Are Large Hepatocellular Carcinomas Still a Contraindication for Laparoscopic Liver Resection?

A meta-analysis: laparoscopic versus open liver resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The indication of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for treating large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial. In this study, we compared the short-term and long-term outcomes of LLR and open liver resection (OLR) for large HCC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched eligible articles about LLR versus OLR for large HCC in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE and performed a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eight publications involving 1,338 patients were included. Among them, 495 underwent LLR and 843 underwent OLR. The operation time was longer in the LLR group (MD: 22.23, 95% CI: 4.14-40.33, p = 0.02). but the postoperative hospital stay time was significantly shorter (MD : -4.88, CI: -5.55 to -4.23, p < 0.00001), and the incidence of total postoperative complications and major complications were significantly fewer (OR: 0.49, 95% CI:0.37-0.66, p < 0.00001; OR: 0.54, 95% CI:0.36 - 0.82, p = 0.003, respectively). Patients in the laparoscopic group had no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative transfusion rate, resection margin size, R0 resection rate, three-year overall survival (OS) and three-year disease-free survival (DFS).

CONCLUSION

LLR for large HCC is safe and feasible. This surgical strategy will not affect the long-term outcomes of patients.

Current Status of Laparoscopic Liver Resection

The evolution of laparoscopic liver surgery, originating in the 1990s, has been marked by significant advancements and milestones, overcoming initial technical hurdles and gaining widespread acceptance within the surgical community as a precise and safe alternative to open procedures. Along this journey, numerous challenges emerged, leading to the accumulation of evidence and the development of guidelines aimed at assisting surgeons in determining the safety, suitability, and complexity of laparoscopic liver resection. This chapter provides a thorough examination of key aspects of laparoscopic liver resection, including difficulty scoring systems, criteria for patient selection, technical considerations, outcomes across different types of liver lesions, and the innovative solutions developed to address challenges, thus offering a comprehensive overview of laparoscopic liver resection, and highlighting its evolving significance in modern hepatobiliary surgery.

Chinese Medicine Prolongs Overall Survival of Chinese Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer: Treatment Pattern and Survival Analysis of a 20-Year Real-World Study

OBJECTIVE

To describe the treatment patterns and survival status of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) in China in the past two decades, and objectively evaluate the impact of standardized Chinese medicine (CM) treatment on the survival of AGC patients.

METHODS

This multicenter registry designed and propensity score analysis study described the diagnosis characteristics, treatment-pattern development and survival status of AGC from 10 hospitals in China between January 1, 2000 and July 31, 2021. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated between non-CM cohort (standard medical treatment) and CM cohort (integrated standard CM treatment ≥3 months). Propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were performed to adjust any difference in average outcomes for bias.

RESULTS

A total of 2,001 patients histologically confirmed locally advanced and/or metastasis stomach and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma were enrolled. Among them, 1,607 received systemic chemotherapy, 215 (10.74%) accepted molecular targeted therapy, 44 (2.2%) received checkpoint inhibitor therapy, and 769 (38.43%) received CM. Two-drug regimen was the main choice for first-line treatment, with fluoropyrimidine plus platinum as the most common regimen (530 cases, 60.09%). While 45.71% (16 cases) of patients with HER2 amplification received trastuzumab in first-line. The application of apatinib increased (33.33%) in third-line. The application of checkpoint inhibitors has increased since 2020. COX analysis showed that Lauren mixed type (P=0.017), cycles of first-line treatment >6 (P=0.000), CM (P=0.000), palliative gastrectomy (P=0.000), trastuzumab (P=0.011), and apatinib (P=0.008) were independent prognostic factors for the OS of AGC. After PSM and IPTW, the median OS of CM cohort and non-CM cohort was 18.17 and 12.45 months, respectively (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world practice for AGC in China, therapy choices consisted with guidelines. Two-drug regimen was the main first-line choice. Standardized CM treatment was an independent prognostic factor and could prolong the OS of Chinese patients with AGC. (Registration No. NCT02781285).

Laparoscopic anatomic vs. nonanatomic liver resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma (≥5 cm) in the right lobe

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impacts and outcomes of laparoscopic anatomic liver resection (LAR) and laparoscopic nonanatomic resection (LNAR) in patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the right lobe of the liver.

BACKGROUND

There are few comparative studies of LAR and LNAR for large HCC.

METHOD

Three hundred thirty-seven patients underwent liver resection for large HCC (≥5 cm) at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, Korea, between January 2004 and December 2022. After the exclusion of patients treated with open hepatic resection and those who had left-lobe or bilobar tumors, 94 patients were ultimately included. Patients were divided into LAR group (61 patients) and LNAR group (33 patients). After propensity score matching (PSM) with 1:1 matching, 31 patients were included in each group. The outcomes in the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

LAR group had longer operative time than LNAR group (333.7 ± 113.7 vs 210 ± 117.6 min, respectively, P < 0.001), wider safety margin (1.4 ± 1.5 vs 0.7 ± 0.7 cm, respectively, P = 0.015), and lower incidence of recurrence (25.8% vs. 54.8%, respectively, P = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

LAR required longer operative time, achieved wider safety margin, and had lower incidence of recurrence than LNAR.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score study

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial, especially for tumors larger than 5 cm. We compared the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection (OLR) for large HCC.

