2 cases. There was no need for conversion or reoperation. Neither major bleeding nor complications resulted from the teaching program. All surgical margins were clear.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary report shows that hand-assistance is a safe way to teach complex liver resections without compromising patient safety or oncological results. More cases are still necessary to draw definitive conclusions about this teaching method.

Are Hybrid Liver Resections Truly Minimally Invasive? A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

Hybrid liver resection is considered a modality of minimally invasive surgery; however, there are doubts regarding loss of benefits of laparoscopy due to the use of an auxiliary incision. We compared perioperative results of patients undergoing hybrid × open and hybrid × pure laparoscopic resections.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing liver resection between June 2008 and January 2016 were studied. Study groups were compared after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Six hundred forty-four resections were included in the comparative analysis: 470 open, 120 pure laparoscopic, and 54 hybrids. After PSM, 54 patients were included in each group. Hybrid × open: hybrid technique had shorter operative time (319.5 ± 108.6 × 376.2 ± 155.8 minutes, P = .033), shorter hospital stay (6.0 ± 2.7 × 8.1 ± 5.6 days, P = .001), and lower morbidity (18.5% × 40.7%, P = .003). Hybrid × pure laparoscopic: hybrid group had lower conversion rate (0% × 13%, P = .013). There was no difference regarding estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, hospital stay, complications, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid resection has better perioperative results than the open approach and is similar to pure laparoscopy. The hybrid technique should be considered a minimally invasive approach.

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.

Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Conventional Approaches for Major or Challenging Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

The benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for low-risk or minor liver resection are well established. There is growing interest in MIS for major hepatectomy (MH) and other challenging resections, but there remain unanswered questions of safety that prevent broad adoption of this technique.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing hepatectomy at 65 hospitals participating in the NSQIP Hepatopancreatobiliary Collaborative in 2014. We assessed serious morbidity or mortality (SMM; including organ/space infection and organ failure). Secondary outcomes included transfusion, bile leak, liver failure, reoperation or intervention, and 30-day readmission. We also measured factors considered to make resection more challenging (ie large tumors, cirrhosis, ≥3 concurrent resections, previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and morbid obesity).

RESULTS

There were 2,819 patients who underwent hepatectomy (aged 58 ± 14 years; 53% female; 25% had MIS). After adjusting for clinical and operative factors, the odds of SMM (odds ratio [OR] = 0.57; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.96; p = 0.03) and reoperation or intervention (OR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.93; p = 0.03) were significantly lower for patients undergoing MIS compared with open. In the MH group (n = 1,015 [13% MIS]), there was no difference in the odds of SMM after MIS (OR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.11; p = 0.08); however, minimally invasive MH met criteria for noninferiority. There were no differences in liver-specific complications or readmission between the groups. Odds of SMM were significantly lower after MIS among patients who had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 0.33; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.70; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large study of minimally invasive MH, we found safety outcomes that are equivalent or superior to conventional open surgery. Although the decision to offer MIS might be influenced by factors not included in this evaluation (eg surgeon experience and other patient factors), these findings support its current use in MH.

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.

Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: Risk Factors and Treatment Strategies

PURPOSE

To investigate the risk factors for recurrence and treatment strategies after patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergo total laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH).

METHODS

The study included 109 patients who underwent LH (laparoscopy resection [LR] group, n = 50) or open hepatectomy [OH] (open resection [OR] group, n = 59) for HCC in our hospital between March 2011 and June 2016. Perioperative outcomes, disease recurrence, survival, and risk factors for recurrence were analyzed.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics did not significantly differ between groups. The 1- and 3-year survival rates were 90.7% and 78.1%, respectively, for the LR group and 83.1% and 74.4%, respectively, for the OR group (P = .71). The 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 89.6% and 51.4%, respectively, for the LR group and 84.7% and 59.6%, respectively, for the OR group (P = .935). Tumor size, differentiation, vascular invasion, surgical bleeding, and surgical resection margin were risk factors for tumor recurrence after LH.

CONCLUSION

LH for HCC did not increase the risk of recurrence compared with OH. Tumor size, differentiation, vascular invasion, surgical bleeding, and surgical resection margin were risk factors for tumor recurrence. Reducing bleeding during surgery and ensuring sufficient surgical margins were the most important measures to reduce postoperative recurrence of HCC.

Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma for various resection extent

Although the number of laparoscopic liver resections (LRRs) has increased, studies of surgical outcomes in comparison with the conventional open approach are limited. The purpose of this study was to analyze the surgical outcomes (safety and efficacy) of LLR versus open liver resection (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).We collected data on all patients who received liver resection for HCC between April 2015 and September 2016 in our institution, and retrospectively investigated the demographic and perioperative data, and also surgical outcomes.Laparoscopic liver resection was performed in 225 patients and OLR in 291. In patients who underwent minor hepatectomy, LLR associated with a shorter duration of operation time (200 vs 220 minutes; P < 0.001), less blood loss (100 vs 225 mL; P < 0.001), lower transfusion rate (3.0% vs 12.0%; P = 0.012), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (6 vs 7 days; P < 0.001) compared with OLR. Dietary recovery was relatively fast in the group of LLR, but there were no significant differences in hepatic inflow occlusion rate, complication rate, and transfusion volume. Patients who received major hepatectomy had a longer duration of operation (240 vs 230 minutes; P < 0.001), less blood loss (200 vs 400 mL; P < 0.001), lower transfusion rate (4.8% vs 16.5%; P = 0.002), lower hepatic inflow occlusion rate (68.3% vs 91.7%; P < 0.001), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (6 vs 8 days; P < 0.001). Complication rate (P = 0.366) and transfusion volume (P = 0.308) did not differ between groups.Laparoscopic liver resection is a feasible and safe alternative to OLR for HCC when performed by a surgeon experienced with the relevant surgical techniques, associated with less blood loss, lower transfusion rate, a rapid return to a normal diet, and shorter postoperative hospital stay with no compromise in complications. Further, long-term follow-up should be acquired for adequate evaluation for survival.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic left hepatectomy: how I do it

