Totally laparoscopic left hepatectomy

Predictors of discharge timing and unplanned readmission after laparoscopic liver resection

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to determine the predictors of discharge timing and 90-day unplanned readmission after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

METHODS

Consecutive LLR performed at the "Institut Mutualiste Montsouris" between 2000 and 2019 were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Length of stay (LOS) was stratified according to surgical difficulty and was categorized as early (LOS<25th percentile), routine (25th percentile<75th percentile), and delayed discharge otherwise. Uni-and-multivariate analyses were conducted to determine the factors associated with the time of discharge and 90-day unplanned readmission.

RESULTS

Early discharge occurred in 15.7% patients whereas delayed discharge occurred in 20.6% patients. Concomitant pancreatic resections (OR 26.8, 95% CI 5.75-125, p < 0.0001) and removal of colorectal primary tumors (OR 7.14, 95% CI 3.98-12.8, p < 0.0001) were the strongest predictors of delayed discharge whereas ERP implementation was the strongest predictor of early discharge (OR 7.4, 95% CI 4.60-11.9, p < 0.0001). Unplanned readmission rate was lower among early discharged patients (7.4% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.0001). Bile leakage was the strongest predictor of 90-day unplanned readmission (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.12-15.8, p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Concomitant colorectal or pancreatic resections were the strongest predictors of delayed discharge. Postoperative bile leakage was the strongest predictor of 90-day unplanned readmission following LLR.

Three-Device (3D) Technique for Liver Parenchyma Dissection in Robotic Liver Surgery

BACKGROUND

The implementation of robotics in liver surgery offers several advantages compared to conventional open and laparoscopic techniques. One major advantage is the enhanced degree of freedom at the tip of the robotic tools compared to laparoscopic instruments. This enables excellent vessel control during inflow and outflow dissection of the liver. Parenchymal transection remains the most challenging part during robotic liver resection because currently available robotic instruments for parenchymal transection have several limitations and there is no standardized technique as of yet. We established a new strategy and share our experience.

METHODS

We present a novel technique for the transection of liver parenchyma during robotic surgery, using three devices (3D) simultaneously: monopolar scissors and bipolar Maryland forceps of the robot and laparoscopic-guided waterjet. We collected the perioperative data of twenty-eight patients who underwent this procedure for minor and major liver resections between February 2019 and December 2020 from the Magdeburg Registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients underwent robotic-assisted 3D parenchyma dissection within the investigation period. Twelve cases of major and sixteen cases of minor hepatectomy for malignant and non-malignant cases were performed. Operative time for major liver resections (≥ 3 liver segments) was 381.7 (SD 80.6) min vs. 252.0 (70.4) min for minor resections (p < 0.01). Intraoperative measured blood loss was 495.8 (SD 508.8) ml for major and 256.3 (170.2) ml for minor liver resections (p = 0.090). The mean postoperative stay was 13.3 (SD 11.1) days for all cases. Liver surgery-related morbidity was 10.7%, no mortalities occurred. We achieved an R0 resection in all malignant cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3D technique for parenchyma dissection in robotic liver surgery is a safe and feasible procedure. This novel method offers an advanced locally controlled preparation of intrahepatic vessels and bile ducts. The combination of precise extrahepatic vessel handling with the 3D technique of parenchyma dissection is a fundamental step forward to the standardization of robotic liver surgery for teaching purposing and the wider adoption of robotic hepatectomy into routine patient care.

The initiation, standardization and proficiency (ISP) phases of the learning curve for minimally invasive liver resection: comparison of a fellowship-trained surgeon with the pioneers and early adopters

BACKGROUND

Using the Ideal Development Exploration Assessment and Long-term study (IDEAL) paradigm, Halls et al. created risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) curves concluding that Pioneers (P) and Early Adopters (EA) of minimally invasive (MI) liver resection obtained similar results after fewer cases. In this study, we applied this framework to a MI Hepatic-Pancreatic and Biliary fellowship-trained surgeon (FT) in order to assess where along the curves this generation fell.

METHODS

The term FT was used to designate surgeons without previous independent operative experience who went from surgical residency directly into fellowship. Three phases of the learning curve were defined using published data on EAs and Ps of MI Hepatectomy, including phase 1 (initiation) (i.e., the first 17 or 50), phase 2 (standardization) (i.e., cases 18-46 or 1-50) and phase 3 (proficiency) (i.e., cases after 46, 50 or 135). Data analysis was performed using the Social Science Statistics software ( www.socscistatistics.com ). Statistical significance was defined as p < .05.

