Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy: single-center experience and technical aspects

Combining occlusion of the right hepatic vein with the Pringle maneuver in laparoscopic anatomic right posterior liver resection

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right posterior anatomic resection (LRPAR) presents challenges due to uncontrollable hemorrhage from the inferior vena cava and the risk of carbon dioxide (CO2) gas embolism. However, there is a lack of research specifically addressing the safe exposure of right hepatic vein (RHV). Herein, we introduced a novel technique of combining occlusion of the RHV with the Pringle maneuver and presented the outcomes of our initial series.

PATIENT AND METHOD

All consecutive patients who underwent LRPAR using this novel technique were enrolled in this study from March 2021 to January 2024. The demographic characteristics, perioperative outcomes and follow-up data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 12 patients underwent LRPAR using the technique of double occlusion during study period. All the procedures were performed laparoscopically, with no conversions to open surgery. The median operative time was 203 min (range of 172-279 min) and the median blood loss was 200 ml (range of 50-280 ml). No patient received a blood transfusion during the perioperative period. Of note, the main trunk of the RHV was fully exposed on the cutting surface in all cases, and no evidence of CO2 gas embolism was observed following double occlusion. None of the patients suffered from Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher postoperative complications, and the perioperative mortality was nil. The median postoperative stay was 5 days (range of 5-7 days). The median hospitalization cost was 43,048.5 RMB (40,240.35-57,921.53 RMB). At a median follow-up period of 24 months (range of 4-35 months), all patients were alive with normal daily living and no disease recurrence was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining occlusion of the right hepatic vein with the Pringle maneuver appears to be a feasible and expected technique for securing the exposure of RHV in LRPAR. Further follow-up and well-designed prospective comparative studies are needed to validate the feasibility and efficacy of this technique.

Prevalence and clinical significance of the Sg6/Sg7 intersegmental veins based on re-evaluation of the Couinaud classification for the right posterior portal vein

Although Segment 6(Sg6) and Segment 7(Sg7) are two independent units, there are currently no clear anatomical boundary markers between Sg6 and Sg7. This study aimed to identify intersegmental veins (ISV) in the intersegmental plane of Sg6 and Sg7, and evaluate the prevalence of ISV, and its clinical significance in anatomical hepatectomy. We analyzed data from 180 patients undergoing abdominal computed tomography (CT) examination, and simultaneously performed 3D reconstruction models of the liver for each patient. The right posterior portal vein was analyzed and re-typed. Furthermore, the existence of ISV was defined, and prevalence and confluence patterns of ISV were analyzed. The author attempted to apply ISV to laparoscopic S6/S7 segmentectomy. We sorted data from the right posterior portal vein and divided it into six types. The ISV could be identified in 82.2% (148/180) of the patients, which were derived from the right hepatic vein (RHV) (91.9%) and right posterior inferior vein (IRHV) (8.1%). Ten ISV-guided laparoscopic Sg6/Sg7 segmentectomy were successfully carried out, seven patients underwent Sg6 segmentectomy, and three patients underwent Sg7 segmentectomy. There was no perioperative mortality. The median operative time was 223 min (range 181-260 min). The median blood loss was 200 ml (range 150-310 ml). The R0 resection rate was 100%. The ISV may be a candidate vessel to distinguish the boundary of the right posterior sector; it is expected to be a landmark in the liver parenchyma of anatomical hepatectomy.