Laparoscopic liver resection has been adopted slowly due to concerns for bleeding and oncologic outcomes. Currently, over 9,500 laparoscopic liver resections have been performed and reported worldwide. Numerous studies have shown the safety and oncologic equivalence of laparoscopic liver resection when compared to open resection. Pure laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection are the two most commonly used techniques for minimally invasive liver resection surgery. Advantages of the hand-port include tactile feedback, facilitation of liver mobilization, and ease of ability to control bleeding. We present a case report with video of a hand-assisted laparoscopic left liver resection for a hepatocellular carcinoma in a non-cirrhotic patient.

Robotic Versus Open Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Matched Comparison

BACKGROUND

Robotic hepatectomy has been suggested to be a safe and effective approach for liver disease; however, studies comparing robotic hepatectomy with the conventional open approach regarding oncologic outcomes for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are limited. Accordingly, we performed a matched comparison of surgical and oncological outcomes between robotic and open hepatectomy.

METHODS

Between January 2012 and October 2015, a total of 183 patients underwent robotic hepatectomy and 275 patients underwent open hepatectomy by the same surgical team in our center. Eighty-one newly diagnosed HCC cases in each group were compared under propensity score matching (PSM) in a 1:1 ratio.

RESULTS

With robotic hepatectomy, the conversion rate was 1.6 % and the complication rate was 4.4 %. On PSM, the groups had a comparable percentage of major liver resections (41.9 vs. 39.5 %) and liver cirrhosis (45.7 vs. 46.9 %). Compared with the open group, the robotic group required longer operation times (343 vs. 220 min), shorter hospital stays (7.5 vs. 10.1 days), and lower dosages of postoperative patient-controlled analgesia (350 vs. 554 ng/kg). The 3-year disease-free survival of the robotic group was comparable with that of the open group (72.2 % vs. 58.0 %; p = 0.062), as was the 3-year overall survival (92.6 vs. 93.7 %; p = 0.431).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first oncological study comparing robotic liver resection for HCC with open resection. Robotic hepatectomy can be applied for challenging major resections in patients with cirrhotic liver disease with less postoperative pain and shorter hospital stays without compromising oncological outcomes.

Surgical outcomes following laparoscopic major hepatectomy for various liver diseases

The aim of the study was to report surgical outcomes (efficacy and safety) of laparoscopic major hepatectomy for various liver diseases.Although the number of laparoscopic liver resections has increased, expansion of laparoscopic major hepatic resection remains limited, mainly owing to the technical difficulties for the procedure as compared to open surgery. We describe our experiences with laparoscopic major hepatectomy for various liver diseases.We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 192 patients who underwent laparoscopic major hepatectomy between October 2007 and March 2015 at Asan Medical Center, Korea.The mean age of the patients was 54 ± 11.6 years, and their mean body mass index was 23.5 kg/m. The most common preoperative diagnosis was hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 82, 42.7%), followed by intrahepatic duct stones (n = 51, 26.6%). We performed 108 left hepatectomies, 55 right hepatectomies, 18 right posterior sectionectomies, 6 right anterior sectionectomies, 2 central bisectionectomies, and 3 donor right hepatectomies. The conversion rate was 1.6% (3 cases) due to bleeding, bile leakage, and uncontrolled hypercapnea during the operation. The mean operation time was 272 ± 80.2 minutes, and the mean estimated blood loss was 300.4 ± 252.2 mL. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 9.8 days. All resection margins were tumor-free in cases of malignant tumors. The morbidity rate was 3.1% (n = 6), including for case of biliary stricture. There were no deaths.Laparoscopic major hepatectomy, including donor hepatectomy, is a safe and feasible option for various liver diseases when careful selection criteria are used by a surgeon experienced with the relevant surgical techniques.

Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy: Toward Protocolization and Simplification

BACKGROUND

Major hurdles for laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LapRH) include difficulties in (1) mobilization and (2) applying hanging maneuver and (3) lack of experienced assistants. We discuss the protocolization of lapRH, introducing our simplified technique.

METHODS

The procedure was disassembled into six steps: (1) curtailed mobilization of the right liver so as to align the resection plane with the laparoscopic camera view, (2) inflow vascular control, (3) setting up the parenchymal resection applying the rubber band retraction method, (4) parenchymal resection approaching the caudate lobe, (5) a lifting-up maneuver using a laparoscopic grasper or retractor instead of the hanging maneuver, and (6) completion of resection dividing the caudate lobe, right hepatic vein, and remaining ligament.