RESULTS

From November 2007 until April 2018, 95 MI hepatectomies were performed by a FT. During phase 1, the FT approached larger tumors than the EA group (p = 0.002), that were more often malignant (94.1%) when compared to the P group (52.5%) (p < 0.001). During phase 2, the FT operated on larger tumors and more malignancies (93.1%) when compared to the Ps (p = 0.004 and p = 0.017, respectively). However, there was no difference when compared to the EA. In the phase 3, the EAs tended to perform more major hepatectomies (58.7) when compared to either the FT (30.6%) (p = 0.002) or the P's cases 51-135 and after 135 (35.3% and 44.3%, respectively) (both p values < 0.001). When compared to the Ps cases from 51-135, the FT operated on more malignancies (p = 0.012), but this was no longer the case after 135 cases by the Ps (p = 0.164). There were no statistically significant differences when conversions; major complications or 30- and 90-day mortality were compared among these 3 groups.

DISCUSSION

Using the IDEAL framework and RA-CUSUM curves, a FT surgeon was found to have curves similar to EAs despite having no previous independent experience operating on the liver. As in our study, FTs may tend to approach larger and more malignant tumors and do more concomitant procedures in patients with higher ASA classifications than either of their predecessors, without statistically significant increases in major morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSION

It is possible that the ISP (i.e., initiation, standardization, proficiency) model could apply to other innovative surgical procedures, creating different learning curves depending on where along the IDEAL paradigm surgeons fall.

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.

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection in patients with a history of abdominal surgeries

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic techniques have become the standard approach for most liver resections. Clinical studies providing conclusive evidence which patients benefit most from minimal-invasive surgery remain limited.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data of all consecutive cases of laparoscopic liver resection between 2015 and 2018 at our center. We compared patients with and without prior abdominal surgeries with respect to postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo score), length of operation, length of ICU stay and length of hospitalization in univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Within the study period 319 patients underwent laparoscopic liver resections, 44% of which had a history of abdominal surgeries. Pre-operative characteristics were similar to patients without prior surgeries. Both groups showed comparable rates of post-operative complications (Clavien-Dindo score ≥3a; 12% in patients without vs. 16% with prior surgeries, p = 0,322). There were no significant differences in length of surgery or length of stay in the ICU or in the hospital.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that history of prior abdominal surgery is not a risk factor for post-operative complications after laparoscopic liver resection. We conclude that prior abdominal surgery should not be considered a contra-indication for laparoscopic approach in liver resection.

Laparoscopic extended liver resection: are postoperative outcomes different?

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is becoming increasingly common in specialized centers, data regarding laparoscopic extended major hepatectomies (LEMH) and their outcomes are limited. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes of LEMH to standard LMH.

METHODS

All patients who underwent purely laparoscopic anatomical right or left hepatectomy and right or left trisectionectomy between February 1998 and January 2016 are enrolled. Demographic, clinicopathological, and perioperative factors were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Perioperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes in LEMH were compared to those of standard LMH.

RESULTS

Among 195 patients with LMH, 47 (24.1%) underwent LEMH, colorectal liver metastases representing 66.7% of all indications. Preoperative portal vein embolization was undertaken in 31 (15.9%) patients. Despite more frequent vascular clamping, blood loss was higher in LEMH group (400 vs. 214 ml; p = 0.006). However, there was no difference in intraoperative transfusion requirements. Thirty-one patients experienced liver failure with no differences between LMH and LEMH groups. Postoperative mortality was comparable in the two groups [3 (2.5%) LMH patients vs. 2 (5%) LEMH patients (p = 0.388)]. Overall morbidity was higher in the LEMH group [49 LMH patients (41.5%) vs. 24 LEMH patients (60%) (p = 0.052)]. Patients treated with left LEMH experienced more biliary leakage (p = 0.011) and more major pulmonary complications (p = 0.015) than left LMH.

CONCLUSION

LEMH is feasible at the price of important morbidity, with manageable and acceptable outcomes. These exigent procedures require high-volume centers with experienced surgeons.

Fully laparoscopic left hepatectomy - a technical reference proposed for standard practice compared to the open approach: a retrospective propensity score model

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) may be an alternative to open (OLH). There are several original variations in the technical aspects of LLH, and no accepted standard. The aim of this study is to assess the safety and effectiveness of the technique developed at Henri Mondor Hospital since 1996.