METHODS

Patients with large HCC after curative hepatectomy were enrolled. To compare the short-term outcomes, propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) were performed to reduce the effect of confounding factors, respectively. Subsequently, Cox-regression analyses were conducted to identify the independent risk factors associated with decreased recurrence-free survival (RFS) and poor overall survival (OS).

RESULT

There were 265 patients enrolled in the final analysis: 146 who underwent OLR and 119 who underwent LLR. There was no significant difference between the OLR and LLR groups according to PSM and IPTW analysis (all P > 0.05). Multivariable analysis revealed that LLR was not independently associated with poorer OS (HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.80-1.67, P = 0.448) or RFS (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.88-1.70, P = 0.238).

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences in perioperative complications or long-term prognosis between LLR and OLR for large HCC, which provides evidence for standard laparoscopic surgical practice with adequate surgeon experience and careful patient selection.

Challenging Scenarios and Debated Indications for Laparoscopic Liver Resections for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) have been increasingly adopted for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with safe short- and long-term outcomes reported worldwide. Despite this, lesions in the posterosuperior segments, large and recurrent tumors, portal hypertension, and advanced cirrhosis currently represent challenging scenarios in which the safety and efficacy of the laparoscopic approach are still controversial. In this systematic review, we pooled the available evidence on the short-term outcomes of LLRs for HCC in challenging clinical scenarios. All randomized and non-randomized studies reporting LLRs for HCC in the above-mentioned settings were included. The literature search was run in the Scopus, WoS, and Pubmed databases. Case reports, reviews, meta-analyses, studies including fewer than 10 patients, non-English language studies, and studies analyzing histology other than HCC were excluded. From 566 articles, 36 studies dated between 2006 and 2022 fulfilled the selection criteria and were included in the analysis. A total of 1859 patients were included, of whom 156 had advanced cirrhosis, 194 had portal hypertension, 436 had large HCCs, 477 had lesions located in the posterosuperior segments, and 596 had recurrent HCCs. Overall, the conversion rate ranged between 4.6% and 15.5%. Mortality and morbidity ranged between 0.0% and 5.1%, and 18.6% and 34.6%, respectively. Full results according to subgroups are described in the study. Advanced cirrhosis and portal hypertension, large and recurrent tumors, and lesions located in the posterosuperior segments are challenging clinical scenarios that should be carefully approached by laparoscopy. Safe short-term outcomes can be achieved provided experienced surgeons and high-volume centers.

Laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a single center propensity-score-matching comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes and long-term survival

BACKGROUND

Although the benefits of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in most circumstances are evident, the benefits for large HCC are contentious. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes and survival after LH versus open hepatectomy (OH) in large HCC patients.

METHODS

An analysis of prospectively maintained database included 215 hepatectomies for large HCC (diameter ≥ 5 cm). The operative and survival outcomes were compared between the LH group (n = 109) and the OH group (n = 106). Propensity score matching (PSM) 1:1 included 70 patients in each group. The entire cohort multivariable analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with surgical complications and suboptimal recurrence-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

After PSM, baseline characteristics and the extent of liver resection were similar in both groups. The LH group had a shorter hospital stay than the OH group (7 vs 9.5 days, p = 0.001). The R0 resection rate, complication rate, overall survival, and RFS were similar between the groups. The multivariate analyses revealed two independent factors predicting surgical complication (major resection; p < 0.001 and large volume blood loss; p = 0.042), and 3 independent factors predicting suboptimal RFS including R1 resection (p = 0.011), multifocal HCC (p = 0.005), and microvascular invasion (p = 0.001). LH was not associated with surgical complication and suboptimal RFS.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the benefits of LH by improving the perioperative outcomes, without long-term survival inferiority in selected large HCC patients compared with conventional OH. LH can be an attractive option for large HCC treatment.