Challenging Scenarios and Debated Indications for Laparoscopic Liver Resections for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) have been increasingly adopted for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with safe short- and long-term outcomes reported worldwide. Despite this, lesions in the posterosuperior segments, large and recurrent tumors, portal hypertension, and advanced cirrhosis currently represent challenging scenarios in which the safety and efficacy of the laparoscopic approach are still controversial. In this systematic review, we pooled the available evidence on the short-term outcomes of LLRs for HCC in challenging clinical scenarios. All randomized and non-randomized studies reporting LLRs for HCC in the above-mentioned settings were included. The literature search was run in the Scopus, WoS, and Pubmed databases. Case reports, reviews, meta-analyses, studies including fewer than 10 patients, non-English language studies, and studies analyzing histology other than HCC were excluded. From 566 articles, 36 studies dated between 2006 and 2022 fulfilled the selection criteria and were included in the analysis. A total of 1859 patients were included, of whom 156 had advanced cirrhosis, 194 had portal hypertension, 436 had large HCCs, 477 had lesions located in the posterosuperior segments, and 596 had recurrent HCCs. Overall, the conversion rate ranged between 4.6% and 15.5%. Mortality and morbidity ranged between 0.0% and 5.1%, and 18.6% and 34.6%, respectively. Full results according to subgroups are described in the study. Advanced cirrhosis and portal hypertension, large and recurrent tumors, and lesions located in the posterosuperior segments are challenging clinical scenarios that should be carefully approached by laparoscopy. Safe short-term outcomes can be achieved provided experienced surgeons and high-volume centers.

Transition from laparoscopic to robotic liver surgery: clinical outcomes, learning curve effect, and cost-effectiveness

The reproducibility of the implementation of robotic liver surgery (RLS) is still debated. The aim of the present study is to evaluate short-term outcomes and cost differences during the implementation of RLS, performed by an early adopter in laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS). Patients undergoing RLS between February 2020 and May 2021 were included. Short-term outcomes of the robotic group (RG) were compared to the "Initial Phase" group (IP) of 120 LLS cases and the 120 most recent laparoscopic cases or "Mastery Phase" group (MP). A cost analysis per procedure for the three groups was performed. Seventy-one patients underwent RLS during the study period. Median operative time in the RG was comparable to the IP, but significantly shorter in the MP (140 vs 138 vs 120 min, p < 0.001). Median intraoperative blood loss in the RG was lower than in both laparoscopic groups (40 ml [20-90 ml] vs 150 ml [50-250 ml] vs 80 ml [30-150 ml], p < 0.001). Median hospital stay in the RG was significantly shorter than the IP group (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in postoperative complication, conversion, or readmission rates. Procedural cost analysis was in favor of robotic surgery (€5008) compared to the IP (€ 6913) and the MP (€6099). Surgeons with sufficient experience in LLS can rapidly overcome the learning curve for RLS. In our experience, the short-term outcomes of the implementation phase of RLS are similar to the mastery phase of LLS. The total average cost per procedure is lower for RLS compared to LLS.

Laparoscopic versus open in right posterior sectionectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now widely adopted for the treatment of liver tumors due to its minimally invasive advantages. However, multicenter, large-sample population-based laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS) has rarely been reported. We aimed to assess the advantages and drawbacks of right posterior sectionectomy compared with laparoscopic and open surgery by meta-analysis.

METHODS

Relevant literature was searched using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Ovid Medline, and Web of Science databases up to September 12, 2021. Quality assessment was performed based on a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3. The data were calculated by odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for fixed-effects and random-effects models.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included seven studies involving 739 patients. Compared with open right posterior sectionectomy (ORPS), the LRPS group had lower intraoperative blood loss (MD - 135.45; 95%CI - 170.61 to - 100.30; P < 0.00001) and shorter postoperative hospital stays (MD - 2.17; 95% CI - 3.03 to - 1.31; P < 0.00001). However, there were no statistically significant differences between LRPS and ORPS regarding operative time (MD 44.97; P = 0.11), pedicle clamping (OR 0.65; P = 0.44), clamping time (MD 2.72; P = 0.31), transfusion rate (OR 1.95; P = 0.25), tumor size (MD - 0.16; P = 0.13), resection margin (MD 0.08; P = 0.63), R0 resection (OR 1.49; P = 0.35), recurrence rate (OR 2.06; P = 0.20), 5-year overall survival (OR 1.44; P = 0.45), and 5-year disease-free survival (OR 1.07; P = 0.88). Furthermore, no significant difference was observed in terms of postoperative complications (P = 0.08), bile leakage (P = 0.60), ascites (P = 0.08), incisional infection (P = 0.09), postoperative bleeding (P = 0.56), and pleural effusion (P = 0.77).