RESULTS

Between March 2014 and August 2015, 13 LapRH surgeries were attempted. The patients consisted of eight males and five females with a mean age of 58.5 ± 11.6 years. Final pathological diagnoses were hepatocellular carcinoma in seven patients, intrahepatic duct stone in 4, and colorectal liver metastasis in 2. The mean total operative time was 381 ± 66 minutes, and the mean intraoperative estimated blood loss was 633 ± 619 ml. One patient was converted to open surgery. There was no clinically significant complication, and the mean length of stay after surgery was 9.1 ± 2.3 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Protocolization and simplification of the procedure may allow professionals to better understand the respective process and determine appropriate port placements, resulting in safe and successful minimally invasive hepatectomy procedures.

Comprehensive guide to laparoscope-assisted graft harvesting in live donors for living-donor liver transplantation: perspective of laparoscopic vision

BACKGROUND

A living donor (LD) for liver transplantation (LT) is the best target for minimally invasive surgery. Laparoscope-assisted surgery (LAS) for LDs has gradually evolved. A donor safety rate of 100% should be guaranteed.

METHODS

We began performing LAS for LDs in June 2012. The aim of this report is to describe the surgical procedures of LAS in detail, discuss various tips and pitfalls, and address the potential for a smooth transition to more advanced LAS.

RESULTS

Preoperative planning based on three-dimensional image analysis is a powerful tool for successful surgery. The combination of liver retraction/countertraction and the pressure produced by pneumoperitoneum widens the dissectible/cuttable layer, increasing the safety of LAS. A flexible laparoscope provides excellent magnified vision in both the horizontal view along the inferior vena cava, under adequate liver retraction, and in the lateral view, to harvest left-sided grafts in critical procedures. Intentional omission of painful incisions is beneficial for LDs. Hepatectomy using a smaller midline incision is safe if a hanging maneuver is used. Safe transition from LAS to a hybrid technique involving a combination of pure laparoscopic surgery and subsequent open surgery seems possible.

CONCLUSION

LDLT surgeons have a very broad intellectual and technical frontier.

Anesthetic and operative considerations for laparoscopic liver resection

We enumerate the broad range of anesthetic considerations that affect the outcome of patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. Key elements for excellent outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection are careful patient selection and risk stratification, appropriate monitoring, techniques to reduce blood loss and transfusion, and active recovery management. Although some of these key elements are the same for open liver operation, there are specific anesthetic considerations of which both the surgical and anesthesia teams must be aware to achieve optimal patient outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection. While unique advantages of laparoscopic liver resection typically include decreased intraoperative bleeding, transfusion requirements, and a lower incidence of postoperative ascites, specific challenges include management of the complicated interplay between low-volume anesthesia and increased intraabdominal pressure due to pneumoperitoneum, with additional considerations regarding circulatory support to treat acute blood loss with need for emergent conversion in some cases. This article will address in detail the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative anesthetic considerations for patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection that both the surgical and anesthesia team should be aware of to optimize outcomes.

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.

Invention of Two Instruments Fitted with SECUREA™ Useful for Laparoscopic Liver Resection

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) became common in Japan when advanced techniques and instruments for the procedure became available and the national medical insurance began covering partial resection and lateral segmentectomy. A successful LLR requires a gentle and powerful hold on the specimens, a steady operating field, and fast and rapid compression of the bleeding point to achieve hemostasis. In this paper we describe two instruments developed in our department by attaching the SECUREA™ endoscopic surgical spacer to the forceps and suction tube used for LLR. The instruments are useful and practical for any type of LLR, even in the hands of less experienced surgeons.

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.

Laparoscopic Left Hemihepatectomy for Left-sided Hepatolithiasis

INTRODUCTION

Hepatolithiasis is a prevalent disease in the southeastern coastal regions of China. Partial hepatectomy is the most definitive treatment for hepatolithiasis. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) for left-sided hepatolithiasis.

METHODS

The clinical data of 37 consecutive patients who underwent pure LLH for left-sided hepatolithiasis at Yinzhou Second Hospital between March 2009 and December 2013 were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Pure LLH was performed successfully in 36 patients. Because of severe adhesions from previous choledochotomy, 1 patient was converted to open procedure. The mean operative time was 257.9 minutes (range, 188 to 396 min). The mean duration of postoperative hospital stay was 11.7 days (range, 8 to 21 d). There were 2 (5.4 %) cases of postoperative bile leakage, 2 (5.4%) cases of intra-abdominal fluid collection, and 1 (2.7%) case of incisional infection, which were successfully managed conservatively. Residual stones were observed in 2 (5.4%) patients. The residual stones were located in the common bile duct in these cases and were removed through the T-tube tract by choledochoscopy. During a mean follow-up of 31.3 months (range, 6 to 63 mo), recurrent stones were detected in 2 (5.4%) patients and were successfully treated with endoscopic sphincterotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

LLH for left-sided hepatolithiasis is feasible and safe in selected patients.

Harness Traction Technique (HARNESS): Novel Method for Controlling the Transection Plane During Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

We present our experience using a novel method for controlling the transection plane, which we termed as the Harness Traction Technique (HARNESS) and evaluate its usefulness. From May 2009 to March 2012, laparoscopic hepatectomies using HARNESS were performed on 35 patients. After the superficial hepatic parenchyma on the line was transected at 1 to 2 cm depth, 5 mm tape was placed along the groove of the line and tied to prevent it from slipping off. Tape was tied and pulled using a forceps toward the best direction for minimizing the bleeding, moving the transection point to the appropriate position and creating good tension for parenchymal transection at the transection point. There were no conversions to laparotomy or intraoperative complications. HARNESS is useful for controlling the dissection line during laparoscopic hepatectomy, leading to precise and safe laparoscopic liver parenchymal dissection.

