Totally laparoscopic extended left hepatectomy

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic extended hepatectomy versus major hepatectomy: a single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) remains restricted to a few specialized centers and poses a challenge to surgeons performing laparoscopic resections. Laparoscopic extended resections are even more complex and rarely conducted.

METHODS

From a single-institution database, we compared the short-term outcomes of patients who underwent major and extended laparoscopic resections, stratifying the entire retrospective cohort into four groups: right hepatectomy, left hepatectomy, right extended hepatectomy, and left extended hepatectomy. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, operative variables, and especially postoperative outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

250 patients underwent major and extended laparoscopic liver resections, including 160 right, 31 right extended, 36 left, and 23 left extended laparoscopic hepatectomies. The most common indication for resection was colorectal liver metastases (64%). Laparoscopic extended hepatectomy (LEH) showed significantly longer operative time, more blood loss, need for Pringle maneuver, conversion to open surgery, higher rates of liver failure, postoperative ascites, and intra-abdominal hemorrhage, R1 margins and length of stay when compared with the LMH group. Mortality rates were similar between groups. Multivariate analysis revealed intraoperative blood transfusion (OR = 5.1[CI-95%: 1.15-6.79]; p = 0.02) as an independent predictor for major complications.

CONCLUSIONS

LEH showed to be feasible, however with higher blood loss and significantly associated to major complications.

Predictors of discharge timing and unplanned readmission after laparoscopic liver resection

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to determine the predictors of discharge timing and 90-day unplanned readmission after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

METHODS

Consecutive LLR performed at the "Institut Mutualiste Montsouris" between 2000 and 2019 were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Length of stay (LOS) was stratified according to surgical difficulty and was categorized as early (LOS<25th percentile), routine (25th percentile<75th percentile), and delayed discharge otherwise. Uni-and-multivariate analyses were conducted to determine the factors associated with the time of discharge and 90-day unplanned readmission.

RESULTS

Early discharge occurred in 15.7% patients whereas delayed discharge occurred in 20.6% patients. Concomitant pancreatic resections (OR 26.8, 95% CI 5.75-125, p < 0.0001) and removal of colorectal primary tumors (OR 7.14, 95% CI 3.98-12.8, p < 0.0001) were the strongest predictors of delayed discharge whereas ERP implementation was the strongest predictor of early discharge (OR 7.4, 95% CI 4.60-11.9, p < 0.0001). Unplanned readmission rate was lower among early discharged patients (7.4% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.0001). Bile leakage was the strongest predictor of 90-day unplanned readmission (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.12-15.8, p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Concomitant colorectal or pancreatic resections were the strongest predictors of delayed discharge. Postoperative bile leakage was the strongest predictor of 90-day unplanned readmission following LLR.

Study: International Multicentric Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases (SIMMILR-CRLM)

(1) Background: Here we report on a retrospective study of an international multicentric cohort after minimally invasive liver resection (SIMMILR) of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) from six centers. (2) Methods: Resections were divided by the approach used: open liver resection (OLR), laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR). Patients with macrovascular invasion, more than three metastases measuring more than 3 cm or a solitary metastasis more than 5 cm were excluded, and any remaining heterogeneity found was further analyzed after propensity score matching (PSM) to decrease any potential bias. (3) Results: Prior to matching, 566 patients underwent OLR, 462 LLR and 36 RLR for CRLM. After PSM, 142 patients were in each group of the OLR vs. LLR group and 22 in the OLR vs. RLR and 21 in the LLR vs. RLR groups. Blood loss, hospital stay, and morbidity rates were all highly statistically significantly increased in the OLR compared to the LLR group, 636 mL vs. 353 mL, 9 vs. 5 days and 25% vs. 6%, respectively (p < 0.001). Only blood loss was significantly decreased when RLR was compared to OLR and LLR, 250 mL vs. 597 mL, and 224 mL vs. 778 mL, p < 0.008 and p < 0.04, respectively. (4) Conclusions: SIMMILR indicates that minimally invasive approaches for CRLM that follow the Milan criteria may have short term advantages. Notably, larger studies with long-term follow-up comparing robotic resections to both OLR and LLR are still needed.