A Case-Matched Analysis of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Located in Posterosuperior Segments of the Liver According to Adaption of Developed Techniques

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for the hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in posterosuperior (PS) segment is technically demanding, but has been overcome by accumulated experiences and technological improvements. We analyzed peri-and post-operative results before and after the adaptation of the enhanced techniques. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 246 patients who underwent LLR for HCC in PS segments from September 2003 to December 2019. According to the introduction of advanced techniques including intercostal trocars, Pringle maneuver, and semi-lateral French position, the patients were divided into Group 1 (n = 43), who underwent LLR from September 2003 to December 2011, and Group 2 (n = 203), who underwent LLR from January 2012 to December 2019. Among these cases, 136 patients (Group 1 = 34, Group 2 = 102) were selected by case-matched analysis using perioperative variables. Results: Mean operation time (362 min vs. 291 min) and hospital stay (11 days vs. 8 days, p = 0.023) were significantly longer in Group 1 than Group 2. Otherwise, disease-free survival (DFS) rate was shorter and resection margin (1.3 mm vs. 0.7 mm, p = 0.034) were smaller in Group 2 than Group 1. However, there was no difference in type of complication (p = 0.084), severity of complication graded by the Clavien–Dindo grade system (p = 0.394), and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates (p = 0.986). In case-matched analysis, operation time (359 min vs. 266 min p = 0.002) and hospital stay (11.5 days vs. 8.0 days, p = 0.032) were significantly different, but there was no significant difference in resection margin, DFS, and OS. Conclusions: The adaptation of improved techniques has reduced the complexity of LLR in PS segments.

The risk factors of intraoperative conversion during laparoscopic hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Intraoperative conversion to laparotomy is a challenge during laparoscopic hepatectomy; however, the risk factors of conversion have been poorly elucidated.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we computed pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each risk factor and evaluated heterogeneity using a L'Abbe plot, Galbraith radial plot, Cochran's Q test, and I². An extended funnel plot was used to evaluate the robustness of the results of meta-analysis. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were performed to determine sources of heterogeneity. Egger's test and Begg's test were used to assess publication bias.

RESULTS

A total of 25 eligible studies were enrolled in the meta-analysis. Higher body mass index (OR 1.346, 95% CI 1.055-1.717), hypertension (OR 1.387, 95% CI 1.100-1.749), male sex (OR 1.278, 95% CI 1.072-1.523), cirrhosis (OR 1.378, 95% CI 1.062-1.788), major resection (OR 2.041, 95% CI 1.748-2.382), posterosuperior tumor location (OR 2.420, 95% CI 1.923-3.044), and larger tumor diameter (OR 1.618, 95% CI 1.270-2.061) were found to be significantly related to intraoperative conversion during laparoscopic hepatectomy. Malignant tumor (OR 1.253, 95% CI 0.970-1.619), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists stage (OR 1.186, 95% CI 0.863-1.631), multiple tumors (OR 1.273, 95% CI 0.866-1.871), and abdominal surgery history (OR 1.236, 95% CI 0.589-2.597) were not associated with conversion. A history of abdominal surgery showed significant heterogeneity with an I² of 80.8% (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis indicated that heterogeneity was caused by the different number of patients among enrolled studies.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we identified a number of factors associated with intraoperative conversion during laparoscopic hepatectomy. Our findings can help patient risk evaluation to reduce the laparotomy conversion rate in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Impact of tumor size on the difficulty of minimally invasive liver resection

INTRODUCTION

We performed this study in order to investigate the impact of tumour size on the difficulty of MILR, as well as to elucidate the optimal tumour size cut-off/s to distinguish between 'easy' and 'difficult' MILRs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is retrospective review of 603 consecutive patients who underwent MILR between 2006 and 2019 of which 461 met the study inclusion criteria. We first conducted an exploratory analysis to visualize the associations between tumor size and various surrogates of laparoscopic difficulty in order to determine to optimal tumor size cutoff for stratification. Visual inspection of flexible spline-based models as well as quantitative evidence determined that perioperative outcomes differed between patients with tumor size of 30-69 mm and tumours ≥70 mm. These cutoffs were used for further downstream analyses.

RESULTS

The cohort of 461 patients was divided into 3 groups based on tumour diameter size. Patients with larger tumours experienced longer operating times ((PGroup 2 vs 1<0.001, PGroup 3 vs 1<0.001, PGroup 3 vs 2<0.001), higher blood loss (PGroup 2 vs 1<0.001, PGroup 3 vs 1<0.001, PGroup 3 vs 2<0.001), as well as significantly longer hospital stay (PGroup 2 vs 1<0.001, PGroup 3 vs 1<0.001, PGroup 3 vs 2<0.001). There was a monotonic trend towards increasing blood transfusion rates (P = 0.006), overall morbidity (P = 0.029) and 90-day mortality rates (P = 0.047) with increasing tumour size.

CONCLUSION

Although tumour size of 30 mm serves as an optimal cut-off for predicting difficult resections as per the Iwate criteria, a trichotomy (<30 mm, 30-69 mm, ≥70 mm) may provide additional granularity. Further large-scale prospective studies are needed to corroborate these findings.