CONCLUSIONS

LRPS has an advantage in the length of hospital stay and blood loss. LRPS is a very useful technology and feasible choice in patients with the right posterior hepatic lobe tumor.

Caudodorsal approach combined with in situ split for laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS) was technically challenging and lack of standardization. There were some approaches for LRPS, such as caudal approach and dorsal approach. During our practice, we initiated pure LRPS using the caudodorsal approach with in situ split and present several advantages of this method.

METHODS

From April 2018 to December 2021, consecutive patients who underwent pure LRPS using the caudodorsal approach with in situ split at our institution entered into this retrospective study. The key point of the caudodorsal approach was that the right hepatic vein was exposed from peripheral branches toward the root and the parenchyma was transected from the dorsal side to ventral side. Specially, the right perihepatic ligaments were not divided to keep the right liver in situ before parenchymal dissection for each case.

RESULTS

11 patients underwent pure LRPS using the caudodorsal approach with in situ split. There were 9 hepatocellular carcinoma, 1 sarcomatoid hepatocellular carcinoma, and 1 hepatic hemangioma. Five patients had mild cirrhosis and 1 had moderate cirrhosis. All the procedures were successfully completed laparoscopically. The median operative time was 375 min (range of 290-505 min) and the median blood loss was 300 ml (range of 100-1000 ml). Five patients received perioperative blood transfusion, of which 1 patient received autologous blood transfusion and 2 patients received blood transfusion due to preoperative moderate anemia. No procedure was converted to open surgery. Two patients who suffered from postoperative complications, improved after conservative treatments. The median postoperative stay was 11 days (range of 7-25 days). No postoperative bleeding, hepatic failure, and mortality occurred.

CONCLUSION

The preliminary clinical effect of the caudodorsal approach with in situ split for LRPS was satisfactory. Our method was feasible and expected to provide ideas for the standardization of LRPS. Further researches are required due to some limitations of this study.

Comparison Between Minimally Invasive Right Anterior and Right Posterior Sectionectomy vs Right Hepatectomy: An International Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched and Coarsened-Exact-Matched Analysis of 1,100 Patients

BACKGROUND

The role of minimally invasive right anterior and right posterior sectionectomy (MI-RAS/MI-RPS) for right-sided liver lesions remains debatable. Although technically more demanding, these procedures might result in faster recovery and lower postoperative morbidity compared with minimally invasive right hemihepatectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

This is an international multicenter retrospective analysis of 1,114 patients undergoing minimally invasive right hemihepatectomy, MI-RAS, and MI-RPS at 21 centers between 2006 and 2019. Minimally invasive surgery included pure laparoscopic, robotic, hand-assisted, or a hybrid approach. A propensity-matched and coarsened-exact-matched analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1,100 cases met study criteria, of whom 759 underwent laparoscopic, 283 robotic, 11 hand-assisted, and 47 laparoscopic-assisted (hybrid) surgery. There were 632 right hemihepatectomies, 373 right posterior sectionectomies, and 95 right anterior sectionectomies. There were no differences in baseline characteristics after matching. In the MI-RAS/MI-RPS group, median blood loss was higher (400 vs 300 mL, p = 0.001) as well as intraoperative blood transfusion rate (19.6% vs 10.7%, p = 0.004). However, the overall morbidity rate was lower including major morbidity (7.1% vs 14.3%, p = 0.007) and reoperation rate (1.4% vs 4.6%, p = 0.029). The rate of close/involved margins was higher in the MI-RAS/MI-RPS group (23.4% vs 8.9%, p < 0.001). These findings were consistent after both propensity and coarsened-exact matching.