Innovative surgical approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common cancer worldwide, with an increasing diffusion in Europe and the United States. The management of such a cancer is continuously progressing and the objective of this paper is to evaluate innovation in the surgical treatment of HCC. In this review, we will analyze the modern concept of preoperative management, the role of laparoscopic and robotic surgery, the intrao-perative use of three dimensional models and augme-nted reality, as well as the potential application of fluore-scence.

What is the Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomy?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is rapidly expanding with more than 9500 cases performed worldwide. While initial series reported non-anatomic resection of benign peripheral hepatic lesions, approximately 50-65 % of laparoscopic liver resections are now being done for malignant tumors, primarily hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or colorectal cancer liver metastases (mCRC).

METHODS

We performed a literature review of published studies evaluating outcomes of major laparoscopic liver resection, defined as three or more Couinaud segments.

RESULTS

Initial fears of adverse oncologic outcomes or tumor seeding have not been demonstrated, and dozens of studies have reported comparable 5-year disease-free and overall survival between laparoscopic and open resection of HCC or mCRC in case-cohort and propensity score-matched analyses. Increased experience has led to laparoscopic anatomic liver resections including laparoscopic major hepatectomy. A steep learning curve of 45-60 cases is evident for laparoscopic hepatic resection.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is safe and effective in the treatment of benign and malignant liver tumors when performed in specialized centers with dedicated teams. Comparable to other complex laparoscopic surgeries, laparoscopic major hepatectomy has a learning curve of 45-60 cases.

Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy by the Caudal Approach Versus Conventional Approach: A Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) is increasingly performed for the treatment of many liver diseases. However, it remains a challenging procedure and is limited to highly specialized centers. Increasing the safety and efficacy of LRH is crucial. This study evaluated the safety and feasibility of the novel caudal approach (CDA) in LRH and in comparison with the conventional approach (CA).

METHODS

Of a total of 40 patients who underwent LRH between June 2007 and July 2015 at our center, 10 cases underwent the CDA, while 30 underwent the CA. Operative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Clinical data and patient characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Only 1 patient required a laparoscopic-assisted procedure in the CDA group, while 14 patients were converted to laparotomy (n = 10) or laparoscopic-assisted procedures (n = 4) in the CA group, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .060). However, the difference in conversion to laparotomy between the two groups was significant (P = .043). In addition, when considering 23 patients with malignancies, the median surgical margin was significantly greater in the CDA group (n = 6) (20 mm versus 10 mm; P = .023) than in the CA group (n = 17). Other operative and postoperative outcomes were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CDA achieves safety and feasibility similar to that of the CA in LRH and requires relatively less conversion to laparotomy. In selected patients, the CDA offers an alternative option to the CA for LRH in experienced hands. Further studies with larger samples are warranted to evaluate the CDA.

A Conceptual Technique for Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy Based on Facts and Oncologic Principles: The Caudal Approach

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a new conceptual technique of laparoscopic right hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND

Despite significant improvements in surgical care in the last decades, morbidity is still high after major hepatectomy. Blood loss and transfusions are known to significantly increase the risk of postoperative complications and cancer recurrence after liver resection. A laparoscopic approach may improve perioperative outcomes in these cases, but data in literature are limited and the surgical technique is not yet standardized.

METHODS

A new conceptual technique of right hepatectomy was designed using evidence-based facts and oncologic rules: laparoscopy with pneumoperitoneum, low central venous pressure, intermittent pedicle clamping, anterior approach without mobilization, and parenchymal section with ultrasonic dissector. Thirty patients were prospectively enrolled between October 2011 and September 2013. Primary endpoint was intraoperative blood loss.

RESULTS

Eighty percent of patients underwent surgery for malignant disease and cirrhosis was present in 11 patients. Benign lesions accounted for 13% of indications, whereas living liver donation was performed in 2 cases. Median blood loss was 100 mL (50-700) and transfusion rate was 7%. Five patients (16.6%) required conversion to laparotomy, including 2 using hybrid technique. The median operative time was 360 minutes (210-510). R0 resection rate was 87% (21/24). Postoperative morbidity rate was 23% (7/30) with 8 complications including 6 Clavien III-IV. No respiratory complication occurred. The median hospital stay was 8 days. No patient died.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that several evidence-based facts could be combined to define a new conceptual technique of laparoscopic right hepatectomy allowing for low blood loss and morbidity.

A review of current status of living donor liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become an inevitable procedure in Asia due to its shortage of deceased donor under the influence of the religion and native cultures. Through a broad variety of experience, LDLT has been evolved and extended its indication. Although there have been many surgical and ethical efforts to prevent donor risk, concerns of donor's safety still are remaining questions due to its strict selection criteria. Therefore, dual grafts LDLT or ABO incompatible (ABO-I) LDLT may be effective means in its application and safety aspect. Many Asian LDLT centers have pointed out the useful extended criteria of LDLT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the applicability of extended criteria should be validated and standardized by worldwide prospective studies based on the Milan criteria. Recent struggling efforts have been reported to surmount extensive portal vein thrombosis and Budd-Chiari syndrome which were previously contraindicated to LDLT. There is no doubt that LDLT is a surely complicated therapy to be performed successfully and requires devoted efforts by surgeons and co-workers. Nonetheless, comprehensive increasing understandings of partial graft LT and improvements of surgical techniques with challenges to obstacles in LDLT will make its prosperity with satisfactory outcomes.

