Laparoscopic segmentectomy of the liver: from segment I to VIII

Expert consensus on laparoscopic hepatectomy (2013 version)

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy has many advantages over open surgery, including minimization of local injury, reduced systemic reactions, and faster postoperative recovery. The aim of this "Consensus" is to provide guidance and reference to surgeons who perform, or are interested in performing laparoscopic liver surgeries.

METHODS

The National Hepatic Surgery Group of the Society of Surgery, a professional society of the Chinese Medical Association, gathered 60 expert hepatic surgeons in Wuhan, China in December 2012, and an "Expert Consensus on Laparoscopic Hepatectomy" was developed.

RESULTS

The types of hepatectomy, indications and contraindications, preoperative preparation, anesthesia, patient position, insufflation pressure, port position, control of hepatic inflow and outflow, indications for conversion to open surgery, and surgical devices and equipment are reviewed. Techniques and procedures of various laparoscopic hepatectomies are also 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.

A novel difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic liver resection

Early on, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was limited to partial resection, but major LLR is no longer rare. A difficulty scoring system is required to guide surgeons in advancing from simple to highly technical laparoscopic resections. Subjects were 90 patients who had undergone pure LLR at three medical institutions (30 patients/institution) from January 2011 to April 2014. Surgical difficulty was assessed by the operator using an index of 1-10 with the following divisions: 1-3 low difficulty, 4-6 intermediate difficulty, and 7-10 high difficulty. Weighted kappa statistic was used to calculate the concordance between the operators' and reviewers' (expert surgeon) difficulty index. Inter-rater agreement (weighted kappa statistic) between the operators' and reviewers' assessments was 0.89 with the three-level difficulty index and 0.80 with the 10-level difficulty index. A 10-level difficulty index by linear modeling based on clinical information revealed a weighted kappa statistic of 0.72 and that scored by the extent of liver resection, tumor location, tumor size, liver function, and tumor proximity to major vessels revealed a weighted kappa statistic of 0.68. We proposed a new scoring system to predict difficulty of various LLRs preoperatively. The calculated score well reflected difficulty.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases in elderly patients: a single-center, case-matched study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) among elderly patients has increased; therefore, older patients are increasingly being considered for hepatic resection. However, data regarding the outcome of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) in elderly patients are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LMH in elderly patients with CRLM.

METHODS

From January 1998 to September 2013, a total of 31 patients aged ≥ 70 years (elderly group) were matched with 62 patients < 70 years (young group) by demographics, tumor characteristics, and details of surgical procedures.

RESULTS

The elderly group was characterized by a higher incidence of hypertension (41.9 vs. 17.7 %, P = 0.022), ≥ 2 comorbidities (32.3 vs. 11.3 %, P = 0.021), and lower prevalence of metastatic rectal cancer (12.9 vs. 38.7 %, P = 0.015). Intraoperative variables, such as surgical duration (300 vs. 240 min, P = 0.920), blood loss (400 vs. 300 mL, P = 0.361), and transfusion rate (9.7 vs. 12.9 %, P = 0.726), were not notably different between the groups. Postoperative mortality (0 vs. 0 %), complications (54.8 vs. 41.9 %, P = 0.276), and major complications (27.4 vs. 16.1 %, P = 0.303, respectively) were comparable between the groups. The 3-year overall survival rates were 61.7 % in the young group (median 40 months) and 57.9 % in the elderly group (median 39 months), respectively (P = 0.842).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results clearly demonstrated that LMH for CRLM could be safely performed in elderly patients; thus, advanced age itself should not be regarded as a contraindication for LMH.

Ultrasound-guided laparoscopic liver resections

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative liver ultrasound has an established role in liver surgery to complete staging and to guide resection. The same performances should be expected by laparoscopic ultrasound (LUS).

METHODS

LUS is first performed to identify relationships between tumor and vasculo-biliary pedicles. The planes where the main vascular structures run are marked on the liver surface. Parenchymal transection is performed and each vessel recognized during LUS exploration is divided.