METHODS

The technique of LLH was conceived for safety and training of two mature generations of lead surgeons. The technique includes full laparoscopy, ventral approach to the common trunk, extrahepatic pedicle dissection, CUSA^® parenchymal transection, division of the left hilar plate laterally to the Arantius ligament, and ventral transection of the left hepatic vein. The outcomes of LLH and OLH were compared. Perioperative analysis included intra- and postoperative, and histology variables. Propensity Score Matching was undertaken of background covariates including age, ASA, BMI, fibrosis, steatosis, tumour size, and specimen weight.

RESULTS

17 LLH and 51 OLH were performed from 1996 to 2014 with perioperative mortality rates of 0% and 6%, respectively. In the LLH group, two patients underwent conversion to open surgery. Propensity matching selected 10 LLH/OLH pairs. The LLH group had a higher proportion of procedures for benign disease. LLH was associated with longer operating time and less blood loss. Perioperative complications occurred in 30% (LLH) and 10% (OLH) (p = 1). Mortality and ITU stay were similar.

CONCLUSION

This technique is recommended as a possible technical reference for standard LLH.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Patients with Large Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Case-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the expansion of laparoscopic approach in the treatment of liver tumors, limited data have been reported regarding large colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). This study aimed at assessing the short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for large (≥5 cm) CRLMs.

METHODS

This was a case-matched study (1:2) comparing patients with large (group L; ≥5 cm) and small (group S; <5 cm) CRLMs using demographic, tumor, and surgical characteristics as matching variables. Postoperative outcomes and survival data were compared in the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Forty patients who underwent LLR for large CRLMs were matched with 80 patients with tumors <5 cm. Major hepatectomy was performed with 75.0 % of patients in Group L and 66.3 % in group S (p = 0.403). Operative time was 300 min in group L and 240 min in group S (p = 0.059). The postoperative mortality and overall morbidity rates were comparable in the 2 groups (p = 1.000 and 0.170, respectively). Postoperative major complication (Dindo-Clavien ≥3) was similar between the two groups (p = 0.072). R0 resection was achieved in 92.5 % in the group L and in 95.0 % in the group S (p = 1.000). The 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival were better for group S than for group L (47.3 vs. 35.4 %, p = 0.044 and 27.3 vs. 14.9 %, p = 0.042, respectively). Multivariate analysis identified positive surgical margins and synchronous presentation as prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

Since LLR was performed safely with favorable oncological adequacy in selected patients with large CRLMs, tumor size should not modify the surgical approach.

Pure Laparoscopic Hepatectomy Versus Open Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in 110 Patients With Liver Cirrhosis: A Propensity Analysis at a Single Center

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the long-term outcomes of pure laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with background cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy has been gaining popularity, but has not been widely accepted, because published data were gathered from small numbers of patients.

METHODS

Data of patients diagnosed with HCC and cirrhosis treated by hepatectomy were reviewed. The outcomes of pure laparoscopic hepatectomy were compared with those of open hepatectomy. Propensity score matching of patients in a ratio of 1:3 was conducted.

RESULTS

There were 110 patients and 330 patients in the laparoscopic group and the open group, respectively. The laparoscopic group had less blood loss (150 vs 400 mL; P < 0.001), shorter operation time (185 vs 255 minutes; P < 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (4vs 7 days; P < 0.001). The median overall survival was 136 months in the laparoscopic group and 120 months in the open group. The 1, 3, and 5-year overall survival rates were 98.9%, 89.8%, and 83.7%, respectively, in the laparoscopic group, and 94%, 79.3%, and 67.4%, respectively, in the open group (P = 0.033). The median disease-free survival was 66.37 months in the laparoscopic group and 52.4 months in the open group. The 1, 3, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 87.7%, 65.8%, and 52.2%, respectively, in the laparoscopic group, and 75.2%, 56.3%, and 47.9%, respectively, in the open group (P = 0.141).

CONCLUSIONS

Pure laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC can be carried out safely with favorable short-term and long-term outcomes even in cirrhotic patients at high-volume liver cancer centers.

Learning curve for laparoscopic major hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is evolving as an important surgical approach in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery. The present study aimed to evaluate the learning curve for LMH at a single centre.

METHODS

Data for all patients undergoing LMH between January 1998 and September 2013 were recorded in a prospective database and analysed. The learning curve for operating time (OT) was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method.