Recent advances in the surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing, despite effective antiviral treatment for hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus infection and the application of preventive measures such as vaccination at birth against HBV infection. This is mainly due to the increase in metabolic syndrome and its hepatic components, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and steatohepatitis. Liver resection and transplantation are the main treatment options, offering long-term survival and potential cure. In this review, the recent advances in the surgical management of HCC are presented. More specifically, the role of liver resection in the intermediate and advanced stages, according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification, is analyzed. In addition, the roles of minimally invasive surgery and of living-related liver transplantation in the management of patients with HCC are discussed. Finally, recent data on the role of molecular markers in the early diagnosis and recurrence of HCC are presented. The management of HCC is complex, as there are several options for each stage of the disease. In order for, each patient to get the maximum benefit, an individualized approach is suggested, in specialized liver units, where cases are discussed in multidisciplinary tumor boards.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity case-matched analysis of the long-term survival

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS

Despite the widespread popularity of laparoscopic surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) remains in evolution. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤7 cm.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with HCC treated by hepatectomy from October 2000 to May 2019 were included. Excluding tumors larger than 7 cm, 1:2 propensity score matching was performed between laparoscopic and open hepatectomies. The perioperative outcomes, 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients who underwent LLR were matched to 90 open hepatectomy (OH) during the same period. LLR group had shorter median hospital stay (5 days vs. 9 days, p=0.00) but required longer operative time (326.0 minutes vs. 272.5 minutes, p=0.018) than the OH group. The 5-year overall survival was better in the LLR group (84.9% vs. 61.1%; p=0.036), though there was no significant difference in the 5-year disease free survival (20.0% vs. 22.2%, p=0.613). The rate of R0 resection was comparable between the 2 groups with a slightly better margin distance in the LLR (5 mm vs. 3 mm, p=0.043).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection is safe and feasible for cirrhotic patients with HCC size up to 7 cm. It has better short-term outcomes and comparable perioperative blood loss and complication rates. The resection margin is not jeopardized and the 5-year overall and disease-free survivals are comparable with the open group.

Improved Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Located in Posterosuperior Segments of the Liver

BACKGROUND

LLR is widely adapted for HCC, while LLR in PS segments is still challenging. With recent improvement of techniques and accumulation of experiences, LLR in PS segments is feasible, but studies investigating the result after the modifications are lacking.

METHODS

In this single-center, retrospective study, 149 patients who underwent LLR for HCC located in PS segments from September 2003 to December 2016 were analyzed. The patients were divided into Group 1 (n=43) and Group 2 (n=106) who underwent LLR before and after 2012, respectively, when advanced techniques including use of intercostal trocars, Pringle maneuver, and semi-lateral position of patient were introduced. Also, these patients were compared with those who underwent open liver resection (OLR; n=124) for HCC in PS segments during the same period.

RESULTS

Mean operative time (394.7 minutes vs 331.2 minutes; P=0.013), intraoperative blood loss (1545.8 ml vs 1208.2 ml; P=0.020), and hospital stay (11.6 days vs 9.2, P<0.001) were significantly less in Group 2. Postoperative complication rate (18.6% vs 18.9%; P=0.970), open conversion rate (23% vs 17%; P=0.374), 5-year overall (79% vs 89%; P=0.607) and 5-year disease-free (52% vs 53%; P=0.657) survival rates were not significantly different between the groups. Compared to the OLR group, complication rate (40.3% vs 18.8%; P< 0.001) and hospital stay (17.6 days vs 9.7 days; P< 0.001) were significantly lower in the LLR group.

CONCLUSION

The complexity of LLR for HCC in PS segments is being gradually overcome by the introduction of advanced techniques.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Left Lateral Segmentectomy for Large Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

With the advancement of endoscopic technology, laparoscopic liver resection has become the standard procedure for left lateral segmentectomy. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes between laparoscopic and open left lateral segmentectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) >5 cm.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 66 patients underwent left lateral segmentectomy for HCC (>5 cm) during the period spanning between 2013 and 2015. To overcome selection bias, 1:3 match using propensity score-matched analysis was performed between laparoscopic and open liver resection.

RESULTS

Relatively smaller tumor size (6.0 vs. 7.0 cm; P=0.030) and more frequent incidence of complete tumor capsule (93.3% vs. 58.8%; P=0.013) were observed in the laparoscopic group compared with the open group before matching. Although the longer operation time (195 vs. 150 min; P=0.022) was consumed in the laparoscopic procedure after matching, the laparoscopic group had shorter postoperative hospital stay (6 vs. 7 d; P=0.002) and less blood loss volume (50 vs. 100 mL; P=0.022). The Pringle maneuver for hepatic inflow occlusion was more likely to be applied in patients who underwent open surgery. The incidence of postoperative complication seemed to be lower in the laparoscopic group (6.7%) compared with that in the open group (11.8%) before matching. On the basis of propensity score-matched analysis, the complication rates were comparable between the 2 groups (7.1% vs. 6.7%, P=0.953). No difference in the 1-year and 3-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates was found between the laparoscopic and open groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic left lateral segmentectomy for large HCC patients showed better perioperative outcomes and equivalent oncologic outcomes as the open procedure, providing evidence for considering as a standard laparoscopic practice through careful selection.

