Survival Study: International Multicentric Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases (SIMMILR-2)

Introduction: Study: International Multicentric Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases (SIMMILR-CRLM) was a propensity score matched (PSM) study that reported short-term outcomes of patients with CRLM who met the Milan criteria and underwent either open (OLR), laparoscopic (LLR) or robotic liver resection (RLR). This study, designated as SIMMILR-2, reports the long-term outcomes from that initial study, now referred to as SIMMILR-1. Methods: Data regarding neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic (NC) and neoadjuvant biological (NB) treatments received were collected, and Kaplan−Meier curves reporting the 5-year overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for OLR, LLR and RLR were created for patients who presented with synchronous lesions only, as there was insufficient follow-up for patients with metachronous lesions. Results: A total of 73% of patients received NC and 38% received NB in the OLR group compared to 70% and 28% in the LLR group, respectively (p = 0.5 and p = 0.08). A total of 82% of patients received NC and 40% received NB in the OLR group compared to 86% and 32% in the RLR group, respectively (p > 0.05). A total of 71% of patients received NC and 53% received NB in the LLR group compared to 71% and 47% in the RLR group, respectively (p > 0.05). OS at 5 years was 34.8% after OLR compared to 37.1% after LLR (p = 0.4), 34.3% after OLR compared to 46.9% after RLR (p = 0.4) and 30.3% after LLR compared to 46.9% after RLR (p = 0.9). RFS at 5 years was 12.1% after OLR compared to 20.7% after LLR (p = 0.6), 33.3% after OLR compared to 26.3% after RLR (p = 0.6) and 22.7% after LLR compared to 34.6% after RLR (p = 0.6). Conclusions: When comparing OLR, LLR and RLR, the OS and RFS were all similar after utilization of the Milan criteria and PSM. Biological agents tended to be utilized more in the OLR group when compared to the LLR group, suggesting that highly aggressive tumors are still managed through an open approach.

Does Robotic Liver Surgery Enhance R0 Results in Liver Malignancies during Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery?—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Robotic procedures are an integral part of modern liver surgery. However, the advantages of a robotic approach in comparison to the conventional laparoscopic approach are the subject of controversial debate. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare robotic and laparoscopic liver resection with particular attention to the resection margin status in malignant cases. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Cochrane Library in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Only studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic liver resections were considered for this meta-analysis. Furthermore, the rate of the positive resection margin or R0 rate in malignant cases had to be clearly identifiable. We used fixed or random effects models according to heterogeneity. Results: Fourteen studies with a total number of 1530 cases were included in qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Malignancies were identified in 71.1% (n = 1088) of these cases. These included hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma, colorectal liver metastases and other malignancies of the liver. Positive resection margins were noted in 24 cases (5.3%) in the robotic group and in 54 cases (8.6%) in the laparoscopic group (OR = 0.71; 95% CI (0.42–1.18); p = 0.18). Tumor size was significantly larger in the robotic group (MD = 6.92; 95% CI (2.93–10.91); p = 0.0007). The operation time was significantly longer in the robotic procedure (MD = 28.12; 95% CI (3.66–52.57); p = 0.02). There were no significant differences between the robotic and laparoscopic approaches regarding the intra-operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, overall and severe complications and conversion rate. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the robotic and laparoscopic procedures regarding the resection margin status. Tumor size was significantly larger in the robotic group. However, randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are needed to demonstrate the benefits of robotics in liver surgery.

The Advances in Computer Vision That Are Enabling More Autonomous Actions in Surgery: A Systematic Review of the Literature

This is a review focused on advances and current limitations of computer vision (CV) and how CV can help us obtain to more autonomous actions in surgery. It is a follow-up article to one that we previously published in Sensors entitled, “Artificial Intelligence Surgery: How Do We Get to Autonomous Actions in Surgery?” As opposed to that article that also discussed issues of machine learning, deep learning and natural language processing, this review will delve deeper into the field of CV. Additionally, non-visual forms of data that can aid computerized robots in the performance of more autonomous actions, such as instrument priors and audio haptics, will also be highlighted. Furthermore, the current existential crisis for surgeons, endoscopists and interventional radiologists regarding more autonomy during procedures will be discussed. In summary, this paper will discuss how to harness the power of CV to keep doctors who do interventions in the loop.

