Laparoscopic major hepatectomy: an evolution in standard of care. Ann Surg. 2009;250:856-860. [PMID: 19806057 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e3181bcaf46]

Albumin-Bilirubin Score: Predicting Short-Term Outcomes Including Bile Leak and Post-hepatectomy Liver Failure Following Hepatic Resection

INTRODUCTION

Post-operative bile leak (BL) and post hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) are the major potential sources of morbidity among patients undergoing liver resection. We sought to define the incidence of BL and PHLF among a large cohort of patients, as well as examine the prognostic impact of model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) scores to predict these short-term outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent a hepatectomy between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2014 were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) liver-targeted database. Risk factors for BL and PHLF were identified using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among the 3064 patients identified, median age was 60 years (IQR 50-68). Most patients underwent surgery (78.9 %) for malignant lesions. Post-operatively, 250 (8.5 %) patients experienced a BL while PHLF occurred in 149 cases (4.9 %). Both MELD (MELD <10 4.9 %; MELD ≥10, 10 %; P = 0.001) and ALBI (grade 1, 4.0 %; grade 2, 7.2 %; grade 3, 10.0 %; P = 0.001) were associated with PHLF occurrence, while only ALBI predicted PHLF severity (P = 0.008). Moreover, ALBI was associated with BL (grade 1, 7.1 %; grade 2, 11.5 %; grade 3, 14.0 %; P < 0.001), whereas MELD was not (MELD <10, 8.4 %; MELD ≥10, 11.2 %; P = 0.13). On multivariable analysis, ALBI grade 2/3 was associated with PHLF (OR 1.57, 95 % CI 1.08-2.27; P = 0.02), PHLF severity (OR 3.06, 95 % CI 1.50-6.23; P = 0.003), and the development of a BL (OR 1.35, 95 % CI 1.02-1.80; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The ALBI score was associated with short-term post-operative outcomes following hepatic resection and represents a useful pre-operative risk-assessment tool to identify patients at risk for adverse post-operative outcomes.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma with a Tumor Size Larger Than 5 cm: Review of 45 Cases in a Tertiary Institution

INTRODUCTION

Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has developed rapidly, 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 feasibility and safety of LLR for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with a tumor size larger than 5 cm.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2007 to December 2014, we performed LLR in 45 patients with HCC with a tumor size ≥5 cm. Perioperative outcome, tumor recurrence, and overall patient survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

Median age was 60 years (interquartile range [IQR] 52-68) and 64.4% (29/45) were male. Seven patients (15.6%) had larger than 10 cm of HCC. No operative deaths occurred and six of the laparoscopic procedures were converted to open resection (conversion rate 13.3%). Median operation time was 365 minutes (IQR 277-443) and median estimated blood loss (EBL) was 400.0 mL (IQR 275-600). There was no R1 or R2 resection and median resection margin was 19.0 mm (IQR 8.0-33.0). Complications above Clavien-Dindo classification grade III occurred in four patients (8.9%). The median overall follow-up time was 10.7 month (range 1.1-62.1). One-year recurrence free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were 86.0% and 95.5%, and 3-year RFS and OS were 70.7% and 86.0%.

CONCLUSION

LLR appears safe and feasible in patients with HCC with a tumor size larger than 5 cm. Expansion of indication for LLR in patients with HCC may be considered.

A survey of current practices and barriers to expanding laparoscopic HPB surgery in Canada

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this survey was to determine the extent to which laparoscopy is used in hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) resections in Canada, and to assess HPB surgeons' attitudes and their perceived barriers to its further adoption.

METHODS

Using an electronic questionnaire, 68 Canadian Hepatopancreatobiliary Association (CHPBA) surgical members were surveyed. The questionnaire consisted of 12 questions regarding: surgeon demographics, the use and limitations of laparoscopy in their practice, and interest in increasing the use of laparoscopic techniques.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 75%. Of the 51 respondents, 86% reported performing minor laparoscopic resections such as hepatic wedge resections. Only 23% of surgeons reported performing laparoscopic liver lobectomies. Eighty-two percent of respondents indicated a wish to increase the use of laparoscopy in their practice. Barriers identified included operating time constraints (61%), a lack of equipment (41%) and lack of adequate training (43%).