Evidence supporting laparoscopic major hepatectomy

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been increasing in frequency with over 9,000 cases done worldwide. Benefits of laparoscopic resection include less blood loss, smaller incisions, decreased postoperative morbidity, and shorter length of stay compared to open liver resection. With increased experience, several centers have reported series of laparoscopic major hepatectomy, although this represents only about 25% of total LLR performed. Evidence is accumulating to support laparoscopic major hepatectomy with the understanding that there is a steep learning curve, and surgeons should begin with minor LLR before moving on to laparoscopic major hepatectomy. Controversy still remains concerning indications, techniques, learning curve, risks, and long-term cancer outcomes with laparoscopic major hepatectomy.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy in cirrhotics: safe if you adjust technique

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver surgery is a growing field, and a small number of recent reports have suggested that laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is feasible even in patients with cirrhosis. However, parenchymal transection of the cirrhotic liver is challenging due to fibrosis and portal hypertension. There is a paucity of data regarding the technical modifications necessary to safely transect the diseased parenchyma.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LLR by a single surgeon between 2008 and 2015 were reviewed. Patients with cirrhosis were compared to those without cirrhosis to examine differences in surgical technique, intraoperative characteristics, and outcomes (including liver-related morbidity and general postoperative complication rates).

RESULTS

A total of 167 patients underwent LLR during the study period. Forty-eight (29 %) had cirrhosis, of which 43 (90 %) had hepatitis C. Most had Child-Pugh class A disease (85 %). Compared to noncirrhotics, patients with cirrhosis were older, had more comorbidities, and were more likely to have hepatocellular carcinoma. Precoagulation before parenchymal transection was used more frequently in cirrhotics (65 vs. 15 %, P < 0.001), and mean portal triad clamping time was longer (32 vs. 22 min, P = 0.002). There were few conversions to open surgery, though hand-assisted laparoscopy was used as an alternative to converting to open in three patients with cirrhosis. Blood loss was relatively low for both groups. Although there were more postoperative complications among cirrhotics (38 vs. 13 %, P = 0.001), this was almost entirely due to a higher rate of minor (Clavien-Dindo I or II) complications. Liver-related morbidity, major complications, and mortality rates were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR is safe for selected patients with cirrhosis. The added complexity associated with the division of diseased liver parenchyma may be overcome with some form of technique modification, including more liberal use of precoagulation, portal triad clamping, or a hand-assist port.

Minimally Invasive Hepatic Surgery

This review provides an overview of the background and progress that has been made in minimally invasive liver surgery. The essential steps of minimally invasive right and left lobectomy as well as left lateral sectionectomy are reviewed. In addition, existing data regarding the feasibility and oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive hepatic resection for malignancy are discussed.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection: a systematic review and pooled analysis of minor and major hepatectomies

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery has been introduced to overcome the limitations of conventional laparoscopy. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the safety and feasibility for three subgroups of robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection: (i) minor resections of easily accessible segments: 2/3, 4B, 5, 6, (ii) minor resections of difficult located segments: 1, 4A, 7, 8 and (iii) major resections: ≥ 4 segments.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library.

RESULTS

Twelve observational, mostly retrospective studies reporting on 363 patients were included. Data were pooled and analyzed. For subgroup (i) (n = 81) the weighted mean operative time was 215 ± 65 min. One conversion (1%) to laparotomy was needed. Weighted mean operative time for subgroup (ii) (n = 17) was 220 ± 60 min. No conversions were needed. For subgroup (iii) (n = 99) the weighted mean operative time was 405 ± 100 min. In this subgroup 8 robotic procedures (8%) were converted to open surgery.

CONCLUSION

Data show that robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection is feasible in minor resections of all segments and major resections. Larger, prospective studies are warranted to compare the possible advantages of robot-assisted surgery with conventional laparoscopy and open surgery.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Experience based guidelines

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been progressively developed along the past two decades. Despite initial skepticism, improved operative results made laparoscopic approach incorporated to surgical practice and operations increased in frequency and complexity. Evidence supporting LLR comes from case-series, comparative studies and meta-analysis. Despite lack of level 1 evidence, the body of literature is stronger and existing data confirms the safety, feasibility and benefits of laparoscopic approach when compared to open resection. Indications for LLR do not differ from those for open surgery. They include benign and malignant (both primary and metastatic) tumors and living donor liver harvesting. Currently, resection of lesions located on anterolateral segments and left lateral sectionectomy are performed systematically by laparoscopy in hepatobiliary specialized centers. Resection of lesions located on posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8) and major liver resections were shown to be feasible but remain technically demanding procedures, which should be reserved to experienced surgeons. Hand-assisted and laparoscopy-assisted procedures appeared to increase the indications of minimally invasive liver surgery and are useful strategies applied to difficult and major resections. LLR proved to be safe for malignant lesions and offers some short-term advantages over open resection. Oncological results including resection margin status and long-term survival were not inferior to open resection. At present, surgical community expects high quality studies to base the already perceived better outcomes achieved by laparoscopy in major centers’ practice. Continuous surgical training, as well as new technologies should augment the application of laparoscopic liver surgery. Future applicability of new technologies such as robot assistance and image-guided surgery is still under investigation.

