Laparoscopic Segment 1 with Partial IVC Resection in Advanced Cirrhosis: How to Do It Safely

An inferior vena cava-priority approach in laparoscopic isolated hepatic caudate lobectomy

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic isolated caudate lobectomy is still a challenging operation for surgeons. The access route of the operation plays a vital role during laparoscopic caudate lobectomy. There are few references regarding this technique. Here, we introduce a preferred inferior vena cava (IVC) approach in laparoscopic caudate lobectomy.

METHODS

Twenty-one consecutive patients with caudate hepatic tumours between June 2016 and December 2021 were included in this study. All of them received laparoscopic caudate lobectomy involving an IVC priority approach. The IVC priority approach refers to prioritizing the dissection of the IVC from the liver parenchyma before proceeding with the conventional left or right approach. It emphasizes the importance of the IVC dissection during process. Clinical data, intraoperative parameters and postoperative results were evaluated. Sixteen patients were performed pure IVC priority approach, while 5 patients underwent a combined approach. We subsequently compared the intraoperative and postoperative between the two groups.

RESULTS

All 21 patients were treated with laparoscopic technology. The operative time was 190.95 ± 92.65 min. The average estimated blood loss was 251.43 ± 247.45 ml, and four patients needed blood transfusions during the perioperative period. The average duration of hospital stay was 8.43 ± 2.64 (range from 6.0 to 16.0) days. Patients who underwent the pure inferior vena cava (IVC) approach required a shorter hepatic pedicle clamping time (26 vs. 55 min, respectively; P < 0.001) and operation time (150 vs. 380 min, respectively; P = 0.002) than those who underwent the combined approach. Hospitalization (7.0 vs. 9.0 days, respectively; P = 0.006) was shorter in the pure IVC group than in the combined group.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic caudate lobectomy with an IVC priority approach is safe and feasible for patients with caudate hepatic tumours.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for hepatic caudate lobectomy: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to investigate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic hepatic caudate lobectomy (LHCL) for treating liver tumor by comparing with the open hepatic caudate lobectomy (OHCL).

METHODS

In the LHCL group, we included 24 patients with liver tumor received LHCL in Qilu Hospital of the Shandong University from January 2014 to January 2019. Meanwhile, 24 matched liver tumor patients underwent OHCL in our hospital served as control. Then we compared the patient characteristics, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes between LHCL group and OHCL group.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in gender, age, degree of cirrhosis, tumor size, preoperative liver function, Child-Pugh grading, proportion of liver cirrhosis, and tumor size between LHCL group and OHCL group (P > 0.05). No death was reported in both groups. The length of incision in LHCL group was significantly lower than that in OHCL group (4.22 ± 1.14 cm vs. 22.46 ± 4.40 cm, P < 0.001). The intraoperative blood loss in LHCL group was significantly lower than that of OHCL group (116.82 ± 71.61 ml vs. 371.74 ± 579.35 ml, P = 0.047). The total operation time, Pringle maneuver occlusion time, and blocking rate in LHCL group showed no statistical difference compared with those of the OHCL group (P > 0.05). The VAS scores at postoperative 24 and 48 h showed no statistical differences between LHCL group and OHCL group (P > 0.05). Compared with the OHCL group, significant decrease was noticed in the proportion of patients with severe pain 48 h after surgery (0 vs. 4.25 ± 0.46, P < 0.001) and dezocine consumption (90.45 ± 45.77 mg vs. 131.6 ± 81.30 mg, P = 0.0448) in the LHCL group.

CONCLUSION

LHCL is effective and feasible for treating liver tumor, which is featured by reducing intraoperative blood loss and serious pain.

