Short- and medium-term results of totally laparoscopic resection for colorectal liver metastases

Safety of laparoscopic liver resection for high-risk patients

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

To investigate the safety of laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) for high-risk patients (HRs) with preoperative comorbidities affecting the heart, lungs, kidneys, glucose tolerance, and central nervous system.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 585 patients who had undergone total hepatectomies from 2006 to 2020. Among them, 239 patients underwent LLRs, and 349 underwent open liver resections (OLRs). The safety and validity of LLRs were analyzed by comparing outcomes and preoperative records between HRs and nonhigh-risk patients (nHRs). HRs were defined as patients with any type of chronic heart disease rated New York Heart Association II or higher, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease rated stage III or higher, chronic kidney disease rated stage III or higher, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, or cerebrovascular disease with neurological sequelae.

RESULTS

A total of 117 LLRs (49.0%) were performed in HRs, and there were more patients with ASA class III or higher than nHRs. Complications of Clavien-Dindo classification grade 3b or higher were not observed in HRs and in only one nHR. Furthermore, no postoperative exacerbations of the five HRs factors were observed in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Rigorous assessment of surgical indications and perioperative management can promote safe LLRs, even in HRs with comorbidities.

Long-term oncological outcomes for HALS/Hybrid vs pure laparoscopic approach in colorectal liver metastases: a propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing hand-assisted laparoscopic (HALS)/Hybrid and pure laparoscopic (PLS) resection for colorectal cancer liver metastasis have focused on short-term results, while long-term oncological outcomes remain understudied.

METHODS

We established a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study from four centers with experience in minimally invasive surgery between 2004 and 2020. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Other endpoints analyzed were intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize baseline differences.

RESULTS

A total of 219 HALS/Hybrid (57.8%) and 160 PLS (42.2%) patients were included. After PSM, 155 patients remained in each group. Operative time (182 vs. 248 min, p = 0.012), use of intraoperative ablation (12.3 vs. 4.5%, p = 0.024), positive resection margin (4.5 vs 13.2%, p = 0.012), and pringle time (21 vs. 37 min, p = 0.001) were higher in PLS group. DFS at 1, 3, 5, and 7 years in HALS/Hybrid and PLS groups were 65.4%, 39.3%, 37.5%, and 36.3% vs. 64.9%, 38.0%, 33.1%, and 33.1%, respectively (p = 0.84). OS at 1, 3, 5, and 7 years in HALS/Hybrid and PLS groups were 94.5%, 71.4%, 54.3%, and 46.0% vs. 96.0%, 68.5%, 51.2%, and 41.2%, respectively (p = 0.73).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests no differences in long-term oncologic outcomes between the two techniques. We discovered that longer total operative, pringle time, higher rates of intraoperative ablation, and positive resection margins were associated with PLS. These differences in favor of HALS/Hybrid could be due to a shorter learning curve and a greater ability to control hemorrhage.

The Value of Laparoscopic Simultaneous Colorectal and Hepatic Resection for Synchronous Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis: A Propensity Score Matching Study

Purpose

The aim of this study is to investigate the value of total laparoscopic simultaneous colorectal and hepatic resection in patients with synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases (sCRLMs).

Methods

sCRLM patients who underwent simultaneous resection from December 2014 to December 2018 in Shanghai Cancer Center, Fudan University were recruited and analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into laparoscopic, open, and hybrid surgery groups. The intraoperative information, postoperative short-term outcome, and long-term survival were compared among the three groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance baselines.

Results

A total of 281 patients were recruited. After PSM, 34 patients were selected from both the laparoscopic and the open surgery group. Forty-seven patients were also selected from both the laparoscopic and the hybrid surgery group. The clinicopathologic baselines between the laparoscopic surgery group and the other two groups were well matched. All the operation-related indicators between laparoscopic surgery and hybrid surgery were similar. However, compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery showed significantly longer operation time (229.09 ± 10.94 min vs. 192.24 ± 9.49 min, p = 0.013) and less intraoperative blood loss [100.00 (50.00–300.00) ml vs. 200.00 (150.00–400.00) ml, p = 0.021]. For postoperative morbidity, there was no significant difference between the laparoscopic surgery group and the hybrid or the open surgery group (23.40% vs. 31.91% and 17.65% vs. 26.47%, p = 0.356 and p = 0.380). Long-term survival analysis showed that there were no significant differences in all 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival, liver recurrence-free survival (RFS), and whole RFS between laparoscopic surgery and hybrid surgery (p = 0.334, p = 0.286, and p = 0.558) or open surgery (p = 0.230, p = 0.348, and p = 0.450).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic simultaneous resection for sCRLM shows slight advantages in surgical safety and short-term outcome, and does not compromise long-term survival.

Laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases - short- and long-term outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

For well-selected patients and procedures, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become the gold standard for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) when performed in specialized centers. However, little is currently known concerning patient-related and peri-operative factors that could play a role in survival outcomes associated with LLR for CRLM.

