The learning curve in laparoscopic liver resection: improved feasibility and reproducibility. Ann Surg. 2009;250:772-782. [PMID: 19801926 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e3181bd93b2]

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.

A Surgical Perspective on Targeted Therapy of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the second leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, is difficult to treat and highly lethal. Since HCC is predominantly diagnosed in patients with cirrhosis, treatment planning must consider both the severity of liver disease and tumor burden. To minimize the impact to the patient while treating the tumor, techniques have been developed to target HCC. Anatomical targeting by surgical resection or locoregional therapies is generally reserved for patients with preserved liver function and minimal to moderate tumor burden. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis and small tumors are optimal candidates for liver transplantation, which offers the best chance of long-term survival. Yet, only 20%-30% of patients have disease amenable to anatomical targeting. For the majority of patients with advanced HCC, chemotherapy is used to target the tumor biology. Despite these treatment options, the five-year survival of patients in the United States with HCC is only 16%. In this review we provide a comprehensive overview of current approaches to target HCC. We also discuss emerging diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, novel therapeutic targets identified by recent genomic profiling studies, and potential applications of immunotherapy in the treatment of HCC.

Factors associated with and outcomes of open conversion after laparoscopic minor hepatectomy: initial experience at a single institution

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has been increasingly adopted worldwide as a result of the rapid advancement in surgical techniques and equipment. This study aims to determine the factors associated with and outcomes of open conversion after laparoscopic minor hepatectomy (LMH) based on a single center multi-surgeon experience.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of the first 147 consecutive LMH performed between 2006 and April 2014 at a single institution. Data on patient demographics, pathology results, perioperative outcomes, and operative results were collected. Factors associated with open conversion were analyzed via univariate analysis and a P value <.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

LMH was performed for malignancy in 114 (77.6%) patients of which hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 82) and colorectal metastases (n = 16) were the most common pathologies. Forty-one (27.9%) patients had cirrhotic livers and 18 (15.7%) had fibrotic livers. Fifty patients (44%) had concomitant surgery in addition to LMH. Twenty (13.6%) procedures required open conversion and the most common reason was for bleeding (n = 12). Twenty-five patients (17%) experienced postoperative complications. Univariate analyses demonstrated that only individual surgeon volume (n ≤ 10 cases) [15 (24.2%) vs 5 (5.9%), P = .001] and institution volume (n ≤ 25 cases) [8 (32%) vs 12 (9.8%), P = .003] were factors associated with open conversion. Open conversion was significantly associated with increased intra-operative blood loss, increased intra-operative blood transfusion, increased postoperative morbidity, and longer postoperative stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual surgeon and institution volumes were important factors associated with open conversion after LMH. Open conversion after LMH resulted in poorer outcomes compared to procedures that were successfully completed laparoscopically.

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.

Laparoscopic vs. open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma of cirrhotic liver: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is considered a safe and feasible alternative to open surgery for malignant liver lesions. However, laparoscopic surgery in cirrhotic patients remains challenging. The aim of this retrospective case-control study was to compare morbidity, mortality, and long-term patient survival between laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and open liver resections (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with histologically proven cirrhosis.

METHODS

A total of 45 patients treated with LLR were matched by cause of cirrhosis, Child-Pugh score, type of surgical resection (subsegmentectomy, segmentectomy, and bisegmentectomy), tumor number, tumor size, and alpha-fetoprotein value with 45 patients treated with OLR. Pre-, intra-, and post-operative variables were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Compared with OLR, the LLR group displayed a significantly shorter operative time (140 vs. 180 min; p = 0.02), shorter hospital stay (7 vs. 12 days; p < 0.0001), and lower morbidity rate (20 vs. 45 % of patients; p = 0.01). A higher rate of R0 resection was observed in the LLR group than in the OLR group (95 vs. 85 %; p = 0.03). Postoperative ascites was more frequently observed in the OLR group (18 vs. 2 %; p = 0.01). Mortality, patient, and disease-free survival rates were similar between groups. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates were 88, 59, and 12 %, respectively, in the LLR group and 63, 44, and 22 % in the OLR group (p = 0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

Significantly shorter operative times, better resection margins, lower postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stay were observed in the LLR group compared with the OLR group. LLR and OLR have similar overall and disease-free survival rates in cirrhotic HCC patients.

Segmentectomy: is minimally invasive surgery going to change a liver dogma?

Nowadays, the respective approach to hepatic resections (for malignant or benign liver lesions) is oriented toward minimal parenchymal resection. This surgical behavior is sustained by several observations that surgical margin width is not correlated with recurrence of malignancies. Parenchymal-sparing resection reduces morbidity without changing long-term results and allows the possibility of re-do liver resection in case of recurrence. Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is performed worldwide and is considered a standard of care for many surgical procedures. MILS is associated with less blood loss, less analgesic requirements, and shorter length of hospital with a better quality of life. One of the more frequent criticisms to MILS is that it represents a more challenging approach for anatomical segmentectomies and that in most cases a non-anatomical resection could be performed with thinner resection margins compared with open surgery. But even in the presence of reduced surgical margins, oncological results in the short- and long-term follow-up seem to be the same such as open surgery. The purpose of this review is to try to understand whether chasing at any cost laparoscopic anatomical segmentectomies is still necessary whereas non-anatomical resections, with a parenchymal-sparing behavior, are feasible and overall recommended also in a laparoscopic approach. The message coming from this review is that MILS is opening more and more new frontiers that are still need to be supported by further experience.

Outcomes of robotic vs laparoscopic hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic liver resections.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library Central. Participants of any age and sex, who underwent robotic or laparoscopic liver resection were considered following these criteria: (1) studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic liver resection; (2) studies reporting at least one perioperative outcome; and (3) if more than one study was reported by the same institute, only the most recent was included. The primary outcome measures were set for estimated blood loss, operative time, conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and mortality rates, hospital stay and major hepatectomy rates.

