Totally laparoscopic central hepatectomy

Laparoscopic central hepatectomy: Feasibility and safety

BACKGROUND

Anatomical liver resection is the gold standard for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), enhancing survival and disease-free outcomes. For centrally located tumors, major resections are necessary but risky, especially for patients with liver disease. Central hepatectomy (CH) offers a parenchymal-sparing alternative to extended or hemihepatectomy (HH), reducing postoperative liver failure risk. However, its complexity and the large transection area make it challenging, especially with laparoscopic techniques. This study evaluates the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic CH for centrally located HCC, comparing surgical outcomes with those of the HH group.

METHODS

A total of 1592 laparoscopic hepatectomy cases from January 2011 to April 2023 were reviewed in a single institution. Patients undergoing laparoscopic CH were compared to those receiving HH during the same period. Exclusion criteria included non-HCC diagnosis, non-central tumors, and cases involving combined procedures.

RESULTS

70 cases of laparoscopic CH and 32 cases of laparoscopic HH were included. The CH and HH groups showed similar estimated blood loss (median 400 ml vs. 290 ml, p = 0.187) and intraoperative blood transfusion rates (10% vs. 15%, p = 0.413). Operation time did not significantly differ (median 330 min vs. 360 min, p = 0.862). Postoperative hospital stay was shorter in CH (median 6 days vs. 9 days, p = 0.018), with fewer ICU transfers (19% vs. 44%, p = 0.014) and lower 90-day mortality (1% vs. 9%, p = 0.055) compared to HH. Complication rates were similar overall (26% vs. 41%, p = 0.069), but HH had more Clavien-Dindo class I and II complications (13% vs. 19%, p = 0.040). Long-term survival did not significantly differ, but tended to favor the CH group.

CONCLUSION

Despite the complexity, laparoscopic CH offers comparable perioperative outcomes and favorable long-term survival compared to HH. It can be considered a viable option for centrally located HCC, preserving liver function.

Different Approaches of Laparoscopic Mesohepatectomy for Centrally Located Hepatocellular Carcinomas

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to describe a simple and novel positional classification system for centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma (CL-HCC), based on which different surgical approaches for laparoscopic mesohepatectomy (LMH) were chosen.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data of patients with CL-HCC who underwent LMH between January 2017 and December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The positional classification method was used to locate tumors. In addition, different approaches were used during the surgery according to the classification type.

RESULTS

All 98 patients underwent LMH, of whom 4 were converted to open surgery. Types I, Ⅱ, and Ⅲ were 24, 37, and 37, respectively. Blood transfusions were performed in only 7 patients, of which the amount was 800 (600, 900) mL. All the patients underwent R0 resection. The complication rate was 9.2% in all cases. No deaths occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Our proposed classification system and corresponding surgical approach in LMH is conducive to the successful completion of surgery.

Laparoscopic central hepatectomy using a parenchymal-first approach: how we do it

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic central hepatectomy (LCH) is a difficult and challenging procedure. This study aimed to describe our experience with LCH using a parenchymal-first approach.

METHODS

Between July 2017 and June 2021, 19 consecutive patients underwent LCH using a parenchymal-first approach at our institution. Herein, the details of this procedural strategy are described, and the demographic and clinical data of the included patients were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 1 female and 18 male patients, all with hepatocellular carcinoma without major vascular invasion. The mean age was 57 ± 10 years. No patients underwent conversion to open surgery, and no blood transfusions were needed intraoperatively. The average operative duration and the average Pringle maneuver duration were 223 ± 65 min and 58 ± 11 min. respectively. The median blood loss was 200 ml (range: 100-800 ml). Postoperative morbidities occurred in 3 patients (15.8%), including 2 cases of bile leakage and 1 case of acquired pulmonary infection; there were no postoperative complications happened such as bleeding, hepatic failure, or mortality. The average postoperative hospital stay was 10 ± 3 days.

CONCLUSION

The optimized procedure of LCH using a parenchymal-first approach is not only feasible but also expected to provide an advantage in laparoscopic anatomical hepatectomy.

Minimally invasive mesohepatectomy for centrally located liver lesions-a case series

BACKGROUND

Resection of centrally located liver lesions remains a technically demanding procedure. To date, there are limited data on the effectiveness and safety of minimally invasive mesohepatectomy for benign and malignant lesions. It was therefore the objective of this study to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive mesohepatectomy for liver tumors at a tertiary care hospital.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent a minimally invasive anatomic mesohepatectomy using a Glissonean pedicle approach from April 2018 to November 2021 were identified from a prospective database. Demographics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics for continuous and categorical variables.

RESULTS

A total of ten patients were included, of whom five patients had hepatocellular carcinoma, one patient had cholangiocarcinoma, three patients had colorectal liver metastases, and one patient had a hydatid cyst. Two and eight patients underwent robotic-assisted and laparoscopic resections, respectively. The median operative time was 393 min (interquartile range (IQR) 298-573 min). Conversion to laparotomy was required in one case. The median lesion size was 60 mm and all cases had negative resection margins on final histopathological analysis. The median total blood loss was 550 ml (IQR 413-850 ml). One patient had a grade III complication. The median length of stay was 7 days (IQR 5-12 days). Time-to-functional recovery was achieved after a median of 2 days (IQR 1-4 days). There were no readmissions within 90 days after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive mesohepatectomy is a feasible and safe approach in selected patients with benign and malignant liver lesions.

Case Report: Robotically Assisted Excision of Cystic Tumor Located in a Difficult to Access Area in the Liver

Introduction: Cystic liver lesions may be benign cysts, parasitic infestations, or malignant tumors requiring surgical resection. Hilar location and relation to major vasculature present challenges in conventional surgical access and resection. Materials and Methods: We describe totally robotic excision of a cystadenoma in a 55-year-old woman without complication. Time points in the accompanying video (https://youtu.be/Tn_QPgpSHA4) are embedded within the text. Results: Advantages of the robotic technique lie in overcoming the natural restriction of conventional laparoscopic instruments, easier repair, and control of intraoperative vascular injuries using EndoWrist^® instruments, ergonomic dissection close to major vasculature and reduced intraoperative blood loss as dissection is easier. Discussion: Indications for robotic surgery included the large size of the cystic lesion, its intrahepatic location, and compression of the inferior vena cava (IVC) and right and middle hepatic veins. Had robotic removal of the lesion not been feasible, the entire lobe of the liver would have required resection.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The initiation, standardization and proficiency (ISP) phases of the learning curve for minimally invasive liver resection: comparison of a fellowship-trained surgeon with the pioneers and early adopters

BACKGROUND

Using the Ideal Development Exploration Assessment and Long-term study (IDEAL) paradigm, Halls et al. created risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) curves concluding that Pioneers (P) and Early Adopters (EA) of minimally invasive (MI) liver resection obtained similar results after fewer cases. In this study, we applied this framework to a MI Hepatic-Pancreatic and Biliary fellowship-trained surgeon (FT) in order to assess where along the curves this generation fell.