CONCLUSIONS

Although technically more demanding, MI-RAS/MI-RPS is a valuable alternative for minimally invasive right hemihepatectomy in right-sided liver lesions with lower postoperative morbidity, possibly due to the preservation of parenchyma. However, the rate of close/involved margins is higher in these procedures. These findings might guide surgeons in preoperative counselling and in selecting the appropriate procedure for their patients.

The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy vs. open approach: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS) is one of the most technically challenging and potentially hazardous procedures in laparoscopic liver resection. Although some available literature works demonstrated the safety and feasibility of LRPS, these data are limited to reports from a single institution and a small sample size without support from evidence-based medicine. So, we performed a meta-analysis to assess further the safety and feasibility of LRPS by comparing it with open right posterior sectionectomy (ORPS).

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for eligible studies comparing LRPS and open approaches. Random and fixed-effects models were used to calculate outcome measures.

Results

Four studies involving a total of 541 patients were identified for inclusion: 250 in the LRPS group and 291 in the ORPS group. The postoperative complication and margin were not statistically different between the two groups (OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.18 to 1.35, P = 0.17) (MD: 0.05, 95% CI: −0.47 to 0.57, P = 0.86), respectively. LRPS had a significantly longer operative time and shorter hospital stay (MD: 140.32, 95% CI: 16.73 to 263.91, P = 0.03) (MD: −1.64, 95% CI: −2.56 to −0.72, P = 0.0005) respectively.

Conclusion

Data from currently available literature suggest that LRPS performed by an experienced surgeon is a safe and feasible procedure in selected patients and is associated with a reduction in the hospital stay.

International multicentre propensity score-matched analysis comparing robotic versus laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive right posterior sectionectomy (RPS) is a technically challenging procedure. This study was designed to determine outcomes following robotic RPS (R-RPS) and laparoscopic RPS (L-RPS).

METHODS

An international multicentre retrospective analysis of patients undergoing R-RPS versus those who had purely L-RPS at 21 centres from 2010 to 2019 was performed. Patient demographics, perioperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were analysed retrospectively from a central database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed, with analysis of 1 : 2 and 1 : 1 matched cohorts.

RESULTS

Three-hundred and forty patients, including 96 who underwent R-RPS and 244 who had L-RPS, met the study criteria and were included. The median operating time was 295 minutes and there were 25 (7.4 per cent) open conversions. Ninety-seven (28.5 per cent) patients had cirrhosis and 56 (16.5 per cent) patients required blood transfusion. Overall postoperative morbidity rate was 22.1 per cent and major morbidity rate was 6.8 per cent. The median postoperative stay was 6 days. After 1 : 1 matching of 88 R-RPS and L-RPS patients, median (i.q.r.) blood loss (200 (100-400) versus 450 (200-900) ml, respectively; P < 0.001), major blood loss (> 500 ml; P = 0.001), need for intraoperative blood transfusion (10.2 versus 23.9 per cent, respectively; P = 0.014), and open conversion rate (2.3 versus 11.4 per cent, respectively; P = 0.016) were lower in the R-RPS group. Similar results were found in the 1 : 2 matched groups (66 R-RPS versus 132 L-RPS patients).

CONCLUSION

R-RPS and L-RPS can be performed in expert centres with good outcomes in well selected patients. R-RPS was associated with reduced blood loss and lower open conversion rates than L-RPS.

Laparoscopic versus open right posterior sectionectomy: an international, multicenter, propensity score-matched evaluation

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic liver resection has become the standard for minor resections, evidence is lacking for more complex resections such as the right posterior sectionectomy (RPS). We aimed to compare surgical outcomes between laparoscopic (LRPS) and open right posterior sectionectomy (ORPS).

METHODS

An international multicenter retrospective study comparing patients undergoing LRPS or ORPS (January 2007-December 2018) was performed. Patients were matched based on propensity scores in a 1:1 ratio. Primary endpoint was major complication rate defined as Accordion ≥ 3 grade. Secondary endpoints included blood loss, length of hospital stay (LOS) and resection status. A sensitivity analysis was done excluding the first 10 LRPS patients of each center to correct for the learning curve. Additionally, possible risk factors were explored for operative time, blood loss and LOS.

