Quality of life from a randomized trial of laparoscopic or open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases

Background

Most treatments for cancer cause a decline in patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Limiting this decline is a universal goal for healthcare providers. Using minimally invasive instead of open surgical techniques might be one way to achieve this. The aim of this study was to compare postoperative HRQoL after open and laparoscopic liver resection.

Methods

This was a predefined substudy of an RCT comparing open with laparoscopic liver resection. Patients with colorectal liver metastases were assigned randomly to open or laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resection. HRQoL was assessed with the Short Form 36 questionnaire at baseline, and 1 and 4 months after surgery.

Results

A total of 280 patients were randomized, of whom 273 underwent surgery (129 laparoscopic, 144 open); 682 questionnaires (83.3 per cent) were available for analysis. One month after surgery, patients in the laparoscopic surgery group reported reduced scores in two HRQoL domains (physical functioning and role physical), whereas those in the open surgery group reported reduced scores in five domains (physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, vitality and social functioning). Four months after surgery, HRQoL scores in the laparoscopic group had returned to preoperative levels, whereas patients in the open group reported reduced scores for two domains (role physical and general health). The between-group difference was statistically significant in favour of laparoscopy for four domains after 1 month (role physical, bodily pain, vitality and social functioning) and for one domain after 4 months (role physical).

Conclusion

Patients assigned to laparoscopic liver surgery reported better postoperative HRQoL than those assigned to open liver surgery. For role limitations caused by physical health problems, patients in the laparoscopic group reported better scores up to 4 months after surgery. Registration number: NCT01516710 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Minilaparotomy for treatment of choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Minilaparotomy has been reported to be an alternative minimally invasive option to laparoscopy. However, the quality of available data on the effectiveness of minilaparotomy to treat choledocholithiasis is poor.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two hundred and twenty-eight patients with choledocholithiasis underwent surgical exploration of the common bile duct via minilaparotomy from 1995 to 2010. Of these, 193 patients had choledocho/cholecystolithiasis with previous ineffective attempts at endoscopic clearance and 29 patients had choledocho/cholecystolithiasis without previous attempts at endoscopic clearance. Six other patients had recurrent/residual choledocholithiasis despite ineffective attempts at endoscopic clearance. Peri-operative adverse events were analyzed in accordance with the revised Satava classification for intra-operative events while post-operative complications were graded according to the Accordion classification.

RESULTS

Conversion was needed in 3.9% of procedures. The mean operative time was 86 min. Post-operative complications occurred in 6.1%, 2.2% of which were major (Accordion grade 4-6). Mortality was 0.9%.

CONCLUSION

Minilaparotomy is an effective minimally invasive approach for the surgical treatment of choledocholithiasis. This approach could be considered as an alternative to the laparoscopic approach for surgical exploration of the common bile duct in patients with choledocholithiasis.

Laparoscopic liver surgery: new frontiers

Laparoscopic liver resection (LHR) has shown classical advantages of minimally invasive surgery over open counterpart. In spite of introduction in early 1990's only few centres worldwide adapted LHR to routine practice. It was due to considerable technical challenges and uncertainty about oncologic outcomes. Surgical instrumentation and accumulation of surgical experience has largely enabled to solve many technical considerations. Intraoperative navigation options have also been improved. Consequently indications have been drastically expanded nearly reaching criteria equal to open liver resection in expert centres. Recent studies have verified oncologic integrity of LHR. However, mastering of LHR is still a quite demanding task limiting expansion of this patient friendly technique. This emphasizes the necessity of systematic training for laparoscopic liver surgery. This article reviews the state of the art of laparoscopic liver surgery lightening burning issues of research and clinical practice.

Single-centre experience of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection is regarded as safe and feasible in selected patients with benign pancreatic tumours. Few data exist on laparoscopic surgery for malignant lesions and larger neoplasms in unselected patients.

METHODS

The study included all patients admitted to Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, from March 1997 to March 2009 for surgery of lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas, and selected patients with lesions in the pancreatic head, who underwent surgery by a laparoscopic approach with curative intent.