RESULTS

A total of 7 articles, published between 2010 and 2014, fulfilled the selection criteria. The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significant reduction in blood loss and lower operative time (MD = 83.96, 95%CI: 10.51-157.41, P = 0.03; MD = 68.43, 95%CI: 39.22-97.65, P < 0.00001, respectively). No differences were found with respect to conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resection resulted in reduced blood loss and shorter surgical times compared to robotic liver resections. There was no difference in conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and length of postoperative stay.

Minimally invasive liver surgery in a hepato-biliary unit: learning curve and indications

Operative indications and type of resection represent a crucial issue of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS), and they should not be modified by the increased experience of laparoscopic liver surgeons. The aim of this study was to define the indications for MILS and the learning curve in a high-volume hepatobiliary surgery Unit. Between 2009 and 2014, 993 liver resections were performed in our unit, and MILS was performed in 81 of these (8.2%). The proportion of MILS significantly increased over the study period of time and was significantly higher during the last 2 years than during the first 2 years (10.8 vs. 6.4%; p = 0.042). Rate of liver resections for benign disease between the first 2 years and the last 2 years of the study period was not significantly different (14.7 vs. 10.5%; p = 0.098). Rate of MILS for malignant disease significantly increased from the first 2 years to the last 2 years: 3.2 vs. 7.5% (p < 0.001). Indication for left lateral sectionectomy in the whole series was rare. It was performed in 37 cases as the only liver surgical procedure, on 993 liver resections (3.7%). In 25 (67.6%) of these, a minimally invasive approach was used. Rate of left lateral sectionectomies between the first 2 years and the last 2 years of the study period was not significantly different: 4.5 vs. 3.8% (p = 0.645). This study shows that the proportion of MILS significantly increased over the study period of time in our high-volume hepatobiliary surgery Unit without changing surgical indications for benign disease and type of resections.

Italian experience in minimally invasive liver surgery: a national survey

This survey provides an overview about current spread of Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (MILR) in Italy. Primary endpoint was to assess evolution of MILR in recent years and its degree of application among centres with different experience in laparoscopic and hepatic surgery. A questionnaire with items describing activity MILR was sent to Italian surgical centers. Diagnosis, technical approaches, resection extent, devices and vascular control, reasons for conversion, morbidity and mortality were recorded. Level of expertise per centre was analysed in terms of learning curve acquisition and relationship with hepatobiliary background. 1497 MILRs from 39 centers (median 27 patients/center, range 1-145, period 1995-2012) were collected. Conversion rate was 10.7% (180 patients out of 1677, excluded from subsequent analysis), with bleeding representing most frequent cause of conversion (34.4%). Eleven centers completed learning curve, performing >60 MILR. Benign lesions were 27.5% and malignant 72.5%, with hepatocellular carcinoma being the most frequent indication. 92.6% of cases were performed with a totally laparoscopic technique (1.3% were hand-assisted, 1.9% single-port and 4.2% robotic). Minor resections accounted for 92.9% (left lateral sectionectomy resulted the most frequent procedure; 23.8%), while major resections represented 7.1%. Overall mortality was 0.2% (3 of 1497 patients) and morbidity 22.8%. Mean length of stay was 5 days. Correlation between MILR activity and a hepatobiliary background was not clear comparing MILR cases and liver resection volumes per center. MILR has been significantly widespread in Italy in recent years, with several centers having definitely completed the learning curve as attested by clinical results consistent with major series from the Western and Eastern countries. MILR programs in Italy seem to arise from both centers with specific hepatobiliary expertise and centers performing advanced general laparoscopic surgery.

Robotic liver resection for malignancy: Current status, oncologic outcomes, comparison to laparoscopy, and future applications

Utilization of robotic techniques for resection of the liver is slowly gaining acceptance in specific situations and is now being applied to more challenging endeavors, such as major hepatectomy for cancer. This review provides a summary of robotic applications in liver surgery, with specific attention perioperative outcomes, oncologic outcomes, cost, and comparison to conventional laparoscopic techniques of liver resection. We also discuss future applications of robotic-assisted liver surgery.

MILS in a general surgery unit: learning curve, indications, and limitations

Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is going to be a method with a wide diffusion even in general surgery units. Organization, learning curve effect, and the environment are crucial issues to evaluate before starting a program of minimally invasive liver resections. Analysis of a consecutive series of 70 patients has been used to define advantages and limits of starting a program of MILS in a general surgery unit. Seventeen MILS have been calculated with the cumulative sum method as the number of cases to complete the learning curve. Operative times [270 (60-480) vs. 180 (15-550) min; p 0.01] and rate of conversion (6/17 vs. 5/53; p 0.018) decrease after this number of cases. More complex cases can be managed after a proper optimization of all steps of liver resection. When a high confidence of the medical and nurse staff with MILS is reached, economical and strategic issues should be evaluated in order to establish a multidisciplinary hepatobiliary unit independent from the general surgery unit to manage more complex cases.

Comparisons of financial and short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open hepatectomy: benefits for patients and hospitals

PURPOSES

This retrospective analysis compared the cost outcomes for both patients and hospitals, as well as the short-term outcomes, for laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH).

METHODS

The subjects comprised 70 patients who underwent LH or OH. The total hospital charge was calculated using the Japanese lump-sum payment system according to the diagnosis procedure combination.

RESULTS

Of the 70 patients, 10 in the LH group and 16 in the OH group underwent primary single limited/anatomic resection or left lateral sectoriectomy. The operation time, blood loss, and postoperative complications did not differ significantly between the two groups. The median [range] time of inflow occlusion was significantly longer [120 (50-194) vs. 57 (17-151) min, P = 0.03] and the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter [5 (4-6) vs. 9 (5-12) days, P < 0.01] in the LH group than in the OH group, respectively. The mean ± standard deviation surgical costs (1307 ± 596 vs. 1054 ± 365 US$, P = 0.43) and total hospital charges (12046 ± 1174 vs. 11858 ± 2096 US$, P > 0.99) were similar in the LH and OH groups, respectively, although the charges per day were significantly higher in the LH group than in the OH group (1388 ± 217 vs. 1016 ± 134 US$, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The costs to patients for LH are similar to those for OH. However, LH provides a financial advantage to hospitals due to a reduced hospital stay and comparable surgical costs.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: Surgeon's view on latest findings and future perspectives

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common liver-derived malignancy with a high fatality rate. Risk factors for the development of HCC have been identified and are clearly described. However, due to the lack of tumor-specific symptoms, HCC are diagnosed at progressed tumor stages in most patients, and thus curative therapeutic options are limited. The focus of this review is on surgical therapeutic options which can be offered to patients with HCC with special regard to recent findings, not exclusively focused on surgical therapy, but also to other treatment modalities. Further, potential promising future perspectives for the treatment of HCC are discussed.

Surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the second most common cause of death from cancer worldwide. Standard potentially curative treatments are either resection or transplantation. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the surgical management of HCC, as well as highlight current issues in hepatic resection and transplantation. In summary, due to the relationship between HCC and chronic liver disease, the management of HCC depends both on tumour-related and hepatic function-related considerations. As such, HCC is currently managed largely through non-surgical means as the criteria, in relation to the above considerations, for surgical management is still largely restrictive. For early stage tumours, both resection and transplantation offer fairly good survival outcomes (5 years overall survival of around 50%). Selection therefore would depend on the level of hepatic function derangement, organ availability and local expertise. Patients with intermediate stage cancers have limited options, with resection being the only potential for cure. Otherwise, locoregional therapy with transarterial chemoembolization or radiofrequency ablation are viable options. Current issues in resection and transplantation are also briefly discussed such as laparoscopic resection, ablation vs resection, anatomical vs non-anatomical resection, transplantation vs resection, living donor liver transplantation and salvage liver transplantation.

Vessel ligation training via an adaptive simulation curriculum

BACKGROUND

A cost-effective model for open vessel ligation is currently lacking. We hypothesized that a novel, inexpensive vessel ligation simulator can efficiently impart transferrable surgical skills to novice trainees.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

VesselBox was designed to simulate vessel ligation using surgical gloves as surrogate vessels. Fourth-year medical students performed ligations using VesselBox and were evaluated by surgical faculty using the Objective Structured Assessments of Technical Skills global rating scale and a task-specific checklist. Subsequently, each student was trained using VesselBox in an adaptive practice session guided by cumulative sum. Posttesting was performed on fresh human cadavers by evaluators blinded to pretest results.

RESULTS

Sixteen students completed the study. VesselBox practice sessions averaged 21.8 min per participant (interquartile range 19.5-27.7). Blinded posttests demonstrated increased proficiency, as measured by both Objective Structured Assessments of Technical Skills (3.23 versus 2.29, P < 0.001) and checklist metrics (7.33 versus 4.83, P < 0.001). Median speed improved from 128.2 s to 97.5 s per vessel ligated (P = 0.001). After this adaptive training protocol, practice volume was not associated with posttest performance.

CONCLUSIONS

VesselBox is a cost-effective, low-fidelity vessel ligation model suitable for graduating medical students and junior residents. Cumulative sum can facilitate an adaptive, individualized curriculum for simulation training.

Approaches to laparoscopic liver resection: a meta-analysis of the role of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery and the hybrid technique

Laparoscopic liver resection has been established as a safe and feasible treatment option. Surgical approaches include pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopy (HALS), and the hybrid technique. The role of these three approaches, and their superiority over open laparotomy, is not yet known. A literature review was performed using specific search phrases, relating to hand-assisted or hybrid approaches to laparoscopic liver resection. Surgical results from 18 case series (HALS, nine series; hybrid technique, nine series), each with ≥ 10 patients, were analyzed. Results indicated that HALS was associated with a mean operative time of 82-264.5 min, an estimated blood loss of 82-300 mL, and a complication rate of 3.8-27.1%. Analysis of series involving the hybrid technique indicated a mean operative time of 111-366.5 min, an estimated blood loss of 93-936 mL, and a complication rate of 3.4-23.5%. In conclusion, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that any single approach is superior to the others, although HALS and the hybrid technique are useful when dealing with difficulties associated with pure laparoscopy. Conversely, the need for these two methods, which can function as a bridge to pure laparoscopic liver resection, may be overcome with appropriate training.

Oncological and surgical results of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for HCC less than 5 cm: case-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is the evaluation of the surgical and oncological results of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by comparing laparoscopic and open liver resection (OLR) in the treatment of this disease. Retrospective analysis of laparoscopic and OLR for HCC (<5 cm) performed over a 4-year period was conducted. The LLR was done by a single surgeon.

METHODS

The study was performed on patients who received liver resection for HCC between July 2007 and August 2011 in our institution. Propensity-based matched analyses were used to account for operative method selection biases. During the 4 years, 1,050 patients with HCC received an operation. Among them patients who never received TACE or RFA before surgery and had HCC (<5 cm) were selected for this study.

RESULTS

174 patients had OLR, and 58 patients underwent LLR. Patients who received LLR had lower operative time, transfusion rate, complication rate, and shorter hospital days. There were significant differences in hospital mortality and morbidity between the two groups. Dietary recovery was relatively fast in the group of LLR. Overall and disease-free survival rates during the 4 years were also not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR is a developing and safe technique in a select group of patients including those with malignancies, and use of this procedure is associated with short hospital stays, a rapid return to a normal diet, full mobility, and minimal morbidity, with acceptable oncological parameters. It may be an optimal method of hepatectomy in HCC (<5 cm). Further, long-term follow-up should be acquired for adequate evaluation for survival.

Multivariate analysis of risk factors for postoperative complications after laparoscopic liver resection

BACKGROUND

The identification of modifiable perioperative risk factors in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) should aid the selection of appropriate surgical procedures and thus improve further the outcomes associated with LLR. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the risk factors for postoperative morbidity associated with laparoscopic liver surgery.

