Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic repeat liver resection and re-operation for liver tumor

Implications of robotic platforms for repeat hepatectomies: a propensity score matched study of clinical outcomes

Robotic surgical approaches have demonstrated improved outcomes in primary hepatectomies. However, data on their effectiveness in redo hepatectomies (subsequent liver resections) are limited. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing primary and redo robotic hepatectomies, with additional analysis comparing outcomes of robotic versus open redo hepatectomies. With IRB approval, we prospectively followed 101 patients from a parent population of 465, who were classified as either primary (non-redo) or redo robotic hepatectomy patients between 2013 and 2023. A Propensity Score Matched (PSM) analysis was conducted to compare perioperative variables between the two cohorts, using age, sex, BMI, IWATE score, tumor size, and tumor type as matching variables. Data are presented as median (mean ± standard deviation). Significance was accepted at p ≤ 0.05. After 3:1 PSM analysis (3 primary patients to 1 robotic redo patient), no significant differences were observed in pre-, intra-, or postoperative variables, except for the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score (p = 0.022). Additional analysis comparing robotic and open redo hepatectomies showed similar perioperative outcomes, with the robotic approach demonstrating comparable safety and feasibility. Length of stay, blood loss, operative duration, morbidity, and mortality showed no significant differences between the two groups. Major complications (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III) occurred in 4% of non-redo patients, with none observed in the redo group. The findings suggest that patients undergoing redo robotic hepatectomies achieve outcomes comparable to those of primary hepatectomy patients. This indicates the potential of robotic platforms to mitigate the added complexities and risks associated with redo hepatectomies. Further multi-center collaboration is necessary to validate these findings.

Indication model for laparoscopic repeat liver resection in the era of artificial intelligence: machine learning prediction of surgical indication

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) is still a challenging technique and requires a careful selection of indications. However, the current difficulty scoring system is not suitable for selecting indications. The purpose of this study is to develop the indication model for LRLR using machine learning and to identify factors associated with open conversion (OC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent repeat hepatectomy (2017-2021) at Samsung Medical Center 2021 were investigated. Multiple indication models were developed using machine learning techniques (random forest, SVM, XGB) and logistic regression. The predictive performance of these models was compared, and risk factors associated with OC were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 221 patients (110 LRLR, 111 ORLR), the ORLR group had a higher previous open approach rate (75.7% vs. 38.2%, p<0.001). Twice previous abdominal surgery was the only independent OC risk factor (OR 6.56, p=0.009). The indication model showed moderate predictive power (random forest AUC=0.779, logistic regression AUC=0.725, p=0.710). Important variables were previous laparoscopic approach, present subsegmentectomy, and left-sided tumor location.

CONCLUSION

The performance of the indication model for LRLR showed moderate predictive power in both machine learning and logistic regression. The important variables for LRLR were previous laparoscopic approach, present subsegmentectomy, and left side location.

Robotic versus laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy: A comparative single-center study of perioperative outcomes

PURPOSE

A repeat liver resection is considered a technically challenging procedure and therefor an open approach is frequently preferred. With the introduction of minimally invasive liver surgery, laparoscopic repeat liver resection demonstrates favorable results, however, limited data on robotic repeat liver resections exists. Our aim is to compare the robotic approach with the laparoscopic one for a repeat liver resection.

METHODS

In a single-center retrospective analysis, we report the data of all minimally invasive repeat liver resections performed between September 2011 and August 2023. Short-term outcomes - including procedure time, blood loss, conversion rate, morbidity and mortality - were compared for a laparoscopic and a robotic approach.

RESULTS

A total of 136 minimally invasive repeat liver resections were performed, of which 56 robotic procedures and 80 laparoscopic procedures. Both groups were similar in baseline demographics, diagnosis and surgical procedure. While the mean procedure time was slightly longer in the robotics group by 15 min (145min and 130min, p = 0.04), the median blood loss was significantly lower in the robotic group (30 ml and 80 ml, p < 0.001). Additionally, there was a trend towards less conversions in the robotic group (n = 0 and n = 6, p = 0.42). Post-operative morbidity and mortality were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The robotic approach for minimally invasive repeat liver surgery is both safe and feasible, while also demonstrating favorable short-term outcomes. In our experience, the 'tunnel technique' - which avoids dissection of intra-abdominal adhesions - is a key advantage of this approach.

Re-do laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy for anastomotic stenosis after laparoscopic total gastrectomy in gastric cancer

PURPOSE

Anastomotic stenosis of esophagojejunostomy after total gastrectomy has a substantial impact on the postoperative quality of life of the patient. If conservative treatment doesn't work, surgical intervention should be considered. However, redoing esophagojejunostomy is an extremely demanding procedure. Especially in the case where the primary surgery was performed laparoscopically, it is an unmet problem to maintain minimal invasiveness in re-do surgery.

METHODS

We report 3 cases of re-do esophagojejunostomy laparoscopically performed for anastomotic stenosis after laparoscopic total gastrectomy in gastric cancer, in whom endoscopic balloon dilation did not work.

RESULTS

Each patient underwent a re-do esophagojejunostomy laparoscopically. The mean operation time was 293 min, and the mean blood loss was 56 ml. There was no anastomosis-related complication, and they were discharged from hospital on 11-16 postoperative days. At the time of discharge, oral food intake was 100% in each patient. One year after the operation, follow-up endoscopic exams showed no anastomotic stenosis.

CONCLUSION

Re-do laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy for anastomotic stenosis after laparoscopic total gastrectomy was safely and successfully performed. It brings patients minimal invasiveness continuously from the initial surgery. Re-do laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy could be one of the options for anastomotic stenosis resistant to conservative treatment.

Efficacy of laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy compared with open repeat hepatectomy: a single-center, propensity score matching study

Introduction

Laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) is considered to be a technically challenging procedure which has not been widely applied. This study aimed to assess the accessibility and security of LRH for patients with hepatic tumor recurrence.

Methods

Between January 2010 and October 2020, we performed 48 LRHs and 31 open repeat hepatectomies (ORHs) for recurrent liver cancer. LRHs were matched to ORHs (1:1) using propensity score matching (PSM) created by comparing preoperative factors. The perioperative data of patients were retrospectively analyzed, including baseline data, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, pathology, days of postoperative stay, complication morbidity, and mortality within 30 days. Overall survival and recurrence-free survival rates with appropriate follow-up were obtained to evaluate the long-term outcomes.

Results

Compared with the ORH, LRH was related with shorter operative duration (169.9 versus 232.9 ml, p < 0.01), less intraoperative bleeding (100.0 versus 500.0 ml, p < 0.01), lower rate of blood transfusion (8.3% versus 58.1%, p < 0.01), and shorter hospitalization (5.0 versus 11.0 days, p < 0.01). The median follow-up was 31 months. The LRH 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival were 77.1%, 61.6%, and 46.2% versus 82.3%, 66.5%, and 29.5% for ORH (p = 0.77). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates of the two groups were 73.4%, 62.0%, and 44.3% versus 66.1%, 44.1%, and 14.7%, respectively (p = 0.22).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic repeated hepatectomy is safe and practicable with great short-term results for selected patients.