Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy a consideration for acceptance as standard of care

A novel Laennec's capsule tunnel approach for pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy: a propensity score matching study

Background

With the development of laparoscopic hepatectomy, there are different surgical approaches and pedicle anatomical methods for laparoscopic left hepatectomy. Combined with our practical experience, we proposed a method of transhepatic Laennec membrane tunnel for laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LT-LLH) and investigated the feasibility by comparison with the extrahepatic Glissonian approach for laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (GA-LLH).

Patients and methods

The data of patients who underwent laparoscopic left hepatectomy in the Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic surgery of Fujian Provincial Hospital from December 2019 to March 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. Among them, 45 cases underwent laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy with an extrahepatic Glissonian approach, and 38 cases underwent laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy via transhepatic Laennec membrane tunnel approach. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) method was performed to compare the perioperative indexes and long-term tumor prognosis between the two groups.

Results

After 1:1 PSM, 33 patients in each group were selected for further analysis. Compared with the GA-LLH group, the operation time of the LT-LLH group was shorter. There was no significant difference in the incidence of total complications between the two groups. Moreover, no statistical differences were found in disease-free survival and overall survival between the two groups.

Conclusion

It is safe, faster, and convenient for selective appropriate cases to carry out laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy through the hepatic Laennec membrane tunnel, which is suitable for clinical promotion.

Novel Liver Parenchymal Transection Technique Using Saline-linked Monopolar Cautery Scissors (SLiC-Scissors) in Robotic Liver Resection

Introduction

Although there are a number of benefits to using robotics in liver surgery over conventional open and laparoscopic approaches, liver parenchymal transection is still the most difficult aspect of robotic liver resection (RLR) due to the limitations of the currently available robotic instruments and the lack of a standardized method.

Methods

We present a novel method for transecting the liver parenchyma during RLR employing saline-linked monopolar cautery (SLiC) scissors (SLiC-Scissors method). Between September 2021 and April 2022, 10 RLRs were performed utilizing the SLiC-Scissors method for both anatomical and non-anatomical liver resections. We assessed the short-term results, as well as the safety and practicality of our robotic liver parenchymal transection technique.

Results

Six of the 10 patients had malignant liver tumors, and four of them had liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Except for S1, the target lesions were present everywhere, and their median size was 25 mm (14-43 mm). The median amount of intraoperative bleeding was 5 mL (5-30 mL), and the median operative and console times were 223 and 134 min, respectively. There were no conversions to open liver resections. The median length of the postoperative stay was seven (4-13) days, and there were no serious postoperative complications or mortality.

Conclusions

The SLiC-Scissors method is a safe and practical procedure for liver parenchymal transection in RLR. In order to standardize and broadly implement RLR into normal patient treatment, this unique approach enables an advanced, locally controlled preparation of intrahepatic vessels and bile ducts.

Laparoscopic Left Hemihepatectomy Using the Hilar Plate-First Approach (with Video)

BACKGROUND

Effective inflow and outflow control of the liver is essential for a safe hepatectomy. Detachment of the hilar plate is a fundamental technique in the Glissonean approach. The hilar plate is situated near the middle hepatic vein, which runs in the midplane of the liver, and serves as a landmark during hemihepatectomy. In this study, we describe the technical details and surgical outcomes of laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy using the hilar plate-first approach.

METHODS

The key procedures of the hilar plate-first approach included the following: (1) detachment of the hilar plate for the left Glissonean approach, (2) the middle hepatic vein approach from the hilar plate, (3) parenchymal transection along the ischemic line and middle hepatic vein, and (4) transection of the left Glissonean pedicle at the ventral aspect of the Arantius ligament.

RESULTS

Between September 2020 and September 2021, 12 patients underwent laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy using the hilar plate-first approach. The median operation time was 227 min (range 140-350 min), and the median estimated blood loss was 82.5 ml (range 50-150 ml). The median length of postoperative hospital stay was 7 days (range 5-10 days). No major complications, including biliary complications, were observed.

CONCLUSION

The hilar plate-first approach contributes to the standardization of surgical techniques for laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy. This technique is a safe and effective approach for the inflow and outflow systems of the left hemiliver.

Case report of pure single-port robotic left lateral sectionectomy using the da Vinci SP system

INTRODUCTION

Since its first appearance in the early 1990s, laparoscopic hepatic resection has become increasingly accepted and recognized as safe as laparotomy. The recent introduction of robotic surgery systems has brought new innovations to the field of minimally invasive surgery, such as laparoscopic surgery. The da Vinci line of surgical systems has recently released a true single-port platform called the da Vinci SP system, which has 3 fully wristed and elbowed instruments and a flexible camera in a single 2.5 cm cannula. We present the first case of robotic liver resection using the da Vinci SP system and demonstrate the technical feasibility of this platform.

PATIENT CONCERNS AND DIAGNOSIS

A 63-year-old woman presented with elevated liver function test results and abdominal pain. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography showed multiple intrahepatic duct stones in the left lateral section and distal common bile duct stones near the ampulla of Vater.

INTERVENTIONS

The docking time was 8 minute. The patient underwent successful da Vinci SP with a total operation time of 135 minute. The estimated blood loss was 50.0 ml. No significant intraoperative events were observed.

OUTCOMES

The numerical pain intensity score was 3/10 in the immediate postoperative period and 1/10 on postoperative day 2. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 5 after verifying that the CT scan did not show any surgical complications.

CONCLUSION

We report a technique of left lateral sectionectomy, without the use of an additional port, via the da Vinci SP system. The present case suggests that minor hepatic resection is technically feasible and safe with the new da Vinci SP system in select patients. For the active application of the da Vinci SP system in hepatobiliary surgery, further device development and research are needed.

Three-Device (3D) Technique for Liver Parenchyma Dissection in Robotic Liver Surgery

BACKGROUND

The implementation of robotics in liver surgery offers several advantages compared to conventional open and laparoscopic techniques. One major advantage is the enhanced degree of freedom at the tip of the robotic tools compared to laparoscopic instruments. This enables excellent vessel control during inflow and outflow dissection of the liver. Parenchymal transection remains the most challenging part during robotic liver resection because currently available robotic instruments for parenchymal transection have several limitations and there is no standardized technique as of yet. We established a new strategy and share our experience.