AIM

To provide an extensive summary of reported outcomes and prognostic factors associated with LLR for CRLM.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library using the keywords "colorectal liver metastases", "laparoscopy", "liver resection", "prognostic factors", "outcomes" and "survival". Only publications written in English and published until December 2019 were included. Furthermore, abstracts of which no accompanying full text was published, reviews, case reports, letters, protocols, comments, surveys and animal studies were excluded. All search results were saved to Endnote Online and imported in Rayyan for systematic selection. Data of interest were extracted from the included publications and tabulated for qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 1064 articles retrieved by means of a systematic and grey literature search, 77 were included for qualitative analysis. Seventy-two research papers provided data concerning outcomes of LLR for CRLM. Fourteen papers were eligible for extraction of data concerning prognostic factors affecting survival outcomes. Qualitative analysis of the collected data showed that LLR for CRLM is safe, feasible and provides oncological efficiency. Multiple research groups have reported on the short-term advantages of LLR compared to open procedures. The obtained results accounted for minor LLR, as well as major LLR, simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and liver resection, LLR of posterosuperior segments, two-stage hepatectomy and repeat LLR for CRLM. Few research groups so far have studied prognostic factors affecting long-term outcomes of LLR for CRLM.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, LLR for CRLM provides good short- and long-term outcomes, independent of the complexity of the procedure.

Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Liver Metastasis: Analysis of Short-term and Long-term Results

BACKGROUND

There is scant data regarding the outcomes of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). The aim of this study is to report our experience and analyze the short-term and long-term results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective study of patients undergoing HALS for CRLM in 2 university affiliated medical centers.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirty-eight liver procedures were performed on 145 patients including 205 parenchymal sparing resections and 33 anatomic resections. The median number of metastases was 1 (range: 1 to 8), 38 patients (26.2%) had 3 or more metastases, and 41 patients (28.3 had a bi-lobar disease. The tumor size was 20 (2 to 90) mm, and 52 patients (36.6%) had a tumor larger than 30 mm. Nighty-nine patients (67.8%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In 8 patients (5.5%) the laparoscopic liver resection was combined with ablation, and 16 patients (11%) underwent a synchronous resection of colorectal cancer. The median operative time, blood loss during surgery, and postoperative hospital stay were 163 minutes, 300 mL, and 4 days, respectively. The median modified Iwate complexity score was 4 (0 to 10) and the conversion rate to open surgery was 5.5%. The overall and major complication rates were 23.8% and 3.6%, respectively. The mortality rate was 0.7%. R0 resections were achieved in 91% of patients. Median overall survival for all the cohort (intend to treat) was 59 months, and the 8- and 10-year overall survival rates were 47.3% and 24.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that HALS is a safe and efficacious treatment for selected patients with CRLM.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy is safe and effective for the management of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases in a population-based analysis in Ontario, Canada. A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has been deemed safe, and, in the case of minor hepatectomy, the standard of care. Short-, long-term outcomes and costs of LH compared with open hepatectomy (OH) in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases have not been well described at the population level.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer undergoing hepatectomy were included in this population-based retrospective cohort study from 2006- to 2014. Postoperative complications (per Clavien-Dindo) and survival were analyzed using a linear mixed model and Cox-Proportional hazards model respectively. Costs of surgery and the 90-day postoperative period were considered in 2018 Canadian dollars and compared from the perspective of a third-party payer.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 56 months, 95% confidence interval (CI): 51 to 68), there were 2991 hepatectomies (OH: 2551 (85%) and LH: 440 (15%)). LH compared to OH was more common for patients >70 years-old (30% vs. 22%, p = 0.004) and for minor hepatectomy (52% vs. 32%, p < 0.001) respectively. By multivariable analyses, OH was associated with similar 90-day mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% CI: 0.56-1.97), and overall survival (Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.08, 95% CI: 0.90-1.29), but higher rates of major postoperative complications (OR 1.34, 95% CI: 1.03-1.76), higher cost (median difference $6,163, 95% CI: $3229 to $9096), and longer length of hospital stay (LOS) (mean difference 3.04 days, 95% CI: 2.7 to 3.91).

CONCLUSION

LH was associated with lower postoperative complications, shorter LOS, which translated into lower costs to the healthcare system, without differences in postoperative mortality and survival.

Laparoscopic liver resection for liver tumours in proximity to major vasculature: A single-center comparative study

BACKGROUND

With growing popularity and experience in laparoscopic liver surgery, the options for more difficult procedures increase. Only small case series have been published regarding laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for tumours in proximity to major vessels (MVs). The aim was to compare outcomes of LLR for tumours located less or more than 15 mm from MVs.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database of consecutive LLR (October 2011-August 2017). Proximity to MVs (PMV) was defined as lesions located within 15 mm to the caval vein, hepatic veins and portal vein (main trunk and first branches). The control group were all lesions located more than 15 mm from MVs.

RESULTS

Some 60/235 LLR were performed for lesions in proximity to major vasculature (24%). In the PMV group, median IWATE Difficulty Score was higher (8.5 (IQR: 6.0-9.0) VS 5.0 (IQR: 3.0-6.0), p < 0.001) as was the use of CUSA® (45.0% VS 8.6%, p < 0.001) and Pringle manoeuvre (8.3% VS 1.7%; p = 0.028). Operative time was longer (180min (IQR: 140-210) VS 120min (IQR: 75-150), p < 0.001) and blood loss was higher (190 ml (IQR: 100-325) VS 75 ml (IQR: 50-220), p < 0.001) in the PMV group. There was no difference in perioperative blood transfusion (3.3% VS 1.7%, p = 0.60) or postoperative morbidity (15.0% VS 14.3%, p = 0.89). There was no mortality in both groups. On mean follow-up of 21 months, no significant differences could be found in disease free (p = 0.77) and overall survival (p = 0.12).

