Laparoscopic liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma. Can we extend the surgical indication in cirrhotic patients?

Impact of Liver Cirrhosis, Severity of Cirrhosis, and Portal Hypertension on the Difficulty and Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Major Liver Resections for Primary Liver Malignancies

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) offer potential benefits such as reduced blood loss and morbidity compared with open liver resections. Several studies have suggested that the impact of cirrhosis differs according to the extent and complexity of resection. Our aim was to investigate the impact of cirrhosis on the difficulty and outcomes of MILR, focusing on major hepatectomies.

METHODS

A total of 2534 patients undergoing minimally invasive major hepatectomies (MIMH) for primary malignancies across 58 centers worldwide were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score (PSM) and coarsened exact matching (CEM) were used to compare patients with and without cirrhosis.

RESULTS

A total of 1353 patients (53%) had no cirrhosis, 1065 (42%) had Child-Pugh A and 116 (4%) had Child-Pugh B cirrhosis. Matched comparison between non-cirrhotics vs Child-Pugh A cirrhosis demonstrated comparable blood loss. However, after PSM, postoperative morbidity and length of hospitalization was significantly greater in Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, but these were not statistically significant with CEM. Comparison between Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis demonstrated the latter had significantly higher transfusion rates and longer hospitalization after PSM, but not after CEM. Comparison of patients with cirrhosis of all grades with and without portal hypertension demonstrated no significant difference in all major perioperative outcomes after PSM and CEM.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence and severity of cirrhosis affected the difficulty and impacted the outcomes of MIMH, resulting in higher blood transfusion rates, increased postoperative morbidity, and longer hospitalization in patients with more advanced cirrhosis. As such, future difficulty scoring systems for MIMH should incorporate liver cirrhosis and its severity as variables.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Liver Resections for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients With Metabolic Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To compare minimally invasive (MILR) and open liver resections (OLRs) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with metabolic syndrome (MS).

BACKGROUND

Liver resections for HCC on MS are associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. No data on the minimally invasive approach in this setting exist.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A multicenter study involving 24 institutions was conducted. Propensity scores were calculated, and inverse probability weighting was used to weight comparisons. Short-term and long-term outcomes were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 996 patients were included: 580 in OLR and 416 in MILR. After weighing, groups were well matched. Blood loss was similar between groups (OLR 275.9±3.1 vs MILR 226±4.0, P =0.146). There were no significant differences in 90-day morbidity (38.9% vs 31.9% OLRs and MILRs, P =0.08) and mortality (2.4% vs 2.2% OLRs and MILRs, P =0.84). MILRs were associated with lower rates of major complications (9.3% vs 15.3%, P =0.015), posthepatectomy liver failure (0.6% vs 4.3%, P =0.008), and bile leaks (2.2% vs 6.4%, P =0.003); ascites was significantly lower at postoperative day 1 (2.7% vs 8.1%, P =0.002) and day 3 (3.1% vs 11.4%, P <0.001); hospital stay was significantly shorter (5.8±1.9 vs 7.5±1.7, P <0.001). There was no significant difference in overall survival and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

MILR for HCC on MS is associated with equivalent perioperative and oncological outcomes to OLRs. Fewer major complications, posthepatectomy liver failures, ascites, and bile leaks can be obtained, with a shorter hospital stay. The combination of lower short-term severe morbidity and equivalent oncologic outcomes favor MILR for MS when feasible.

Impact of liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension on minimally invasive limited liver resection for primary liver malignancies in the posterosuperior segments: An international multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

To assess the impact of cirrhosis and portal hypertension (PHT) on technical difficulty and outcomes of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) in the posterosuperior segments.

METHODS

This is a post-hoc analysis of patients with primary malignancy who underwent laparoscopic and robotic wedge resection and segmentectomy in the posterosuperior segments between 2004 and 2019 in 60 centers. Surrogates of difficulty (i.e, open conversion rate, operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion, and use of the Pringle maneuver) and outcomes were compared before and after propensity-score matching (PSM) and coarsened exact matching (CEM).

RESULTS

Of the 1954 patients studied, 1290 (66%) had cirrhosis. Among the cirrhotic patients, 310 (24%) had PHT. After PSM, patients with cirrhosis had higher intraoperative blood transfusion (14% vs. 9.3%; p = 0.027) and overall morbidity rates (20% vs. 14.5%; p = 0.023) than those without cirrhosis. After coarsened exact matching (CEM), patients with cirrhosis tended to have higher intraoperative blood transfusion rate (12.1% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.059) and have higher overall morbidity rate (22.8% vs. 12.5%; p = 0.007) than those without cirrhosis. After PSM, Pringle maneuver was more frequently applied in cirrhotic patients with PHT (62.2% vs. 52.4%; p = 0.045) than those without PHT.

CONCLUSION

MILR in the posterosuperior segments in cirrhotic patients is associated with higher intraoperative blood transfusion and postoperative morbidity. This parameter should be utilized in the difficulty assessment of MILR.

Impact of liver cirrhosis, the severity of cirrhosis, and portal hypertension on the outcomes of minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomies for primary liver malignancies

BACKGROUND

The impact of cirrhosis and portal hypertension on perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomies remains unclear. We aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes between patients with preserved and compromised liver function (noncirrhotics versus Child-Pugh A) when undergoing minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomies. In addition, we aimed to determine if the extent of cirrhosis (Child-Pugh A versus B) and the presence of portal hypertension had a significant impact on perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

This was an international multicenter retrospective analysis of 1,526 patients who underwent minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomies for primary liver malignancies at 60 centers worldwide between 2004 and 2021. In the study, 1,370 patients met the inclusion criteria and formed the final study group. Baseline clinicopathological characteristics and perioperative outcomes of these patients were compared. To minimize confounding factors, 1:1 propensity score matching and coarsened exact matching were performed.

RESULTS

The study group comprised 559, 753, and 58 patients who did not have cirrhosis, Child-Pugh A, and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis, respectively. Six-hundred and thirty patients with cirrhosis had portal hypertension, and 170 did not. After propensity score matching and coarsened exact matching, Child-Pugh A patients with cirrhosis undergoing minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomies had longer operative time, higher intraoperative blood loss, higher transfusion rate, and longer hospital stay than patients without cirrhosis. The extent of cirrhosis did not significantly impact perioperative outcomes except for a longer duration of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Liver cirrhosis adversely affected the intraoperative technical difficulty and perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomies.

Surgical and Oncological Outcomes of Salvage Hepatectomy for Locally Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Locoregional Therapy: A Single-Institution Experience

Surgical and oncological outcomes of hepatectomy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after locoregional therapy, including locally recurrent HCC (LR-HCC), were examined. Among 273 consecutive patients who underwent hepatectomy for HCC, 102 with recurrent HCC were included and retrospectively reviewed. There were 35 patients with recurrent HCC after primary hepatectomy and 67 with recurrent HCC after locoregional therapies. Pathologic review revealed 30 patients with LR-HCC. Background liver function was significantly worse in patients with recurrent HCC after locoregional therapy (p = 0.002). AFP (p = 0.031) and AFP-L3 (p = 0.033) serum levels were significantly higher in patients with LR-HCC. Perioperative morbidities were significantly more frequently observed with recurrent HCC after locoregional therapies (p = 0.048). Long-term outcomes of recurrent HCC after locoregional therapies were worse than those after hepatectomy, though there was no prognostic difference according to the recurrence patterns after locoregional therapies. Multivariate analyses showed that prognostic factors for resected recurrent HCC were previous locoregional therapy (hazard ratio [HR] 2.0; p = 0.005), multiple HCCs (HR 2.8; p < 0.001), and portal venous invasion (HR 2.3; p = 0.001). LR-HCC was not a prognostic factor. In conclusion, salvage hepatectomy for LR-HCC showed worse surgical outcomes but a favorable prognosis.

