Long-term survival following minimally invasive extended cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer: A 7-year experience from the National Cancer Database

Clinical outcomes of minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) versus open extended cholecystectomy: A multicenter propensity score matched study

BACKGROUND

This multicenter study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive extended cholecystectomy (MI-EC) versus open EC (O-EC) for patients with gallbladder cancer (GBC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent EC (cholecystectomy, wedge resection of the liver bed, and regional lymphadenectomy) for GBC between 2010 and 2020 in three centers were included in the study. The clinicopathological data were compared after propensity score matching. Additional subgroup analysis on laparoscopic and robotic EC (L-EC and R-EC) was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 377 patients were included: 308 for O-EC and 69 for MI-EC, respectively. The MI-EC group had a longer operative time (188.9 vs. 238.1 min, p < .001) and shorter hospital stay (9.0 vs. 7.2 days, p = .007), although no differences were found in operative blood loss, complication rate and survival outcome. In subgroup analysis, L-EC patients had a longer operative time (264.4 vs. 202.0 min, p = .001), compared to R-EC patients with comparable perioperative and survival outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Although patients with MI-EC had a longer operation time and higher medical costs, the advantages were enhanced recovery with comparable short- and long-term outcomes. The operation time was less for R-EC patients than for L-EC patients, though the high cost still remains. The surgery type for EC can be selected according to the patient's condition, social status and surgeon's preference.

Laparoscopic vs open radical resection in management of gallbladder carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Radical resection offers the only hope for the long-term survival of patients with gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) above the T1b stage. However, whether it should be performed under laparoscopy for GBC is still controversial.

AIM

To compare laparoscopic radical resection (LRR) with traditional open radical resection (ORR) in managing GBC.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of online databases, including Medline (PubMed), Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, was conducted to identify comparative studies involving LRR and ORR in GBCs till March 2023. A meta-analysis was subsequently performed.

RESULTS

A total of 18 retrospective studies were identified. In the long-term prognosis, the LRR group was comparable with the ORR group in terms of overall survival and tumor-free survival (TFS). LRR showed superiority in terms of TFS in the T2/tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) Ⅱ stage subgroup vs the ORR group (P = 0.04). In the short-term prognosis, the LRR group had superiority over the ORR group in the postoperative length of stay (POLS) (P < 0.001). The sensitivity analysis showed that all pooled results were robust.

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis results show that LRR is not inferior to ORR in all measured outcomes and is even superior in the TFS of patients with stage T2/TNM Ⅱ disease and POLS. Surgeons with sufficient laparoscopic experience can perform LRR as an alternative surgical strategy to ORR.

Inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis of laparoscopic versus open Sg4b-5 bi-segmentectomy in patients with gallbladder cancer

Sg4b-5 anatomical bi-segmentectomy with regional lymphadenectomy (Sg4b5) is a surgical option for gallbladder cancer (GBC) treatment. The laparoscopic approach to this challenging operation is still controversial. Aim of this study was to compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open Sg4b5 in a single institution series of patients. All consecutive patients who underwent Sg4b5 for GBC from January 2000 to September 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was performed. 75 patients were analyzed, 18 in the laparoscopic and 57 in the open group. After IPTW, laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly decreased median intraoperative blood loss (100 vs 237.09 ml, p = 0.001), shorter median length of hospital stay (4 vs 8 days, p = < 0.001) and a higher median number of harvested nodes (9 vs 7, p = 0.026). Operation time was shorter in the open group (355 vs 259 min, p < 0.001). No significant differences were found regarding clear resection margins, overall and major (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) morbidity, bile leakage rate, 90 days post-operative mortality, overall and disease-free survival. Laparoscopic Sg4b-5 anatomical bi-segmentectomy and regional lymphadenectomy is feasible and safe with long term outcome comparable to open approach at least in early stages. Laparoscopic approach confirms its well-known short-term benefits with less intraoperative bleeding and shorter length of stay. Moreover, it might allow a better lymphadenectomy.

Role of laparoscopic surgery in the management of gallbladder cancer: Systematic review & meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis evaluates the safety and short-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic vs. open surgery for gallbladder carcinoma(GBC).

METHODS

Meta-analysis was performed on laparoscopic(LG) and open group(OG) studies. Data for survival outcomes were extracted from Kaplan-Meier curves and combined with Tierney's method to estimate hazard ratios(HRs) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in overall survival(HR: 1.01), disease-free survival(HR: 0.84), 30-day mortality(RR:1.10), overall recurrence(RR:0.93), intraoperative gallbladder violation(RR:1.17), operative time(WMD:8.32), number of patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy(RR:1.06) and blood transfusion(RR: 0.81). A significant difference was seen in survival of T3 subgroup(HR:0.77) and number of lymph node dissections (LND)(WMD: 0.63) favoring OG, along with a decrease in postoperative complications(RR:0.65), greater incidence of R0 resections(RR:1.04), lower volume of intraoperative blood loss(WMD: 128.62), lower time in removing drainage tube(WMD: 1.35), shorter diet recovery time(WMD: 1.88), shorter hospital stay(WMD: 3.51), lower incidence of 90-day mortality(RR:0.49) favoring LG. A higher incidence of port-site recurrence(RR:1.99) was reported in LG.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery is non-inferior to the open approach in terms of oncological outcomes and has an improved rate of postoperative complications.

Approach to Resectable Biliary Cancers

OPINION STATEMENT

Biliary malignancies, although rare, can be some of the most challenging to manage surgically. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas are resectable if there is no evidence of metastatic disease. These tumors are managed with anatomic resection and portal lymphadenectomy when centrally located or multiple in a single lobe. Non-anatomic resection can be performed for solitary peripheral tumors with minimally invasive techniques. It is not our practice to routinely employ neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to resection of these tumors. Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy is utilized at our institution in highly selected patients in the context of an ongoing clinical trial for unresectable tumors. Hilar cholangiocarcinomas, when resectable (i.e., ipsilateral arterial involvement or lack of vascular involvement), are managed with right or left (extended) hepatectomy, caudate resection, and portal lymphadenectomy. Distal cholangiocarcinomas are managed with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not routinely used in our treatment algorithm of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas. Nodal involvement and positive margin (R1) resection necessitates adjuvant chemotherapy. Finally, gallbladder carcinoma is managed with radical cholecystectomy, anatomic segment IVb/V resection, and portal lymphadenectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy is employed routinely amongst patients with T2 or higher tumors and those with positive lymph nodes.