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, LLR of lesions in proximity to MVs is safe and feasible with acceptable short and long-term results.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the short- and long-term outcomes for laparoscopic and open liver resections for liver metastases from colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic approach to liver resection has experienced exponential growth in recent years. However, evidence-based guidelines are needed for its safe future progression. The main aim of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resections for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

METHODS

To identify all the comparative manuscripts between laparoscopic and open liver resections for CRLM, all published English language studies with more than ten cases were screened. In addition to the primary meta-analysis, 3 specific subgroup analyses were performed on patients undergoing minor-only, major-only and synchronous resections. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology and Newcastle-Ottawa Score.

RESULTS

From the initial 194 manuscripts identified, 21 were meta-analysed, including results from the first randomized trial comparing open and laparoscopic resections of CRLM. Five of these were specific to patients undergoing a synchronous resection (399 cases), while six focused on minor (3 series including 226 cases) and major (3 series including 135 cases) resections, respectively. Thirteen manuscripts compared 2543 cases but could not be assigned to any of the above sub-analyses, so were analysed independently. The majority of short-term outcomes were favourable to the laparoscopic approach with equivalent rates of negative resection margins. No differences were observed between the approaches in overall or disease-free survival at 1, 3 or 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resection for CRLM offers improved short-term outcomes with comparable long-term outcomes when compared to open approach.

Simultaneous Colon and Liver Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Cancer with Synchronous Liver Metastases: A Single Center Experience

Background: The one-stage approach for colorectal cancer (CRC) with synchronous liver metastases (SLM) has demonstrated advantages, when feasible, in terms of oncological radicality and reduction in sanitary costs. The simultaneous laparoscopic approach to both colon cancer and liver metastases joins the advantages of mini-invasiveness to the one-stage approach. Methods: During the period from February 2011 to July 2017, a single surgeon performed 17 laparoscopic colorectal operations with simultaneous liver resection for CRC with SLM. Colorectal procedures included 9 rectal resections, 6 left colectomies, and 2 right colectomies. Associated hepatic resections included 1 left hepatectomy, 1 right posterior sectionectomy, 2 segmentectomies, and 13 wedge resections. We analyzed retrospectively the patient's short-term outcome and operative and oncologic results. Results: There was no conversion to open surgery. Six patients (35%) had minor complications (Clavien-Dindo grade I-II), whereas only 2 patients (12%) had major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV) and no mortality occurred. The median time of discharge was 8.6 (range 5-36) days. We obtained 94% of R0 resection margin on the liver specimen and 100% of negative distal and circumferential margin in case of rectal resection. An average of 20 lymphnodes were retrieved in the colorectal specimen. Conclusions: Simultaneous mini-invasive colorectal and liver resection is a challenging but feasible procedure. The advantages of treating primary cancer and metastases in the same recovery justify the morbidity rate, especially because the most of the complications are minor and no cases of mortality occurred. Further experience is needed to better understand how to reduce the morbidity rate.

Minimally Invasive Management of Secondary Liver Cancer

Laparoscopic liver surgery for secondary liver cancer is increasing. The most common indications are colorectal cancer liver metastases followed by adenocarcinoma metastases from other solid organs, such as breast, pancreatic neuroendocrine, and other gastrointestinal tract cancers. This article provides a comprehensive review of crucial concepts when managing secondary liver cancer minimally invasively, a summary of the up-to-date literature, and a discussion of the development of the application of this technique over time.

Long term outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic versus open resection for colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Because of the advancements in the surgical techniques of liver resection and improvements in anesthesia and postoperative critical care, the simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis either by the laparoscopic procedure or by the open resection method has been considered as a safe and acceptable option. However, there is limited information on the comparison of postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery. This study investigated the clinical results and postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis in comparison with those of open surgery.

METHODS

Patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastasis who underwent simultaneous resection at Shuang Ho Hospital from 2009 to 2017 were identified. The patient demographics, perioperative morbidity, and survival rates were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients underwent simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis. Laparoscopic procedure was performed for 16 patients, and the remaining 22 patients underwent open surgery. No significant differences were observed in the patient characteristics between the two groups. There was no perioperative mortality in both groups. The 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 56% and 35% in the laparoscopic group and 70% and 15% in the open surgery group, respectively. The 1- and 3-year overall survival rates were 100% and 84% in the laparoscopic group and 73% and 48% in the open surgery group, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, laparoscopic surgery for simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis seems to be safe and had a similar outcome to that of open surgery.

Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases

Background

To compare surgical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases.

Results

A total of 14 retrospective studies with 1679 colorectal liver metastases patients were analyzed: 683 patients treated with laparoscopic liver resection and 996 patients with open liver resection. With respect to surgical outcomes, laparoscopic compared with open liver resection was associated with lower blood loss (MD, -216.7, 95% CI, -309.4 to -124.1; P < 0.00001), less requiring blood transfusion (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.55; P < 0.00001), lower postoperative complication morbidity (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P = 0.003), and shorter hospitalization time (MD, -3.85, 95% CI, -5.00 to -2.71; P < 0.00001). However, operation time and postoperative mortality were no significant difference between the two approaches. With respect to oncological outcomes, laparoscopic liver resection group was prone to lower recurrence rate (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61−0.99; P = 0.04), but surgical margins R0, overall survival and disease-free survival were no significant difference.

Materials and Methods

We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for all relevant studies. All statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR) and continuous data were calculated by mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic and open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases have the same effect on oncological outcomes, but laparoscopic liver resection achieves better surgical outcomes.

Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS): surgical techniques and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Right posterior sectionectomy is one of the most technically challenging laparoscopic liver resections. Currently, there is limited published data regarding the technique and results required to better understand its safety and feasibility.