RESULTS

Of 173 patients undergoing major hepatectomy, left hepatectomy was performed in 28 (16·2 per cent), left trisectionectomy in nine (5·2 per cent), right hepatectomy in 115 (66·5 per cent), right trisectionectomy in 13 (7·5 per cent) and central hepatectomy in eight (4·6 per cent). Median duration of surgery was 270 (range 100-540) min and median blood loss was 300 (10-4500) ml. There were 20 conversions to an open procedure (11·6 per cent). Vascular clamping was independently associated with conversion on multivariable analysis (hazard ratio 5·95, 95 per cent c.i. 1·24 to 28·56; P = 0·026). The CUSUMOT learning curve was modelled as a parabola (CUSUMOT  = 0·2149 × patient number(2)  - 30·586 × patient number - 1118·3; R(2)  = 0·7356). The learning curve comprised three phases: phase 1 (45 initial patients), phase 2 (30 intermediate patients) and phase 3 (the subsequent 98 patients). Although right hepatectomy was most common in phase 1, a significant decrease was observed from phase 1 to 3 (P = 0·007) in favour of more complex procedures.

CONCLUSION

The learning curve for LMH consisted of three characteristic phases identified by CUSUM analysis. The data suggest that the learning phase of LMH included 45 to 75 patients.

3D visualization reduces operating time when compared to high-definition 2D in laparoscopic liver resection: a case-matched study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of three-dimensional (3D) visualization on operative performance during elective laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

BACKGROUND

Major limitations of conventional laparoscopy are lack of depth perception and tactile feedback. Introduction of robotic technology, which employs 3D imaging, has removed only one of these technical obstacles. Despite the significant advantages claimed, 3D systems have not been widely accepted.

METHODS

In this single institutional study, 20 patients undergoing LLR by high-definition 3D laparoscope between April 2014 and August 2014 were matched to a retrospective control group of patients who underwent LLR by two-dimensional (2D) laparoscope.

RESULTS

The number of patients who underwent major liver resection was 5 (25%) in the 3D group and 10 (25%) in the 2D group. There was no significant difference in contralateral wedge resection or combined resections between the 3D and 2D groups. There was no difference in the proportion of patients undergoing previous abdominal surgery (70 vs. 77%, p = 0.523) or previous hepatectomy (20 vs. 27.5%, p = 0.75). The operative time was significantly shorter in the 3D group when compared to 2D (225 ± 109 vs. 284 ± 71 min, p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in blood loss in the 3D group when compared to 2D group (204 ± 226 in 3D vs. 252 ± 349 ml in 2D group, p = 0.291). The major complication rates were similar, 5% (1/20) and 7.5% (3/40), respectively, (p ≥ 0.99).

CONCLUSION

3D visualization may reduce the operating time compared to high-definition 2D. Further large studies, preferably prospective randomized control trials are required to confirm this.

Influence of body mass index on postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing prevalence of obesity, the impact of body weight on postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) still remains poorly evaluated. The present study aimed to explore the impact of body mass index (BMI) on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing LLR.

STUDY DESIGN

All patients undergoing LLR from January 2008 to December 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. BMI was subdivided into normal weight (<24.9 kg/m(2)), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m(2)), and obese (≥30.0 kg/m(2)). These three groups were compared in terms of demographic data, intraoperative factors, and postoperative outcomes. Logistic regression was used to determine odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals and evaluate BMI as an independent risk factor for morbidity.

RESULTS

Among 228 selected patients, 83 (36.4%) patients were overweight and 32 (14.0%) were obese. Despite higher rates of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and ischemic heart disease with an increase in BMI, no significant difference in operative time, blood loss, and conversion rate was observed in the three groups. There were no significant differences in postoperative mortality rate between the groups (0.9 vs. 1.2 vs. 0%). The rate of overall complications (31.0 vs. 31.3 vs. 40.6%) and major complications (14.2 vs. 9.6 vs. 18.8%) did not differ in the three groups. Major hepatectomy (HR 6.810, CI 1.437-32.267, p = 0.016) and operative time >180 min (HR 2.639, CI 1.179-5.908, p = 0.018) were independently associated with postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrated that BMI does not negatively affect the postoperative short-term outcomes. Therefore, obesity and overweight should not be a contraindication for LLR.

Risk factors for complications after laparoscopic major hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic major hepatectomy (MH) is becoming increasingly common in several specialized centres, data regarding outcomes are limited. The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for postoperative complications of purely laparoscopic MH at a single centre.

METHODS

All patients who underwent purely laparoscopic MH between January 1998 and March 2014 at the authors' institution were enrolled. Demographic, clinicopathological and perioperative factors were collected prospectively, and data were analysed retrospectively. The dependent variables studied were the occurrence of overall and major complications (Dindo-Clavien grade III or above).

