Propensity score-matched analysis of laparoscopic-assisted and hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection versus pure laparoscopic liver resection: an international multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic-assisted (LALR) and hand-assisted (HALR) liver resections have been utilized during the early adoption phase by surgeons when transitioning from open surgery to pure LLR. To date, there are limited data reporting on the outcomes of LALR or HALR compared to LLR. The objective was to compare the perioperative outcomes after LALR and HALR versus pure LLR.

METHODS

This is an international multicentric analysis of 6609 patients undergoing minimal-invasive liver resection at 21 centers between 2004 and 2019. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed after propensity score matching (PSM) comparison between LALR and HALR versus LLR.

RESULTS

5279 cases met study criteria of whom 5033 underwent LLR (95.3%), 146 underwent LALR (2.8%) and 100 underwent HALR (1.9%). After 1:4 PSM, LALR was associated with inferior outcomes as evidenced by the longer postoperative stay, higher readmission rate, higher major morbidity rate and higher in-hospital mortality rate. Similarly, 1:6 PSM comparison between HALR and LLR also demonstrated poorer outcomes associated with HALR as demonstrated by the higher open conversion rate and higher blood transfusion rate. All 3 approaches technical variants demonstrated the same oncological radicality (R1 rate).

CONCLUSION

LALR and HALR performed during the learning curve was associated with inferior perioperative outcomes compared to pure LLR.

Long-term oncological outcomes for HALS/Hybrid vs pure laparoscopic approach in colorectal liver metastases: a propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing hand-assisted laparoscopic (HALS)/Hybrid and pure laparoscopic (PLS) resection for colorectal cancer liver metastasis have focused on short-term results, while long-term oncological outcomes remain understudied.

METHODS

We established a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study from four centers with experience in minimally invasive surgery between 2004 and 2020. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Other endpoints analyzed were intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize baseline differences.

RESULTS

A total of 219 HALS/Hybrid (57.8%) and 160 PLS (42.2%) patients were included. After PSM, 155 patients remained in each group. Operative time (182 vs. 248 min, p = 0.012), use of intraoperative ablation (12.3 vs. 4.5%, p = 0.024), positive resection margin (4.5 vs 13.2%, p = 0.012), and pringle time (21 vs. 37 min, p = 0.001) were higher in PLS group. DFS at 1, 3, 5, and 7 years in HALS/Hybrid and PLS groups were 65.4%, 39.3%, 37.5%, and 36.3% vs. 64.9%, 38.0%, 33.1%, and 33.1%, respectively (p = 0.84). OS at 1, 3, 5, and 7 years in HALS/Hybrid and PLS groups were 94.5%, 71.4%, 54.3%, and 46.0% vs. 96.0%, 68.5%, 51.2%, and 41.2%, respectively (p = 0.73).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests no differences in long-term oncologic outcomes between the two techniques. We discovered that longer total operative, pringle time, higher rates of intraoperative ablation, and positive resection margins were associated with PLS. These differences in favor of HALS/Hybrid could be due to a shorter learning curve and a greater ability to control hemorrhage.

Comparison of oncological outcomes for hand-assisted and pure laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy: results from the Taiwan Upper Tract Urothelial Cancer Collaboration Group

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (LNU) has gradually become the new standard treatment for localized upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC). With more blunt dissection and tactile sensation, hand-assisted LNU might shorten the operative time compared with the pure laparoscopic approach. However, whether the use of the hand-assisted or the pure laparoscopic approach has an effect on oncological outcomes remains unclear.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 629 patients with non-metastatic UTUC who underwent hand-assisted (n = 515) or pure LNU (n = 114) at 9 hospitals in Taiwan between 2004 and 2019. Overall survival, cancer-specific survival, recurrence-free survival, and bladder recurrence-free survival were compared between these two groups using inverse-probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) derived from the propensity scores for baseline covariate adjustment.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 32.9 and 28.7 months in the hand-assisted and the pure groups, respectively. IPTW-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models showed that the laparoscopic approach (pure vs. hand-assisted) was not significantly associated with all-cause mortality (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.49-1.24, p = 0.304), cancer-specific mortality (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.51-1.51, p = 0.634), or extra-vesical recurrence (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.41-1.04, p = 0.071). However, the pure laparoscopic approach was significantly associated with lower intra-vescial recurrence (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43-0.96, p = 0.029) for patients who underwent LNU. Kaplan-Meier curves also revealed that the pure laparoscopic approach was associated with better bladder recurrence-free survival compared with the hand-assisted laparoscopic approach in both the original cohort and the IPTW-adjusted cohort (log-rank p = 0.042 and 0.027, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of hand-assisted or pure LNU does not significantly affect the all-cause mortality, cancer-specific mortality, or extra-vesical recurrence for patients with non-metastatic UTUC. However, the hand-assisted laparoscopic approach could increase the risk of intra-vesical recurrence for patients who undergo LNU.