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.

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection in patients with a history of abdominal surgeries

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic techniques have become the standard approach for most liver resections. Clinical studies providing conclusive evidence which patients benefit most from minimal-invasive surgery remain limited.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data of all consecutive cases of laparoscopic liver resection between 2015 and 2018 at our center. We compared patients with and without prior abdominal surgeries with respect to postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo score), length of operation, length of ICU stay and length of hospitalization in univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Within the study period 319 patients underwent laparoscopic liver resections, 44% of which had a history of abdominal surgeries. Pre-operative characteristics were similar to patients without prior surgeries. Both groups showed comparable rates of post-operative complications (Clavien-Dindo score ≥3a; 12% in patients without vs. 16% with prior surgeries, p = 0,322). There were no significant differences in length of surgery or length of stay in the ICU or in the hospital.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that history of prior abdominal surgery is not a risk factor for post-operative complications after laparoscopic liver resection. We conclude that prior abdominal surgery should not be considered a contra-indication for laparoscopic approach in liver resection.

Laparoscopic extended liver resection: are postoperative outcomes different?

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is becoming increasingly common in specialized centers, data regarding laparoscopic extended major hepatectomies (LEMH) and their outcomes are limited. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes of LEMH to standard LMH.

METHODS

All patients who underwent purely laparoscopic anatomical right or left hepatectomy and right or left trisectionectomy between February 1998 and January 2016 are enrolled. Demographic, clinicopathological, and perioperative factors were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Perioperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes in LEMH were compared to those of standard LMH.

RESULTS

Among 195 patients with LMH, 47 (24.1%) underwent LEMH, colorectal liver metastases representing 66.7% of all indications. Preoperative portal vein embolization was undertaken in 31 (15.9%) patients. Despite more frequent vascular clamping, blood loss was higher in LEMH group (400 vs. 214 ml; p = 0.006). However, there was no difference in intraoperative transfusion requirements. Thirty-one patients experienced liver failure with no differences between LMH and LEMH groups. Postoperative mortality was comparable in the two groups [3 (2.5%) LMH patients vs. 2 (5%) LEMH patients (p = 0.388)]. Overall morbidity was higher in the LEMH group [49 LMH patients (41.5%) vs. 24 LEMH patients (60%) (p = 0.052)]. Patients treated with left LEMH experienced more biliary leakage (p = 0.011) and more major pulmonary complications (p = 0.015) than left LMH.

CONCLUSION

LEMH is feasible at the price of important morbidity, with manageable and acceptable outcomes. These exigent procedures require high-volume centers with experienced surgeons.

Advances and challenges in laparoscopic surgery in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the fifth most common malignancy and the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. From the wide variety of treatment options, surgical resection and liver transplantation are the only therapeutic ones. However, due to shortage of liver grafts, surgical resection is the most common therapeutic modality implemented. Owing to rapid technological development, minimally invasive approaches have been incorporated in liver surgery. Liver laparoscopic resection has been evaluated in comparison to the open technique and has been shown to be superior because of the reported decrease in surgical incision length and trauma, blood loss, operating theatre time, postsurgical pain and complications, R0 resection, length of stay, time to recovery and oral intake. It has been reported that laparoscopic excision is a safe and feasible approach with near zero mortality and oncologic outcomes similar to open resection. Nevertheless, current indications include solid tumors in the periphery < 5 cm, especially in segments II through VI, while according to the consensus laparoscopic major hepatectomy should only be performed by surgeons with high expertise in laparoscopic and hepatobiliary surgery in tertiary centers. It is necessary for a surgeon to surpass the 60-cases learning curve observed in order to accomplish the desirable outcomes and preserve patient safety. In this review, our aim is to thoroughly describe the general principles and current status of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, as well as future prospects.

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.

