Ten-year experience of totally laparoscopic liver resection in a single institution

New technique of extracorporeal hepatic inflow control for pure laparoscopic liver resection

We have developed a new technique of the Pringle maneuver by clamping outside the abdominal wall for pure laparoscopic liver resection (pure Lap). Our technique successfully controls bleeding and enables pure Lap to be completed without any events, even for a large tumor. Between 2008 and 2010, we compared consecutive patients who received pure Lap with (n=11) and without (n=7) this Pringle maneuver. Although tumor size in the Pringle group was significantly larger than in the no-Pringle group (3.35±1.64 vs. 1.11±0.29 cm, respectively), intraoperative bleeding was not significantly different (165.5±188.5 vs. 177.9±364.4 mL, respectively). In contrast, operation time in the Pringle group was significantly longer than in the no-Pringle group (343.1±99.5 vs. 199.6±63.2 min, respectively). Pure Lap for large tumors is feasible when employing a new Pringle maneuver outside the abdominal wall.

Modified hepatic vascular occlusion facilitates hepatectomy for malignant hepatic tumor in laparoscopy

PURPOSE

The parenchymal transection and bleeding are important problems in laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH). The study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LH for a malignant hepatic tumor (MHT) with hepatic vascular occlusion (HVO) only using a monopolar electrocautery.

METHODS

A total of 31 patients' profiles, operative data, clinical outcomes, pathologic findings, and follow-up information were collected who underwent LH with HVO.

RESULTS

The median operative time was 176 minutes and the median postoperative hospital stay was 9 days. The median estimated blood loss was 310 mL. The median tumor size was 4.6 cm and the median surgical margin was 12 mm.The ischemia injury to the liver in patients subjected to selective HVO was less than that in patients subjected to the Pringle maneuver.

CONCLUSIONS

HVO facilitates LH in transecting liver parenchyma and reduces bleeding, making LH safe and feasible only using monopolar electrocautery in selected patients with malignancies. Moreover, the selective HVO have more advantages over the Pringle maneuver in decreasing ischemic injury.

Current management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

The current management therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients are discussed in this review. Despite the development of new therapies, HCC remains a “difficult to treat” cancer because HCC typically occurs in advanced liver disease or hepatic cirrhosis. The progression of multistep and multicentric HCC hampers the prevention of the recurrence of HCC. Many HCC patients are treated with surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), although these modalities should be considered in only selected cases with a certain HCC number and size. Although there is a shortage of grafts, liver transplantation has the highest survival rates for HCC. Several modalities are salvage treatments; however, intensive care in combination with other modalities or in combination with surgical resection or RFA might offer a better prognosis. Sorafenib is useful for patients with advanced HCC. In the near future, HCC treatment will include stronger molecular targeted drugs, which will have greater potency and fewer adverse events. Further studies will be ongoing.

Laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a matched pair analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is currently perceived a complex and challenging laparoscopic procedure and is limited to a few expert teams. This study analyzed the short- and long-term outcomes of LMH for HCC compared with open hepatectomy.

METHODS

From January 2006 to May 2014, 38 patients underwent LMH for HCC (10 left and 28 right hepatectomy). They were matched and compared to 38 patients (10 left and 28 right hepatectomy) who underwent a conventional open approach. Short-term operative and postoperative outcomes as well as long-term outcomes, including disease-free survival and overall survival rates, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Patients were well matched for several preoperative factors. Overall complication rates were significantly higher for the open group. No significant difference was seen in 3-year overall survival between the open and laparoscopic groups (69.2 vs. 73.4 %; p = 0.951). A trend toward better 3-year disease-free survival after laparoscopy was observed (29.7 vs. 50.3 %; p = 0.219), even though the difference did not reach statistical significance. The same trend was seen in subgroup analyses of right and left hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows the feasibility of LMH for HCC compared to open hepatectomy in regard to both short- and long-term outcomes. LMH offers many advantages commonly attributed to laparoscopy and is well suited for HCC with cirrhosis when performed by experienced surgeons.

Laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a matched pair analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is currently perceived a complex and challenging laparoscopic procedure and is limited to a few expert teams. This study analyzed the short- and long-term outcomes of LMH for HCC compared with open hepatectomy.

METHODS

From January 2006 to May 2014, 38 patients underwent LMH for HCC (10 left and 28 right hepatectomy). They were matched and compared to 38 patients (10 left and 28 right hepatectomy) who underwent a conventional open approach. Short-term operative and postoperative outcomes as well as long-term outcomes, including disease-free survival and overall survival rates, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Patients were well matched for several preoperative factors. Overall complication rates were significantly higher for the open group. No significant difference was seen in 3-year overall survival between the open and laparoscopic groups (69.2 vs. 73.4 %; p = 0.951). A trend toward better 3-year disease-free survival after laparoscopy was observed (29.7 vs. 50.3 %; p = 0.219), even though the difference did not reach statistical significance. The same trend was seen in subgroup analyses of right and left hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows the feasibility of LMH for HCC compared to open hepatectomy in regard to both short- and long-term outcomes. LMH offers many advantages commonly attributed to laparoscopy and is well suited for HCC with cirrhosis when performed by experienced surgeons.

Liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in 313 Western patients: tumor biology and underlying liver rather than tumor size drive prognosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Treatment decisions for hepatocellular carcinoma are mostly guided by tumor size. The aim of this study was to analyze resection outcomes according to tumor size and characterize prognostic factors.

METHODS

Patients resected at a Western center between 1989 and 2010 were grouped by largest tumor size: <50mm, 50-100mm, and >100mm. The primary end points were overall- and recurrence-free survival. Univariate associations with primary endpoints were entered into a Cox proportional hazard regression model.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirteen patients underwent resection: 111 (36%) had tumors <50mm, 113 (36%) had tumors between 50 and 100mm, and 89 (28%) had tumors >100mm. Five-year overall and disease-free survival rates for the three groups were 67%, 46%, and 34%, and 32%, 27%, and 27%, respectively. Thirty-five patients, mostly from <50mm group, underwent transplantation which was associated with a 91% 5 year survival rate. Tumor size was not an independent predictor of overall or recurrence-free survival on multivariate analyses. Independent predictors of decreased overall survival were: intraoperative transfusion (HR=2.60), cirrhosis (HR=2.42), poorly differentiated tumor (HR=2.04), satellite lesions (HR=1.69), alpha-fetoprotein >200 (HR=1.53), and microvascular invasion (HR=1.48). The use of salvage transplantation was an independent predictor of improved survival (HR=0.21). Recurrence-free survival was predicted by intraoperative transfusion (HR=2.15), poorly differentiated tumor (HR=1.87), microvascular invasion (HR=1.71) and cirrhosis (HR=1.69).