The LiMAx Test as Selection Criteria in Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery

Background: Liver failure is a crucial predictor for relevant morbidity and mortality after hepatic surgery. Hence, a good patient selection is mandatory. We use the LiMAx test for patient selection for major or minor liver resections in robotic and laparoscopic liver surgery and share our experience here. Patients and methods: We identified patients in the Magdeburg registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS) who underwent robotic or laparoscopic minor or major liver surgery and received a LiMAx test for preoperative evaluation of the liver function. This cohort was divided in two groups: patients with normal (LiMAx normal) and decreased (LiMAx decreased) liver function measured by the LiMAx test. Results: Forty patients were selected from the MD-MILS regarding the selection criteria (LiMAx normal, n = 22 and LiMAx decreased, n = 18). Significantly more major liver resections were performed in the LiMAx normal vs. the LiMAx decreased group (13 vs. 2; p = 0.003). Hence, the mean operation time was significantly longer in the LiMAx normal vs. the LiMAx decreased group (356.6 vs. 228.1 min; p = 0.003) and the intraoperative blood transfusion significantly higher in the LiMAx normal vs. the LiMAx decreased group (8 vs. 1; p = 0.027). There was no significant difference between the LiMAx groups regarding the length of hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss, liver surgery related morbidity or mortality, and resection margin status. Conclusion: The LiMAx test is a helpful and reliable tool to precisely determine the liver function capacity. It aids in accurate patient selection for major or minor liver resections in minimally invasive liver surgery, which consequently serves to improve patients’ safety. In this way, liver resections can be performed safely, even in patients with reduced liver function, without negatively affecting morbidity, mortality and the resection margin status, which is an important predictive oncological factor.

Study: International Multicentric Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases (SIMMILR-CRLM)

(1) Background: Here we report on a retrospective study of an international multicentric cohort after minimally invasive liver resection (SIMMILR) of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) from six centers. (2) Methods: Resections were divided by the approach used: open liver resection (OLR), laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR). Patients with macrovascular invasion, more than three metastases measuring more than 3 cm or a solitary metastasis more than 5 cm were excluded, and any remaining heterogeneity found was further analyzed after propensity score matching (PSM) to decrease any potential bias. (3) Results: Prior to matching, 566 patients underwent OLR, 462 LLR and 36 RLR for CRLM. After PSM, 142 patients were in each group of the OLR vs. LLR group and 22 in the OLR vs. RLR and 21 in the LLR vs. RLR groups. Blood loss, hospital stay, and morbidity rates were all highly statistically significantly increased in the OLR compared to the LLR group, 636 mL vs. 353 mL, 9 vs. 5 days and 25% vs. 6%, respectively (p < 0.001). Only blood loss was significantly decreased when RLR was compared to OLR and LLR, 250 mL vs. 597 mL, and 224 mL vs. 778 mL, p < 0.008 and p < 0.04, respectively. (4) Conclusions: SIMMILR indicates that minimally invasive approaches for CRLM that follow the Milan criteria may have short term advantages. Notably, larger studies with long-term follow-up comparing robotic resections to both OLR and LLR are still needed.

Artificial Intelligence Surgery: How Do We Get to Autonomous Actions in Surgery?

