Laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastasis patients allows patients to start adjuvant chemotherapy without delay: a propensity score analysis. Surg Endosc. 2018;32:3273-3281. [PMID: 29340819 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6046-y]

Printing a cure: A tailored solution for localized drug delivery in liver cancer treatment

Adjuvant chemotherapy is highly recommended for liver cancer to enhance survival rates due to its tendency to recur frequently. Localized drug-eluting implants have gained traction as an alternative to overcome the limitations of systemic chemotherapy. This work describes the development of biodegradable 3D printed (3DP) bilayer films loaded with 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and cisplatin (Cis) with different infill percentages where the 5FU layers were 40%, 30%, and 30% and Cis layers were 10%, 15%, and 10% for films A, B, and C, respectively. The relevant characterization tests were performed, and the drug content of films was 0.68, 0.50, and 0.50 mg of 5FU and 0.39, 0.80, and 0.34 mg of Cis for films A, B, and C, respectively. Cis release was affected by the alterations to the film design, where films A, B, and C showed complete release at 12, 14, and 23 days, respectively. However, 5FU was released over 24 h for all films. The films were stable for up to two weeks after storage at 25 °C/65% relative humidity and four weeks at 4 °C where drug content, tensile strength, FTIR, and thermal analysis results demonstrated negligible alterations. The cytotoxicity of the films was assessed by MTS assays using HepG2 cell lines demonstrating up to 81% reduction in cell viability compared to blank films. Moreover, apoptosis was confirmed by Western Blots and the determination of mitochondrial cell potential, highlighting the potential of these films as a promising approach in adjuvant chemotherapy.

Short-term and long-term outcomes after robotic versus open hepatectomy in patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Robotic hepatectomy (RH) is currently widely accepted and it is associated with some benefits when compared to open hepatectomy (OH). However, whether such benefits can still be achieved for patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing RH or OH.

METHODS

Perioperative and survival data from patients with large HCC who underwent RH or OH between January 2010 and December 2020 were collected from eight centres. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to minimise potential biases.

RESULTS

Using predefined inclusion criteria, 797 patients who underwent OH and 309 patients who underwent RH were enroled in this study. After PSM, 280 patients in the robotic group had shorter operative time (median 181 vs. 201 min, P <0.001), lower estimated blood loss (median 200 vs. 400 ml, P <0.001), and shorter postoperative length of stay (median 6 vs. 9 days, P <0.001) than 465 patients in the open group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in overall survival and recurrence-free survival. Cox analysis showed AFP greater than 400 ng/ml, tumour size greater than 10 cm, and microvascular invasion were independent risk factors for overall survival and recurrence-free survival. After PSM, subgroup analysis showed that patients with a huge HCC (diameter >10 cm) who underwent RH had significantly lower estimated blood loss (median 200.0 vs. 500.0 min, P <0.001), and shorter length of stay (median 7 vs. 10 days, P <0.001) than those who underwent OH.

CONCLUSION

Safety and feasibility of RH and OH for patients with large HCC were comparable. RH resulted in similar long-term survival outcomes as OH.

Minimally invasive vs. open approach to the simultaneous treatment of colorectal tumors with synchronous liver metastasis: a single center, propensity-score matched analysis from Mayo clinic

BACKGROUND

Open combined resections of colorectal primary tumors and synchronous liver metastases have become common in selected cases. However, evidences favoring a minimally invasive (MIS) approach are still limited. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of MIS vs. open synchronous liver and colorectal resections.

METHODS

384 cases of synchronous colorectal and liver resections performed at one institution were identified during the study period. MIS vs open approach were compared after a propensity score matching; surgical outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

MIS cases featured longer operative time (399 vs 300 min, p < 0.001), fewer blood loss (200 vs 500 ml, p = 0.003), and shorter hospitalization (median LOS 4 vs 6 days, p = 0.001). No difference was observed between the two groups for use of Pringle maneuver (p = 0.083), intraoperative blood transfusion (p = 0.061), achievement of negative colorectal (p = 0.176) and liver margins (p = 1.000), postoperative complications (p = 1.000) and significant (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a) complications (p = 0.817), delay of adjuvant therapy due to complications (p = 0.555), 30- and 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Synchronous colorectal and liver metastases resections via a minimally-invasive approach in high-volume centers with appropriate expertise result in significantly lower blood loss and length of stay despite longer operative time in comparison to open, with no oncological inferiority.