CONCLUSION

By studying a large group of patients across a distribution of tumor sizes and background liver diseases, it is demonstrated that size alone is a limited prognostic factor. Tumor biology and condition of the underlying liver are better prognosticators and should be given closer attention. Although hampered by recurrence rates, resection is safe and offers good overall survival. In addition, it may allow for better selection for salvage transplantation after consideration of histopathological risk factors.

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for liver metastases from colorectal cancer: A comparative analysis of 168 consecutive cases at a single center

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection for liver metastases from colorectal cancer (CRLM) is performed in a relatively small number of institutions. Its operative results have been reported to be comparable with that of open laparotomy; however, information on its oncologic outcomes is scarce. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH) to treat CRLM at a single institution.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data from 168 consecutive patients who underwent LH (n = 100) or OH (n = 68) for CRLM. The tumor characteristics, operative results, overall survival (OS) rate, recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate, and recurrence patterns were analyzed and compared. A previously published survival-predicting nomogram was applied to compare OS and RFS between the 2 patient groups.

RESULTS

The largest tumor diameter and the number of tumors were significantly larger in the OH group than in the LH group; however, no differences in other tumor factors were observed between the 2 groups. When matched by the nomogram, OS and RFS remained comparable between the 2 groups in every examined stratum, not only for low-risk patients but also for those with high risk. The recurrence patterns also were similar (liver: 30.2% vs 26.8%, P = .72; lung: 22.6% vs 34.1%, P = .22; peritoneum: 7.6% vs 4.9%, P = .45).

CONCLUSION

The long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for CRLM were comparable with those of the open procedure in not only low-risk but also high-risk patients.

Robotic liver surgery: preliminary experience in a tertiary hepato-biliary unit

Minimally invasive liver surgery is performed with increasing frequency by hepatic surgeons. Laparoscopy was the first approach to be used and it is currently safely feasible in selected patients by experienced surgeons. Minor and major laparoscopic hepatectomies are now performed as a routine procedure in tertiary referral centers, with increasing evidence of long-term results comparable to traditional surgery together with the advantages of a minimally invasive approach. Robotic surgery, first developed for military purposes, showed to overcome some of the limits of laparoscopy, with an improved visual magnification, a 3-dimensional view and enhanced dexterity with better movement control. This allows an easier approach for resections in the posterior segments and for lesions close to major vessels. We present our preliminary experience of 20 consecutive robotic liver resection. Indications were colo-rectal liver metastasis (n = 7), hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 6), liver hemangioma (n = 2), biliary cystoadenoma (n = 2), breast cancer liver metastasis (n = 1), lung cancer liver metastasis (n = 1), symptomatic left liver lithiasis (n = 1). No conversion to laparotomy have been made and no hepatic pedicle clamping has been performed. The median duration of surgery was 141 min. There was no mortality, global morbidity was 10%. Median tumor size was 36 mm. Median post-operative length of stay was 5.7 days. Robotic surgery can be safely performed by experienced hepatic surgeons, resections of lesions in the posterior segments and close to the major vessels seem to be the best indication. Further studies are needed to clarify the exact role of robotics in liver surgery.

Pure laparoscopic hepatectomy as repeat surgery and repeat hepatectomy

AIM: To assess clinical outcomes of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) in patients with a history of upper abdominal surgery and repeat hepatectomy.

METHODS: This study compared the perioperative courses of patients receiving LH at our institution that had or had not previously undergone upper abdominal surgery. Of the 80 patients who underwent LH, 22 had prior abdominal surgeries, including hepatectomy (n = 12), pancreatectomy (n = 3), cholecystectomy and common bile duct excision (n = 1), splenectomy (n = 1), total gastrectomy (n = 1), colectomy with the involvement of transverse colon (n = 3), and extended hysterectomy with extensive lymph-node dissection up to the upper abdomen (n = 1). Clinical indicators including operating time, blood loss, hospital stay, and morbidity were compared among the groups.

RESULTS: Eighteen of the 22 patients who had undergone previous surgery had severe adhesions in the area around the liver. However, there were no conversions to laparotomy in this group. In the 58 patients without a history of upper abdominal surgery, the median operative time was 301 min and blood loss was 150 mL. In patients with upper abdominal surgical history or repeat hepatectomy, the operative times were 351 and 301 min, and blood loss was 100 and 50 mL, respectively. The median postoperative stay was 17, 13 and 12 d for patients with no history of upper abdominal surgery, patients with a history, and patients with repeat hepatectomy, respectively. There were five cases with complications in the group with no surgical history, compared to only one case in the group with a prior history. There were no statistically significant differences in the perioperative results between the groups with and without upper abdominal surgical history, or with repeat hepatectomy.

CONCLUSION: LH is feasible and safe in patients with a history of upper abdominal surgery or repeat hepatectomy.

Costs of laparoscopic and open liver and pancreatic resection: A systematic review

AIM: To study costs of laparoscopic and open liver and pancreatic resections, all the compiled data from available observational studies were systematically reviewed.

METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases to identify all studies published up to 2013 that compared laparoscopic and open liver [laparoscopic hepatic resection (LLR) vs open liver resection (OLR)] and pancreatic [laparoscopic pancreatic resection (LPR) vs open pancreatic resection] resection. The last search was conducted on October 30, 2013.

RESULTS: Four studies reported that LLR was associated with lower ward stay cost than OLR (2972 USD vs 5291 USD). The costs related to equipment (3345 USD vs 2207 USD) and theatre (14538 vs 11406) were reported higher for LLR. The total cost was lower in patients managed by LLR (19269 USD) compared to OLR (23419 USD). Four studies reported that LPR was associated with lower ward stay cost than OLR (6755 vs 9826 USD). The costs related to equipment (2496 USD vs 1630 USD) and theatre (5563 vs 4444) were reported higher for LPR. The total cost was lower in the LPR (8825 USD) compared to OLR (13380 USD).

CONCLUSION: This systematic review support the economic advantage of laparoscopic over open approach to liver and pancreatic resection.

Experience of laparoscopic liver resection for various liver diseases

Backgrounds/Aims

We present our experience of laparoscopic liver resection for various liver diseases.

Methods

From April 2008 to August 2012 in Chungnam National University, 68 of 253 liver resections were performed laparoscopically. During the first year, laparoscopy-assisted liver resection was mainly performed and subsequently totally laparoscopic liver resection was the main operative type. Surgery type for treatment purposes was decided preoperatively. Clinical data were collected retrospectively and analyzed.