RESULTS

A total of 183 patients were enrolled. The types of MH included left-sided hepatectomy in 40 patients (21·9 per cent), right-sided hepatectomy in 135 (73·8 per cent) and central hepatectomy in eight (4·4 per cent). Median duration of surgery was 255 (range 100-540) min, and median blood loss was 280 (10-4500) ml. Complications occurred in 100 patients (54·6 per cent), and the 90-day all-cause mortality rate was 2·7 per cent. Liver-specific and general complications occurred in 62 (33·9 per cent) and 38 (20·8 per cent) patients respectively. Multivariable analysis identified one independent risk factor for global postoperative complications: intraoperative simultaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (odds ratio (OR) 6·93, 95 per cent c.i. 1·49 to 32·14; P = 0·013). There were two independent risk factors for major complications: intraoperative blood transfusion (OR 2·50, 1·01 to 6·23; P = 0·049) and bilobar resection (OR 2·47, 1·00 to 6·06; P = 0·049).

CONCLUSION

Purely laparoscopic MH is feasible and safe. Simultaneous RFA and bilobar resection should probably be avoided.

Totally laparoscopic right hepatectomy combined with resection of the inferior vena cava by anterior approach

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy has become a standard procedure for laparoscopic resection in specialized centers;1-6 however, tumor involvement of the inferior vena cava (IVC) is still considered a contraindication. Here, we describe a safe technique of totally laparoscopic extended right hepatectomy to segment 1 combined with IVC resection using an anterior approach.

METHODS

We performed 61 totally laparoscopic right hepatectomies by an anterior approach between January 2009 and April 2014. The video illustrates this procedure in a 58-year-old female with bilateral colorectal liver metastases involving the right-anterior wall of the retrohepatic IVC. Right hepatectomy was performed by initial hilar dissection and ligation of vascular inflow followed by division of the hepatic parenchyma with en-bloc segmentectomy 1, to expose the left side of the retrohepatic IVC. The right hepatic vein was divided using an endoscopic vascular stapler. As the involved portion of IVC could be isolated with the application of a single vascular clamp, the right IVC wall was divided using an endoscopic stapler. Thereafter, posterior mobilization of the right liver was performed.

RESULTS

The surgical duration was 270 min and blood loss was 50 mL. The postoperative period was uneventful, and the patient was discharged 9 days after surgery. Histopathological examination confirmed the presence of a colorectal metastasis with tumor-free margin.

CONCLUSION

We devised a secure procedure to perform totally laparoscopic right hepatectomy combined with IVC resection using an anterior approach; this may be a safe and useful technique to perform laparoscopic right hepatectomy.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases in elderly patients: a single-center, case-matched study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) among elderly patients has increased; therefore, older patients are increasingly being considered for hepatic resection. However, data regarding the outcome of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) in elderly patients are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LMH in elderly patients with CRLM.

METHODS

From January 1998 to September 2013, a total of 31 patients aged ≥ 70 years (elderly group) were matched with 62 patients < 70 years (young group) by demographics, tumor characteristics, and details of surgical procedures.

RESULTS

The elderly group was characterized by a higher incidence of hypertension (41.9 vs. 17.7 %, P = 0.022), ≥ 2 comorbidities (32.3 vs. 11.3 %, P = 0.021), and lower prevalence of metastatic rectal cancer (12.9 vs. 38.7 %, P = 0.015). Intraoperative variables, such as surgical duration (300 vs. 240 min, P = 0.920), blood loss (400 vs. 300 mL, P = 0.361), and transfusion rate (9.7 vs. 12.9 %, P = 0.726), were not notably different between the groups. Postoperative mortality (0 vs. 0 %), complications (54.8 vs. 41.9 %, P = 0.276), and major complications (27.4 vs. 16.1 %, P = 0.303, respectively) were comparable between the groups. The 3-year overall survival rates were 61.7 % in the young group (median 40 months) and 57.9 % in the elderly group (median 39 months), respectively (P = 0.842).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results clearly demonstrated that LMH for CRLM could be safely performed in elderly patients; thus, advanced age itself should not be regarded as a contraindication for LMH.

Minimally invasive approaches to extrapancreatic cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Due to the perceived difficulty in dissecting gallbladder cancers and extrapancreatic cholangiocarcinomas off of the portal structures and in performing complex biliary reconstructions, very few centers have used minimally invasive techniques to remove these tumors. Furthermore, due to the relative rarity of these tumors when compared to hepatocellular carcinoma, only a few reports have focused on short- and long-term results.

