Laparoscopic segmentectomy of the liver: from segment I to VIII

Robotic versus laparoscopic resections of posterosuperior segments of the liver: a propensity score-matched comparison

BACKGROUND

Open parenchymal-preserving resection is the current standard of care for lesions in the posterosuperior liver segments. Laparoscopy and robot-assisted surgery are emergent surgical approaches for liver resections, even in posteriorly located lesions. The objective of this study was to compare robot-assisted to laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resections for lesions located in segments 7, 8, 4a, and 1.

METHODS

Demographics, comorbidities, clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical treatments, and outcomes from patients who underwent laparoscopic and robot-assisted liver resection in two centers for lesions in the posterosuperior segments between June 2008 and February 2014 were reviewed. A 1:2 matched propensity score analysis was performed by individually matching patients in the robotic cohort to patients in the laparoscopic cohort based on demographics, comorbidities, performance status, tumor stage, location, and type of resection.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients who underwent robot-assisted liver resection were matched with 72 patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. Matched patients displayed no significant differences in postoperative outcomes as measured by blood loss, hospital stay, R0 negative margin rate, and mortality. The overall morbidity according to the comprehensive complication index was also similar (34.6 ± 33 vs. 18.4 ± 11.3, respectively, for robotic and laparoscopic approach, p = 0.11). Patients undergoing robotic liver surgery had significantly longer inflow occlusion time (77 vs. 25 min, p = 0.001) as compared with their laparoscopic counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

Although number and severity of complications in the robotic group appears to be higher, robotic and laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resections in the posterosuperior segments display similar safety and feasibility.

Early and Long-term Oncological Outcomes After Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Propensity Score-based Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare early and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing resection for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) by either a laparoscopic (LA) or an open (OA) approach.

BACKGROUND

The LA is still a matter of debate regarding the surgical management of CLM.

METHODS

Data of all patients from 32 French surgical centers who underwent liver resection for CLM from January 2006 to December 2013 were collected. Aiming to obtain 2 well-balanced cohorts for available variables influencing early outcome and survival, the LA group was matched 1:1 with the OA group by using a propensity score (PS)-based method.

RESULTS

The unmatched initial cohort consisted of 2620 patients (LA: 176, OA: 2444). In the matched cohort for operative risk factors (LA: 153, OA: 153), the LA group had shorter hospitalization stays [11.1 (±9) days vs 13.9 (±10) days; P = 0.01] and was associated with lower rates of grade III to V complications [odds ratio (OR): 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14-0.51; P = 0.0002] and inhospital transfusions (OR: 0.33 95% CI 0.18-0.59; P < 0.0001). On a prognostic factors well-balanced population (LA: 73, OA: 73), the LA group and the OA group experienced similar overall (OS) and disease-free (DFS) survival rates [OS rates of 88% and 78% vs 84% and 75% at 3 and 5 years, respectively (P = 0.72) and DFS rates of 40% and 32% vs 52% and 36% at 3 and 5 years, respectively (P = 0.60)].

CONCLUSIONS

In the patients who are suitable for LA, laparoscopy yields better operative outcomes without impairing long-term survival.

Anatomical liver resection of segment 4a en bloc with the caudate lobe

Anatomical segmentectomy is the complete resection of an area supplied by a segmental portal branch. Among segmentectomies, isolated segmentectomy 4 is a technically demanding procedure because there are two transection planes: on the left side along the umbilical fissure and, on the right side, along the middle hepatic vein. Although there are several reports on anatomic segmentectomies, only few regard the anatomic segmentectomy 4a. We report here the case of a 60-year-old man who underwent anatomical segmentectomy 4a en bloc with the caudate lobe to resect a colorectal liver metastasis located in segment 4a and involving the paracaval portion of the caudate lobe. This type of procedure was planned in order to maximize the postoperative functional hepatic reserve, thereby reducing the risk of postoperative liver failure and ultimately allowing the possibility for future repeat hepatectomy in case of recurrence. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:665-667. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection for caudate lobe: technical strategy and comparative analysis with anteroinferior and posterosuperior segments

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now considered a standard procedure in peripheral segments, there are few reports on laparoscopic segment 1 (Sg1) resection. The aim of this study was to assess both safety and feasibility of Sg1 LLR.

METHODS

From 2000 to 2014, all patients who underwent LLR were identified from a prospective database. Patients with resection of Sg1 (Sg1 group) were compared with those with resection of anteroinferior segments (AI group: segments 3, 4b, 5, 6) or posterosuperior segments (PS group: segments 4a, 7, 8), in terms of tumor characteristics, surgical treatment, and short-term outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 15, 151, and 67 patients in Sg1, AI, and PS groups. Tumor size and tumor number were similar between the three groups (p = 0.139, p = 0.102). Operative time was significantly shorter in Sg1 (150 min) and AI group (135 min) compared with PS group (180 min) (p = 0.021). Median blood loss was notably higher in PS group (140 ml) compared with Sg1 group (75 ml) and AI group (10 ml) (p = 0.001). No mortality was observed in all groups. Postoperative complication rate was 20.0 % with Sg1 group, 14.6 % with AI group, and 20.9 % with PS group (p = 0.060). The rate of major complication was significantly higher in Sg1 group (13.3 %) and PS group (11.9 %) compared with AI group (4.0 %) (p = 0.042). Resection margins were clear in all Sg1 and PS group patients, whereas two (1.3 %) patients in AI group had R1 margins (p = 0.586).