METHODS

The term FT was used to designate surgeons without previous independent operative experience who went from surgical residency directly into fellowship. Three phases of the learning curve were defined using published data on EAs and Ps of MI Hepatectomy, including phase 1 (initiation) (i.e., the first 17 or 50), phase 2 (standardization) (i.e., cases 18-46 or 1-50) and phase 3 (proficiency) (i.e., cases after 46, 50 or 135). Data analysis was performed using the Social Science Statistics software ( www.socscistatistics.com ). Statistical significance was defined as p < .05.

RESULTS

From November 2007 until April 2018, 95 MI hepatectomies were performed by a FT. During phase 1, the FT approached larger tumors than the EA group (p = 0.002), that were more often malignant (94.1%) when compared to the P group (52.5%) (p < 0.001). During phase 2, the FT operated on larger tumors and more malignancies (93.1%) when compared to the Ps (p = 0.004 and p = 0.017, respectively). However, there was no difference when compared to the EA. In the phase 3, the EAs tended to perform more major hepatectomies (58.7) when compared to either the FT (30.6%) (p = 0.002) or the P's cases 51-135 and after 135 (35.3% and 44.3%, respectively) (both p values < 0.001). When compared to the Ps cases from 51-135, the FT operated on more malignancies (p = 0.012), but this was no longer the case after 135 cases by the Ps (p = 0.164). There were no statistically significant differences when conversions; major complications or 30- and 90-day mortality were compared among these 3 groups.

DISCUSSION

Using the IDEAL framework and RA-CUSUM curves, a FT surgeon was found to have curves similar to EAs despite having no previous independent experience operating on the liver. As in our study, FTs may tend to approach larger and more malignant tumors and do more concomitant procedures in patients with higher ASA classifications than either of their predecessors, without statistically significant increases in major morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSION

It is possible that the ISP (i.e., initiation, standardization, proficiency) model could apply to other innovative surgical procedures, creating different learning curves depending on where along the IDEAL paradigm surgeons fall.

Robotic and laparoscopic liver resection-comparative experiences at a high-volume German academic center

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is a feasible and safe procedure for benign and malignant tumors. There has been an ongoing debate on whether conventional laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) or robotic liver resection (RLR) is superior and if one approach should be favored over the other. We started using LLR in 2010, and introduced RLR in 2013. In the present paper, we report on our experiences with these two techniques as early adopters in Germany.

METHODS

The data of patients who underwent MILS between 2010 and 2020 were collected prospectively in the Magdeburg Registry for Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery (MD-MILS). A retrospective analysis was performed regarding patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and perioperative parameters.

RESULTS

We identified 155 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Of these, 111 (71.6%) underwent LLR and 44 (29.4%) received RLR. After excluding cystic lesions, 113 cases were used for the analysis of perioperative parameters. Resected specimens were significantly bigger in the RLR vs. the LLR group (405 g vs. 169 g, p = 0.002); in addition, the tumor diameter was significantly larger in the RLR vs. the LLR group (5.6 cm vs. 3.7 cm, p = 0.001). Hence, the amount of major liver resections (three or more segments) was significantly higher in the RLR vs. the LLR group (39.0% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.005). The mean operative time was significantly longer in the RLR vs. the LLR group (331 min vs. 181 min, p = 0.0001). The postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in the RLR vs. the LLR group (13.4 vs. LLR 8.7 days, p = 0.03). The R0 resection rate for solid tumors was higher in the RLR vs. the LLR group but without statistical significance (93.8% vs. 87.9%, p = 0.48). The postoperative morbidity ≥ Clavien-Dindo grade 3 was 5.6% in the LLR vs. 17.1% in the RLR group (p = 0.1). No patient died in the RLR but two patients (2.8%) died in the LLR group, 30 and 90 days after surgery (p = 0.53).

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive liver surgery is safe and feasible. Robotic and laparoscopic liver surgery shows similar and adequate perioperative oncological results for selected patients. RLR might be advantageous for more advanced and technically challenging procedures.

Early versus late recurrence of centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma after mesohepatectomy: A cohort study based on the STROBE guidelines

The aim of this study was to investigate the features, treatment, and prognosis of early versus late recurrence of centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma (CL-HCC) after mesohepatectomy (MH).Three hundred forty eight patients with CL-HCC undergoing MH were included. Data on clinicopathological characteristics, initial surgical details, timing and sites of tumor recurrence, management after recurrence, and long-term outcomes were analyzed.The optimal cutoff value to differentiate early (71 patients, 64.5%) versus late (39, 35.5%) recurrence was defined as 12 months. Patients with early recurrence (ER) had higher alpha fetoprotein (AFP) level (P < .001), more advanced tumor stage (P = .024), and higher incidence of microvascular invasion (MVI, P = .001). Patients with ER had higher incidence of local tumor recurrence (P = .027) and higher average number of recurrent nodules (P = .016) than patients with LR. Patients after ER showed a better overall survival (from date of diagnosis of recurrence) than after late recurrence (LR). Patients with ER had less chances of curative treatment (14.1% vs 41.0%, P = .004) after tumor recurrence than patients with LR. Multivariable analyses revealed that liver cirrhosis (P < .001) and tumor differentiation (P < .001) were associated with an increased likelihood of LR, while multiple tumor number (P = .005), type IV classification (P = .012), and MVI (P < .001) were independent risk factors related to ER.ER and LR after MH for CL-HCC were associated with different risk predictors and prognosis. Data on the timing of recurrence may inform decisions about postoperative adjuvant treatment, as well as help to predict long-term survival for these patients.

Laparoscopic versus open mesohepatectomy for patients with centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic mesohepatectomy (LM) has been performed for patients with centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma (CL-HCC), its short- and long-term benefits compared with traditional open surgery remain unclear. The aim of the present study was to explore the independent role of LM in the prognosis of patients with CL-HCC.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was undertaken of 348 patients who underwent mesohepatectomy for CL-HCC between January 2012 and October 2017 in our hospital. The impact of the surgical methods on long-term prognosis was evaluated by multivariable regression analysis. In addition, patients in the LM group were matched in a 1:3 ratio with open mesohepatectomy (OM) group.