METHODS

We performed a review by combining the experience of three international centers with expertise in complex minimally invasive hepatobiliary surgery. Patients were entered into a database prospectively. All patients with gallbladder cancer and cholangiocarcinoma were analyzed; patients with distal cholangiocarcinomas who underwent laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomies were excluded. Patients were divided according to if they had gallbladder cancer, hilar cholangiocarcinoma, or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

RESULTS

A total of 15 patients underwent laparoscopic resection for gallbladder cancer and 10 for preoperatively suspected gallbladder cancer, and 5 underwent laparoscopic completion procedures. An average of four lymph nodes (range = 1-11) were retrieved and all patients had an R0 resection. One patient (7 %) required conversion to an open procedure. No patients developed a biliary fistula, required percutaneous drainage, or had endoscopic stent placement. One patient had a recurrence at 3 months despite a negative final pathological margin, and a second patient had a distant recurrence at 20 months with a mean follow-up of 23 months. Nine patients underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. All anastomoses were completed laparoscopically. Biliary fistula was seen in two patients, one of which died after a transhepatic percutaneous biliary drain resulted in uncontrollable intra-abdominal hemorrhage despite reoperation. A third patient developed a pulmonary embolism. Thus, the morbidity and mortality rates were 33 and 11 %, respectively. One patient was converted to open and six patients (66 %) are alive with a median follow-up of 22 months. Five patients underwent minimally invasive resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma; of these, two also required laparoscopic major hepatectomy. The mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 240 mL (range = 0-400 mL) and the median length of stay (LOS) was 15 days (range = 11-21 days). All patients are alive with a median follow-up of 11 months (range = 3-18 months). None of the 29 patients developed port site recurrences.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive approaches to gallbladder cancer and intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma seem feasible and safe in the short term. Larger series with longer follow-up are needed to see if there are any long-term disadvantages or advantages to laparoscopic resection of extrapancreatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Adopting Gayet's Techniques of Totally Laparoscopic Liver Surgery in the United States

Professor Brice Gayet of the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris in Paris, France, has developed totally laparoscopic techniques for all segments of the liver. As a pioneer in the field of minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery, he started a Minimally Invasive Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Fellowship in 2006. A retrospective review of all hepatic cases performed by a single surgeon since completing this Fellowship was undertaken. From November 2007 to October 2012, a total of 80 liver resections were done, of which 73 were begun with the intention of completing the case laparoscopically. Of these, more than 90% were completed laparoscopically and 88% were for malignant disease. One of the foundations of Professor Gayet's techniques is the low lithotomy or 'French' position and the utilization of a small robotically controlled laparoscope holder that is sterilizeable and considerably more economic than complete surgical systems. Prototypes exist of robotically controlled hand-held laparoscopic instruments that, unlike the complete surgical system, enable surgeons to maintain a sense of touch (haptics). Proper training in minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary techniques can be obtained with surgeons able to independently perform laparoscopic major hepatectomies without senior minimally invasive backup. Furthermore, miniature and more affordable robotics may enable more surgeons to enjoy the benefits of minimally invasive surgery while maintaining patient safety and minimizing the rising burden of health-care costs worldwide.

A novel extra-glissonian approach for totally laparoscopic left hepatectomy

INTRODUCTION

We describe a novel extra-glissonian approach (EGA) for totally laparoscopic left hepatectomy. Published techniques for totally laparoscopic left hepatectomy generally involve the selective ligation of the vascular and biliary elements of the left pedicle. The laparoscopic dissection of these structures can be tedious, difficult, and dangerous. The EGA has proven useful in open surgery for major hepatectomies. We feel that this approach could be even more useful in the laparoscopic context.

METHODS

We describe an extra-glissonian laparoscopic technique in which the left pedicle is isolated extraparenchymally, detaching the left hilar plate, with particular attention to preserving the branch for segment I. The left portal triad is encircled with a cotton tape and transected with an endostapler. This is performed totally extraparenchymally without damaging the surrounding parenchyma.

RESULTS

This EGA technique for laparoscopic left hepatectomy follows by laparoscopy the same steps and recommendations that make the EGA safe and effective in open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The EGA for LLH can be performed as described in open surgery, therefore offering the same advantages.

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy with intrahepatic transection of the right bile duct

BACKGROUND

Although our earlier videos demonstrated extrahepatic control of the hepatic arterial, portal venous, and biliary system, we have begun transecting the biliary system intraparenchymally for lesions distant from hilar plate and the confluence of the right and left hepatic ducts.1 (-) 3