RESULTS

A total of 166 patients had 170 operations, including 138 pancreatic resections, 18 explorations, nine resections of peripancreatic tissue and five other therapeutic procedures. Four patients had repeat procedures. There were 53 endocrine tumours (31.0 per cent), 28 pancreatic carcinomas (16.4 per cent), five cases of metastases (2.9 per cent), 48 cystic tumours (28.1 per cent) and 37 other lesions (21.6 per cent). The total morbidity rate was 16.5 per cent. Fistula was the most common complication (10.0 per cent). Three patients needed reoperation for complications. There were three hospital deaths (1.8 per cent). Median hospital stay following surgery was 4 days.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resection of lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas in an unselected patient series was safe and feasible, and should be the method of choice for this patient group in specialized centres.

Evaluation of endoscopic and traditional open approaches to pheochromocytoma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adrenalectomy is an excellent alternative to open surgery, while there are doubts in regard to laparoscopic treatment of pheochromocytoma due to its unsteady intraoperative hemodynamics. The goal of the study was to define optimal surgical approach to pheochromocytoma.

METHODS

A total of 99 patients with pheochromocytoma were operated from 1990 to 2002. Nine, 28, 40, and 22 patients were operated respectively through laparoscopic (group 1), thoracophrenotomic (group 2), lumbotomic (group 3), and laparotomic (group 4) approaches. Intraoperative parameters including those related with hemodynamic stability were studied. Postoperative analgesic medication, complications, and hospital stay were registered.

RESULTS

Mean operative time was 132 +/- 49 min, 104 +/- 29 min, 81 +/- 30 min, and 129 +/- 40 min, respectively, in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4. Thoracophrenotomic approach had a minimal time from starting of adrenal dissection to central adrenal vein crossing on the right side and lumbotomic approach on the left side. Laparoscopy showed longest length of that period on both sides. However, we observed more stable intraoperative dynamics during laparoscopic adrenalectomy in comparison with any traditional open approaches on both sides. Mean blood loss was 178 +/- 112 ml, 410 +/- 255 ml, 314 +/- 163 ml, and 420 +/- 398 ml, respectively, in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4. Blood transfusions were required in 0%, 35.7%, 20%, and 13.6% of cases, respectively, in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4. Using laparoscopic approach resulted in significant decrease of prescription of opoids, postoperative hospital stay, and rate of postoperative complications. Among traditional approaches lumbotomy presented better postoperative results due to its less invasive nature.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is a method of choice to pheochromocytoma in experienced hands. Open approaches are still feasible. Among traditional approaches lumbotomy should be preferred. Thoracophrenotomy can be justified only for major tumors on the right side. Laparotomy is indicated in selected cases of extraadrenal pheochromocytoma.

Does tumor size influence the outcome of laparoscopic adrenalectomy?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adrenalectomy is safe and effective for small adrenal tumors, but its role for large adrenal tumors and the influence of tumor size on the outcome of laparoscopic adrenalectomy have been questioned.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-one patients with unilateral adrenal tumors operated on between January 1997 and April 2000 were selected for this study. The indications for surgery were Conn's adenoma in 16 patients, pheochromocytoma in 7 patients, Cushing's adenoma in 4 patients, and incidental lesions in 4 patients. The patients were divided in two groups: 19 patients with tumors <3.5 cm (Group I) and 12 patients with tumors > or = 3.5 cm (Group II). The outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

None of the laparoscopic procedures was converted to open surgery. The tumor size correlated with operative time (r = 0.434; P = 0.015) and blood loss (r = 0.513; P = 0.003), with both being significantly greater for larger tumors. No patient required a blood transfusion during or after surgery. One preoperative complication occurred in Group I. There was no peroperative complication in Group II. The median postoperative hospital stay and opioid requirement did not differ significantly between the groups. One patient in Group I developed pneumonia, while no postoperative complications were recorded in Group II.

CONCLUSION

Surgery for large adrenal tumors can safely be performed laparoscopically with outcomes comparable to those of surgery for small tumors.