Totally laparoscopic caudate lobe resection: technical aspects and literature review

The particular anatomic location of the hepatic caudate lobe between the hilar plate and inferior vena cava means that it is still considered unsuitable for laparoscopic measures and a difficult site even for conventional surgery. Here we describe the first case to be reported in the literature of caudate lobe resection for a single metastasis from breast adenocarcinoma that was completed using an exclusively laparoscopic procedure and a simplified scheme involving the placement of 4 trocars, without any need for conversion or the Pringle maneuver. The patient was 31 years old with a history of radical right mastectomy and chemotherapy. The patient's postoperative course was uneventful and she was discharged 4 days after the surgery. Twelve months on, she is currently alive and disease free.

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.

Traditional versus robot-assisted full laparoscopic liver resection: a matched-pair comparative study

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery was introduced as a means of overcoming the limitations of traditional laparoscopy. This report describes the results of a matched comparative study between traditional (TLLR) and robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection (RLLR) performed in two European centers.

METHODS

From January 2008-April 2013, 46 patients underwent RLLR at San Matteo degli Infermi Hospital. Each patient was matched to a patient who had undergone TLLR at Antoine Béclère Hospital. The variables evaluated were operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were included in each group. Despite matching, more tumors were solitary in the TLLR group (P = 0.02) and more were localized in the superior and posterior segments in the RLLR group (P = 0.003). The median duration of surgery was 210 and 176 min in the RLLR and TLLR groups, respectively (P = 0.12). Conversion rate, blood loss, morbidity, and length of stay were similar in both groups. In multivariate analysis in all cohorts of patients, the sole independent risk factor of postoperative complications was the operative duration [OR = 1.016; P = 0.007].

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic LLR is associated with outcomes similar to those obtained with TLLR. However, robotics may facilitate LLR in patients with superior and posterior liver tumors.

Indications for liver surgery: laparoscopic or robotic approach

Laparoscopic liver resections have been demonstrated to be safe and effective with the advantages of a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, less adhesions and better postoperative recovery compared to open surgery. However, indications are usually confined to peripheral, small lesions, due to issues intrinsic to the approach. In the effort to overcome some of these technical limitations, robotic technology has been developed, with encouraging findings. We performed a review of the literature to assess the current indications for laparoscopic hepatic resections and to investigate the role of robotics in broadening the application of minimally invasive liver surgery. Although a paucity of data exists, especially regarding long-term oncological outcomes and specific comparisons with laparoscopy, robotics has been proved to facilitate several complex liver procedures, including parenchyma-saving resections. Thus, the number of patients who can benefit from less invasive, conservative approach is potentially increased.

Learning curve for laparoscopic major hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is evolving as an important surgical approach in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery. The present study aimed to evaluate the learning curve for LMH at a single centre.

METHODS

Data for all patients undergoing LMH between January 1998 and September 2013 were recorded in a prospective database and analysed. The learning curve for operating time (OT) was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method.

RESULTS

Of 173 patients undergoing major hepatectomy, left hepatectomy was performed in 28 (16·2 per cent), left trisectionectomy in nine (5·2 per cent), right hepatectomy in 115 (66·5 per cent), right trisectionectomy in 13 (7·5 per cent) and central hepatectomy in eight (4·6 per cent). Median duration of surgery was 270 (range 100-540) min and median blood loss was 300 (10-4500) ml. There were 20 conversions to an open procedure (11·6 per cent). Vascular clamping was independently associated with conversion on multivariable analysis (hazard ratio 5·95, 95 per cent c.i. 1·24 to 28·56; P = 0·026). The CUSUMOT learning curve was modelled as a parabola (CUSUMOT  = 0·2149 × patient number(2)  - 30·586 × patient number - 1118·3; R(2)  = 0·7356). The learning curve comprised three phases: phase 1 (45 initial patients), phase 2 (30 intermediate patients) and phase 3 (the subsequent 98 patients). Although right hepatectomy was most common in phase 1, a significant decrease was observed from phase 1 to 3 (P = 0·007) in favour of more complex procedures.