RESULTS

From 01/2009 to 10/2013, in 61 out of 742 liver resections (8.2 %), a laparoscopic approach was attempted. The conversion rate was 9.8 % (six patients). No conversion was related to bleeding or intraoperative complications. The remnant 55 patients were affected by benign lesions in 11 cases and malignant tumors in 44. The resections included 3 left hepatectomies, 14 bisegmentectomies Sg2-3, 5 segmentectomies, and 38 wedge resections. Associated procedures were performed in eight patients (14.5 %), including four colorectal resections. Median duration of surgery was 150 min (60-345 min). Median operative blood loss was 100 mL (0-500 mL). Median size of resected tumor was 2.5 cm (0.9-8 cm). Median surgical margin in oncological resections was 7 mm (0-50 mm). Postoperative complications occurred in four patients (7.2 %), all grade 2 according to Dindo classification. No liver-related morbidity occurred. Median length of hospital stay was 5 days (3-9 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided liver resections can be performed by laparoscopic approach with the same accuracy than open surgery.

Role of intercostal trocars on laparoscopic liver resection for tumors in segments 7 and 8

Performing laparoscopic liver resection for lesions located in segment 7 and 8 is technically difficult, as the operative field is far from the conventional trocar site, and the liver impedes free motion of the laparoscopic instrument. Inserting the port through the intercostal space (ICS) may facilitate liver resection for these lesions. From January 2012 to July 2013, five patients (four men and one woman) underwent laparoscopic S7 or 8 segmentectomy for liver metastasis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Ports were inserted at the 7th and 9th ICS, respectively, in addition to conventional abdominal ports. The mean age was 58 ± 10 (45-74) years; operation time, 197 ± 68 (110-300) minutes; blood loss, 161 ± 138 (40-320) ml; and length of hospital stay, 7 ± 3 (4-12) days. Pathologic findings revealed three, one, and one case(s) of colon cancer metastasis, breast cancer metastasis, and HCC, respectively. The mean tumor size and tumor-free margin were 2.2 ± 1.1 cm and 5.8 ± 1.9 mm, respectively. There were no postoperative complications. Laparoscopic liver resection using intercostal trocars could be a useful method for tumors located in segments 7 and 8 of the liver in selected patients.

Laparoscopic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between Middle Eastern and Western experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is growing in popularity, but the short- and long-term outcome of patients undergoing LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has not yet been established.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS) from cited English and Chinese publications. Clinical and survival parameters were extracted. The search was last conducted in October 2013. After application of selective criteria, 24 remaining original studies with more than 15 patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the Western experience, mean operative time was between 150 to 300 minutes, and mean blood loss ranged from 55 to 452 mL. Transfusion was required in all series, ranging from 2.8% to 50%. The conversion rate ranged from 5% to 19.4%. Three cases of death were reported. General morbidity rate ranged from 1.5% to 25%. Specific complications were divided into hemorrhage (2.4% to 25%), ascites (3.7% to 15.3%), and biliary collection (0.6% to 5%). Liver insufficiency was reported in two cases. Mean hospital stay ranged from 5.4 to 15 days. In all case-matched studies, LLR was statistically associated with a shorter hospital stay. The 5-year overall survival rate ranged from 55% to 70%. No trocar-site recurrence was observed. The recurrence rate ranged from 21.4% to 50%. Comparative studies did not demonstrate any significant difference in terms of recurrence between LLR and open liver resection (OLR). In the Middle Eastern experience, mean operative time ranged from 147 to 325 minutes, and mean blood loss ranged from 88 to 808 mL. Transfusion was required, ranging from 1.8% to 19.2%. The conversion rate ranged from 1.8% to 18.6%, and four series reported no conversion. There was no mortality. The main specific complication was ascites (1.7% to 26.6%). A biliary collection was reported in only two series (10.7% and 13.3%), and only one case of postoperative liver insufficiency was reported. Mean hospital stay ranged from 4 to 11.5 days. Statistically, three comparative studies reported a shorter postoperative hospital stay following LLR versus OLR. The 5-year overall survival rate ranged from 50% to 76.6%. Comparative studies did not demonstrate any significant difference in terms of overall survival and recurrence rate between LLR and OLR. No trocar-site recurrence was reported. The recurrence rate ranged from 26.9% to 45.5%, and two series reported no recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery should be considered an acceptable alternative for the treatment of HCC.

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.

Using a 'no drain' policy in 342 laparoscopic hepatectomies: which factors predict failure?

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to identify factors that predict the failure of a 'no drain' policy in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

METHODS

Surgical outcomes in 342 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy were reviewed. Drains were placed only for the following predefined criteria: (i) intraoperative bile leak; (ii) bilioenteric anastomosis, and (iii) increased risk for postoperative bleeding ('no drain' policy). Factors leading to need for postoperative drainage or reoperation were evaluated.