METHODS

All patients who underwent elective LLR between January 1999 and December 2012 were included. Demographic data, preoperative risk factors, operative variables, histological analysis, and postoperative course were recorded. Multivariate analysis was carried out using an unconditional logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Between January 1999 and December 2012, 140 patients underwent LLR. There were 56 male patients (40%) and mean age was 57.8 ± 17 years. Postoperative complications were recorded in 30 patients (21.4%). Postoperative morbidity was significantly higher after LLR of malignant tumors [n = 26 (41.3%)] when compared to LLR of benign lesions [n = 4 (5.2%) (P < 0.0001)]. By multivariate analysis, operative time [OR = 1.008 (1.003-1.01), P = 0.001] and LLR performed for malignancy [OR = 9.8 (2.5-37.6); P = 0.01] were independent predictors of postoperative morbidity. In the subgroup of patients that underwent LLR for malignancy using the same multivariate model, operative time was the sole independent predictor of postoperative morbidity [OR = 1.008 (1.002-1.013); P = 0.004].

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative complication rate increases by 60% with each additional operative hour during LLR. Therefore, expected operative time should be assessed before and during LLR, especially when dealing with malignant tumor.

Laparoscopic liver resection for living donation: Where do we stand?

In Western countries, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) may represent a valuable alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation. Yet, after an initial peak of enthusiasm, reports of high rates of complications and of fatalities have led to a certain degree of reluctance towards this procedure especially in Western countries. As for living donor kidney transplantation, the laparoscopic approach could improve patient’s tolerance in order to rehabilitate this strategy and reverse the current trend. In this setting however, initial concerns regarding patient’s safety and graft integrity, need for acquiring surgical expertise in both laparoscopic liver surgery and living donor transplantation and lack of evidence supporting the benefits of laparoscopy have delayed the development of this approach. Similarly to what is performed in classical resectional liver surgery, initial experiences of laparoscopy have therefore begun with left lateral sectionectomy, which is performed for adult to child living donation. In this setting, the laparoscopic technique is now well standardized, is associated with decreased donor blood loss and hospital stays and provides graft of similar quality compared to the open approach. On the other hand laparoscopic major right or left hepatectomies for adult-adult LDLT currently lack standardization and various techniques such as the full laparoscopic approach, the hand assisted approach and the hybrid approach have been reported. Hence, even-though several reports highlight the feasibility of these procedures, the true benefits of laparoscopy over laparotomy remain to be fully assessed. This could be achieved through standardization of the procedures and creation of international registries especially in Eastern countries where LDLT keeps on flourishing.

Recent advances in the surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy. The treatment of HCC is complex and complicated by the severity of associated chronic liver disease, the stage of HCC, and the clinical condition of the patient. Liver resection (LR) is one of the most efficient treatments for patients with HCC, with an expected 5-year survival of 38%-61% depending on the stage of the disease. Improved liver function assessment, increased understanding of segmental liver anatomy from advanced imaging studies, and surgical technical progress are important factors that have led to reduced mortality in patients with HCC. The indication for LR may be expanded due to emerging evidences from laparoscopic hepatectomies and combined treatments with newly developed chemotherapies. Liver transplantation (LT) is considered as an ideal treatment for removal of existing tumors and the injured/preneoplastic underlying liver tissue with impaired liver function and the risk of multicentric carcinogenesis that results from chronically injured liver. However, LT is restricted to patients with minimal risk of tumor recurrence under immunosuppression. The expansion of criteria for LT in HCC patients is still under trial and discussion. Limited availability of grafts, as well as the risk and the cost of transplantation have led to considerable interest in expansion of the donor pool, living donor-related transplantation, and combined treatment involving LR and LT. This highlight presents evidence concerning recent studies evaluating LR and LT in HCC patients. In addition, alternative therapies for the treatment of early stage tumors and the management of patients on transplant waiting lists are discussed.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Wedge resections to living donor hepatectomy, are we heading in the right direction?

Despite inception over 15 years ago and over 3000 completed procedures, laparoscopic liver resection has remained mainly in the domain of selected centers and enthusiasts. Requirement of extensive open liver resection (OLR) experience, in-depth understanding of anatomy and considerable laparoscopic technical expertise may have delayed wide application. However healthy scepticism of its actual benefits and presence of a potential publication bias; concern about its safety and technical learning curve, are probably equally responsible. Given that a large proportion of our work, at least in transplantation is still OLR, we have attempted to provide an entirely unbiased, mature opinion of its pros and cons in the current invited review. We have divided this review into two sections as we believe they merit separate attention on technical and ethical grounds. The first part deals with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in patients who present with benign or malignant liver pathology, wherein we have discussed its overall outcomes; its feasibility based on type of pathology and type of resection and included a small section on application of LLR in special scenarios like cirrhosis. The second part deals with the laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy (LDH) experience to date, including its potential impact on transplantation in general. Donor safety, graft outcomes after LDH and criterion to select ideal donors for LLR are discussed. Within each section we have provided practical points to improve safety in LLR and attempted to reach reasonable recommendations on the utilization of LLR for units that wish to develop such a service.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: a metaanalysis of 610 patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains controversial. The objective of this manuscript was to perform a metaanalysis comparing outcomes of LLR with open liver resection (OLR) in patients with hepatic mCRC, and to identify which patients were suitable candidates for LLR.

STUDY DESIGN

A PubMed search identified 2,122 articles. When filtered for case-matched articles comparing LLR with OLR for mCRC, 8 articles were identified consisting of 610 patients (242 LLR, 368 OLR). A random effects metaanalysis was performed.

RESULTS

The 2 groups were well-matched for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor size, number of metastases, extent of major hepatectomy, and use of neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy. The mean number of metastases in the LLR and OLR groups were 1.4 and 1.5, respectively (P = .14). Estimated blood loss was less in LLR group (262 vs 385 mL; P = .049). Transfusion rate was significantly less in LLR group (9.9 vs 19.8%; P = .004). There was no difference in operative time (248.7 vs 262.8 min; P = .85). Length of stay (LOS) was less in the LLR group (6.5 vs 8.8 days; P = .007). The overall complication rate was less in LLR group (20.3% vs 33.2%; P = .03). Importantly, there was no difference in the 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) or overall survival (OS) rates.

CONCLUSION

In carefully selected patients with limited mCRC (1 or 2 tumors), LLR provides marked perioperative benefits without compromising oncologic outcomes or long-term survival. Specifically, LLR offers decreased blood loss, LOS, and overall complication rates with comparable 5-year OS and DFS.