Laparoscopic and Open Liver Resections for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis in the Ukrainian State Center

Background Minimally invasive liver resections for metastatic colorectal cancer have been increasingly performed all over the world with promising results. We planned the current study to review our experience on this matter and compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM). Materials and methods This is a single-center retrospective analysis of patients with CRLM who underwent laparoscopic (n=86) and open (n=96) surgical treatment for metastatic liver lesions between March 2016 and November 2022. Tumor characteristics, intra- and postoperative results, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were analyzed and compared. Results LLR was associated with significantly shorter surgery duration (180 minutes versus 295 minutes, p=0.03). There was no significant difference in blood loss between the two groups (100 mL versus 350 mL, p=0.061). Additionally, the laparoscopic approach was associated with significantly shorter hospital stays (6 days versus 9 days, p=0.004). The rate of major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ 3) was lower in the LLR group (5.8% versus 16.6%, p=0.037). There was no mortality in the LLR group, and in the OLR group, one lethal case was induced by mesenteric thrombosis on the fifth postoperative day. We did not find a statistically significant difference in the OS rate between the two groups at one, three, and five years: 97.3%, 74.7%, and 43.4%, respectively, in the OLR group and 95.1%, 70.3%, and 49.5%, respectively, in the LLR group (p=0.53). DFS at one, three, and five years were 88.7%, 52.3%, and 25.5%, respectively, in the LLR group and 71.9%, 53.1%, and 19.3%, respectively, in the OLR group (p=0.66). Conclusions This study showed that laparoscopic liver surgery is a safe and effective method of CRLM treatment in our center. LLR was associated with a decrease in major morbidity, shorter surgery duration, and reduced postoperative hospital stay. Minimally invasive liver resections showed similar oncological outcomes to the open approach in terms of overall and disease-free survival.

Outcomes and Patient Selection in Laparoscopic vs. Open Liver Resection for HCC and Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) are the two most common malignant tumors that require liver resection. While liver transplantation is the best treatment for HCC, organ shortages and high costs limit the availability of this option for many patients and make resection the mainstay of treatment. For patients with CRLM, surgical resection with negative margins is the only potentially curative option. Over the last two decades, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been increasingly adopted for the resection of a variety of tumors and was found to have similar long-term outcomes compared to open liver resection (OLR) while offering the benefits of improved short-term outcomes. In this review, we discuss the current literature on the outcomes of LLR vs. OLR for patients with HCC and CRLM. Although the use of LLR for HCC and CRLM is increasing, it is not appropriate for all patients. We describe an approach to selecting patients best-suited for LLR. The four common difficulty-scoring systems for LLR are summarized. Additionally, we review the current evidence behind the emerging robotically assisted liver resection technology.

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

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

Recent Advances in Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases-A Review

Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches to liver resection have been increasingly adopted into use for surgery on colorectal cancer liver metastases. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the outcomes when comparing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), robotic liver resection (RLR), and open liver resection (OLR) for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) in 39 studies (2009-2022) that include a case-matched series, propensity score analyses, and three randomized clinical trials. LLR is associated with less intraoperative blood loss and shorter hospital stay compared with OLR. LLR can be performed with comparable operative time. LLR has similar rates of perioperative complications and mortality as OLR. There were no significant differences in 5-year overall or disease-free survival between approaches. Robotic liver resection (RLR) has comparable perioperative safety to LLR and may improve rates of R0 resection in certain patients. Finally, MIS approaches to the hepatic resection of CRLM reduce the time from liver resection to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy. Thus, MIS liver surgery should be considered in the array of options for patients with CRLM, though thoughtful patient selection and surgeon experience should be part of that decision.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in elderly patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is a widely practiced therapeutic method and holds several advantages over open liver resection (OLR) including less postoperative pain, lower morbidity, and faster recovery. However, the effect of LLR for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in elderly patients remains controversial. Therefore, we aimed to perform the first meta-analysis of propensity score-matched (PSM) studies to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of LLR versus OLR for elderly patients with HCC.