Pure Laparoscopic Left Hemihepatectomy for Hepatic Peribiliary Cysts with Biliary Intraepithelial Neoplasia

Introduction. Hepatic peribiliary cysts (HPCs) usually originate due to the cystic dilatation of the intrahepatic extramural peribiliary glands. We describe our rare experience of pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (PLLH) in a patient with HPCs accompanied by a component of biliary intraepithelial neoplasia (BilIN). Case Presentation. A 65-year-old man was referred for further investigation of mild hepatic dysfunction. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography showed dilatation of the left-sided intrahepatic bile duct, and biliary cytology showed class III cells. The patient was highly suspected of having left side-dominated cholangiocarcinoma and underwent PLLH. Microscopic findings revealed multiple cystic dilatations of the extramural peribiliary glands; hence, this lesion was diagnosed as HPCs. The resected intrahepatic bile duct showed that the normal ductal lumen comprised low columnar epithelia; however, front formation on the BilIN was observed in some parts of the intrahepatic bile duct, indicating that the BilIN coexisted with HPCs. Conclusion. We chose surgical therapy for this patient owing to the presence of some features of biliary malignancy. We employed noble PLLH as a minimally invasive procedure for this patient.

Liver cirrhosis grading Child-Pugh class B: a Goliath to challenge in laparoscopic liver resection?-prior experience and matched comparisons

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is highly difficult in the background of liver cirrhosis. In this case series, we aimed to summarize our prior experience of LH in liver cirrhosis grading Child-Pugh class B.

METHODS

In the LH database of Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital in Zhejiang, China, patients who were pathologically diagnosed with cirrhosis and graded as Child-Pugh class B or C were reviewed.

RESULTS

Five patients grading Child B were included. There was no Child C case in our LH database. For included cases, median blood loss (BL) was 800 (range, 240-1,000) mL, median operative time was 135 (range, 80-170) minutes, and median length of hospital stay was 9 (range, 7-15) days. Forty percent (2/5) of patients was converted to open. The postoperative complication (PC) rate was 20.0% (1/5). When these Child B cases were compared with Child A cases undergoing LH, there was no statistical significance in BL, complication rate, operative time, open rate and hospital stay (HS) (P>0.05). This finding was confirmed by two ways of matched comparisons (a 1:2 comparison based on age and gender, and a 1:1 propensity score matching).

CONCLUSIONS

Although relevant literatures had suggested feasibility of LH in cirrhotic cases grading Child A, this study was the first one to discuss the value of LH in Child B cases. Our prior experience showed that in selected patients, LH in Child B patients had the potential to be as safe as in Child A cases. The efficacy of LH in Child C patients needs further exploration.

Pure Laparoscopic Versus Open Left Lateral Sectionectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Single-Center Experience

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy has been proven to be a safe and effective treatment for liver lesions. However, most of the literatures only reported this treatment method on benign lesion or colorectal metastases. The data on long-term outcome of laparoscopic left lateral section resection in patients with HCC and cirrhosis are still limited. The aim of this study is to analyze the survival outcome of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy when compared to open approach in patients with HCCs.

METHOD

Between January 2004 and September 2014, 967 patients had primary HCC with hepatectomy performed. Twenty-four patients had undergone pure laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Twenty-nine patients with case-matched tumor characteristics and liver functions but received open left lateral sectionectomy for HCC were included for comparison.

RESULTS

Comparing laparoscopic group to open resection group, the median operation time was 190.5 versus 195 min (P = 0.734); the median blood loss was 100 versus 300 ml (P < 0.001). Hospital stay was 5 days in laparoscopic group versus 6 days in the open group (P = 0.057). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of complications (P = 0.495). The median survival in laparoscopic group was >115 months versus >125 months in the open group (P = 0.853).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy for HCC is a safe and simple procedure associated with less blood loss. The survival outcome is comparable with conventional open approach. It is becoming a more favorable treatment option even for patients with HCC and cirrhosis.

Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomy-Technique and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

With technological innovations especially newer parenchymal transection devices, improved understanding of hepatic anatomy facilitated by better imaging, and reconstructions along with experiences gained from advanced minimal invasive procedures, laparoscopic liver surgery is gaining momentum with more than 5300 reported cases worldwide. Most of the published literature comprises nonanatomical and segmental resections with only few case series having major hepatic resections performed by minimally invasive approach. Aim of this article is to share our technique and experience of total laparoscopic major hepatectomy.

METHODS

It is a retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained database of 56 patients, who underwent laparoscopic major hepatectomy for various indications during 2001 to 2013.

RESULTS

Of 56 patients operated, 37 had malignant disease and 19 had benign lesions with mean size of 6.0 ± 2.8 cm. Thirty-four patients underwent right hepatectomy and 22 left with mean age of 54.8 ± 15.3 years. Mean operating time was 227.4 ± 51.8 min with mean blood loss 265.5 ± 143.4 ml and transfusion needed in 10.7 %. Pringle's maneuver was used in 19.6 % with mean occlusion time of 34.0 ± 11.4 min. Liver-specific complications were observed in 12.5 % and overall complications in 19.6 %. Mean resection margin length in malignant lesions was 2.1 ± 0.9 cm, with <1 cm margin noted in 5.4 %. Median hospital stay was 8 days (6-29) with readmission rate of 8.9 %, re-intervention rate of 5.3 % and 90 days mortality of 1.7 %.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic major liver resection is a formidable task. It requires considerable expertise in both, advanced laparoscopy, and liver surgery. It can be feasible, safe, and oncologically adequate in well-selected cases in experience hands.