The impact of mini-invasive right hepatectomy in the setting of living donation: a meta-analysis

Adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (A2ALDLT) represents a challenging procedure, mainly when the right hepatic lobe is donated. Therefore, especially in Western countries, the medical community still considers it a “risky procedure”. The present meta-analysis investigated the postoperative results reported in donors undergoing right hepatectomy for A2ALDLT through a minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) vs. open liver resection (OLR) approach, with the intent to clarify the hypothesis that the MILR approach should minimize the risks for the donor. A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE-PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE electronic databases. The primary outcome investigated was the complication rate after transplant. Fifteen studies were included (n = 2094; MILR = 553 vs. OLR = 1541). The MILR group only merged the statistical relevance in terms of advantage in terms of a lower number of complications (OR = 0.771, 95% CI 0.578–1.028; P value = 0.077). Investigating the complications ≥ IIIa according to the Dindo-Clavien classification, the estimated blood loss, and the length of hospital stay, no statistical difference was reported between the two groups. MILR represents a novel and promising approach for improving the results in A2ALDLT. However, no benefits have been reported regarding blood loss, length of stay, and postoperative complications. More extensive experiences are needed to re-evaluate the impact of MILR in right lobe live donation.

Safety and oncological outcomes for large (stage ≥T2b) and locally advanced renal cell carcinoma: comparison between laparoscopic and modified hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy

Objective

To compare the operative and oncologic outcomes between hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (HALRN) and laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) for large (stage ≥T2b) and locally advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data from patients who underwent HALRN or LRN for stage ≥T2b renal cell carcinoma from January 2011 to January 2018 in our institution. The patients’ demographics, perioperative parameters, and postoperative follow-up data were compared between the two groups. The survival outcome was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method.

Results

The HALRN group comprised 78 patients, and the LRN group comprised 63 patients. The median operative duration was significantly shorter in the HALRN than LRN group. The two groups were equivalent in terms of the incision length, blood loss, complication rate, and duration of hospitalization. In the HALRN and LRN groups, the 5-year overall survival rates were 69.4% and 73.1%, the 5-year cancer-specific survival rates were 80.0% and 83.3%, and the 5-year progression-free survival rates were 66.4% and 74.7%, respectively, with no significant differences.

Conclusions

Compared with LRN, HALRN may offer a shorter operative duration and equivalent surgical outcomes without sacrificing oncological efficacy. In addition, HALRN has specific advantages for extremely large and complicated renal tumors.

Minimally invasive liver resection in the era of robotics: analysis of 214 cases

BACKGROUND

Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (MILR) techniques range from a hybrid-technique to full robotic approaches. When compared with open techniques, MILR has been shown to be advantageous by reducing pain, complications, length of stay and blood loss. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and hospital resource utilization between full laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and robotic liver resections among major (≥ 3 segments) and minor (≤ 2 segments) resections.

METHODS

A single-center comparative retrospective review was completed on 214 patients undergoing full laparoscopic, hand-assisted, or robotic liver resection procedures between 2005 and 2018.

RESULTS

Among minor resections: 85 full laparoscopic, 40 hand-assisted, and 35 robotic liver resection cases were analyzed; and among major resections: 13, 33, and 8 cases were analyzed, respectively. In the adjusted subgroup analysis of minor resections, OR time was significantly longer for the minor hand-assisted group ([Formula: see text] = 181 min; p < 0.05), and the average lesion size was smaller for the minor full laparoscopic group ([Formula: see text] = 4.2 cm; p < 0.05). Overall, direct hospital charges were lowest in the group of patients who underwent a minor resection using the full laparoscopic technique ([Formula: see text] = $39,054.90; p < 0.05), compared to the robotic technique. Due to the smaller sample size (n = 54) in the major resection subgroup, only two significant observations were made - the full laparoscopic group had the least amount of blood loss ([Formula: see text] = 227 cc; p < 0.05) and incurred the least amount of room and board charges compared to the other two techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic approach appears favorable for minor resections as evidenced by shorter length of stay but more costly than full laparoscopy. Clinical outcomes appear to be more dependent upon the magnitude of the resection (i.e. major vs. minor) than the MILR technique chosen. Randomized trials may be indicated to discern the best indications and advantages of each technique.