Results

Preoperatively, 43 patients (63.2%) were diagnosed with benign disease, 19 patients (27.9%) were malignant liver tumors and 6 patients (8.8%) were indeterminate liver tumor but favorable towards malignancy. Anatomical major liver resection was performed in 58 cases (85.3%) and 10 cases (14.7%) were non-anatomical resection. Left hemihepatectomy was performed in 38 cases (55.8%) followed by left lateral sectionectomy in 18 cases (26.5%), and segment IV and IVa segmentectomy, were each in 1 case. Mean operation time was 235.0 minutes (range, 60-470) and 14 patients (18.6%) had intraoperative transfusion. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 10.2 days (range, 4-32). Mean operation time of laparoscopy-assisted left lobectomy was 317 minutes and totally laparoscopic left lobectomy was 281 minutes, but there was no significant statistical difference between these two operation types. There were 11 episodes of postoperative complications in 8 patients. There was no mortality after laparoscopic liver resection.

Conclusions

We concluded that laparoscopic liver resection is a feasible operation, but needs to be carefully conducted in malignant tumors.

Laparoscopic liver resection for malignancy: A review of the literature

AIM: To review the published literature about laparoscopic liver resection for malignancy.

METHODS: A PubMed search was performed for original published studies until June 2013 and original series containing at least 30 patients were reviewed.

RESULTS: All forms of hepatic resections have been described ranging from simple wedge resections to extended right or left hepatectomies. The usual approach is pure laparoscopic, but hand-assisted, as well as robotic approaches have been described. Most studies showed comparable results to open resection in terms of operative blood loss, postoperative morbidity and mortality. Many of them showed decreased postoperative pain, shorter hospital stays, and even lower costs. Oncological results including resection margin status and long-term survival were not inferior to open resection.

CONCLUSION: In the hands of experienced surgeons, laparoscopic liver resection for malignant lesions is safe and offers some short-term advantages over open resection. Oncologically, similar survival rates have been observed in patients treated with the laparoscopic approach when compared to their open resection counterparts.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: a metaanalysis of 610 patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains controversial. The objective of this manuscript was to perform a metaanalysis comparing outcomes of LLR with open liver resection (OLR) in patients with hepatic mCRC, and to identify which patients were suitable candidates for LLR.

STUDY DESIGN

A PubMed search identified 2,122 articles. When filtered for case-matched articles comparing LLR with OLR for mCRC, 8 articles were identified consisting of 610 patients (242 LLR, 368 OLR). A random effects metaanalysis was performed.

RESULTS

The 2 groups were well-matched for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor size, number of metastases, extent of major hepatectomy, and use of neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy. The mean number of metastases in the LLR and OLR groups were 1.4 and 1.5, respectively (P = .14). Estimated blood loss was less in LLR group (262 vs 385 mL; P = .049). Transfusion rate was significantly less in LLR group (9.9 vs 19.8%; P = .004). There was no difference in operative time (248.7 vs 262.8 min; P = .85). Length of stay (LOS) was less in the LLR group (6.5 vs 8.8 days; P = .007). The overall complication rate was less in LLR group (20.3% vs 33.2%; P = .03). Importantly, there was no difference in the 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) or overall survival (OS) rates.

CONCLUSION

In carefully selected patients with limited mCRC (1 or 2 tumors), LLR provides marked perioperative benefits without compromising oncologic outcomes or long-term survival. Specifically, LLR offers decreased blood loss, LOS, and overall complication rates with comparable 5-year OS and DFS.

[Laparoscopic liver surgery]

Liver resection remains the method of choice for curative treatment for liver tumors. Development in diagnostic and surgical techniques has improved operative results as well as long-term outcomes. In the last decade minimally invasive laparoscopic (LAP) surgery has been increasingly adopted by liver units. The trend in LAP liver resection has been moving from limited resections towards major hepatectomy. This process, however, is relatively slow, which can be due to technical difficulties of the procedure and fear of haemorrhage. Despite having a hard time at the start, major resections become more common. Up to now approximately 6000 LAP liver resections were performed worldwide, number of major hepatectomies is estimated between 700-800. LAP liver resections are feasible with significant benefits for patients consisting of less blood loss, less narcotic requirements, and shorter hospital stay with comparable postoperative morbidity and mortality to open liver resections. It is an accepted management of both benign and malignant liver lesions. There is no difference between LAP and open surgery in late survival after resection for colorectal liver metastases. Overall survival of LAP resected hepatocellular carcinoma cases seems to be superior compared with open surgery.

Decreased blood loss reduces postoperative complications in resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The correlation between blood loss and the risk of postoperative complications was unclear in patients undergoing resection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

We studied 539 patients who had resection of HCC. Postoperative complications were recorded according to the modified Clavien-Dindo classification. Variables were compared between patients with grade III to V complications and those with no or grade I to II. A spline regression analysis was used to estimate the probability of grade III to V complications.

RESULTS

Among variables, blood loss (P = 0.0001), operating time (P = 0.0001), blood transfusion (P = 0.0001), and tumor size (P = 0.02) differed significantly between patients with grade III to V and those with no or I to II. Multivariate analysis revealed that the factor most strongly related to complications was blood loss (odds ratio 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-1.96, P = 0.0001). Spline regression analysis showed that an increase in blood loss was accompanied by increase in the risk of complication; when the estimated probability of grade III to V complications exceeded 50% (95% CI 30.0-70.0), the corresponding blood loss was 820 ml.

CONCLUSION

Decrease in blood loss in resection of HCC is accompanied by reduced risk of complications. Surgeons need to minimize blood loss as less as 820 ml.

Laparoscopic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between Middle Eastern and Western experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is growing in popularity, but the short- and long-term outcome of patients undergoing LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has not yet been established.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS) from cited English and Chinese publications. Clinical and survival parameters were extracted. The search was last conducted in October 2013. After application of selective criteria, 24 remaining original studies with more than 15 patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the Western experience, mean operative time was between 150 to 300 minutes, and mean blood loss ranged from 55 to 452 mL. Transfusion was required in all series, ranging from 2.8% to 50%. The conversion rate ranged from 5% to 19.4%. Three cases of death were reported. General morbidity rate ranged from 1.5% to 25%. Specific complications were divided into hemorrhage (2.4% to 25%), ascites (3.7% to 15.3%), and biliary collection (0.6% to 5%). Liver insufficiency was reported in two cases. Mean hospital stay ranged from 5.4 to 15 days. In all case-matched studies, LLR was statistically associated with a shorter hospital stay. The 5-year overall survival rate ranged from 55% to 70%. No trocar-site recurrence was observed. The recurrence rate ranged from 21.4% to 50%. Comparative studies did not demonstrate any significant difference in terms of recurrence between LLR and open liver resection (OLR). In the Middle Eastern experience, mean operative time ranged from 147 to 325 minutes, and mean blood loss ranged from 88 to 808 mL. Transfusion was required, ranging from 1.8% to 19.2%. The conversion rate ranged from 1.8% to 18.6%, and four series reported no conversion. There was no mortality. The main specific complication was ascites (1.7% to 26.6%). A biliary collection was reported in only two series (10.7% and 13.3%), and only one case of postoperative liver insufficiency was reported. Mean hospital stay ranged from 4 to 11.5 days. Statistically, three comparative studies reported a shorter postoperative hospital stay following LLR versus OLR. The 5-year overall survival rate ranged from 50% to 76.6%. Comparative studies did not demonstrate any significant difference in terms of overall survival and recurrence rate between LLR and OLR. No trocar-site recurrence was reported. The recurrence rate ranged from 26.9% to 45.5%, and two series reported no recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery should be considered an acceptable alternative for the treatment of HCC.

Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy: a matched comparison

OBJECTIVE

To perform a matched comparison of surgical and postsurgical outcomes between our robotic and laparoscopic hepatic resection experience.

BACKGROUND

The application of robotic technology and technique to liver surgery has grown. Robotic methods may have the potential to overcome certain laparoscopic disadvantages, but few studies have drawn a matched comparison of outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic liver resections.

METHODS

Demographics, intraoperative variables, and postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing robotic (n = 57) and laparoscopic (n = 114) hepatic resections between November 2007 and December 2011 were reviewed. A 1:2 matched analysis was performed by individually matching patients in the robotic cohort to patients in the laparoscopic cohort based on demographics, comorbidities, performance status, and extent of liver resection.

RESULTS

Matched patients undergoing robotic and laparoscopic liver resections displayed no significant differences in operative and postoperative outcomes as measured by blood loss, transfusion rate, R0 negative margin rate, postoperative peak bilirubin, postoperative intensive care unit admission rate, length of stay, and 90-day mortality. Patients undergoing robotic liver surgery had significantly longer operative times (median: 253 vs 199 minutes) and overall room times (median: 342 vs 262 minutes) compared with their laparoscopic counterparts. However, the robotic approach allowed for an increased percentage of major hepatectomies to be performed in a purely minimally invasive fashion (81% vs 7.1%, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest series comparing robotic to laparoscopic liver resections. Robotic and laparoscopic liver resection display similar safety and feasibility for hepatectomies. Although a greater proportion of robotic cases were completed in a totally minimally invasive manner, there were no significant benefits over laparoscopic techniques in operative outcomes.

Laparoscopic limited liver resection decreases morbidity irrespective of the hepatic segment resected

OBJECTIVES

The laparoscopic approach is widely used in abdominal surgery. However, the benefits of laparoscopy in liver surgery have hitherto been insufficiently established. This study sought to investigate these benefits and, in particular, to establish whether or not the laparoscopic approach is beneficial in patients with lesions involving the posterosuperior segments of the liver.

METHODS

Outcomes in a cohort of patients undergoing mostly minor hepatectomy (50 laparoscopic and 52 open surgery procedures) between January 2000 and December 2010 at the University Clinic of Navarra were analysed. The two groups displayed similar clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Patients submitted to laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) had a lower risk for complications [odds ratio (OR) = 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07-0.74; P = 0.013] and shorter hospital stay (OR = 0.08, 95% CI 0.02-0.27; P < 0.001) independently of the presence of classical risk factors for complications. In the cohort of patients with lesions involving posterosuperior liver segments (20 laparoscopic, 21 open procedures), LLR was associated with significantly fewer complications (OR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.04-0.71) and a lower risk for a long hospital stay (OR = 0.1, 95% CI 0.02-0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that the laparoscopic approach to hepatic resection decreases the risk for post-surgical complications and lengthy hospitalization in patients undergoing minor liver resections. This beneficial effect is observed even in patients with lesions located in segments that require technically difficult resections.

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy as a training procedure for surgeons learning laparoscopic hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection remains limited to a relatively small number of institutions because of insufficient hepatic and laparoscopic surgical experience and few training opportunities. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of an improved laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy technique as a training procedure for new surgeons.

METHODS

Twenty-four laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomies (LLLSs) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into 3 groups with 8 patients in each: those undergoing surgery by expert surgeons prior to 2008 (Group A); those undergoing surgery by expert surgeons after 2008, when a standardized LLLS technique was adopted (Group B); and those undergoing LLLS by junior surgeons being trained (Group C).

RESULTS

The median operative time was significantly shorter for Group B (103 min; range, 99-109 min) and C (107 min; range, 85-135 min) patients than for Group A (153 min; range, 95-210 min) patients. There were no significant differences in blood loss or hospital stay. In Groups B and C, no conversions to open laparotomy or complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

The standardized LLLS procedure was both safe and feasible as a technique for training surgeons in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Laparoscopic liver resection compared to open approach in patients with colorectal liver metastases improves further resectability: Oncological outcomes of a case-control matched-pairs analysis

AIMS

Liver resection is considered the standard treatment of colorectal metastases (CRLM). However, to date, no long term oncological results and data regarding repeat hepatectomy after laparoscopic approach are known. The aim of this study is to analyze single center long-term surgical and oncological outcomes after liver resection for CRLM.

METHODS

A total of 57 open resections (OR) were matched with 57 laparoscopic resections (LR) for CRLM. Matching was based mainly on number of metastases, tumor size, segmental position of lesions, type of hepatectomy and type of resection.

RESULTS

Morbidity rate was significantly less in the LR group (p = 0.002); the length of hospital stay was 6.5 ± 5 days for the LR group and 9.2 ± 4 days for the OR group (p = 0.005). After a median follow up of 53.7 months for the OR group and 40.9 months for the LR group, the 5-y overall survival rate was 65% and 60% respectively (p = 0.36) and the 5-y disease free survival rate was 38% and 29% respectively (p = 0.24). More patients in the LR group received a third hepatectomy for CRLM relapse than in the OR group (80% vs. 14.3% respectively; p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic resection for CRLM offers advantages in terms of reduced blood loss, morbidity rate and hospital stay. It provides comparable long-term oncological outcomes but can improve further resectability in patients with recurrent disease.

Laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy with or without synchronous colectomy for colorectal liver metastasis: a meta-analysis

Background

To compare short-term and long-term results of colorectal patients undergoing laparoscopic and open hepatectomy. Moreover, outcomes of laparoscopic versus open procedures for simultaneous primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis resection were compared.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed and EmBase databases (until Oct. 22. 2013) with no limits. Bibliographic citation management software (EndNote X6) was used for extracted literature management. Quality assessment was performed according to a modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The data were analyzed using Review Manager (Version 5.1), and sensitivity analysis was performed by sequentially omitting each study.