METHODS

We present a novel technique for the transection of liver parenchyma during robotic surgery, using three devices (3D) simultaneously: monopolar scissors and bipolar Maryland forceps of the robot and laparoscopic-guided waterjet. We collected the perioperative data of twenty-eight patients who underwent this procedure for minor and major liver resections between February 2019 and December 2020 from the Magdeburg Registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients underwent robotic-assisted 3D parenchyma dissection within the investigation period. Twelve cases of major and sixteen cases of minor hepatectomy for malignant and non-malignant cases were performed. Operative time for major liver resections (≥ 3 liver segments) was 381.7 (SD 80.6) min vs. 252.0 (70.4) min for minor resections (p < 0.01). Intraoperative measured blood loss was 495.8 (SD 508.8) ml for major and 256.3 (170.2) ml for minor liver resections (p = 0.090). The mean postoperative stay was 13.3 (SD 11.1) days for all cases. Liver surgery-related morbidity was 10.7%, no mortalities occurred. We achieved an R0 resection in all malignant cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3D technique for parenchyma dissection in robotic liver surgery is a safe and feasible procedure. This novel method offers an advanced locally controlled preparation of intrahepatic vessels and bile ducts. The combination of precise extrahepatic vessel handling with the 3D technique of parenchyma dissection is a fundamental step forward to the standardization of robotic liver surgery for teaching purposing and the wider adoption of robotic hepatectomy into routine patient care.

Is minimally invasive surgery of lesions in the right superior segments of the liver justified? A multi-institutional study of 245 patients

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive resection for lesions in segments 7 or 8. We compare outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and Open parenchymal sparing liver resections at two high-volume centers.

METHODS

From 2003 to 2016 we identified patients who underwent MIS or Open resections for lesions in segments 7 or 8 at two institutions (MSKCC and SGH). Outcomes were compared using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and forty-five patients underwent resection of lesions in segments 7 or 8 (MIS 30% and Open 70%). Compared to the Open group, the MIS group had longer operative time (223 ± 88 vs 188 ± 72 minutes, P = .003), lower blood loss (297 ± 287 vs 448 ± 670 mL, P = .03), and shorter mean length of stay (5.2 ± 7.4 vs 8.3 ± 11.7 days, P < .001), which remained significant on multivariate analysis. No differences in Pringle time, rate of postoperative complications, or R0 resections were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

With appropriately selected patients treated by experienced MIS hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons, MIS resection of segments 7 or 8 is safe with similar rates of complications and R0 resections, with significantly less blood loss and shorter length of stay.

How to safely perform laparoscopic liver resection for children: A case series of 19 patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility and outcome of laparoscopic hepatectomy in pediatric patients with liver tumors and introduce surgical techniques to minimize complications.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 19 patients less than the age of 18 years old who underwent LLR for liver tumors between November 2005 and May 2017.

RESULTS

Ten females and nine males with a median age of 26 months and a median body weight of 14.7 kg were enrolled. Diseases of these patients were hepatoblastoma, neuroblastoma, biliary atresia, and liver abscess. The numbers of resected hepatic segments were more than two in thirteen patients and one in six patients. One patient required conversion to laparotomy to control bleeding caused by injury to the left hepatic vein. Nine patients received transfusions perioperatively. Median duration of operation was 230 min, and median postoperative hospital stay was 7.0 days. There was no postoperative complication. Only one patient showed nonhepatic recurrence of neuroblastoma which caused mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR for benign and malignant liver tumors showed acceptable amount of bleeding and low complication rate. Therefore, LLR would be a safe and feasible option for liver tumors in children with proper technical efforts and selection of patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Modified liver hanging maneuver in laparoscopic major hepatectomy: the learning curve and evolution of indications

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is a technically challenging procedure requiring a steep learning curve. The liver hanging maneuver is a useful technique in liver resection, especially for large or invasive tumors, a relative contraindication of the laparoscopic approach. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the learning curve for laparoscopic major hepatectomy using the liver hanging maneuver and extended indications.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic major hepatectomy using the liver hanging maneuver by a single surgeon from January 2013 and September 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Our hanging technique involves placing the hanging tape along the inferior vena cava for right-sided hepatectomy or the ligamentum venosum for left-sided hepatectomy. The upper end of the tape was placed at the lateral side of the major hepatic veins. The learning curve for operating time and blood loss was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method.

RESULTS

Among 53 patients, 18 underwent right hepatectomy, 26 underwent left hepatectomy, and 9 underwent right posterior sectionectomy. CUSUM analysis showed that operative time and blood loss improved after the 30th laparoscopic major hepatectomy. The 53 consecutive patients were divided into two groups (early, patients 1-30; late, patients 31-53). The median operative time was lower in the late group, but the difference was not statistically significant (270 vs. 245 min, p = 0.261). The median blood loss was also significantly lower in the late group (350 vs. 150 ml, p < 0.001). Large tumors (measuring > 10 cm) and tumors in proximity to major vessels were significantly higher in the late group (0 vs. 17.4%, p = 0.018; 3.3 vs. 21.7%, p = 0.036; respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that laparoscopic major hepatectomy using the modified liver hanging maneuver has a learning curve of 30 cases. After procedure standardization, the indications have gradually been extended to large or invasive tumors.

Intrahepatic Glissonian Approach to the Ventral Aspect of the Arantius Ligament in Laparoscopic Left Hemihepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy using the Glissonian approach is technically challenging secondary to a thick Glissonian pedicle and limited maneuverability of laparoscopic instruments. This procedure demands extreme caution owing to the high risk of bile leakage associated with left hemihepatectomy. We describe the technical details and surgical outcomes of the intrahepatic Glissonian approach to the ventral aspect of the Arantius ligament in laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy.

METHODS

After detachment of the left side of hilar plate, the meticulous dissection was performed in the liver capsule above the left Glissonian pedicle. Dissection of the ventral aspect of the Arantius ligament creates the space between the liver parenchyma and the left Glissonian pedicle. The left Glissonian pedicle was isolated and encircled using the long curved laparoscopic instrument. During the parenchymal transection, the left Glissonian pedicle was transected using lateral to the Arantius ligament.

RESULTS

Between February 2013 and July 2018, 13 consecutive patients underwent pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy. The median operation time was 230 min (range 180-300 min), and the median estimated blood loss was 300 mL (range 100-600 mL). Two patients (15%) required transfusion. The median tumor size was 40 mm (range 10-105 mm). All patients showed negative resection margins. The median postoperative hospital stay was 8 days (range 6-15 days). Major postoperative complications occurred in 1 patient (7.7%). No perioperative deaths occurred.