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach of isolated resection located in the caudate lobe is a feasible and curative surgical option in selected patients.

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.

Preoperative selection of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis for hepatic resection

Surgical resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) has a well-documented improvement in survival. To benefit from this intervention, proper selection of patients who would be adequate surgical candidates becomes vital. A combination of imaging techniques may be utilized in the detection of the lesions. The criteria for resection are continuously evolving; currently, the requirements that need be met to undergo resection of CRLM are: the anticipation of attaining a negative margin (R0 resection), whilst maintaining an adequate functioning future liver remnant. The timing of hepatectomy in regards to resection of the primary remains controversial; before, after, or simultaneously. This depends mainly on the tumor burden and symptoms from the primary tumor. The role of chemotherapy differs according to the resectability of the liver lesion(s); no evidence of improved survival was shown in patients with resectable disease who received preoperative chemotherapy. Presence of extrahepatic disease in itself is no longer considered a reason to preclude patients from resection of their CRLM, providing limited extra-hepatic disease, although this currently is an area of active investigations. In conclusion, we review the indications, the adequate selection of patients and perioperative factors to be considered for resection of colorectal liver metastasis.

A Left-Sided, Purely Laparoscopic Approach for Anatomic Caudate Hepatectomy: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic caudate hepatectomy, which is a challenging procedure, has been reported sporadically. However, there is no standardized surgical technique, and the safety and feasibility of this procedure remain controversial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A left-sided, purely laparoscopic approach for anatomic caudate hepatectomy was used for 11 selected patients in our institution. The procedure and technique of laparoscopic caudate hepatectomy were described. Perioperative data of these patients were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The 11 cases included two subgroups: laparoscopic isolated caudate hepatectomy (n = 4) and laparoscopic combined caudate and left hemihepatectomy (n = 7). There were three major steps for anatomic caudate hepatectomy. Two conversions were required (18.2%). Two complications (Clavien Grades I and II) occurred but no deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

The left-sided, purely laparoscopic approach for anatomic caudate hepatectomy is safe and feasible in selected patients. This procedure can be performed by hepatobiliary surgeons with abundant experience in laparoscopic liver surgery.

Learning curve in laparoscopic liver surgery: a fellow's perspective

The learning curve for laparoscopic liver surgery is infrequently addressed in current literature. In this paper, we explored the challenges faced in embarking on laparoscopic liver surgery in a unit that did predominantly open liver surgery. In setting up our laparoscopic liver surgery program, we adopted skills and practices learnt during fellowships at various high volume centers in North America and Australia, with modifications to suit our local patients' disease patterns. We started with simple minor resections in anterolateral segments to build confidence, which allowed us to train the surgical and nursing team before progressing to more difficult resections. Inter institutional collaboration and exchange of skills also enabled the synergistic development of techniques for safe progression to more complex surgeries. Multimedia resources and international guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery are increasingly accessible, which further guide the practice of this emerging field, as evidence continues to validate the laparoscopic approach in well selected cases.

Incidence, risk factors and consequences of bile leakage following laparoscopic major hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Bile leakage (BL) remains a common cause of major morbidity after open major liver resection but has only been poorly described in patients undergoing laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH). The present study aimed to determine the incidence, risk factors and consequences of BL following LMH.

METHODS

All 223 patients undergoing LMH between 2000 and 2013 at two tertiary referral centres were retrospectively analysed. BL was defined according to the International Study Group of Liver Surgery, and its incidence and consequences were assessed. Risk factors for BL were determined on multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

BL occurred in 30 (13.5 %) patients, and its incidence remained stable over time (p = 0.200). BL was diagnosed following the presence of bile into the abdominal drain in 14 (46.7 %) patients and after drainage of symptomatic abdominal collections in 16 (53.3 %) patients without intra-operative drain placement. Grade A, B and C BL occurred in 3 (10.0 %), 23 (76.6 %) and 4 (13.4 %) cases, respectively. Interventional procedures for BL included endoscopic retrograde cholangiography, percutaneous and surgical drainage in 10 (33.3 %), 23 (76.7 %) and 4 (13.3 %) patients, respectively. BL was associated with significantly increased rates of symptomatic pleural effusion (30.0 vs. 11.4 %, p = 0.006), multiorgan failure (13.3 vs. 3.6 %, p = 0.022), postoperative death (10.0 vs. 1.6 %, p = 0.008) and prolonged hospital stay (18 vs. 8 days, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, BMI > 28 kg/m(2) (OR 2.439, 95 % CI 1.878-2.771, p = 0.036), history of hepatectomy (OR 1.675, 95 % CI 1.256-2.035, p = 0.044) and biliary reconstruction (OR 1.975, 95 % CI 1.452-2.371, p = 0.039) were significantly associated with increased risk of BL.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

After LMH, BL occurred in 13.5 % of the patients and was associated with significant morbidity. Patients with one or several risk factors for BL should benefit intra-operative drain placement.