METHODS

Databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched until April 2022 for eligible studies that compared LLR and OLR for the treatment of HCC in elderly patients. Short-term outcomes include postoperative complications, blood loss, surgical time, and length of hospital stay. Long-term outcomes include overall survival (OS) rate and disease-free survival (DFS) rate at 1, 3, and 5 years.

RESULTS

A total of 12 trials involving 1,861 patients (907 in the LLR group, 954 in the OLR group) were included. Compared with OLR, LLR was associated with lower postoperative complications (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.62, P < 0.00001, I 2 = 0%), less blood loss (MD -285.69, 95% CI -481.72 to -89.65, P = 0.004, I 2 = 96%), and shorter hospital stay (MD -7.88, 95% CI -11.38 to -4.37, P < 0.0001, I 2 = 96%), whereas operation time (MD 17.33, 95% CI -6.17 to 40.83, P = 0.15, I 2 = 92%) was insignificantly different. Furthermore, there were no significant differences for the OS and DFS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

For elderly patients with HCC, LLR offers better short-term outcomes including a lower incidence of postoperative complications and shorter hospital stays, with comparable long-term outcomes when compared with the open approach. Our results support the implementation of LLR for the treatment of HCC in elderly patients.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-4-0156/, identifier INPLASY202240156.

Impact of anatomical liver resection on patient survival in KRAS-wild-type colorectal liver metastasis: A multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is a standard therapy for colorectal liver metastasis. However, the impact of anatomical resection and nonanatomical resection on the survival in patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type and Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated colorectal liver metastasis remain unclear. We investigated whether anatomical resection versus nonanatomical resection improves survival in colorectal liver metastasis stratified by Kirsten rat sarcoma mutational status.

METHODS

Among 639 consecutive patients with colorectal liver metastasis who underwent primary liver resection between January 2008 and December 2017, 349 patients were excluded due to their unknown Kirsten rat sarcoma mutational status, or due to receiving anatomical resection with concomitant non-anatomical resection, radiofrequency, or R2 resection. Accordingly, 290 patients with colorectal liver metastasis were retrospectively assessed. The relationships between resection types and survival were investigated in Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type and -mutated groups.

RESULTS

Anatomical resection was performed in 77/186 (41%) and 44/104 (42%) patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type and Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated genetic statuses, respectively. For both, the clinical-pathologic factors were comparable, except a larger maximum tumor size and surgical margin were observed in anatomical resection cases. Anatomical resection patients had significantly longer recurrence-free survival and overall survival than nonanatomical resection cases in the Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type group (recurrence-free survival, P < .001; overall survival, P = .005). No significant recurrence-free survival or overall survival differences were observed between Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated anatomical resection and non-anatomical resection (recurrence-free survival, P = .132; overall survival, P = .563). Although, intrahepatic recurrence in Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type and -mutated colorectal liver metastasis was comparable (P = .973), extrahepatic recurrence was increased in Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated versus -wild-type colorectal liver metastasis (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In contrast to Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated colorectal liver metastasis with higher extrahepatic recurrence after liver resection, local liver control via anatomical resection improved the postoperative survival in patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type colorectal liver metastasis.

Laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases - short- and long-term outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

For well-selected patients and procedures, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become the gold standard for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) when performed in specialized centers. However, little is currently known concerning patient-related and peri-operative factors that could play a role in survival outcomes associated with LLR for CRLM.