Results

Finally, 14 studies, including a total of 975 CLM (colorectal liver metastasis) patients, compared laparoscopic with open hepatectomy. 3 studies of them, including a total of 107 CLM patients, compared laparoscopic with open procedures for synchronous hepatectomy and colectomy. Laparoscopic hepatectomy was associated with a significantly less blood loss, shorter hospitalization time, and less operative transfusion rate. In addition, lower hospital morbidity rate (OR = 0.57, 95%CI:0.42–0.78, P = 0.0005) and better R0 resection (OR = 2.44, 95%CI:1.21–4.94, P = 0.01) were observed in laparoscopic hepatectomy. For long-term outcomes, there were no significant differences between two surgical procedures on recurrence and overall survival. In comparison of synchronous hepatectomy and colectomy, laparoscopic procedure displayed shorter hospitalization (MD = −3.40, 95%CI:−4.37–2.44, P<0.00001) than open procedure. Other outcomes, including surgical time, estimated blood loss, hospital morbidity, and overall survival did not differ significantly in the comparison.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic hepatectomy with or without synchronous colectomy are acceptable for selective CLM patients. We suggest standard inclusion criteria of CLM patients be formulated.

Risk factors and management of conversions to an open approach in laparoscopic liver resection: analysis of 265 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

As a consequence of continuous technical developments in liver surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is increasingly performed worldwide.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and December 2011, 265 LLR were performed in 242 patients for various diseases. The experience of LLR is reported focusing on risk factors of conversion and their management.

RESULTS

The overall conversion rate was 17/265 (6.4%), equally distributed over the period of the study. Statistically significant factors for conversion were found to be LLR of the postero-superior (P-S) segments (SI, SIVa; SVII; SVIII) (12.7% converted versus 2.5% non-converted groups, P = 0.01) and a major compared with a minor hepatectomy (15.2% vs. 4.6%, P = 0.02 respectively). A R0 resection was achieved in 93.2% of cases. According to Dindo's classification, complications were recorded as grade I (n = 20); grade II (6); grade III (11) and grade IV(1) events (total morbidity rate of 14%). Univariate analysis identified a major hepatectomy and resection involving P-S segments as prognostic factors for conversion whereas multivariate analysis identified the latter as an independent risk factor [P = 0.003, odds ratio (OR) = 5.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.8-18.8].

CONCLUSIONS

LLR can be safely performed with low overall morbidity. According to this experience and irrespective of the learning curve, resections of P-S segments were identified as an independent risk factor for conversion in LLR.

Pure laparoscopic posterior sectionectomy for liver metastasis resulting from choroidal malignant melanoma: a case report

Liver metastases resulting from primary choroidal malignant melanomas occur frequently and have a poor prognosis. As a result of advancements in multidisciplinary approaches, life expectancy can be increased when R0 resection is possible. Herein we report the surgical outcomes of pure laparoscopic posterior sectionectomy (PLPS) in a patient with a solitary liver metastasis resulting from choroidal malignant melanoma. The subject was a 46-year-old Japanese man who had received radiotherapy for primary right choroidal malignant melanoma 2 years before presenting at our hospital; he subsequently underwent ophthalmectomy as a result of the relapse. During follow-up, CT revealed a metastatic lesion in the liver S7, and interventional treatments were performed sequentially. The lesion still showed a tendency to enlarge, so we performed PLPS. On postoperative day 7, the patient was discharged from the hospital, and he started to receive adjuvant chemotherapy 2 weeks after PLPS. Although PLPS is deemed to be difficult for lesions in the upper part or posterior segment of the liver, we performed this modality safely.

Outcome of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Liver resection provides one of the best oncological outcomes for liver metastases in patients with colorectal cancer. However, long-term results concerning laparoscopic resection versus open hepatectomy for stage IV colon cancer are still limited. The aim of this study is to compare the survival outcome of laparoscopic liver resection with open liver resection for colorectal metastases.

METHOD

Between October 2002 and September 2011, a total of 1697 patients underwent liver resection for liver tumour and 60 patients underwent pure laparoscopic liver resection. Twenty patients had laparoscopic resection for colorectal liver metastases. Case-matched control patients who received open liver resection were included for comparison. The immediate operative outcomes and survival outcomes including operation morbidity were compared.

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent laparoscopic resection of liver metastases. Forty patients who had open hepatectomy for colorectal metastases were selected as case control. Comparing the laparoscopic group with the open resection group, the median operating time was 180 min versus 210 min P = 0.059, the median blood loss was 200 versus 310 mL (P = 0.043). Hospital stay was 4.5 versus 7 days (P = 0.021), disease-free survival was 9.8 versus 10.9 months (P = 0.299), and the median survival was 69.4 versus 42.1 months (P = 0.235).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection is a safe and effective treatment for liver metastases in patients with colorectal cancer. It is associated with less blood loss and shorter hospital stay when compared with open surgery. Long-term survival is comparable to the conventional open approach.

Simultaneous laparoscopic resection of primary colorectal cancer and associated liver metastases: a systematic review

As many as 25 % of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients have liver metastases at presentation. However, the optimal strategy for resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastasis remains controversial. Despite the increasing use of laparoscopy in colorectal and liver resections, combined laparoscopic resection of the primary CRC and synchronous liver metastasis is rarely performed. The potential benefits of this approach are the possibility to perform a radical operation with small incisions, earlier recovery, and reduction in costs. The aim of this study was to review the literature on feasibility and short-term results of simultaneous laparoscopic resection. We conducted a systematic search of all articles published until February 2013. Search terms included: hepatectomy [Mesh], "liver resection," laparoscopy [Mesh], hand-assisted laparoscopy [Mesh], surgical procedures, minimally invasive [Mesh], colectomy [Mesh], colorectal neoplasms [Mesh], and "colorectal resections." No randomized trials are available. All data have been reported as case reports, case series, or case-control studies. Thirty-nine minimally invasive simultaneous resections were identified in 14 different articles. There were 9 (23 %) major hepatic resections. The most performed liver resection was left lateral sectionectomy in 26 (67 %) patients. Colorectal resections included low rectal resections with total mesorectal excision, right and left hemicolectomies, and anterior resections. Despite the lack of high-quality evidence, the laparoscopic combined procedure appeared to be feasible and safe, even with major hepatectomies. Good patient selection and refined surgical technique are the keys to successful simultaneous resection. Simultaneous left lateral sectionectomy associated with colorectal resection should be routinely proposed.

Feasibility and safety of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with a tumor size of 5-10 cm

Background

Although laparoscopic liver resection has developed rapidly and gained widespread acceptance for the treatment of benign liver diseases and hepatocellular carcinoma with a small tumor size, its usefulness for the treatment of large tumors is less clear, due to concerns about compromising oncological principles and patient safety. The purpose of this study was to explore the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with a tumor size of 5–10 cm.

Methods

From March 2007 to December 2011, we performed liver resection in 275 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with a tumor size of 5–10 cm. Laparoscopic liver resection was performed in 97 patients (Lap-Hx group) and open liver resection was performed in 178 patients (Open-Hx group). Operative time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion rate, and length of postoperative hospital stay were compared between the two groups. Early and intermediate-term postoperative outcomes were also compared.