Total laparoscopic left hepatectomy for primary hepatolithiasis: Eight-year experience in a single center

BACKGROUND

Primary hepatolithiasis is prevalent in some Asian countries. Hepatectomy is a definitive treatment for this disease. Whether laparoscopic left hepatectomy (LLH) is suitable for primary hepatolithiasis remains controversial, because LLH is more challenging technically. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of LLH for primary hepatolithiasis in a single center.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 96 consecutive patients who underwent LLH for primary hepatolithiasis in the Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital from May 2005 to December 2012. In addition, 105 patients who met the same inclusion criteria for LLH but underwent open left hepatectomy (OLH) for hepatolithiasis during the same period were reviewed for comparison. The patient characteristics, operative features, postoperative course, residual stone rate, and recurrent stone rate were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the LLH group, 81 patients (84.4%) underwent total LLH and 15 (15.6%) were converted to open hepatectomy. The volume of intraoperative blood loss was less in the LLH than OLH group (383 ± 281 vs 554 ± 517 mL; P = .005). The intraoperative transfusion rate was also significantly lower in the LLH group (8.3% vs 30.5%; P < .001). There were no differences between the LLH and OLH groups in operation time, duration of postoperative hospitalization, postoperative complication rate, residual stone rate, or recurrent stone rate.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, total LLH is a safe, effective, and promising treatment for patients with hepatolithiasis.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Appraisal of Laparoscopic Liver Resection in the Treatment of Liver Metastasis with Special Reference to Outcome in Colorectal Malignancies

Treatment of metastatic liver disease is at the crossroads of an evolutionary transformation with more and more reports reiterating the benefits of resectional therapy in various cancers. A quest for application of laparoscopic approaches to the management of liver metastasis has arisen due to the projected benefits of less morbidity, early recovery, and equivalent oncological outcome in selected malignancies. However, the diverse and heterogenous data on indications, operative technique, and outcome evaluation make a comparative analysis of these studies difficult. This review is an appraisal of technique and outcome of minimally invasive liver resection as reported in the current literature with special reference to treatment of metastatic colorectal cancers.

Laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma in the posterosuperior liver segments

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is mostly performed to treat solitary tumors in the anterolateral liver segments (II, III, IVb, V, and VI). Few reports are available on LH for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the posterosuperior liver segments (I, IVa, VII, and VIII), especially in association with cirrhosis. The purpose of this study was to investigate the safety and feasibility of LH in this clinical setting.

METHODS

From January 2008 to January 2011, LH was conducted in 56 patients with HCC in the posterosuperior liver segments (PS group) and 70 patients with HCC in the anterolateral liver segments (AL group) who were admitted to Southwest Hospital of the Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China. The clinical data and follow-up results in the two groups of patients were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

No patient in either group died during the perioperative period. Statistically significant differences were found between the PS and AL groups in terms of the operation time (217.5 ± 63.7 vs 176.8 ± 48.4 min, P = 0.000), volume of blood loss (295.5 ± 186.8 vs 220.4 ± 164.2 ml, P = 0.001), conversion rate from laparoscopy to laparotomy (17.9 vs 7.1 %, P = 0.031), transfusion rate (16.1 vs 4.3 %, P = 0.025), cases of hepatic inflow occlusion (38/18 vs 28/42, P = 0.002), and duration of inflow occlusion (41.3 ± 16.3 vs 31.3 ± 12.2 min, P = 0.005). Parameters with no significant differences between the two groups of patients included tumor size (4.0 ± 1.5 vs 3.9 ± 1.7 cm, P = 0.894), resection margin (1.7 ± 0.7 vs 1.8 ± 0.6 cm, P = 0.102), postoperative complication rate (16.1 vs 17.1 %, P = 0.873), postoperative anal exhaust time (3.2 ± 0.6 vs 3.0 ± 0.6 days, P = 0.361), and postoperative hospital stay (10.5 ± 2.7 vs 10.0 ± 0.6 days, P = 0.102). The serum alanine transaminase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels on postoperative days 1 and 3 were significantly higher in the PS group than in the AL group. There were no significant differences in the postoperative levels of the serum total bilirubin, albumin, ALT, or AST levels on postoperative days 5 and 7. After 2-48 months of follow-up, no significant differences in the 1- and 3-year overall survival rates (92.9 vs 95.7 %, P = 0.487 and 76.0 vs 76.8 %, P = 0.878, respectively) or 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates (85.7 vs 87.1 %, P = 0.797 and 57.6 vs 56.4 %, P = 0.806, respectively) were noted between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LH is safe and feasible for selected patients with HCC in the posterosuperior segments of the liver.

Impact of Laparoscopic Versus Open Hepatectomy on Perioperative Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Primary Hepatic Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To compare the perioperative outcomes of patients with primary hepatic carcinoma treated with laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) with those treated with open hepatectomy (OH).

METHODS

From January 2010 to August 2014, 100 patients with primary hepatic carcinoma were randomly divided into the LH group and OH group respectively, 50 patients in each group. And the incision length, blood loss, operative time, postoperative liver function, anus exhaust time, complications, length of postoperative hospital stay, and cost measures were compared.