CONCLUSION

The learning curve for LMH consisted of three characteristic phases identified by CUSUM analysis. The data suggest that the learning phase of LMH included 45 to 75 patients.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Open and laparoscopic resection of hepatocellular adenoma: trends over 23 years at a specialist hepatobiliary unit

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular adenoma (HCA) is a rare benign liver epithelial tumour that can require surgery. This retrospective study reports a 23-year experience of open and laparoscopic resections for HCA.

METHODS

Patients with a histological diagnosis of HCA were included in this analysis. Surgical resection was performed in all symptomatic patients and in those with lesions measuring >5 cm.

RESULTS

Between 1989 and 2012, 62 patients, 59 of whom were female, underwent surgery for HCA (26 by open surgery and 36 by laparoscopic surgery). Overall, 96.6% of female patients had a history of contraceptive use; 54.8% of patients presented with abdominal pain and 11.2% with haemorrhage; the remaining patients were asymptomatic. Patients who underwent laparoscopy had smaller lesions (mean ± standard deviation diameter: 68.3 ± 35.2 mm versus 91.9 ± 42.5 mm; P = 0.022). Operatively, laparoscopic and open liver resection did not differ except in the number of pedicle clamps, which was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (27.8% versus 57.7% of patients; P = 0.008). Postoperative variables did not differ between the groups. Mortality was nil. Two surgical specimens were classified as HCA/borderline hepatocellular carcinoma. At the 3-year follow-up, all patients were alive with no recurrence of HCA.

CONCLUSIONS

Open and laparoscopic liver resections are both safe and feasible approaches for the surgical management of HCA. However, laparoscopic liver resections may be limited by lesion size and location and require advanced surgical skills.

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.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy: pure laparoscopic approach versus hand-assisted technique

Laparoscopic liver resections are being performed with increasing frequency, with several groups having reported minimally invasive approaches for major anatomic hepatic resections. Some surgeons favor a pure laparoscopic approach, while others prefer a hand-assisted approach for major laparoscopic liver resections. There are clear advantages and disadvantages to a hand-assisted technique. The purpose of this study is to summarize the literature comparing pure laparoscopic and hand-assisted approaches for minimally invasive hepatic resection, and to describe our approach in 432 laparoscopic liver resections.

Robot-assisted surgery: improved tool for major liver resections?

Minimally invasive liver surgery has recently undergone an explosion in reported worldwide experience. Given its comparable outcomes to its open counterpart, high-volume centers are utilizing minimal access liver surgery more frequently under well-defined criteria. The recent introduction of robot-assisted surgery has further revolutionized the field of minimally invasive surgery and has expanded the reach of feasibility. Robot-assisted surgery was developed to help overcome the disadvantages of conventional laparoscopic surgery. As a result, there has been an increase in the reporting of advanced robot-assisted liver resections. A literature review was performed to identify the current manuscripts describing robot-assisted liver surgery. Nine case series were identified, yielding 144 unique patient characteristics. Outcomes indicate that robot-assisted liver resection is feasible and safe for both minor and major liver resections with regard to estimated blood loss, length of stay, and complications. Early data also suggest that robot-assisted liver surgery is efficacious with regard to short-term oncologic outcomes. Future studies will be needed to better evaluate advantages and disadvantages compared to laparoscopic liver resections.

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.

Hepatocellular adenoma: an excellent indication for laparoscopic liver resection

OBJECTIVES

Laparoscopic resection for benign liver disease has gained wide acceptance in recent years and hepatocellular adenoma (HA) seems to be an appropriate indication. This study aimed to discuss diagnosis and treatment strategies, and to assess the feasibility, safety and outcomes of pure laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in a large series of patients with HA.

METHODS

Of 88 patients who underwent pure LLR, 31 were identified as having HA. Diagnosis was based on radiological evaluation and resections were performed for lesions measuring >5.0 cm.

