Technical approach of robotic total right hepatic lobectomy: How we do it?

Comparison of efficacy between robotic and open hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies

This meta-analysis evaluates and contrasts the diagnosis and perioperative results involving RLR (robotic liver resection) and open OLR (open liver resection). The researcher used systematic search criteria of databases including MEDLINE, PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library for relevant literature published between January 2000 and January 2025. Eight non-randomized controlled trials were included, each using propensity score matching (PSM), involving 1192 patients. Among them, 557 patients received robotic laparoscopic resection (RLR), while 635 patients underwent open laparoscopic resection (OLR). Undergoing RLR was found to lead to longer surgical times, according to the analysis; however, patients undergoing RLR experienced notably shorter hospital stays compared to those undergoing open liver resection. No significant variations were noted regarding blood loss between the groups, incidence of bile leakage, complication rates, R0 resection margins, or 90-day mortality. RLR demonstrates surgical results similar to those of OLR. Key advantages include shorter hospitalization times and lower complication rates.

A decade of experience with 530 minimally invasive robotic hepatectomies from a single tertiary hepatobiliary center: analysis of short-term outcomes and oncologic survival

BACKGROUND

This research is the first study in the United States to document more than a decade of experience with 530 patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy at a single high-volume institution.

METHODS

With institutional review board approval, a prospectively collected database of consecutive patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy from 2012 to January 2024 was reviewed. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD).

RESULTS

Of the 530 robotic hepatectomies, 231 (44.0%) were minor resections, 133 (25.0%) were technically major resections, and 166 (31.0%) were major resections. The patients were aged 63.0 (61.0 ± 14.7) years with a body mass index of 28.0 (29.0 ± 7.9) kg/m2. Cirrhosis was present in 80 patients (19.0%), with an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3.0 (3.0 ± 0.5) and a Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score of 7.0 (8.0 ± 3.0). Of note, 280 patients (53.0%) had previous abdominal operations, and 44 patients (8%) had previous liver resections. The operative time was 233.0 (260.0 ± 130.7) minutes, and the estimated blood loss was 100.0 (165.0 ± 205.0) mL. Moreover, 353 patients (66%) had hepatectomies for neoplastic disease, and 500 patients (95%) had an R0 resection margin. The tumor size was 4.0 (5.0 ± 3.6) cm. The total 90-day postoperative complications were 45 (8%), of which 21 (4%) were classified as major complications (Clavien-Dindo score of >III). The length of stay was 3.0 (4.0 ± 3.7) days, and the 30-day readmission rate was 86 (16%). The overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 82%, 65%, and 59% for colorectal liver metastases, 84%, 68%, and 60% for hepatocellular carcinoma, and 79%, 61%, and 50% for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, respectively.

CONCLUSION

After a decade of application and optimization at a high-volume institution, the robotic approach has been demonstrated to be a safe and effective approach to liver resection.

Effect of IWATE laparoscopic difficulty score on postoperative outcomes and costs for robotic hepatectomy: Are complex resections more expensive?

BACKGROUND

The IWATE criteria, a four-level classification system for laparoscopic hepatectomy, measures technical complexity but lacks studies on its impact on outcomes and costs, especially in robotic surgeries. This study evaluated the effects of technical complexity on perioperative outcomes and costs in robotic hepatectomy.

METHODS

Since 2013, we prospectively followed 500 patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy. Patients were classified into four levels of IWATE scores; (low [0-3], intermediate [4-6], advanced [7-9], and expert [10-12]) determined by tumor characteristics, liver function and resection extent. Perioperative variables were analyzed with significance accepted at a p-value ≤.05.