International experience for laparoscopic major liver resection

Although minor laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) appear as standardized procedures, major LLRs are still limited to few expert teams. The aim of this study was to report the combined data of 18 international centers performing major LLR. Variables evaluated were number and type of LLR, surgical indications, number of synchronous colorectal resections, details on technical points, conversion rates, operative time, blood loss and surgical margins. From 1996 to 2014, a total of 5388 LLR were carried out including 1184 major LLRs. The most frequent indication for laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) was colorectal liver metastases (37.0%). Seven centers used hand assistance or hybrid approach selectively for LRH mostly at the beginning of their experience. Seven centers apply Pringle's maneuver routinely. The conversion rate for all major LLRs was 10% and mean operative time was 291 min. Mean estimated blood loss for all major LLR was 327 ml and negative surgical margin rate was 96.5%. Major LLRs still remain challenging procedures requiring important experience in both laparoscopy and liver surgery. Stimulating the younger generation to learn and accomplish these techniques is the better way to guarantee further development of this surgical field.

[Minimally invasive surgery of primary and secondary liver tumors : indications, techniques and results]

BACKGROUND

Initially, mainly superficial liver lesions were resected laparoscopically but now even major resections are performed using a minimally invasive procedure. Careful selection of suitable patients is of key importance.

AIMS AND METHODS

This article describes the current state of the art in patient selection and choice of the appropriate laparoscopic technique based on a review of the recent literature. Perioperative and oncological outcome parameters of laparoscopic liver resection are presented.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic liver resection offers significant benefits compared to open liver resection in terms of reduced intraoperative blood loss, reduced overall and liver-specific complications and length of hospital stay without compromising oncological outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Lesions in the peripheral anterolateral segments (segments 2, 3, 4b, 5 and 6) are particularly suitable for laparoscopic liver resection. Access to the posterosuperior segments 1, 4a, 7 and 8 is more challenging but safe and feasible in experienced centers.

Laparoscopic liver resection using a rubber band retraction technique: usefulness and perioperative outcome in 100 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly performed worldwide, surgeons still face technical challenges because of the variety of procedures used according to tumor location. In the current study, we introduce a unique retraction method using an elastic rubber band and present its learning curve in addition to the perioperative outcomes of 100 consecutive patients.

METHODS

A series of 100 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection using a rubber band technique between August 2008 and June 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. All the study patients underwent the rubber band technique as a method to expose the parenchymal resection plane.

RESULTS

The study subjects consisted of 56 males and 44 females with a mean age of 56.7 ± 9.6 years. There were a total of four open conversions. There was no postoperative mortality. Eighty-five patients underwent minor resection, and 15 patients underwent major resection. Among the 85 patients who underwent a minor resection, 65 patients who had favorably located tumors were compared with the 20 patients who had unfavorably located tumors. A comparison of perioperative outcomes revealed a significant difference in operative time (197.3 ± 81.9 vs. 245.9 ± 116.8 min, P = 0.040) but no differences in any other parameters. There were three (4.6 %) and one (5 %) open conversions in the favorable and unfavorable tumor location group, respectively (P = 0.954). The postoperative complication rates were not statistically different between the two groups [4 (6.2 %) vs. 1 (5 %), P = 0.848]. In the learning curve analysis, operative time and blood loss for left lateral sectionectomy (n = 14) and left hepatectomy (n = 12) and minor limited resections for posterosuperior lesions (n = 20) reached a plateau after approximately ten cases.

CONCLUSION

The retraction technique describes here using an elastic rubber band is a useful approach that results in a safe laparoscopic liver resection. Moreover, this can be applied proficiently after a reasonable learning curve.

Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted major hepatectomies: an Italian multi-institutional comparative study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH), although safely feasible in experienced hands and in selected patients, is a formidable challenge because of the technical demands of controlling hemorrhage, sealing bile ducts, avoiding gas embolism, and maintaining oncologic surgical principles. The enhanced surgical dexterity offered by robotic assistance could improve feasibility and/or safety of minimally invasive major hepatectomy. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes of LMH and robotic-assisted major hepatectomy (RMH).

METHODS

Pooled data from four Italian hepatobiliary centers were analyzed retrospectively. Demographic data, operative, and postoperative outcomes were collected from prospectively maintained databases and compared.

RESULTS

Between January 2009 and December 2012, 25 patients underwent LMH and 25 RMH. The two groups were comparable for all baseline characteristics including type of resection and underlying pathology. Conversion to open surgery was required in one patient in each group (4%). No difference was noted in operative time, estimated blood, and need for allogenic blood transfusions. Intermittent pedicle occlusion was required only in LMH (32% vs. 0; p = 0.004). Length of hospital stay, including time spent in intensive care unit, was similar between the two groups, but patients undergoing LMH showed quicker recovery of bowel activity, with shorter time to first flatus (1 vs. 3 days; p = 0.023) and earlier tolerance to oral liquid diet (1 vs. 2 days; p = 0.001). No difference was noted in complication rate, 90-day mortality, and readmission rate.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective multi-institution study confirms that selected patients can safely undergo minimally invasive major hepatectomy, either LMH or RMH. The fact that intermittent pedicle occlusion could be avoided in RMH suggests improved surgical ability to deal with bleeding during liver transection, but further studies are needed before any final conclusion can be drawn.

Laparoscopic liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma: Current role and limitations

Liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is currently known to be a safer procedure than it was before because of technical advances and improvement in postoperative patient management and remains the first-line treatment for HCC in compensated cirrhosis. The aim of this review is to assess current indications, advantages and limits of laparoscopic surgery for HCC resections. We also discussed the possible evolution of this surgical approach in parallel with new technologies.

Laparoscopic liver resection compared to open approach in patients with colorectal liver metastases improves further resectability: Oncological outcomes of a case-control matched-pairs analysis

AIMS

Liver resection is considered the standard treatment of colorectal metastases (CRLM). However, to date, no long term oncological results and data regarding repeat hepatectomy after laparoscopic approach are known. The aim of this study is to analyze single center long-term surgical and oncological outcomes after liver resection for CRLM.