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

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

Short and long-term outcomes after minimally invasive liver resection for single small hepatocellular carcinoma: An analysis of 714 patients from the IGoMILS (Italian group of minimally invasive liver surgery) registry

BACKGROUND

Widespread use of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) contributed to the reduction of surgical risk of liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Aim of this study was to analyze outcomes of MILS for single ≤3 cm HCC.

METHODS

Patients who underwent MILS for single ≤3 cm HCC (November 2014 - December 2019) were identified from the Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery (IGoMILS) Registry.

RESULTS

Of 714 patients included, 641 (93.0%) were Child-Pugh A; 65.7% were limited resections and 2.2% major resections, with a conversion rate of 5.2%. Ninety-day mortality rate was 0.3%. Overall morbidity rate was 22.4% (3.8% major complications). Mean postoperative stay was 5 days. Robotic resection showed longer operative time (p = 0.004) and a higher overall morbidity rate (p < 0.001), with similar major complications (p = 0.431). Child-Pugh B patients showed worse mortality (p = 0.017) and overall morbidity (p = 0.021), and longer postoperative stay (p = 0.005). Five-year overall survival was 79.5%; cirrhosis, satellite micronodules, and microvascular invasion were independently associated with survival.

CONCLUSIONS

MILS for ≤3 cm HCC was associated with low morbidity and mortality rates, showing high safety, and supporting the increasing indications for surgical resection in these patients.

Conversion of Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for HCC in Advanced Cirrhosis: Clinical Impact and Role of Difficulty Scoring Systems

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver resections (MILRs) in cirrhosis are at risk of conversion since cirrhosis and complexity, which can be estimated by scoring systems, are both independent factors for. We aimed to investigate the consequence of conversion of MILR for hepatocellular carcinoma in advanced cirrhosis.

METHODS

After retrospective review, MILRs for HCC were divided into preserved liver function (Cohort-A) and advanced cirrhosis cohorts (Cohort-B). Completed and converted MILRs were compared (Compl-A vs. Conv-A and Compl-B vs. Conv-B); then, converted patients were compared (Conv-A vs. Conv-B) as whole cohorts and after stratification for MILR difficulty using Iwate criteria.

RESULTS

637 MILRs were studied (474 Cohort-A, 163 Cohort-B). Conv-A MILRs had worse outcomes than Compl-A: more blood loss; higher incidence of transfusions, morbidity, grade 2 complications, ascites, liver failure and longer hospitalization. Conv-B MILRs exhibited the same worse perioperative outcomes than Compl-B and also higher incidence of grade 1 complications. Conv-A and Conv-B outcomes of low difficulty MILRs resulted in similar perioperative outcomes, whereas the comparison of more difficult converted MILRs (intermediate/advanced/expert) resulted in several worse perioperative outcomes for patients with advanced cirrhosis. However, Conv-A and Conv-B outcomes were not significantly different in the whole cohort where "advanced/expert" MILRs were 33.1% and 5.5% in Cohort A and B.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion in the setting of advanced cirrhosis can be associated with non-inferior outcomes compared to compensated cirrhosis, provided careful patient selection is applied (patients elected to low difficulty MILRs). Difficulty scoring systems may help in identifying the most appropriate candidates.

Laparoscopic versus open resection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth commonest malignancy worldwide, and the fourth-leading cause of cancer related death. Partial liver resection (LR) forms the mainstay of therapy for suitable patients with preserved liver function. In recent years, significant advances in surgical technology, refinement of operative techniques and improvements in peri-operative care have facilitated the widespread adoption of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) with encouraging outcomes. Liver cirrhosis (LC) is present in up to 80% of patients with HCC, and adds a further dimension of complexity to LR. Cirrhotic patients have a propensity for greater intraoperative blood loss as well as increased postoperative complications such as refractory ascites and posthepatectomy liver failure. Tumor localization within the fibrotic parenchyma is challenging, giving rise to concerns about resection margin status. Patients are also at higher risk of developing metachronous lesions, which affects long-term survival. Presently, the exact role of LLR in HCC patients with underlying LC is not well-defined. Current evidence suggests that LLR offers a multitude of benefits in the short-term such as reduced blood loss and blood transfusion requirements and lower morbidity, when compared to open resection. Oncologic adequacy and long-term survival do not appear to be compromised. Special consideration must be given for LLR in patients with advanced cirrhosis, or those who require extensive major hepatectomies. We present here a brief review of the literature surrounding LLR for HCC on a background of LC.

The preoperative M2BPGi score predicts operative difficulty and the incidence of postoperative complications in laparoscopic liver resection

BACKGROUND

Liver fibrosis or cirrhosis frequently makes parenchymal transection more difficult, but the difficulty score of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), including the IWATE criteria, does not include a factor related to liver fibrosis. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate M2BPGi as a predictor of the difficulty of parenchymal transection and the incidence of postoperative complications in LLR.

METHODS

Data from 54 patients who underwent laparoscopic partial liver resection (LLR-P) and 24 patients who underwent laparoscopic anatomical liver resection between 2017 and 2019 in our institution were retrospectively analyzed. All cases were classified according to M2BPGi scores, and reserve liver function, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications were compared among these groups.

RESULTS

Sixteen cases (29.6%) were M2BPGi negative (cut-off index < 1.0), 25 cases (46.3%) were 1+ (1.0 ≤ cut-off index < 3.0), and 13 cases (24.1%) were 2+ (cut-off index ≥ 3.0). M2BPGi-positive cases had significantly worse hepatic reserve function (K-ICG: 0.16 vs 0.14 vs 0.08, p < 0.0001). Intraoperative bleeding was significantly greater in M2BPGi-positive cases [50 ml vs 150 ml vs 200 ml, M2BPGi (-) or (1+) vs M2BPGi (2+), p = 0.045]. Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ II) were significantly more frequent in M2BPGi-positive cases [0% vs 4% vs 33%, M2BPGi (-) or (1+) vs M2BPGi (2+), p = 0.001].

CONCLUSION

M2BPGi could predict surgical difficulty and complications in LLR-P. In particular, it might be better not to select M2BPGi (2+) cases as teaching cases because of the massive bleeding during parenchymal transection.

A Comparative Study of an Integrated Ultrasonic/Bipolar Sealing Device Versus an Articulating Bipolar Sealing Device for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery

BACKGROUND

Sealing devices (SD) seal and cut tissue through different energy modalities, and are routinely used in laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS). The aim of this study is to compare the outcome of Thunderbeat (TB), an integrated ultrasonic/bipolar SD, versus Enseal (ES), an articulating bipolar SD, in LLS.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted in a single center from December 2013 to September 2020. The primary endpoint was difference in blood loss (BL) between ES and TB. Secondary endpoints were complications, operative time, hospital stay, and 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

352 patients were identified: TB (n = 105) and ES (n = 247). Median BL was significantly lower with TB (50 mL [20-120]) compared to ES (100 mL [50-250]) (p < 0.0001). Significant differences were identified for median operative time (TB 115 min [45-300]) vs. ES 140 min [40-370]; p = 0.0008) and median hospital stay (TB 2 days [1-4] vs. ES 4 days [3-6]; p < 0.0001). No major differences were encountered for postoperative bleeding (TB 0% vs. ES 1%; p = 0.5574), biliary leak (TB 1% vs. ES 2%; p = 1.0000), and 90-day mortality (TB 0% vs. ES 1%; p = 1.0000).