CONCLUSION

An intrahepatic Glissonian approach to the ventral aspect of the Arantius ligament is a feasible and effective technique in laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy.

Clinical efficacy of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection: a meta analysis

To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted liver resection (RLR) and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) by the means of meta-analytical techniques. We searched PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase and Web of Science databases, collecting randomized or non-randomized studies about robotic-assisted and laparoscopic liver resections. The searching cutoff date was 2017/6/30, all the data obtained were statistically analyzed using RevMan5.3 software recommended by Cochrane Collaboration. A total of thirteen articles, involving 938 patients were enrolled in meta-analysis. Among them, 435 cases underwent RLR, and 503 cases underwent LLR. Compared with LLR, the RLR had longer operative time [MD=65.49, 95%CI (42.00, 88.98) P＜0.00001＝more intraoperative blood loss [MD=69.88, 95%CI (27.11, 112.65) P=0.001] and a higher cost [MD=4.24, 95%CI (3.08, 5.39) P＜0.00001＝. There were no significant differences between the two groups in transfusion rate, complication rate, conversion rate, the R1 resection rate and hospital stay. In the subgroup analysis of surgery after 2010, a lower conversion rate was observed in RLR, other clinical outcomes are comparable between RLR and LLR. In the subgroup analysis of minor hepatectomy, RLR is still associated with longer operative time, but there is no difference in other outcomes. In the subgroup analysis of left hemihepatectomy or left lateral hepatectomy, RLR is associated with more blood loss. Although RLR associated with Longer operative time and more intraoperative blood loss, it displays the same safety and effectiveness as LLR for hepatectomies. And the high cost is still a major hindrance for the widely application of robotic surgery.

The clinical and biological impacts of the implementation of fast-track perioperative programs in complex liver resections: A propensity score-based analysis between the open and laparoscopic approaches

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the fast-track approach in patients undergoing complex liver procedures and to analyse factors that influence morbidity and functional recovery.

METHODS

Hepatic resections (2014-2016) were stratified according to difficulty score, obtaining a group of 215 complex resections (102 laparoscopic, 163 open). The laparoscopic group was matched by propensity score with open patients to obtain the minimally invasive liver surgery group (n = 102) and the open group (n = 102).

RESULTS

Groups were similar in terms of patient and disease characteristics. The postoperative morbidity was 31.4% in the minimally invasive liver surgery and 38.2% in the open group (P = .05), and functional recovery was shorter in the minimally invasive liver surgery (respectively 4 versus 6 days, P = .041). The adherence to fast-track was high in both groups, with several items with higher penetrance in the minimally invasive liver surgery group. Among factors associated with morbidity and functional recovery, a laparoscopic approach and strict adherence to a fast-track protocol resulted in protective factors.

CONCLUSION

The combination of minimally invasive approaches and fast-track protocols allows a reduced rate of postoperative morbidity and satisfactory functional recovery even in the setting of complex liver resections. When the laparoscopic approach is not feasible, strict adherence to a fast-track program is associated with the achievement of adequate results and should be implemented.

Fully laparoscopic left hepatectomy - a technical reference proposed for standard practice compared to the open approach: a retrospective propensity score model

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) may be an alternative to open (OLH). There are several original variations in the technical aspects of LLH, and no accepted standard. The aim of this study is to assess the safety and effectiveness of the technique developed at Henri Mondor Hospital since 1996.

METHODS

The technique of LLH was conceived for safety and training of two mature generations of lead surgeons. The technique includes full laparoscopy, ventral approach to the common trunk, extrahepatic pedicle dissection, CUSA^® parenchymal transection, division of the left hilar plate laterally to the Arantius ligament, and ventral transection of the left hepatic vein. The outcomes of LLH and OLH were compared. Perioperative analysis included intra- and postoperative, and histology variables. Propensity Score Matching was undertaken of background covariates including age, ASA, BMI, fibrosis, steatosis, tumour size, and specimen weight.

RESULTS

17 LLH and 51 OLH were performed from 1996 to 2014 with perioperative mortality rates of 0% and 6%, respectively. In the LLH group, two patients underwent conversion to open surgery. Propensity matching selected 10 LLH/OLH pairs. The LLH group had a higher proportion of procedures for benign disease. LLH was associated with longer operating time and less blood loss. Perioperative complications occurred in 30% (LLH) and 10% (OLH) (p = 1). Mortality and ITU stay were similar.

CONCLUSION

This technique is recommended as a possible technical reference for standard LLH.

A systematic surgical procedure: The '7+3' approach to laparoscopic right partial hepatectomy [deep segment (S) VI, S VII or S VIII] in 52 patients with liver tumors

Laparoscopic right partial hepatectomy (LRPH), located in the deep segment (S) VI, S VII or S VIII, is a complicated procedure, due to its poor operative field and high risk of bleeding. The present study aimed to summarize our experience of LRPH and to share our systematic surgical procedure, the ‘7+3’ approach. This approach includes seven key points and three main instruments. A total of 81 cases were included, which were divided into 2 groups [LRPH, n=52; open hepatectomy (OH), n=29]. The demographic profile, intraoperative parameters and postoperative parameters were obtained and analyzed. Blood loss (245.38±268.37 ml) in the LRPH group was not significantly more than in the OH group (230.93±257.62 ml; P=0.936). The durations of surgery, liver parenchyma transection and portal triad clamping were also not significantly more than those in the OH group (145.52±48.29 vs. 129.83±35.04 min; P=0.149 for surgery; 28.52±10.16 vs. 23.97±10.44 min; P=0.059 for liver parenchyma transection; 20.62±9.61 vs. 17.31±10.12 min; P=0.149 for portal triad clamping). However, the number of postoperative hospital days in the LRPH group was smaller (10.67 in LRPH vs. 12.07 in OH; P=0.025). The present study demonstrated the satisfactory surgical outcomes and economic benefits of the systematic ‘7+3’ surgical technique for LRPH. Further studies in larger cohorts and other centers are required to confirm its feasibility and superiority.

Laparoscopic liver hanging maneuver through the retrohepatic tunnel on the right side of the inferior vena cava combined with a simple vascular occlusion technique for laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy

Background

Laparoscopic hepatectomy has been performed in many hospitals, with the development of the laparoscopic operation technique. However, performing complex laparoscopic hepatectomy, such as right hemihepatectomy, is still a challenge. The aim of this study was to describe the application of a simple vascular occlusion technique and new liver hanging maneuver (LHM) in complex laparoscopic hepatectomy, which are both advocated by Chen Xiaoping for open hepatectomy.