RESULTS

Overall, 399 patients were included from 9 centers from 6 European countries of which 150 LRPS could be matched to 150 ORPS. LRPS was associated with a shorter operative time [235 (195-285) vs. 247 min (195-315) p = 0.004], less blood loss [260 (188-400) vs. 400 mL (280-550) p = 0.009] and a shorter LOS [5 (4-7) vs. 8 days (6-10), p = 0.002]. Major complication rate [n = 8 (5.3%) vs. n = 9 (6.0%) p = 1.00] and R0 resection rate [144 (96.0%) vs. 141 (94.0%), p = 0.607] did not differ between LRPS and ORPS, respectively. The sensitivity analysis showed similar findings in the previous mentioned outcomes. In multivariable regression analysis blood loss was significantly associated with the open approach, higher ASA classification and malignancy as diagnosis. For LOS this was the open approach and a malignancy.

CONCLUSION

This international multicenter propensity score-matched study showed an advantage in favor of LRPS in selected patients as compared to ORPS in terms of operative time, blood loss and LOS without differences in major complications and R0 resection rate.

Indocyanine green fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy is considered difficult on the basis of the surgery difficulty scoring system. In this study, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the technical application of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients who underwent ICG fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy at Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Department of Zhongnan Hospital, Wuhan University, from June 2018 to December 2019, were included. The influence of patient position, trocar placement, hepatic inflow occlusion, central venous pressure (CVP), and the ICG fluorescence imaging-guided method were analyzed.

RESULTS

In 17 patients, the left lateral position was maintained when the main tumor was in the S7, and in the remaining nine patients, the supine position was maintained with the right side of the body raised when the main tumor was in the S6. Ten patients who underwent preoperative injection of ICG were successfully developed for nonanatomical hepatectomy. Sixteen patients received intraoperative ICG injection for anatomical hepatectomy (2 cases had positive imaging findings, 14 cases had negative imaging findings, and 2 cases had failed imaging findings). All patients underwent the Pringle maneuver during the procedure. Four patients were preset with subhepatic vena cava blocking and one patient with suprahepatic inferior vena cava blocking. CVP was controlled at 3.00 ± 0.63 (mean ± SD) cmH₂O. The operative time was 216.14 ± 52.05 min, and the bleeding volume was 128.57 ± 75.55 ml. Four patients had Clavien-Dindo level I complications, and one had level III complications. Postoperative hospitalization duration was 6.19 ± 1.40 days. There were 14 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, 9 with metastatic liver malignancies, 2 with hepatic hemangioma, 1 with focal nodular hyperplasia of the liver, and 10 with hepatitis B liver cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

ICG fluorescence imaging guidance could be helpful for the safe implementation of laparoscopic right posterior hepatectomy.

One-stage laparoscopic parenchymal sparing liver resection for bilobar colorectal liver metastases: safety, recurrence patterns and oncologic outcomes

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) of bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are challenging and the safety and long-term outcomes are unclear. In this study, the short- and long-term outcomes and recurrence patterns of one-stage LLR for bilobar CRLM were compared to single laparoscopic resection for CRLM.

METHODS

This single-center study consisted of all patients who underwent a parenchymal sparing LLR for CRLM between October 2011 and December 2018. Demographics, perioperative outcomes, short-term outcomes, oncologic outcomes and recurrence patterns were compared. Data were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