RESULTS

Some 307 patients underwent OM and 41 had LM. In both adjusted and non-adjusted models, patients in LM group had similar overall survival (OS, both P > 0.05) and disease-free survival (DFS, both P > 0.05) compared to OM patients. The mean (s.d.) OS in LM and OM groups was 41.6 (7.2) and 46.4 (1.4) months, respectively. The mean (s.d.) DFS in LM and OM groups was 37.7 (5.9) and 33.4 (1.5) months, respectively. After propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis, 96 patients remained in OM group and 32 patients in LM group. In the PSM subset, patients in LM group still had comparable OS (P = 0.120) and DFS (P = 0.757) compared to patients in the OM group. After PSM, patients receiving LM had longer vascular exclusion time (P = 0.006) and shorter hospital stay (P = 0.004). In addition, LM was associated with reduced postoperative morbidity after PSM adjustment (P = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

LM is associated with fewer complications and does not compromise survival compared with OM. LM can be recommended as a safe and reasonable surgical option in selected patients with CL-HCC.

Recurrence patterns after laparoscopic resection of colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

The major issue after liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is the high incidence of recurrence. Unlike open liver resection (OLR), recurrence following laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is not well documented. The aim of this study was to analyze recurrence patterns and treatment following LLR for CRLM.

STUDY DESIGN

All patients who underwent LLR for CRLM from 2000 to 2016 were reviewed. Patients who presented with recurrence were compared to those who did not. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and risk of recurrence and survival prognostic factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, 273 patients were included, of which 157 (57.5%) were treated for one liver metastasis (LM). Median follow-up was 41 (12-187) months and associated extrahepatic disease was present in 27% of patients (mainly pulmonary, 65%). After a median of 16 (3-151) months, 197 (72%) patients presented with recurrence. Recurrences were early (< 6 months) in 22.8% of cases, occured in a single site in 66% and were intrahepatic, extrahepatic, or both in 44, 30, and 26%, respectively. Recurrences were treated with surgery or chemotherapy only in 45 and 47%, respectively. 3-, 5-, and 10-year OS was 82, 71, and 43%, respectively. Independent risk factors for recurrence were node-positive primary tumor, extrahepatic disease before hepatectomy, and R1 resection.

CONCLUSION

LLR for CRLM does not seem to be associated with distinctive recurrence patterns. LLR for CRLM yielded satisfying RFS and OS and should therefore be considered whenever possible.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Patients with Large Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Case-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the expansion of laparoscopic approach in the treatment of liver tumors, limited data have been reported regarding large colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). This study aimed at assessing the short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for large (≥5 cm) CRLMs.

METHODS

This was a case-matched study (1:2) comparing patients with large (group L; ≥5 cm) and small (group S; <5 cm) CRLMs using demographic, tumor, and surgical characteristics as matching variables. Postoperative outcomes and survival data were compared in the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Forty patients who underwent LLR for large CRLMs were matched with 80 patients with tumors <5 cm. Major hepatectomy was performed with 75.0 % of patients in Group L and 66.3 % in group S (p = 0.403). Operative time was 300 min in group L and 240 min in group S (p = 0.059). The postoperative mortality and overall morbidity rates were comparable in the 2 groups (p = 1.000 and 0.170, respectively). Postoperative major complication (Dindo-Clavien ≥3) was similar between the two groups (p = 0.072). R0 resection was achieved in 92.5 % in the group L and in 95.0 % in the group S (p = 1.000). The 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival were better for group S than for group L (47.3 vs. 35.4 %, p = 0.044 and 27.3 vs. 14.9 %, p = 0.042, respectively). Multivariate analysis identified positive surgical margins and synchronous presentation as prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

Since LLR was performed safely with favorable oncological adequacy in selected patients with large CRLMs, tumor size should not modify the surgical approach.

Starting a new laparoscopic liver surgery program: initial experience and improved efficiency

BACKGROUND

Owing to the anatomic complexity of the liver and the risk of hemorrhage, most liver resections are still performed using an open procedure. We evaluated the outcomes of introducing a laparoscopic liver program to a community teaching hospital.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed laparoscopic liver resections performed between August 2010 and July 2013 at St. Joseph's Health Centre in Toronto. The primary outcomes were mortality, major morbidity and negative margins. Secondary outcomes included other perioperative outcomes. We used nonparametric tests to compare the outcomes during the first (group A) and second (group B) halves of the study period.

RESULTS

Group A included 19 patients and group B had 25 patients; 9 and 4 patients, respectively, had major resections. Group A had the only death due to liver failure. There was no difference in major complications (10.6% v. 16%) or length of stay (4.5 v. 4.6 d) between the groups. One patient in group B had a positive margin. There was a significant decrease in duration of surgery (from 237 to 170 min, p = 0.007), with a trend toward shorter duration for major resections (from 318 to 238 min, p = 0.07). Furthermore, more procedures were performed for malignancy in group B than group A (36.8% v. 84.0%, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resection can be safely introduced into a Canadian community teaching hospital. Average duration of surgery decreased by 67 minutes despite a 2-fold increase in the number of cases performed for malignancy.

Laparoscopic parenchymal-sparing liver resection of lesions in the central segments: feasible, safe, and effective

INTRODUCTION

Here we report the first systematic evaluation of laparoscopic parenchymal-sparing segmentectomies for the resection of lesions in the central liver segments and the first series of laparoscopic mesohepatectomies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 1995 to 2012, 482 laparoscopic hepatectomies were performed. Thirty-two patients underwent isolated resection of IVa and VIII, bisegmentectomies of IVa/IVb and V/VIII, or mesohepatectomy. Sixteen isolated resections of IVb or V were excluded. Data was extracted from a retrolective database and chart review. Complications were classified (Clavien-Dindo) by three independent surgeons. Seventeen patients had colorectal liver metastasis, four had neuroendocrine tumors, five had hepatocellular carcinoma, two had GIST, and one each had esophageal cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma. Fifteen patients underwent anatomic- and 17 non-anatomic wedge resection. Average blood loss was 403 cc (SD 475), and overall operative time was 183 (SD 106) for hepatectomy and 253 min (SD 94) for mesohepatectomies. Major complications were mainly attributable to synchronous procedures. Mortality, transfusion, and morbidity rates were 0, 12, and 37 %, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Parenchymal-sparing laparoscopic central liver resections and mesohepatectomies are feasible, safe, and effective if specific technical details we have learned over time are considered. Concomitant procedures should be an exception. This approach exhibits an alternative to open surgery while avoiding unnecessary sacrifice of functional parenchyma.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Influence of body mass index on postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing prevalence of obesity, the impact of body weight on postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) still remains poorly evaluated. The present study aimed to explore the impact of body mass index (BMI) on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing LLR.

STUDY DESIGN

All patients undergoing LLR from January 2008 to December 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. BMI was subdivided into normal weight (<24.9 kg/m(2)), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m(2)), and obese (≥30.0 kg/m(2)). These three groups were compared in terms of demographic data, intraoperative factors, and postoperative outcomes. Logistic regression was used to determine odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals and evaluate BMI as an independent risk factor for morbidity.