Results

Only one liver resection was performed for every patient with HCC in the present study.No operative deaths occurred in either group. Nine of the laparoscopic procedures were converted to open resection (conversion rate 9.28%). There were no significant differences in mean operative time (245±105 min vs 225±112 min; P = .469), mean estimated intraoperative blood loss (460±426 mL vs 454±365 mL; P = .913), or blood transfusion rate (4.6%, 4/88) vs (2.8%, 5/178)(P = .480) between the Lap-Hx and Open-Hx groups. However, postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the Lap-Hx group than the Open-Hx group (8.2±3.6 days vs 13.5±3.8 days; P = .028). There was a lower rate of postoperative complications in the Lap-Hx group than the Open-Hx group (9% vs 30%; P = .001), but there were no severe complications in either group. The median overall follow-up time was 21 months (range 2–50 months) and the median follow-up of time of survivors was 23 months. The median follow-up time was 25 months in the Lap-Hx group and 20 months in the Open-Hx group. The follow-up rate was 95% (84 patients) in the Lap-Hx group and 95% (169 patients) in the Open-Hx group, which was not a significant difference between the two groups (P = .20). Tumor recurrence occurred in 17 patients (20%) in the Lap-Hx group and 35 patients (21%) in the Open-Hx group, which was not a significant difference between the two groups (P = .876). A total of 33 patients (13%) died during the study period, including 12 patients (14%) in the Lap-Hx group and 21 patients (12%) in the Open-Hx group, which was not a significant difference between the two groups (P = .695). There were also no significant differences in the 1-year rates of overall survival (94% vs 95%; P = .942) or disease-free survival (93% vs 92%; P = .941), or the 3-year rates of overall survival (86% vs 88%; P = .879) or disease-free survival (66% vs 67%; P = .931), between the Lap-Hx and Open-Hx groups.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic liver resection is safe and feasible in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with a tumor size of 5–10 cm. Laparoscopic liver resection can avoid some of the disadvantages of open resection, and is beneficial in selected patients based on preoperative liver function, tumor size and location.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy: pure laparoscopic approach versus hand-assisted technique

Laparoscopic liver resections are being performed with increasing frequency, with several groups having reported minimally invasive approaches for major anatomic hepatic resections. Some surgeons favor a pure laparoscopic approach, while others prefer a hand-assisted approach for major laparoscopic liver resections. There are clear advantages and disadvantages to a hand-assisted technique. The purpose of this study is to summarize the literature comparing pure laparoscopic and hand-assisted approaches for minimally invasive hepatic resection, and to describe our approach in 432 laparoscopic liver resections.

Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients. Feasibility of nonanatomic resection in difficult tumor locations

BACKGROUND:

Surgical resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhotic patients remains controversial because of high morbidity and recurrence rates. Laparoscopic resection of liver tumors has recently been developed and could reduce morbidity. The aim of this study was to evaluate retrospectively our results for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for HCC including lesions in the posterosuperior segments of the liver in terms of feasibility, outcome, recurrence and survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Between June 2005 and February 2009, we performed 20 LLR for HCC. Median age of the patients was 66 years. The underlying cirrhosis was staged as Child A in 17 cases and Child B in 3.

RESULTS:

LLR included anatomic resection in six cases and nonanatomic resection in 14. Eleven procedures were associated in nine (45%) patients. Median tumor size and surgical margins were 3.1 cm and 15 mm, respectively. A conversion to laparotomy occurred in one (5%) patient for hemorrhage. Mortality and morbidity rates were 0% and 15% (3/20). Median hospital stay was 8 days (range: 5-16 days). Over a mean follow-up period of 26 months (range: 19–62 months), 10 (50%) patients presented recurrence, mainly at distance from the surgical site. Treatment of recurrence was possible in all the patients, including orthotopic liver transplantation in three cases.

CONCLUSIONS:

LLR for HCC in selected patients is a safe procedure with good short-term results. It can also be proposed in tumor locations with a difficult surgical access maintaining a low morbidity rate and good oncological adequacy. This approach could have an impact on the therapeutic strategy of HCC complicating cirrhosis as a treatment with curative intent or as a bridge to liver transplantation.

Long-term survival analysis of pure laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: a single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic liver resection has been reported as a safe and effective approach to the management of liver cancer. However, studies of long-term outcomes regarding tumor recurrence and patient survival in comparison with the conventional open approach are limited. The aim of this study was to analyze the survival outcome of laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between October 2002 and September 2009, 32 patients underwent pure laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Case-matched control patients (n = 64) who received open liver resection for HCC were included for comparison. Patients were matched in terms of cancer stage, tumor size, location of tumor, and magnitude of resection. Immediate operation outcomes, operation morbidity, disease-free survival, and overall survival were compared between groups.

RESULTS

With the laparoscopic group compared with the open resection group, operation time was 232.5 minutes versus 204.5 minutes (P = 0.938), blood loss was 150 mL versus 300 mL (P = 0.001), hospital stay was 4 days versus 7 days (P < 0.0001), postoperative complication was 2 (6.3%) versus 12 (18.8%) (P = 0.184), disease-free survival was 78.5 months versus 29 months (P = 0.086), and overall survival was 92 months versus 71 months (P = 0.142). The disease-free survival for stage II HCC was 22.1 months versus 12.4 months (P = 0.075).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection for HCC is associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and fewer postoperative complications in selected patients with no compromise in survival.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatic colorectal metastases -- a retrospective comparative cohort analysis and literature review

Background

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for management of hepatic colorectal metastases (HCRM) is commonly being performed; however, there are limited reports comparing LH outcomes with those of open hepatectomy (OH) procedure. The aim of the present study was to compare perioperative outcomes between the LH and OH procedures performed at a single medical center.

Methods

From Jan 2008 to May 2012, 30 patients with pathologically confirmed HCRM underwent LH, and 140 patients underwent OH at our hospital. Patients' demographics, perioperative outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

2 patients (6.7%) in the LH group underwent laparotomies for intraoperative hemorrhage. The LH group had an increased surgical duration (235 min vs. 365 min, (P<0.001), shorter hospital stay (7.5 days vs. 11.5 days, P<0.001), and fewer complications (26.2% vs. 55%, P<0.001) than the OH group. However, in a matched cohort comparison of 30 LH cases and 30 OH cases, no significant variations were observed in the following parameters: surgical duration (235 min vs. 255 min, P = 0.23), positive margin rates (6.7% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.27), or postoperative hematological changes. LH patients had less estimated blood loss (215 ml vs. 385 ml, P<0.001), less morbidity (26.2% vs. 50%, P = 0.02), shorter hospital stay (7.5 days vs. 11.5 days, P<0.001), and lower analgesic requests than with those in the OH group.

