LAPAROSCOPIC HEPATECTOMY: FAD, FOOLHARDY OR FUTURE

Modified hepatic vascular occlusion facilitates hepatectomy for malignant hepatic tumor in laparoscopy

PURPOSE

The parenchymal transection and bleeding are important problems in laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH). The study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LH for a malignant hepatic tumor (MHT) with hepatic vascular occlusion (HVO) only using a monopolar electrocautery.

METHODS

A total of 31 patients' profiles, operative data, clinical outcomes, pathologic findings, and follow-up information were collected who underwent LH with HVO.

RESULTS

The median operative time was 176 minutes and the median postoperative hospital stay was 9 days. The median estimated blood loss was 310 mL. The median tumor size was 4.6 cm and the median surgical margin was 12 mm.The ischemia injury to the liver in patients subjected to selective HVO was less than that in patients subjected to the Pringle maneuver.

CONCLUSIONS

HVO facilitates LH in transecting liver parenchyma and reduces bleeding, making LH safe and feasible only using monopolar electrocautery in selected patients with malignancies. Moreover, the selective HVO have more advantages over the Pringle maneuver in decreasing ischemic injury.

Enhanced recovery programmes in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The terms ‘enhanced recovery after surgery’, ‘enhanced recovery programme’ (ERP) and ‘fast track surgery’ refer to multimodal strategies aiming to streamline peri-operative care pathways, to maximise effectiveness and minimise costs. While the results of ERP in colorectal surgery are well reported, there have been no reviews examining if these concepts could be applied safely to hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery. The aim of this systematic review was to appraise the current evidence for ERP in HPB surgery.

METHODS

A MEDLINE® literature search was undertaken using the keywords ‘enhanced recovery’, ‘fast-track’, ‘peri-operative’, ‘surgery’, ‘pancreas’ and ‘liver’ and their derivatives such as ‘pancreatic’ or ‘hepatic’. The primary endpoint was length of post-operative hospital stay. Secondary endpoints were morbidity, mortality and readmission rate.

RESULTS

Ten articles were retrieved describing an ERP. ERP protocols varied slightly between studies. A reduction in length of stay was a consistent finding following the incorporation of ERP when compared with historical controls. This was not at the expense of increased rates of readmission, morbidity or mortality in any study.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of an ERP in HPB surgery appears safe and feasible. Currently, many of the principles of the multimodal pathway are derived from the colorectal ERP and distinct differences exist, which may impede its implementation in HPB surgery.

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.

Open versus laparoscopic resection for liver tumours

BACKGROUND

The issue under debate is whether laparoscopic liver resections for malignant tumours produce outcomes which are comparable with conventional, open liver resections.

METHODS

Literature review on liver resection and laparoscopy.

RESULTS

There are no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published that provide any evidence for the benefits of laparoscopic liver resections for liver tumours. In case-control series reporting short-term outcomes, laparoscopic liver resection has been shown to have the advantage of a reduced length of hospital stay. There are as yet, however, no adequate long-term survival studies demonstrating that laparoscopic liver resection is oncologically equivalent to open resection.

DISCUSSION

The challenge for the near future is to test the oncological integrity of laparoscopic liver resection in controlled trials in the same way that we have learned from the RCTs carried out in laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. It is likely that laparoscopic liver resection will then have to compete with fast-track, open liver resection. Already, concerns have been raised regarding the learning curve required to master the techniques of laparoscopic liver resection.