Long-term surgical outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing laparoscopic vs. open liver resection: A retrospective and propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

There is limited availability of well-designed comparative studies using propensity score matching with a sufficient sample size to compare laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) vs. open liver resection (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare the feasibility and safety of LLR and OLR in patients with HCC.

METHODS

We enrolled 168 patients who underwent elective LLR (n = 58) or OLR (n = 110) for HCC in two tertiary medical centers between November 2009 and December 2018. Patients who underwent LLR were propensity score-matched to patients who underwent OLR in a 1:1 ratio. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes and disease-free and overall survival rates were prospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

Among the 116 patients analyzed, 58 each belonged to the LLR and OLR groups. We performed 85 segmentectomies or sectionectomies, 19 left-lateral-sectionectomies, 9 left-hemihepatectomies, and 3 right-hemihepatectomies. There was no significant difference in age, sex, Child-Pugh class, original liver disease, preoperative alpha-fetoprotein, tumor size, tumor location, overall morbidity, and operative time. There was a significant difference in the length of postoperative hospital stay between the two groups (LLR vs OLR; 8 vs 10 days, p = 0.003). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates in the LLR and OLR groups were 96.6%, 92.8%, and 73.3% and 93.1%, 88.8%, and 76.1%, respectively (p = 0.642). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates in the LLR and OLR groups were 84.4%, 64.0%, and 60.2% and 93.1%, 67.4%, and 63.9%, respectively (p = 0.391).

CONCLUSION

LLR for HCC can be performed safely with acceptable short-term and long-term outcomes compared with OLR.

Robotic approach to the liver: Open surgery in a closed abdomen or laparoscopic surgery with technical constraints?

The application of the minimally invasive approach has shown to be safe and effective for liver surgery and is in constant growth. The indications for laparoscopic surgery are steadily increasing across the field. In the early 2000s, robotic surgery led to some additional improvements, such as tremor filtration, instrument stability, 3D view and more comfort for the surgeon. These techniques bring in some advantages compared to the traditional OLR: less blood loss, shorter admissions, fewer adhesions, and a faster postoperative recovery and better outcomes in case of further hepatectomy for tumor recurrence has been shown. Concerning which is the best minimally invasive approach between laparoscopic and robotic surgery, the evidence is still conflicting. The latter shows good potential, since the endo-wristed instruments work similarly to the surgeon's hands, even with an intact abdominal wall. However, the technique is still under development, burdened by important costs, and limited by the lack of some instruments available for the laparoscopic approach. The paucity of universally accepted and proven data, especially concerning long-term outcomes, hampers drawing univocal acceptance at present. Furthermore, the number of variables related both to the patient and the disease further complicates the decision leading to a treatment tailored to each patient with strict selection. This review aims to explore the main differences between laparoscopic and robotic surgery, focusing on indications, operative technique and current debated clinical issues in recent literature.

Indications for laparoscopic liver resection of mass-forming intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

We investigated the indications for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of mass-forming intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (MF-ICC), including the need for lymph node dissection for improved postoperative prognosis.

METHODS

This study involved 36 patients who underwent surgery for solitary peripheral MF-ICC. Fifteen patients underwent LLR, and 21 underwent open liver resection (OLR). Surgical outcomes and prognostic factors were investigated to determine the indications for LLR.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed in perioperative outcomes between patients who underwent LLR and OLR. A significantly worse disease-free survival (DFS) rate was observed in patients who preoperatively had a tumor diameter ≥3 cm, vascular invasion on diagnostic imaging, and elevated serum carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels. A significantly worse overall survival (OS) rate was observed in patients with a tumor diameter ≥3 cm, vascular invasion on diagnostic imaging, and elevated serum CA19-9 levels. Therefore, a tumor diameter ≥3 cm, vascular invasion on diagnostic imaging, and elevated serum CA19-9 and CEA levels were determined to be preoperative prognostic factors. DFS and OS rates were significantly better in patients without these factors. Moreover, in six patients without these factors who underwent LLR, neither lymph node metastasis nor postoperative recurrence was observed.

CONCLUSION

A tumor diameter ≥3 cm, vascular invasion on diagnostic imaging, and elevated serum CA19-9 and CEA levels are preoperative prognostic factors for peripheral MF-ICC. LLR is indicated for patients without these factors.

Modified liver hanging maneuver in laparoscopic major hepatectomy: the learning curve and evolution of indications

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is a technically challenging procedure requiring a steep learning curve. The liver hanging maneuver is a useful technique in liver resection, especially for large or invasive tumors, a relative contraindication of the laparoscopic approach. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the learning curve for laparoscopic major hepatectomy using the liver hanging maneuver and extended indications.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic major hepatectomy using the liver hanging maneuver by a single surgeon from January 2013 and September 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Our hanging technique involves placing the hanging tape along the inferior vena cava for right-sided hepatectomy or the ligamentum venosum for left-sided hepatectomy. The upper end of the tape was placed at the lateral side of the major hepatic veins. The learning curve for operating time and blood loss was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method.