RESULTS

The sample included 29 female and two male patients. Their mean age was 33.2 years. A total of 27 patients had a single lesion, one patient had two and one had four lesions. The two remaining patients had liver adenomatosis. Mean tumour size was 7.5 cm. Three right hepatectomies, 17 left lateral sectionectomies and 11 wedge resections or segmentectomies were performed. There was no need for blood transfusion or conversion to open surgery. Postoperative complications occurred in two patients. Mean hospital stay was 3.8 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Hepatocellular adenoma should be regarded as an excellent indication for pure LLR. Pure LLR is safe and feasible and should be considered the standard of care for the treatment of HA when performed by surgeons with experience in liver and laparoscopic surgery.

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.

Laparoscopy-assisted resection of an undiagnosed liver tumor and ascending colon cancer via mini median laparotomy: report of a case

We describe how we resected a hepatic angiomyolipoma and ascending colon cancer synchronously via laparoscopic left lateral segmentectomy and laparoscopic right colectomy, respectively. The patient was a 72-year-old man, admitted to our hospital after a liver tumor and ascending colon cancer were detected during a general health check. Computed tomography (CT) showed a hypervascular liver tumor mimicking hepatocellular carcinoma, 2 cm in diameter, in segment 3 of the liver. The ascending colon cancer was diagnosed as T2N0M0, Stage I. The left lateral liver and right colon were mobilized laparoscopically and hepatic transaction, followed by resection and anastomosis of the colon, were performed extracorporeally through the same 7-cm upper median incision. This type of laparoscopy-assisted combined resection is useful to obtain a pathological diagnosis of the liver tumor and to remove the entire tumor in a minimally invasive and cosmetic manner.

Pure laparoscopic en bloc left hemihepatectomy and caudate lobe resection in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

There is an ongoing debate on whether it is safe to push the boundaries and widen the indications of laparoscopic liver surgery after careful patient selection. We report 2 cases of pure laparoscopic en bloc left hemihepatectomy and caudate lobe resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC).

METHODS

The first patient (a 79-year old) had an ICC affecting segments 2, 3, and 4 of the liver with dilatation of segment 1 ducts at preoperative imaging. The second patient (an 81-year old) had an ICC affecting segments 2, 3 with local invasion of segment 1. Both patients underwent pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy and caudate lobe resection.

RESULTS

The first patient's operative time was 360 minutes and blood loss was 390 mL. Postoperative hospital stay was 8 days. The definitive histology was as follows: pT1 ICC (25 mm in maximal diameter), with 20 mm free resection margin. The second patient's operative time was 310 minutes and blood loss was 300 mL. Postoperative hospital stay was 4 days. The definitive histology was as follows: T1 ICC (49 mm in maximal diameter) with 10 mm free resection margin. The first patient was disease free 12 months after surgery. The second patient died 11 months after surgery of metastatic disease.

CONCLUSION

Pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy and caudate lobectomy for ICC may be feasible and safe. This is, however, a very complex procedure requiring extensive experience in laparoscopic liver surgery and careful patient selection to optimize surgical outcome. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic description of a pure laparoscopic en bloc left hemihepatectomy and caudate lobe resection for ICC.

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.

[Value of laparoscopic liver resection]

Whereas in other fields of surgery minimally invasive techniques have replaced the open surgery approach, liver resection is still a domain of conventional surgery. However, it is internationally emerging that laparoscopic hepatic surgery will become more important by conceptional improvements. This article describes the technical aspects of laparoscopic liver resection, in particular the procedure with respect to the individual liver segments. The advantages and disadvantages of the minimally invasive technique and also the indications for laparoscopic liver resection will be discussed.

Vascular clamping in liver surgery: physiology, indications and techniques

This article reviews the historical evolution of hepatic vascular clamping and their indications. The anatomic basis for partial and complete vascular clamping will be discussed, as will the rationales of continuous and intermittent vascular clamping.Specific techniques discussed and described include inflow clamping (Pringle maneuver, extra-hepatic selective clamping and intraglissonian clamping) and outflow clamping (total vascular exclusion, hepatic vascular exclusion with preservation of caval flow). The fundamental role of a low Central Venous Pressure during open and laparoscopic hepatectomy is described, as is the difference in their intra-operative measurements. The biological basis for ischemic preconditioning will be elucidated. Although the potential dangers of vascular clamping and the development of modern coagulation devices question the need for systemic clamping; the pre-operative factors and unforseen intra-operative events that mandate the use of hepatic vascular clamping will be highlighted.