RESULTS

Among 500 patients, 337 (67%) underwent advanced to expert-level operations. Median operative duration was 213 min (range: 16-817 min; mean ± SD: 240 ± 116.1 min; p < .001) and estimated blood loss (EBL) was 95 mL (range: 0-3500 mL; mean ± SD:142 ± 171.1 mL; p < .001). Both operative duration and EBL showed positive correlations with increasing IWATE scores. Median length of stay (LOS) of 3 days (range: 0-34; mean ± SD:4 ± 3.0 days; p < .001) significantly correlated with IWATE score. Total cost of $25 388 (range: $84-354 407; mean ± SD: 29752 ± 20106.8; p < .001) also significantly correlated with operative complexity, however hospital reimbursement did not. No correlation was found between IWATE score and postoperative complications or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical variables such as operative duration, EBL, and LOS correlate with IWATE difficulty scores in robotic hepatectomy. Financial metrics such as costs but not reimbursement received by the hospital correlate with IWATE scores.

Comparison of IWATE, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, and Southampton Laparoscopic Liver Resection Difficulty Scoring Systems for Predicting Intra and Postoperative Outcomes in Robotic Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

IWATE, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris (IMM), and Southampton are established difficulty scoring systems (DSS) for laparoscopic hepatectomy, yet none specifically address robotic hepatectomy. Our study evaluates these 3 DSS for predicting perioperative outcomes in robotic hepatectomy.

METHODS

With IRB approval, we prospectively followed 359 consecutive patients undergoing robotic hepatectomies, assessing categorical metrics like conversions to open, intra/postoperative issues, Clavien-Dindo Score (≥III), 30 and 90-day mortality, and 30-day readmissions using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and Area Under the Curve (AUC) to determine efficacy in predicting their occurrence for each DSS. Continuous metrics such as operative duration, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay, and total cost were analyzed using Spearman's correlation and regression. Predictive strength was significant with an AUC or correlation ≥.700 and P-value ≤.05.

RESULTS

IMM had highest predictive accuracy for conversions to open (AUC = .705) and postoperative complications (AUC = .481). Southampton was most accurate in predicting Clavien Dindo ≥ III complications (AUC = .506). IWATE excelled in predicting 30-day mortality (AUC = .552), intraoperative issues (AUC = .798), In-hospital mortality (AUC = .450), 90-day mortality (AUC = .596), and readmissions (AUC = .572). Regression showed significant relationships between operative duration, EBL, and hospital cost with increasing scores for all DSS (P ≤ .05).

DISCUSSION

Statistical analysis of the 3 DSS indicates that each has specific strengths that can best predict intra- and/or postoperative outcomes. However, all showed inaccuracies and conflicting relationships with the variables, indicating lack of substantial hierarchy between DSS. Given these inconsistencies, a dedicated comprehensive DSS should be created for robotic hepatectomy.

Current Status of Robotic Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery

Laparoscopic surgery is performed worldwide and has clear economic and social benefits in terms of patient recovery time. It is used for most gastrointestinal surgical procedures, but laparoscopic surgery for more complex procedures in the esophageal, hepatobiliary, and pancreatic regions remains challenging. Minimally invasive surgery that results in accurate tumor dissection is vital in surgical oncology, and development of surgical systems and instruments plays a key role in assisting surgeons to achieve this. A notable advance in the latter half of the 1990s was the da Vinci Surgical System, which involves master-slave surgical support robots. Featuring high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) imaging with magnification capabilities and forceps with multi-joint function, anti-shake function, and motion scaling, the system compensates for the drawbacks of conventional laparoscopic surgery. It is expected to be particularly useful in the field of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, which requires delicate reconstruction involving complex liver anatomy with diverse vascular and biliary systems and anastomosis of the biliary tract, pancreas, and intestines. The learning curve is said to be short, and it is hoped that robotic surgery will be standardized in the near future. There is also a need for a standardized robotic surgery training system for young surgeons that can later be adapted to a wider range of surgeries. This systematic review describes trends and future prospects for robotic surgery in the hepatobiliary-pancreatic region.