Conclusions

LH for metastatic colorectal cancer is a safe and feasible treatment, even in patients who underwent prior laparotomy surgeries and provides significantly less morbidity and shorter hospital stay than OH, without compromising curability or increasing morbidity.

Laparoscopic segmentectomy of the liver: from segment I to VIII

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the surgical techniques necessary to complete total laparoscopic segmentectomy (LS) of all liver segments (I-VIII).

BACKGROUND

When compared to open surgery, preservation of functional hepatic volume may be more difficult during laparoscopic hepatectomy. LS is a possible alternative to hemihepatectomy, but laparoscopic surgical techniques to complete anatomically accurate segmentectomy have not yet been well established.

METHODS

Data of a total of 342 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy were reviewed. LS was defined as complete removal of the Couinaud's segment, in which the corresponding hepatic veins are exposed on the raw surface. The laparoscopic approach was facilitated by using intraoperative ultrasonography for each segment and by placing intercostal trocars to expose the root of the right hepatic vein for segmentectomy VII and VIII.

RESULTS

LS was completed in 62 patients: 36 segmentectomies (from I-VIII), 16 bisegmentectomies of the right lobe, and 10 subsegmentectomies were performed. Conversion to open surgery was required in 3 patients (IVa, VI, and VII). When 26 LS of the superior/posterior hepatic (sub)segments (I, IVa, VII, and VIII) were compared with the remaining 36 LS, the former group required a longer operation time (240 [132-390] minutes vs 155 [90-360]) minutes, P < 0.01) and showed an increased amount of blood loss (350 [20-1500] mL vs 100 [10-1100] mL, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

LS is feasible and has become an essential surgical technique that can minimize the loss of functional liver volume without reducing curability, although further technical advancements are needed to enhance the accuracy of the resection, especially for the superior/posterior segments.

Laparoscopic resection of hepatocellular carcinoma

The current treatment of HCC is truly multidisciplinary. Notwithstanding, surgical management remains the gold standard which other therapies are compared to. Operative management is divided into transplantation and resection; the latter is further subdivided among open and laparoscopic approaches. Resection has become safer, remains superior to locoregional treatments, and can be a life-prolonging bridge to transplantation. The decision to pursue laparoscopic resection for HCC is driven by safety and a view toward the long-term management of both the malignancy and the underlying liver disease. For patients with a solitary HCC <5 cm in segments 2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6, no evidence of extrahepatic tumor burden, compensated liver disease, and the absence of significant portal hypertension, laparoscopy has an important role. Under these circumstances, resection can be performed with reduced mortality and morbidity and equivalent oncologic outcomes, disease-free survival, and overall survival when compared with similarly selected cirrhotic patients undergoing open resection. Blood loss and transfusion requirements are low, and laparoscopy itself does not expose the patient to complications and does not increase the risk of cancer recurrence or dissemination. Finally, because HCC recurrence remains high in the cirrhotic liver, treatment following surgical resection mandates routine surveillance and treatment by locoregional therapy, reresection, or transplantation as required-the latter two of which are facilitated by an initial laparoscopic resection.

Laparoscopic navigated liver resection: technical aspects and clinical practice in benign liver tumors

Laparoscopic liver resection has been performed mostly in centers with an extended expertise in both hepatobiliary and laparoscopic surgery and only in highly selected patients. In order to overcome the obstacles of this technique through improved intraoperative visualization we developed a laparoscopic navigation system (LapAssistent) to register pre-operatively reconstructed three-dimensional CT or MRI scans within the intra-operative field. After experimental development of the navigation system, we commenced with the clinical use of navigation-assisted laparoscopic liver surgery in January 2010. In this paper we report the technical aspects of the navigation system and the clinical use in one patient with a large benign adenoma. Preoperative planning data were calculated by Fraunhofer MeVis Bremen, Germany. After calibration of the system including camera, laparoscopic instruments, and the intraoperative ultrasound scanner we registered the surface of the liver. Applying the navigated ultrasound the preoperatively planned resection plane was then overlain with the patient's liver. The laparoscopic navigation system could be used under sterile conditions and it was possible to register and visualize the preoperatively planned resection plane. These first results now have to be validated and certified in a larger patient collective. A nationwide prospective multicenter study (ProNavic I) has been conducted and launched.

Lessons learned from the first 100 laparoscopic liver resections: not delaying conversion may allow reduced blood loss and operative time

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic approach to liver resective surgery is slowly spreading to specialized centers. Little is known about factors influencing the immediate postoperative outcome.

STUDY DESIGN

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the immediate outcome of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), with particular emphasis on intraoperative bleeding and conversion. A retrospective analysis of demographic, clinical, and surgical data, including conversion, morbidity/mortality, and hospital stay, of the first 100 patients at our institution undergoing LLR from February 1997 through March 2007 was performed.

RESULTS

Indication for LLR was benign lesion in 28 patients, malignancy in 33, and living donation in 39. Seventy-five resections involved two or more segments. Mean blood loss was 120 ± 127.6 mL. One patient (1%) required transfusion. Mean operative time was 253 ± 91.6 minutes. No patient died. Postoperative complications occurred in 21 patients. The conversion rate was 17%. Variables related to conversion were American Society of Anesthesiologists Class II, body mass index, cirrhosis, necessity for the Pringle maneuver, and intraoperative blood loss. Conversion did not influence the operative time. Patients with conversion had more complications and a longer hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Liver resection by laparoscopy is feasible and safe, implying low intraoperative blood loss. Not perfect physical conditions, cirrhosis, high body mass index, and, intraoperatively, blood loss and the necessity of a Pringle maneuver should be considered risk factors for conversion. A meticulous dissection by bipolar coagulation, Harmonic(®) (Ethicon) scalpel, and ultrasound dissector, other than the attitude not to delay conversion in difficult cases, may allow for low blood loss without prolongation of operative time, with a possible, slight increase of the conversion rate.

Initial experiences of simultaneous laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases

Introduction. Simultaneous resection of primary colorectal carcinoma (CRC) and synchronous liver metastases (SLMs) is subject of debate with respect to morbidity in comparison to staged resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate our initial experience with this approach. Methods. Five patients with primary CRC and a clinical diagnosis of SLM underwent combined laparoscopic colorectal and liver surgery. Patient and tumor characteristics, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes were evaluated retrospectively. Results. The primary tumor was located in the colon in two patients and in the rectum in three patients. The SLM was solitary in four patients and multiple in the remaining patient. Surgical approach was total laparoscopic (2 patients) or hand-assisted laparoscopic (3 patients). The midline umbilical or transverse suprapubic incision created for the hand port and/or extraction of the specimen varied between 5 and 10 cm. Median operation time was 303 (range 151-384) minutes with a total blood loss of 700 (range 200-850) mL. Postoperative hospital stay was 5, 5, 9, 14, and 30 days. An R0 resection was achieved in all patients. Conclusions. From this initial single-center experience, simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and liver resection appears to be feasible in selected patients with CRC and SLM, with satisfying short-term results.