RESULTS

Drains were placed in 44 patients (drainage group). Postoperatively, additional procedures were required in five (11.4%) patients in the drainage group and in 18 (6.0%) patients in the no-drainage group. Multivariate analysis suggested that blood loss of >400 ml [odds ratio (OR) 4.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41-14.2; P = 0.010] and preoperative chemotherapy (OR = 2.24, 95% CI 0.82-6.48; P = 0.120) may increase the risk for need for postoperative procedures when intraoperative prophylactic drainage is not used.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic drainage during liver resection should be considered not only in the presence of uncontrollable bile leak or concern for postoperative bleeding risk, but also in patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy and those in whom intraoperative blood loss is >400 ml. Otherwise, a 'no drain' policy is safe and would enhance the advantages of minimally invasive liver surgery.

Laparoscopic liver resection in the semiprone position for tumors in the anterosuperior and posterior segments, using a novel dual-handling technique and bipolar irrigation system

Background

Hepatic tumors in the lower edge and lateral segments are commonly treated by laparoscopic liver resection. Tumors in the anterosuperior and posterior segments are often large and locally invasive, and resection is associated with a higher risk of insufficient surgical margins, massive intraoperative bleeding, and breaching of the tumor. Laparoscopic surgery for such tumors often involves major hepatectomy, including resection of a large volume of normal liver tissue. We developed a novel method of laparoscopic resection of tumors in these segments with the patient in the semiprone position, using a dual-handling technique with an intercostal transthoracic port. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and usefulness of our technique.

Methods

Of 160 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection at our center from June 2008 to May 2013, we retrospectively reviewed those with tumors in the anterosuperior and posterior segments. Patients were placed supine or semilateral during surgery until January 2010 and semiprone from February 2010.

Results

Before the introduction of the semiprone position in February 2010, a total of 7 of 40 patients (17.5 %) with tumors in the anterosuperior and posterior segments underwent laparoscopic liver resection, and after introduction of the semiprone position, 69 of 120 patients (57.5 %) with tumors in the anterosuperior and posterior segments underwent laparoscopic liver resection (P < 0.001). There were no conversions to open surgery, reoperations, or deaths. The semiprone group had a significantly higher proportion of patients who underwent partial resection or segmentectomy of S7 or S8, lower intraoperative blood loss, and shorter hospital stay than the supine group (all P < 0.05). Postoperative complication rates were similar between groups.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic liver resection in the semiprone position is safe and increases the number of patients who can be treated by laparoscopic surgery without increasing the frequency of major hepatectomy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00464-014-3469-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Visualization of subcapsular hepatic malignancy by indocyanine-green fluorescence imaging during laparoscopic hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic hepatectomy has increasingly been used to treat cancers in the liver, the accuracy of intraoperative diagnosis may be inferior to that of open surgery because the ability to visualize and palpate the liver surface during laparoscopy is relatively limited. Fluorescence imaging has the potential to provide a simple compensatory diagnostic tool for identification of cancers in the liver during laparoscopic hepatectomy.

METHODS

In 17 patients who were to undergo laparoscopic hepatectomy, 0.5 mg/kg body weight of indocyanine green (ICG) was administered intravenously within the 2 weeks prior to surgery. Intraoperatively, a laparoscopic fluorescence imaging system obtained fluorescence images of its surfaces during mobilization of the liver.

RESULTS

In all, 16 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) and 16 liver metastases (LMs) were resected. Of these, laparoscopic ICG fluorescence imaging identified 12 HCCs (75%) and 11 LMs (69%) on the liver surfaces distributed over Couinaud's segments 1-8, including the 17 tumors that had not been identified by visual inspections of normal color images. The 23 tumors that were identified by fluorescence imaging were located closer to the liver surfaces than another nine tumors that were not identified by fluorescence imaging (median [range] depth 1 [0-5] vs. 11 [8-30] mm; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Like palpation during open hepatectomy, laparoscopic ICG fluorescence imaging enables real-time identification of subcapsular liver cancers, thus facilitating estimation of the required extent of hepatic mobilization and determination of the location of an appropriate hepatic transection line.

The comparison of oncologic and clinical outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Purpose

We evaluate the operative outcome and oncologic outcome of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and compare with open liver resection.