A propensity score matched analysis of robotic and open hepatectomy for treatment of liver tumors. Clinical outcomes, oncological survival, and costs comparison

Minimally invasive robotic hepatectomy is gaining popularity with a faster rate of adoption when compared to laparoscopic approach. Technical advantages brought by the robotic surgical system facilitate a transition from open to minimally invasive technique in hepatic surgery. Published matched data examining the results of robotic hepatectomy using the open approach as a benchmark are still limited. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes, survival, and costs between robotic and open hepatectomy undertaken in our tertiary hepatobiliary center. With IRB approval, we prospectively followed 285 consecutive patients undergoing hepatectomy for neoplastic liver diseases between 2012 and 2020. Propensity score matched comparison of robotic and open hepatectomy was conducted by 1:1 ratio. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD). The matching process assigned 49 patients to each arm, open and robotic hepatectomy. There were no differences in R1 resection rates (4% vs 4%; p = 1.00). Differences in perioperative variables between open and robotic hepatectomy included postoperative complications (16% vs 2%; p = 0.02) and length of stay (LOS) [6 (7 ± 5.0) vs 4 (5 ± 4.0) days; p = 0.002]. There were no differences between open and robotic hepatectomy regarding postoperative hepatic insufficiency (10% vs 2%; p = 0.20). No difference was seen in long-term survival outcomes. While there were no differences in costs, robotic hepatectomy was associated with lower reimbursement [$20,432 (39,191 ± 41,467.81) vs $33,190 (67,860 ± 87,707.81); p = 0.04] and lower contribution margin [$-11,229 (3902 ± 42,572.43) vs $8768 (34,690 ± 89,759.56); p = 0.03]. Compared to open approach, robotic hepatectomy robotic offers lower rates of postoperative complications, shorter LOS and similar costs, while not compromising long-term oncological outcomes. Robotic hepatectomy may eventually become the preferred approach in minimally invasive treatment of liver tumors.

Fluorescence-Guided Robotic Segment 8 Superior Liver Resection. Technical Approach to Sectoral Inflow Occlusion

In the past decade, precision hepatectomy which requires the understanding of segmental and subsegmental liver anatomy has gained popularity due to its parenchymal-sparing benefits. The importance of this concept has led liver surgeons to a consensus conference and its guideline in regards to precision anatomy in minimally invasive liver resection, held in Tokyo in 2020. A precise control of the sectoral hepatic artery and portal vein allows for a bloodless liver resection, without the use of Pringle maneuver. In the literature, technical description of the right anterior portal pedicle dissection during minimally invasive robotic liver surgery is limited. In this study, we therefore demonstrate such a technique using fluorescence guidance during robotic segment 8 superior liver resection.

Preoperative planning and intraoperative real-time navigation with indocyanine green fluorescence in robotic liver surgery

PURPOSE

We aimed at exploring indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence wide spectrum of applications in hepatobiliary surgery as can result particularly useful in robotic liver resections (RLR) in order to overcome some technical limitations, increasing safety, and efficacy.

METHODS

We describe our experience of 76 RLR performed between March 2020 and December 2022 exploring all the possible applications of pre- and intraoperative ICG administration.

RESULTS

Hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases were the most common indications for RLR (34.2% and 26.7% of patients, respectively), and 51.3% of cases were complex resections with high IWATE difficulty scores. ICG was administered preoperatively in 61 patients (80.3%), intraoperatively in 42 patients (55.3%) and in both contexts in 25 patients (32.9%), with no observed adverse events. The most frequent ICG goal was to achieve tumor enhancement (59 patients, 77.6%), with a success rate of 94.9% and the detection of 3 additional malignant lesions. ICG facilitated evaluation of the resection margin for residual tumor and perfusion adequacy in 33.9% and 32.9% of cases, respectively, mandating a resection enlargement in 7.9% of patients. ICG fluorescence allowed the identification of the transection plane through negative staining in the 25% of cases. Vascular and biliary structures were visualized in 21.1% and 9.2% of patients, with a success rate of 81.3% and 85.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

RLR can benefit from the routine integration of ICG fluoresce evaluation according to each individual patient and condition-specific goals and issues, allowing liver functional assessment, anatomical and vascular evaluation, tumor detection, and resection margins assessment.