METHODS

The patient was a 50-year old gentleman with synchronous colorectal hepatic metastasis, who underwent 6 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a Folfox-based regimen followed by laparoscopic right hepatectomy plus wedge resection of segment 4 and microwave ablation for a lesion in segment 2. This was followed 1 month later by laparoscopic proctocolectomy. Of note, the patient was also treated with Avastin for 1 month, which was stopped 2 months prior to his liver surgery. Pneumoperitoneum was obtained with the Veress needed; alternatively, the open technique may need to be used in patients who have undergone previous surgery. A 12-mm blunt tip balloon trocar was placed approximately 1 hand-breadth below the right costal margin. Two 12-mm working trocars were placed to the left and right of this optic trocar, and trocars were then placed in the left sub xiphoid region and in the right flank for the assistants. The right hepatic artery was triply clipped proximally and twice distally prior to being sharply transected. The right hepatic portal vein was then transected using a laparoscopic vascular GIA stapler device (TriStapler, Covidien, Norwalk, CT). The anterior surface of the liver was examined, and there was a clear line of demarcation along Cantlie's line. Using the ultrasonic shears (Harmonic Scalpel, Ethicon, Cincinnati, OH), the liver parenchyma was then transected. In the area of the right hepatic duct, the liver parenchyma was transected with a single firing of the laparoscopic GIA vascular stapler device. The right hepatic vein was then identified and similarly transected with a single firing of the laparoscopic vascular GIA stapler device. Hemostasis along the hepatic parenchyma was reinforced with the laparoscopic bipolar device. The two trocars on the right of the patient are connected into 1 incision, and a gel port is placed to facilitate removal of the specimen; alternatively, an old incision can be used. For patients who will need a laparoscopic or open colectomy, a lower midline incision is made.

RESULTS

From Jan 2009 to Oct 2010, 13 patients underwent right hepatectomy. The average age was 63.5 years (range, 46-87 years). The indication for surgery were all for cancer including 11 colorectal metastasis, 1 anal cancer metastasis, and 1 cholangiocarcinoma. In these 13 patients, 1 patient (7.7%) required conversion to an open approach because of bleeding, 1 additional patient required laparoscopic hand assistance, and the remaining patients were completed laparoscopically. There were no surgical mortalities at 30 or 90 days. Complications occurred in 2 (15%) patients, and included 1 patient who was converted to an open procedure because of hemorrhage and was complicated by a bile leak; the second patient with complication also developed a 1-bile leak, both of which responded to percutaneous treatments. The mean hospital stay was 7.7 days (range, 5-17 days). The mean operative time was 401 min (range, 220-600 min). The mean estimated blood loss was 878 cm(3) (range, 100-3,000 cm(3)). All patients underwent an R0 resection.

DISCUSSION

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is feasible. As in open hepatectomies, intrahepatic transection of the right bile duct may be safer because there is a decreased risk of injury to the left hepatic duct.4 (,) 5 Larger series with longer-term follow-up are necessary.

Initial experience with laparoscopic hepatic resection at a comprehensive cancer center

BACKGROUND

Over the past few years, surgeons have been able to obtain training in advanced minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for hepatic, pancreatic, and biliary (HPB) cases instead of having to teach themselves these complex techniques. As a result, the initial experience of a surgeon with advanced MIS HPB training at a national cancer center was reviewed.

METHODS

The experience of a surgeon with the first 50 laparoscopic hepatectomies for cancer was reviewed retrospectively. All cases begun with the intention to complete the hepatectomy laparoscopically were included in the laparoscopic group.

RESULTS

From November 2008 to October 2010, a total of 57 hepatectomies were performed, with 53 attempted laparoscopically. Of these 57 hepatectomies, 46 (87%) were completed laparoscopically, 4 (7%) required hand assistance, and 3 (6%) were converted to an open approach. Laparoscopic minor hepatectomies were performed for 28 patients and laparoscopic major hepatectomies for 25 patients. The mean operative time was 265 min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 300 ml. The mean hospital stay was 7 days. Complications occurred for six patients (11%) (2 bile leaks, 2 hemorrhages requiring conversion, 1 hernia requiring a hernia repair on postoperative day 7, and 1 ileus managed nonoperatively).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons with advanced MIS HPB training may be able to perform a higher percentage of their hepatectomies laparoscopically. Training in both open and laparoscopic HPB surgery is advisable before these techniques are performed.

Laparoscopic left hepatectomy for liver metastases at a national cancer center

This video describes the techniques necessary to perform left hepatectomy (including removal of hepatic segments I-IV) for secondary cancers using totally laparoscopic techniques. Extra-parenchymal control of hepatic inflow will be emphasized. Methods of hepatic parenchymal transection using the ultrasonic shears and laparoscopic bipolar device will be shown. Short-term oncologic outcomes regarding margin status and lymph node retrieval will be discussed. These procedures should currently be performed in high-volume cancer centers with expertise in minimally invasive techniques.

