Laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy for suspected early gall bladder carcinoma: thinking beyond convention

Evolution from laparoscopic to robotic radical resection for gallbladder cancer: a propensity score-matched comparative study

BACKGROUND

The use of robotic or laparoscopic surgery for gallbladder cancer (GBC) is increasing, with reported advantages over conventional open surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes and postoperative overall survival (OS) associated with robotic radical resection (RRR) and laparoscopic radical resection (LRR) for GBC.

METHOD

A total of 109 patients with GBC who underwent radical resection with the same surgical team between January 2015 and December 2023 were enrolled, with 21 patients in the RRR group and 88 cases in the LRR group. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) algorithm was used to compare the surgical outcomes and postoperative prognosis between the RRR and LRR groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors of postoperative overall survival (OS) and complications of Clavien-Dindo (C-D) Grades III-IV.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 46 (inter-quartile range, IQR 29-70) months for the LRR group and 16 (IQR 12-34) months for the RRR group. After PSM, the baseline characteristics of the RRR and LRR groups were generally well balanced, with 21 patients in each group. RRR was associated with significantly decreased intraoperative bleeding [100.00 (50.00, 200.00) mL vs 200.00 (100.00, 300.00) mL] and higher number of lymph nodes (LNs) yield [12.00 (9.00, 15.50) vs 8.00 (6.00, 12.00)]. The two groups showed comparable outcomes in terms of the incidence of biliary reconstruction, the range of liver resection, the length of operation, the incidence of postoperative morbidity, the incidence of C-D Grades III-IV complications, number of the days of drainage tubes indwelling and postoperative hospital stay, and mortality by postoperative days 30 and 90. After PSM, the 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival rates were 78, 70, and 37%, respectively, in the RRR group, and 71, 59, and 48%, respectively, in the LRR group (P = 0.593). Multivariate analysis showed that the preoperative TB level ≥ 72 µmol/L and biliary reconstruction were found to be the independent risk factors of C-D Grades III-IV complications. T3 stage was identified to be the risk factor for postoperative OS.

CONCLUSION

Compared with LRR, RRR showed comparable perioperative outcomes in terms of length of operation, and postoperative complications, recovery, and OS. In our case series, RRR of GBC can be accomplished safely and tends to show less intraoperative bleeding and higher LNs yield.

Gallbladder cancer: Progress in the Indian subcontinent

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is one of the commonest biliary malignancies seen in India, Argentina, and Japan. The disease has dismal outcome as it is detected quite late due to nonspecific symptoms and signs. Early detection is the only way to improve the outcome. There have been several advances in basic as well as clinical research in the hepatobiliary and pancreatic diseases in the West and other developed countries but not enough has been done in GBC. Therefore, it is important and the responsibility of the countries with high burden of GBC to find solutions to the many unanswered questions like etiopathogenesis, early diagnosis, treatment, and prognostication. As India being one of the largest hubs for GBC in the world, it is important to know how the country has progressed on GBC. In this review, we will discuss the outcome of the publications from India highlighting the work and the developments taken place in past several decades both in basic and clinical research.

Incidence and management of gallbladder cancer in cholecystectomy specimens: a 5-year tertiary centre experience

BACKGROUND

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is an uncommon, but highly aggressive cancer. Half of these cases are diagnosed pre-operatively, and the remaining cases are discovered incidentally on post-cholecystectomy specimens. There is a significant geographical variability in GBC incidence, with increasing age, female sex, and prolonged duration of cholelithiasis being risk factors for GBC. The primary aim was to define the overall local incidence of GBC incidental GBC and management of these cases. The secondary aim was to determine any pertinent risk factors in our case population.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was performed on all the cholecystectomy specimens at the Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service from 1 January 2016 to 2 December 2021. Data was collected via the electronic medical record. The incidence and management of gallbladder cancers was calculated, and association with body mass index (BMI), smoking status, diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was identified.

RESULTS

3904 cholecystectomy specimens were reviewed. GBC was identified in 0.46% of cholecystectomies. 50% of these cases were found incidentally. Abdominal pain was the most common presenting complaint (94.4%). GBC was associated with increased age and BMI and female sex. There was no association between smoking status, diabetes or IBD with an increased incidence of cancer. Tumour staging guided surgical and/or adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

GBC is rare. Patients with symptoms are associated with a poor prognosis. Incidental cancers are common, and negative margin resection based on the T stage of the cancer is the most reliable curative option.

Surgical and Oncological Outcomes of Wedge Resection Versus Segment 4b + 5 Resection for T2 and T3 Gallbladder Cancer: a Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is the standard operative procedure for patients with T2 and T3 gallbladder cancers (GBC). However, the optimal extent of hepatectomy remains unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search and meta-analysis to assess the safety and long-term outcomes of wedge resection (WR) vs. segment 4b + 5 resection (SR) in patients with T2 and T3 GBC. We reviewed surgical outcomes (i.e., postoperative complications and bile leak) and oncological outcomes (i.e., liver metastasis, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS)).

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 1178 records. Seven studies reported assessments of the above-mentioned outcomes in 1795 patients. WR had significantly fewer postoperative complications than SR, with an odds ratio of 0.40 (95% confidence interval, 0.26 - 0.60; p < 0.001), although there were no significant differences in bile leak between WR and SR. There were no significant differences in oncological outcomes such as liver metastases, 5-year DFS, and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with both T2 and T3 GBC, WR was superior to SR in terms of surgical outcome and comparable to SR in terms of oncological outcomes. WR that achieves margin-negative resection may be a suitable procedure for patients with both T2 and T3 GBC.

Application of laparoscopic surgery in gallbladder carcinoma

Gallbladder carcinoma (GC) is a rare type of cancer of the digestive system, with an incidence that varies by region. Surgery plays a primary role in the comprehensive treatment of GC and is the only known cure. Compared with traditional open surgery, laparoscopic surgery has the advantages of convenient operation and magnified field of view. Laparoscopic surgery has been successful in many fields, including gastrointestinal medicine and gynecology. The gallbladder was one of the first organs to be treated by laparoscopic surgery, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the gold standard surgical treatment for benign gallbladder diseases. However, the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for patients with GC remain controversial. Over the past several decades, research has focused on laparoscopic surgery for GC. The disadvantages of laparoscopic surgery include a high incidence of gallbladder perforation, possible port site metastasis, and potential tumor seeding. The advantages of laparoscopic surgery include less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and fewer complications. Nevertheless, studies have provided contrasting conclusions over time. In general, recent research has tended to support laparoscopic surgery. However, the application of laparoscopic surgery in GC is still in the exploratory stage. Here, we provide an overview of previous studies, with the aim of introducing the application of laparoscopy in GC.