RESULTS

Among 53 patients, 18 underwent right hepatectomy, 26 underwent left hepatectomy, and 9 underwent right posterior sectionectomy. CUSUM analysis showed that operative time and blood loss improved after the 30th laparoscopic major hepatectomy. The 53 consecutive patients were divided into two groups (early, patients 1-30; late, patients 31-53). The median operative time was lower in the late group, but the difference was not statistically significant (270 vs. 245 min, p = 0.261). The median blood loss was also significantly lower in the late group (350 vs. 150 ml, p < 0.001). Large tumors (measuring > 10 cm) and tumors in proximity to major vessels were significantly higher in the late group (0 vs. 17.4%, p = 0.018; 3.3 vs. 21.7%, p = 0.036; respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that laparoscopic major hepatectomy using the modified liver hanging maneuver has a learning curve of 30 cases. After procedure standardization, the indications have gradually been extended to large or invasive tumors.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Patients with Multiple Hepatocellular Carcinomas Meeting the Milan Criteria: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Background: Until now, there is little knowledge about the value of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for patients with multiple hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC). This study was performed to assess the efficacy and outcomes of LLR versus open liver resection (OLR) for patients with multiple HCC meeting the Milan criteria. Methods: One hundred fifteen patients with multiple HCC meeting the Milan criteria who underwent liver resection from April 2015 to March 2018 were enrolled into this study. According to the different surgical procedures, patients were divided into LLR group and OLR group. Perioperative and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups after propensity score matching (PSM) with 1:1 match. Results: Thirty three patients were included into each group after PSM with well-balanced basic level. The intraoperative blood loss in LLR group was less than OLR group before PSM (median, 200 vs. 300 mL, P = .004), but the difference was not statistically significant after PSM (median, 200 vs. 300 mL, P = .064). LLR group showed shorter postoperative hospital stay when compared with OLR group (median, 7 vs. 8 days, respectively, P = .014). The perioperative complications and early mortality were comparable in both groups. There were no significant differences in the term of overall survival (OS. P = .502) or recurrence-free survival (RFS. P = .887) between the two groups after PSM. Conclusions: LLR could be safely and feasibly performed for patients with multiple HCC meeting the Milan criteria in selected patients. It does not increase the risks of postoperative complications and has a similar oncological outcomes compared to OLR.

Laparoscopic liver resection: a review of current indications and surgical techniques

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been the most impressive development in the field of liver surgery in recent two decades. Technical innovations and experience accumulation have made LLR a safe and effective procedure with faster postoperative recovery. Despite the fast spreading of the procedure, details regarding the indications, oncological outcomes and technical essentials were still disputable. To address these issues, two international consensus conferences were hold to update the knowledge in this field. The statements of the both conferences were not conclusive and more high-quality researches are required. In this article, we reviewed the development and the current state of LLR. Indications, outcomes, surgical techniques and devices used in LLR were also discussed.

The Asia Pacific Consensus Statement on Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Report from the 7th Asia-Pacific Primary Liver Cancer Expert Meeting Held in Hong Kong

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has been gaining momentum, and it has become an accepted practice after the two international consensus conferences where experts worked up guidelines to standardize this approach and improve its safety. However, most laparoscopic hepatectomies were performed in patients with liver metastases. The concurrent presence of liver cirrhosis with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) poses a great challenge to clinicians trying to establish a routine use of laparoscopic liver resection for HCC.

SUMMARY

The first Asia Pacific consensus meeting on laparoscopic liver resection for HCC was held in July 2016 in Hong Kong. A group of expert liver surgeons with experience in both open and laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC convened to formulate recommendations on the role and perspective of laparoscopic liver resection for primary liver cancer. The recommendations consolidate the most recent evidence pertaining to laparoscopic hepatectomy together with the latest thinking of practicing clinicians involved in laparoscopic hepatectomy, and give detailed guidance on how to deploy the treatment effectively for patients in need.