CONCLUSION

The integrated ultrasonic/bipolar SD is superior to the articulating bipolar SD in LLS for intraoperative BL without an increase in complications.

Current evidence on posthepatectomy liver failure: comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Despite important advances in many areas of hepatobiliary surgical practice during the past decades, posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) still represents an important clinical challenge for the hepatobiliary surgeon. The aim of this review is to present the current body of evidence regarding different aspects of PHLF.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted to identify relevant articles for each topic of PHLF covered in this review. The literature search was performed using Medical Subject Heading terms on PubMed for articles on PHLF in English until May 2022.

RESULTS

Uniform reporting on PHLF is lacking due to the use of various definitions in the literature. There is no consensus on optimal preoperative assessment before major hepatectomy to avoid PHLF, although many try to estimate future liver remnant function. Once PHLF occurs, there is still no effective treatment, except liver transplantation, where the reported experience is limited.

DISCUSSION

Strict adherence to one definition is advised when reporting data on PHLF. The use of the International Study Group of Liver Surgery criteria of PHLF is recommended. There is still no widespread established method for future liver remnant function assessment. Liver transplantation is currently the only effective way to treat severe, intractable PHLF, but for many indications, this treatment is not available in most countries.

Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery: A Snapshot from a Major Dutch HPB and Transplant Center

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) has been progressively adopted on a nationwide scale. The aim of this study is to investigate MILS implementation in a high-volume Dutch hepato-pancreato-biliary and transplant center, which is considered a moderate to low-volume center from a European standpoint.

METHODS

All patients who underwent MILS at Erasmus Medical Center between April 2010 and December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients' surgical outcomes were compared after stratification according to resections' difficulty and liver cirrhosis.

RESULTS

A total of 212 cases were included. Major liver resections were performed in 24 patients (11%), while minor resections were performed in 188 patients (89%). Among those, 177 (94%) resections were classified as technically minor and 11 (6%) as technically major. Major morbidity was reported in 14/177 patients (8%) after technically minor resections and in 3/24 patients (13%) after major resections. Anatomically and technically major resections had higher intraoperative blood losses (425 (0-2100) vs. 240 (50-110) vs. 100 (0-2400) mL; p-value < 0.001) and longer hospital stay (6 (3-25) vs. 5 (2-9) vs. 3 (1-44); p-value < 0.001) when compared with the technically minor counterpart. Perioperative outcomes were similar when comparing cirrhotic MILS with the non-cirrhotic cohort.

CONCLUSION

MILS program implementation can lead to encouraging surgical outcomes even in low- to moderate-volume centers. Although low procedural volume might be predictive of impaired outcomes, long-standing experience in the HPB and liver transplant field could mitigate low-case volume effects on surgical outcomes.

Is partial hepatectomy a curable treatment option for hepatocellular carcinoma accompanied by cirrhosis? A meta-analysis and cure model analysis

Backgrounds/Aims

It is challenging to assess the efficacy of partial hepatectomy (PH) as a treatment option for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accompanied by cirrhosis. This study aimed to determine the cure fraction of PH for HCC accompanied by cirrhosis compared to that for HCC without cirrhosis.

Methods

A systematic review was performed on outcomes of previous studies that compared recurrence-free survival (RFS) after PH in patients with HCC with or without cirrhosis. A meta-analysis was conducted to obtain the cumulative hazard ratio for two patient groups: cirrhosis and non-cirrhosis. Cure fractions after PH in both groups were determined using a cure model analysis.

Results

A total of 18 studies were eligible for meta-analysis and 13 studies were selected for the cure model analysis. The cumulative hazard ratio for RFS of the cirrhosis group compared to that of the non-cirrhosis group was 1.66 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43–1.93). Survival data of 3,512 patients in both groups were reconstructed from survival curves of original articles for cure model analysis. The probability of being statistically cured after PH for HCC was 14.1% (95% CI, 10.6%–18.1%) in the cirrhosis group lower than that (32.5%) in the non-cirrhosis group (95% CI, 28.6%–36.4%).

Conclusions

The prognosis after PH for HCC accompanied by cirrhosis is inferior to that for HCC without cirrhosis. However, a cure can be expected for one-seventh of patients with HCC accompanied by cirrhosis after PH.

Laparoscopic dorsal subsegmentectomy 8: Exploit the 3d technology to plan liver resection, and predict intraparenchymal pedicles. A case report. (With video explanation)

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic liver surgery is spreading, encouraged by technical and technological improvement. Both the obligated narrow space and the difficulty to modify it lead to a more complex approach to the lesions located in the posterosuperior portion of the liver. Surgical strategies such as the Caudal approach or the Diamond technique could ameliorate surgical procedure, but these areas remain a challenge and are still classified as complex.

CLINICAL CASE

We discuss the case of a 68 year old man with metachronous liver metastasis in the dorsal part of segment 8. We used portal phase CT-scan Dicom data to create Three-dimensional reconstruction, which was able to show the more distal branches of intraparenchymal structures. The reconstructed images were subsequently used to plan laparoscopic liver resection.

DISCUSSION

The capability of three-dimensional reconstruction to create a realistic image allows us to use ultrasound as a navigation tool. Exploiting these two technologies together, we arrived to regulate the resection stages by recognizing previously marked structures and searching them at every intervention phase. The strategy performed demonstrates both a high level of precision and the capability to predict intraparenchymal structures.

CONCLUSION

The advantages obtained from three-dimensional reconstruction are numerous in terms of either anatomical comprehension and technical precision, suggesting a potential improvement in surgical skill. Three-dimensional technology should be encouraged and spread to understand, in every single aspect, the potential of its use.

Is minimally invasive liver surgery a reasonable option in recurrent HCC? A snapshot from the I Go MILS registry

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a safe procedure. Repeat surgery is more often required, and the role of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is not yet clearly defined. The present study analyzes data compiled by the Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery (IGoMILS) on LLR. To compare repeated LLR with the first LLR for HCC is the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the outcome of repeat LLR in the case of primary open versus primary MILS surgery. The data cohort is divided into two groups. Group 1: first liver resection and Group 2: Repeat LLR. To compare the two groups a 3:1 Propensity Score Matching is performed to analyze open versus MILS primary resection. Fifty-two centers were involved in the present study, and 1054 patients were enrolled. 80 patients underwent to a repeat LLR. The type of resection was different, with more major resections in the group 1 before matching the two groups. After propensity score matching 3:1, each group consisted of 222 and 74 patients. No difference between the two groups was observed. In the subgroup analysis, in 44 patients the first resection was performed by an open approach. The other 36 patients were resected with a MILS approach. We found no difference between these two subgroups of patients. The present study in repeat MILS for HCC using the IGoMILS Registry has observed the feasibility and safety of the MILS procedure.