METHODS

A total of 57 open resections (OR) were matched with 57 laparoscopic resections (LR) for CRLM. Matching was based mainly on number of metastases, tumor size, segmental position of lesions, type of hepatectomy and type of resection.

RESULTS

Morbidity rate was significantly less in the LR group (p = 0.002); the length of hospital stay was 6.5 ± 5 days for the LR group and 9.2 ± 4 days for the OR group (p = 0.005). After a median follow up of 53.7 months for the OR group and 40.9 months for the LR group, the 5-y overall survival rate was 65% and 60% respectively (p = 0.36) and the 5-y disease free survival rate was 38% and 29% respectively (p = 0.24). More patients in the LR group received a third hepatectomy for CRLM relapse than in the OR group (80% vs. 14.3% respectively; p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic resection for CRLM offers advantages in terms of reduced blood loss, morbidity rate and hospital stay. It provides comparable long-term oncological outcomes but can improve further resectability in patients with recurrent disease.

High-frequency jet ventilation shortened the duration of gas embolization during laparoscopic liver resection in a porcine model

BACKGROUND

Positive pressure mechanical ventilation causes rhythmic changes in thoracic pressure and central blood flow. If entrainment occurs, it could be easier for carbon dioxide to enter through a wounded vein during laparoscopic liver lobe resection (LLR). High-frequency jet ventilation (HFJV) is a ventilating method that does not cause pronounced pressure or blood flow changes. This study aimed to investigate whether HFJV could influence the frequency, severity, or duration of gas embolism (GE) during LLR.

METHODS

Twenty-four anaesthetized piglets underwent lobe resection and were randomly assigned to either normal frequency ventilation (NFV) or HFJV (n=12 per group). During resection, a standardized injury to the left hepatic vein was created to increase the risk of GE. Haemodynamic and respiratory variables were monitored. Online blood gas monitoring and transoesophageal echocardiography were used. GE occurrence and severity were graded as 0 (none), 1 (minor), or 2 (major), depending on the echocardiography results.

RESULTS

GE duration was shorter in the HFJV group (P=0.008). However, no differences were found between the two groups in the frequency or severity of embolism. Incidence of Grade 2 embolism was less than that found in previous studies and physiological responses to embolism were variable.

CONCLUSION

HFJV shortened the mean duration of GE during LLR and was a feasible ventilation method during the procedure. Individual physiological responses to GE were unpredictable.

Perpetuating proficiency in donor right hepatectomy for living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Donor right hepatectomy (DRH) was developed by master liver surgeons and has been applied in many liver transplant centers as the mainstay for adult living donor liver transplantation. It is a major and complex surgical operation performed on living liver donors for the benefit of liver recipients. The donors deserve the lowest though inevitable morbidity and mortality. In this study, the surgical outcomes of DRH performed by newer surgeons at an established center were studied to assess the transferability of the techniques of this standardized procedure.

METHODS

We studied 450 consecutive DRHs performed by 11 surgeons. Three surgeons initiated and developed the transplant program and performed the first 200 DRHs (Era I). The role of chief surgeon in the following 250 DRHs (Era II) was gradually taken up by four newer surgeons with close guidance initially.

RESULTS

Blood loss and operation time at the end of Era I versus the beginning of Era II were 251 vs. 341 mL and 391 vs. 497 minutes. The learning curve effect in Era I did not occur in Era II. The complication rates of the last 50 cases in Era I and Era II were 16% and 24%, respectively. Era I had one donor death whereas Era II had no donor death.

CONCLUSION

At an established center, DRH can be carried out safely by newer surgeons with good outcomes.

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy as a training procedure for surgeons learning laparoscopic hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection remains limited to a relatively small number of institutions because of insufficient hepatic and laparoscopic surgical experience and few training opportunities. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of an improved laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy technique as a training procedure for new surgeons.

METHODS

Twenty-four laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomies (LLLSs) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into 3 groups with 8 patients in each: those undergoing surgery by expert surgeons prior to 2008 (Group A); those undergoing surgery by expert surgeons after 2008, when a standardized LLLS technique was adopted (Group B); and those undergoing LLLS by junior surgeons being trained (Group C).

RESULTS

The median operative time was significantly shorter for Group B (103 min; range, 99-109 min) and C (107 min; range, 85-135 min) patients than for Group A (153 min; range, 95-210 min) patients. There were no significant differences in blood loss or hospital stay. In Groups B and C, no conversions to open laparotomy or complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

The standardized LLLS procedure was both safe and feasible as a technique for training surgeons in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Clinical usefulness of endo intestinal clips during Pringle's maneuver in laparoscopic liver resection: a technical report

BACKGROUND

Control of bleeding is important in parenchymal transection during laparoscopic liver resection. We suggest a new technique using Endo intestinal clips for the intestinal tract to achieve easy, safe hepatoduodenal ligament clamping during laparoscopic liver resection.

METHODS

In this study, 10 consecutive patients underwent pure laparoscopic liver resection. Pringle's maneuver was performed using Endo intestinal clips directly on the hepatoduodenal ligament.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic Pringle's maneuver using Endo intestinal clips is very easy and safe. In this series, Pringle's maneuver was used a mean of 3.4 times (range, 1 to 5) in each case. Mean operative time was 271.0 minutes (range, 105 to 415 min) and mean volume of intraoperative blood loss was 119.5 mL (range, 10 to 320 mL). No intraoperative or postoperative morbidity or mortality was encountered.

CONCLUSIONS

Pringle's maneuver using Endo intestinal clips can be performed easily and safely during laparoscopic liver resection.

Laparoscopic vs open right hepatectomy: a value-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Current literature lacks sufficient data on outcomes after extensive laparoscopic liver resections. We hypothesized that laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) is associated with better clinical outcomes and less overall hospital costs than open right hepatectomy (ORH), supporting the notion that major laparoscopic hepatic resections carry increased value when compared with the open approach.

STUDY DESIGN

We reviewed medical records of all patients at our institution who underwent elective LRH (n = 48) or ORH (n = 57) from May 16, 2008 to March 1, 2012. Patient demographics, preoperative comorbidities, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Hospital billing data were collected for each case to determine the average hospital costs per case.