RESULTS

Among 228 selected patients, 83 (36.4%) patients were overweight and 32 (14.0%) were obese. Despite higher rates of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and ischemic heart disease with an increase in BMI, no significant difference in operative time, blood loss, and conversion rate was observed in the three groups. There were no significant differences in postoperative mortality rate between the groups (0.9 vs. 1.2 vs. 0%). The rate of overall complications (31.0 vs. 31.3 vs. 40.6%) and major complications (14.2 vs. 9.6 vs. 18.8%) did not differ in the three groups. Major hepatectomy (HR 6.810, CI 1.437-32.267, p = 0.016) and operative time >180 min (HR 2.639, CI 1.179-5.908, p = 0.018) were independently associated with postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrated that BMI does not negatively affect the postoperative short-term outcomes. Therefore, obesity and overweight should not be a contraindication for LLR.

Risk factors for complications after laparoscopic major hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic major hepatectomy (MH) is becoming increasingly common in several specialized centres, data regarding outcomes are limited. The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for postoperative complications of purely laparoscopic MH at a single centre.

METHODS

All patients who underwent purely laparoscopic MH between January 1998 and March 2014 at the authors' institution were enrolled. Demographic, clinicopathological and perioperative factors were collected prospectively, and data were analysed retrospectively. The dependent variables studied were the occurrence of overall and major complications (Dindo-Clavien grade III or above).

RESULTS

A total of 183 patients were enrolled. The types of MH included left-sided hepatectomy in 40 patients (21·9 per cent), right-sided hepatectomy in 135 (73·8 per cent) and central hepatectomy in eight (4·4 per cent). Median duration of surgery was 255 (range 100-540) min, and median blood loss was 280 (10-4500) ml. Complications occurred in 100 patients (54·6 per cent), and the 90-day all-cause mortality rate was 2·7 per cent. Liver-specific and general complications occurred in 62 (33·9 per cent) and 38 (20·8 per cent) patients respectively. Multivariable analysis identified one independent risk factor for global postoperative complications: intraoperative simultaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (odds ratio (OR) 6·93, 95 per cent c.i. 1·49 to 32·14; P = 0·013). There were two independent risk factors for major complications: intraoperative blood transfusion (OR 2·50, 1·01 to 6·23; P = 0·049) and bilobar resection (OR 2·47, 1·00 to 6·06; P = 0·049).

CONCLUSION

Purely laparoscopic MH is feasible and safe. Simultaneous RFA and bilobar resection should probably be avoided.

Totally laparoscopic right hepatectomy combined with resection of the inferior vena cava by anterior approach

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy has become a standard procedure for laparoscopic resection in specialized centers;1-6 however, tumor involvement of the inferior vena cava (IVC) is still considered a contraindication. Here, we describe a safe technique of totally laparoscopic extended right hepatectomy to segment 1 combined with IVC resection using an anterior approach.

METHODS

We performed 61 totally laparoscopic right hepatectomies by an anterior approach between January 2009 and April 2014. The video illustrates this procedure in a 58-year-old female with bilateral colorectal liver metastases involving the right-anterior wall of the retrohepatic IVC. Right hepatectomy was performed by initial hilar dissection and ligation of vascular inflow followed by division of the hepatic parenchyma with en-bloc segmentectomy 1, to expose the left side of the retrohepatic IVC. The right hepatic vein was divided using an endoscopic vascular stapler. As the involved portion of IVC could be isolated with the application of a single vascular clamp, the right IVC wall was divided using an endoscopic stapler. Thereafter, posterior mobilization of the right liver was performed.

RESULTS

The surgical duration was 270 min and blood loss was 50 mL. The postoperative period was uneventful, and the patient was discharged 9 days after surgery. Histopathological examination confirmed the presence of a colorectal metastasis with tumor-free margin.

CONCLUSION

We devised a secure procedure to perform totally laparoscopic right hepatectomy combined with IVC resection using an anterior approach; this may be a safe and useful technique to perform laparoscopic right hepatectomy.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases in elderly patients: a single-center, case-matched study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) among elderly patients has increased; therefore, older patients are increasingly being considered for hepatic resection. However, data regarding the outcome of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) in elderly patients are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LMH in elderly patients with CRLM.

METHODS

From January 1998 to September 2013, a total of 31 patients aged ≥ 70 years (elderly group) were matched with 62 patients < 70 years (young group) by demographics, tumor characteristics, and details of surgical procedures.

RESULTS

The elderly group was characterized by a higher incidence of hypertension (41.9 vs. 17.7 %, P = 0.022), ≥ 2 comorbidities (32.3 vs. 11.3 %, P = 0.021), and lower prevalence of metastatic rectal cancer (12.9 vs. 38.7 %, P = 0.015). Intraoperative variables, such as surgical duration (300 vs. 240 min, P = 0.920), blood loss (400 vs. 300 mL, P = 0.361), and transfusion rate (9.7 vs. 12.9 %, P = 0.726), were not notably different between the groups. Postoperative mortality (0 vs. 0 %), complications (54.8 vs. 41.9 %, P = 0.276), and major complications (27.4 vs. 16.1 %, P = 0.303, respectively) were comparable between the groups. The 3-year overall survival rates were 61.7 % in the young group (median 40 months) and 57.9 % in the elderly group (median 39 months), respectively (P = 0.842).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results clearly demonstrated that LMH for CRLM could be safely performed in elderly patients; thus, advanced age itself should not be regarded as a contraindication for LMH.

Synchronous resections of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis by laparoscopic approach

Liver metastasis of colorectal cancer is common. Resection of solitary tumors of primary and metastatic colorectal cancer can have a favorable outcome. Open resection of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis in one operation or in separate operations is currently common practice. Reports have shown that synchronous resections do not jeopardize short or long-term surgical outcomes and that this is a safe and effective approach in open surgery. The development of laparoscopic colorectal surgery and laparoscopic hepatectomy has made a minimally invasive surgical approach to treating colorectal cancer with liver metastasis feasible. Synchronous resections of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis by laparoscopy have recently been reported. The efficacy and safety of laparoscopic colorectal resection and laparoscopic hepatectomy have been proven separately but synchronous resections by laparoscopy are in hot debate. As it has been shown that open resection of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis in one operation results in an equally good short-term outcome when compared with that done in separate operations, laparoscopic resection of the same in one single operation seems to be a good option. Recent evidence has shown that this new approach is a safe alternative with a shorter hospital stay. Large scale randomized controlled trials are needed to demonstrate the effectiveness of this minimally invasive approach.

Minimally invasive approaches to extrapancreatic cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Due to the perceived difficulty in dissecting gallbladder cancers and extrapancreatic cholangiocarcinomas off of the portal structures and in performing complex biliary reconstructions, very few centers have used minimally invasive techniques to remove these tumors. Furthermore, due to the relative rarity of these tumors when compared to hepatocellular carcinoma, only a few reports have focused on short- and long-term results.