Current status and progress in laparoscopic surgery for gallbladder carcinoma

Gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) is the most common biliary tract malignancy associated with a concealed onset, high invasiveness and poor prognosis. Radical surgery remains the only curative treatment for GBC, and the optimal extent of surgery depends on the tumor stage. Radical resection can be achieved by simple cholecystectomy for Tis and T1a GBC. However, whether simple cholecystectomy or extended cholecystectomy, including regional lymph node dissection and hepatectomy, is the standard surgical extent for T1b GBC remains controversial. Extended cholecystectomy should be performed for T2 and some T3 GBC without distant metastasis. Secondary radical surgery is essential for incidental gall-bladder cancer diagnosed after cholecystectomy. For locally advanced GBC, hepatopancreatoduodenectomy may achieve R0 resection and improve long-term survival outcomes, but the extremely high risk of the surgery limits its implementation. Laparoscopic surgery has been widely used in the treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies. GBC was once regarded as a contraindication of laparoscopic surgery. However, with improvements in surgical instruments and skills, studies have shown that laparoscopic surgery will not result in a poorer prognosis for selected patients with GBC compared with open surgery. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery is associated with enhanced recovery after surgery since it is minimally invasive.

Oncologic and Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Open Extended Cholecystectomy for Gallbladder Cancer

Laparoscopic surgery has been traditionally contraindicated for gallbladder cancer, but there have been few reports demonstrating the oncologic outcomes of this treatment. This study aimed to compare the technical feasibility and the long-term outcomes after laparoscopic versus open extended cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer. Between January 2011 and December 2018, 44 patients with gallbladder cancer who underwent extended cholecystectomy were included in this study, with 20 patients in the laparoscopic group and 24 patients in the open group. Perioperative outcomes, overall survival (OS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were retrospectively analyzed. There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) between the two groups in terms of perioperative outcomes, including blood loss, postoperative complications, R0 resection, and the number of lymph nodes retrieved. Patients in the laparoscopic group showed similar OS compared to the open group (5 year tumor-specific OS rate: 84.7% vs. 62.5%; p = 0.125). On subgroup analysis of patients with stage T2 and N0 disease, the laparoscopic group showed better OS (T2: 90.9% vs. 75.0%, p = 0.256; N0: 100.0% vs. 76.5%, p = 0.028). There was no difference in terms of RFS (3 year RFS: 74.4% vs. 64%; p = 0.571) and locoregional recurrence (10.0% vs. 16.9%, p = 0.895) between the two groups. There was no port-site recurrence in the laparoscopic group. This study suggests that laparoscopic extended cholecystectomy might be not inferior to open surgery in terms of oncologic safety or early and long-term outcomes in patients with early gallbladder cancer.

Treatment of Resectable Gallbladder Cancer

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the most common biliary tract cancer worldwide and its incidence has significant geographic variation. A unique combination of predisposing factors includes genetic predisposition, geographic distribution, female gender, chronic inflammation, and congenital developmental abnormalities. Today, incidental GBC is the most common presentation of resectable gallbladder cancer, and surgery (minimally invasive or open) remains the only curative treatment available. Encouragingly, there is an important emerging role for systemic treatment for patients who have R1 resection or present with stage III-IV. In this article, we describe the pathogenesis, surgical and systemic treatment, and prognosis.

Comparison of Outcomes After Primary Laparoscopic Versus Open Approach for T1b/T2 Gallbladder Cancer

Objectives

The primary laparoscopic approach (PLA) for T1b/T2 gallbladder cancer (GBC) remains contradicted. We aimed to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes after PLA versus open approach (OA) for T1b/T2 GBC.

Methods

Patients with resected T1b/T2 GBC were selected from our hospital between January 2011 and August 2018. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and several secondary outcomes were used to evaluate safety and effectiveness. Subgroup analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors for OS/DFS in GBC patients undergoing PLA/OA.

Results

A total of 114 patients who underwent OA (n = 61) or PLA (n = 53) were included in the study. The percent of PLA cases was increased over time from 40.0% in 2011 to 70.0% in 2018 (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in OS [hazard ratio (HR), 1.572; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.866–2.855; p = 0.13] and DFS (HR, 1.225; 95% CI, 0.677–2.218; p = 0.49). No significance was found for intraoperative drainage placement (p = 0.253), intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.497), operation time (p = 0.105), postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.797), positive LNs (p = 0.494), total harvested LNs (p = 0.067), and recurrence rates (P = 0.334). Subgroup analyses demonstrated no significance of conversion rates after PLA (all p > 0.05). Patients undergoing PLA with good/poor OS would have similar recurrence rates (p = 0.402). Positive LNs (p = 0.032) and tumor differentiation (p = 0.048) were identified as risk factors for OS after PLA, while positive LNs (p = 0.005) was identified for OS after OA. Moreover, age (p = 0.013), gallbladder stone (p = 0.008), tumor size (p = 0.028), and positive LNs (p = 0.044) were potential risk factors for DFS after OA.

Conclusions

PLA for T1b/T2 GBC was comparable to OA in terms of perioperative and long-term outcomes. Less positive LNs and well-differentiated tumors were independent predictors for better OS after PLA, and less positive LNs were also identified for better OS after OA. Additionally, younger age, without gallbladder stone, smaller tumor size, and less positive LNs were potential risk factors for better DFS after OA.

Clinical Outcomes Between a Minimally Invasive and Open Extended Cholecystectomy for T2 Gallbladder Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background: Although a minimally invasive extended cholecystectomy (MIEC) for T2 gallbladder cancer (T2 GBC) has been performed in many experienced centers, no oncologic comparison with open extended cholecystectomy (OEC) has yet been reported. Methods: T2 GBC patients who underwent MIEC (n = 60) or OEC (n = 135) were enrolled. We used propensity score matching (PSM) using pre- and intraoperative variables. Short- and long-term outcomes were then compared before and after PSM. Results: Before PSM, OEC patients more frequently showed completion of surgery after a simple cholecystectomy (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.551), and lymph node enlargement on preoperative computed tomography (SMD = -0.471). PSM was used to select 56 patients from each of the 2 patient groups. MIEC patients showed comparable complication rate (7.1% versus 12.5%, P = .365) and shorter hospital stay (5.7 days versus 9.8 days, P < .001). The median follow-up period was 26.2 months, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate (96.8% versus 91.1%, P = .464) and 5-year recurrence free survival (RFS) (54.7% versus 44.4%, P = .580) outcomes were still comparable between MIEC and OEC groups. Conclusion: MIEC have advantages such as early recovery and comparable short-term outcomes compared with OEC. MIEC showed comparable OS and RFS outcomes compared with OEC. MIEC is a safe option without oncological compromise for T2 GBC.