Recent advances in the surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing, despite effective antiviral treatment for hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus infection and the application of preventive measures such as vaccination at birth against HBV infection. This is mainly due to the increase in metabolic syndrome and its hepatic components, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and steatohepatitis. Liver resection and transplantation are the main treatment options, offering long-term survival and potential cure. In this review, the recent advances in the surgical management of HCC are presented. More specifically, the role of liver resection in the intermediate and advanced stages, according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification, is analyzed. In addition, the roles of minimally invasive surgery and of living-related liver transplantation in the management of patients with HCC are discussed. Finally, recent data on the role of molecular markers in the early diagnosis and recurrence of HCC are presented. The management of HCC is complex, as there are several options for each stage of the disease. In order for, each patient to get the maximum benefit, an individualized approach is suggested, in specialized liver units, where cases are discussed in multidisciplinary tumor boards.

Non-cirrhotic hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic viral hepatitis: Current insights and advancements

Primary liver cancers carry significant morbidity and mortality. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) develops within the hepatic parenchyma and is the most common malignancy originating from the liver. Although 80% of HCCs develop within background cirrhosis, 20% may arise in a non-cirrhotic milieu and are referred to non-cirrhotic-HCC (NCHCC). NCHCC is often diagnosed late due to lack of surveillance. In addition, the rising prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and diabetes mellitus have increased the risk of developing HCC on non-cirrhotic patients. Viral infections such as chronic Hepatitis B and less often chronic hepatitis C with advance fibrosis are associated with NCHCC. NCHCC individuals may have Hepatitis B core antibodies and occult HBV infection, signifying the role of Hepatitis B infection in NCHCC. Given the effectiveness of current antiviral therapies, surgical techniques and locoregional treatment options, nowadays such patients have more options and potential for cure. However, these lesions need early identification with diagnostic models and multiple surveillance strategies to improve overall outcomes. Better understanding of the NCHCC risk factors, tumorigenesis, diagnostic tools and treatment options are critical to improving prognosis and overall outcomes on these patients. In this review, we aim to discuss NCHCC epidemiology, risk factors, and pathogenesis, and elaborate on NCHCC diagnosis and treatment strategies.

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma as the new field of implementation of laparoscopic liver resection programs. A comparative propensity score-based analysis of open and laparoscopic liver resections

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study is to analyze the outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resections for (Intrahepatic CholangioCarcinoma) ICC in the modern era of laparoscopic liver surgery.

METHODS

Patients undergoing laparoscopic and open liver resections for ICC in two European referral centers were included. Finally, 104 patients from the open group and 104 patients from the laparoscopic group were compared after propensity scores matching according to seven covariates representative of patients and disease characteristics. Indications to surgery and short- and long-term outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Operative time, number of retrieved nodes, rate, and depth of negative resection margins were comparable between the two groups. Blood loss was lower in the MILS (150 ± 100 mL, mean ± SD) compared with the Open group (350 ± 250 mL, p = 0.030). Postoperative complications occurred in 14.4% of patients in the MILS and in the 24% of patients in the Open group (p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in long-term outcomes between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm feasibility, safety, and oncological efficiency of the laparoscopic approach in the management of ICC. However, this surgery is often complex and should be only considered in centers with large experience in laparoscopic liver surgery.

[Minimally invasive liver surgery]

Minimally invasive liver surgery is safe and can be performed with results practically equal to those in open surgery. There are different techniques of parenchyma dissection and hemostasis available for the safe performance of minor and major resections, both laparoscopically and robotics based. Due to its technical options robotics-based surgery is a further development of laparoscopy. Expertise in minimally invasive and in liver surgery are essential prerequisites.

Laparoscopic and open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis: multicentre propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Child-Pugh A cirrhosis has been demonstrated as beneficial. However, the role of laparoscopy in Child-Pugh B cirrhosis is undetermined. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare open and laparoscopic resection for HCC with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis.

METHODS

Data on liver resections were gathered from 17 centres. A 1 : 1 propensity score matching was performed according to 17 predefined variables.

RESULTS

Of 382 available liver resections, 100 laparoscopic and 100 open resections were matched and analysed. The 90-day postoperative mortality rate was similar in open and laparoscopic groups (4.0 versus 2.0 per cent respectively; P = 0.687). Laparoscopy was associated with lower blood loss (median 110 ml versus 400 ml in the open group; P = 0.004), less morbidity (38.0 versus 51.0 per cent respectively; P = 0.041) and fewer major complications (7.0 versus 21.0 per cent; P = 0.010), and ascites was lower on postoperative days 1, 3 and 5. For laparoscopic resections, patients with portal hypertension developed more complications than those without (26 versus 12 per cent respectively; P = 0.002), and patients with a Child-Pugh B9 score had higher morbidity rates than those with B8 and B7 (7 of 8, 10 of 16 and 21 of 76 respectively; P < 0.001). Median hospital stay was 7.5 (range 2-243) days for laparoscopic liver resection and 18 (3-104) days for the open approach (P = 0.058). The 5-year overall survival rate was 47 per cent for open and 65 per cent for laparoscopic resection (P = 0.142). The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 32 and 37 per cent respectively (P = 0.742).

CONCLUSION

Patients without preoperative portal hypertension and Child-Pugh B7 cirrhosis may benefit most from laparoscopic liver surgery.

Is Single-Incision Laparoscopic Liver Surgery Safe and Efficient for the Treatment of Malignant Hepatic Tumors? A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The objective of this review was to evaluate the safety and efficiency of single-incision laparoscopic liver surgery (SILLS) for malignant liver lesions.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the Medline database was performed, including studies published up to February 2019.

RESULTS

Overall, 69 patients (50 males) with a median age of 61 years (range, 31-90) from 16 studies underwent SILLS for malignant liver disease and were included in this review. The majority of patients underwent resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 52, 75 %), followed by metastatic disease (n = 15, 22 %). The hepatic lesions were located in anterolateral liver segments in 62 patients (90 %) and in posterosuperior liver segments in 7 patients (10 %). Sixty-five patients (94 %) underwent minor liver resection. The median blood loss was 200 mL (range 0-2500), while 4 patients that underwent single-port resection were converted to either conventional laparoscopy or open resections. Two cases were reported to be associated with postoperative complications in the single-port group (1 [1.7 %] grade Dindo-Clavien I-II, 1 [1.7 %] grade Dindo-Clavien III-IV), while no complications were noted in the multiport group. All patients successfully underwent R0 resection.

CONCLUSIONS

SILLS seems to be a safe and efficient treatment modality for malignant liver disease when performed by experienced surgeons in carefully selected patients. More studies are needed to better identify which patients may benefit from such an operative approach.

Benchmark performance of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy and right hepatectomy in expert centers

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Herein, we aimed to establish benchmark values - based on a composite indicator of healthcare quality - for the performance of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) and laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) using data from expert centers.

METHODS

Data from a nationwide multicenter survey including all patients undergoing LLLS and LRH between 2000 and 2017 were analyzed. Textbook outcome (TO) completion was considered in patients fulfilling all 6 of the following characteristics: negative margins, no transfusion, no complication, no prolonged hospital stay, no readmission and no mortality. For each procedure, a cut-off laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) volume by center was associated with TO on multivariable analysis. These cut-offs defined the expert centers. The benchmark values were set at the 75th percentile of median outcomes among these expert centers.