AIM

To provide an extensive summary of reported outcomes and prognostic factors associated with LLR for CRLM.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library using the keywords "colorectal liver metastases", "laparoscopy", "liver resection", "prognostic factors", "outcomes" and "survival". Only publications written in English and published until December 2019 were included. Furthermore, abstracts of which no accompanying full text was published, reviews, case reports, letters, protocols, comments, surveys and animal studies were excluded. All search results were saved to Endnote Online and imported in Rayyan for systematic selection. Data of interest were extracted from the included publications and tabulated for qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 1064 articles retrieved by means of a systematic and grey literature search, 77 were included for qualitative analysis. Seventy-two research papers provided data concerning outcomes of LLR for CRLM. Fourteen papers were eligible for extraction of data concerning prognostic factors affecting survival outcomes. Qualitative analysis of the collected data showed that LLR for CRLM is safe, feasible and provides oncological efficiency. Multiple research groups have reported on the short-term advantages of LLR compared to open procedures. The obtained results accounted for minor LLR, as well as major LLR, simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and liver resection, LLR of posterosuperior segments, two-stage hepatectomy and repeat LLR for CRLM. Few research groups so far have studied prognostic factors affecting long-term outcomes of LLR for CRLM.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, LLR for CRLM provides good short- and long-term outcomes, independent of the complexity of the procedure.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

[Evidence of minimally invasive oncological surgery of the liver]

BACKGROUND

The evidence for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of the liver has significantly increased with the increasing number of publications on this topic in recent years; however, this technique has not yet gained broad acceptance among surgeons.

OBJECTIVE

Analysis and presentation of the current literature on MIS of the liver.

MATERIAL UND METHODS

Structured PubMed literature search and analysis.

RESULTS

According to the literature, MIS and open liver surgery are equivalent regarding the oncological quality. In addition to parenchyma-preserving resections, major hepatectomies (e.g. hemihepatectomy and sectorectomy), two-stage concepts and re-resections have increasingly been reported. The MIS of the liver is associated with less blood loss and other immunological advantages in addition to a shorter hospital stay. The highest level of evidence has been achieved for colorectal liver metastases for which a systematic review even revealed a survival benefit for patients undergoing MIS surgery. From an oncological perspective, laparoscopic and robotic liver surgery are considered to be equivalent.

CONCLUSION

According to the current literature MIS of the liver is recommended for the resection of colorectal liver metastases and hepatocellular carcinoma.

Robotic Liver Surgery - Current Standards and Future Perspectives

BACKGROUND

 Robotic liver surgery is emerging as the future of minimal invasive surgery. The robotic surgical system offers a stable camera platform, elimination of physiologic tremor, augmented surgical dexterity as well as improved ergonomics because of a seated operating position. Due to the theoretical advantages of the robotic assisted system, complex liver surgery might be an especially interesting indication for a robotic approach since it demands delicate tissue dissection, precise intracorporeal suturing as well as difficult parenchymal transection with subsequent need for meticulous hemostasis and biliostasis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

 An analysis of English and German literature on open, laparoscopic and robotic liver surgery was performed and this review provides a general overview of the existing literature along with current standards and aims to specifically point out future directions of robotic liver surgery.

RESULTS

 Robotic liver surgery is safe and feasible compared to open and laparoscopic surgery, with improved short-term postoperative outcomes and at least non-inferior oncological outcomes.

CONCLUSION

 In complex cases including major hepatectomies, extended hepatectomies with biliary reconstruction and difficult segmentectomies of the posterior-superior segments, robotic surgery appears to emerge as a reasonable alternative to open surgery rather than being an alternative to laparoscopic procedures.

Surgical Glove Technique for Laparoscopic Liver Resection

BACKGROUND

Liver tumors located in segments 7 and 8 pose a technical challenge to standard laparoscopic liver resection. Intraoperative placement of a surgical glove behind the right liver after the right triangular ligament and coronary ligament are divided facilitates liver exposure during parenchymal transection and control of the bleeding at the deeper part of the parenchymal plane. The aim of this study was to describe our standardized technique in detail and to assess the feasibility of this technique in patients with different clinical backgrounds and clarify the limits of this technique.