METHODS

We performed a review by combining the experience of three international centers with expertise in complex minimally invasive hepatobiliary surgery. Patients were entered into a database prospectively. All patients with gallbladder cancer and cholangiocarcinoma were analyzed; patients with distal cholangiocarcinomas who underwent laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomies were excluded. Patients were divided according to if they had gallbladder cancer, hilar cholangiocarcinoma, or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

RESULTS

A total of 15 patients underwent laparoscopic resection for gallbladder cancer and 10 for preoperatively suspected gallbladder cancer, and 5 underwent laparoscopic completion procedures. An average of four lymph nodes (range = 1-11) were retrieved and all patients had an R0 resection. One patient (7 %) required conversion to an open procedure. No patients developed a biliary fistula, required percutaneous drainage, or had endoscopic stent placement. One patient had a recurrence at 3 months despite a negative final pathological margin, and a second patient had a distant recurrence at 20 months with a mean follow-up of 23 months. Nine patients underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. All anastomoses were completed laparoscopically. Biliary fistula was seen in two patients, one of which died after a transhepatic percutaneous biliary drain resulted in uncontrollable intra-abdominal hemorrhage despite reoperation. A third patient developed a pulmonary embolism. Thus, the morbidity and mortality rates were 33 and 11 %, respectively. One patient was converted to open and six patients (66 %) are alive with a median follow-up of 22 months. Five patients underwent minimally invasive resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma; of these, two also required laparoscopic major hepatectomy. The mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 240 mL (range = 0-400 mL) and the median length of stay (LOS) was 15 days (range = 11-21 days). All patients are alive with a median follow-up of 11 months (range = 3-18 months). None of the 29 patients developed port site recurrences.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive approaches to gallbladder cancer and intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma seem feasible and safe in the short term. Larger series with longer follow-up are needed to see if there are any long-term disadvantages or advantages to laparoscopic resection of extrapancreatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Adopting Gayet's Techniques of Totally Laparoscopic Liver Surgery in the United States

Professor Brice Gayet of the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris in Paris, France, has developed totally laparoscopic techniques for all segments of the liver. As a pioneer in the field of minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery, he started a Minimally Invasive Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Fellowship in 2006. A retrospective review of all hepatic cases performed by a single surgeon since completing this Fellowship was undertaken. From November 2007 to October 2012, a total of 80 liver resections were done, of which 73 were begun with the intention of completing the case laparoscopically. Of these, more than 90% were completed laparoscopically and 88% were for malignant disease. One of the foundations of Professor Gayet's techniques is the low lithotomy or 'French' position and the utilization of a small robotically controlled laparoscope holder that is sterilizeable and considerably more economic than complete surgical systems. Prototypes exist of robotically controlled hand-held laparoscopic instruments that, unlike the complete surgical system, enable surgeons to maintain a sense of touch (haptics). Proper training in minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary techniques can be obtained with surgeons able to independently perform laparoscopic major hepatectomies without senior minimally invasive backup. Furthermore, miniature and more affordable robotics may enable more surgeons to enjoy the benefits of minimally invasive surgery while maintaining patient safety and minimizing the rising burden of health-care costs worldwide.

Total laparoscopic limited anatomical resection for centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic liver

Background

Limited anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is complicated in cirrhotic patients with centrally located HCC and limited liver reserve. We present a case of total laparoscopic left medial and right ventroanterior sectionectomy performed using the intrahepatic Glissonian approach in a cirrhotic liver for curative resection of HCC.

Methods

The patient was a 69-year-old man with a 6.5-cm-diameter HCC located at segments 4, 5, and 8 and which was compressing the middle hepatic vein (MHV). Child–Pugh class A liver cirrhosis was noted, and the 15-min retention rate for indocyanine green was 14 %. Preoperative surgical planning suggested the feasibility of limited anatomical subsegmental resection. The patient was placed in the supine position and 5 trocars were used for the procedure. The operation began with cholecystectomy, division of liver ligaments, and exposure of the right hepatic vein root and the umbilical Glissonian pedicles to the left medial segment. Parenchymal transection was performed using a laparoscopic harmonic scalpel and Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator until the MHV was reached. After exposing the ventral branches of the right anterior Glissonian pedicle and dividing them, resection was continued along the demarcation line. Fissure veins draining to the MHV root were identified and divided. The MHV root was closed using an automatic stapler.

Results

The operation time was 565 min and estimated blood loss was 665 ml; blood transfusion was not required. Pathological examination confirmed a moderately differentiated HCC with all resected margins free of malignancy. Postoperative recovery was uneventful and the patient was discharged on the postoperative day 7. There was no tumor recurrence 18 months after the operation.

Conclusions

Total laparoscopic left medial and right ventroanterior sectionectomy via the intrahepatic Glissonian approach is feasible for HCC in a cirrhotic liver with limited liver reserve. Preoperative planning is essential in order to compute successful hepatic function. Standardization of surgical techniques may aid in safely performing this procedure.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00464-012-2624-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Minimally invasive liver resection: robotic versus laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLS).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was made comparing robotic (n = 11) and laparoscopic (n = 18) LLS performed at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between January 2009 and July 2011. Demographic data, operative, and postoperative outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

Demographic and tumor characteristics of robotic and laparoscopic LLS were similar. There were also no significant differences in operative outcomes including estimated blood loss and operating room time. Patients undergoing robotic LLS had more admissions to the ICU (46 versus 6 %), increased rate of minor complications (27 versus 0 %), and longer lengths of stay (4 versus 3 days). There were no significant differences in major complication rates or 90-day mortality. The cost of robotic and laparoscopic LLS was not significantly different when only considering direct costs ($5,130 versus $4,408, p = 0.401). However, robotic LLS costs were significantly greater when including indirect costs, which were estimated to be $1,423 per robotic case ($6,553 versus $4,408, p = 0.021).

DISCUSSION

Robotic LLS yields slightly inferior clinical outcomes and increased cost compared to the laparoscopic approach.

Minimally invasive evaluation and treatment of colorectal liver metastases

Minimally invasive techniques used in the evaluation and treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) include ultrasonography (US), computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, percutaneous and operative ablation therapy, standard laparoscopic techniques, robotic techniques, and experimental techniques of natural orifice endoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic techniques range from simple staging laparoscopy with or without laparoscopic intraoperative US, through intermediate techniques including simple liver resections (LRs), to advanced techniques such as major hepatectomies. Hereins, we review minimally invasive evaluation and treatment of CRLM, focusing on a comparison of open LR (OLR) and minimally invasive LR (MILR). Although there are no randomized trials comparing OLR and MILR, nonrandomized data suggest that MILR compares favorably with OLR regarding morbidity, mortality, LOS, and cost, although significant selection bias exists. The future of MILR will likely include expanding criteria for resectability of CRLM and should include both a patient registry and a formalized process for surgeon training and credentialing.