AIM

To report our experience, results and techniques, highlighting a variety of tips and tricks to facilitate this resection. A video is attached for technical demonstration.

METHODS

Retrospective review of prospectively maintained databases from June 2006 to June 2016. Three different techniques were used: resection following hilar inflow control, inflow control at Rouviere's sulcus and resection with intra parenchymal control.

RESULTS

29 LRPS were performed over a 10-year period. Median operative time was 240 min (150-480). Pringle's manoeuvre was performed in 19 (65.5%) with a median total duration of 35 (20-75) min. Median perioperative blood loss was 600 (100-2500) ml. Additional liver resections were performed in 16 (55.1%). There were two(6.9%) laparoscopic to open conversions. Median postoperative hospital stay was 5 (2-30) days. The median size of the tumour resected was 25 (10-54) mm with median number of resected lesions were 2 (1-4), median free resection margin was 9.5 (1-45) mm, margins were infiltrated (R1) in two (6.7%) cases. There was one death within 30-days (3.4%).

CONCLUSION

LRPS is feasible, efficient and safe. However, it is a technically challenging procedure and requires advance skills in liver and laparoscopic surgery. Surgeons should be familiar with a variety of approaches as each offers different advantages depending on the location and nature of the lesion, surgical preference and intraoperative findings.

Laparoscopic versus open 1-stage resection of synchronous liver metastases and primary colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of open and laparoscopic approaches for concomitant resection of synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2015, all patients undergoing combined resection of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases were included in the study (n=43). Laparoscopic and open groups were compared regarding clinical, perioperative and oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 29 patients in the open group and 14 patients in the laparoscopic group. The groups were similar regarding demographics, comorbidities, histopathological characteristics of the primary tumor and liver metastases. Postoperative complication rate (44.8% vs. 7.1%, P=0.016) was higher, and hospital stay (10 vs. 6.4 days, P=0.001) longer in the open compared to the laparoscopic group. Overall survival (OS) was comparable between the groups (P=0.10); whereas, disease-free survival (DFS) was longer in laparoscopic group (P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results, in patients, whose primary colorectal cancer and metastatic liver disease was amenable to a minimally invasive resection, a concomitant laparoscopic approach resulted in less morbidity without compromising oncologic outcomes. This suggests that a laparoscopic approach may be considered in appropriate patients by surgeons with experience in both advanced laparoscopic liver and colorectal techniques.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases in Elderly and Octogenarian Patients: A Multicenter Propensity Score Based Analysis of Short- and Long-term Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases in the elderly.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has been associated with less morbidity and similar oncological outcomes to open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). It has been reported that these benefits continue to be observed in elderly patients. However, in previous studies, patients over 70 or 75 years were considered as a single, homogenous population raising questions regarding the true impact of the laparoscopic approach on this diverse group of elderly patients.

METHOD

Prospectively maintained databases of all patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM in 5 tertiary liver centers were included. Those over 70-years old were selected for this study. The cohort was divided in 3 subgroups based on age. A comparative analysis was performed after the implementation of propensity score matching on the 2 main cohorts (laparoscopic and open groups) and also on the study subgroups.

RESULTS

A total of 775 patients were included in the study. After propensity score matching 225 patients were comparable in each of the main groups. Lower blood loss (250 vs 400 mL, P = 0.001), less overall morbidity (22% vs 39%, P = 0.001), shorter High Dependency Unit (2 vs. 6 days, P = 0.001), and total hospital stay (5 vs. 8 days, P = 0.001) were observed after laparoscopic liver resection. Comparable rates of R0 resection (88% vs 88%, P = 0.999), median recurrence-free survival (33 vs 27 months, P = 0.502), and overall survival (51 vs 45 months, P = 0.671) were observed. The advantages seen with the laparoscopic approach were reproduced in the 70 to 74-year old subgroup; however there was a gradual loss of these advantages with increasing age.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients over 70 years of age laparoscopic liver resection, for colorectal liver metastases, offers significant lower morbidity, and a shorter hospital stay with comparable oncological outcomes when compared with open liver resection. However, the benefits of the laparoscopic approach appear to fade with increasing age, with no statistically significant benefits in octogenarians except for a lower High Dependency Unit stay.

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

BACKGROUND

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

STUDY DESIGN

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

[Laparoscopic liver resection]

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

Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The effects of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) on oncological outcomes for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CCLM) remain inconclusive. Major databases were searched from January 1992 to October 2016. Effects of LLR vs OLR were determined. The primary endpoints were oncological outcomes. In total, 32 eligible non-randomized studies with 4697 patients (LLR: 1809, OLR: 2888) were analyzed. There were higher rates of clear surgical margins (OR: 1.64, 95%CI: 1.32 to 2.05, p < 0.00001) in the LLR group, without significant differences in disease recurrence, 3- or 5-year overall survival(OS) and disease free survival(DFS) between the two approaches. LLR was associated with less intraoperative blood loss (WMD: −147.46 [−195.78 to −99.15] mL, P < 0.00001) and fewer blood transfusions (OR: 0.41 [0.30–0.58], P < 0.00001), but with longer operation time (WMD:14.44 [1.01 to 27.88] min, P < 0.00001) compared to OLR. Less overall morbidity (OR: 0.64 [0.55 to 0.75], p < 0.00001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD: −2.36 [−3.06 to −1.66] d, p < 0.00001) were observed for patients undergoing LLR, while there was no statistical difference in mortality. LLR appears to be a safe and feasible alternative to OLR in the treatment of CCLM in selected patients.