METHODS

Medical records of 20 consecutive patients considered for laparoscopic liver resection using the surgical glove technique were reviewed.

RESULTS

All patients had malignant disease and the vast majority of patients had colorectal metastatic tumors. Overall, 65% of patients had tumors located in segment 8. Placing the surgical water glove could be achieved without complication in all 20 patients. One surgical glove was used in this series (usually size 6.5 to 7.5 is an adequate size). Time for preparing the surgical green water glove was estimated to be less than 1 min. The mean duration of operation ranged from 136 to 332 min (median, 240 min). Intermittent Pringle's maneuver was applied in all patients with a median time of 33 min. No additional intercostal trocars were required. There was no intraoperative blood transfusion or conversion to open surgery. The median maximum size of the tumor was 23 mm. There was no operative mortality. Overall morbidity was 30%. Surgical margins were negative in 80% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The surgical glove technique is easy, reproducible, effective, and safe and can be applied to both laparoscopic and robotic liver resection.

New frontiers in liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver resection is one of the main curative options for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis and is the treatment of choice in non-cirrhotic patients. However, careful patient selection is required to balance the risk of postoperative liver failure and the potential benefit on long-term outcomes. In the last decades, improved surgical techniques and perioperative management, as well as better patient selection, have enabled the indications for liver resection to be expanded. In this review, we aim to describe the main indications for liver resection in the management of HCC, its role compared to percutaneous ablation and liver transplantation in the therapeutic algorithm, as well as the recent advances in liver surgery that could be used to improve the prognosis of patients with HCC.

Survival Advantage of Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection For Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data From Randomized Trials and Propensity-score Matched Studies

OBJECTIVE

To perform an individual participant data meta-analysis using randomized trials and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies which compared laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM).

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials and PSM studies constitute the highest level of evidence in addressing the long-term oncologic efficacy of laparoscopic versus open resection for CLM. However, individual studies are limited by the reporting of overall survival in ways not amenable to traditional methods of meta-analysis, and violation of the proportional hazards assumption.

METHODS

Survival information of individual patients was reconstructed from the published Kaplan-Meier curves with the aid of a computer vision program. Frequentist and Bayesian survival models (taking into account random-effects and nonproportional hazards) were fitted to compare overall survival of patients who underwent laparoscopic versus open surgery. To handle long plateaus in the tails of survival curves, we also exploited "cure models" to estimate the fraction of patients effectively "cured" of disease.

RESULTS

Individual patient data from 2 randomized trials and 13 PSM studies involving 3148 participants were reconstructed. Laparoscopic resection was associated with a lower hazard rate of death (stratified hazard ratio = 0.853, 95% confidence interval: 0.754-0.965, P = 0.0114), and there was evidence of time-varying effects (P = 0.0324) in which the magnitude of hazard ratios increased over time. The fractions of long-term cancer survivors were estimated to be 47.4% and 18.0% in the laparoscopy and open surgery groups, respectively. At 10-year follow-up, the restricted mean survival time was 8.6 months (or 12.1%) longer in the laparoscopy arm (P < 0.0001). In a subgroup analysis, elderly patients (≥65 years old) treated with laparoscopy experienced longer 3-year average life expectancy (+6.2%, P = 0.018), and those who live past the 5-year milestone (46.1%) seem to be cured of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This patient-level meta-analysis of high-quality studies demonstrated an unexpected survival benefit in favor of laparoscopic over open resection for CLM in the long-term. From a conservative viewpoint, these results can be interpreted to indicate that laparoscopy is at least not inferior to the standard open approach.