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy with intrahepatic transection of the right bile duct

BACKGROUND

Although our earlier videos demonstrated extrahepatic control of the hepatic arterial, portal venous, and biliary system, we have begun transecting the biliary system intraparenchymally for lesions distant from hilar plate and the confluence of the right and left hepatic ducts.1 (-) 3

METHODS

The patient was a 50-year old gentleman with synchronous colorectal hepatic metastasis, who underwent 6 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a Folfox-based regimen followed by laparoscopic right hepatectomy plus wedge resection of segment 4 and microwave ablation for a lesion in segment 2. This was followed 1 month later by laparoscopic proctocolectomy. Of note, the patient was also treated with Avastin for 1 month, which was stopped 2 months prior to his liver surgery. Pneumoperitoneum was obtained with the Veress needed; alternatively, the open technique may need to be used in patients who have undergone previous surgery. A 12-mm blunt tip balloon trocar was placed approximately 1 hand-breadth below the right costal margin. Two 12-mm working trocars were placed to the left and right of this optic trocar, and trocars were then placed in the left sub xiphoid region and in the right flank for the assistants. The right hepatic artery was triply clipped proximally and twice distally prior to being sharply transected. The right hepatic portal vein was then transected using a laparoscopic vascular GIA stapler device (TriStapler, Covidien, Norwalk, CT). The anterior surface of the liver was examined, and there was a clear line of demarcation along Cantlie's line. Using the ultrasonic shears (Harmonic Scalpel, Ethicon, Cincinnati, OH), the liver parenchyma was then transected. In the area of the right hepatic duct, the liver parenchyma was transected with a single firing of the laparoscopic GIA vascular stapler device. The right hepatic vein was then identified and similarly transected with a single firing of the laparoscopic vascular GIA stapler device. Hemostasis along the hepatic parenchyma was reinforced with the laparoscopic bipolar device. The two trocars on the right of the patient are connected into 1 incision, and a gel port is placed to facilitate removal of the specimen; alternatively, an old incision can be used. For patients who will need a laparoscopic or open colectomy, a lower midline incision is made.

RESULTS

From Jan 2009 to Oct 2010, 13 patients underwent right hepatectomy. The average age was 63.5 years (range, 46-87 years). The indication for surgery were all for cancer including 11 colorectal metastasis, 1 anal cancer metastasis, and 1 cholangiocarcinoma. In these 13 patients, 1 patient (7.7%) required conversion to an open approach because of bleeding, 1 additional patient required laparoscopic hand assistance, and the remaining patients were completed laparoscopically. There were no surgical mortalities at 30 or 90 days. Complications occurred in 2 (15%) patients, and included 1 patient who was converted to an open procedure because of hemorrhage and was complicated by a bile leak; the second patient with complication also developed a 1-bile leak, both of which responded to percutaneous treatments. The mean hospital stay was 7.7 days (range, 5-17 days). The mean operative time was 401 min (range, 220-600 min). The mean estimated blood loss was 878 cm(3) (range, 100-3,000 cm(3)). All patients underwent an R0 resection.

DISCUSSION

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is feasible. As in open hepatectomies, intrahepatic transection of the right bile duct may be safer because there is a decreased risk of injury to the left hepatic duct.4 (,) 5 Larger series with longer-term follow-up are necessary.

Initial experience with laparoscopic hepatic resection at a comprehensive cancer center

BACKGROUND

Over the past few years, surgeons have been able to obtain training in advanced minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for hepatic, pancreatic, and biliary (HPB) cases instead of having to teach themselves these complex techniques. As a result, the initial experience of a surgeon with advanced MIS HPB training at a national cancer center was reviewed.

METHODS

The experience of a surgeon with the first 50 laparoscopic hepatectomies for cancer was reviewed retrospectively. All cases begun with the intention to complete the hepatectomy laparoscopically were included in the laparoscopic group.

RESULTS

From November 2008 to October 2010, a total of 57 hepatectomies were performed, with 53 attempted laparoscopically. Of these 57 hepatectomies, 46 (87%) were completed laparoscopically, 4 (7%) required hand assistance, and 3 (6%) were converted to an open approach. Laparoscopic minor hepatectomies were performed for 28 patients and laparoscopic major hepatectomies for 25 patients. The mean operative time was 265 min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 300 ml. The mean hospital stay was 7 days. Complications occurred for six patients (11%) (2 bile leaks, 2 hemorrhages requiring conversion, 1 hernia requiring a hernia repair on postoperative day 7, and 1 ileus managed nonoperatively).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons with advanced MIS HPB training may be able to perform a higher percentage of their hepatectomies laparoscopically. Training in both open and laparoscopic HPB surgery is advisable before these techniques are performed.

[Current state of laparoscopic hepatic surgery: results of a survey of DGAV-members]

BACKGROUND

To date laparoscopic hepatic surgery is only common in a few centres for a specific selected patient group. The intention of this survey was to estimate the current state of affairs for laparoscopic hepatic surgery in Germany at 2008.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire was prepared and sent out by e-mail in May 2009 to the members of the DGAV (German Society of General and Visceral Surgery). The feedback was evaluated anonymously.

RESULTS

A total of 181 answers were received by 31st July 2009 (return rate of 15.9%). The return rate of basic and standard care hospitals was 9.2%, specialized hospitals 23.6%, hospitals with maximum care 50% and university hospitals had a return rate of 71.9%. The question whether laparoscopic hepatic surgery had been performed in 2008 was answered with YES by 125 (69.1%) and NO by 54 (29.8%) members. The number of laparoscopic hepatic surgery interventions (laparoscopic ultrasound, laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation and resection) in 2008 was given as more than 50 by 4 (2.2%) hospitals, between 20 and 50 by 11 (6.1%) hospitals, between 10 and 20 by 23 (12.7%) hospitals, between 5 and 10 by 45 (24.9%) hospitals and between 0 and 5 by 54 (29.8%) hospitals. In 2008 the frequency of laparoscopic ultrasound during intraoperative staging to confirm the diagnosis ranged from 2 to 250, whereby 96.4% of the hospitals had less than 50 and only 2 hospitals (2.7%) had 211 and 250 examinations, respectively. 50 hospitals carried out laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (RFA). 69 (38.1%) of the interviewed hospitals reported hepatic laparoscopic resections (n=551).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver surgery has been done in Germany in patients with benign or malignant liver lesions. Pure laparoscopy is the most common access. Atypical resections are the primarily indication followed by left lateral resections. All further types of resection have been done in a very small number. Laparoscopic liver surgery has been performed in all types of hospitals.