RESULTS

Average operative duration, estimated blood loss, intravenous fluid resuscitation requirements, high-grade postoperative complications, the need for postoperative admission to the ICU, and hospital length of stay were significantly less within the LRH cohort. Thirty-day mortality and readmission rates were equivalent between the 2 groups. Despite higher operative costs for LRH ($16,605 vs $10,411, p < 0.001), total postoperative costs were significantly less ($9,075 for LRH vs $16,341 for ORH, p < 0.001), resulting in equivalent overall costs ($25,679 for LRH vs $26,751 for ORH, p = 0.65).

CONCLUSIONS

Although overall costs between LRH and ORH are equivalent, clinical outcomes after LRH are comparable to those after ORH, supporting the value of laparoscopy in extensive right hepatic resections. Efforts to reduce operative costs of LRH, while maintaining optimal patient outcomes, should be the focus of surgeons and hospitals moving forward.

Pure laparoscopic liver resection reduces surgical site infections and hospital stay. Results of a case-matched control study in 50 patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection is an emerging tool in surgical oncology, but its role in liver tumors is far from being universally accepted.

METHODS

We designed a case-matched control study, comparing laparoscopic (LAP) vs. open hepatectomies (OP) performed in the same center during the same period of time. Fifty LAP were performed (34 liver metastases, 7 hepatocellular carcinomas, 2 hydatid cysts, and 5 benign tumors). Cases were compared with 100 OP matched according to: diagnosis, number of lesions, type of resection, age, ASA score, and ECOG performance status. We evaluated intraoperative and postoperative parameters, focusing on morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Preoperative data were comparable in both groups. Operative features were similar in terms of overall morbidity 18 (36 %) vs. 36 (36 %), p = 1; intraoperative bleeding, 401 (18-2192) vs. 475 (20-2000) mL, p = 0.89; pedicle clamping, 37 (74 %) vs. 88 (88 %), p = 0.55; margin, 0.6 (0-5) vs. 0.65 (0-5) cm, p = 0.94, and mortality p = 0.65 for the LAP and OP groups, respectively. There was a significant decrease in surgical site infections 1 (2 %) vs. 18 (18 %) p = 0.007 in the LAP group. Operative time was longer: 295 (120-600) vs. 200 (70-450) min (p = 0.0001), and hospital stay significantly shorter: 4 (1-60) vs. 7 (3-44) days, p = 0.0001 with less readmissions (0 vs. 7 %) in the LAP.

DISCUSSION

In adequately selected patients, laparoscopic hepatectomy is feasible, safe, shortens hospital stay, and decreases surgical site infections.

Risk factors and management of conversions to an open approach in laparoscopic liver resection: analysis of 265 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

As a consequence of continuous technical developments in liver surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is increasingly performed worldwide.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and December 2011, 265 LLR were performed in 242 patients for various diseases. The experience of LLR is reported focusing on risk factors of conversion and their management.

RESULTS

The overall conversion rate was 17/265 (6.4%), equally distributed over the period of the study. Statistically significant factors for conversion were found to be LLR of the postero-superior (P-S) segments (SI, SIVa; SVII; SVIII) (12.7% converted versus 2.5% non-converted groups, P = 0.01) and a major compared with a minor hepatectomy (15.2% vs. 4.6%, P = 0.02 respectively). A R0 resection was achieved in 93.2% of cases. According to Dindo's classification, complications were recorded as grade I (n = 20); grade II (6); grade III (11) and grade IV(1) events (total morbidity rate of 14%). Univariate analysis identified a major hepatectomy and resection involving P-S segments as prognostic factors for conversion whereas multivariate analysis identified the latter as an independent risk factor [P = 0.003, odds ratio (OR) = 5.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.8-18.8].

CONCLUSIONS

LLR can be safely performed with low overall morbidity. According to this experience and irrespective of the learning curve, resections of P-S segments were identified as an independent risk factor for conversion in LLR.

Laparoscopic liver resection: a review

Laparoscopic liver surgery was slower to develop than other fields of laparoscopic surgery because of a steep learning curve, and fear of uncontrolled bleeding or gas embolism. However, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is associated with significant advantages: faster recovery, less post-operative pain, less morbidity, easier subsequent surgery and better cosmetic results. Since the inception of this technique, more than 3000 procedures have been reported. The aim of this update was to review the literature in order to define the indications (malignant tumors, benign tumors, major resections), the advantages and limits of this approach as well as the expected value of new technology, such as intra-operative guidance or robotics, in the development of this branch of surgery.

Simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases in the right lobe using pure laparoscopic surgery

It is now common to resect colorectal cancer by laparoscopic surgery. Hepatectomy has become a standard treatment for patients with colorectal cancer with resectable liver metastases. The resection of liver tumors can now be done partly by laparoscopic surgery. However, metastatic tumors in the right lobe are often difficult to resect laparoscopically. Furthermore, simultaneous resection of the colorectum and liver may also be difficult. In this study, we evaluated a new method to resect both colorectal cancer and liver metastases in the right lobe by laparoscopic surgery. Two cases are presented that underwent total laparoscopic resection of a right lobe tumor, associated with laparoscopic colorectal resection. The metastatic tumor in the right lobe was first resected in the left hemi-prone position. Then, the colorectal cancer was resected in the lithotomy position. The method for resecting the right lobe liver tumor and colorectal cancer was safe and feasible. The mean duration of surgery was 443.5 min, and the mean blood loss was 158 mL. The postoperative course was uneventful. In selected patients, laparoscopic hepatectomy for right lobe synchronous metastatic tumors can be safely performed simultaneously with colorectal surgery.

[Laparoscopic liver resection: lessons learned after 132 resections]

INTRODUCTION

After 20 years of experience in laparoscopic liver surgery there is still no clear definition of the best approach (totally laparoscopic [TLS] or hand-assisted [HAS]), the indications for surgery, position, instrumentation, immediate and long-term postoperative results, etc.

AIM

To report our experience in laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs).