KEY MESSAGE

The panel of experts gathered evidence and produced recommendations providing guidance on the safe practice of laparoscopic hepatectomy for patients with HCC and cirrhosis. The inherent advantage of the laparoscopic approach may result in less blood loss if the procedure is performed in experienced centers. The laparoscopic approach to minor hepatectomy, particularly left lateral sectionectomy, is a preferred practice for HCC at experienced centers. Laparoscopic major liver resection for HCC remains a technically challenging operation, and it should be carried out in centers of excellence. There is emerging evidence that laparoscopic liver resection produces a better oncological outcome for HCC when compared with radiofrequency ablation, particularly when the lesions are peripherally located. Augmented features in laparoscopic liver resection, including indocyanine green fluorescence, 3D laparoscopy, and robot, will become important tools of surgical treatment in the near future. A combination of all of these features will enhance the experience of the surgeons, which may translate into better surgical outcomes. This is the first consensus workforce on laparoscopic liver resection for HCC, which is a unique condition that occurs in the Asia Pacific region.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Lesions Adjacent to Major Vessels: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for lesions adjacent to major vessels was still associated with difficulty and challenge. This study aimed to compare outcomes after LLR and open liver resection (OLR) of lesions adjacent to major vessels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with hepatic tumors close to main or second branches of Glisson's tree, to the major hepatic vein, or to the inferior vena cava within 1 cm between January 2015 and January 2017 was performed based on the propensity score matching (PSM) method. Perioperative and oncological outcomes were then evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients underwent LLR and 86 patients had OLR. After 1:1 PSM, well-matched 40 patients in each group were obtained. The operative time (240 versus 210 minutes, P = .012) in the LLR group was significantly longer than that in the OLR group, whereas blood loss (200 versus 400 mL, P = .003) was less in the laparoscopic group. The median hospital stay for LLR (6 versus 8 days, P = .032) was shorter than for the open procedure. No statistical differences was noted according to overall postoperative complications, but the OLR group tended to be vulnerable to more severe complications. For patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, the comparable oncological results in terms of 2-year overall survival (P = .898) and disease-free survival (P = .992) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR for tumors adjacent to major vessels appears to be feasible and safe in selected patients. LLR is associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and similar oncological outcomes compared with OLR.

Multidisciplinary management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Current approaches

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is a common primary hepatic tumor. However, its outcomes are usually worse than those of hepatocellular carcinoma owing to its non-specific presentation and detection at an advanced stage. The most widely used serum marker, carbohydrate antigen 19-9, is non-specific. Furthermore, imaging studies rarely identify any pathognomonic features. Surgery is the only treatment option that offers a chance of long-term survival. However, the resectability rate is low owing to the high frequencies of intrahepatic metastases, peritoneal carcinomatosis, or extrahepatic metastases. Surgical treatment should be tailored according to the macroscopic classification of ICC (e.g. mass-forming, periductal infiltrating, and intraductal growth types) because it reflects the tumor's dissemination pattern. Although lymph node metastasis is a negative prognostic factor, the importance and extent of lymph node dissection is still controversial. To improve patient survival, liver transplantation is considered in some patients with unresectable ICC, especially in those with an insufficient remnant liver volume. Minimally invasive procedures, including laparoscopic and robotic liver resection, have been tested and achieved comparable outcomes to conventional surgery in preliminary studies. No randomized trials have confirmed the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in ICC, and several trials have evaluated molecular-targeted agents as monotherapy or in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy. Multidisciplinary approaches are necessary to improve the outcomes of ICC.

Can laparoscopic liver resection provide a favorable option for patients with large or multiple intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas?

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for large or multiple intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (ICCs) remains equivocal. The main concerns are potential risks of inadequate resection margin, tumor rupture, uncontrollable bleeding, tumor seeding, and inadequate lymph node sampling. In this study, we aimed to determine the safety, feasibility, and oncological efficacy of LLR for large (≥5 cm) or multiple (≥2) ICCs.

METHODS

Among 50 patients receiving liver resection for ICC between May 2004 and January 2016, 12 patients who had undergone LLR for large or multiple ICCs (Group A, n = 12) were compared with 18 patients who had undergone LLR for small solitary ICCs (Group B, n = 18), as well were compared with 20 patients who had undergone open liver resection for large or multiple ICCs (Group C, n = 20). Perioperative and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Compared with Group B, Group A had fewer patients with T1 tumors (58.3 vs. 100%; P = 0.006) and a longer hospital stay (14 vs. 9 days; P = 0.039); operating time, blood loss, surgical margin, cases receiving lymph node dissection, conversion rates, and morbidity were comparable. There were no life-threatening complications and no mortality. No tumor rupture or dissemination occurred, nor did port-site recurrence follow surgery. After a median follow-up of 22 months, no difference was noted in 3-year overall survival (56.3 vs. 59.5%; P > 0.05) and recurrence-free survival (43.8 vs. 50%; P > 0.05) between the two groups. Similarly, perioperative and long-term outcomes were comparable between Group A and Group C.

CONCLUSION

LLR for large or multiple ICCs is technically safe, feasible, and oncologically effective in select patients. It provides a favorable option for patients seeking curative treatment. The minimally invasive nature will benefit these patients without compromising the oncological efficacy. Future larger-scale studies and well-designed randomized trials are warranted to evaluate this issue.

Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases

BACKGROUND

There is a need for high-level evidence regarding the added value of laparoscopic (LLR) compared with open (OLR) liver resection. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) undergoing LLR and OLR using propensity score matching to minimize bias.