Methods

The clinical data of 29 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy (LRH) from October 2014 to October 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. During operation, the vascular occlusion technique without hilus dissection and LHM through the retrohepatic avascular tunnel on the right side of the inferior vena cava were used.

Result

All 29 operations were successfully performed laparoscopically, while adopting Chen’s methods. The study consisted of 23 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, four patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and two patients with hepatic metastasis of colonic carcinoma. The tumor size was 12.4 ± 1.9 cm. The operation time of LRH was 190.3 ± 49.9 min. The intraoperative blood loss of LRH was 281.7 ± 117.8 mL; five patients required blood transfusion, and the amount of blood transfusion was 300.0 ± 89.4 mL. No case was converted to open surgery, and no death occurred. All resulted in R0 resections. The median free margin was 20.1 ± 10.8 mm. The time of postoperative oral diet intake was 2.10 ± 0.96 days. The complication rate was 17.2%. The average hospital stay after operation was 10.0 ± 2.9 days.

Conclusion

Complex hepatectomy is a bloodless procedure that can be performed under a laparoscope safely using Chen’s methods of vascular occlusion technique and LHM.

Modified liver hanging maneuver focusing on outflow control in pure laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Outflow control during laparoscopic liver resection necessitates the use of technically demanding procedures since the hepatic veins are fragile and vulnerable to damage during parenchymal transection. The liver hanging maneuver reduces venous backflow bleeding during deep parenchymal transection. The present report describes surgical outcomes and a technique to achieve outflow control during application of the modified liver hanging maneuver in patients undergoing laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of clinical data from 29 patients who underwent laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomy using the modified liver hanging maneuver between February 2013 and March 2017. For this hanging technique, the upper end of the hanging tape was placed on the lateral aspect of the left hepatic vein. The tape was then aligned with the ligamentum venosum. The position of the lower end of the hanging tape was determined according to left-sided hepatectomy type. The hanging tape gradually encircled either the left hepatic vein or the common trunk of the left hepatic vein and middle hepatic vein.

RESULTS

The surgical procedures comprised: left lateral sectionectomy (n = 10); left hepatectomy (n = 17); and extended left hepatectomy including the middle hepatic vein (n = 2). Median operative time was 210 min (range 90-350 min). Median intraoperative blood loss was 200 ml (range 60-600 ml). Two intraoperative major hepatic vein injuries occurred during left hepatectomy. Neither patient developed massive bleeding or air embolism. Postoperative major complications occurred in one patient (3.4%). Median postoperative hospital stay was 7 days (range 4-15 days). No postoperative mortality occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The present modified liver hanging maneuver is a safe and effective method of outflow control during laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomy.

Diffusion, outcomes and implementation of minimally invasive liver surgery: a snapshot from the I Go MILS (Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery) Registry

The Italian Group of MILS (I Go MILS) prospective registry was established in 2014 with the goals to create a hub for data and projects on a national basis and to promote the diffusion and implementation of MILS programs on a national scale. The primary endpoint of the present study is to give a snapshot of the real diffusion and outcomes of MILS in Italy, while analyzing the role of the registry in the implementation of MILS programs nationwide. The I Go MILS Registry is a prospective and intention-to-treat registry opened to any Italian center performing MILS, without restriction criteria based on number of procedures. The Registry is developed through the eClinical, an electronic platform for the management of clinical trials and is based on 34 clinical variables, regarding indication, intra- and postoperative course. Clinical outcomes and data regarding implementation of MILS activity have been analyzed for the aim of the study. Between November 2014 and June 2017, data from 1678 MILS performed in 48 centers have been collected (mean number of procedures per center 35, range 1-302). 22% of procedures were performed for benign and 78% for malignant disease (HCC constituted the 49.1% and CRLM the 31.2% of malignant tumors). Major liver resections (>3 liver segments), including right and left hepatectomies, trisectionectomies and ALPPS procedures were 10% of the series. Mean blood loss was 200 ± 230 mL Morbidity rate was 20.5% and mortality was 0.3%. 10.4% of cases were converted to open approach. Median length of stay was 5 days. MILS/total resections ratio in 13 experienced centers increased from 14 to 30% after Registry establishment. MILS programs are well established in Italy, with progressive increase both in the number of cases and in the numerosity of centers. The I Go MILS Registry is playing a crucial role in monitoring the development of MILS in the real world on a national basis while giving a significant contribution to the implementation of MILS programs.

A Modified Liver Hanging Maneuver in Pure Laparoscopic Left Hemihepatectomy with Preservation of the Middle Hepatic Vein: Video and Technique

BACKGROUND

The liver hanging maneuver is a novel and useful technique that is widely used in open liver resections. The present study describes the surgical technique and outcomes of a modified liver hanging maneuver for pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy.

METHOD

The clinical data of patients who underwent laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy using a modified hanging technique were retrospectively reviewed. The upper end of the hanging tape was placed on the lateral side of the left hepatic vein. The pathway of the tape was situated along the ligamentum venosum.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients underwent pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy with the modified hanging technique. The median operation time was 225 min (range 180-300 min), with a median blood loss of 265 ml (range 140-600 ml). Postoperative major complications occurred in one patient (6.3%). The median postoperative hospital stay was 8 days (range 5-15 days). There was no postoperative liver failure or mortality.

CONCLUSION

This modified liver hanging maneuver is a simple, safe, and reproducible approach as dissection of between the middle and left hepatic vein is not required. This technique may be useful in laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy.

Laparoscopic liver surgery: towards a day-case management

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory surgery (AS) is a contemporary subject of interest. The feasibility and safety of AS for solid abdominal organs are still dubious. In the present study, we aimed at defining potential surgical criteria for AS by analyzing a large database of patients who underwent laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) in two French expert centers.

METHODS

This study was performed using prospectively filled databases including patients that underwent pure LLS between 1998 and 2015. Patients whose perioperative medical characteristics (ASA score <3, no associated extra-hepatic procedure, surgical duration ≤180 min, blood loss ≤300 mL, no intraoperative anesthesiological or surgical complication, no postoperative drainage) were potentially adapted for ambulatory LLS were included in the analysis. In order to determine the risk factors for postoperative complications, multivariate analysis was carried out.