RESULTS

LH could achieve shorter incision length, less blood loss, more rapid recovery in liver function and gastrointestinal function, and shorter postoperative hospital stay length compared with OH for primary hepatic carcinoma patients (all P<0.05). However, LH could not significantly shorten operative time, and reduce postoperative complications and hospitalization cost (all P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared with OH, LH could improve perioperative outcomes of primary hepatic carcinoma patients.

Laparoscopic Hepatectomy for Liver Cancer

This chapter covers a range of important topics of laparoscopic hepatectomy as a novel approach toward treatment of liver cancer. Although laparoscopic hepatectomy was performed in a limited number of centers in the 1990s, technological innovations, improvements in surgical techniques and accumulation of experience by surgeons have led to more rapid progress in laparoscopic hepatectomy in the late 2000s for minimally invasive hepatic surgery. Currently, laparoscopic hepatectomy can be performed for all tumor locations and several diseases via several approaches. The laparoscopic approach can be applied to several types of resection, not only for tumors but also for liver transplantation, with equivalent or better results compared with those obtained with open surgery. Therefore, laparoscopic hepatectomy will become a standard procedure for treatment of liver cancer in the near future.

Anatomical Liver Resections Guided by 3-Dimensional Parenchymal Staining Using Fusion Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the feasibility and efficacy of anatomical liver resection (ALR) guided by fused images comprising a macroscopic view and indocyanine green fluorescence imaging (fusion IGFI).

BACKGROUND

ALR is established in treating hepatocellular carcinoma or other malignancies to achieve curability and functional preservation. However, the conventional demarcation technique (CDT) marks only the organ surface and sometimes fails to execute a completely valid demarcation.

METHODS

Twenty-four consecutive ALRs for focal liver malignancy were studied using fusion IGFI. Indocyanine green was administered systemically after selective inflow clamping in 12 patients or by portal puncture and direct injection in 12 patients, and we compared demarcation findings between fusion IGFI and CDT. The strength of contrast between target and nontarget areas was quantitatively calculated as contrast index and compared between IGFI and CDT according to injection technique or state of the liver surface.

RESULTS

Fusion IGFI achieved valid demarcation in 23 of 24 patients (95.8%), whereas CDT achieved valid demarcation in only 10 patients (41.7%) (P < 0.0001). The contrast index of fusion IGFI was 0.81 (0.18-2.51), which was significantly higher than that of CDT at 0.12 (0.01-0.42) (P < 0.0001), and the same result was obtained regardless of the injection method or liver surface state used. ALR was conducted referring to 3-dimensional staining of target parenchyma, with no related perioperative adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Fusion IGFI is a safe imaging technique for ALR that attained valid 3-dimensional parenchymal demarcation with better feasibility and clearer demarcation than CDT.

Traditional versus robot-assisted full laparoscopic liver resection: a matched-pair comparative study

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery was introduced as a means of overcoming the limitations of traditional laparoscopy. This report describes the results of a matched comparative study between traditional (TLLR) and robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection (RLLR) performed in two European centers.

METHODS

From January 2008-April 2013, 46 patients underwent RLLR at San Matteo degli Infermi Hospital. Each patient was matched to a patient who had undergone TLLR at Antoine Béclère Hospital. The variables evaluated were operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were included in each group. Despite matching, more tumors were solitary in the TLLR group (P = 0.02) and more were localized in the superior and posterior segments in the RLLR group (P = 0.003). The median duration of surgery was 210 and 176 min in the RLLR and TLLR groups, respectively (P = 0.12). Conversion rate, blood loss, morbidity, and length of stay were similar in both groups. In multivariate analysis in all cohorts of patients, the sole independent risk factor of postoperative complications was the operative duration [OR = 1.016; P = 0.007].

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic LLR is associated with outcomes similar to those obtained with TLLR. However, robotics may facilitate LLR in patients with superior and posterior liver tumors.

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.

A propensity score-matched case-control comparative study of laparoscopic and open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) for single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in case-controlled patient groups using the propensity score.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2005 and February 2013, 292 patients underwent surgical resection for HCC. Of these, 202 patients who underwent surgical resection for initial treatment for a single mass were enrolled. These patients were divided into two groups according to the method of operation: the Lap group (patients who underwent LLR) and the Open group (patients who underwent OLR). To correct different demographic and clinical factors in the two groups, propensity score matching was used at a 1:1 ratio, and, finally, 102 patients were enrolled in this study, 51 patients in each group. Preoperative characteristics, perioperative results, and long-term results were retrospectively analyzed based on the prospectively recorded database.

RESULTS

Preoperative baseline variables were well balanced in both groups. There were no differences of extent of surgery and rate of anatomical resection between the two groups. With the exception of a shorter postoperative hospital stay in the Lap group than that of the Open group (8.2 days versus 12.3 days; P=.004), there were no significant differences in perioperative, pathological, and long-term outcomes. The 5-year overall survival rates were 80.1% in the Lap group and 85.7% in the Open group, respectively (P=.173). The 5-year disease-free survival rates were 67.8% in the Lap group and 54.8% in the Open group, respectively (P=.519).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR for HCC is safe, and long-term oncologic outcomes in selected patients were comparable to those who underwent OLR.

