Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: Case-matched study with propensity score matching

Highlights of the Third Expert Forum of Asia-Pacific Laparoscopic Hepatectomy; Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgeons of Asia (ELSA) Visionary Summit 2017

The application of laparoscopy for liver surgery is rapidly increasing and the past few years have demonstrated a shift in paradigm with a trend towards more extended and complex resections. The development of instruments and technical refinements with the effective use of magnified caudal laparoscopic views have contributed to the ability to overcome the limitation of laparoscopic liver resection. The Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgeons of Asia (ELSA) Visionary Summit 2017 and the 3^rd Expert Forum of Asia-Pacific Laparoscopic Hepatectomy organized hepatobiliary pancreatic sessions in order to exchange surgical tips and tricks and discuss the current status and future perspectives of laparoscopic hepatectomy. This report summarizes the oral presentations given at the 3^rd Expert Forum of Asia-Pacific Laparoscopic Hepatectomy.

Correlation between Resection Margin and Disease Recurrence with a Restricted Cubic Spline Model in Patients with Resected Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The relationship between resection margin (RM) and recurrence of resected hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is unclear.

METHODS

We reviewed clinical data for 419 patients with HCC. The oncologic outcomes were compared between 2 groups of patients classified according to the inflexion point of the restricted cubic spline plot.

RESULTS

The patients were divided according to an RM of <1 cm (n = 233; narrow RM group) or ≥1 cm (n = 186; wide RM group). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate was lower (34.8 vs. 43.8%, p = 0.042) and recurrence near the resection site was more frequent (4.7 vs. 0%, p = 0.010) in the narrow RM group. Patients with multiple lesions, or prior transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) were excluded from subgroup analyses. In patients with a 2-5 cm HCC, the 5-year RFS was greater in the wide RM group (54.4 vs. 32.5%, p = 0.036). Narrow RM (hazard ratio 1.750, 95% CI 1.029-2.976, p = 0.039) was independently associated with disease recurrence.

CONCLUSION

In patients with a single 2-5 cm HCC without prior TACE/RFA, an RM of ≥1 cm was associated with lower risk of recurrence after liver resection.

A Match-Pair Analysis of Open Versus Laparoscopic Liver Surgery

Background and Objectives:

In addition to general advantages of laparoscopic over open surgery, such as better cosmesis and faster recovery, laparoscopic liver surgery offers specific advantages. Improved liver function and potentially earlier postoperative oncologic treatment are suggested by the literature as benefits of laparoscopic over open liver surgery. The purpose of this analysis was to analyze the outcomes of laparoscopic liver surgery in our department.

Methods:

All laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) performed from January 2011 through July 2016 were identified from the institutional database and matched 1:2 to open liver resections (OLRs). Data were analyzed regarding perioperative outcome, and significance was set at P < .05.

Results:

Of 1525 liver resections, 120 patients were included in this analysis. Forty resections were performed laparoscopically. Patients in the LLR group more often had benign tumors. No patient died after LLR, but 2 required conversion to open surgery (5%) because of bleeding. Blood loss (200 vs 500 mL, P < .001) was less and hospital stay (6 vs. 7 days, P = .001) shorter after LLR. Iwate score, operating time, and the size of the resection margins did not differ between the groups. Iwate score correlated with operative time (P = .027).

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic liver surgery was safe, and several advantages over open surgery were confirmed in our series.

Laparoscopic versus open treatment of gallbladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

The aim of this review was to evaluate the effect of laparoscopic surgery on the treatment of patients with gallbladder cancer (GBC).

Methods:

A comprehensive search of Medline and Cochrane Library was conducted to identify relevant articles. A meta-analysis was subsequently performed.

Results:

A total of 20 studies including 1217 patients met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis showed that the 5-year survival rate was significant higher in laparoscopic group than open group (48.4% vs. 38.5%; odds ratio [OR], 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22–2.19; P = 0.001). Although the scar recurrence rate was significant higher in laparoscopic group than open group (7.1% vs. 4.0%; OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.11–3.96; P = 0.02), the overall recurrence rates between two groups were not significant different (44.8% vs. 42.2%; OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.64–1.14; P = 0.29). In addition, compared with open extended cholecystectomy (EC), laparoscopic EC (LEC) was associated with less intraoperative blood loss, shorter post-operative hospital stays and insignificant less complication rate (10.0% vs. 18.3%; OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.15–1.73; P = 0.28).

Conclusion:

Laparoscopic simple cholecystectomy does not lead to a worse prognosis when applied on patients with GBC. LEC can be performed in specialised expert centres on elective patients.