RESULTS

During the study period, pure LLS was performed in 994 patients. After preoperative and intraoperative characteristics screening, 174 (17.5%) patients were considered for the final analysis. Lesions (benign (46%) and liver metastases (43%)) were predominantly single with a mean size of 37 ± 32 mm in an underlying normal or steatotic liver parenchyma (94.8%). The vast majority of LLS performed were single procedures including wedge resections and liver cyst unroofing or left lateral sectionectomies (74%). The global morbidity rate was 14% and six patients presented a major complication (Dindo-Clavien ≥III). The mean length of stay was 5 ± 4 days. Multivariate analysis showed that major hepatectomy [OR 29.04 (2.26-37.19); P = 0.01] and resection of tumors localized in central segments [OR 41.24 (1.08-156.47); P = 0.04] were independent predictors of postoperative morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

In experienced teams, approximately 7% of highly selected patients requiring laparoscopic hepatic surgery (wedge resection, liver cyst unroofing, or left lateral sectionectomy) could benefit from ambulatory surgery management.

First quarter century of laparoscopic liver resection

The beginnings of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) were at the start of the 1990s, with the initial reports being published in 1991 and 1992. These were followed by reports of left lateral sectionectomy in 1996. In the years following, the procedures of LLR were expanded to hemi-hepatectomy, sectionectomy, segmentectomy and partial resection of posterosuperior segments, as well as the parenchymal preserving limited anatomical resection and modified anatomical (extended and/or combining limited) resection procedures. This expanded range of LLR procedures, mimicking the expansion of open liver resection in the past, was related to advances in both technology (instrumentation) and technical skill with conceptual changes. During this period of remarkable development, two international consensus conferences were held (2008 in Louisville, KY, United States, and 2014 in Morioka, Japan), providing up-to-date summarizations of the status and perspective of LLR. The advantages of LLR have become clear, and include reduced intraoperative bleeding, shorter hospital stay, and - especially for cirrhotic patients-lower incidence of complications (e.g., postoperative ascites and liver failure). In this paper, we review and discuss the developments of LLR in operative procedures (extent and style of liver resections) during the first quarter century since its inception, from the aspect of relationships with technological/technical developments with conceptual changes.

Development Process and Technical Aspects of Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: Learning Curve Based on 15 Years of Experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy continues to be a challenging operation associated with a steep learning curve. This study aimed to evaluate the learning process during 15 years of experience with laparoscopic hepatectomy and to identify approaches to standardization of this procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospectively collected data of 317 consecutive laparoscopic hepatectomies performed from January 2000 to December 2014 were reviewed retrospectively. The operative procedures were classified into 4 categories (minor hepatectomy, left lateral sectionectomy [LLS], left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy), and indications were classified into 5 categories (benign-borderline tumor, living donor, metastatic liver tumor, biliary malignancy, and hepatocellular carcinoma).

RESULTS

During the first 10 years, the procedures were limited mainly to minor hepatectomy and LLS, and the indications were limited to benign-borderline tumor and living donor. Implementation of major hepatectomy rapidly increased the proportion of malignant tumors, especially hepatocellular carcinoma, starting from 2011. Conversion rates decreased with experience for LLS (13.3% vs 3.4%; p = 0.054) and left hepatectomy (50.0% vs 15.0%; p = 0.012), but not for right hepatectomy (41.4% vs 35.7%; p = 0.661).

CONCLUSIONS

Our 15-year experience clearly demonstrates the stepwise procedural evolution from LLS through left hepatectomy to right hepatectomy, as well as the trend in indications from benign-borderline tumor/living donor to malignant tumors. In contrast to LLS and left hepatectomy, a learning curve was not observed for right hepatectomy. The ongoing development process can contribute to faster standardization necessary for future advances in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

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.

Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: Risk Factors and Treatment Strategies

PURPOSE

To investigate the risk factors for recurrence and treatment strategies after patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergo total laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH).

METHODS

The study included 109 patients who underwent LH (laparoscopy resection [LR] group, n = 50) or open hepatectomy [OH] (open resection [OR] group, n = 59) for HCC in our hospital between March 2011 and June 2016. Perioperative outcomes, disease recurrence, survival, and risk factors for recurrence were analyzed.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics did not significantly differ between groups. The 1- and 3-year survival rates were 90.7% and 78.1%, respectively, for the LR group and 83.1% and 74.4%, respectively, for the OR group (P = .71). The 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 89.6% and 51.4%, respectively, for the LR group and 84.7% and 59.6%, respectively, for the OR group (P = .935). Tumor size, differentiation, vascular invasion, surgical bleeding, and surgical resection margin were risk factors for tumor recurrence after LH.

CONCLUSION

LH for HCC did not increase the risk of recurrence compared with OH. Tumor size, differentiation, vascular invasion, surgical bleeding, and surgical resection margin were risk factors for tumor recurrence. Reducing bleeding during surgery and ensuring sufficient surgical margins were the most important measures to reduce postoperative recurrence of HCC.

An Improved Surgical Technique for Pure Laparoscopic Left Hemihepatectomy: Ten Years Experience in a Tertiary Center

Background: This study details our experience with an improved surgical technique involving the hepatic pedicle during laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH).

Methods: We describe an improved laparoscopic technique to extraparenchymally divide the left hepatic pedicle. A retrospective analysis of all of the patients who underwent laparoscopic liver procedures between 2002 and 2012 was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups, an early LLH group (ELLH group) and a recent LLH group (RLLH group), based on the surgical approach used for the left hepatic pedicle.

Results: A total of 72 cases of LLH (26 ELLH and 46 RLLH) were identified. The RLLH group exhibited a shorter median operative time, median length of hospital stay, and lower median blood loss compared to the ELLH group (182, 162.5–223.7 versus 232.5, 200–357.5 minutes, P < .01; 5, 4.2–7 versus 7, 6–8.7 days, P < .05; 150, 100–257.5 versus 300, 200–337.5 mL, P < .05, respectively). No perioperative mortality was observed.

Conclusions: This study confirms that our improved surgical technique for LLH is practical, safe, and effective. The main advantage of this method compared to other techniques is the possibility of attaining rapid and precise control of vascular inflow, thus facilitating LLH.