The ALPPS in the Treatment of Hepatitis B-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Cirrhosis: A Single-Center Study and Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) has been reported to be a new treatment strategy for patients with predicted small volumes of future liver remnant (FLR). ALPPS is associated with rapid hypertrophy of FLR but it has a high postoperative mortality and morbidity. Up to now, it is controversial to apply ALPPS in hepatocellular carcinoma, especially for patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

Between May 2014 and June 2015, consecutive patients who underwent ALPPS with hepatitis B-related hepatocellular carcinoma with cirrhosis carried out in our center were included into the study. Demographic characteristics, surgical outcomes, and pathological results were evaluated. Subsequently, follow-up was still in progress.

RESULTS

The median operating time of the first (n = 12) and the second procedures (n = 10) were 285.0 and 212.5 minutes, respectively. The median blood loss were 200 and 800 mL for 2 stages of operations. The severe complication (≥IIIB) rates for the first and the second operations were 25.0% versus 40.0%, respectively. Six patients with too small future live remnant died of postoperative hepatic failure. On a median follow-up of 16 months of the 6 patients discharged, 4 patients were still alive and of 2 were disease-free.

CONCLUSION

In terms of the feasibility and safety, this study showed that ALPPS in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with insufficient future liver remnant might be a double-edged sword, and careful patients selected was proposed. Too small of FLR/SLV, less than 30%, is not recommended for ALPPS in liver with cirrhosis.

Is Laparoscopic Hepatectomy a Safe, Feasible Procedure in Patients with a Previous Upper Abdominal Surgery?

Background:

Laparoscopic liver resection has become an accepted treatment for liver tumors or intrahepatic bile duct stones, but its application in patients with previous upper abdominal surgery is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy in these patients.

Methods:

Three hundred and thirty-six patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy at our hospital from March 2012 to June 2015 were enrolled in the retrospective study. They were divided into two groups: Those with previous upper abdominal surgery (PS group, n = 42) and a control group with no previous upper abdominal surgery (NS group, n = 294). Short-term outcomes including operating time, blood loss, hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality were compared among the groups.

Results:

There was no significant difference in median operative duration between the PS group and the NS group (180 min vs. 160 min, P = 0.869). Median intraoperative blood loss was same between the PS group and the control group (200 ml vs. 200 ml, P = 0.907). The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the NS group than in the PS group (17.0% vs. 31.0%, P = 0.030). Mortality and other short-term outcomes did not differ significantly between groups.

Conclusions:

Our study showed no significant difference between the PS group and NS group in term of short-term outcomes. Laparoscopic hepatectomy is a feasible and safe procedure for patients with previous upper abdominal surgery.

Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases

BACKGROUND

There is a need for high-level evidence regarding the added value of laparoscopic (LLR) compared with open (OLR) liver resection. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) undergoing LLR and OLR using propensity score matching to minimize bias.

METHODS

This was a single-centre retrospective study using a prospective database of patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM between August 2004 and April 2015. Co-variates selected for matching included: number and size of lesions, tumour location, extent and number of resections, phase of surgical experience, location and lymph node status of primary tumour, perioperative chemotherapy, unilobar or bilobar disease, synchronous or metachronous disease. Prematching and postmatching analyses were compared. Surgical and oncological outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Some 176 patients undergoing LLR and 191 having OLR were enrolled. After matching, 133 patients from each group were compared. At prematching analysis, patients in the LLR group showed a longer overall survival (OS) and higher R0 rate than those in the OLR group (P = 0·047 and P = 0·030 respectively). Postmatching analyses failed to confirm these results, showing similar OS and R0 rate between the LLR and OLR group (median OS: 55·2 versus 65·3 months respectively, hazard ratio 0·70 (95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 1·05; P = 0·082); R0 rate: 92·5 versus 86·5 per cent, P = 0·186). The 5-year OS rate was 62·5 (95 per cent c.i. 45·5 to 71·5) per cent) for OLR and 64·3 (48·2 to 69·5) per cent for LLR. Longer duration of surgery, lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative stay were found for LLR on postmatching analysis.

CONCLUSION

Propensity score matching showed that LLR for CRLM may provide R0 resection rates and long-term OS comparable to those for OLR, with lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative hospital stay.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for colorectal cancer liver metastases: comparative study with propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to compare the results of laparoscopic hepatectomy with those of open hepatectomy for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CCLM) using a propensity score matching (PSM) in two university hospital settings.

METHODS

A patient in the laparoscopic approach (LA) surgery group was randomly matched with another patient in the open approach (OA) group using a 1:1 allocated ratio with the nearest estimated propensity score. No patients of the LA group were excluded for the matching. Matching criteria included age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American society anesthesiologists score, potential co-morbidities, hepatopathies, synchronous or metachronous lesions, size and number of CCLM, preoperative chemotherapy, minor or major liver resections. Intraoperative, postoperative data, and survival were compared in both groups.

RESULTS

From January 2012 to January 2015, a total of 242 hepatectomies were consecutively performed, of which 119 for CCLM, namely 101 in the OA group (84.9%) and 18 in the LA group (15.1%). The conversion rate was 5.6% (n=1). The mortality rate was 1% in the OA group and 0% in the LA group. Prior to PSM, there was a statistically significant difference favorable to the LA group regarding operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay and the rate of medical complications. After PSM, there was no difference regarding operative time or length of hospital stay. However, there was a trend towards less blood loss (P=0.066) and fewer medical complications (44.4% vs.16.7%, P=0.07). The R0 resection rate was 94.4% (n=17) in the two groups. In addition, there was no difference regarding overall survival (P=0.358) and recurrence-free survival [HR =0.99 (0.1-12.7); P=0.99].