Outcomes of major laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

To compare the surgical outcomes of major laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 177 patients who underwent major liver resection for HCC between January 2004 and June 2015. We divided the 177 patients into two groups according to the type of procedure: major LLR (LLR group; n = 67) and major OLR (OLR group; n = 110).

RESULTS

Procedures in the LLR group were right hepatectomy (30 patients), right posterior sectionectomy (28), left hepatectomy (11), right anterior sectionectomy (6), extended right hepatectomy (6), and central bisectionectomy (2). Tumor size was greater in the OLR group than in the LLR group (6.3 ± 3.8 vs 4.1 ± 2.4 cm; P = 0.016). The mean indocyanine green retention rate at 15 min (P = 0.698) and serum α-fetoprotein (P = 0.186) were similar in both groups. The mean operation time was longer in the LLR group (416.6 ± 166.9 vs 332.5 ± 105.4 min; P = 0.002). Blood loss (P = 0.319), transfusion rate (P = 0.260), and R0 rate (P = 0.255) were similar in both groups. Hospital stay was shorter (11.3 ± 8.3 vs. 18 ± 21.4 days; P = 0.007) and the complication rate was lower (20.5% vs. 38.7%; P = 0.005) in the LLR group. The 5-year overall survival (77.3% vs 60.2%; P = 0.087) and disease-free survival (50.8% vs 40.1%; P = 0.139) rates were comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Major LLR of HCC is feasible and oncologically safe when performed by experienced surgeons. Further refinements of the surgical technique are needed to reduce operation time.

Evolution of Laparoscopic Liver Surgery from Innovation to Implementation to Mastery: Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes of 2,238 Patients from 4 European Specialized Centers

BACKGROUND

First seen as an innovation for select patients, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has evolved since its introduction, resulting in worldwide use. Despite this, it is still limited mainly to referral centers. The aim of this study was to evaluate a large cohort undergoing LLR from 2000 to 2015, focusing on the technical approaches, perioperative and oncologic outcomes, and evolution of practice over time.

STUDY DESIGN

The demographics and indications, intraoperative, perioperative, and oncologic outcomes of 2,238 patients were evaluated. Trends in practice and outcomes over time were assessed.

RESULTS

The percentage of LLR performed yearly has increased from 5% in 2000 to 43% in 2015. Pure laparoscopy was used in 98.3% of cases. Wedge resections were the most common operation; they were predominant at the beginning of LLR and then decreased and remained steady at approximately 53%. Major hepatectomies were initially uncommon, then increased and reached a stable level at approximately 16%. Overall, 410 patients underwent resection in the posterosuperior segments; these were more frequent with time, and the highest percentage was in 2015 (26%). Blood loss, operative time, and conversion rate improved significantly with time. The 5-year overall survival rates were 73% and 54% for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), respectively. The 5-year, recurrence-free survival rates were 50% and 37% for HCC and CRLM, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Since laparoscopy was introduced, a long implementation process has been necessary to allow for standardization and improvement in surgical care, mastery of the technique, and the ability to obtain good perioperative results with safe oncologic outcomes.

Comparison of acute kidney injury between open and laparoscopic liver resection: Propensity score analysis

The inflammatory response has been shown to be a major contributor to acute kidney injury. Considering that laparoscopic surgery is beneficial in reducing the inflammatory response, we compared the incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury between laparoscopic liver resection and open liver resection. Among 1173 patients who underwent liver resection surgery, 222 of 926 patients who underwent open liver resection were matched with 222 of 247 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection, by using propensity score analysis. The incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury assessed according to the creatinine criteria of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes definition was compared between those 1:1 matched groups. A total 77 (6.6%) cases of postoperative acute kidney injury occurred. Before matching, the incidence of acute kidney injury after laparoscopic liver resection was significantly lower than that after open liver resection [1.6% (4/247) vs. 7.9% (73/926), P < 0.001]. After 1:1 matching, the incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury was still significantly lower after laparoscopic liver resection than after open liver resection [1.8% (4/222) vs. 6.3% (14/222), P = 0.008; odds ratio 0.273, 95% confidence interval 0.088-0.842, P = 0.024]. The postoperative inflammatory marker was also lower in laparoscopic liver resection than in open liver resection in matched set data (white blood cell count 12.7 ± 4.0 × 103/μL vs. 14.9 ± 3.9 × 103/μL, P < 0.001). Our findings suggest that the laparoscopic technique, by decreasing the inflammatory response, may reduce the occurrence of postoperative acute kidney injury during liver resection surgery.