RESULTS

Among 4,400 LLRs performed in 29 centers, 855 patients who underwent LLLS and 488 who underwent LRH were identified. The overall incidences of TO after LLLS and LRH were 43.7% and 23.8%, respectively. LLR volume cut-offs of 25 LLR/year (odds ratio [OR] 2.45; bootstrap 95% CI 1.65-3.69; p = 0.001) and 35 LLR/year (OR 2.55; bootstrap 95% CI 1.34-5.63; p = 0.003) were independently associated with completion of TO after LLLS and LRH, respectively. Eight centers for LLLS and 6 centers for LRH, including 516 and 346 patients undergoing LLLS/LRH respectively, reached these cut-offs and were identified as expert centers. After LLLS, benchmark values of severe complication, mortality and TO completion were defined as ≤5.3%, ≤1.2% and ≥46.6%, respectively. After LRH, benchmark values of severe complication, mortality and TO completion were ≤20.4%, ≤2.8% and ≥24.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an up-to-date reference on the benchmark performance of LLLS and LRH in expert centers.

LAY SUMMARY

In a nationwide French survey of laparoscopic liver resection, expert centers were defined according to the completion of a textbook outcome, which is a composite indicator of healthcare quality. Benchmark values regarding intra-operative details and outcomes were established using data from 516 patients with laparoscopic left lateral sectionectiomy and 346 patients with laparoscopic right hepatectomy from expert centers. These values should be used as a reference point to improve the quality of laparoscopic resections.

Impact of liver cirrhosis on the difficulty of minimally-invasive liver resections: a 1:1 coarsened exact-matched controlled study

INTRODUCTION

The impact of liver cirrhosis on the difficulty of minimal invasive liver resection (MILR) remains controversial and current difficulty scoring systems do not take in to account the presence of cirrhosis as a significant factor in determining the difficulty of MILR. We hypothesized that the difficulty of MILR is affected by the presence of cirrhosis. Hence, we performed a 1:1 matched-controlled study comparing the outcomes between patients undergoing MILR with and without cirrhosis including the Iwate system and Institut Mutualiste Montsouris (IMM) system in the matching process.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2019, 598 consecutive patients underwent MILR of which 536 met the study inclusion criteria. There were 148 patients with cirrhosis and 388 non-cirrhotics. One-to-one coarsened exact matching identified approximately exact matches between 100 cirrhotic patients and 100 non-cirrhotic patients.

RESULTS

Comparison between MILR patients with cirrhosis and non-cirrhosis in the entire cohort demonstrated that patients with cirrhosis were associated with a significantly increased open conversion rate, transfusion rate, need for Pringles maneuver, postoperative, stay, postoperative morbidity and postoperative 90-day mortality. After 1:1 coarsened exact matching, MILR with cirrhosis were significantly associated with an increased open conversion rate (15% vs 6%, p = 0.03), operation time (261 vs 238 min, p  < 0.001), blood loss (607 vs 314 mls, p  = 0.002), transfusion rate (22% vs 9%, p  = 0.001), need for application of Pringles maneuver (51% vs 34%, p  = 0.010), postoperative stay (6 vs 4.5 days, p  = 0.004) and postoperative morbidity (26% vs 13%, p  = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

The presence of liver cirrhosis affected both the intraoperative technical difficulty and postoperative outcomes of MILR and hence should be considered an important parameter to be included in future difficulty scoring systems for MILR.

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic hepatectomy of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Almost all liver tumours can be removed laparoscopically, but some difficult tumour locations complicate laparoscopic surgery. Recurrent liver tumours often pose great difficulties to laparoscopic surgery due to adhesions caused by previous operations. Referring to laparoscopic adrenalectomy, a retroperitoneal approach is proposed to remove liver tumours near the adrenal gland, which will provide a new method for liver surgery.

CASE PRESENTATION

Our case involves a patient with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) whose last operation was laparoscopic hepatectomy in our department, with a recurrence of HCC 2 years after the first surgery. In this case, based on preoperative CT and MRI, through a retroperitoneal approach, combined with intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) localization and indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence navigation, laparoscopic hepatectomy was successfully performed to precisely resect recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma in segment VII. The patient was discharged on the third day after the operation. The AFP decreased to normal levels on the 28th postoperative day.

CONCLUSIONS

Retroperitoneal hepatectomy has the advantages of less trauma, shorter operation times, fewer complications and faster recovery for hepatic tumours near the adrenal gland. Accurate localization of tumours is needed to ensure accurate resection; therefore, IOUS and ICG fluorescence are very important. Liver parenchyma was severed strictly according to fluorescent labelling during hepatectomy, which prevented the deviation of liver parenchyma from the plane and ensured that the margin of hepatectomy was tumour-free. In order to ensure a radical resection of the tumour, it may be necessary to enter the abdominal cavity.

The Role of Salvage Transplantation in Patients Initially Treated With Open Versus Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery: An Intention-to-Treat Analysis

Despite gaining wide consensus in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) has been poorly investigated for its role in the setting of salvage liver transplantation (SLT). A multicenter retrospective analysis was carried out in 6 Italian centers on 211 patients with HCC who were initially resected with open (n = 167) versus MILS (n = 44) and eventually wait-listed for SLT. The secondary endpoint was identification of risk factors for posttransplant death and tumor recurrence. The enrolled patients included 211 HCC patients resected with open surgery (n = 167) versus MILS (n = 44) and wait-listed for SLT between January 2007 and December 2017. We analyzed the intention-to-treat survival of these patients. MILS was the most important protective factor for the composite risk of delisting, posttransplant patient death, and HCC recurrence (OR, 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.63; P = 0.003). MILS was also the only independent protective factor for the risk of post-SLT patient death (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.93; P = 0.04). After propensity score matching, MILS was the only independent protective factor against the risk of delisting, posttransplant death, and HCC recurrence (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.07-0.75; P = 0.02). On the basis of the current analysis, MILS seems protective over open surgery for the risk of delisting, posttransplant patient death, and tumor recurrence. Larger prospective studies balancing liver function and tumor stage are strongly favored to better clarify the beneficial effect of MILS for HCC patients eventually referred to SLT.

Laparoscopic liver resection: indications, limitations, and economic aspects

Background

Minimally invasive techniques have increasingly found their way into liver surgery in recent years. A multitude of mostly retrospective analyses suggests several advantages of laparoscopic over open liver surgery. Due to the speed and variety of simultaneous technical and strategic developments, it is difficult to maintain an overview of the current status and perspectives in laparoscopic liver surgery.

Purpose

This review highlights up-to-date aspects in laparoscopic liver surgery. We discuss established indications with regard to their development over time as well as continuing limitations of applied techniques. We give an assessment based on the current literature and according to our own center experiences, not least with regard to a highly topical cost discussion.

Conclusions

While in the beginning mainly benign tumors were laparoscopically operated on, liver metastasis and hepatocellular carcinoma are now among the most frequent indications. Technical limitations remain and should be evaluated with the overall aim not to endanger quality standards in open surgery. Financial aspects cannot be neglected with the necessity of cost-covering reimbursement.

Reappraisal of the advantages of laparoscopic liver resection for intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma within a stage migration perspective: Propensity score analysis of the differential benefit

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to analyze the outcome of laparoscopic approach specifically in patients with Intermediate-stage disease and to define the differential benefit with Early-stage patients.