Total abdominal approach for postero-superior segments (7, 8) in laparoscopic liver surgery: a multicentric experience

Laparoscopic liver resections are frequently performed for peripheral lesions located in the antero-inferior segments. Resection of postero-superior segments is more demanding and dangerous than other segmentectomies, resulting in a longer operation time and increased blood loss. To reduce technical challenges, some authors advocated a modified surgical approach for these segments with the patient placed in the left lateral decubitus with the right arm suspended and suggested technical variations like the use of an additional intercostal trocar, the placement of one or two additional trans-thoracic trocars, a hand-assisted approach or a hybrid method with a median laparotomy. In the present series of 88 patients from four hepatobiliary centers with high volume of activity in Italy, a standard lithotomic position has been routinely used without the need for left lateral decubitus or semi-prone position and through abdominal wall without use of trans-thoracic trocars. This approach allows a more comfortable use of the Pringle maneuver that we used routinely in hepatic resection for PS segments; and, a very short time is needed for conversion, whenever it is required. In our series, laparoscopic resection of liver tumors located in the postero-superior segments of the liver with a total abdominal approach is technically feasible and safe with short-term results similar to other laparoscopic liver resections.

Laparoscopy-Specific Surgical Concepts for Hepatectomy Based on the Laparoscopic Caudal View: A Key to Reboot Surgeons' Minds

BACKGROUND

Despite diffusion of laparoscopic hepatectomy, the acquisition of necessary skills is not easy for open liver surgeons. Concepts and techniques have totally changed in laparoscopic hepatectomy compared with open hepatectomy, which is an underlying cause of a technical hurdle in laparoscopic hepatectomy. This study aimed to illustrate laparoscopy-specific concepts and techniques for hepatectomy.

METHODS

Video footages of laparoscopic and open hepatectomies stored in the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Kyoto University were reviewed to define the differences in surgical view, surgical concept, and technical details, using left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) and right hepatectomy (RH) as representative examples.

RESULTS

By comparison with open LLS and RH, laparoscopy-specific procedures were identified with regard to surgical view, parenchymal transection, available landmarks, and vascular dissection. By laparoscopy, the surgical field was constantly viewed and accessed from the caudal side to the cranial side. Similarly, the parenchyma was divided, and intrahepatic vessels were dissected in the same direction. Laparoscopy-specific landmarks were identified for both LLS and RH, behind the liver.

CONCLUSIONS

The concepts and techniques in laparoscopic hepatectomy are totally different from those of open hepatectomy because of the different surgical views. Understanding the laparoscopy-specific concepts and techniques would facilitate safe and efficient execution of laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomies: clinical outcomes and classification

BACKGROUND

According to the Louisville Statement, laparoscopic major hepatectomy is a heterogeneous category that includes "traditional" trisectionectomies/hemi-hepatectomies and the technically challenging resection of segments 4a, 7, and 8. The aims of this study were to assess differences in clinical outcomes between laparoscopic "traditional" major hepatectomy and resection of "difficult-to-access" posterosuperior segments and to define whether the current classification is clinically valid or needs revision.

METHODS

We reviewed a prospectively collected single-center database of 390 patients undergoing pure laparoscopic liver resection. A total of 156 patients who had undergone laparoscopic major hepatectomy according to the Louisville Statement were divided into two subcategories: laparoscopic "traditional" major hepatectomy (LTMH), including hemi-hepatectomies and trisegmentectomies, and laparoscopic "posterosuperior" major hepatectomy (LPMH), including resection of posterosuperior segments 4a, 7, and 8. LTMH and LPMH subgroups were compared with respect to demographics, intraoperative variables, and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

LTMH was performed in 127 patients (81 %) and LPMH in 29 (19 %). Operation time was a median 330 min for LTMH and 210 min for LPMH (p < 0.0001). Blood loss was a median 500 ml for LTMH and 300 ml for LPMH (p = 0.005). Conversion rate was 9 % for LTMH and nil for LPMH (p = 0.219). In all, 28 patients (22 %) developed postoperative complications after LTMH and 5 (17 %) after LPMH (p = 0.801). Mortality rate was 1.6 % after LTMH and nil after LPMH. Hospital stay was a median 5 days after LTMH and 4 days after LPMH (p = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

The creation of two subcategories of laparoscopic major hepatectomy seems appropriate to reflect differences in intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between LTMH and LPMH.

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.

Pioneering Robotic Liver Surgery in Germany: First Experiences with Liver Malignancies

Background

Minimally invasive liver surgery is growing worldwide with obvious benefits for the treated patients. These procedures maybe improved by robotic techniques, which add several innovative features. In Germany, we were the first surgical department implementing robotic assisted minimally invasive liver resections.

Material and methods

Between June 2013 and March 2015, we performed robotic based minimally invasive liver resections in nine patients with malignant liver disease. Five off these patients suffered from primary and four from secondary liver malignancies. We retrospectively analyzed the perioperative variables of these patients and the oncological follow up.