Adverse Outcomes After Bile Spillage in Incidental Gallbladder Cancers: A Population-based Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of bile spillage during cholecystectomy on oncological outcomes in incidental gallbladder cancers.

BACKGROUND

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is rare, but lethal. Achieving complete resection offers the best chance of survival. About 30% of GBCs are discovered incidentally after cholecystectomy for benign pathology. There is an anecdotal association between peritoneal dissemination and bile spillage during the index cholecystectomy. However, no population-based studies are available that measure the consequences of bile spillage on patient outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort comparison of patients with incidental GBC. All cholecystectomies and cases of GBC in Alberta, Canada, from 2001 to 2015, were identified. GBCs discovered incidentally were included. Operative events leading to bile spillage were reviewed. Patient outcomes were compared between cases of bile spillage versus no contamination.

RESULTS

In all, 115,484 cholecystectomies were performed, and a detailed analysis was possible in 82 incidental GBC cases. In 55 cases (67%), there was bile spillage during the index cholecystectomy. Peritoneal carcinomatosis occurred more frequently in those with bile spillage (24% vs 4%; P = 0.0287). Patients with bile spillage were less likely to undergo a radical re-resection (25% vs 56%; P = 0.0131) and were less likely to achieve an R0 resection margin [odds ratio 0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.55]. On Cox regression modeling, bile spillage was an independent predictor of shorter disease-free survival (hazard ratio 1.99, 95% CI 1.07-3.67).

CONCLUSION

For incidentally discovered GBC, bile spillage at the time of index cholecystectomy has measureable adverse consequences on patient outcomes. Early involvement of a hepatobiliary specialist is recommended where concerning features for GBC exist.

Laparoscopic versus open extended cholecystectomy with bi-segmentectomy (s4b and s5) in patients with gallbladder cancer

Introduction:

The outcome of laparoscopic extended cholecystectomy (EC) with wedge hepatic resection (LECW) in patients with gallbladder cancer (GBC) has been compared with that of open EC with wedge hepatic resection (OECW), but studies comparing laparoscopic EC with bi-segmentectomy (LECB) with open EC with bi-segmentectomy (OECB) are lacking.

Patients and Methods:

This retrospective study comprised of 68 patients with GBC who were offered either LECB or OECB from July 2011 to July 2018. Patients were divided into laparoscopic group (LG) and open group (OG), and appropriate statistical methods were used for comparison.

Results:

Out of the total 68 patients, 30 patients were in LG and 38 patients were in OG. Demographic, clinical and biochemical characteristics were similar except significantly higher number of male patients in OG (P = 0.01). In LG versus OG, the mean operation time was 286 versus 274 min (P = 0.565), mean blood loss was 158 versus 219 ml (P = 0.006) and mean hospital stay was 6.4 versus 9 days (P = 0.0001). The complication rate was 16.6% in LG and 31.5% in OG, but this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.259). The median number of lymph nodes was 12 in both LG and OG (P = 0.62). Distribution of patients among American Joint Committee on Cancer stages I to IV was similar in both the groups (P = 0.5). Fifty percent of the patients in both the groups received adjuvant treatment (P = 1). In LG versus OG, the recurrence rate was 20% versus 28.9% (P = 0.4), mean recurrence-free survival was 48 months versus 44 months (P = 0.35) and overall survival was 51 months versus 46 months (P = 0.45). In LG versus OG, 1, 3 and 5-year survival was 96% versus 94%, 79% versus 72% and 79% versus 62% (P = 0.45). The median follow-up was statistically significantly shorter (24 vs. 36 months) in LG versus OG (P = 0.0001).

Conclusions:

The oncological outcome and survival after LECB in patients with resectable GBC is not inferior to that after OECB. Laparoscopic approach has a potential to improve perioperative outcome in patients with GBC.

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

BACKGROUND

Open extended cholecystectomy (O-EC) has long been the recommended treatment for resectable gallbladder cancer (GBC), while the minimally-invasive approach for EC (MIS-EC) remains controversial. Our aim was to analyze overall survival of GBC patients treated with MIS-EC vs O-EC at the national level.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the National Cancer Database of patients with resectable GBC (2010-2016) and treated with either MIS-EC or O-EC was performed. Overall survival (OS) was compared by the surgical approach.

RESULTS

A total of 680 patients were identified, of whom 235 (34.6%) underwent MIS-EC. There were no differences in the rates of positive margins between MIS-EC and O-EC (14% vs 19%, respectively; P = .278), and in the mean lymph node yield (6.54 vs 6.66, respectively; P = .914). The median survival following MIS-EC was significantly higher than that of O-EC (39 vs 26 months; P = .048). After stratification by pathological stage and after adjustment, there was no significant difference in OS between the groups (HR = 0.9, 95% CI, 0.6-1.5).

CONCLUSION

In this large national cohort, MIS-EC oncologic outcomes were noninferior to the O-EC. Proficiency with MIS techniques, proper patient selection, and referral to specialized centers may allow a greater benefit from this treatment modality.

Complete laparoscopic radical resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma: technical aspects and long-term results from a single center

Introduction

The landscape of surgical treatments for hepatobiliary disease was significantly changed after the advent of laparoscopy. Many kinds of complex laparoscopic procedures can be routinely performed at present, but radical resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HC) by laparoscopy is still highly contentious.

Aim

To describe our primary experience with laparoscopic radical resection for HC and determine the safety and feasibility of this procedure.

Material and methods

Between December 2015 and November 2019, 32 patients planned to undergo curative-intent laparoscopic resection of HC in our department. The perioperative and long-term outcomes of these patients were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

Laparoscopic surgery with radical resection was ultimately performed in 24 (75.0%) patients; 3 (9.3%) patients were found to be unresectable at the preliminary exploration stage, and 5 (15.7%) patients converted from laparoscopy to laparotomy. The operation time and blood loss were 476.95 ±133.89 min and 568.75 ±324.01 ml, respectively. A negative margin was achieved in 19 (79.1%) of the laparoscopy patients. Three (12.5%) patients were identified with microscopic positive margins, and 2 (8.4%) patients underwent macroscopic residual tumor resection (R2). The length of postoperative stay was 23.3 ±11.7 days. Severe morbidity occurred in 4 (16.6%) patients. The actuarial 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival for patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were 49.1% and 47.0%, respectively.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic radical resection for HC is safe and feasible in experienced hands for highly selected patients but is still in its initial stages. When adequate oncologic resection is performed, the laparoscopic approach does not adversely influence the prognosis of the patient.