Most surgeons are skeptical as to the feasibility of autonomous actions in surgery. Interestingly, many examples of autonomous actions already exist and have been around for years. Since the beginning of this millennium, the field of artificial intelligence (AI) has grown exponentially with the development of machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), computer vision (CV) and natural language processing (NLP). All of these facets of AI will be fundamental to the development of more autonomous actions in surgery, unfortunately, only a limited number of surgeons have or seek expertise in this rapidly evolving field. As opposed to AI in medicine, AI surgery (AIS) involves autonomous movements. Fortuitously, as the field of robotics in surgery has improved, more surgeons are becoming interested in technology and the potential of autonomous actions in procedures such as interventional radiology, endoscopy and surgery. The lack of haptics, or the sensation of touch, has hindered the wider adoption of robotics by many surgeons; however, now that the true potential of robotics can be comprehended, the embracing of AI by the surgical community is more important than ever before. Although current complete surgical systems are mainly only examples of tele-manipulation, for surgeons to get to more autonomously functioning robots, haptics is perhaps not the most important aspect. If the goal is for robots to ultimately become more and more independent, perhaps research should not focus on the concept of haptics as it is perceived by humans, and the focus should be on haptics as it is perceived by robots/computers. This article will discuss aspects of ML, DL, CV and NLP as they pertain to the modern practice of surgery, with a focus on current AI issues and advances that will enable us to get to more autonomous actions in surgery. Ultimately, there may be a paradigm shift that needs to occur in the surgical community as more surgeons with expertise in AI may be needed to fully unlock the potential of AIS in a safe, efficacious and timely manner.

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.

200 consecutive laparoscopic pancreatic resections performed with a robotically controlled laparoscope holder

INTRODUCTION

Because of the potential benefit of robotics in pancreatic surgery, we review our experience at two minimally invasive pancreatic surgery centers that utilize a robotically controlled laparoscope holder to see if smaller robots that enable the operating surgeon to maintain contact with the patient may have a role in the treatment of pancreatic disease.

METHODS

From March 1994 to June 2011, a total of 200 laparoscopic pancreatic procedures utilizing a robotically controlled laparoscope holder were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 72 duodenopancreatectomies, 67 distal pancreatectomies, 23 enucleations, 20 pancreatic cyst drainage procedures, 5 necrosectomies, 5 atypical pancreatic resections, 4 total pancreatectomies, and 4 central pancreatectomies were performed. Fourteen patients required conversion to an open approach and eight a hand-assisted one. A total of 24 patients suffered a major complication. Sixteen patients developed a pancreatic leak and 19 patients required reoperation. Major complications occurred in 14 patients and pancreatic leaks occurred in 13 patients. Ten patients required conversion to a lap-assisted or open approach and six patients required reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, a robotically assisted approach using a camera holder seems the only way to incorporate some of the benefits of robotics in pancreatic surgery while maintaining haptics and contact with the patient.

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.

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.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy for malignant tumors

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy has become the gold standard for benign tumors. As more surgeons have expertise in open and laparoscopic pancreatic surgery, increasing numbers of benign-appearing tumors are being removed via minimally invasive techniques and found to have malignancy on final pathology. Because of our growing experience in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, we have begun removing preoperatively suspected malignancies in the distal pancreas with minimally invasive techniques.

METHODS

All cases were collected prospectively in a database and analyzed retrospectively. All cases begun laparoscopically with the intention of performing the resection with minimally invasive techniques were considered even if the operation was ultimately converted to an open procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 12 cases have been attempted of which four required hand assistance and one required conversion to an open approach due to delayed bleeding from a calcified splenic artery that had been transected with laparoscopic GIA stapler device. In total, eight (67%) patients had malignant disease and four (33%) were found to have benign tumors. The median lymph node retrieval is 8 (range 3-16) with no positive margins. The morbidity rate is 17% with one reoperation (8%) and one mortality (8%) at 30 and 90 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach to malignant pancreatic tumors is feasible with similar morbidity and mortality rates to benign series. When tumors are next to the confluence of the splenic portal vein, a hand-assisted approach may be adviseable. Calcified splenic arteries should be sought on preoperative imaging and either transected in non-calcified segments or controlled via open techniques via the hand port.