Propensity score matched comparison of robotic and open major hepatectomy for malignant liver tumors

BACKGROUND

Outcome data on robotic major hepatectomy are lacking. This study was undertaken to compare robotic vs. 'open' major hepatectomy utilizing patient propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

With institutional review board approval, we prospectively followed 183 consecutive patients who underwent robotic or 'open' major hepatectomy, defined as removal of three or more Couinaud segments. 42 patients who underwent 'open' approach were matched with 42 patients who underwent robotic approach. The criteria for PSM were age, resection type, tumor size, tumor type, and BMI. Survival was individually stratified for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC), and colorectal liver metastases (CLM). The data are presented as: median (mean ± SD).

RESULTS

Operative duration for the robotic approach was 293 (302 ± 131.5) vs. 280 (300 ± 115.6) minutes for the 'open' approach (p = NS). Estimated Blood Loss (EBL) was 200 (239 ± 183.6) vs. 300 (491 ± 577.1) ml (p = 0.01). There were zero postoperative complications with a Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ III for the robotic approach and three for the 'open' approach (p = NS). ICU length of stay (LOS) was 1 (1 ± 0) vs. 2 (3 ± 2.0) days (p = 0.0001) and overall LOS was 4 (4 ± 3.3) vs. 6 (6 ± 2.7) days (p = 0.003). In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, overall survival was similar for patients with IHCC and CLM regardless of the approach. However, patients with HCC who underwent robotic resection lived significantly longer (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Utilizing propensity score matched analysis, the robotic approach was associated with a lower EBL, shorter ICU LOS, and shorter overall LOS while maintaining similar operative duration and promoting survival in patients with HCC. We believe that the robotic approach is safe and efficacious and should be considered a preferred alternative approach for major hepatectomy.

Application of da Vinci robot and laparoscopy on repeat hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Repeat laparoscopic liver resection has been used safely and effectively on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, few studies have been performed on repeat HCC surgery by a da Vinci robot. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of the patients with repeat HCC treated using a da Vinci robot or laparoscopic system at a single centre.

METHODS

All of the patients with repeat HCC treated using a da Vinci robotic or laparoscopic system between April 2017 and April 2020 were included in this retrospective study.

RESULTS

There were 24 patients with a mean age of 56 years who underwent da Vinci robotic or laparoscopic surgery for treatment of repeat HCC who were included in this study. The operations lasted 152 ± 25 min and 142 ± 34 min. The average intraoperative blood loss was 284 ± 89 ml and 251 ± 92 ml. The average hospitalisation stay lasted 9 ± 2 days and 9 ± 3 days. The rates at which surgeons switched to open surgery were 9% and 23%. No serious perioperative or post-operative complications were encountered.

CONCLUSION

Da Vinci robots can provide a precise dissection of the tissue under a perfect view. It is a technically feasible procedure for less rates at which surgeons switched to open surgery on repeat HCC.

Does Metabolic Syndrome Effect the Perioperative Course and Costs of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing Robotic Hepatectomy? A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

This study was undertaken to examine the postoperative outcomes, costs, and survival after robotic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with or without metabolic syndrome.

METHODS

Following IRB approval, we prospectively followed 56 patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy for HCC from 2016-2020. Patients with metabolic syndrome were compared to patients without metabolic syndrome regarding postoperative clinical outcomes, costs, and survival. Propensity score matching of a 1:1 ratio matched patients with and without metabolic syndrome according to 6 variables.

RESULTS

17 patients were matched to each arm. Mean age was 64 ± 14.0 years and 30 patients (88%) had operations that were classified as advanced (IWATE 7-9) or expert (IWATE 10-12). There were no differences between patients with metabolic syndrome versus patients without metabolic syndrome in terms of operative duration (306 [301 ± 76.2] vs 239 [260 ± 116.9] minutes; P = 0.23), estimated blood loss (300 [321 ± 195.5] vs 200 [214 ± 151.4] ml; P = 0.08), conversion to "open" operation (1 [6%] vs 1 [6%]; p = 1.00), tumor size (5 [5 ± 3.0] vs 3 [4 ± 2.2] cm; P = 0.28), postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo Score (≥III) (0 vs 1; P = 1.00), in-hospital mortality (0 [0%] vs 1 [6%]; P = 1.00), length of stay (5 [5 ± 1.7] vs 4 [5 ± 4.4] days; P = 1.00), and 30-day readmissions (1 [6%] vs 1 [6%]; P = 1.00). There were no differences in overall costs and profit. There was no difference in 1-year, 2-year, and 3- year overall survival in patients with or without metabolic syndrome after robotic HCC resection (84% vs 77%, 84% vs 61%, and 45% vs 61%, P = 0.42).