Current status and future perspectives of minimally invasive surgery in gallbladder carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) is the most common biliary tract malignancy, which is characterized by easy local invasion, lymph nodes metastasis, local vascular invasion. Hence, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) can be performed in a limited number of patients. In our study, we reviewed the current studies on laparoscopic surgery (LS) and robotic surgery (RS) for GBC and analysed the limitations and difficulties of MIS for GBC.

METHODS

Multiple electronic databases were used for a systematic literature retrieval. All studies involving MIS of GBC were included (up to August 2019).

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies were included, of which 18 studies involved LS for GBC and six studies concerned RS of GBC. For LS, 16 studies contained relevant information of T stage, and 323 patients (98.8%) had T3 or lower stage; the average rate of R0 resection, conversion, postoperative complications and mortality was 95.3% (range 80.5-100%), 1.9% (range 0-16.7%), 13.4% (range 0-33.3%) and 1.0% (range 0-10%), respectively. For RS, four studies contained relevant information of T stage, and all patients were T3 or lower stage; the average rate of R0 resection, conversion and postoperative complications was 96.8% (range 81.8-100%), 5.5% (range 0-14.8%) and11.9% (range 0-36.4%), respectively. In addition, no patient had perioperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS for GBC is limited to highly selected patients and is considered to be technically feasible in experienced surgeons. However, improvements in technical and instrumental are needed to reduce the associated postoperative complications and implantation metastasis, and to promote MIS in the treatment of GBC.

Oncologic safety of laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy in pT2 gallbladder cancer: A propensity score matching analysis compared to open approach

The role of laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy (LRC) in the surgical management of T2 gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) is still controversial.The medical records of patients with T2 GBC treated with radical cholecystectomy were retrospectively reviewed. In this study, we compare the short- and long-term oncologic outcomes, using propensity score matching analysis, of patients with T2 GBC who underwent LRC and open radical cholecystectomy (ORC).Among 183 patients, 86 were selected by propensity score matching (LRC = 43 and ORC = 43). The ORC group underwent more extensive surgery (liver resections and extended lymph node dissections [ELND]) than the LRC group. The LRC group had less operative blood loss, shorter length of hospital stay, fewer complications, and had the earlier start of adjuvant chemotherapy. There was no significant difference between the laparoscopic and open surgery groups in terms of 5-year overall survival rate (64.6% vs 80.4%, P = .214) and disease-free survival rate (77.1% vs 82.2%, P = .641). A subgroup analyses showed that liver resection and ELND had no survival advantage compared to no liver resection and regional lymph node dissection, respectively.Our LRC approach is safe and effective, with long-term survival comparable to that of ORC.

Robotic extended cholecystectomy in gallbladder cancer

BACKGROUND

The application of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in advanced gallbladder cancer (GBC) requiring extended cholecystectomy is challenging, in terms of achieving clinically safe and complete oncologic resection. Recently developed robotic systems, however, may provide advantages in overcoming difficulties faced by laparoscopic MIS. The purpose of this study is to investigate the feasibility and advantages of a robotic system to assist with extended cholecystectomy.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with clinically suspected stage T2 or above, GBC (as determined by preoperative computed tomography or ultrasonography) underwent robotic extended cholecystectomy (REC) from February 2018 to January 2020. The attached video shows the detailed procedure in the following order: the positioning of the patient and the trocars, Kocher maneuver, lymph node dissection (#8, 9, 12, 13), skeletonization of hepatoduodenal ligament, ligation of the cystic duct and liver resection.

RESULTS

Of 16 patients who underwent REC, mean operation time was 198.3 min and the median estimated blood loss was 295 ml. 11 patients (68.8%) were pathologically diagnosed as stage T2 or above, and the metastatic lymph node was identified in 3 patients (18.8%). All cases had secured tumor-free resection margins, and 3 patients (18.8%) showed invasion to the hepatic parenchyma. The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was 7.2. The median duration of hospital stay was 7 days. There were no mortality or recurrence within 90 days after the operation.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that robotic systems can be safely utilized in advanced stage GBC, facilitating oncologically sufficient lymph node dissection and rapid recovery.

Lateral approach toward hepatoduodenal ligament during laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy for Gallbladder cancer

BACKGROUND

The common approach of Lymph node dissection (LND) during laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy (LRC) is an anterior approach [1,2], which emulates the view of open surgery. However, isolating the post-pancreatic nodes and retro-portal nodes completely without any damage to neighboring organs can be difficult in laparoscopic surgery because the dorsal structures of hepatoduodenal ligament are embedded and it is difficult for a surgeon to expose them [3]. On the other hand, the lateral approach offers the better way to expose and dissect dorsal part of hepatoduodenal ligament and it can be useful for dissecting hilar during laparoscopic right hepatectomy without injury of left side vascular structures.

METHODS

We performed retrospective analysis of consecutive 10 patients submitted to LRC for Gallbladder (GB) cancer and described a technical aspect regarding LND for those series of cases. Among them, we introduced a patient with 71 years old man in a surgical video clip. He had no symptom and was his lesion was detected during a regular health care screening. The preoperative computed tomography showed T2 cancer with suspicious involvement in liver. His liver function was normal and tumor marker level was in normal range. LRC with liver wedge resection were contemplated for his treatment.