Laparoscopic liver resection using a monopolar soft-coagulation device to provide maximum intraoperative bleeding control for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The popularity of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is spreading, worldwide, because the intraoperative blood loss is less than for open hepatectomy and it is associated with a shorter hospitalization period [1-6]. During LLR, intraoperative hemostasis is difficult to achieve, unlike during laparotomy where bleeding can be stopped instantly [7-10]. Our LLR method for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) includes maximal control of intraoperative bleeding using a monopolar soft-coagulation device. Although we use a monopolar soft-coagulation device to control bleeding during LLR, while coagulating the thin blood vessels, we also developed a maneuver (the hepatocyte crush method: HeCM) to allow liver transection to progress while liver parenchymal cells are being crushed.

METHOD

Between January 2008 and March 2016, we performed total LLR on 150 hepatocellular carcinoma patients (144 partial liver resections and six left lateral sectionectomies) using the maneuver shown in the video.

RESULTS

The patients had Child-Pugh Scores of grade A (n = 100), B (42), or C (n = 8) and the localizations of tumor were segment (S) 1(n = 7), S2 (19), S3 (23), S4 (28), S5 (17), S6 (26), S8 (17), and S8 (29). The median blood loss was 30 (range 0-490) g during a median surgical time of 207 (range 127-468) min. One patient required conversion to a laparotomy due to the presence of severe adhesions; none of the patients required conversion due to intraoperative hemorrhage. The peak aspartate aminotransferase (AST) level was 320 (range 57-1964) IU/L. Although some patients showed high AST levels, none showed signs of hepatic failure. The median postoperative hospital stay duration was 6 (range 3-21) days. Postoperative complications occurred in seven cases (4.7%), including intraabdominal abscesses (n = 2), wound infections (2), intraabdominal hemorrhage (1), bile duct stricture (1), and umbilical hernia (1). The mortality was zero.

CONCLUSION

HeCM, combined with the use of a monopolar soft-coagulation device, is a good technique for reducing bleeding during liver resection in patients with HCC.

Laparoscopic liver resection of hepatocellular carcinoma located in segments 7 or 8

BACKGROUND

Many centers consider hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in segments 7 or 8 to be unsuitable for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). We evaluated the safety of LLR of HCC in segments 7 or 8 following the introduction of new laparoscopic techniques.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 104 patients who underwent LLR (n = 46) or open liver resection (OLR) (n = 58) for HCC located in segments 7 or 8 between October 2004 and June 2015. The LLR group was subdivided into two subgroups according to whether LLR was performed before (Lap1; n = 29) or after (Lap2; n = 17) the introduction of the Pringle maneuver, intercostal trocars, and semi-lateral patient positioning.

RESULTS

Non-anatomical resection was more frequent (63.0 vs. 29.3%; P < 0.001) and tumor size was smaller (2.8 vs. 4.7 cm; P < 0.001) in the LLR group than in the OLR group. Blood transfusion (P = 0.526), operation time (P = 0.267), postoperative complications (P = 0.051), and resection margin (P = 0.705) were similar in both groups. LLR was associated with less blood loss (550 vs. 700 ml, P = 0.030) and shorter hospital stay (8 vs. 10 days; P = 0.001). The 3-year overall (90.2 vs. 81.2%, P = 0.096) and disease-free survival (15.1 vs. 12.1%; P = 0.857) rates were similar in both groups. The Lap2 group has less blood loss (230 vs. 500 ml; P = 0.005) and shorter hospital stay (7 vs. 9 days; P = 0.038) compared with the Lap1 group.

CONCLUSION

LLR can be safely performed for HCC located in segments 7 or 8 with recent improvements in surgical techniques and accumulated experience.

Prediction of surgical outcomes of laparoscopic liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma by defining surgical difficulty

BACKGROUND

Several classification systems for assessing the surgical difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) have been proposed. We evaluated three current classification systems, including traditional Major/Minor Classification, Complexity Classification, and the Difficulty Scoring System for predicting the surgical outcomes after LLR.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data of 301 patients who underwent LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma between March 1, 2004 and June 30, 2015. We compared the intraoperative, pathologic, and postoperative outcomes according to the three classifications. We also compared the prognostic value of the three classifications using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

The Major/Minor Classification, Complexity Classification, and the Difficulty Scoring System efficiently differentiated surgical difficulty in terms of blood loss (P = 0.001, P = 0.009, and P < 0.001, respectively) and operation time (all P < 0.001). Regarding intraoperative outcomes, the Difficulty Scoring System and Complexity Classification successfully differentiated the transfusion rate (P = 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). However, only the Complexity Classification adequately predicted severe postoperative complications (P = 0.032), the severity of complications (P < 0.001), and the length of hospital stay (P = 0.005). In ROC curve analysis, the Complexity Classification (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.611) outperformed the Major/Minor Classification (AUC = 0.544) and the Difficulty Scoring System (AUC = 0.530) for predicting severe postoperative complications. None of the classification systems predicted recurrence or patient survival.