METHODS

Six hundred twenty-two resections for HCC were dichotomized according to staging (Early and Intermediate) and to approach and then matched in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores to obtain four groups (E-MILS and E-Open, including 104 patients respectively; Int-MILS and Int-Open, including 142 patients, respectively). The differential benefit associated with the minimally invasive technique was evaluated between intermediate-stage and early-stage patients taking into account blood loss and morbidity rate as outcome indicators.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic approach resulted in a statistically significant lower blood loss, reduced morbidity, reduced incidence of hepatic decompensation and shorter time for functional recover and length of stay. The evaluation of the differential benefit showed a greater advantage of laparoscopic approach in Intermediate-stage patients compared with Early-stage patients, both in terms of blood loss and morbidity rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The favorable biological scenario associated with laparoscopic approach allows to obtain enhanced benefits in the setting of more advanced liver disease. The push towards minimal invasiveness and the incremental benefit associated with it could potentially promote stage migration in suitable patients.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Setting of Portal Vein Hypertension: Results of an International Multi-institutional Analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein hypertension assessed with platelet count (PVH-PLT; platelet count < 100,000/mL) are often denied surgery even when the disease is technically resectable. Short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery (MIS) versus open resection for HCC and PVH-PLT were compared.

METHODS

Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the clinicopathological differences between MIS and non-MIS patents. Univariate comparison and standard survival analyses were utilized.

RESULTS

Among 1974 patients who underwent surgery for HCC, 13% had a PVH-PLT and 33% underwent MIS. After 1:1 PSM, 407 MIS and 407 non-MIS patients were analyzed. Incidence of complications and length-of-stay (LoS) were higher among non-MIS versus MIS patients (both p ≤ 0.002). After PSM, among 178 PVH-PLT patients (89 MIS and 89 non-MIS), patients who underwent a non-MIS approach had longer LoS (> 7 days; non-MIS: 55% vs. MIS: 29%), as well as higher morbidity (non-MIS: 42% vs. MIS: 29%) [p <0.001]. In contrast, long-term oncological outcomes were comparable, including 3-year overall survival (non-MIS: 66.2% vs. MIS: 72.9%) and disease-free survival (non-MIS: 47.3% vs. MIS: 50.2%) [both p ≥ 0.08].

CONCLUSION

An MIS approach was associated with improved short-term outcomes, but similar long-term outcomes, compared with open liver resection for patients with HCC and PVH-PLT. An MIS approach for liver resection should be considered for patients with HCC, even those individuals with PVH-PLT.

Preoperative predictors of liver decompensation after mini-invasive liver resection

BACKGROUND

Post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) represents the most frequent complication after liver surgery, and the most common cause of morbidity and mortality. Aim of the study is to identify the predictors of PHLF after mini-invasive liver surgery in cirrhosis and chronic liver disease, and to develop a model for risk prediction.

METHODS

The present study is a multicentric prospective cohort study on 490 consecutive patients who underwent mini-invasive liver resection from the Italian Registry of Mini-invasive Liver Surgery (I go MILS). Retrospective additional biochemical and clinical data were collected.

RESULTS

On 490 patients (26.5% females), PHLF occurred in 89 patients (18.2%). The only independent predictors of PHLF were Albumin-Bilirubin (ALBI) score (OR 3.213; 95% CI 1.661-6.215; p < .0.0001) and presence of ascites (OR 3.320; 95% CI 1.468-7.508; p = 0.004). Classification and regression tree (CART) modeling led to the identification of three risk groups: PHLF occurred in 23/217 patients with ALBI grade 1 (10.6%, low risk group), in 54/254 patients with ALBI score 2 or 3 and absence of ascites (21.3%, intermediate risk group) and in 12/19 patients with ALBI score 2 or 3 and evidence of ascites (63.2%, high risk group), p < 0.0001. The three groups showed a corresponding increase in postoperative complications (20.0%, 27.5% and 66.7%), Comprehensive Complication Index (5.1 ± 11.1, 6.0 ± 10.9 and 18.8 ± 18.9) and hospital stay (6.0 ± 4.0, 6.0 ± 6.0 and 8.0 ± 5.0 days).

CONCLUSION

The risk of PHLF can be stratified by determining two easily available preoperative factors: ALBI and ascites. This model of risk prediction offers an objective instrument for a correct clinical decision-making.

Impact of resection margins for colorectal liver metastases in laparoscopic and open liver resection: a propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no clear consensus over the optimal width of resection margin for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), with evolving definitions alongside the advances on the management of the disease. In addition, data on the impact of resection margin after laparoscopic liver resection are still scarce.

METHODS

Prospectively maintained databases of patients undergoing open or laparoscopic CRLM resection in 7 European tertiary hepatobiliary referral centres were reviewed. After propensity score matching (PSM), the influence of 1 mm and wider margins on OS and DFS were evaluated in open and laparoscopic cohorts.

RESULTS

After PSM, 648 patients were comparable in each group. The incidence of positive margins (< 1 mm) was similar in open and laparoscopic groups (17% vs 13%, p = 0,142). Margins < 1 mm were associated with shorter RFS in open (12 vs 26 months, p = 0.042) and in laparoscopic group (13 vs 23, p = 0,002). Margins < 1 mm were associated with shorter OS in open (36 vs 57 months, p = 0.027), but not in laparoscopic group (49 vs 60, p = 0,177). Subgroups with margins ≥ 1 mm (1-4 mm, 5-9 mm, ≥ 10 mm) presented similar RFS in open (p = 0,251) or laparoscopic cohorts (p = 0.117), as well as similar OS in open (p = 0.295) or laparoscopic cohorts (p = 0.908). In the presence of liver recurrence, repeat liver resection was performed in 70 (30%) patients in the open group and 88 (48%) in the laparoscopic group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that a positive resection margin (less than 1 mm) width does not impact OS after laparoscopic resection of CRLMs as it does in open liver resection. However, a positive margin continues to affect RFS in open and laparoscopic resection. Wider margins than 1 mm do not seem to improve oncological results in open or laparoscopic surgery.

Impact of cirrhosis in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection in a nationwide multicentre survey

BACKGROUND

The aim was to analyse the impact of cirrhosis on short-term outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in a multicentre national cohort study.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all patients undergoing LLR in 27 centres between 2000 and 2017. Cirrhosis was defined as F4 fibrosis on pathological examination. Short-term outcomes of patients with and without liver cirrhosis were compared after propensity score matching by centre volume, demographic and tumour characteristics, and extent of resection.

RESULTS

Among 3150 patients included, LLR was performed in 774 patients with (24·6 per cent) and 2376 (75·4 per cent) without cirrhosis. Severe complication and mortality rates in patients with cirrhosis were 10·6 and 2·6 per cent respectively. Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) developed in 3·6 per cent of patients with cirrhosis and was the major cause of death (11 of 20 patients). After matching, patients with cirrhosis tended to have higher rates of severe complications (odds ratio (OR) 1·74, 95 per cent c.i. 0·92 to 3·41; P = 0·096) and PHLF (OR 7·13, 0·91 to 323·10; P = 0·068) than those without cirrhosis. They also had a higher risk of death (OR 5·13, 1·08 to 48·61; P = 0·039). Rates of cardiorespiratory complications (P = 0·338), bile leakage (P = 0·286) and reoperation (P = 0·352) were similar in the two groups. Patients with cirrhosis had a longer hospital stay than those without (11 versus 8 days; P = 0·018). Centre expertise was an independent protective factor against PHLF in patients with cirrhosis (OR 0·33, 0·14 to 0·76; P = 0·010).

CONCLUSION

Underlying cirrhosis remains an independent risk factor for impaired outcomes in patients undergoing LLR, even in expert centres.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Laparoscopic Versus Open Major Hepatectomy: Analysis of Clinical Outcomes and Cost Effectiveness in a High-Volume Center

BACKGROUND

Considering the increasing evidence on the feasibility of laparoscopic major hepatectomies (LMH), their clinical outcomes and associated costs were herein evaluated compared to open (OMH).