Pure versus hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a retrospective cohort study of 1508 transplants from two centers

BACKGROUND

Although minimally invasive procedures have been established as the standard for a donor nephrectomy, there are many different surgical techniques described in the literature. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of kidney transplant procedures using the pure retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (PRDN) and hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARDN) techniques.

METHODS

A retrospective study involving 1508 transplant procedures was conducted; 874 were PRDN procedures; and 634 were HARDN. We reviewed the outcomes of the PRDN and HARDN groups, which were performed at two different centers over an identical time period.

RESULTS

Donors in the PRDN group had a longer operation time (P < 0.0001), reduced estimated blood loss (P < 0.0001), less open conversion (P = 0.0002), lower postoperative serum C-reactive protein levels (P < 0.0001), and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.0001) than the HARDN group. Recipients in the PRDN group had lower serum creatinine levels at postoperative day 1-6 and the decreased incidence of slow graft function (P = 0.0017) than the HARDN group. The HARDN procedure was an independent risk factor for the incidence of acute rejection (P = 0.0211) and graft loss (P = 0.0193).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that the PRDN procedure is less invasive for donors as it results in reduced blood loss, lower postoperative serum CRP levels, and a shorter postoperative stay than the HARDN procedure. Additionally, PRDN provides a better outcome for recipients as it lowers the incidence of acute rejection and improves graft survival compared to HARDN.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy is a useful surgical treatment method for patients with excessive splenomegaly: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy (HALS) can help overcome the drawbacks of laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) while maintaining its advantages.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and advantages of HALS for splenomegaly.

METHODS

The relevant literature was reviewed using the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Ovid Medline, and Wanfang databases to compare the clinical outcomes of HALS and LS. Odds ratios or mean differences were calculated with 95% confidence intervals for fixed-effects and random-effects models. Overall, 754 patients from 16 trials who met the inclusion criteria were selected.

RESULTS

In pure splenectomy, blood loss volume (P < 0.001) and conversion rate (P = 0.008) were significantly lower in the HALS group than in the LS group. Conversely, for splenomegaly, the operative time (P = 0.04) was shorter and blood loss volume (P < 0.001) and conversion rate (P = 0.001) were significantly lower in the HALS group than in the LS group. However, no significant difference was observed in hospital stay length, blood transfusion, time to food intake, complications, or mortality rate between the two groups. Moreover, in splenectomy and devascularization of the upper stomach (DUS), the operative time (P = 0.04) was significantly shorter and blood loss volume (P < 0.001) and conversion rate (P = 0.05) were significantly lower in the HALS + DUS group than in the LS + DUS group. However, no significant difference was observed in hospital stay length, timing of diet, and complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

HALS is an ideal surgical treatment method for splenomegaly because it can maximize the benefits for patients while maintaining the advantages of LS.

Laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients: a comparison of laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic techniques

BACKGROUND

Recent American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP)-based evidence indicates that laparoscopic (LAP) colectomy results in improved outcomes compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy in the general population. Previous comparative studies demonstrated that the HAL technique offers distinct advantages for obese patients. The aim of this study was to perform comparative analyses of HAL and LAP colectomy and low anterior resection (LAR) in obese patients.

METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP public use file and targeted colectomy dataset, 2012-2014, were utilized for patients undergoing colectomy and LAR. Only obese patients (BMI > 30) and laparoscopic or hand-assisted operations were included. Patient, operation, and outcome variables were compared in two separate cohorts: colectomy and LAR. Bivariate analysis compared the approaches, followed by multivariable regression.

RESULTS

Of 9610 obese patients included, HAL and LAP colectomy were performed in 3126 and 3793 patients and LAR in 1431 and 1260 patients, respectively. In comparison to LAP colectomy, HAL colectomy patients had increased comorbidities including class 2 and 3 obesity. HAL colectomy was associated with higher overall morbidity (20 vs. 16%, p < 0.001), infectious complications (10.2 vs. 7.7%, p < 0.001), anastomotic leaks (3.0 vs. 2.2%, p = 0.03), and ileus (11 vs. 8%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis indicated that overall morbidity (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.11-1.44), infectious complications (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.14-1.59), and ileus (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.12-1.57) were each increased in the HAL colectomy cohort but not different for HAL and LAP LAR.

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison to LAP colectomy, the HAL technique is used more often in obese patients with an increased operative risk profile. While inherent bias and unmeasured variables limit the analysis, the available data indicate that the HAL technique is associated with increased perioperative morbidity. Alternatively, HAL and LAP LAR are performed in obese patients with a similar risk profile and result in similar postoperative outcomes.