RESULTS

In the video clip, the patient was laid on an operating table in supine position. A zero degrees flexible laparoscope was used through the port on right subcostal angle. After identifying the common hepatic artery, #8 nodes were dissected and a 360-degree surrounding loop was applied to it for gentle retraction. Then gastroduodenal artery was identified with same manner. Cystic duct was isolated and frozen biopsy of its stump was done. After completing the isolation of common bile duct, another 360-degree loop was placed around it. The main trunk of the portal vein was exposed and followed superiorly up to the area of its bifurcation. Camera moved to lateral side of patient, to provide the better view of posterior and dorsal part of hepatoduodenal ligament. Careful dissection of retro-portal area with node dissection was then performed and portal vein was surrounded in 360°. Then, surgeon paid attention to dissecting retro-pancreatic #13 nodes, which was clearly identified and dissected. LRC was performed successfully by using lateral laparoscopic approach. Then liver wedge resection under laparoscopy was performed without any problem. This approach was not a great invention or innovation. Rather, this approach is commonly used technique in "liver and pancreatic minimally invasive procedures" including robotic procedures. However, this simple procedure can be useful for a surgeon to perform LRC. During last 20 years, we performed radical cholecystectomy for treating GB cancer in our institution. Since 2014, we changed the policy to treat early GB cancer (in the stage of T1b and T2) with "minimally invasive procedure". We performed only LND without liver resection for peritoneal side tumor. Most of all patients were diagnosed in preoperative manner. Only two cases of incidental cancer underwent additional operation of LND and liver resection. Half of cases went through the process of dissection of lymph nodes only and 5 liver resections were done. None of patients undergoing LRC required conversion to another view during hilar dissection. The retro-portal vein and pancreas head LND could be reached expeditiously and safely prior to parenchymal transection. Majority of them revealed T2 and T1b finally. Number of retrieved nodes were in between 1 and 17 and median was 7. There was one complication of small bowel perforation during adhesiolysis.

CONCLUSION

Lateral approach during LRC appears to offer better way to visualize, expose and dissect the dorsal part of hepatoduodenal ligament and LND #12,13s.

Laparoscopic surgery for early gallbladder carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a controversy as to whether laparoscopic surgery leads to a poor prognosis compared to the open approach for early gallbladder carcinoma (GBC). We hypothesized that the laparoscopic approach is an alternative for early GBC.

AIM

To identify and evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of early GBC.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of online databases, including MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane libraries, and Web of Science, was performed to identify non-comparative studies reporting the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery and comparative studies involving laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in early GBC from January 2009 to October 2019. A fixed-effects meta-analysis was performed for 1- and 5-year overall survival and postoperative complications, while 3-year overall survival, operation time, blood loss, the number of lymph node dissected, and postoperative hospital stay were analyzed by random-effects models.

RESULTS

The review identified 7 comparative studies and 8 non-comparative studies. 1068 patients (laparoscopic surgery: 613; open surgery: 455) were included in the meta-analysis of 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival with no significant differences observed [(HR = 0.54; 95%CI: 0.29-1.00; I² = 0.0%; P = 0.051), (HR = 0.75; 95%CI: 0.34-1.65; I² = 60.7%; P = 0.474), (HR = 0.71; 95%CI: 0.47-1.08; I² = 49.6%; P = 0.107), respectively]. There were no significant differences in operation time [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 18.69; 95%CI: −19.98-57.36; I² = 81.4%; P = 0.343], intraoperative blood loss (WMD = −169.14; 95%CI: −377.86-39.57; I² = 89.5%; P = 0.112), the number of lymph nodes resected (WMD = 0.12; 95%CI: −2.95-3.18; I² = 73.4%; P = 0.940), and the complication rate (OR = 0.69; 95%CI: 0.30-1.58; I² = 0.0%; P = 0.377 ) between the two groups, while patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery had a reduced length of hospital stay (WMD = −5.09; 95%CI: −8.74- −1.45; I² = 91.0%; P= 0.006).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis confirms that laparoscopic surgery is a safe and feasible alternative to open surgery with comparable survival and operation-related outcomes for early GBC.

Current standards and future perspectives in adjuvant treatment for biliary tract cancers

Biliary tract cancer, including cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) and gallbladder cancer (GBC) are rare tumours with a rising incidence. Prognosis is poor, since most patients are diagnosed with advanced disease. Only ~20% of patients are diagnosed with early-stage disease, suitable for curative surgery. Despite surgery performed with potentially-curative intent, relapse rates are high, with around 60-70% of patients expected to have disease recurrence. Most relapses occur in the form of distant metastases, with a predominance of liver spread. In view of high tumour recurrence, adjuvant strategies have been explored for many years, in the form of radiotherapy, chemo-radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Historically, few randomised trials were available, which included a variety of additional tumours (e.g. pancreatic and ampullary tumours); most evidence relied on phase II and retrospective studies, with no high-quality evidence available to define the real benefit derived from adjuvant strategies. Since 2017, three randomised phase III clinical trials have been reported; all recruited patients with resected biliary tract cancer (CCA and GBC) who were randomised to observation alone, or chemotherapy in the form of gemcitabine (BCAT study; included patients diagnosed with extrahepatic CCA only), gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (PRODIGE-12/ACCORD-18; included patients diagnosed with CCA and GBC) or capecitabine (BILCAP; included patients diagnosed with CCA and GBC). While gemcitabine-based chemotherapy failed to show an impact on patient outcome (relapse-free survival (RFS) or overall survival (OS)), the BILCAP study showed a benefit from adjuvant capecitabine in terms of OS (pre-planned sensitivity analysis in the intention-to-treat population and in the per-protocol analysis), with confirmed benefit in terms of RFS. Based on the BILCAP trial, international guidelines recommend adjuvant capecitabine for a period of six months following potentially curative resection of CCA as the current standard of care for resected CCA and GBC. However, BILCAP failed to show OS benefit in the intention-to-treat (non-sensitivity analysis) population (primary end-point), and this finding, as well as some inconsistencies between studies has been criticised and has led to confusion in the biliary tract cancer medical community. This review summarises the adjuvant field in biliary tract cancer, with evidence before and after 2017, and comparison between the latest randomised phase III studies. Potential explanations are presented for differential findings, and future steps are explored.

Comparison of oncological outcomes after open and laparoscopic re-resection of incidental gallbladder cancer

BACKGROUND

The safety and oncological efficacy of laparoscopic re-resection of incidental gallbladder cancer have not been studied. This study aimed to compare laparoscopic with open re-resection of incidentally discovered gallbladder cancer while minimizing selection bias.

METHODS

This was a multicentre retrospective observational cohort study of patients with incidental gallbladder cancer who underwent re-resection with curative intent at four centres between 2000 and 2017. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were analysed by intention to treat. Inverse probability of surgery treatment weighting using propensity scoring was undertaken.