Current status of laparoscopic liver resection for the management of colorectal liver metastases

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies worldwide. The commonest site of spread is the liver, with up to 40% of patients developing colorectal liver metastasis (CLRM) during the course of their lifetime. Significant advances in surgical techniques, as well as breakthroughs in chemotherapy and biologic agents, have resulted in dramatic improvements in prognosis. A multimodal approach comprising of liver resection coupled with systemic therapy offers these patients the best chance of cure. The arrival of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) within the last 3 decades has added a whole new dimension to the management of this condition. Today, CLRM is one of the most frequent indications for LLR globally. Meta-analyses of retrospective studies and two randomized trials have demonstrated superior short-term outcomes following LLR, with no differences in mortality rates. Oncologically, R0 resection rates are comparable to the open approach, while overall and disease-free survival rates are also similar. As surgeons gain confidence, boundaries are pushed even further. High-volume centers have published their early experiences with complex LLR of recurrent CLRM as well as totally laparoscopic synchronous resection of CRC and liver metastases, with very encouraging results. In the presence of extensive bilobar CLRM, two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) and associating liver partition with portal vein ligation (ALPPS) may be adopted to augment an inadequate future liver remnant to facilitate metastasectomy. Interestingly, the adoption of LLR for these techniques also seem to confer additional benefits. Despite the plethora of advantages, LLR comes with its own unique set of limitations such as a steep learning curve and high cost. The surgical world eagerly awaits the results of prospective trials currently underway in order to further advance the management of this disease.

Oncological Resection for Liver Malignancies: Can the Laparoscopic Approach Provide Benefits?

: Laparoscopic surgery has become an increasingly popular alternative approach to open surgery, resulting in a paradigm shift in liver surgery. Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was initially indicated for small benign and peripheral tumors, at present more than half of LLRs are performed in malignant tumors. Several studies have reported the feasibility of LLR in malignant disease and suggested various short-term benefits compared to open liver resection, including decreased blood loss and postoperative complications and a shorter hospital stay. Although these benefits are important to surgeons, patients, and providers, the main goal of surgery for malignancies is to achieve a maximum oncologic benefit.The relevance of the laparoscopic approach must be assessed in relation to the possibility of respecting basic oncological rules and the expertise of the center. Easy LLRs can be safely performed by most surgeons with minimum expertise in liver surgery and laparoscopy, and can therefore probably provide an oncological benefit. On the other hand, intermediate or difficult LLRs require technical expertise and an oncological benefit can only be achieved in expert centers. Technical standardization is the only way to obtain an oncological benefit with this type of resection, and many problems must still be solved.

Open versus minimally invasive liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases (LapOpHuva): a prospective randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To present surgical and oncological outcomes using a prospective and randomized trial (LapOpHuva, NCT02727179) comparing minimally invasive liver resection (LLR) versus open liver resection (OLR) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

METHODS

Between February 2005 and March 2016, 204 selected patients with CRLM were randomized and 193 were included: LLR (n = 96) and OLR (n = 97). The primary endpoint was to compare postoperative morbidity. Other secondary endpoints were oncological outcomes, use of the Pringle maneuver, surgical time, blood losses, transfusions, hospital stay, mortality and OS, and disease-free survival (DFS) at 3, 5, and 7 years.

RESULTS

LLR presented with lower global morbidity (11.5% vs. 23.7%, p = 0.025) but with similar severe complications. Long-term survival outcomes were similar in both groups. The cumulative 1-, 3-, 5-, 7-year OS for LLR and OLR were 92.5%, 71.5%, 49.3%, 35.6% versus 93.6%, 69.7%, 47.4%, 35.5%, respectively (log-rank = 0.047, p = 0.82). DFS for LLR and OLR was 72.7%, 33.5%, 22.7%, and 20.8% versus 61.6%, 27.2%, 23.9%, and 17.9%, respectively (log-rank = 1.427, p = 0.23). LLR involved more use of the Pringle maneuver (15.5% vs. 30.2%, p = 0.025) and a shorter hospital stay (4 vs. 6 days, p < 0.001). There were no differences regarding surgical time, blood losses, transfusion, and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients with CRLM, LLR presents similar oncological outcomes with the advantages of the short-term results associated with LLR.

Short- and Long-term Outcomes after Robotic and Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Malignancies: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

OBJECTIVES

A laparoscopic approach improves short-term outcomes and maintains long-term outcomes compared to an open approach. In turn, the recent development of robotic surgery raises the question whether it performs as well as laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR) for malignancies.