CONCLUSION

The Complexity Classification was superior to the other methods for assessing surgical difficulty and predicting complications after LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Association of Remnant Liver Ischemia With Early Recurrence and Poor Survival After Liver Resection in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Importance

The remnant liver after hepatectomy may have inadequate blood supply, especially following nonanatomical resection or vascular damage.

Objective

To evaluate whether remnant liver ischemia (RLI) may have an adverse effect on long-term survival and morbidity after liver resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This study was a retrospective analysis at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Remnant liver ischemia was graded on postoperative computed tomographic scans in 328 patients who underwent hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2013.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Remnant liver ischemia was defined as reduced or absent contrast enhancement during the venous phase. Remnant liver ischemia was classified as minimal (none or marginal) or severe (partial, segmental, or necrotic).

Results

Among 328 patients (252 male and 76 female; age range, 26-83 years [mean age, 58.2 years]), radiologic signs of severe RLI were found in 98 patients (29.9%), of whom 63, 16, and 19 had partial, segmental, or necrotic RLI, respectively. These patients experienced more complications and longer hospital stay than patients with minimal RLI. Preoperative history of transarterial embolization (odds ratio [OR], 1.77; 95% CI, 1.02-3.03; P = .04), use of the Pringle maneuver (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.08-3.58; P = .03), and longer operative time (OR, 1.003; 95% CI, 1.002-1.005; P < .001) were independent risk factors for severe RLI. Early recurrence rates within 6 (60.2% vs 9.6%) or 12 (79.6% vs 18.7%) months after hepatectomy were higher in patients with severe RLI than in patients without RLI (P < .001). Severe remnant liver ischemia was an independent risk factor for overall survival (OR, 6.98; 95% CI, 4.27-11.43; P < .001) and disease-free survival (OR, 5.15; 95% CI, 3.62-7.35; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Preventive management and technical refinements in hepatectomy are important to decrease the risk of RLI and to improve survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Prospective registry for laparoscopic liver resection

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been widely performed throughout the world. Although prospective registry studies to clarify the safety of LLR have been feasible, no prior multicenter prospective study has addressed this issue. We have conducted a multicenter prospective cohort study to reveal the current status of LLR in Japan.

METHODS

From April 2015 to March 2016, candidates for LLR were preoperatively enrolled at 12 institutions. The primary end-point was surgical safety, which was evaluated based on surgical factors and on short-term and midterm outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients were enrolled. Planned laparoscopic procedures included 96 pure laparoscopies, 1 hand-assisted laparoscopy, and 5 hybrid techniques. Non-anatomical partial resection or left lateral sectionectomy were performed in almost all cases. The median duration of surgery was 221 min. The median blood loss was 80.5 mL. Conversion was required for four patients (3.9%). The 90-day postoperative morbidities with grades more severe than II in the Clavien-Dindo classification were observed in six patients (5.9%). The median postoperative hospital stay was 9.5 days. No cases involved reoperation or mortality.

CONCLUSION

Minor resection of LLR has been performed safely. To ensure the safe dissemination of LLR, including for major resection, a larger multicenter prospective study is required.

[Laparoscopic liver resection]

Laparoscopic liver surgery has become an established procedure in the treatment of liver tumors. Due to its short-term and long-term advantages, the number of centers with experience in laparoscopic liver surgery has greatly increased in the last few years. The complexity of the interventions performed has nearly reached the level of open surgery. This article describes the importance of laparoscopic hepatic surgery and discusses the evidence for the procedure. In addition, the indications for the most frequently resected tumors, metastases of colorectal cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma are explained together with important aspects of certain tumor localizations. In addition, the authors explain the technical aspects of the surgical technique and give an overview on new developments. To illustrate the possibilities of laparoscopic liver surgery, a video of a complete laparoscopically performed associating liver partition and portal vein ligation (ALPPS) procedure is available as supplementary material.

Hepatic resection for primary and secondary liver malignancies

Liver surgery has become the standard treatment of primary liver cancer and liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Also, patients with non-colorectal liver metastases are increasingly offered surgery due to the low morbidity and excellent long-term results. The evolution of two-stage procedures helps to increase resectability. Also, laparoscopic and robotic liver surgery are constantly developed.

Left jackknife position: a novel position for laparoscopic hepatectomy

Background

Laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in segment VI, VII, or VIII of the liver is usually difficult because of poor operative exposure, due to the unique anatomical structure. In this study, we evaluated the practice of laparoscopic hepatectomy with the left jackknife position for patients with HCC located in segment VI, VII, or VIII.