RESULTS

A total of 255 patients underwent re-resection (190 open, 65 laparoscopic). Nineteen laparoscopic procedures were converted to open operation. Surgery before 2011 was the only factor associated with conversion. Duration of hospital stay was shorter after laparoscopic re-resection (median 4 versus 6 days; P < 0·001). Three-year OS rates for laparoscopic and open re-resection were 87 and 62 per cent respectively (P = 0·502). Independent predictors of worse OS were residual cancer found at re-resection (hazard ratio (HR) 1·91, 95 per cent c.i. 1·17 to 3·11), blood loss of at least 500 ml (HR 1·83, 1·23 to 2·74) and at least four positive nodes (HR 3·11, 1·46 to 6·65). In competing-risks analysis, the RFS incidence was higher for laparoscopic re-resection (P = 0·038), but OS did not differ between groups. Independent predictors of worse RFS were one to three positive nodes (HR 2·16, 1·29 to 3·60), at least four positive nodes (HR 4·39, 1·96 to 9·82) and residual cancer (HR 2·42, 1·46 to 4·00).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic re-resection for selected patients with incidental gallbladder cancer is oncologically non-inferior to an open approach. Dissemination of advanced laparoscopic skills and timely referral of patients with incidental gallbladder cancer to specialized centres may allow more patients to benefit from this operation.

Totally Laparoscopic Radical Cholecystectomy for Gallbladder Cancer: A Single Center Experience

Background: Primary laparoscopic approach for the treatment of cancers of the biliary tract is not popular in the surgical community. The aim of this study is to report the short-term data of patients who underwent total laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer (GBC) at a single center of specialized hepatobiliary surgery. Methods: From November 2016 to January 2019, we routinely performed a laparoscopic approach for two groups of patients: (1) patients with primary GBC (diagnosed preoperatively) and (2) patients with incidental GBC (IGBC) discovered after cholecystectomy. Results: Our retrospective study included 18 patients (7 primary GBCs, 11 IGBCs). Conversion rate from laparoscopy to laparotomy was 28.6% and 9.1%, respectively, for the two groups, but this difference was not statistically significant (P = .28). Only 3 patients had liver recurrence (27.3%) and 1 had liver invasion (14.3%). A more advanced T category and TNM stage were presented in the preoperative suspicion cases (T3-T4 18.2% versus 57.1%, P = .06, stage IVA-B 9.1% versus 71.4%, P = .017). Regional lymphadenectomy was performed in 15 patients, in 73.3% the total number of lymph nodes (total LNs) retrieved was more than 7 (7-12 LNs in 66.7% of patients and >12 LNs in 6.6% of patients). The mean postoperative long stay was 8 days excluding for cases who developed complication. Conclusions: Laparoscopy can be considered a safe treatment for IGBC or primary GBC. The T3 stage with only liver involvement was not a contraindication. The real reasons that lead to convert the laparoscopic procedure were due to oncological concerns, unrelated to the liver infiltration.

Short-term outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for patients presenting with suspected gallbladder cancer: Report of 8 cases

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gallbladder cancer (GBCa) has traditionally been discouraged, with limited studies reporting on its outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of MIS for patients with GBCa or suspected GBCa.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 8 consecutive patients who underwent MIS for GBCa by a single surgeon over a 22-month period between 2015 and 2017.

RESULTS

Three patients underwent robotic surgery, while five underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery. Four patients presented with histologically proven GbCa detected incidentally after cholecystectomy. All 4 patients underwent resection of Segment 4b/5. Of these, 3 underwent hilar lymphadenectomy and 1 underwent hilar lymph node sampling. Four patients presenting with suspected GBCa underwent upfront extended cholecystectomy. Two patients who had malignancy on frozen section underwent hilar lymphadenectomy. The median operation time was 242.5 (range, 165-530) min, and the median blood loss was 175 (range, 50-700) ml. The median post-operative hospital stay was 3.5 (range, 2-8) days. There were no open conversion, post-operative morbidities and mortalities. Six had histologically proven GBCa. Five were T3 and one had T2 cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study confirm the short-term safety and feasibility of MIS for patients with GBCa, as all eight patients underwent successful MIS with no major morbidity or mortality. Further studies with larger patient cohorts with long-term follow-up are needed to determine the oncologic outcomes and the definitive role of MIS in treating GBCa.

Robotic surgery for gallbladder cancer: Operative technique and early outcomes

BACKGROUND

The objective was to elucidate the operative technique of robotic radical cholecystectomy (RRC) and to compare the early outcomes of RRC with open radical cholecystectomy (ORC) for gallbladder cancer (GBC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent RRC for suspected or incidental GBC between July 2015 and August 2018 were analyzed. Patients who underwent ORC during the same period and fulfilled the study criteria formed the control group.

RESULTS

During the study period, 27 patients who underwent RRC formed the study group (group A) and 70 matched patients who underwent ORC formed the control group (group B). Median surgical time was higher in group A (295 vs 200 minutes, P < 0.001). However, median blood loss (200 vs 600 mL, P < 0.001), postoperative hospital stay (4 vs 5 days, P = 0.046) and postoperative morbidity (1 vs 15 patients, P = 0.035) were lower in group A. Median lymph node yield was 10 (range = 2-21) for group A and 9 (range = 2-25) for group B, and was comparable (P = 0.408). During a median follow up of 9 (1-46) months, two patients in group A developed recurrence (no port site recurrence).

CONCLUSION

RRC is safe and feasible and the short-term results are compared with ORC.

Totally Laparoscopic Radical Resection of Gallbladder Cancer: Technical Aspects and Long-Term Results

INTRODUCTION

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is a rare tumor in developed countries. Chile has one of the highest incidences worldwide. For patients affected by resectable T1b or more advanced GBC, radical cholecystectomy (RC) is considered the standard therapy. Our aim is to describe the surgical technique and clinical-pathological results of patients undergoing totally laparoscopic radical resection of GBC.

METHODS

Patients undergo laparoscopic radical resection for primary and incidental GBC, between the years 2009 and 2016 in two centers from Chile. Patients in whom suspected bile duct invasion, frozen biopsy did not confirm cancer and para-aortic lymph node sampling was positive were excluded.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were operated, 77.8% were female with median age of 60.5 year, and 16 patients had previous cholecystectomy with incidental cancer finding. The median operative time was 490 min (400-550). No conversion to open surgery occurred. All patients achieved a R0 resection. Postoperative complications occurred in 2 patients (11.1%), and there was not mortality. After a median follow-up of 59 months, the 5-year survival was 80.7%.

CONCLUSION

This study shows the technical feasibility of the totally laparoscopic approach for radical resection of GBC with the same principles of classical open surgery. It appears that long-term oncological findings would also be similar at least in less advanced lesions.