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.

Minimally invasive liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: a multi-institutional, international report of safety, feasibility, and early outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a multicenter, international series on minimally invasive liver resection for colorectal carcinoma (CRC) metastasis.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Multiple single series have been reported on laparoscopic liver resection for CRC metastasis. We report the first collaborative multicenter, international series to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and oncologic integrity of laparoscopic liver resection for CRC metastasis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent minimally invasive liver resection for CRC metastasis from February 2000 to September 2008 from multiple medical centers from the United States and Europe. The multicenter series of patients were accumulated into a single database. Patient demographics, preoperative, operative, and postoperative characteristics were analyzed. Actuarial overall survival was calculated with Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 109 patients underwent minimally invasive liver resection for CRC metastasis. The median age was 63 years (range, 32-88 years) with 51% females. The most common sites of primary colon cancer were sigmoid/rectum (51%), right colon (25%), and left colon (13%). Synchronous liver lesions were present in 11% of patients. For those with metachronous lesions liver lesions, the median time interval from primary colon cancer surgery to liver metastasectomy was 12 months. Preoperative chemotherapy was administered in 68% of cases prior to liver resection. The majority of patients underwent prior abdominal operations (95%). Minimally invasive approaches included totally laparoscopic (56%) and hand-assisted laparoscopic (41%), the latter of which was employed more frequently in the US medical centers (85%) compared with European centers (13%) (P = 0.001). There were 4 conversions to open surgery (3.7%), all due to bleeding. Extents of resection include wedge/segmentectomy (34%), left lateral sectionectomy (27%), right hepatectomy (28%), left hepatectomy (9%), extended right hepatectomy (0.9%), and caudate lobectomy (0.9%). Major liver resections (> or =3 segments) were performed in 45% of patients. Median OR time was 234 minutes (range, 60-555 minutes) and blood loss was 200 mL (range, 20-2500 mL) with 10% receiving a blood transfusion. There were no reported perioperative deaths and a 12% complication rate. Median length of hospital stay for the entire series was 4 days (range, 1-22 days) with a shorter stay in medical centers in the United States (3 days) versus that seen in Europe (6 days) (P = 0.001). Negative margins were achieved in 94.4% of patients. Actuarial overall survivals at 1-, 3-, and 5-year for the entire series were 88%, 69%, and 50%, respectively. Disease-free survivals at 1-, 3-, and 5-year were 65%, 43%, and 43%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive liver resection for colorectal metastasis is safe, feasible, and oncologically comparable to open liver resection for both minor and major liver resections, even with prior intra-abdominal operations, in selected patients and when performed by experienced surgeons.

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: 8 years of multicenter Spanish register

BACKGROUND

To present the data of laparoscopy in liver surgery and to assess the real indications and outcomes of this kind of approach.

METHODS

From February 2000 to March 2008, a prospective study was performed on 182 patients from 15 Spanish surgical centres.

RESULTS

A total of 308 lesions was collected. The mean age was 57 years old, and 61.5% were female. Among patients with cystic lesions we found: 45 simple cysts, 19 policystic diseases, 12 hydatidic cysts and 2 cystoadenomas. Among solid lesions (n = 104), we found 34 patients with benign pathology (12 focal nodular hyperplasia, 10 adenomas, 7 haemangyomas and 5 other lesions) and 70 with malignant pathology (38 metastases, 29 hepatocellular carcinomas, 2 cholangiocarcinomas and 1 lymphoma). The global rate of conversion was 8.8%. The global morbidity rate was 14.8%, and 5 of them required re-intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Nowadays there are strong criteria for patients being submitted to laparoscopy procedures based both on type and location features. The postoperative morbidity rate is low, also for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic liver. In case of malignant pathology, we think the use of ultrasonography is mandatory to obtain a free margin, which implies a long-term survival rate.