Methods

A total of 10 patients were enrolled to undergo laparoscopic hepatectomy with the left jackknife position. Tumors located in segment VI, VII, or VIII were assessed by preoperative dynamic computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative fasting time, postoperative drainage time, major postoperative complications, and duration of postoperative hospital stay were recorded.

Results

All surgeries were successfully completed. None of the patients required conversion to open surgery during the procedure, and no serious postoperative complications were observed. The median tumor size was 31 mm (range 23–41 mm) in diameter, the mean operation time was 166 ± 38 min, the mean intraoperative blood loss was 220 ± 135 mL, and the median postoperative hospital stay was 4 days (range 2–7 days).

Conclusions

For HCC located in segment VI, VII, or VIII, laparoscopic hepatectomy with this novel position—the left jackknife position—is safe and effective during tumor resection by exposing a sufficient operating field.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02809287

Meta-analysis of laparoscopic vs open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) are widely accepted as safe and effective procedures for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the hands of experienced surgeons. The efficacy and extent of benefits of pure as well as hand-assisted laparoscopic and laparoscopy-assisted liver resection over open liver resection (OLR) have been investigated by numerous studies during the last 10 years. The aim of our meta-analysis is to investigate the effect of LLR in short- and long-term outcomes compared to OLR in patients operated for HCC. A total of 5203 patients from forty-four studies were included in our meta-analysis reporting for short- and long-term results for both LLR and OLR for HCC. Among them, 1830 underwent pure laparoscopic hepatectomy, 282 underwent pure laparoscopic or hand-assisted laparoscopic or laparoscopy-assisted hepatectomy, and 3091 were operated through open approach. LLRs were found to be significantly associated with lower blood loss, need for blood transfusion, successful achievement of R0 resection as well as wider resection margin, shorter hospital stay, lower morbidity and 30-day mortality rates. Operative time, tumor recurrence, 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival as well as 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival were not found different between the groups. This meta-analysis clearly demonstrates the superiority of laparoscopic resection over the open approach for patients with small HCC.

Is laparoscopic hepatectomy superior to open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma?

The low perioperative morbidity and shorter hospital stay associated with laparoscopic hepatectomy have made it an often-used option at many liver centers, despite the fact that many patients with hepatocellular carcinoma have cirrhosis, which makes the procedure more difficult and dangerous. Type of surgical procedure proves not to be a primary risk factor for poor outcomes after hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, the available evidence clearly shows that laparoscopic hepatectomy is an effective alternative to the open procedure for patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma, even in the presence of cirrhosis. Whether the same is true for patients with intermediate or advanced disease is less clear, since laparoscopic major hepatectomy remains a technically demanding procedure.

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) has now become standard practice. However, published series are small and retrospective. The aim was to compare at a national level the use and short-term outcome of laparoscopic and open LLS.

METHODS

National hospital discharge databases were screened to identify all adult patients who had undergone elective LLS in France between 2007 and 2012. Outcome measurements included blood transfusion, severe morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay. The independent influence of the laparoscopic approach on these outcomes was tested overall and after stratifying for the indication (benign condition, primary malignancy, liver metastasis).

RESULTS

Over the 6-year study period, 2198 patients underwent LLS, accounting for 6.9% of all elective liver resections. Some 28.5% of LLS procedures were performed laparoscopically. Among hospitals in which LLS was carried out, 33.2% of procedures were done laparoscopically (median 2 laparoscopic LLS resections per year). The laparoscopic approach was independently associated with a shorter length of hospital stay irrespective of the indication, and a lower transfusion rate in patients with benign condition or primary malignancy.

CONCLUSION

LLS is seldom performed and the laparoscopic approach has not been adopted widely. The potential benefit of laparoscopic LLS varies according to the indication.

Laparoscopy-Assisted versus Open Hepatectomy for Live Liver Donor: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of laparoscopy-assisted living donor hepatectomy (LADH) in comparison with open living donor hepatectomy (ODH) for liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND

LADH is becoming increasingly common for living donor liver transplant around the world. We aim to determine the efficacy of LADH and compare it with ODH.

METHODS

A systematic search on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted in May 2017.

RESULTS

Nine studies were suitable for this analysis, involving 979 patients. LADH seemed to be associated with increased operation time (WMD = 24.85 min; 95% CI: -3.01~52.78, P = 0.08), less intraoperative blood loss (WMD = -59.92 ml; 95% CI: -94.58~-25.27, P = 0.0007), similar hospital stays (WMD = -0.47 d; 95% CI: -1.78~0.83, P = 0.47), less postoperative complications (RR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.51~0.94, P = 0.02), less analgesic use (SMD = -0.22; 95% CI: -0.44~-0.11, P = 0.04), similar transfusion rates (RR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.24~3.12, P = 0.82), and similar graft weights (WMD = 7.31 g; 95% CI: -23.45~38.07, P = 0.64).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that LADH is a safe and effective technique and, when compared to ODH.