METHODS

Major contributors of perioperative expenses were considered. With respect to the occurrence of conversion, a primary intention-to-treat analysis including conversions in the LMH group (ITT-A) was performed. An additional per-protocol analysis excluding conversions (PP-A) was undertaken, with calculation of additional costs of conversion analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five LMH and 61 OMH were included (14.5% conversion rate). At the ITT-A, LMH showed lower blood loss (p < 0.001) and morbidity (global p 0.037, moderate p 0.037), shorter hospital stay (p 0.035), and a lower need for intra- and postoperative red blood cells transfusions (p < 0.001), investigations (p 0.004), and antibiotics (p 0.002). The higher intraoperative expenses (+ 32.1%, p < 0.001) were offset by postoperative savings (- 27.2%, p 0.030), resulting in a global cost-neutrality of LMH (- 7.2%, p 0.807). At the PP-A, completed LMH showed also lower severe complications (p 0.042), interventional procedures (p 0.027), and readmission rates (p 0.031), and postoperative savings increased to - 71.3% (p 0.003) resulting in a 29.9% cost advantage of completed LMH (p 0.020). However, the mean additional cost of conversion was significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Completed LMH exhibit a high potential treatment effect compared to OMH and are associated to significant cost savings. Despite some of these benefits may be jeopardized by conversion, a program of LMH can still provide considerable clinical benefits without cost disadvantage and appears worth to be implemented in high-volume centers.

Pure laparoscopic versus open hemihepatectomy: a critical assessment and realistic expectations - a propensity score-based analysis of right and left hemihepatectomies from nine European tertiary referral centers

INTRODUCTION

A stronger evidence level is needed to confirm the benefits and limits of laparoscopic hemihepatectomies.

METHODS

Laparoscopic and open hemihepatectomies from nine European referral centers were compared after propensity score matching (right and left hemihepatectomies separately, and benign and malignant diseases sub-analyses).

RESULTS

Five hundred and forty-five laparoscopic hemihepatectomies were compared with 545 open. Laparoscopy was associated with reduced blood loss (P < 0.001), postoperative stay (P < 0.001) and minor morbidity (P = 0.002), supported by a lower Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) (P = 0.035). Laparoscopic right hemihepatectomies were associated with lower ascites (P = 0.016), bile leak (P = 0.001) and wound infections (P = 0.009). Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomies exhibited a lower incidence of bile leak and cardiovascular complications (P = 0.024; P = 0.041), lower minor and major morbidity (P = 0.003; P = 0.044) and reduced CCI (P = 0.002). Laparoscopic major hepatectomies (LMH) for benign disease were associated with lower blood loss (P = 0.001) and bile leaks (P = 0.037) and shorter total stay (P < 0.001). LMH for malignancy were associated with lower blood loss (P < 0.001) and minor morbidity (P = 0.027) supported by a lower CCI (P = 0.021) and shorter stay (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This multicenter study confirms some associated advantages of laparoscopic left and right hemihepatectomies in malignant and benign conditions highlighting the need for realistic expectations of the minimally invasive approach based on the resected hemiliver and the patients treated.

Appraisal of disease-specific benefits of minimally invasiveness in surgery of breast cancer liver metastases

BACKGROUND

The primary endpoint of this study is to analyze short term benefit of laparoscopic approach (minimally invasive liver surgery [MILS]) over the open techniques in patients submitted to surgery for breast cancer liver metastases (BCLM) within a disease-specific perspective.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A group of 30 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection for BCLM constituted the Study group (MILS group) and was matched in a ratio of 1:2 with patients who underwent open surgery for BCLM (Open group, constituting the Control group).

RESULTS

MILS approach resulted in a statistically significant lower blood loss (150 vs 300 mL; P < .05). The rate of postoperative complications was similar (13.3% and 16.6% in the MILS and Open groups, respectively). MILS approach was associated with a shorter length of postoperative stay (4 ± 2 days) compared with the Open group (7 ± 3 days), allowing a faster return to adjuvant treatments. Both MILS and open groups showed adequate oncological radicality, with comparable long-term results.

CONCLUSION

MILS approach to BCLM represents the optimal instrument to obtain an adequate disease clearance in the selected group of patients candidates to surgery: the type of procedure (minor resections for limited hepatic disease) and characteristics of patients contribute to enhance the feasibility and the benefits of the laparoscopic technique.

Optimal introduction of laparoscopic liver resection for Child-Pugh B

INTRODUCTION

Surgery for Child-Pugh B liver function is considered risky because of its high morbidity rate and the acceptable indication criteria for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for Child-Pugh B patients have not been identified. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to determine the optimal introduction of LLR for Child-Pugh B patients based on our single-institute experience.

METHODS

A total of 17 Child-Pugh B patients underwent LLR between 2005 and 2017. Their clinical outcomes were compared to those of LLR for Child-Pugh A patients (103 cases), conventional open liver resection for Child-Pugh B patients (19 cases), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for Child-Pugh B patients (20 cases) during the same period.

RESULTS

LLR for Child-Pugh B patients had a significantly higher conversion rate than LLR for Child-Pugh A patients (Child-Pugh A vs B: 3.9% vs 35.3%, P < 0.01). However, patients who successfully underwent laparoscopic resection (11 cases) had fewer postoperative ascites and shorter postoperative hospital stays compared to patients who underwent conventional open liver resection. In comparison to the RFA group, the LLR group more frequently had lesions in the left lateral segment (LLR vs RFA: 50.0% vs 10.0%, P = 0.02) and exophytic tumor (21.4% vs 0%, P = 0.02) than did the RFA group. Also, compared to the RFA group, the LLR group had a lower local recurrence rate (0% vs 15%, P = 0.25) and a longer recurrence-free survival (P = 0.049), but the overall survival was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In the treatment of Child-Pugh B liver malignancy, the minimal invasiveness of LLR was revealed. Our results suggest that lesions in the left lateral segment and exophytic tumors are good indications for LLR for Child-Pugh B.

Long-term perioperative outcomes of pure laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has increased. We retrospectively compared the perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) with those of open liver resection (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in well-matched patient groups using propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

We reviewed medical records of patients with HCC who underwent liver resection between July 2007 and April 2016 at our center. In total, 2335 patients were included in this study and divided into LLR (n = 264) and OLR (n = 2071) groups. For group comparisons, 1:2 PSM was used with covariates of baseline characteristics, including tumor characteristics and surgical liver resection procedures.

RESULTS

After PSM, there were 217 and 434 patients in the LLR and OLR groups, respectively. The LLR group had shorter hospital stays (8.9 vs. 14.8 days; P < 0.001) and lower postoperative morbidity (6.5% vs. 12.0%; P = 0.022). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 98.1%, 87.0%, and 78.6%, respectively, for the LLR group, and 98.3%, 90.8%, and 84.3%, respectively, for the OLR group (P = 0.570). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 81.0%, 62.0%, and 49.1%, respectively, for the LLR group, and 85.3%, 64.7%, and 56.2%, respectively, for the OLR group (P = 0.563).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term oncological outcomes were comparable between LLR and OLR for selected patients. LLR was associated with multiple benefits, even for selected patients with cirrhosis who underwent major hepatectomy. LLR for HCC performed by an experienced surgeon could be considered a safe and feasible alternative to OLR for selected patients.

Preoperative Prognosticators of Safe Laparoscopic Hepatocellular Carcinoma Resection in Advanced Cirrhosis: a Propensity Score Matching Population-Based Analysis of 1799 Western Patients

BACKGROUND

The safety and oncologic outcomes of patients with advanced cirrhosis undergoing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) compared to open resection (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain unclear.