Laparoscopic Hilar Lymph Node Sampling in Patients With Biliary Tract Cancers That are Rarely Associated With Nodal Metastasis

PURPOSE

Among the various types of biliary tract cancer, patients with single, small (<5 cm), peripheral intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), or small (<2 cm) gallbladder tumors (GBTs) rarely develop lymph node (LN) metastasis. We investigated a laparoscopic approach for hilar LN sampling in such cases.

METHODS

Among the 176 patients with biliary tract cancer who were treated from January 2012 to March 2017, 21 (ICC, n=4; GBT, n=17) met the above indications.

RESULTS

All patients were treated by a laparoscopic approach with R0 resection. After determining the pathologic diagnosis, 9 patients with GBT and all 4 patients with ICC underwent laparoscopic LN sampling; the mean numbers of sampled LNs were 2.6 and 7.3, respectively; no patients had metastasis. The mean operating times for GBT and ICC were 223 and 379 minutes, respectively; the mean blood loss was 23 mL and 171 mL. With the exception of 1 patient who developed intrahepatic metastasis of ICC at the opposite liver lobe, all of the patients were recurrence free.

CONCLUSIONS

A laparoscopic approach could be safely applied under our indications.

Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes Following Robotic Liver Resections for Primary Hepatobiliary Malignancies: A Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE

Robotic liver surgery (RLS) has emerged as a feasible alternative to laparoscopic or open resections with comparable perioperative outcomes. Little is known about the oncologic adequacy of RLS. The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term oncologic outcomes for patients undergoing RLS for primary hepatobiliary malignancies.

METHODS

We performed an international, multicenter, retrospective study of patients who underwent RLS for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CC), or gallbladder cancer (GBC) between 2006 and 2016. Age, gender, histology, resection margin status, extent of surgical resection, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 61 included patients, 34 (56%) had RLS performed for HCC, 16 (26%) for CC, and 11 (18%) for GBC. The majority of resections were nonanatomical or segmental resections (39.3%), followed by central hepatectomy (18%), left-lateral sectionectomy (14.8%), left hepatectomy (13.1%), right hepatectomy (13.1%), and right posterior segmentectomy (1.6%). R0 resection was achieved in 94% of HCC, 68% of CC, and 81.8% of GBC patients. Median hospital stay was 5 days, and conversion to open surgery was needed in seven patients (11.5%). Grade III-IV Dindo-Clavien complications occurred in seven patients with no perioperative mortality. Median follow-up was 75 months (95% confidence interval 36-113), and 5-year OS and DFS were 56 and 38%, respectively. When stratified by tumor type, 3-year OS was 90% for HCC, 65% for GBC, and 49% for CC (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

RLS can be performed for primary hepatobiliary malignancies with long-term oncologic outcomes comparable to published open and laparoscopic data.

Early recurrence after laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy in a patient with gallbladder cancer

Laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer (GBC) has been performed at various oncology centres reporting its technical feasibility. Considering GBC an aggressive malignancy, laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy should be dealt with caution. We recently encountered a case of carcinoma gallbladder who underwent laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy elsewhere and presented with early recurrence. The patient's records were evaluated and he underwent re-resection. Hereby, we discuss the factors that could lead to early recurrence after laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy and measures that can be taken to prevent it.

Laparoscopic Surgery for Gallbladder Cancer: An Expert Consensus Statement

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing number of reports on the favorable outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for gallbladder cancer (GBC), there is no consensus regarding this surgical procedure.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to develop a consensus statement on the application of laparoscopic surgery for GBC based on expert opinions.

METHODS

A consensus meeting among experts was held on September 10, 2016, in Seoul, Korea.

RESULTS

Early concerns regarding port site/peritoneal metastasis after laparoscopic surgery have been abated by improved preoperative recognition of GBC and careful manipulation to avoid bile spillage. There is no evidence that laparoscopic surgery is associated with decreased survival compared with open surgery in patients with early-stage GBC if definitive resection during/after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed. Although experience with laparoscopic extended cholecystectomy for GBC has been limited to a few experts, the postoperative and survival outcomes were similar between laparoscopic and open surgeries. Laparoscopic reoperation for postoperatively diagnosed GBC is technically challenging, but its feasibility has been demonstrated by a few experts.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery for GBC is still in the early phase of the adoption curve, and more evidence is required to assess this procedure.

Survey Results of the Expert Meeting on Laparoscopic Surgery for Gallbladder Cancer and a Review of Relevant Literature

BACKGROUND

Favorable outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for gallbladder cancer (GBC) have been reported; yet consensus on the indications and surgical techniques for laparoscopic surgery for GBC is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the current status of laparoscopic surgery for GBC by analyzing the results of a survey of experts and by reviewing the relevant published literature.

METHODS

Before an expert meeting was held on September 10, 2016 in Seoul, Korea, an international survey was undertaken of expert surgeons in the field of GBC surgery.

RESULTS

The majority of surgeons who responded agreed that laparoscopic surgery has an acceptable role for suspicious or early GBC, and that laparoscopic extended cholecystectomy has a value comparable to that of open surgery in selected patients with GBC. However, the selection criteria for laparoscopic surgery for overt GBC and the details of the surgical techniques varied among surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey and literature review revealed that laparoscopic surgery for GBC is performed in highly selected cases. However, the favorable outcomes in the published reports and the positive view of experienced surgeons for this operative procedure suggest a high likelihood that laparoscopic surgery will be more frequently performed for GBC in the future.

The technique of laparoscopic hepatic bisegmentectomy with regional lymphadenectomy for gallbladder cancer

Background:

Laparoscopic hepatic bisegmentectomy (s4b and s5) with regional lymphadenectomy (LHBRL) for patients with gallbladder cancer (GBC) is rarely reported.

Aims:

The aim of the study was to describe the technique of LHBRL in patients with GBC and to present our initial experience.

Patients and Methods:

This retrospective study was conducted on twenty patients with GBC who were considered for LHBRL by the described technique. These patients either had a suspicion of GBC (SGBC) or had an incidental diagnosis of GBC (IGBC). Appropriate statistical methods were applied.