Laparoscopic Total Caudate Lobectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Caudate lobe is located in the deep dorsal area of the liver between the portal triad and the inferior vena cava (IVC). Torrential bleeding can occur from the IVC and short hepatic veins during dissection. Isolated total caudate lobe resection is still rare and technically demanding. We herein present a video on the technical aspect of laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy.

METHOD

A 61-year-old woman was admitted for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma detected on imaging. She had history of multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma in July 2015 and underwent open cholecystectomy, segment 6 and segment 8 tumorectomy. Ten months later, the computed tomography scan and magnetic resonance imaging showed a 1 cm arterial enhancing lesion in segment I (S1) with no other foci of recurrence. Laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy was contemplated.

RESULTS

The operative time was 270 minutes. The intraoperative blood loss was 200 mL and blood transfusion was not necessary. The patient was discharged on the fourth postoperative day without any complications.

CONCLUSION

This report showed the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy. Nonetheless, it is a technically demanding procedure. It should be performed in carefully selected patients and by experienced hepatobiliary surgeons proficient in laparoscopic liver resection.

Current Technical Issues for Surgery of Primary Liver Cancer

Primary liver cancer is the fifth most common cancer worldwide. Apart from liver transplantation, surgical resection has been accepted as the effective local treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), one of the most common primary liver cancers. Recent technological innovations including navigation technology and intraoperative real-time fluorescence guidance have been utilized for liver resections in clinical practice. With respect to liver resection techniques, the laparoscopic approach has been increasingly gaining popularity as one of the minimally-invasive treatments of HCC. These technological innovations and technical advancements are expected to further improve the safety and efficacy of liver resections.

The need for organization of laparoscopic liver resection

In this article, we present the rationale for creating a new society aiming at organizing laparoscopic liver surgery. It has been named International Laparoscopic Liver Society (ILLS). Its main mission is to facilitate the diffusion and education of laparoscopic liver resection for meaningful improvements in patient care. This will include organization of a biannual congress dedicated to laparoscopic liver resection, coordination of international registries, helping in the education of surgeons wishing to learn these techniques including travel grants, provide a website serving as a forum supporting collaboration between surgeons interested in the advancement of laparoscopic liver resection techniques (http://www.ills.global/). ILLS aims at working in collaboration with existing HPB societies.

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.

Review of 103 Cases of Laparoscopic Repeat Liver Resection for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) has been shown in small retrospective studies to be a safe and effective treatment for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) in selected patients. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the current literature to determine the safety, feasibility, and oncologic integrity of LRLR for rHCC.

METHODS

A computerized search of the PubMed database was performed for all English language studies evaluating LRLR for HCC from January 1, 2005 to March 31, 2016.

RESULTS

Ten studies reporting on 103 patients were included in this review. 30/51 (58.5%) patients had liver cirrhosis. In 66/95 (69.5%) patients, the index surgery was an open resection and this was a major hepatectomy in 8/49 (16.3%) patients. In 17/72 (23.6%) patients, LRLR was performed for tumors in the posterosuperior segments and in 21/60 (35%) for ipsilateral HCC recurrence. The median tumor size of rHCC ranged from 17-40 mm and 8/69 (11.6%) LRLR were for multifocal rHCC. In 100/103 (97%) patients LRLR was attempted via pure laparoscopy and 2 (1.9%) required open conversion. Median operation time of LRLR ranged from 73-343 minutes and the median blood loss ranged from 50 to 297 mL. The reported postoperative morbidity was 24/97 (24.7%) and there was no postoperative mortality. The median postoperative length of stay ranged from 3.5 to 11 days. Three studies compared the outcomes of LRLR versus open resection for rHCC and all three demonstrated a significant decrease in blood loss in favor of LRLR.

CONCLUSION

In highly selected patients; LRLR for rHCC is feasible and safe. LRLR can be performed for patients with previous open LR, previous major hepatectomy, two previous LR, multiple tumors, liver cirrhosis, ipsilateral HCC recurrence, and cancers located in the difficult posterosuperior segments. Comparative studies have demonstrated that LRLR is superior to open repeat liver resection in terms of perioperative outcomes such as decreased blood loss and length of stay.