METHODS

This was a single-centre retrospective study using a prospective database of patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM between August 2004 and April 2015. Co-variates selected for matching included: number and size of lesions, tumour location, extent and number of resections, phase of surgical experience, location and lymph node status of primary tumour, perioperative chemotherapy, unilobar or bilobar disease, synchronous or metachronous disease. Prematching and postmatching analyses were compared. Surgical and oncological outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Some 176 patients undergoing LLR and 191 having OLR were enrolled. After matching, 133 patients from each group were compared. At prematching analysis, patients in the LLR group showed a longer overall survival (OS) and higher R0 rate than those in the OLR group (P = 0·047 and P = 0·030 respectively). Postmatching analyses failed to confirm these results, showing similar OS and R0 rate between the LLR and OLR group (median OS: 55·2 versus 65·3 months respectively, hazard ratio 0·70 (95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 1·05; P = 0·082); R0 rate: 92·5 versus 86·5 per cent, P = 0·186). The 5-year OS rate was 62·5 (95 per cent c.i. 45·5 to 71·5) per cent) for OLR and 64·3 (48·2 to 69·5) per cent for LLR. Longer duration of surgery, lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative stay were found for LLR on postmatching analysis.

CONCLUSION

Propensity score matching showed that LLR for CRLM may provide R0 resection rates and long-term OS comparable to those for OLR, with lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative hospital stay.

Comparison of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma located in the posterosuperior segments or anterolateral segments: A case-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is an attractive option for treating liver tumors. Laparoscopic liver resection is more difficult for hepatocellular carcinomas located in the posterosuperior segments than for hepatocellular carcinomas in the anterolateral segments. We compared perioperative and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinomas located in the posterosuperior and anterolateral segments.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data for 230 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinomas between September 2003 and July 2014. Of these, 116 patients were selected by case-matched analysis using age, sex, tumor number and size, Child-Pugh class, and extent of liver resection. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to tumor location: the anterolateral group (n = 58) and the posterosuperior group (n = 58).

RESULTS

Operation time (355 minutes vs 212 minutes, P < .005), intraoperative blood loss (600 mL vs 410 mL, P < .001), and hospital stay (8.5 days vs 7 days, P = .040) were significantly greater in the posterosuperior group than in the anterolateral group. The open conversion (13.8% vs 10.3%, P = .777), postoperative complication (17.2% vs 10.3%, P = .420), 5-year overall survival (88.5% vs 85.7%, P = .370), and 5-year, recurrence-free survival (47.6% vs 40.9%, P = .678) rates were not significantly different between the posterosuperior and anterolateral groups.

CONCLUSION

Although laparoscopic liver resection is more difficult for hepatocellular carcinomas located in the posterosuperior segment, there were no differences in the short- and long-term outcomes between the posterosuperior and anterolateral groups. The perceived impact of tumor location on patient outcomes could be overcome by experience and technical improvements.

Current status and future perspective of laparoscopic surgery in hepatobiliary disease

Recent advances in minimally invasive surgery include laparoscopic and robotic surgery. These surgical techniques have changed the paradigm of surgical treatment for hepatobiliary diseases. Minimally invasive surgery has the advantages of minimal wound extension for cosmetic effect, early postoperative recovery, and few postoperative complications in patients. For laparoscopic liver resection, the indications have been expanded and oncological outcome was proven to be similar with open surgery in the malignant disease. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a classical operation for benign gallbladder diseases and the effort to decrease the surgical wound resulted to perform single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. For choledochal cyst, laparoscopic surgery is applied gradually despite of the difficulties associated with anastomosis, and robotic surgery for hepatobiliary disease is also performed for more minimally invasive surgery; however, while admitting the advantage of robotic surgery, robotic technology should be improved for development of more convenient and cheaper instrument and continuous efforts to enhance surgical technique to overcome long operation is necessary. In this review, the status and future perspectives of minimally invasive surgery for hepatobiliary diseases are summarized and discussed.

Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy by the Caudal Approach Versus Conventional Approach: A Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) is increasingly performed for the treatment of many liver diseases. However, it remains a challenging procedure and is limited to highly specialized centers. Increasing the safety and efficacy of LRH is crucial. This study evaluated the safety and feasibility of the novel caudal approach (CDA) in LRH and in comparison with the conventional approach (CA).

METHODS

Of a total of 40 patients who underwent LRH between June 2007 and July 2015 at our center, 10 cases underwent the CDA, while 30 underwent the CA. Operative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Clinical data and patient characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Only 1 patient required a laparoscopic-assisted procedure in the CDA group, while 14 patients were converted to laparotomy (n = 10) or laparoscopic-assisted procedures (n = 4) in the CA group, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .060). However, the difference in conversion to laparotomy between the two groups was significant (P = .043). In addition, when considering 23 patients with malignancies, the median surgical margin was significantly greater in the CDA group (n = 6) (20 mm versus 10 mm; P = .023) than in the CA group (n = 17). Other operative and postoperative outcomes were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CDA achieves safety and feasibility similar to that of the CA in LRH and requires relatively less conversion to laparotomy. In selected patients, the CDA offers an alternative option to the CA for LRH in experienced hands. Further studies with larger samples are warranted to evaluate the CDA.