Mini-incision right hepatic lobectomy with or without laparoscopic assistance for living donor hepatectomy

Minimally invasive procedures are considered to be safe and effective approaches to the management of surgical liver disease. However, this indication remains controversial for living donor hepatectomy. Between 2000 and 2011, living donor right hepatectomy (LDRH) was performed 58 times. Standard right hepatectomy was performed in 30 patients via a subcostal incision with a midline extension. Minimally invasive procedures began to be used for LDRH in 2008. A hybrid technique (hand-assisted laparoscopic liver mobilization and minilaparotomy for parenchymal dissection) was developed and used in 19 patients. In 2010, an upper midline incision (10 cm) without laparoscopic assistance for LDRH was innovated, and this technique was used in 9 patients. The perioperative factors were compared, and the indications for minimally invasive LDRH were investigated. The operative blood loss was significantly less for the patients undergoing a minimally invasive procedure versus the patients undergoing the standard procedure (212 versus 316 mL, P = 0.001), and the operative times were comparable. The length of the hospital stay was significantly shorter for the minimally invasive technique group (5.9 versus 7.8 days, P < 0.001). The complication rates were 23% and 25% for the standard technique and minimally invasive technique groups, respectively (P = 0.88). Patients undergoing minilaparotomy LDRH had a body mass index (24.0 kg/m(2)) similar to that of the hybrid technique patients (25.8 kg/m(2), P = 0.36), but the graft size was smaller (780 versus 948 mL, P = 0.22). In conclusion, minimally invasive LDRH can be performed without safety being impaired. LDRH with a 10-cm upper midline incision and without laparoscopic assistance may be appropriate for donors with a smaller body mass. Laparoscopic assistance can be added as needed for larger donors. This type of LDRH with a 10-cm incision is innovative and is recommended for experienced centers.

Perioperative analysis of laparoscopic liver resection with different methods of hepatic inflow occlusion

BACKGROUND

During liver resection, bleeding remains the most important challenge. A reduction in blood loss and avoiding the need for a blood transfusion are important objectives for liver surgeons today. The authors compared the intra- and postoperative course of patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resections under intermittent total pedicle occlusion (IPO), hemihepatic vascular occlusion (HVO), and selective vascular occlusion (SVO).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis was conducted of patient data from 41 cases of laparoscopic liver resection in three groups of patients under different occlusion methods, including 15 cases of IPO, 15 cases of HVO, and 11 cases of SVO. The advantages and disadvantages of the various methods were compared, as well as blood loss, operation time, changes in postoperative liver function, and complications.

RESULTS

There was no operative death in any of the 41 patients. Generally, there was no significant difference among the three groups in blood loss, clamping time, or operative time. After the operation, the effect on liver function for the HVO and SVO groups was significantly less severe than that for the IPO group (P<.05). The incidence of postoperative complications was mainly related to IPO and the larger amount of bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Both HVO and SVO are feasible in laparoscopic hepatectomy and have the advantage of reducing liver remnant ischemia injury and modality rate over IPO. HVO is easy to do for left lateral lobe or resection of the left half of the liver. SVO is suitable for right lobe resection.

New developments in the treatment of hepatic tumors

The International Association of Surgeons, Gastroenterologists and Oncologists (IASGO) hosted their annual world congress under the auspices of president Masatoshi Makuuchi from Japan and the general secretary Nicolas J Lygidakis. This year the congress was held in Tokyo, and the president was Wataru Kimura of Yamagata University. It is common knowledge that a major triple disaster struck Japan in March 2011. It was thought, for a time, that the congress would not take place, but the great courage and determination of the hosts allowed the conference to continue as scheduled. This congress was one of the most interesting hosted by the IASGO, evidenced by the presence of 909 participants from 59 countries, including invited speakers from Europe, America, Africa and Asia. The congress provided an opportunity to exchange knowledge of new techniques, methods of diagnosis and therapy. The program included symposiums, video presentations, free papers and poster presentations. This manuscript highlights presentations of the newest and most original material concerning the treatment of liver tumors, especially hepatocellular carcinoma.

Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma using a modified liver-hanging maneuver

BACKGROUND

Posterosuperior liver segments are the most difficult locations for laparoscopy to access. This location is considered by most surgeons to be a poor indication for a laparoscopic liver resection due to the limited visualization and the difficulty of controlling bleeding. The liver-hanging maneuver (LHM) is a technique taking aim at reducing intraoperative blood loss through an open approach.

METHODS

We report our early experience on adopting a modified liver-hanging technique to perform a totally laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy to remove a 5-cm hepatocellular carcinoma located in Couinaud's segments 6 and 7.

RESULTS

The procedure was completed laparoscopically with acceptable time of surgery and blood loss. A 3.5-cm tumor-free resection margin was achieved. The patient was discharged on postoperative Day 10 without complications. No evidence of recurrence was seen at the 12-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Total laparoscopic posterior sectionectomy using a modified LHM is a possible operative procedure greatly facilitating surgical manipulation. This maneuver was successfully used to mobilize the liver, to guide the hepatic transection, and to prevent bleeding. The potential advantages of this procedure should be evaluated in a comparative study on a large number of patients.

Outcome of laparoscopic major liver resection for colorectal metastases

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is gaining widespread acceptance. However, data are still lacking on the feasibility, long- and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (i.e., three or more liver segments).

METHODS

Between October 2002 and December 2008, prospectively collected data of 117 patients who underwent major liver resection [97 open (OMLR) and 20 laparoscopic (LMLR) procedures] for CRLM were analyzed. Twenty patients in the LMLR group were matched with 20 patients of the OMLR based on 13 parameters. We compared the long- and short-term outcomes between these two groups.

RESULTS

Median duration of surgery was 257.5 (range 75-360) min in LMLR versus 232.5 (range 120-400) min in OMLR (P = 0.228). Median blood loss during surgery was 550 ml in each group (range 100-4,000 vs. 100-2,500 ml, P = 0.884). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of postoperative complications (both severity and location). Median magnitude of tumor-free resection margin was 7.5 versus 5.5 mm in the laparoscopy versus open group, respectively (P = 0.651). Median disease-free survival (DFS) of the entire study population was 18.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.9-50.0 months]. Median overall survival (OS) was 50.7 months (95% CI 36.2 months to undetermined). The estimated DFS and OS rates at 1, 2, and 5 years were comparable in the two groups (P = 0.637 and 0.872, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic MLR for selected CRLM is feasible and might result in comparable oncologic outcomes as in open liver resection.