Evolution of laparoscopic liver resection

Important development in hepatic surgery

Technical notes on pure laparoscopic isolated caudate lobectomy for patient with liver cancer

BACKGROUND

The advantages of laparoscopic liver resection become more obvious as evidence on its long-term outcome has emerged. Compared to open resection, there is no difference in term of overall survival. Many reports showed that the hospital stay was shorter and blood loss was less when laparoscopic hepatectomy was used. However, laparoscopic approach for caudate lobe resection remains a challenging procedure. The close proximity to inferior vena cava (IVC) and hepatic vein make this procedure extra difficult. This paper will demonstrate the use of pure laparoscopic approach for a patient with caudate lobe liver metastasis. Haemostasis by intracorporal suturing is safely performed when bleeding is encountered from the IVC.

METHOD

The patient was a 54-year-old lady who had carcinoma of the rectum with laparoscopic anterior resection performed. She was found to have a 2 cm lesion in the left caudate lobe of the liver on follow-up. Her platelet count was only 120×10⁹/L. Pure laparoscopic resection of the caudate lobe was performed as shown in the video.

RESULTS

The operation last for 180 minutes. Blood loss was 220 mL and no blood transfusion was required. She resumed diet on the next day and was discharged 3 days after the operation. Histopathological examination showed 2 cm colorectal liver metastasis with a clear margin. Contrast CT scan performed 1 year after the operation showed no recurrence of the disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic approach for caudate lobe resection is a feasible option. It can be performed to patients in center by surgeons with experience in both hepatobiliary and laparoscopic skills.

Comparison of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma located in the posterosuperior segments or anterolateral segments: A case-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is an attractive option for treating liver tumors. Laparoscopic liver resection is more difficult for hepatocellular carcinomas located in the posterosuperior segments than for hepatocellular carcinomas in the anterolateral segments. We compared perioperative and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinomas located in the posterosuperior and anterolateral segments.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data for 230 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinomas between September 2003 and July 2014. Of these, 116 patients were selected by case-matched analysis using age, sex, tumor number and size, Child-Pugh class, and extent of liver resection. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to tumor location: the anterolateral group (n = 58) and the posterosuperior group (n = 58).

RESULTS

Operation time (355 minutes vs 212 minutes, P < .005), intraoperative blood loss (600 mL vs 410 mL, P < .001), and hospital stay (8.5 days vs 7 days, P = .040) were significantly greater in the posterosuperior group than in the anterolateral group. The open conversion (13.8% vs 10.3%, P = .777), postoperative complication (17.2% vs 10.3%, P = .420), 5-year overall survival (88.5% vs 85.7%, P = .370), and 5-year, recurrence-free survival (47.6% vs 40.9%, P = .678) rates were not significantly different between the posterosuperior and anterolateral groups.

CONCLUSION

Although laparoscopic liver resection is more difficult for hepatocellular carcinomas located in the posterosuperior segment, there were no differences in the short- and long-term outcomes between the posterosuperior and anterolateral groups. The perceived impact of tumor location on patient outcomes could be overcome by experience and technical improvements.

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.

Laparoscopic repeat liver resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Repeat liver resection is effective for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC). This study aimed to determine the outcomes of laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) for rHCC.

METHODS

Eight consecutive patients who underwent LRLR for rHCC were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Six patients had previous open and two had laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). There was one (12.5%) open conversion for bleeding and one (12.5%) post-operative morbidity. The median tumour size was 24 mm (range: 8-50 mm). LRLR was performed for rHCC in the ipsilateral lobe as compared to the index surgery in 4/8 (50%) patients. Five of eight (62.5%) patients had rHCC in the difficult posterosuperior segments. Six patients had previous open LR, and two had previous LLR. One patient (patient 4) had two prior open LR for rHCC, and LRLR was performed for the second recurrence. The median duration from the first surgery to LRLR was 29 months (range: 6-109 months). The median post-operative stay was 3.5 days. All eight patients had R0 resections, and at a median follow-up of 7.5 months, all patients were disease-free.

CONCLUSION

LRLR for rHCC is feasible and safe. This can be performed even for patients with previous open liver resections, cirrhosis, lesions in the posterosuperior segments and prior LR of the ipsilateral lobe. LRLR for rHCC is feasible and safe in highly selected patients.

Comparison of Learning Curves for Major and Minor Laparoscopic Liver Resection

BACKGROUND

Because laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has a steep learning curve, analyzing experience is important for trainees. Several authors have described the learning curve of LLR, without comparing the learning curves between major and minor LLR.

METHODS

Perioperative data were retrieved from the medical records of 170 consecutive patients who underwent LLR by a single surgeon at a tertiary hospital. Learning curves were generated and compared between major and minor LLR using cumulative sum control charts and the moving average.