Results

Mean age of the patients was 63 years (range 45–71). One patient suffered from intrahepatic cholangiocellular, four from hepatocellular carcinoma, and four patients from colorectal liver metastases. In six patients, left lateral liver resection, in two cases single segment resection, and in one case minimally invasive guided liver ablation were performed. Five patients underwent previous abdominal surgery. Mean operation time was 312 min (range 115–458 min). Mean weight of the liver specimens was 182 g (range 62–260 g) and mean estimated blood loss was 251 ml (range 10–650 ml). The mean tumor size was 4.4 cm (range 3.5–5.5 cm). In all cases, R0 status was confirmed with a mean margin of 0.6 cm (range 0.1–1.5 cm). One patient developed small bowel fistula on postoperative day 5, which could be treated conservatively. No patient died. Mean hospital stay of the patients was 6 days (range 3–10 days). During a mean follow up of 12 months (range 1–21 months), two patients developed tumor recurrence.

Conclusion

Robotic-based liver surgery is feasible in patients with primary and secondary liver malignancies. To achieve perioperative parameters comparable to open settings, the learning curve must be passed. Minor liver resections are good candidates to start this technique. But the huge benefits of robotic-based liver resections should be expected in extended procedures beyond minor liver resections with the currently available technology.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in posterosuperior segments

BACKGROUND

Traditional open liver resection remains the classic procedure for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in the posterosuperior segments of the liver (segments I, IVa, VII, and VIII). This study compared the perioperative and oncologic results for laparoscopic versus open liver resection of HCC located in the posterosuperior segments, especially in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

This study included 41 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and 86 who underwent open liver resection (OLR) for HCC in the posterosuperior segments between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2012. There perioperative course and oncologic outcomes were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the LLR and OLR groups in length of operation (242.41 ± 73.69 vs. 235.38 ± 65.80 min), transfusion rate (7.3 vs. 14.0 %), R0 resection rate (100 vs. 97.7 %), or tumor size (4.22 ± 2.05 vs. 4.30 ± 1.49 cm). In contrast, postoperative hospital stay (9.44 ± 2.72 vs. 14.53 ± 6.03 days) was significantly shorter, and postoperative complication rates (17.1 vs. 37.2 %) and intraoperative blood loss (272.20 ± 170.86 vs. 450.12 ± 344.70 mL) significantly lower in the LLR than in the OLR group. In addition, there was no significant difference between the two groups (LLR vs. OLR) regarding 1-year overall survival rate (95.1 vs. 89.5 %), 3-year overall survival rate (78 vs. 76.7 %,), 1-year disease-free survival rate (87.8 vs. 82.6 %,), and 3-year disease-free survival rate (70.7 vs. 68.6 %).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR for selected patients with HCC in the posterosuperior segments may offer the same oncologic outcomes as conventional procedures, while being associated with such advantages as lower blood loss, fewer postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stay.

How surgical technology translates into practice: the model of laparoscopic liver resections performed in France

OBJECTIVES

Analyze, at a national level, the adoption and practice of laparoscopic liver resections (LAP), compared to open resections (OPEN).

BACKGROUND

LAP initiated 20 years ago, has been described for all hepatectomies, and is considered as the reference technique for some resections. There are, however, no data on its adoption outside selected specialty centers.

METHODS

French Healthcare databases were screened to identify all patients who underwent an elective LAP or OPEN between 2007 and 2012. Patients' demographics, associated conditions, indication for surgery, hepatectomy performed, and hospital type and hepatectomy caseload were retrieved. Patients who had possible overcoding of biopsies as wedge resections were identified to select REAL resections. Time trend analyses were performed using a piecewise linear regression and the average annual percent change (AAPC) calculated.

RESULTS

There were 7881 (17.8%) LAP and 36,359 (82.2%) OPEN performed in an average of 483 hospitals. Of these, biopsies accounted for 29.9% of the LAP (7.3% of the OPEN, P<0.0001) and the incidence of LAP biopsies increased after 2009. The AAPC of the incidence of real LAP increased more than that of real OPEN (7.0% vs 1.3%) but most were minor resections (61.1% vs 28.9% for OPEN, P<0.0001), only 15% of patients were operated by LAP and intermediate (or major) resections were performed in 19.5% (or 4.8%) of hospitals performing liver resections. The proportion of resections performed by LAP was inversely related to annual caseload. The overall incidence of resections performed for benign conditions did not increase.

CONCLUSIONS

LAP is not developing, has not been adopted for intermediate/major resections, does not result in overuse for benign indications and some of the 2009 -consensus statements are not applied.

Intercostal and transthoracic trocars enable easier laparoscopic resection of dome liver lesions

BACKGROUND

Dome liver lesions (those in segments VII or VIII) pose a challenge to standard laparoscopic resection. The use of additional intercostal and transthoracic trocars (ITTs) potentially facilitates resection over standard subcostal laparoscopic (SSL) techniques.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively collected liver resection database was performed, selecting all minor resections of segments VII and VIII using the ITT and SSL approaches. The techniques of intercostal transdiaphragmatic access are described and the surgical outcomes of the two groups compared.