METHOD

From 2011 to 2017, the study population included 111 patients in the LLR group and 61 in the RLR group. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared before and after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Operative mortality rate was nil. The intraoperative blood transfusion rate was higher during RLR (15% vs. 2%, p = 0.0009). Major morbidity and hospital stay were not different between the two groups. The resection margin width (LLR 7 mm vs. RLR 10 mm, p = 0.13) and R1 resection rates (resection margin width < 1 mm; LLR 15% vs. RLR 11%, p = 0.49) were similar. After PSM (55 patients in each group), the blood transfusion, major morbidity, hospital stay and R1 resection were similar between the two groups. When considering the largest subset of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma including 114 patients (66%), the 3-year overall survival rate was 80% in the LLR group and 97% in the RLR group (p = 0.10) and remained similar after PSM (p = 0.27). The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate was 50% in the LLR group and 64% in the RLR group (p = 0.30) and remained similar after PSM (p = 0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were found in blood transfusion, incidence of positive resection margins and long-term outcomes between the two techniques. RLR does not compromise short-term and oncologic outcomes in patients with liver cancers.

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.

How to increase the resectability of initially unresectable colorectal liver metastases: A surgical perspective

Although surgical resection is the only treatment of choice that can offer prolonged survival and a chance of cure in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), nearly 80% of patients are deemed to be unresectable at the time of diagnosis. Considerable efforts have been made to overcome this initial unresectability, including expanding the indication of surgery, the advent of conversion chemotherapy, and development and modification of specific surgical techniques, regulated under multidisciplinary approaches. In terms of specific surgical techniques, portal vein ligation/embolization can increase the volume of future liver remnant and thereby reduce the risk of hepatic insufficiency and death after major hepatectomy. For multiple bilobar CRLM that were traditionally considered unresectable even with preoperative chemotherapy and portal vein embolization, two-stage hepatectomy was introduced and has been adopted worldwide with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes. Recently, ALPPS (associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy) was reported as a novel variant of two-stage hepatectomy. Although issues regarding safety remain unresolved, rapid future liver remnant hypertrophy and subsequent shorter intervals between the two stages lead to a higher feasibility rate, reaching 98%. In addition, adding radiofrequency ablation and vascular resection and reconstruction techniques can allow expansion of the pool of patients with CRLM who are candidates for liver resection and thus a cure. In this review, we discuss specific techniques that may expand the criteria for resectability in patients with initially unresectable CRLM.

Laparoscopic versus open two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases: A bi-institutional, propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic, two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases is poorly evaluated.

METHODS

We reviewed retrospectively 86 consecutive patients who underwent complete two-stage hepatectomy (left lobe clearance as the first stage and standard/extended right hepatectomy as the second stage) for bilobar colorectal liver metastases between 2007 and 2017 in 2 tertiary centers. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between laparoscopic and open two-stage hepatectomy before and after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy was performed in 38 patients and open two-stage hepatectomy in 48. After propensity score matching, 25 laparoscopic and 25 open patients showed similar preoperative characteristics. For the first stage, a laparoscopic approach was associated with lesser hospital stays (4 vs 7.5 days; P < .001). For the second stage, a laparoscopic approach was associated with less blood loss (250 vs 500 mL; P = .040), less postoperative complications (32% vs 60%; P = .047), lesser hospital stays (9 vs 16 days; P = .013), and earlier administration of chemotherapy (1.6 vs 2 months; P = .039). Overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and liver-recurrence-free survival were comparable between the groups (3-year overall survival: 80% vs 54%; P = .154; 2-year recurrence-free survival: 20% vs 18%; P = .200; 2-year liver-recurrence-free survival: 39% vs 33%; P = .269). Although both groups had comparable recurrence patterns, repeat hepatectomies for recurrence were performed more frequently in the laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy group (56% vs 0%; P = .006).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases is safe and feasible with favorable surgical and oncologic outcomes compared to open two-stage hepatectomy.