Clinical impact of laparoscopic hepatectomy: technical and oncological viewpoints

The objective of this study was to assess the clinical impact of laparoscopic hepatectomy from technical and oncological viewpoints through the consecutive 5-year experience of an expert team. The subjects consisted of 491 consecutive hepatectomies performed over the course of 5 years. A total of 190 hepatectomies (38.6 %) were performed laparoscopically, and the remaining 301 (61.4 %) were open hepatectomies. Chronological trends of operative procedures and their indications were evaluated, and patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were analyzed from an oncological viewpoint. The proportion of laparoscopic hepatectomies performed increased significantly during the study period (from 17.6 to 49.5 %). According to chronological trends, right hepatectomy was standardized using consecutive steps after minor hepatectomy, left lateral sectionectomy, and left hepatectomy were standardized. The proportion of laparoscopic hepatectomies performed for HCC increased from 21.4 to 71.0 %. No significant difference was observed in the proportion of major hepatectomies performed for HCC between the open and laparoscopy groups (50.6 vs. 48.6 %, p = 0.8053), whereas that of anatomical segmentectomy for HCC was significantly lower in the laparoscopy group (28.7 vs. 11.1 %, p = 0.0064). All laparoscopic anatomical segmentectomies were of segments 5 and 6, and there was no segmentectomy of posterosuperior lesions. The present study shows the consecutive technical developmental processes for minor hepatectomy, left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy without compromising oncological principles. Laparoscopic anatomical segmentectomy for posterosuperior lesions may be the most technically demanding procedure, requiring individualized standardization.

Two cases of laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases in elderly patients

INTRODUCTION

The laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer and laparoscopic liver surgery are widely considered to be safe. Recently, it has been reported that the simultaneous laparoscopic resection of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastasis is technically feasible and safe when it is performed at experienced centers. However, the feasibility of simultaneous laparoscopic procedures for colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases in elderly patients has not been studied sufficiently. In this study, two cases in which elderly patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases were treated with simultaneous laparoscopic resection are reported.

PRESENTATION OF CASES

An 83-year-old female was diagnosed with ascending colon cancer and synchronous hepatic metastases. Simultaneous laparoscopic resection of the primary colon cancer and the liver metastasis was performed. Another tiny hepatic metastasis was subsequently detected in the right hepatic lobe. It was treated with hand-assisted radiofrequency ablation (RFA). The total operative time was 470min, and 340g of intraoperative blood loss occurred. The other case involved a 78-year-old male who was diagnosed with ascending colon cancer and synchronous hepatic metastasis in the right hepatic lobe. Simultaneous laparoscopic resection of the primary colon tumor and liver metastasis was performed. The total operative time was 471min, and 240g of intraoperative blood loss occurred. The postoperative courses of both patients were uneventful.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that simultaneous laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases is feasible and safe in elderly patients.

Laparoscopy Decreases Pulmonary Complications in Patients Undergoing Major Liver Resection: A Propensity Score Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare both incidence and types of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) between laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) and open major hepatectomy (OMH).

BACKGROUND

LMHs are increasingly performed. Yet, the benefits of laparoscopy over laparotomy regarding PPCs remain unknown.

METHODS

In this multi-institutional study, all patients undergoing OMH or LMH between 1998 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Risk factors for PPCs were analyzed on multivariate analysis. Comparison of both overall rate and types of PPCs between OMH and LMH patients was performed after propensity score adjustment on factors influencing the choice of the approach.

RESULTS

LMH was performed in 226 (18.6%) of the 1214 included patients. PPCs occurred in 480 (39.5%) patients including symptomatic pleural effusion in 366 (30.1%) patients, respiratory insufficiency in 141 (11.6%), acute respiratory distress syndrome in 84 (6.9%), pulmonary infection in 80 (6.5%), and pulmonary embolism in 47 (3.8%) patients. On multivariate analysis, preoperative hypoprotidemia [hazard ratio (HR): 1.341, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.001-1.795; P = 0.049], open approach (HR: 2.481, 95% CI: 1.141-6.024; P = 0.024), right-sided hepatectomy (HR: 2.143, 95% CI: 1.544-2.975; P < 0.001), concomitant extrahepatic procedures (HR: 1.742, 95% CI: 1.103-2.750; P = 0.017), transfusion (HR: 2.851, 95% CI: 2.067-3.935; P < 0.001), and operative time more than 6 hours (HR: 1.510, 95% CI: 1.127-2.022; P = 0.006) were independently associated with PPCs. After propensity score matching, the overall incidence of PPCs (13.2% vs 40.5%, P < 0.001), symptomatic pleural effusion (11.6% vs 26.4%, P = 0.003), pleural effusion requiring drainage (1.7% vs 9.9%, P = 0.006), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (1.7% vs 9.9%, P = 0.006) were significantly lower in the laparoscopy group than in the open group.

CONCLUSIONS

Pure laparoscopy allows reducing PPCs in patients requiring major liver resection.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

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

Laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastases: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Preliminary series have shown the feasibility of combined laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM). The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes for matched patients undergoing combined resections.

METHODS

An international multicenter database of 142 patients that underwent combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM between 1997 and 2013 was compared to a database of 241 patients treated by open during the same period. Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes was performed after propensity score adjustment.

RESULTS

After matching, 89 patients were compared in each group including mostly ASA I-II patients, presenting with mean number of 1.5 CRLM, with a mean diameter of 30 mm, and resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy. A rectal resection was required in 46 and 43 % of laparoscopic and open procedures, respectively (p = 0.65). There was no difference in global operative time, blood loss and transfusion rates between the two groups. A conversion was required in 7 % of the laparoscopic procedures. Morbidity rates were similar in the two groups (p = 1.0). The 3-year overall survival in the laparoscopy and open groups were 78 and 65 %, respectively (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without severe comorbidities presenting with one, small (≤3 cm), CRLM resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy, combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM allowed similar short- and long-term outcomes compared with the open approach.

Laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastases: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Preliminary series have shown the feasibility of combined laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM). The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes for matched patients undergoing combined resections.

METHODS

An international multicenter database of 142 patients that underwent combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM between 1997 and 2013 was compared to a database of 241 patients treated by open during the same period. Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes was performed after propensity score adjustment.

RESULTS

After matching, 89 patients were compared in each group including mostly ASA I-II patients, presenting with mean number of 1.5 CRLM, with a mean diameter of 30 mm, and resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy. A rectal resection was required in 46 and 43 % of laparoscopic and open procedures, respectively (p = 0.65). There was no difference in global operative time, blood loss and transfusion rates between the two groups. A conversion was required in 7 % of the laparoscopic procedures. Morbidity rates were similar in the two groups (p = 1.0). The 3-year overall survival in the laparoscopy and open groups were 78 and 65 %, respectively (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without severe comorbidities presenting with one, small (≤3 cm), CRLM resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy, combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM allowed similar short- and long-term outcomes compared with the open approach.