RESULTS

A total of 19 patients were analysed. The ITT group included 8 patients and the SSL group included 11. The groups were comparable in median lesion size (20 mm in the ITT group and 26 mm in the SSL group). Blood loss, operative times, morbidity and conversion rates were similar. There was no lung injury or postoperative clinical pneumothorax in any patient undergoing transdiaphragmatic access. Median hospital stay was significantly shorter in the ITT group (2 days) than in the SSL group (6 days) (P = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

The ITT approach is safe, effective and complementary to standard laparoscopic techniques for the resection of small tumours in segments VII and VIII.

3D visualization reduces operating time when compared to high-definition 2D in laparoscopic liver resection: a case-matched study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of three-dimensional (3D) visualization on operative performance during elective laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

BACKGROUND

Major limitations of conventional laparoscopy are lack of depth perception and tactile feedback. Introduction of robotic technology, which employs 3D imaging, has removed only one of these technical obstacles. Despite the significant advantages claimed, 3D systems have not been widely accepted.

METHODS

In this single institutional study, 20 patients undergoing LLR by high-definition 3D laparoscope between April 2014 and August 2014 were matched to a retrospective control group of patients who underwent LLR by two-dimensional (2D) laparoscope.

RESULTS

The number of patients who underwent major liver resection was 5 (25%) in the 3D group and 10 (25%) in the 2D group. There was no significant difference in contralateral wedge resection or combined resections between the 3D and 2D groups. There was no difference in the proportion of patients undergoing previous abdominal surgery (70 vs. 77%, p = 0.523) or previous hepatectomy (20 vs. 27.5%, p = 0.75). The operative time was significantly shorter in the 3D group when compared to 2D (225 ± 109 vs. 284 ± 71 min, p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in blood loss in the 3D group when compared to 2D group (204 ± 226 in 3D vs. 252 ± 349 ml in 2D group, p = 0.291). The major complication rates were similar, 5% (1/20) and 7.5% (3/40), respectively, (p ≥ 0.99).

CONCLUSION

3D visualization may reduce the operating time compared to high-definition 2D. Further large studies, preferably prospective randomized control trials are required to confirm this.

Outcomes of laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in the era of laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Although there are very few reports of laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (RPS), we believe this is a promising operative method for lesions confined to the right posterior section of the liver.

METHOD

Between September 2003 and June 2012, laparoscopic liver resection was performed in 408 patients at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. We analyzed the clinical data of 24 patients who underwent laparoscopic RPS for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and compared outcomes with patients who underwent open RPS (n = 19).

RESULTS

The mean operation time was 567 minutes, and the mean postoperative hospital stay was 10.6 ± 4.8 days. The mean tumor-free margin was 3.0 ± 5.8 cm. There were no deaths or major complications. Two complications occurred, which were managed by percutaneous drainage. There were three conversions to laparotomy because of an insufficient tumor margin. These patients were treated when we had limited experience of laparoscopic resection. Extended RPS (n = 6), which involved RPS and resection of the right hepatic vein, was performed to achieve an adequate margin if the tumor was located very close to the right hepatic vein. The mean operation time was longer in laparoscopy group than that in open group (P < .001), but there was no difference in the mean resection margin (P = .450) and the rate of postoperative complications (P = .380) between 2 groups. There was no statistical difference in 5-year overall patient survival rate (79.1% vs 77.7%; P = .754) and the 5-year disease-free survival rate (42.2% vs 51.5%; P = .752) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic RPS is feasible when performed by experienced surgeons, but further refinements of the surgical technique are needed to reduce operation time.

Systematic review of the use of pre-operative simulation and navigation for hepatectomy: current status and future perspectives

Pre-operative simulation using three-dimensional (3D) reconstructions have been suggested to enhance surgical planning of hepatectomy. Evidence on its benefits for hepatectomy patients remains limited. This systematic review examined the use and impact of pre-operative simulation and intraoperative navigation on hepatectomy outcomes. A systematical searched electronic databases for studies reporting on the use and results of simulation and navigation for hepatectomy was performed. The primary outcome was change in operative plan based on simulation. Secondary outcomes included operating time (min), estimated blood loss, surgical margins, 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality, and study-specific outcomes. From 222 citations, we included 11 studies including 497 patients. All were observational cohort studies. No study compared hepatectomy with and without simulation. All studies performed 3D reconstruction and segmentation, most commonly with volumetrics measurements. In six studies reporting intraoperative navigation, five relied on ultrasound, and one on a resection map. Of two studies reporting on it, the resection line was changed intraoperatively in one third of patients, based on simulation. Virtually predicted liver volumes (Pearson correlation r = 0.917 to 0.995) and surgical margins (r = 0.84 to 0.967) correlated highly with actual ones in eight studies. Heterogeneity of the included studies precluded meta-analysis. Pre-operative simulation seems accurate in measuring volumetrics and surgical margins. Current studies lack intraoperative transposition of simulation for direct navigation. Simulation appears useful planning of hepatectomies, but further work is warranted focusing on the development of improved tools and appraisal of their clinical impact compared to traditional resection.