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Over a period of 10 years we performed 132 LLRs in 129 patients: 112 malignant tumours (90 hepatic metastases; 22 primary malignant tumours) and 20 benign lesions (18 benign tumours; 2 hydatid cysts). Twenty-eight cases received TLS and 104 had HAS.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

6 right hepatectomies (2 as the second stage of a two-stage liver resection); 6 left hepatectomies; 9 resections of 3 segments; 42 resections of 2 segments; 64 resections of one segment; and 5 cases of local resections.

RESULTS

There was no perioperative mortality, and morbidity was 3%. With TLS the resection was completed in 23/28 cases, whereas with HAS it was completed in all 104 cases. Transfusion: 4,5%; operating time: 150min; and mean length of stay: 3,5 days. The 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates for the primary malignant tumours were 100, 86 and 62%, and for colorectal metastases 92, 82 and 52%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

LLR via both TLS and HAS in selected cases are similar to the results of open surgery (similar 5-year morbidity, mortality and survival rates) but with the advantages of minimally invasive surgery.

[Laparoscopic liver resection: lessons learned after 132 resections]

INTRODUCTION

After 20 years of experience in laparoscopic liver surgery there is still no clear definition of the best approach (totally laparoscopic [TLS] or hand-assisted [HAS]), the indications for surgery, position, instrumentation, immediate and long-term postoperative results, etc.

AIM

To report our experience in laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs).

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Over a period of 10 years we performed 132 LLRs in 129 patients: 112 malignant tumours (90 hepatic metastases; 22 primary malignant tumours) and 20 benign lesions (18 benign tumours; 2 hydatid cysts). Twenty-eight cases received TLS and 104 had HAS.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

6 right hepatectomies (2 as the second stage of a two-stage liver resection); 6 left hepatectomies; 9 resections of 3 segments; 42 resections of 2 segments; 64 resections of one segment; and 5 cases of local resections.

RESULTS

There was no perioperative mortality, and morbidity was 3%. With TLS the resection was completed in 23/28 cases, whereas with HAS it was completed in all 104 cases. Transfusion: 4,5%; operating time: 150min; and mean length of stay: 3,5 days. The 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates for the primary malignant tumours were 100, 86 and 62%, and for colorectal metastases 92, 82 and 52%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

LLR via both TLS and HAS in selected cases are similar to the results of open surgery (similar 5-year morbidity, mortality and survival rates) but with the advantages of minimally invasive surgery.

Laparoscopic liver resection as a safe and efficacious alternative to open resection for colorectal liver metastasis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) remain to be established. A meta-analysis was undertaken to compare LLR and open liver resection (OLR) for CLM with respect to surgical and oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed to retrieve all relevant articles published in the English language by the end of March 2013. Data were analyzed using Review Manager version 5.0.

RESULTS

A total of 8 nonrandomized controlled studies with 695 subjects were analyzsed. Intra-operative blood loss, the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion, morbidity and the length of hospital stay were all significantly reduced after LLR. Postoperative recurrence, 5-year overall and disease-free survivals were comparable between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR for CLM is safe and efficacious. It improves surgical outcomes and uncompromises oncologic outcomes as compared with OLR.

Robotic surgery of the liver: Italian experience and review of the literature

Robotic liver resection is a new promising minimally invasive surgical technique not yet validated by level I evidence. During recent years, the application of the laparoscopic approach to liver resection has grown less than other abdominal specialties due to the intrinsic limitations of laparoscopic instruments. Robotics can overcome these limitations above all for complex operations. A review of the literature on major hepatic surgery was conducted on PubMed using selected keywords. Two hundred and thirty-five patients in 17 series were analysed and outcomes such as operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, conversion rate, and costs were described. The most commonly performed procedures were wedge resection and segmentectomy, but the predominance of major hepatectomies performed with robotic surgery is likely due to the superior control achieved by the robotic system.

The conversion and complication rates were 4.2% and 13.4%, respectively. Intracavitary fluid collections and bile leaks were the most frequently occurring morbidities. The mean operation time was 285 min. The mean intraoperative blood loss was 50–280 mL. The mean postoperative hospital stay was four to seven days. Overall survival and long-term outcomes were not reported. Robotic liver surgery in Italy has become a clinical reality that is gaining increasing acceptance; a survey was carried out on robotic surgery, which showed that it is perceived as a significant advantage for operators and a consistent gain for the patient. More than 100 robotic hepatic resections have been performed in Italy where important robotic training schools are active.

Robotic liver surgery is feasible and safe in trained and experienced hands. Further evaluation is required to assess the improvement in outcomes and long-term oncologic follow-up.

Surgery for colorectal liver metastases

Half of all patients with colorectal cancer develop metastatic disease. The liver is the principal site for metastases, and surgical resection is the only modality that offers the potential for long-term cure. Appropriate patient selection for surgery and improvements in perioperative care have resulted in low morbidity and mortality rates, resulting in this being the therapy of choice for suitable patients. Modern management of colorectal liver metastases is multimodal incorporating open and laparoscopic surgery, ablative therapies such as radiofrequency ablation or microwave ablation and (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. The majority of patients with hepatic metastases should be considered for resectional surgery, if all disease can be resected, as this offers the only opportunity for prolonged survival.

Totally laparoscopic full left hepatectomy for living donor liver transplantation in adolescents and adults

In recent years different minimal access strategies have been designed in order to perform living donor liver surgery for adult recipients with less morbidity. Techniques involve shortening the length of the incision with or without previous laparoscopic mobilization of the liver. Herein we present two cases of totally laparoscopic living donor left hepatectomy, with and without removal of the middle hepatic vein, respectively. We describe in detail the anatomical and technical aspects of the procedure focusing on relevant points to enhance safety.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy: pure laparoscopic approach versus hand-assisted technique

Laparoscopic liver resections are being performed with increasing frequency, with several groups having reported minimally invasive approaches for major anatomic hepatic resections. Some surgeons favor a pure laparoscopic approach, while others prefer a hand-assisted approach for major laparoscopic liver resections. There are clear advantages and disadvantages to a hand-assisted technique. The purpose of this study is to summarize the literature comparing pure laparoscopic and hand-assisted approaches for minimally invasive hepatic resection, and to describe our approach in 432 laparoscopic liver resections.