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.

Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery of the entire gland: initial experience

Many pancreatic cancer surgeons have been slow to adopt minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) due a lack of formalized minimally invasive training and the perceived difficulty in dissecting pancreatic tumors and tissue away from the superior mesenteric vessels and consequent concerns for adequacy of oncologic margins and lymph node retrieval. A review of the first 29 MIPS procedures for malignant and premalignant tumors of the pancreas with the aid of a sterilizeable robotically-controlled camera holder was undertaken. As opposed to other robots currently available, this device allows for hand-assistance by the operating surgeon. Fourteen minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies (MIDP) (10 laparoscopic, 3 hand-assisted, 1 converted to open), 13 MIPDs (6 laparoscopic, 5 hand-assisted, 2 converted to open), and 2 laparoscopic central pancreatectomies have been performed. Seventeen (59%) of these patients were treated for cancer. Of these, 11 underwent a MIPD and 6 a MIDP. There were postoperative complications in seven patients (24%) at 30 days. Thirty and 90 day mortality was 3%. A sterilizeable robotically-controlled laparoscope holder that enables the operating surgeon to remain in contact with the patient and have the option of a hand-assisted approach may be particularly helpful for minimally invasive approaches to malignant and premalignant pancreatic tumors.

Video: laparoscopic right hepatectomy and partial resection of the diaphragm for liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Indications for minimally invasive major hepatectomies have been increasing as experience with these techniques grows. Invasion into the diaphragm is considered a contraindication to the laparoscopic approach. At their institution, the authors have begun approaching all tumors laparoscopically. This report presents the techniques necessary to perform right hepatectomy, partial diaphragm resection, and repair using totally laparoscopic techniques.

METHODS

Five trocars are placed in a semilunar fashion approximately one handbreadth apart along a line one handbreadth below the right subcostal margin. The hepatic inflow is taken extraparenchymally before transection of the hepatic parenchyma in an anterior-to-posterior fashion. The hepatic inflow then is transected, and the involved portion of diaphragm is transected with ultrasonic shears. Next, the diaphragm is repaired primarily and buttressed with an absorbable material to decrease the incidence of recurrent diaphragmatic hernia.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic treatment was attempted for ten patients and successfully completed for nine of these patients (90%). All 10 patients had secondary liver tumors. Three patients required concomitant partial diaphragm resection. The median estimated blood loss (EBL) was 500 ml (range, 300-3,000 ml). All margins were negative, and the average hospital stay was 8 days (range, 5-17 days). Two patients (20%) experienced complications, which consisted of biliary leaks, which were treated with percutaneous drainage. One of these patients underwent conversion to an open procedure due to an inferior vena cava injury. No mortality occurred at 30 or 90 days of follow-up evaluation.

CONCLUSION

The minimally invasive approach to secondary tumors requiring right hepatectomy is feasible and safe even when there is diaphragmatic involvement. Larger series with long-term follow-up evaluation are needed to determine whether these short-term results translate into durable benefits.

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy: a review of 285 published cases

BACKGROUND

Given the difficulty level of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), limited data exist for a comparison to open pancreatoduodenectomies. As the technique becomes more diffuse, issues regarding the adequacy of oncologic margins and lymph node retrieval need to be addressed.

METHODS

All published cases of MIPD were examined. Variables analyzed included conversion rates, operating room time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, follow-up, complications, mortality, lymph node retrieval, and margins.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles describing outcomes after MIPD were found, and a total of 285 cases were described. Main malignancy treated was pancreatic adenocarcinoma, accounting for 32% of all cases. Eighty-seven percent were performed totally laparoscopically, and 13% were performed with a hand-assisted approach to facilitate the reconstruction step of the procedure. The rate of conversion to an open procedure was 9%. Estimated blood loss had a weighted average (WA) of 189 mL. Average length of stay had a WA of 12 days, and average follow-up had a WA of 14 months. The overall complication rate was 48%, and the overall mortality rate was 2%. Average lymph nodes retrieved ranged from 7 to 36 nodes, with a WA of 15 nodes, and positive margins of resection were reported to be positive in 0.4% of patients with malignant disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This review found similar outcomes with respect to perioperative morbidity and mortality rates compared to open pancreatoduodenectomies. The oncologic goals of pancreatic resection may be able to be achieved by MIPD, but longer follow-up and larger series are still needed.