Results:

Twelve patients (60%) had SGBC and eight patients (40%) had IGBC. Eighteen patients (90%) were females and median age was 50 (range: 28–70) years. Median (range) surgical blood loss was 120 ml (80–400), operation time was 300 (200–480) min and hospital stay was 5.5 (2–10) days. No patient had iatrogenic complication during LHBRL. Five (25%) patients required conversion to open method. Four patients (20%) who developed complications were managed conservatively. All but three patients (25%) with SGBC had a benign disease on final biopsy. TNM stage of 17 patients (85%) with adenocarcinoma was T1bN0 in 3 (17.6%), T2N0 in 6 (35.3%), T3N0 in 2 (11.7%) and T1-3N1 in 6 (35.3%). The median lymph node count was 10 (range: 4–24) and resection margins were negative (R0) in all. The overall survival was 82.3%. During a median follow-up of 22 months, two patients died due to disease recurrence and one patient died due to myocardial infarction.

Conclusion:

The described technique of LHBRL is safe and feasible for patients with GBC without extrahepatic involvement.

Laparoscopic treatment for suspected gallbladder cancer confined to the wall: a 10-year study from a single institution

Objective

Although laparoscopic treatment of gallbladder cancer (GBC) has been explored in the last decade, long-term results are still rare. This study evaluates long-term results of intended laparoscopic treatment for suspected GBC confined to the gallbladder wall, based on our experience over 10 years.

Methods

Between August 2006 and December 2015, 164 patients with suspected GBC confined to the wall were enrolled in the protocol for laparoscopic surgery. The process for GBC treatment was analyzed to evaluate the feasibility of computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with frozen-section examination in identifying GBC confined to the wall. Of 159 patients who underwent the intended laparoscopic radical treatment, 47 with pathologically proven GBC were investigated to determine the safety and oncologic outcomes of a laparoscopic approach to GBC.

Results

Among the 164 patients, 5 patients avoided further radical surgery because of unresectable disease and 12 were converted to open surgery; in the remaining 147 patients, totally laparoscopic treatment was successfully accomplished. Extended cholecystectomy was performed in 37 patients and simple cholecystectomy in 10. The T stages based on final pathology were Tis (n=6), T1a (n=2), T1b (n=9), T2 (n=26), and T3 (n=4). Recurrence was detected in 11 patients over a median follow-up of 51 months. The disease-specific 5-year survival rate of these 47 patients was 68.8%, and rose to 85% for patients with a normal cancer antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) level.

Conclusions

The favorable long-term outcomes demonstrate the feasibility of combined CT/MRI and frozen-section examination in the selection of patients with GBC confined to the gallbladder wall, confirm the oncologic safety of laparoscopic treatment in selected GBC patients, and favor measurement of preoperative CA19-9 in the selection of GBCs suitable for laparoscopic treatment.

Laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy for carcinoma gallbladder: A case series

Introduction: Nowadays laparoscopic surgery is a very common form of treatment strategy for digestive diseases and these ‘keyhole’ surgeries provide many benefits to the patients. However, controversy exists when the laparoscopic surgery is done for early gallbladder cancer. The aim of our study was to report two such cases to see feasibility and safety of laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy with lymph node dissection. Case Series: Two patients underwent laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy with lymph node dissection for gallbladder carcinoma. Both patients were preoperatively diagnosed. Mean operative time was 172 minutes, and average estimated blood loss was 225 ml. There was no intraoperative complication. The liver dissection was done by Harmonic in one case and by Waterjet in the other case. Average hospital stay after surgery was four days. Postoperative morbidity included minimal bile leak in one patient only and no bile leak in patient operated with Waterjet system. Postoperative histopathology revealed adenocarcinoma of gallbladder with no lymph node invasion T2N0M0 (Stage II) in both patients. The mean lymph node retrieval was 5.5. Both patients received adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and carboplatin. Conclusion: We conclude that laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy with lymph node dissection is safe and beneficial for the patients with T1b/T2 gallbladder carcinoma and is useful in selected patients with a preoperative suspicion of early-stage gallbladder cancer by sparing them the necessity of a second-stage open procedure.

Laparoscopic Radical Cholecystectomy for Primary or Incidental Early Gallbladder Cancer: The New Rules Governing the Treatment of Gallbladder Cancer

AIM

To evaluate the technical feasibility and oncologic safety of laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy (LRC) for primary or incidental early gallbladder cancer (GBC) treatment.

METHODS

Articles reporting LRC for GBC were reviewed from the first case reported in 2010 to 2015 (129 patients). 116 patients had a preoperative diagnosis of gallbladder cancer (primary GBC). 13 patients were incidental cases (IGBC) discovered during or after a laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

RESULTS

The majority of patients who underwent LRC were pT2 (62.7% GBC and 63.6% IGBC). Parenchyma-sparing operation with wedge resection of the gallbladder bed or resection of segments IVb-V were performed principally. Laparoscopic lymphadenectomy was carried out according to the reported depth of neoplasm invasion. Lymph node retrieved ranged from 3 to 21. Some authors performed routine sampling biopsy of the inter-aorto-caval lymph nodes (16b1 station) before the radical treatment. No postoperative mortality was documented. Discharge mean day was POD 5th. 16 patients had post operative morbidities. Bile leakage was the most frequent post-operative complication. 5 y-survival rate ranged from 68.75 to 90.7 months.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy can not be considered as a dogmatic contraindication to GBC but a primary approach for early case (pT1b and pT2) treatment.

Current Role of Minimally Invasive Radical Cholecystectomy for Gallbladder Cancer

Background. For Tis and T1a gallbladder cancer (GbC), laparoscopic cholecystectomy can provide similar survival outcomes compared to open cholecystectomy. However, for patients affected by resectable T1b or more advanced GbC, open approach radical cholecystectomy (RC), consisting in gallbladder liver bed resection or segment 4b-5 bisegmentectomy, with locoregional lymphadenectomy, is considered the gold standard while minimally invasive RC (MiRC) is skeptically considered. Aim. To analyze current literature on perioperative and oncologic outcomes of MiRC for patients affected by GbC. Methods. A Medline review of published articles until June 2016 concerning MiRC for GbC was performed. Results. Data relevant for this review were presented in 13 articles, including 152 patients undergoing an attempt of MiRC for GbC. No randomized clinical trial was found. The approach was laparoscopic in 147 patients and robotic in five. Conversion was required in 15 (10%) patients. Postoperative complications rate was 10% with no mortality. Long-term survival outcomes were reported by 11 studies, two of them showing similar oncologic results when comparing MiRC with matched open RC. Conclusions. Although randomized clinical trials are still lacking and only descriptive studies reporting on limited number of patients are available, current literature seems suggesting that when performed at highly specialized centers, MiRC for GbC is safe and feasible and has oncologic outcomes comparable to open RC.