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

BACKGROUND

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Risk factors and consequences of conversion in laparoscopic major liver resection

BACKGROUND

Although recent reports have suggested potential benefits of the laparoscopic approach in patients requiring major hepatectomy, it remains unclear whether conversion to open surgery could offset these advantages. This study aimed to determine the risk factors for and postoperative consequences of conversion in patients undergoing laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH).

METHODS

Data for all patients undergoing LMH between 2000 and 2013 at two tertiary referral centres were reviewed retrospectively. Risk factors for conversion were determined using multivariable analysis. After propensity score matching, the outcomes of patients who underwent conversion were compared with those of matched patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy who did not have conversion, operated on at the same centres, and also with matched patients operated on at another tertiary centre during the same period by an open laparotomy approach.

RESULTS

Conversion was needed in 30 (13·5 per cent) of the 223 patients undergoing LMH. The most frequent reasons for conversion were bleeding and failure to progress, in 14 (47 per cent) and nine (30 per cent) patients respectively. On multivariable analysis, risk factors for conversion were patient age above 75 years (hazard ratio (HR) 7·72, 95 per cent c.i. 1·67 to 35·70; P = 0·009), diabetes (HR 4·51, 1·16 to 17·57; P = 0·030), body mass index (BMI) above 28 kg/m(2) (HR 6·41, 1·56 to 26·37; P = 0·010), tumour diameter greater than 10 cm (HR 8·91, 1·57 to 50·79; P = 0·014) and biliary reconstruction (HR 13·99, 1·82 to 238·13; P = 0·048). After propensity score matching, the complication rate in patients who had conversion was higher than in patients who did not (75 versus 47·3 per cent respectively; P = 0·038), but was not significantly different from the rate in patients treated by planned laparotomy (79 versus 67·9 per cent respectively; P = 0·438).

CONCLUSION

Conversion during LMH should be anticipated in patients with raised BMI, large lesions and biliary reconstruction. Conversion does not lead to increased morbidity compared with planned laparotomy.

The role of adult living donor liver transplantation and recent advances

Twenty years since the first cases were described, adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT) is now considered a valid option to expand the donor pool in view of the ongoing shortage of organs and the high waiting list mortality rate. Despite the rapid evolution and acceptance of this complex process of donation and transplantation in clinical practice, the indications, outcome, ethical considerations and quality and safety aspects continue to evolve based on new data from large cohort studies. This article reviews the surgical and clinical advances in the field of liver transplantation, focusing on technical refinements and discussing the issues that may lead to a further expansion of this complex surgical procedure and the role of ALDLT.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Multivariate analysis of risk factors for postoperative complications after laparoscopic liver resection

BACKGROUND

The identification of modifiable perioperative risk factors in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) should aid the selection of appropriate surgical procedures and thus improve further the outcomes associated with LLR. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the risk factors for postoperative morbidity associated with laparoscopic liver surgery.

METHODS

All patients who underwent elective LLR between January 1999 and December 2012 were included. Demographic data, preoperative risk factors, operative variables, histological analysis, and postoperative course were recorded. Multivariate analysis was carried out using an unconditional logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Between January 1999 and December 2012, 140 patients underwent LLR. There were 56 male patients (40%) and mean age was 57.8 ± 17 years. Postoperative complications were recorded in 30 patients (21.4%). Postoperative morbidity was significantly higher after LLR of malignant tumors [n = 26 (41.3%)] when compared to LLR of benign lesions [n = 4 (5.2%) (P < 0.0001)]. By multivariate analysis, operative time [OR = 1.008 (1.003-1.01), P = 0.001] and LLR performed for malignancy [OR = 9.8 (2.5-37.6); P = 0.01] were independent predictors of postoperative morbidity. In the subgroup of patients that underwent LLR for malignancy using the same multivariate model, operative time was the sole independent predictor of postoperative morbidity [OR = 1.008 (1.002-1.013); P = 0.004].

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative complication rate increases by 60% with each additional operative hour during LLR. Therefore, expected operative time should be assessed before and during LLR, especially when dealing with malignant tumor.

Laparoscopic liver resection for living donation: Where do we stand?

In Western countries, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) may represent a valuable alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation. Yet, after an initial peak of enthusiasm, reports of high rates of complications and of fatalities have led to a certain degree of reluctance towards this procedure especially in Western countries. As for living donor kidney transplantation, the laparoscopic approach could improve patient’s tolerance in order to rehabilitate this strategy and reverse the current trend. In this setting however, initial concerns regarding patient’s safety and graft integrity, need for acquiring surgical expertise in both laparoscopic liver surgery and living donor transplantation and lack of evidence supporting the benefits of laparoscopy have delayed the development of this approach. Similarly to what is performed in classical resectional liver surgery, initial experiences of laparoscopy have therefore begun with left lateral sectionectomy, which is performed for adult to child living donation. In this setting, the laparoscopic technique is now well standardized, is associated with decreased donor blood loss and hospital stays and provides graft of similar quality compared to the open approach. On the other hand laparoscopic major right or left hepatectomies for adult-adult LDLT currently lack standardization and various techniques such as the full laparoscopic approach, the hand assisted approach and the hybrid approach have been reported. Hence, even-though several reports highlight the feasibility of these procedures, the true benefits of laparoscopy over laparotomy remain to be fully assessed. This could be achieved through standardization of the procedures and creation of international registries especially in Eastern countries where LDLT keeps on flourishing.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Wedge resections to living donor hepatectomy, are we heading in the right direction?

Despite inception over 15 years ago and over 3000 completed procedures, laparoscopic liver resection has remained mainly in the domain of selected centers and enthusiasts. Requirement of extensive open liver resection (OLR) experience, in-depth understanding of anatomy and considerable laparoscopic technical expertise may have delayed wide application. However healthy scepticism of its actual benefits and presence of a potential publication bias; concern about its safety and technical learning curve, are probably equally responsible. Given that a large proportion of our work, at least in transplantation is still OLR, we have attempted to provide an entirely unbiased, mature opinion of its pros and cons in the current invited review. We have divided this review into two sections as we believe they merit separate attention on technical and ethical grounds. The first part deals with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in patients who present with benign or malignant liver pathology, wherein we have discussed its overall outcomes; its feasibility based on type of pathology and type of resection and included a small section on application of LLR in special scenarios like cirrhosis. The second part deals with the laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy (LDH) experience to date, including its potential impact on transplantation in general. Donor safety, graft outcomes after LDH and criterion to select ideal donors for LLR are discussed. Within each section we have provided practical points to improve safety in LLR and attempted to reach reasonable recommendations on the utilization of LLR for units that wish to develop such a service.