Video: Laparoscopic anterior cystogastrostomy

This video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/SLE/A10, shows the steps necessary to carry out a stapled laparoscopic cystogastrostomy through an anterior gastrotomy. As with open surgery, at least a 3-cm anastamosis should be created to reduce the risk of early closure and recurrent pseudocyst formation. Although the initial minimally invasive cystogastrostomies reported were carried out by placing the laparoscopic trocars directly into the stomach, the anterior approach uses only 1 gastrostomy procedure and may have a decreased risk of gastric leak. A posterior approach has been described here; however, it may be more technically demanding. Only when the pseudocyst does not clearly communicate with the posterior stomach wall should cystojejunostomy be attempted. This can be done with a loop of jejunum or through a Roux-en Y.

Laparoscopic completion radical cholecystectomy for T2 gallbladder cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of minimally invasive surgery in the surgical management of gallbladder cancer is a matter of controversy. Because of the authors' growing experience with laparoscopic liver and pancreatic surgery, they have begun offering patients laparoscopic completion partial hepatectomies of the gallbladder bed with laparoscopic hepatoduodenal lymphadenectomy.

METHODS

The video shows the steps needed to perform laparoscopic resection of the residual gallbladder bed, the hepatoduodenal lymph node nodes, and the residual cystic duct stump in a setting with a positive cystic stump margin. The skin and fascia around the previous extraction site are resected, and this site is used for specimen retrieval during the second operation.

RESULTS

To date, three patients have undergone laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy with hepatoduodenal lymph node dissection for gallbladder cancer. The average number of lymph nodes retrieved was 3 (range, 1-6), and the average estimated blood loss was 117 ml (range, 50-200 ml). The average operative time was 227 min (range, 120-360 min), and the average hospital length of stay was 4 days (range, 3-5 days). No morbidity or mortality was observed during 90 days of follow-up for each patient.

CONCLUSION

Although controversy exists as to the best surgical approach for gallbladder cancer diagnosed after routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy, the minimally invasive approach seems feasible and safe, even after previous hepatobiliary surgery. If the previous extraction site cannot be ascertained, all port sites can be excised locally. Larger studies are needed to determine whether the minimally invasive approach to postoperatively diagnosed early-stage gallbladder cancer has any drawbacks.

Laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy and Roux-en-Y choledochojejunostomy for gallbladder cancer

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy was one of the first laparoscopic procedures, gallbladder cancer has been one of the last malignancies tackled with minimally invasive techniques. This video reviews the minimally invasive approaches to preoperatively suspected gallbladder cancer.

METHODS

Like the standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy, the minimally invasive procedure is performed with four trocars. The surgeon operates with the patient in the French position. A totally laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy including wedge resections of segments IVB and V is undertaken with hepatoduodenal lymphadenectomy and common bile duct excision. The biliary system is reconstructed via a laparoscopic choledochojejunostomy.

RESULTS

Six patients have undergone laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy. Three of these patients were found to have gallbladder cancer according to the final pathology. All the final surgical margins were negative, and the average lymph node retrieval was 3 (range, 1-6).

CONCLUSION

The minimally invasive approach to gallbladder cancer is feasible and safe. It should currently be performed in high-volume centers with expertise in both hepatobiliary and minimally invasive surgery. Larger trials are needed to determine whether either the open or laparoscopic approach offers any advantage.