The "Short-Cut" Laparoscopic Reverse Approach: A Novel Strategy for Synchronous Colorectal Cancer and Liver Metastases Requiring Major or Complex Procedures?

AIM

To report on the feasibility and the safety of a novel strategy in patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases (SLM) requiring major or complex procedures for both the primary and liver deposits.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The strategy consisted in performing the two major procedures (liver first and colorectal) by laparoscopy within a short interval in order to keep both oncological advantages and short-terms outcome benefits.

RESULTS

Two patients were treated with this strategy: one with a laparoscopic resection of segment VIII extended to the segment IVb followed by the laparosopic rectal resection; the second with a laparoscopic left hepatectomy with a microwave ablation of the lesion located in the segment VII followed by the laparoscopic resection of the sigmoid colon. Postoperative courses were uneventful.

CONCLUSION

The "short-cut" laparoscopic reverse approach may represent an attractive option for patients requiring major liver and colorectal resections for SLM provided expertise in laparoscopic surgery in both fields is ensured.

Quality of life from a randomized trial of laparoscopic or open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases

Background

Most treatments for cancer cause a decline in patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Limiting this decline is a universal goal for healthcare providers. Using minimally invasive instead of open surgical techniques might be one way to achieve this. The aim of this study was to compare postoperative HRQoL after open and laparoscopic liver resection.

Methods

This was a predefined substudy of an RCT comparing open with laparoscopic liver resection. Patients with colorectal liver metastases were assigned randomly to open or laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resection. HRQoL was assessed with the Short Form 36 questionnaire at baseline, and 1 and 4 months after surgery.

Results

A total of 280 patients were randomized, of whom 273 underwent surgery (129 laparoscopic, 144 open); 682 questionnaires (83.3 per cent) were available for analysis. One month after surgery, patients in the laparoscopic surgery group reported reduced scores in two HRQoL domains (physical functioning and role physical), whereas those in the open surgery group reported reduced scores in five domains (physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, vitality and social functioning). Four months after surgery, HRQoL scores in the laparoscopic group had returned to preoperative levels, whereas patients in the open group reported reduced scores for two domains (role physical and general health). The between-group difference was statistically significant in favour of laparoscopy for four domains after 1 month (role physical, bodily pain, vitality and social functioning) and for one domain after 4 months (role physical).

Conclusion

Patients assigned to laparoscopic liver surgery reported better postoperative HRQoL than those assigned to open liver surgery. For role limitations caused by physical health problems, patients in the laparoscopic group reported better scores up to 4 months after surgery. Registration number: NCT01516710 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Highlights, limitations and future challenges of laparoscopic resection for colorectal liver metastases

The liver is the most common site for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRLM). Despite advances in oncologic treatment, resection of metastases is still the only curative option. Although laparoscopic surgery for primary colorectal cancer is well documented and widely used, laparoscopic surgery for liver metastases has developed more slowly. However, in spite of some difficulties, laparoscopic approach demonstrated strong advantages including minimal parietal damage, decreased morbidity (reduced blood loss and need for transfusion, fewer pulmonary complications), and simplification of subsequent iterative hepatectomy. Up to now, more than 9 000 laparoscopic procedures have been reported worldwide and long-term results in colorectal liver metastases seem comparable to the open approach. Only one recent randomized controlled trial has compared the laparoscopic and the open approach. The purpose of the present update was to identify the barriers limiting widespread acceptance of laparoscopic approach, the benefits and the limits of laparoscopic hepatectomies in CRLM.

Minimally Invasive Management of Secondary Liver Cancer

Laparoscopic liver surgery for secondary liver cancer is increasing. The most common indications are colorectal cancer liver metastases followed by adenocarcinoma metastases from other solid organs, such as breast, pancreatic neuroendocrine, and other gastrointestinal tract cancers. This article provides a comprehensive review of crucial concepts when managing secondary liver cancer minimally invasively, a summary of the up-to-date literature, and a discussion of the development of the application of this technique over time.