Modified laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatic hemangioma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) using many different surgical techniques has become increasingly popular for the management of hepatic tumors. The performance of surgical procedures involving the least possible impairment is expected increasingly more often by both surgeons and patients. We herein describe a clinical cohort of ten patients with hepatic cavernous hemangioma (HCH) who underwent modified LH (MLH) with a new technique. We herein present the advantages of the low level of impairment during performance of this modified procedure and compare the outcomes of MLH with those of traditional LH (TLH) for HCH.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated the treatment outcomes in 24 patients with HCH who underwent MLH (n = 10) or TLH (n = 14) from February 2008 to January 2013. Their demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were compared.

RESULTS

MLH was successful in all patients. An electromechanical morcellator allowed for easy extraction of the entire HCH without the use of a cumbersome retrieval bag, enlarged incision, or hand-assisted incision. There was no conversion to an open operation or significant perioperative complications. The operation time (P = 0.037), time to removal of the HCH (P < 0.0001), visual analog scale pain score on the first postoperative day (P = 0.012), time to off-bed activity (P = 0.036), and postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.048) were significantly lower in the MLH group than in the TLH group.

CONCLUSIONS

MLH involving the use of an electromechanical morcellator provides expedient recovery and minimal postoperative pain and scarring. It is a feasible, effective, and safe surgical procedure and embodies all of the benefits of minimally invasive surgery for patients with HCH.

Age is no longer a limit: two cases of hepatectomy in patients over 90 years old

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common malignant tumor with poor prognosis. The age of patients affected by HCC is considered to be increasing, and several studies have reported significantly higher rates of morbidity and mortality after hepatectomy for HCC in elderly patients. However, other studies have reported that the short- and long-term outcomes of surgery for HCC in elderly patients are similar to those in younger patients. Whether the indications for hepatic resection in elderly patients resemble those in younger patients has thus been questioned. We describe two cases of patients over 90 years old who underwent major hepatectomy for HCC, representing the oldest patients in the world to have done so.

Risk factors for complications after laparoscopic major hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic major hepatectomy (MH) is becoming increasingly common in several specialized centres, data regarding outcomes are limited. The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for postoperative complications of purely laparoscopic MH at a single centre.

METHODS

All patients who underwent purely laparoscopic MH between January 1998 and March 2014 at the authors' institution were enrolled. Demographic, clinicopathological and perioperative factors were collected prospectively, and data were analysed retrospectively. The dependent variables studied were the occurrence of overall and major complications (Dindo-Clavien grade III or above).

RESULTS

A total of 183 patients were enrolled. The types of MH included left-sided hepatectomy in 40 patients (21·9 per cent), right-sided hepatectomy in 135 (73·8 per cent) and central hepatectomy in eight (4·4 per cent). Median duration of surgery was 255 (range 100-540) min, and median blood loss was 280 (10-4500) ml. Complications occurred in 100 patients (54·6 per cent), and the 90-day all-cause mortality rate was 2·7 per cent. Liver-specific and general complications occurred in 62 (33·9 per cent) and 38 (20·8 per cent) patients respectively. Multivariable analysis identified one independent risk factor for global postoperative complications: intraoperative simultaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (odds ratio (OR) 6·93, 95 per cent c.i. 1·49 to 32·14; P = 0·013). There were two independent risk factors for major complications: intraoperative blood transfusion (OR 2·50, 1·01 to 6·23; P = 0·049) and bilobar resection (OR 2·47, 1·00 to 6·06; P = 0·049).

CONCLUSION

Purely laparoscopic MH is feasible and safe. Simultaneous RFA and bilobar resection should probably be avoided.

A prospective clinical study evaluating the development of bowel wall edema during laparoscopic and open visceral surgery

BACKGROUND

To examine bowel wall edema development in laparoscopic and open major visceral surgery.

METHODS

In a prospective study, 47 consecutively operated patients with gastric and pancreatic resections were included. Twenty-seven patients were operated in a conventional open procedure (open group) and 20 in a laparoscopic fashion (lap group). In all procedures, a small jejunal segment was resected during standard preparation, of which we measured the dry-wet ratio. Furthermore, HE staining was performed for measuring of bowel wall thickness and edema assessment.

RESULTS

Mean value (±std) of dry-wet ratio was significantly lower in the open than in the lap group (0.169 ± 0.017 versus 0.179 ± 0.015; p = 0.03) with the same amount of fluid administration in both groups and a longer infusion interval during laparoscopic surgery. Subgroup analyses (only pancreatic resections) still showed similar results. Histologic examination depicted a significantly larger bowel wall thickness in the open group.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery does not seem to lead to the bowel wall edema observed to occur in open surgery regardless of the degree of intravenous fluid administration, thus supporting its use even in major visceral surgery.

Laparoscopic transthoracic liver resection

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive laparoscopic liver surgery is being performed with increased frequency. Lesions located on the anterior and lateral liver segments are easier to approach through laparoscopy. On the other hand, laparoscopic access to posterior and superior segments is less frequent and technically demanding.

AIM

Technical description for laparoscopic transthoracic access employed on hepatic wedge resection.

TECHNIQUE

Laparoscopic transthoracic hepatic wedge resection on segment 8.

CONCLUSION

Transthoracic approach allows access to the posterior and superior segments of the liver, and should be considered for oddly located tumors and in patients with numerous previous abdominal interventions.