RESULTS

Major and minor LLR was performed in 96 and 74 patients, respectively. The learning curves showed a steady state after case 50 for major LLR. Because of discordant results in minor LLR, subgroup analyses were performed, showing competency in LLR after cases 25 and 35 for left lateral sectionectomy and tumorectomy, respectively. Transfused red blood cell volume (0.6 versus 2.2 packs, P < .001) decreased after achievement of competence in major LLR. Blood loss exceeding 500 mL (odds ratio 2.395, 95% confidence interval 1.096-5.233, P = .028) was independently associated with LLR failure.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of cases required to accomplish LLR differed according to the extent of resection. Extensive blood loss was independently associated with LLR failure.

[Diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Update consensus document from the AEEH, SEOM, SERAM, SERVEI and SETH]

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common primary malignancy of the liver and one of the most frequent causes of death in patients with liver cirrhosis. Simultaneously with the recognition of the clinical relevance of this neoplasm, in recent years there have been important developments in the diagnosis, staging and treatment of HCC. Consequently, the Asociación Española para el Estudio del Hígado has driven the need to update clinical practice guidelines, continuing to invite all the societies involved in the diagnosis and treatment of this disease to participate in the drafting and approval of the document (Sociedad Española de Trasplante Hepático, Sociedad Española de Radiología Médica, Sociedad Española de Radiología Vascular e Intervencionista y Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica). The clinical practice guidelines published in 2009 accepted as Clinical Practice Guidelines of the National Health System has been taken as reference document, incorporating the most important advances that have been made in recent years. The scientific evidence for the treatment of HCC has been evaluated according to the recommendations of the National Cancer Institute (www.cancer.gov) and the strength of recommendation is based on the GRADE system.

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.

Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Liver

Operations on the liver have been undertaken for centuries for numerous indications including trauma, infections, and even for malignancy, but it was not until the past few decades that rates dramatically increased. This expanse in liver operations is due to a multitude of factors, including broader indications as well as improved safety. Our understanding of metastatic disease to the liver, especially colorectal cancer metastases, has vastly amplified the number of patients who would be candidates for hepatic resections and liver-directed therapies. We will focus our discussion here on planned minimally invasive operations for benign and malignant tumors as the majority of the literature relates to this setting.

National trends with a laparoscopic liver resection: results from a population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Interest in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has grown since the International 'Louisville Statement' regarding laparoscopic liver surgery was published in 2009. However, limited population-based data on LLR utilization patterns and outcomes are available.

METHODS

LLR data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS, 2000-2012) and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP, 2005-2012) were compared before and after the Louisville Statement in 2009.

RESULTS

In total, 1131 and 642 LLR were identified from NIS and NSQIP, respectively. Three-quarters of patients underwent LLR for a malignant indication (NIS primary malignancy, 29.6% versus metastasis, 45.1%; NSQIP primary malignancy, 35.5% versus metastasis, 46.1%). The annual volume of LLR increased from 2000-2008 versus 2009-2012 (NIS: 63 versus 168, P < 0.001; NSQIP: 52 versus 127; both P = 0.001). The peri-operative mortality associated with LLR was 2.8% in NIS and 2.2% in NSQIP. The morbidity was 38.1% in NIS and 30.7% in NSQIP. Mortality and morbidity did not change over time (both P > 0.050). After 2009, LLR was associated with a shorter length of stay (LOS) (NIS: 5 versus 6 days, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Since the Louisville Statement in 2009, utilization of LLR has increased. LLR is associated with a modest decrease in LOS and appears to be safe with mortality and morbidity similar to open surgery.

Outcomes of Pure Laparoscopic versus Open Hepatic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Cirrhotic Patients: A Case-Control Study with Propensity Score Matching

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Laparoscopic hepatic resection (LH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has gradually gained ground as a safe and minimally invasive treatment, although LH for cirrhotic patients remains challenging.

METHODS

Between January 2007 and August 2014, 28 and 57 patients with histologically proven cirrhosis (histological activity index, fibrosis score 4) underwent pure LH and open hepatic resection (OH; less than segmentectomy), respectively, for peripheral HCC ≤5 cm. To correct the difference in clinicopathological factors, including difficulty scores, between the two groups, propensity score matching was used at a 1:1 ratio, which resulted in a comparison of 20 patients per group. We compared the short- and long-term outcomes of LH and OH to investigate the efficacy of LH.

RESULTS

Clinicopathological variables, including difficulty scores, were well balanced between the two groups. The incidence of complications and mean intraoperative blood loss were lower in the LH group than the OH group (0 vs. 45% and 180 vs. 440 ml, p = 0.001 and 0.04, respectively). The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 42% in the LH group and 30% in the OH group (p = 0.533), whereas the 5-year overall survival rates were 46 and 60%, respectively (p = 0.606).

CONCLUSIONS

LH is a safe and effective treatment option for cirrhotic patients with HCC in terms of intraoperative blood loss and morbidity.