Laparoscopic left hepatectomy for liver metastases at a national cancer center

This video describes the techniques necessary to perform left hepatectomy (including removal of hepatic segments I-IV) for secondary cancers using totally laparoscopic techniques. Extra-parenchymal control of hepatic inflow will be emphasized. Methods of hepatic parenchymal transection using the ultrasonic shears and laparoscopic bipolar device will be shown. Short-term oncologic outcomes regarding margin status and lymph node retrieval will be discussed. These procedures should currently be performed in high-volume cancer centers with expertise in minimally invasive techniques.

Glissonian approach for laparoscopic mesohepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Experience with advanced techniques has increased the indications for laparoscopic liver resection. This video demonstrates technical aspects of a pure laparoscopic mesohepatectomy using intrahepatic Glissonian technique. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of anatomic laparoscopic mesohepatectomy using the Glissonian approach published in the English literature.

METHODS

A 62-year-old man with colorectal liver metastasis occupying central liver segments was referred for surgical treatment. The first step is the control of segment 4 pedicle. Using the round ligament as a guide, one incision is performed on its right margin and another is made at the bottom of segment 4. A vascular clamp is introduced through those incisions to occlude segment 4 Glissonian sheath. The next step is to control the right anterior pedicle. The first incision is made in front of the hilum and another is performed on the right edge of gallbladder bed. Laparoscopic clamp is introduced through these incisions and closed producing ischemic discoloration of segments 5 and 8. Vascular clamp is replaced by an endoscopic vascular stapling device and stapler is fired. Line of liver transection is marked along the liver surface following ischemic area. Liver transection is accomplished with bipolar vessel sealing device and endoscopic stapling device as appropriate. Specimen was extracted through a suprapubic incision. Liver raw surfaces were reviewed for bleeding and bile leaks.

RESULTS

Operative time was 200 min with minimum blood loss and no need for blood transfusion. Recovery was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on the fifth postoperative day. Histological examination revealed clear surgical margins.

CONCLUSIONS

Mesohepatectomy can be safely performed laparoscopically in selected patients and by surgeons with expertise in both liver surgery and laparoscopic techniques. The use of the intrahepatic Glissonian approach may help to identify the exact limits of the mesohepatectomy to avoid ischemic injury of the remnant liver.

Totally laparoscopic central bisectionectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma

A central bisectionectomy of the liver removes segments 4, 5, and 8, and this is a technically demanding operation because it requires two transection planes. Until now, the laparoscopic approach for this operative procedure has been rarely attempted. We report in this article on a totally laparoscopic central bisectionectomy that was performed in a 49-year-old male who had centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and this tumor was in contact with the middle hepatic vein. The operative procedure was performed by using five trocars with the patient placed in the lithotomy position. The operative time was 430 minutes, the estimated blood loss was about 800 mL, and no perioperative transfusion was needed. The postoperative pathology confirmed a HCC with a 1-cm free resection margin. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 13 without any significant complications. This case shows the feasibility and safety of performing the totally laparoscopic central bisectionectomy for resecting HCC.

Total laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma located in all segments of the liver

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is still not a well-established treatment modality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Moreover, most reported cases have been limited to tumors in the anterolateral (AL) segments (segments 2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6). We evaluated clinical and oncologic outcomes after LLR for HCC located in all segments, including lesions located in the posterosuperior (PS) segments (segments 1, 4a, 7, and 8).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 69 patients who had undergone LLR for HCC between September 2003 and November 2008. The patients were divided into two groups (group AL and group PS) according to tumor location. The clinical data of the two groups were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULT

There was no postoperative mortality. Fifteen patients (21.7%) experienced 19 postoperative complications. During a median follow-up period of 21.3 months, recurrence was detected in 21 (30.4%) patients. The 3-year overall survival rate and disease-free survival rate were 90.4 and 60.4%, respectively. There was no difference in clinicopathologic characteristics between the two groups except for a male predominance in group PS (p = 0.021) and that there were more patients with thrombocytopenia in group AL (p = 0.001). Although group PS patients had longer operative time (p = 0.001) and longer postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.039), along with a tendency toward a higher rate of open conversion (p = 0.054) and greater blood loss (p = 0.068), there was no significant difference in rates of postoperative complications (p = 0.375), recurrence (p = 0.740), 3-year overall survival (p = 0.237) or disease-free survival (p = 0.411) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience shows that LLR can be safely performed in selected patients with HCC located in all segments of the liver, including the posterosuperior segments, with acceptable postoperative morbidity and oncologic results.

Comparing the clinical and economic impact of laparoscopic versus open liver resection

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has thus far not gained widespread acceptance among liver surgeons. Valid questions remain regarding the relative clinical superiority of the laparoscopic approach as well as whether laparoscopic hepatectomy carries any economic benefit compared with open liver surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work is to compare the clinical and economic impact of laparoscopic versus open left lateral sectionectomy (LLS).

METHODS

Between May 2002 and July 2008, 44 laparoscopic LLS and 29 open LLS were included in the analysis. Deviation-based cost modeling (DBCM) was utilized to compare the combined clinical and economic impact of the open and laparoscopic approaches.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic approach compared favorably with the open approach from both a clinical and economic standpoint. Not only was the median length of stay (LOS) shorter by 2 days in the laparoscopic group (3 versus 5 days, respectively, P = 0.001), but the laparoscopic cohort also benefited from a significant reduction in postoperative morbidity (P = 0.001). Because the groups differed significantly in age and ratio of benign to malignant disease, a subgroup analysis limited to patients with malignant disease was undertaken. The same reduction in LOS and postoperative morbidity was evident within the malignant subgroup undergoing laparoscopic LLS (P = 0.003). The economic impact of the laparoscopic approach was noteworthy, with the laparoscopic approach US$1,527-2,939 more cost efficient per patient compared with the open technique.

CONCLUSION

Our study seems not only to corroborate the safety and clinical benefit of the laparoscopic approach but also suggests a fiscally important cost advantage for the minimally invasive approach.

Oncologic results of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases in two specialized centers

OBJECTIVE

Compare oncologic results of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for resection of colorectal metastases to the liver.

SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA

Open hepatectomy (OH) is the current standard of care for the management of colorectal liver metastases. Although the feasibility of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has been established, only select centers have used this technique as their primary modality. At present there is no study comparing the oncologic outcomes for colorectal liver metastases patients undergoing LH versus OH.

METHODS

Two groups composed of 60 patients each were obtained from 2 specialized liver units performing either OH or LH as their primary modality. Cohorts of 215 LH cases and 1783 OH were used to establish the study population. Patients were compared on an intention to treat basis using 9 preoperative prognostic criteria obtained from LiverMetSurvey. These included sex, age, primary tumor localization, number of tumors, diameter of tumor, distribution of metastases, presence of extrahepatic disease, initial respectability, and the use of prehepatectomy chemotherapy. Overall survival and disease-free survival were compared between OH and LH for a follow-up of 36 months.