Thirty six patients underwent a LLR for bilobar CRLM and ninety patients underwent a single LLR. Demographics were similar among groups. More patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the bilobar group (55.6% vs 34.4%, P = 0.03). There was no difference in conversion rate, R0 resection and transfusion rate. Blood loss and operative time were higher in the bilobar group (250 ml (IQR 150-450) vs 100 ml (IQR 50-250), P < 0.001 and 200 min (IQR 170-230) vs 130 min (IQR 100-165), P < 0.001) and hospital stay was longer (5 days (IQR 4-7) vs 4 days (IQR 3-6), P = 0.015). The bilobar group had more technically major resections (88.9% vs 56.7%, P < 0.001). Mortality was nil in both groups and major morbidity was similar (2.8% vs 3.3%, P = 1.0). There was no difference in recurrence pattern. Overall survival (OS) was similar (1 yr: 96% in both groups and 5 yr 76% vs 66%, P = 0.49), as was recurrence-free survival (RFS) (1 yr: 64% vs 73%, 3 yr: 38 vs 42%, 5 yr: 38% vs 28%, P = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, LLR for bilobar CRLM can be performed safely with similar oncologic outcomes as patients who underwent a single LLR for CRLM.

The role of the laparoscopic approach in two-stage hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

In selected patients, laparoscopic liver surgery for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) leads to better short-term outcomes and comparable oncologic outcomes in comparison with an open approach. However, its role in two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) remains poorly explored.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective study was performed to evaluate the role of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in the first and second stage of TSH. Demographic data, comorbid factors, perioperative outcomes, and short-term outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Between September 2011 and May 2020, 23 patients were planned to undergo a TSH. The first stage hepatectomy (FSH) was performed laparoscopically in 22 patients (96%) without need for conversion. The median blood loss was 50 cc (IQR 30-100 cc) and postoperative length of hospital stay was 4 days (IQR 2.5-5 days). R0 resections were obtained in 18 FSHs (78%), while all others were R1 vascular (22%). Fourteen patients (61%) underwent a second stage hepatectomy (SSH). All SSHs were anatomically major hepatectomies. SSH was performed laparoscopically in 7 patients (50%), with need for conversion in 1 case (14%). The median blood loss was slightly lower in the open liver resection (OLR) group compared to the LLR group (200 cc (IQR 110-375 cc) vs. 240 cc (IQR 150-400 cc), respectively. The median postoperative length of hospital stay was 3 days shorter in the LLR group compared to the OLR group (4 days (IQR 3.5-4 days) vs. 7 days (IQR 4.5-8.5 days), respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The already proven advantages of LLR in the treatment of CRLM favor the role of a laparoscopic approach in TSH for CRLM. In first stage minor or technically major hepatectomy, LLR is progressively becoming the gold standard. Laparoscopic second stage anatomically major hepatectomy is feasible in experienced hands, but should be limited to selected cases and should be performed in expert centers.

A multicenter cohort analysis of laparoscopic hepatic caudate lobe resection

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic resection of the hepatic caudate lobe (LRCL) requires a high level of expertise due to its challenging anatomical area. Only case reports, case series, and single-center cohort studies have been published. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of this laparoscopic procedure.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study including all patients who underwent LRCL in 4 high-volume hepatobiliary units between January 2000 and May 2018 was performed. Perioperative, postoperative, and survival outcomes were assessed. Postoperative morbidity was stratified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification with severe complications defined by grade III or more. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 32 patients were included, including 22 (68.8%) with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM), one (3.1%) with cholangiocarcinoma, four (12.5%) with other malignancies, and five (15.6%) with symptomatic benign lesions. Simultaneous colorectal and/or additional liver resection was performed in 20 (62.5%) patients. The median (IQR) operative time was 155 (121-280) minutes, blood loss was 100 (50-275) ml, conversion rate was 9.4% (n = 3), severe complications were observed in 2 patients (6.3%), and median (range) length of hospital stay was 3 [1-39] days. No 90-day postoperative mortality was noticed. The median (IQR) follow-up for the CRLM group was 14 [10-23] months. Five-year overall survival rate was 82% in this subgroup. Small interinstitutional differences were observed without major impact on surgical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

LRCL is safe and feasible when performed in high-volume centers. Profound anatomical knowledge, advanced laparoscopic skills, and mastering intraoperative ultrasound are essential. No major interinstitutional differences were ascertained.