Laparoscopy After Liver Transplant: Result of an Initial Series

There are few reports about laparoscopic approach after liver transplantation (LT). The aim of this paper is to analyze in terms of feasibility and therapeutic effectiveness an initial experience with laparoscopy in patients who have had a liver transplantation.

METHODS

Laparoscopic procedures were divided into "early" and "late" laparoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 10 laparoscopic procedures after LT were performed in 9 patients: 3 early and 7 late. The early laparoscopic procedures were performed in 3 patients who had a torpid evolution in their liver transplant: 2 were diagnostic only and 1 was also therapeutic. There were no intraoperative events or conversions. We recorded 2 complications. In 7 patients a late laparoscopy was performed: 4 in the upper abdomen and 3 in the lower abdomen. Of the 4 in the upper abdomen, 3 were liver procedures and 1 was in the transverse colon, on the other side; in addition, 2 laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs and 1 laparoscopic appendectomy also were performed. None of these 7 cases was converted, and there were no intraoperative events.

CONCLUSIONS

The early postoperative period, in critically ill patients diagnostic and eventually therapeutic laparoscopy was feasible and effective in our cases. Late laparoscopy in the upper abdomen is difficult due to adhesions and adds to the risk of poor graft function, but was feasible for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. Late laparoscopy in the lower abdomen with good graft function has the same safety and efficacy as those performed on nontransplanted patients.

The learning curve of laparoscopic liver resection after the Louisville statement 2008: Will it be more effective and smooth?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been proven to be feasible and safe. However, it is a difficult and complex procedure with a steep learning curve. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve of LLR at our institutions since 2008.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-six consecutive LLRs were included from May 2008 to December 2014. Patient characteristics, operative data, and surgical outcomes were collected prospectively and analyzed.

RESULTS

The median tumor size was 25 mm (range 5-90 mm), and 96 % of the resected tumors were malignant. 41.3 % (52/126) of patients had pathologically proven liver cirrhosis. The median operation time was 216 min (range 40-602 min) with a median blood loss of 100 ml (range 20-2300 ml). The median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range 2-10 days). Six major postoperative complications occurred in this series, and there was no 90-day postoperative mortality. Regarding the incidence of major operative events including operation time longer than 300 min, perioperative blood loss above 500 ml, and major postoperative complications, the learning curve [as evaluated by the cumulative sum (CUSUM) technique] showed its first reverse after 22 cases. The indication of laparoscopic resection in this series extended after 60 cases to include tumors located in difficult locations (segments 4a, 7, 8) and major hepatectomy. CUSUM showed that the incidence of major operative events proceeded to increase again, and the second reverse was noted after an additional 40 cases of experience. Location of the tumor in a difficult area emerged as a significant predictor of major operative events.

CONCLUSIONS

In carefully selected patients, CUSUM analysis showed 22 cases were needed to overcome the learning curve for minor LLR.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy by curettage and aspiration: a report of 855 cases

BACKGROUND

In 1998, the technique of laparoscopic hepatectomy by curettage and aspiration was developed and a special instrument, laparoscopic multifunctional operative dissector (LPMOD), was designed for this procedure. In the past 17 years, this procedure was developed gradually and had become the routine procedure for laparoscopic hepatectomy in local area. This paper is to report results of 17-year practice of this procedure.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy from August 1998 to March 2015 were reviewed. Hepatectomies were performed using the technique of laparoscopic hepatectomy by curettage and aspiration. By using the LPMOD, liver parenchyma was crashed and aspirated immediately and the intrahepatic ducts and small vessels were preserved and were safely dissected for ligation. Laparoscopic selective hepatic flow occlusion was performed routinely for hemi-hepatectomies to control intraoperative blood loss.

RESULTS

A total of 855 cases underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy by curettage and aspiration. No perioperative death, 105 patients were converted to open operation, and 84 of them were converted before liver transection without any emergency. Postoperative bleeding occurred in three patients (0.4 %), and bile leakage occurred in seven patients (0.8 %).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic hepatectomy by curettage and aspiration is a safe procedure for liver resection with acceptable morbidity and mortality.

Laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy: a review of current status

Over the last two decades, laparoscopic surgery has been adopted in various surgical fields. Its advantages of reduced blood loss, reduced postoperative morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and excellent cosmetic outcome compared with conventional open surgery are well validated. In comparison with other abdominal organs, laparoscopic hepatectomy has developed relatively slowly due to the potential for massive bleeding, technical difficulties and a protracted learning curve. Furthermore, applications to liver graft procurement in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have been delayed significantly due to concerns about donor safety, graft outcome and the need for expertise in both laparoscopic liver surgery and LDLT. Now, laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy in adult-to-pediatric LDLT is considered the standard of care in some experienced centers. Currently, the shift in application has been towards left lobe and right lobe graft procurement in adult LDLT from left lateral section in pediatric LDLT. However, the number of cases is too small to validate the safety and reproducibility. The most important concern in LDLT is donor safety. Even though a few studies reported the technical feasibility and comparable outcomes to conventional open surgery, careful validating through larger sample sized studies is needed to achieve standardization and wide application.