Hand-assisted robotic right donor nephrectomy in patient with total situs inversus: A case report

Total situs inversus" is an infrequent congenital condition. The robot has been already proved as a safe and attractive approach for living donor nephrectomies. We report here the first right donor nephrectomy in a patient with total situs inversus that is performed using the Da Vinci platform.

Transition From Hand-Assisted to Pure Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy

Background and Objectives:

We compared perioperative donor outcomes and early graft function of hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) and pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (PLDN) performed by a single surgeon, to define the feasibility of technical transition from HALDN to PLDN.

Methods:

From October 1, 2012, through June 30, 2014, 60 donor nephrectomies were performed by a single surgeon who lacked experience with laparoscopic renal surgery: the first 30 by HALDN and the last 30 by PLDN. Operative and convalescence parameters were compared, as were intra- and postoperative complications within 90 days according to the Satava and Clavien-Dindo classifications, respectively. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the association of baseline characteristics with complications.

Results:

Baseline characteristics were similar in the 2 groups, except for American Society of Anesthesiologists score II (10.0% vs 43.3%; P = .007). All procedures were completed as planned. All operative and convalescence parameters of donors and graft outcomes were similar in the 2 groups, as were overall rates of intraoperative (43.3% vs 36.7%, P = .598) and postoperative (86.7% vs 70.0%; P = .209) complications. No factor was significantly predictive of intraoperative complications, whereas sex (female vs male, odds ratio, 0.183; P = .029) and learning curve (odds ratio, 0.602; P = .036) were significant determinants of postoperative complication.

Conclusion:

The technical transition from HALDN to PLDN does not involve a steep learning curve for surgeons less experienced with laparoscopic renal surgery and maintains similar perioperative donor and graft outcomes.

A comparison of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer: a propensity score analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare oncologic outcomes and perioperative variables following conventional laparoscopic surgery (LAP) versus hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Between January 2008 and December 2012, 2680 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for rectal cancer were analyzed. We used 1:1 propensity score matching to adjust for potential baseline confounders between groups including age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor distance from the anal verge, clinical T and N categories, pathologic T and N categories, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level, and the status of preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy. After matching, we analyzed 278 patients in each group (n = 556).

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 36.2 and 37.4 months in the HALS group and the conventional LAP group, respectively. Postoperative complications were not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.531). The 5-year overall survival rate was 88.8 % in the HALS group and 91.2 % in the conventional LAP group (P = 0.329). The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 77.0 % in the HALS group and 79.7 % in the conventional LAP group (P = 0.591).

CONCLUSIONS

HALS is considered a safe and feasible approach for rectal cancer treatment that enables the preservation of the advantages of conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Approaches to laparoscopic liver resection: a meta-analysis of the role of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery and the hybrid technique

Laparoscopic liver resection has been established as a safe and feasible treatment option. Surgical approaches include pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopy (HALS), and the hybrid technique. The role of these three approaches, and their superiority over open laparotomy, is not yet known. A literature review was performed using specific search phrases, relating to hand-assisted or hybrid approaches to laparoscopic liver resection. Surgical results from 18 case series (HALS, nine series; hybrid technique, nine series), each with ≥ 10 patients, were analyzed. Results indicated that HALS was associated with a mean operative time of 82-264.5 min, an estimated blood loss of 82-300 mL, and a complication rate of 3.8-27.1%. Analysis of series involving the hybrid technique indicated a mean operative time of 111-366.5 min, an estimated blood loss of 93-936 mL, and a complication rate of 3.4-23.5%. In conclusion, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that any single approach is superior to the others, although HALS and the hybrid technique are useful when dealing with difficulties associated with pure laparoscopy. Conversely, the need for these two methods, which can function as a bridge to pure laparoscopic liver resection, may be overcome with appropriate training.

Clinical application of hand-assisted laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: An analysis of 56 cases

AIM: To explore the clinical value of hand-assisted laparoscopic (HALS) right hemicolectomy.

METHODS: The clinical data for 56 patients who underwent HALS right hemicolectomy were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS: One case required conversion to open surgery due to abnormal blood vessels and bleeding, and all the others successfully recovered after HALS surgery. No operative deaths occurred. Operative time ranged from 90 to 150 min, with a mean value of 136 min. Operative blood loss ranged from 20 to 230 mL, with an average of 87 mL. Postoperative hospital stay was 4-10 d. Postoperative pain was mild. The patients progressed to a liquid diet 2 d postoperatively and underwent removal of stitches and extubation on postoperative day 7. Two patients developed postoperative mechanical intestinal obstruction but recovered after receiving treatment.

CONCLUSION: HALS right hemicolectomy is a safe treatment with fewer traumas, less bleeding, and faster recovery, in line with the concept of fast track surgery.