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resections for CCLM seem to yield short- and long-term results, which are similar to open hepatectomies, and could well be considered an alternative to open surgery and become the gold standard in carefully selected patients.

Comparative Short-term Benefits of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: 9000 Cases and Climbing

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of worldwide literature on laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and compare short-term outcomes against open liver resections (OLR) by meta-analyses.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

There are no updated pooled data since 2009 about the current status and short-term outcomes of LLR worldwide.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All English language publications on LLR were screened. Descriptive worldwide data and short-term outcomes were obtained. Separate analyses were performed for minor-only and major-only resection series, and series in which minor/major resections were not differentiated. Apparent case duplications were excluded.

RESULTS

A set of 463 published manuscripts were reviewed. One hundred seventy-nine single-center series were identified that accounted for 9527 LLR cases worldwide. Minor-only, major-only, and combined major-minor series were 61, 18, and 100, respectively, including 32, 8, and 43 comparative series, respectively. Of the total 9527 LLR cases reported, 6190 (65%) were for malignancy and 3337 (35%) were for benign indications. There were 37 deaths reported (mortality rate = 0.4%). From the meta-analysis comparing case-matched LLR to OLR (N = 2900 cases), there was no increased mortality and significantly less complications, transfusions, blood loss, and hospital stay observed in LLR vs OLR.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest review of LLR available to date with over 9000 cases published. It confirms growing safety when performed in selected patients and by trained surgeons, and suggests that LLR may offer improved patient short-term outcomes compared with OLR. Improved levels of evidence, standardized reporting of outcomes, and assuring proper training are the next challenges of laparoscopic liver surgery.

Clinical Utility of the Difficulty Scoring System for Predicting Surgical Time of Laparoscopic Liver Resection

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has several problems, such as technical complexity and patient and tumor factors. A difficulty scoring system to preoperatively evaluate the difficulty of LLR was established at the second International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resection. The aim of this study was to explore the clinical usefulness of the difficulty scoring system for LLR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2010 to June 2015, the records of 78 patients who had undergone LLR were retrospectively reviewed. The patients' data were used to assign a difficulty score, and the correlations between scores and surgical outcomes were investigated.

RESULTS

The mean surgical time was 256 minutes, and the mean blood loss was 168 mL. The difficulty score significantly correlated with surgical time and blood loss, but not with morbidity and postoperative hospital stay. Multivariate analysis showed that the difficulty score was an independent predictor of prolonged surgical time.

CONCLUSIONS

The difficulty score was found to be an effective predictor of surgical time for LLR.

Safely extending the indications of laparoscopic liver resection: When should we start laparoscopic major hepatectomy?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is an innovative procedure that is still in the exploration phase. Although new surgical techniques have learning curves, safety should be maintained from the onset. This retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the safe introduction of LMH.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data from 245 consecutive patients who underwent pure laparoscopic liver resection. Patients were divided into three groups: Phase I, the first 64 cases, all minor hepatectomies; Phase II, cases from the first LMH case to the midmost of the LMH cases (n = 69, including 22 LMHs); Phase III, the most recent 112 cases, including 22 LMHs. Patient characteristics and surgical results were evaluated, and the learning curve was analysed with the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method.

RESULTS

The first LMH was adopted after sufficient preparatory experience was gained from performing 64 minor hepatectomies. In cases of LMH, there were no significant differences in the surgical time between Phases II and III (356 vs. 309 min; P = 0.318), morbidity rate (22.7 vs. 31.8 %; P = 0.736), or major morbidity rate (18.2 vs. 9.1 %; P = 0.664); however, estimated blood loss was significantly reduced from Phase II to Phase III (236 vs. 68 mL; P = 0.018). The CUSUM for morbidity also showed similar outcomes through Phases II and III.

CONCLUSION

There is a learning curve associated with laparoscopic liver resection. To maintain a low morbidity rate, 60 laparoscopic minor hepatectomies could provide adequate experience before the adoption of LMH.

Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Elderly Patients: A Comparative Study From a Single Center

The life expectancy continues to gradually increase worldwide. Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was recently reported to be a relatively safe procedure for treatment of liver disease because of the development of new techniques and instruments. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes of elderly patients who underwent LLR. Of these 61 patients who underwent LLR in our institute from January 2010 through April 2014, 21 were aged 75 years and above (group E), and 40 were aged below 75 years (group NE). Patient characteristics were retrospectively analyzed between the 2 groups. The results showed that patient characteristics were similar between the 2 groups, although the incidence of hypertension was significantly greater among patients in group E. There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications or length of hospital stay between the 2 groups. In conclusion, LLR for elderly patients was a feasible procedure compared with nonelderly patients.

Evidence supporting laparoscopic major hepatectomy

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

The role of exosomes in the pathogenesis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Exosomes are small membrane bound vesicles secreted by cancer cells that have a cytosol rich in proteins and nucleic acids which are capable of modulating the phenotype of neighbouring cells which take them up. In this review we explore the mechanisms through which exosomes are able to impact on the pathogenesis of pancreatic ductal cancer through the modulation of tumour formation and development and exploitation of the tumour microenvironment to modulate both the adaptive and innate immune response. In addition we highlight the potential utility of exosomes not only as biomarkers of disease but also as tools to be used in the therapeutic armamentarium against this disease.