METHODS

Patients with HCC resection during 2010-2014 were identified from the National Cancer Database. Patients with severe fibrosis; single lesions; M0; and known grade, margin status, tumor size, length of hospital stay, 30- and 90-day mortality, 30-day readmission, surgical approach, and complete follow-up were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching analysis of LLR:OLR was performed. Prognostic effect of LLR was assessed by multivariable Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

A total of 1799 hepatectomy patients (minor (n = 491, 27.3%); major (n = 1308, 72.7%)) were included. Of 193 (10.7%) LLR patients, 190 were eligible for matching. The LLR vs OLR did not differ for patient characteristics, resection margin status, and 30-day (p = 0.141), 90-day mortality (p = 0.121), or 30-day readmission (p = 0.784). Median hospital stay was shorter for LLR (6 vs 8 days, p = 0.001). Median overall survival (OS) was similar for LLR vs OLR (44.2 and 39.5 months, respectively, p = 0.064). Predictors of worse OS were older age (hazard ratio (HR) 1.04, p = 0.034), > 2 comorbidities (HR 1.29, p = 0.012), grade 3-4 disease (HR 1.81, p = 0.025), N1 disease (HR 1.04, p = 0.048), and R1 margins (HR 1.34, p = 0.002). After adjustment for confounders, LLR vs OLR was not a significant risk factor for OS (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.76-1.71, p = 0.522).

CONCLUSION

While LLR in advanced cirrhosis for patients with HCC proved safe, optimal patient selection based on the preoperatively available factors comorbidities, age, degree of underlying liver disease, and high-quality oncologic surgery will determine long-term survival.

Hepatocellular carcinoma in non-cirrhotic liver: A comprehensive review

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common type of primary liver cancer, which in turns accounts for the sixth most common cancer worldwide. Despite being the 6^th most common cancer it is the second leading cause of cancer related deaths. HCC typically arises in the background of cirrhosis, however, about 20% of cases can develop in a non-cirrhotic liver. This particular subgroup of HCC generally presents at an advanced stage as surveillance is not performed in a non-cirrhotic liver. HCC in non-cirrhotic patients is clinically silent in its early stages because of lack of symptoms and surveillance imaging; and higher hepatic reserve in this population. Interestingly, F3 fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus infections are associated with high risk of developing HCC. Even though considerable progress has been made in the management of this entity, there is a dire need for implementation of surveillance strategies in the patient population at risk, to decrease the disease burden at presentation and improve the prognosis of these patients. This comprehensive review details the epidemiology, risk factors, clinical features, diagnosis and management of HCC in non-cirrhotic patients and provides future directions for research.

Surgical outcomes between patients with and without a cirrhotic liver undergoing laparoscopic liver resection: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery in patients with liver cirrhosis (CL) is considered to be challenging. Recent studies have shown that laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is more beneficial of reduced operative stress and postoperative complications in patients with CL.

AIM

A meta-analysis was done to review the currently available published data comparing LLR for patients with CL versus those non-cirrhosis of the liver (NCL).

METHODS

The electronic databases of PubMed, Wiley, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from date of inception to January 29, 2018. Studies reporting a comparison of outcomes and methods of LLR in CL and NCL groups were included. The studies were evaluated using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 1573 patients from six cohort studies were included in final analysis. The CL group had a slightly shorter operative time compared with the NCL group (weighted mean difference [WMD], 18.78min shorter; 95% confidence interval [CI], -43.54-5.98; P=0.14) and delayed hospital stay (WMD, 1.26 days longer; 95% CI, -0.05-2.56; P=0.06). Blood loss, blood transfusion rate, mortality, and conversion rate did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR is safe and feasible in the CL compared with the NCL groups. Our present review indicates that LLR should be considered when selecting surgery for patients with CL.

Resection for hepatocellular cancer: overpassing old barriers

Several recent studies have shown that the selection limits commonly used for patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) potentially requiring a liver resection (LR) are too restrictive. The present review aims at investigating the studies showing that LR is no longer a treatment suitable only for highly selected patients, but also for patients selectively presenting one-to-more negative factors. Several specific variables have been investigated, none of them showing to be an absolute contraindication for LR: age; single vs. multiple diseases; the dimension of the nodule; hyperbilirubinemia; clinically relevant portal hypertension; Child-Pugh status; macrovascular invasion. As a consequence, LR for the treatment of HCC-on-cirrhosis is a safe and effective procedure not only in "ideal cases", but also for selected patients presenting risk factors. The presence of only one of these factors does not represent an absolute contraindication for LR. On the opposite, the contemporaneous presence of risk factors should contraindicate the procedure. Further studies investigating the "borderline" cases are required, mainly looking at the possible decisive role of laparoscopy in this setting.

Laparoscopic liver resection of hepatocellular carcinoma located in unfavorable segments: a propensity score-matched analysis from the I Go MILS (Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery) Registry

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most important indications for the minimally invasive approach. Our study aims to analyze the experience of the Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery with laparoscopic surgical treatment of HCC, with a focus on tumor location and how it affects morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

38 centers participated in this study; 372 cases of LLR for HCC were prospectively enrolled. Patients were divided into two groups according to the HCC nodule location. Group 1 favorable location and group 2 unfavorable location. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups before and after a propensity score match (PS) 1:1.

RESULTS

Before PS in group 2 surgical time was longer; conversion rate was higher; postoperative transfusion and comprehensive complication index were also higher. PS was performed with a cohort of 298 patients (from 18 centers), with 66 and 232 patients with HCC in unfavorable and favorable locations, respectively. After PS matching, 62 patients from group 1 and group 2 each were compared. Operative and postoperative course were similar in patients with HCC in favorable and unfavorable LLR locations. Surgical margins were found to be identical before and after PS.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that LLR in patients with HCC can be safely performed in all segments because of the extensive experience of all surgeons from multiple centers in performing traditional open liver surgery as well as laparoscopic surgery.

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.

Open Liver Resection, Laparoscopic Liver Resection, and Percutaneous Thermal Ablation for Patients with Solitary Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma (≤30 mm): Review of the Literature and Proposal for a Therapeutic Strategy

BACKGROUND

Patients with a single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤3 cm and preserved liver function have the highest likelihood to be cured if treated. The most adequate treatment methods are yet a matter that is debated.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature about open anatomic resection (AR), laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), and percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA).

RESULTS

PTA is effective as resection for HCC < 2 cm, when they are neither subcapsular nor perivascular. PTA in HCC of 2-3 cm is under evaluation. AR with the removal of the tumor-bearing portal territory is recommended for HCC > 2 cm, except for subcapsular ones. In comparison with open surgery, LRR has better short-term outcomes and non-inferior long-term outcomes. LLR is standardized for superficial limited resections and for left-sided AR.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the available evidences, the following therapeutic proposal can be advanced. Laparoscopic limited resection is the standard for any subcapsular HCC. PTA is the first-line treatment for deep-located HCC < 2 cm, except for those in contact with Glissonean pedicles. Laparoscopic AR is the standard for deep-located HCC of 2-3 cm of the left liver, while open AR is the standard for deep-located HCC of 2-3 cm in the right liver. HCC in contact with Glissonean pedicles should be scheduled for resection (open or laparoscopic) independent of their size. Liver transplantation is reserved to otherwise untreatable patients or as a salvage procedure at recurrence.

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.