RESULTS

The median follow-up for the LH group is 30 months and 33 months for the OH group (P = 0.75). One-, 3-, and 5-year patient survival for LH was 97%, 82%, and 64% and 97%, 70%, and 56% in the OH group, respectively (P = 0.32). One-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival was 70%, 47%, and 35% and 70%, 40%, and 27% (P = 0.32), respectively for the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

In a highly specialized center, first line application of laparoscopic liver resection in selected patients can provide comparable oncologic results to treatment with open liver resection for patients with colorectal liver metastases.

World review of laparoscopic liver resection-2,804 patients

OBJECTIVE

To provide a review of the world literature on laparoscopic liver resection.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Initially described for peripheral, benign tumors resected by nonanatomic wedge resections, minimally invasive liver resections are now being performed more frequently, even for larger, malignant tumors located in challenging locations. Although a few small review articles have been reported, a comprehensive review on laparoscopic liver resection has not been published.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search using Pubmed, screening all English publications on laparoscopic liver resections. All data were analyzed and apparent case duplications in updated series were excluded from the total number of patients. Tumor type, operative characteristics, perioperative morbidity, and oncologic outcomes were tabulated.

RESULTS

A total of 127 published articles of original series on laparoscopic liver resection were identified, and accounted for 2,804 reported minimally invasive liver resections. Fifty percent were for malignant tumors, 45% were for benign lesions, 1.7% were for live donor hepatectomies, and the rest were indeterminate. Of the resections, 75% were performed totally laparoscopically, 17% were hand-assisted, and 2% were laparoscopic-assisted open hepatic resection (hybrid) technique, with the remainder being other techniques or conversions to open hepatectomies. The most common laparoscopic liver resection was a wedge resection or segmentectomy (45%) followed by anatomic left lateral sectionectomy (20%), right hepatectomy (9%), and left hepatectomy (7%). Conversion from laparoscopy to open laparotomy and from laparoscopy to hand-assisted approach occurred in 4.1% and 0.7% of reported cases, respectively. Overall mortality was 9 of 2,804 patients (0.3%), and morbidity was 10.5%, with no intraoperative deaths reported. The most common cause of postoperative death was liver failure. Postoperative bile leak was observed in 1.5% of cases. For cancer resections, negative surgical margins were achieved in 82% to 100% of reported series. The 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates after laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma were 50% to 75% and 31% to 38.2%, respectively. The 3-year overall and disease-free survival rates after laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal metastasis to the liver were 80% to 87% and 51%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, laparoscopic liver resections are safe with acceptable morbidity and mortality for both minor and major hepatic resections. Oncologically, 3- and 5-year survival rates reported for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal cancer metastases are comparable to open hepatic resection, albeit in a selected group of patients.

Laparoscopic liver surgery

Great advances have occurred in the field of laparoscopic hepatic surgery. It is now clear that in experienced hands, the laparoscopic method of liver resection is as safe as an open procedure. The key phrase in this last sentence is "in experienced hands". The new devices that are available might make an inexperienced hepatic surgeon, well-trained in laparoscopic surgery, embark on hepatic resection without thorough knowledge of hepatic anatomy. The converse may also be true. As no criteria for credentialing of laparoscopic hepatic surgeons exist, the decision as to who is sufficiently trained to perform these procedures is left to individual hospital credentialing boards. While a certification procedure defined by leaders in this field and supported by surgical societies would be welcomed, the ability to achieve and enforce these guidelines appear to be more of a challenge. In addition, while most comparison studies in this area conclude by suggesting that a randomized, clinical trial would be needed to definitively arrive at an answer regarding the benefits of minimally invasive liver surgery compared with open surgery, it would likely be extremely difficult to accrue patients, given the data presented in articles regarding the success of laparoscopic hepatic resections. The authors conclude that an internationalregistry of all laparoscopic cases should b e established to insure patient safety and a mechanism for self-monitoring.

Early experience with single incision transumbilical laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding using the SILS Port

BACKGROUND

The rapid progression of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) into the realm of advanced surgical procedures has been fueled in recent years by the development of flexible instrumentation necessary to restore triangulation lost in the divergent nature of this approach, and multichannel ports that addressed the challenges regarding the limited range of movement of trocars in close proximity. We herein are reporting our early experience using the SILS Port to perform single incision transumbilical laparoscopic gastric banding in five of our patients.

METHODS

Five carefully selected female patients (body mass indices between 35 and 45kg/m(2) with peripheral obesity) underwent laparoscopic gastric banding using this single incision transumbilical technique. The same surgeon performed all surgical interventions. For all five patients, the same perioperative protocol and operative techniques were implemented.

RESULTS

A total of five single incision transumbilical laparoscopic gastric banding procedures were successfully performed using this technique. Mean operative time was 111min. There were no mortalities or postoperative complications noted during the mean follow-up period of 1.5 months.

CONCLUSION

Single incision transumbilical laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding using SILS Port is a safe and feasible evolving approach. The intraumbilical location of the implanted port facilitates access for subsequent adjustments and provides patients with an improved cosmetic outcome.

Transumbilical Gelport access technique for performing single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS)

INTRODUCTION

Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is an area of active research within general surgery.

DISCUSSION

A number of procedures, including cholecystectomy, appendectomy, urologic procedures, adrenalectomy, and bariatric procedures, are currently being performed with this methodology. There is, as yet, no standard published technique for single-port access to the peritoneal cavity for SILS. We describe, herein, an access technique utilizing existing instrumentation including a Gelport and wound retractor that is reliable and easy. This technique has been used successfully at our institution for a number of single incision laparoscopic procedures.

The current role of laparoscopic liver resection for the treatment of liver tumors

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) represents a natural extension of minimally invasive surgery. Several case-control studies have demonstrated that LLR is safe and feasible in carefully selected patients. LLR is associated with reduced operative blood loss and earlier recovery when compared with open surgery. In addition, oncologic clearance achieved with LLR is comparable to that achieved with open surgery. Improved cosmesis and postoperative patient comfort also argue in favor of LLR compared with open surgery. When considering whether a patient is suitable for LLR, the size and location of the neoplasm must be taken into account. Operator experience must also be considered as LLR is technically demanding and requires experience in conventional hepatobiliary surgery and advanced laparoscopy. The main indication for LLR is limited resection of superficial or peripherally located tumors. In the case of malignant tumors, LLR should be indicated only if a safe and effective oncologic resection can be performed, and the availability of laparoscopy should not change the indications for benign lesions. Ultimately, the future application of LLR will depend on how easily liver surgeons can master the technique and whether the long-term results of LLR can match those achieved with open resection.