Impact of totally laparoscopic combined management of colorectal cancer with synchronous hepatic metastases on severity of complications: a propensity-score-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Thanks to widespread diffusion of minimally invasive approach in the setting of both colorectal and hepatic surgeries, the interest in combined resections for colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases (SCLM) by totally laparoscopic approach (TLA) has increased. Aim of this study was to compare outcome of combined resections for SCLM performed by TLA or by open approach, in a propensity-score-based study.

STUDY DESIGN

All 25 patients undergoing combined TLA for SCLM at San Raffaele Hospital in Milano were compared in a case-matched analysis with 25 out of 91 patients undergoing totally open approach (TOA group). Groups were matched with 1:2 ratio using propensity scores based on covariates representing disease severity. Main endpoints were postoperative morbidity and long-term outcome. The Modified Accordion Severity Grading System was used to quantify complications.

RESULTS

The groups resulted comparable in terms of patients and disease characteristics. The TLA group, as compared to the TOA group, had lower blood loss (350 vs 600 mL), shorter postoperative stay (9 vs 12 days), lower postoperative morbidity index (0.14 vs 0.20) and severity score for complicated patients (0.60 vs 0.85). Colonic anastomosis leakage had the highest fractional complication burden in both groups. In spite of comparable long-term overall survival, the TLA group had better recurrence-free survival.

CONCLUSION

TLA for combined resections is feasible, and its indications can be widened to encompass a larger population of patients, provided its benefits in terms of reduced overall risk and severity of complications, rapid functional recovery and favorable long-term outcomes.

Intraoperative monitoring of stroke volume variation versus central venous pressure in laparoscopic liver surgery: a randomized prospective comparative trial

BACKGROUND

Central venous pressure (CVP) is used as a marker of cardiac preload to control intraoperative blood loss in open hepatectomies, while its reliability in laparoscopy is less certain. The aim of this randomized prospective trial was to evaluate the outcome of laparoscopic resections performed with stroke volume variation (SVV) or CVP monitoring.

METHODS

All candidates for laparoscopic liver resection were assigned randomly to SVV or to CVP groups. Outcome was evaluated included conversion rate, cause of conversion, intraoperative blood loss, need for transfusions, length of surgery and postoperative results.

RESULTS

Ninety consecutive patients were enrolled: both SVV and CVP groups included 45 patients each and were comparable in terms of patient and disease characteristics. A reduced rate of conversion was recorded in the SVV compared to the CVP group (6.7% and 17.8% respectively, p = 0.02). Blood loss was lower in the SVV group (150 mL), compared to the CVP group (300 mL, p = 0.04). Morbidity, mortality, length of stay and functional recovery were comparable. On multivariate analysis, lesion location, extent of hepatectomy and type of cardiac preload monitoring were associated significantly to risk of conversion.

CONCLUSION

SVV monitoring in laparoscopic liver surgery improves intraoperative outcome, thus enhancing the benefits of the minimally-invasive approach and fast-track protocols.

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.

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 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.

Laparoscopic anterior approach of major hepatectomy combined with colorectal resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and operative outcomes of the anterior approach technique for a simultaneous colorectal and liver laparoscopic procedure given its demonstrated benefits and discuss the advantages of this strategy.

PATIENT AND METHODS

In the presented case, a total laparoscopic anterior approach was used for a left hemihepatectomy in combination with laparoscopic colorectal resections for synchronous liver metastases, which emphasizes the technical aspects of this procedure. The duration of surgery, blood loss, and postoperative outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic anterior approach for a left hepatectomy with simultaneous colon resection for liver metastases was feasible and safe without postoperative complications. The duration of surgery was 190 minutes with an estimated blood loss of 200 mL. The postoperative course was uneventful.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic anterior approach for a major hepatectomy for unilobular synchronous metastases can be safely performed simultaneously with colorectal surgery in select patients.

Laparoscopic Parenchymal-Sparing Resections for Nonperipheral Liver Lesions, the Diamond Technique: Technical Aspects, Clinical Outcomes, and Oncologic Efficiency

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of liver lesions has moved toward "parenchymal-sparing" strategies. Although open parenchymal-sparing liver resections are supported by encouraging results, the applicability of the laparoscopic approach for nonperipheral tumors is still questionable. Our aim was to assess the feasibility, safety, and oncologic adequacy of laparoscopic parenchymal-sparing liver resection for nonperipheral lesions with a description of the technique adopted in this setting.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospectively collected single-center database of 517 laparoscopic liver resections was reviewed. Laparoscopic nonperipheral parenchymal-sparing liver resections (LapPSLRs), that is, entirely intraparenchymal limited resections performed on nonperipheral lesions, were selected. Intra- and perioperative outcomes were analyzed along with 3-year actuarial survival for patients with colorectal liver metastases.

RESULTS

The group comprised 49 LapPSLRs. Colorectal liver metastases were the most frequent diagnosis (n = 24 patients). Lesions were located in segments 8, 7, 4a, and 3 in 51%, 8.2%, 36.7%, and 4.1% of cases, respectively. Conversion occurred in 4 patients (8%). Intra- and postoperative short-term outcomes were calculated for the 24 isolated LapPSLR (not associated with any concurrent liver resection). Median operative time and blood loss were 215 minutes and 225 mL, respectively. Pringle maneuver was used in 75% of cases. Postoperative 90-day mortality was nil and morbidity rate was 12.5%. Median postoperative stay was 3 days. Median tumor-free margin was 4 mm and 100% R0 rate was achieved for all LapPSLRs with curative intent. Three-year overall, recurrence-free, and disease-free survival rates were 100%, 65.2%, and 69.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic parenchymal-sparing liver resections for nonperipheral liver lesions are feasible and can be performed safely without compromising perioperative and oncological outcomes.