Intrahepatic Glissonian approach for pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in laparoscopic devices and experience with advanced techniques have increased the indications for laparoscopic liver.

AIM

The aim of this work was to present a video with technical aspects of a pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (segments 2, 3, and 4) by using the intrahepatic Glissonian approach and control of venous outflow without hilar dissection or the Pringle maneuver.

PATIENT AND METHOD

A 63-year-old woman with a 5-cm solitary liver metastasis was referred for treatment. Four trocars were used. The left lobe was pulled upward and the lesser omentum was divided, exposing Arantius' ligament. This ligament is a useful landmark for the identification of the main left Glissonian pedicle. A small anterior incision was made in front of the hilum, and a large clamp was introduced behind the Arantius' ligament toward the anterior incision, allowing control of the left main sheath. Ischemic discoloration of the left liver was achieved and marked with cautery. The vascular clamp was replaced by a stapler. If ischemic delineation was coincident with a previously marked area, the stapler was fired. The left hepatic vein was dissected and encircled. Parenchymal transection and vascular control of the hepatic veins were accomplished with a Harmonic scalpel and an endoscopic stapling device, as appropriate. All these steps were performed without the Pringle maneuver and without hand assistance.

RESULTS

Operative time was 220 minutes with minimum blood loss. Hospital stay was 4 days. Pathology showed free surgical margins. The patient is alive with no signs of recurrence 18 months after the operation.

CONCLUSION

Totally laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy is safe and feasible in selected patients and should be considered for patients with benign or malignant liver neoplasms. The described technique, with the use of the intrahepatic Glissonian approach and control of venous outflow, may facilitate laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy by reducing the technical difficulties in pedicle control and may decrease bleeding during liver transection.

Vascular clamping in liver surgery: physiology, indications and techniques

This article reviews the historical evolution of hepatic vascular clamping and their indications. The anatomic basis for partial and complete vascular clamping will be discussed, as will the rationales of continuous and intermittent vascular clamping.Specific techniques discussed and described include inflow clamping (Pringle maneuver, extra-hepatic selective clamping and intraglissonian clamping) and outflow clamping (total vascular exclusion, hepatic vascular exclusion with preservation of caval flow). The fundamental role of a low Central Venous Pressure during open and laparoscopic hepatectomy is described, as is the difference in their intra-operative measurements. The biological basis for ischemic preconditioning will be elucidated. Although the potential dangers of vascular clamping and the development of modern coagulation devices question the need for systemic clamping; the pre-operative factors and unforseen intra-operative events that mandate the use of hepatic vascular clamping will be highlighted.

Laparoscopic liver resection: when to use the laparoscopic stapler device

Minimally invasive hepatic resection was first described by Gagner et al. in the early 1990s and since then has become increasingly adopted by hepatobiliary and liver transplant surgeons. Several techniques exist to transect the hepatic parenchyma laparoscopically and include transection with stapler and/or energy devices, such as ultrasonic shears, radiofrequency ablation and bipolar devices. We believe that coagulative techniques allow for superior anatomic resections and ultimately permit for the performance of more complex hepatic resections. In the stapling technique, Glisson's capsule is usually incised with an energy device until the parenchyma is thinned out and multiple firings of the staplers are then used to transect the remaining parenchyma and larger bridging segmental vessels and ducts. Besides the economic constraints of using multiple stapler firings, the remaining staples have the disadvantage of hindering and even preventing additional hemostasis of the raw liver surface with monopolar and bipolar electrocautery. The laparoscopic stapler device is, however, useful for transection of the main portal branches and hepatic veins during minimally invasive major hepatic resections. Techniques to safely perform major hepatic resection with the above techniques will be described with an emphasis on when and how laparoscopic vascular staplers should be used.

The Medical and Surgical Department of Digestive Diseases and Minimally Invasive HPB Fellowship at IMM

The Medical and Surgical Department at the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris combines all the medical and surgical specialists in digestive diseases to work together on the same team and in the same unit. It represents a novel approach to the care of the patient with pathology of the digestive system. A Minimally Invasive HPB Fellowship was created in 2006 because of the vast laparoscopic experience at this institution. It is the first such fellowship listed on the IHPBA website and appears to be the first of its kind. For surgeons interested in pursuing a career in minimally invasive HPB surgery, it is currently accepted that expertise in both laparoscopy and HPB surgery have been the only means to gain the ability to tackle advanced procedures in this complex field. However, as young surgeons continue to get an earlier exposure to more and more complex minimally invasive procedures during residency, the need to perform two fellowships may be eliminated and more centers like IMM may permit graduating residents to become experts in this field in 1 year.