Laparoscopic Transabdominal With Transdiaphragmatic Access Improves Resection of Difficult Posterosuperior Liver Lesions

OBJECTIVE

We describe the technical details and evaluate the safety, feasibility, and usefulness of a combined lateral and abdominal (CLA) approach for laparoscopic resection of liver segments 7 and 8.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection of lesions in the posterosuperior area of segments 7 and 8 is technically challenging, and currently there is no standardized laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

Through review of a prospectively maintained database, we identified 44 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of lesions in segment 7 or 8. Twenty-five patients required the CLA approach because their lesions were more posterosuperior and intraparenchymal; 19 patients underwent resection with a regular abdominal-only approach of more accessible anteroinferior lesions. We reviewed operative details and video footage of these operations and compared the outcomes of the 2 groups.

RESULTS

In the group treated with the CLA approach, deep location was more frequent (88% vs 42%; P = 0.035), median tumor diameter was larger (24.5 mm vs 15 mm; P = 0.114), and the median weight of the excised parenchyma was greater (56.5 g vs 23 g; P = 0.093). Median operative time was longer in the CLA approach group (217.5 minutes vs 165 minutes; P = 0.046), but blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, surgical margin status, morbidity, and mortality were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CLA approach permits safe laparoscopic resection of lesions in the posterosuperior area of segments 7 and 8, allowing surgeons to overcome the difficulties of limited visualization and access to the target lesions.

Laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases

Background

Despite the gradual diffusion of laparoscopic liver resection, the feasibility and results of laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) for bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have not been described frequently. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic TSH for bilobar CRLM.

Methods

All patients eligible for laparoscopic TSH among those treated for bilobar CRLM from 2000 to 2013 were included. Demographics, tumour characteristics, surgical procedures, and short- and long-term outcomes were analysed.

Results

Laparoscopic TSH was planned in 34 patients with bilobar CRLM, representing 17·2 per cent of all 198 patients treated for bilobar CRLM. Thirty patients received preoperative chemotherapy, and 20 had portal vein occlusion to increase the volume of the remnant liver. Laparoscopic resection of the primary colorectal tumour was integrated within the first-stage hepatectomy in 11 patients. After a median interval of 3·1 months, 26 patients subsequently had a successful laparoscopic second-stage hepatectomy, including 18 laparoscopic right or extended right hepatectomies. The mortality rate for both stages was 3 per cent (1 of 34), and the overall morbidity rate for the first and second stages was 50 per cent (17 of 34) and 54 per cent (14 of 26) respectively. Mean length of hospital stay was 6·1 and 9·0 days respectively. With a median follow-up of 37·8 (range 6–129) months, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates in patients who completed TSH were 78 and 41 per cent respectively. The 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 26 and 13 per cent respectively.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic TSH for bilobar CRLM is safe and does not jeopardize long-term outcomes in selected patients.

Video assisted resections. Increasing access to minimally invasive liver surgery?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate perioperative outcomes, safety and feasibility of video-assisted resection for primary and secondary liver lesions.

METHODS

From a prospective database, we analyzed the perioperative results (up to 90 days) of 25 consecutive patients undergoing video-assisted resections in the period between June 2007 and June 2013.

RESULTS

The mean age was 53.4 years (23-73) and 16 (64%) patients were female. Of the total, 84% were suffering from malignant diseases. We performed 33 resections (1 to 4 nodules per patient). The procedures performed were non-anatomical resections (n = 26), segmentectomy (n = 1), 2/3 bisegmentectomy (n = 1), 6/7 bisegmentectomy (n = 1), left hepatectomy (n = 2) and right hepatectomy (n = 2). The procedures contemplated postero-superior segments in 66.7%, requiring multiple or larger resections. The average operating time was 226 minutes (80-420), and anesthesia time, 360 minutes (200-630). The average size of resected nodes was 3.2 cm (0.8 to 10) and the surgical margins were free in all the analyzed specimens. Eight percent of patients needed blood transfusion and no case was converted to open surgery. The length of stay was 6.5 days (3-16). Postoperative complications occurred in 20% of patients, with no perioperative mortality.

CONCLUSION

The video-assisted liver resection is feasible and safe and should be part of the liver surgeon armamentarium for resection of primary and secondary liver lesions.

Single-port and multi-port laparoscopic left lateral liver sectionectomy for treating benign liver diseases: a prospective, randomized, controlled study

BACKGROUND

The use of single-port laparoscopy for left-lateral liver sectionectomy (LLLS) has been reported in the literature, but the effectiveness and safety of LLLS has not been validated in randomized, controlled trials. This prospective randomized controlled trial compared the effectiveness and safety of single-port and multi-port laparoscopic LLLS for the surgical treatment of benign liver disease.

METHODS

Altogether, 38 patients aged 17-65 years (16 men, 22 women) with benign liver diseases were hospitalized for elective laparoscopic LLLS between January 2010 and December 2012. Patients were randomly assigned to either single-port (n = 19) or multi-port (n = 19) laparoscopic LLLS. Main outcome measures were operative time, volume of intraoperative blood loss, complication rates, and postoperative hospitalization.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparable. Single-port and multi-port laparoscopies were successfully completed in all but one patient (1/19, 5.3 %) who required conversion from a single-port to a multi-port procedure. The two groups had similar mean operative times and volumes of intraoperative blood loss. There were no clinically significant postoperative complications or deaths. The single-port group had a significantly shorter postoperative hospitalization than the multi-port group (2.5 ± 1.7 vs. 4.0 ± 2.1 days; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-port laparoscopic LLLS is a technically feasible, effective, safe alternative to multi-port laparoscopy for the treatment of benign liver diseases in cautiously selected patients.