Oncological safety of ultrasound-guided laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal metastases: a case-control study

Laparoscopic liver surgery has gained widespread acceptance and nowadays it is suggested even for malignant disease. Although the benefits on short-term outcomes have been proven, data on oncological safety are still lacking. The aim of this study is to assess oncologic results after ultrasound-guided laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) or open liver resection (OLR) for colorectal metastases. 37 consecutive patients undergoing LLR between 01/2004 and 03/2014 were matched at a ratio of 1:1 with 37 OLR. Matching criteria were male sex, number and diameter of liver metastases, segment location, synchronous presentation, site and stage of primary tumor, positive lymph nodes of the primary, and concomitant extrahepatic disease. Demographic characteristics were similar among groups. Parenchymal transection time was longer in the LLR group (68 ± 38.2 SD vs 40 ± 33.7 SD, p = 0.01). Mortality was nil in LLR and OLR. Overall morbidity was significantly lower in LLR (13.5 vs 37.8%, p = 0.02), although severe complications were similar among the two groups. Patients undergoing LLR were discharged earlier (5 ± 2.3 SD vs 8 ± 6.6 SD days, p < 0.001). The median margin width was 5 (0-40) mm in LLR vs 8 (0-25) mm in OLR, p = 0.897. R1 resection was recorded in four LLR and three OLR (p = 1). Overall recurrences were similar among groups. Eight patients with hepatic or extrahepatic recurrence among LLR underwent surgery vs four of OLR (p = 0.03). After a median follow-up of 35.7 months in LLR and 47.9 months in OLR, 3-year overall survival was 91.8% LLR and 74.8% OLR (p = 0.14). 3-year disease-free survival was 69.1% LLR and 65.9% OLR (p = 0.53). Multivariate analysis showed that postoperative complications [HR 3.42 (95% CI 1.32-8.89)] and multiple metastases [HR 3.84 (95% CI 1.34-10.83)] were independent predictors of worse survival (p = 0.01). Ultrasound-LLR for colorectal hepatic metastases is safe, ensuring oncologic outcomes comparable to OLR.

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.

Oncological outcomes of laparoscopic surgery of liver metastases: a single-centre experience

In the era of multimodal management of liver metastases, surgical resection remains the only curative option, with open approach still being referred to as the standard of care. Currently, the feasibility and benefits of the laparoscopic approach for liver resection have been largely demonstrated. However, its oncologic adequacy remains to be confirmed. The aim of this study is to report the oncological results of laparoscopic liver resection for metastatic disease in a single-centre experience. A single-centre database of 413 laparoscopic liver resections was reviewed and procedures for liver metastases were selected. The assessment of oncologic outcomes included analysis of minimal tumour-free margin, R1 resection rate and 3-year survival. The feasibility and safety of the procedures were also evaluated through analysis of perioperative outcomes. The study comprised 209 patients (294 procedures). Colorectal liver metastases were the commonest indication (67.9%). Fourteen patients had conversion (6.7%) and oncological concern was the commonest reason for conversion (42.8%). Median tumour-free margin was 10 mm and complete radical resections were achieved in 211 of 218 curative-intent procedures (96.7%). For patients affected by colorectal liver metastases, 1- and 3-year OS resulted 85.9 and 66.7%. For patients affected by neuroendocrine liver metastases, 1- and 3-year OS resulted 93 and 77.8%. Among the patients with metastases from other primaries, 1- and 3-year OS were 83.3 and 70.5%. The laparoscopic approach is a safe and valid option in the treatment of patients with metastatic liver disease undergoing curative resection. It does offer significant perioperative benefits without compromise of oncologic outcomes.

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.

Colorectal cancer liver metastases: laparoscopic and open radiofrequency-assisted surgery

INTRODUCTION

The liver is the most common site of colorectal metastases (colorectal liver metastases - CLM). Surgical treatment in combination with oncological therapy is the only potentially curative method. Unfortunately, only 10-25% of patients are suitable for surgery. Traditionally, open liver resection (OLR) is usually performed. However, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become popular worldwide in the last two decades.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness and benefits of radiofrequency minor LLR of CLM in comparison with OLR.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The indication for surgery was CLM and the possibility to perform minor laparoscopic or OLR not exceeding two hepatic segments according to Couinaud's classification.

RESULTS

Sixty-six minor liver resections for CLM were performed. Twenty-five (37.9%) patients underwent a laparoscopic approach and 41 (62.1%) patients underwent OLR. The mean operative time was 166.4 min for LLR and 166.8 min for OLR. Average blood loss was 132.3 ±218.0 ml during LLR and 149.5 ±277.5 ml during OLR. Length of hospital stay was 8.4 ±2.0 days for LLR and 10.5 ±5.8 days for OLR. All resections were R0. There was no case of mortality. Postoperative complications were recognized in 9 (13.6%) patients: 8 in the group of OLR patients and 1 in the LLR group. The median survival time for LLR was 70.5 months and for OLR 61.9 months. The 5-year overall survival rate was higher for LLR vs. OLR - 82.1% vs. 69.8%. The average length of disease-free interval after LLR was greater (52.2 months) in comparison with OLR (49.4%). The 5-year disease-free interval was 63.2% for LLR and 58% for OLR.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes and oncological radicality of minor laparoscopic liver resections of CLM are comparable to outcomes of OLR.