A Double Suspension Technique for Laparoscopic Isolated Caudate Lobectomy

Background: Laparoscopic isolated caudate lobectomy is still a challenging procedure for hepatobiliary surgeons because of its deep location and narrow operating space. Hilar exposure and adequate operation space play an important role during laparoscopic caudate lobectomy. Very few references are available on this technique, and in this study, we present a new suspension technique to assist laparoscopic caudate lobectomy. Materials and Methods: The data of patients with caudate hepatic tumors who underwent laparoscopic isolated caudate lobectomy with or without the double suspension technique at the Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Results: A total of 25 patients underwent laparoscopic isolated caudate lobectomy at Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital between June 2016 and March 2022. Eight patients had perioperative complications, and no patient died within 30 days after surgery. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of conversion rate (8.3% versus 7.7%; P = .954), complication rate (25.0% versus 38.5%; P = .480), length of stay (8.0 [6.0-11.0] days versus 9.0 [6.0-19.0] days; P = .098), and postoperative liver function changes. Patients who underwent resection in the suspension group had shorter operation time (154.9 ± 44.3 minutes versus 224 ± 86.3 minutes; P = .018), inferior vena cava dissection time (30.1 ± 5.4 minutes versus 44.8 ± 7.4 minutes; P < .001), and less bleeding (125.0 [20-800.0] mL versus 350 [80-850.0] mL, P = .011). Conclusions: This double suspension technique is a safe and feasible method to assist laparoscopic caudate lobectomy. It provides clear exposure and adequate surgical space, thereby shortening the operation time and reducing intraoperative blood loss.

Safety and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Caudate Lobectomy: A Systematic Review

Resection of the caudate lobe of the liver is considered a highly challenging type of liver resection due to the region’s intimacy with critical vascular structures and deep anatomic location inside the abdominal cavity. Laparoscopic resection of the caudate lobe is considered one of the most challenging laparoscopic liver procedures. The objective of our systematic review was to evaluate the safety, technical feasibility and main outcomes of laparoscopic caudate lobectomy LCL. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken for studies published until September 2021. A total of 20 studies comprising 221 patients were included. Of these subjects, 36% were women, whereas the vast majority of resections (66%) were performed for malignant tumors. Tumor size varied significantly between 2 and 160 mm in the largest diameter. The mean operative time was 210 min (range 60–740 min), and estimated blood loss was 173.6 mL (range 50–3600 mL). The median hospital length of stay LOS was 6.5 days (range 2–15 days). Seven cases of conversion to open were reported. The vast majority of patients (93.7%) underwent complete resection (R0) of their tumors. Thirty-six out of 221 patients developed postoperative complications, with 5.8% of all patients developing a major complication (Clavien–Dindo classification ≥ III).No perioperative deaths were reported by the included studies. LCL seems to be a safe and feasible alternative to open caudate lobectomy OCL in selected patients when undertaken in high-volume centers by experienced surgeons.

Laparoscopic Caudate Hepatectomy for a Recurrent Tumor Behind the Vena Cava After Multiple Open Hepatectomies (With Video)

BACKGROUND

Caudate hepatectomy is one of the most difficult procedures among liver surgeries because of its deep location and proximity to the inferior vena cava (IVC), particularly in patients with a history of open hepatectomies. 1,2,3 METHODS: A 77-year-old man underwent three open hepatectomies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including a sub-segmentectomy of S6 and partial hepatectomies of S7 and S8 during follow-up for hepatitis C virus-associated liver cirrhosis. However, HCC recurred in the caudate lobe behind the IVC (Supplemental video file 1). We lysed the severe adhesion in the upper abdomen, including the liver hilum, and exposed the ventral surface of the caudate lobe. We then used a Nathanson retractor to ventrally retract the severely enlarged left lobe. To counteract the severe adhesion that prevented us from controlling the hepatoduodenal ligament, we used the laparoscopic Satinsky vascular clamp for hilar inflow control. Using the anterior approach, we performed parenchymal resection from the distal side of the caudate lobe. Then, we gradually exposed the ventral surface of the IVC and separated the caudate lobe from the IVC. The IVC ligament was divided, and the caudate lobe, including the tumor behind the IVC, was removed.

RESULTS

The operation time was 229 min with a total hepatic hilar clamping time of 69 min and blood loss of 10 mL. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 8 without any complications. Pathological examination revealed moderately differentiated HCC (pT1N0M0) with a negative surgical margin.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach using specialized laparoscopic instruments is feasible for a tumor located in the caudate lobe behind the IVC, even in patients with a history of multiple open hepatectomies.