Methods

From January 2004 to December 2012, clinical data of 70 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection for HCC (laparoscopic liver resection group, lapa-group) were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Control group (open liver resection group, open-group) were retrospectively matched, and compared with lapa-group.

Results

Laparoscopic major liver resections were performed in 4 patients. Laparoscopic anatomical resections and nonanatomical resections were performed in 39 patients, and 31 patients, respectively. Mean operative time was shorter in lapa-group (215.5 ± 121.84 minutes vs. 282.30 ± 80.34 minutes, P = 0.001), mean intraoperative transfusion rate and total amount were small in lapa-group (24.28%, 148.57 ± 3,354.98 mL vs. 40.78%, 311.71 ± 477.01 mL). Open conversion occurred in 6 patients (8.57%) because of bleeding, inadequate resection, invisible mass on intraoperative ultrasonography, and tumor rupture. In lapa-group and open-group, 3-year disease-free survival rates were 58.3% ± 0.08%, and 62.6% ± 0.06%, respectively (P = 0.773). In lapa-group and open-group 3-year overall survival rates were 65.3% ± 0.8%, and 65.7% ± 0.6%, respectively (P = 0.610).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic liver resection for HCC is feasible and safe in a large number of patients, with reasonable operative and oncologic results.

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.

Pure laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma with chronic liver disease

Pure laparoscopic hepatectomy is a less invasive procedure than conventional open hepatectomy for the resection of hepatic lesions. Increases in experiences with the technique, in combination with advances in technology, have promoted the popularity of pure laparoscopic hepatectomy. However, indications for usage and potential contraindications of the procedure remain unresolved. The characteristics and specific advantages of the procedure, especially for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with chronic liver diseases, are reviewed and discussed in this paper. For cirrhotic patients with liver tumors, pure laparoscopic hepatectomy minimizes destruction of the collateral blood and lymphatic flow from laparotomy and mobilization, and mesenchymal injury from compression. Therefore, pure laparoscopic hepatectomy has the specific advantage of minimal postoperative ascites production that leads to lowering the risk of disturbance in water or electrolyte balance and hypoproteinemia. It minimizes complications that routinely trigger postoperative serious liver failure. Under adequate patient positioning and port arrangement, the partial resection of the liver in the area of subphrenic space, peri-inferior vena cava area or next to the attachment of retro-peritoneum is facilitated in pure laparoscopic surgery by providing good vision and manipulation in the small operative field. Furthermore, the features of reduced post-operative adhesion, good vision, and manipulation within the small area between the adhesions make this procedure safer in the context of repeat hepatectomy procedures. These improved features are especially advantageous for patients with liver cirrhosis and multicentric and/or metachronous HCCs.

Caudal approach to pure laparoscopic posterior sectionectomy under the laparoscopy-specific view

AIM: To study our novel caudal approach laparoscopic posterior-sectionectomy with parenchymal transection prior to mobilization under laparoscopy-specific view.

METHODS: Points of the procedure are: (1) Patients are put in left lateral position and posterior sector is not mobilized; (2) Glissonian pedicle of the sector is encircled and clamped extra-hepatically and divided afterward during the transection; (3) Dissection of inferior vena cava (IVC) anterior wall behind the liver is started from caudal. Simultaneously, liver transection is performed to search right hepatic vein (RHV) from caudal; (4) Liver transection proceeds to the bifurcation of the vessels from caudal to cranial, exposing the surfaces of IVC and RHV. Since the remnant liver sinks down, the cutting surface is well-opend; and (5) After the completion of transection, dissection of the resected liver from retroperitoneum is easily performed using the gravity. This approach was performed for a 63 years old woman with liver metastasis close to RHV.

RESULTS: RHV exposure is required for R0 resection of the lesion. Although the cutting plane is horizontal in supine position and the gravity obstructs the exposure in the small subphrenic space, the use of specific characteristics of laparoscopic hepatectomy, such as the good vision for the dorsal part of the liver and IVC and facilitated dissection using the gravity with the patient positioning, made the complete RHV exposure during the liver transection easy to perform. The operation time was 341 min and operative blood loss was

1356 mL. Her postoperative hospital stay was uneventfull and she is well without any signs of recurrences 14 mo after surgery.

CONCLUSION: The new procedure is feasible and useful for the patients with tumors close to RHV and the need of the exposure of RHV.