Rationale and surgical technique of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy using endoscopic staples

Purpose

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) has been widely accepted due to benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Some surgeons prefer to isolate glissonian pedicles to segments II and III and to control individual pedicles with surgical clips, whereas opt like to control glissonian pedicles simultaneously using endoscopic stapling devices. The aim of this study was to find the rationale of LLLS using endoscopic staples.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed and compared the clinical outcomes (operation time, drainage length, transfusion, hospital stay, and complication rate) of 35 patients that underwent LLLS between April 2004 and February 2012. Patients were dichotomized by surgical technique based on whether glissonian pedicles were isolated and controlled (the individual group, n = 21) or controlled using endoscopic staples at once (the batch group, n = 14).

Results

Mean operation time was 265.3 ± 21.3 minutes (mean ± standard deviation) in the individual group and 170 ± 22.9 minutes in the batch group. Operation time in the batch group was significantly shorter than the individual group (P = 0.007). Mean drainage length was 4.8 ± 1.6 and 2.6 ± 1.5 days in the individual and the batch group. There was significantly shorter in the batch group, also (P = 0.006). No transfusion was required in the batch group, but 4 patients in the individual group needed transfusion. Mean hospital stay was 10.7 ± 1.1 and 9.4 ± 0.8 days in the individual and the batch groups (P = 0.460). There were no significant complications or mortality in both groups.

Conclusion

LLLS using endoscopic staples (batch group) was found to be an easier and safer technique without morbidity or mortality.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy is theoretically better than open hepatectomy: preparing for the 2nd International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resection

Six years have passed since the first International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resection was held. This comparatively new surgical technique has evolved since then and is rapidly being adopted worldwide. We compared the theoretical differences between open and laparoscopic liver resection, using right hepatectomy as an example. We also searched the Cochrane Library using the keyword "laparoscopic liver resection." The papers retrieved through the search were reviewed, categorized, and applied to the clinical questions that will be discussed at the 2nd Consensus Conference. The laparoscopic hepatectomy procedure is more difficult to master than the open hepatectomy procedure because of the movement restrictions imposed upon us when we operate from outside the body cavity. However, good visibility of the operative field around the liver, which is located beneath the costal arch, and the magnifying provide for neat transection of the hepatic parenchyma. Another theoretical advantage is that pneumoperitoneum pressure reduces hemorrhage from the hepatic vein. The literature search turned up 67 papers, 23 of which we excluded, leaving only 44. Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are underway, but their results are yet to be published. Most of the studies (n = 15) concerned short-term results, with some addressing long-term results (n = 7), cost (n = 6), energy devices (n = 4), and so on. Laparoscopic hepatectomy is theoretically superior to open hepatectomy in terms of good visibility of the operative field due to the magnifying effect and reduced hemorrhage from the hepatic vein due to pneumoperitoneum pressure. However, there is as yet no evidence from previous studies to back this up in terms of short-term and long-term results. The 2nd International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resection will arrive at a consensus on the basis of the best available evidence, with video presentations focusing on surgical techniques and the publication of guidelines for the standardization of procedures based on the experience of experts.

Laparoscopic approach to gastrointestinal malignancies: toward the future with caution

After the rapid acceptance of laparoscopy to manage multiple benign diseases arising from gastrointestinal districts, some surgeons started to treat malignancies by the same way. However, if the limits of laparoscopy for benign diseases are mainly represented by technical issues, oncologic outcomes remain the foundation of any procedures to cure malignancies. Cancerous patients represent an important group with peculiar aspects including reduced survival expectancy, worsened quality of life due to surgery itself and adjuvant therapies, and challenging psychological impact. All these issues could, potentially, receive a better management with a laparoscopic surgical approach. In order to confirm such aspects, similarly to testing the newest weapons (surgical or pharmacologic) against cancer, long-term follow-up is always recommendable to assess the real benefits in terms of overall survival, cancer-free survival and quality of life. Furthermore, it seems of crucial importance that surgeons will be correctly trained in specific oncologic principles of surgical oncology as well as in modern miniinvasive technologies. Therefore, laparoscopic treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies requires more caution and deep analysis of published evidences, as compared to those achieved for inflammatory bowel diseases, gastroesophageal reflux disease or diverticular disease. This review tries to examine the evidence available to date for the use of laparoscopy and robotics in malignancies arising from the gastrointestinal district.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open left hemihepatectomy for left-sided hepatolithiasis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of open versus laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (OLH vs. LLH) for left-sided hepatolithiasis.

METHODS

Between October 2007 and June 2012, 149 patients with left-sided hepatolithiasis who underwent LLH (n = 37) or OLH (n = 112) were evaluated. The perioperative and long-term outcomes that were reviewed included the stone clearance rate, operative morbidity and mortality, and the stone recurrence rate.

RESULTS

The mean operative time of the LLH group was significantly longer than that of the OLH group (257±50.4 minutes vs. 237±75.5 minutes, p = 0.022), but the mean hospital stay was significantly shorter (8.8±4.10 vs. 14.1±4.98 days, p < 0.001). Postoperative complications were noted in four and twenty cases among LLH and OLH patients, respectively (p = 0.982). The initial clearance rate of intrahepatic duct (IHD) stones was 100% and 96.4% in the LLH and OLH groups, respectively, but all remnant stones (n = 4, OLH group) were resolved postoperatively. There were two cases of recurrence of IHD stones in OLH patients, but none in LLH patients (p = 0.281).

CONCLUSIONS

In left-sided hepatolithiasis, LLH was safe and effective: it resulted in low postoperative morbidity, no mortality and a high stone clearance rate, and there were no incidences of recurrence in our study. The potential benefits of LLH include a shorter hospital stay and a faster return to oral intake. If consideration is given to the appropriate indication criteria, including the extent of hepatectomy and the location and distribution of lesions, LLH may be an excellent choice for treatment of left-sided hepatolithiasis.