CONCLUSION

For patients with and without metabolic syndrome, robotic advanced/expert hepatectomy for HCC resulted in similar intra-operative metrics, postoperative outcomes, costs, and survival.

Does Preoperative Thrombocytopenia in Patients Undergoing Robotic Hepatectomy for Liver Tumors Predict Poor Outcomes? A Propensity-Score Match Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Thrombocytopenia is a known surrogate marker for cirrhosis and portal hypertension and has been associated with increased risk of poor perioperative outcomes when studied in "open" operations. This study was undertaken to assess thrombocytopenia as an independent risk factor for undesirable perioperative outcomes after robotic hepatectomy.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 279 patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy at our institution. Patients were stratified into two cohorts based on preoperative platelet counts. Thrombocytopenia was classified as having a platelet count less than 150 /μL. Patients were 2:1 ratio propensity-score matched based on IWATE score and age. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD).

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients with thrombocytopenia were matched to 72 patients without thrombocytopenia. Patients with thrombocytopenia had higher MELD scores [p = 0.02] and higher Child-Pugh Scores [p <0.001]. Intraoperatively, patients with thrombocytopenia had shorter operative duration [p = 0.03] but similar estimated blood loss (EBL) [p = 0.78]. Postoperatively, there were more fresh frozen plasma transfusions in patients with thrombocytopenia [p = 0.04]. There were no differences in IWATE scores, tumor size, conversions to "open" operations, intraoperative complications, patient length of stay (LOS), Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III complications, perioperative RBC transfusion, in-hospital mortality, or 30-day readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

In our propensity-score matched study, patients with thrombocytopenia had more severe liver disease; however, there were no differences in their EBL, LOS, or perioperative complications. Preoperative thrombocytopenia, while being an indicator of severity of liver disease potentially promoting perioperative bleeding, does not negatively affect the perioperative course of patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy.

Rationality and necessity of vascular stapler application during liver resection (Review)

Liver resection (LR) is the primary treatment method for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Improving surgical safety and reducing surgical morbidity and mortality is important for patients receiving LR. Various devices have been developed to facilitate vascular transection to reduce intraoperative blood loss, which is considered to be a predictor of poor surgical outcomes in patients undergoing LR. Vascular staplers have been widely applied for the division of major vascular and biliary structures in the process of LR; however, when and how to use these tools remains controversial. This review aims to report the rationality and necessity of using vascular staplers in vessel transection during liver surgery. Due to the risk of intraoperative and postoperative hemorrhage and biliary fistula, the process of transection of the portal pedicle and hepatic vein is a crucial step during LR. Stapling represents a vascular dissection technique that is widely used in laparoscopic LR and has then been popularized in open LR. Advocates argue that stapler transection methods provide several advantages, including diminished blood loss, fewer transfusion requirements and shorter operative times. However, other studies have failed to demonstrate those benefits when using these tools compared with the simple clamp-crushing technique. Using the stapler vascular transection method resulted in smaller surgical margins and similar surgical outcomes compared with those of the clamp-crushing vascular transection method. However, the intraoperative use of vascular staplers may significantly increase the financial burden of liver resection for patients with HCC, while not improving short- and long-term outcomes. Therefore, it has been suggested that vascular staplers should not be routinely used in LR. The current review discussed the above points and recommended that the stapling transection of the portal pedicle and hepatic vein should be applied during laparoscopic LR in a rational manner. However, the suturing ligation method should be routinely used in open LR.