DISCUSSION

This survey demonstrates that currently, most Canadian HPB surgeons use laparoscopy for minor HPB resections; however, there is a strong desire to expand the use of minimally invasive techniques amongst Canadian HPB surgeons. Training centered on addressing the limitations and barriers to the uptake of minimally invasive techniques in HPB surgery are needed.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic left hepatectomy: how I do it

Laparoscopic liver resection has been adopted slowly due to concerns for bleeding and oncologic outcomes. Currently, over 9,500 laparoscopic liver resections have been performed and reported worldwide. Numerous studies have shown the safety and oncologic equivalence of laparoscopic liver resection when compared to open resection. Pure laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection are the two most commonly used techniques for minimally invasive liver resection surgery. Advantages of the hand-port include tactile feedback, facilitation of liver mobilization, and ease of ability to control bleeding. We present a case report with video of a hand-assisted laparoscopic left liver resection for a hepatocellular carcinoma in a non-cirrhotic patient.

Comparison of laparoscopic major hepatectomy with propensity score matched open cases from the National Clinical Database in Japan

BACKGROUND

The National Clinical Database (NCD) in Japan is a nationwide registry that collects the data of more than 1,200,000 surgical cases annually from over 3,500 hospitals. Based on the NCD data, this study compared the perioperative outcomes of major laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) with those of major open liver resection (OLR) using the propensity score matching method.

METHODS

We collected data on 15,191 major hepatectomy cases (929 major LLR cases and 14,262 major OLR cases), and investigated the short-term outcomes in well-matched groups.

RESULTS

In the LLR group, 30-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, and operative mortality were 0.9%, 1.7%, and 1.7% respectively. The mean blood loss in the LLR group (865.4 ± 1,148.2 ml) was significantly less than in the OLR group (1,053.8 ± 1,176.6 ml), and the median postoperative hospital stay for the LLR patients (21.37 ± 19.71 days) was significantly shorter than for the OLR patients (26.25 ± 24.53 days). The complication rate in the LLR group (16.4%) was significantly lower than that in the OLR group (23.5%).

CONCLUSION

LLR in selected patients is currently safely performed as well as OLR even in patients requiring major hepatectomy, associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and fewer complications.

Surgical outcomes following laparoscopic major hepatectomy for various liver diseases

The aim of the study was to report surgical outcomes (efficacy and safety) of laparoscopic major hepatectomy for various liver diseases.Although the number of laparoscopic liver resections has increased, expansion of laparoscopic major hepatic resection remains limited, mainly owing to the technical difficulties for the procedure as compared to open surgery. We describe our experiences with laparoscopic major hepatectomy for various liver diseases.We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 192 patients who underwent laparoscopic major hepatectomy between October 2007 and March 2015 at Asan Medical Center, Korea.The mean age of the patients was 54 ± 11.6 years, and their mean body mass index was 23.5 kg/m. The most common preoperative diagnosis was hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 82, 42.7%), followed by intrahepatic duct stones (n = 51, 26.6%). We performed 108 left hepatectomies, 55 right hepatectomies, 18 right posterior sectionectomies, 6 right anterior sectionectomies, 2 central bisectionectomies, and 3 donor right hepatectomies. The conversion rate was 1.6% (3 cases) due to bleeding, bile leakage, and uncontrolled hypercapnea during the operation. The mean operation time was 272 ± 80.2 minutes, and the mean estimated blood loss was 300.4 ± 252.2 mL. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 9.8 days. All resection margins were tumor-free in cases of malignant tumors. The morbidity rate was 3.1% (n = 6), including for case of biliary stricture. There were no deaths.Laparoscopic major hepatectomy, including donor hepatectomy, is a safe and feasible option for various liver diseases when careful selection criteria are used by a surgeon experienced with the relevant surgical techniques.

An Improved Surgical Technique for Pure Laparoscopic Left Hemihepatectomy: Ten Years Experience in a Tertiary Center

Background: This study details our experience with an improved surgical technique involving the hepatic pedicle during laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH).

Methods: We describe an improved laparoscopic technique to extraparenchymally divide the left hepatic pedicle. A retrospective analysis of all of the patients who underwent laparoscopic liver procedures between 2002 and 2012 was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups, an early LLH group (ELLH group) and a recent LLH group (RLLH group), based on the surgical approach used for the left hepatic pedicle.

Results: A total of 72 cases of LLH (26 ELLH and 46 RLLH) were identified. The RLLH group exhibited a shorter median operative time, median length of hospital stay, and lower median blood loss compared to the ELLH group (182, 162.5–223.7 versus 232.5, 200–357.5 minutes, P < .01; 5, 4.2–7 versus 7, 6–8.7 days, P < .05; 150, 100–257.5 versus 300, 200–337.5 mL, P < .05, respectively). No perioperative mortality was observed.

Conclusions: This study confirms that our improved surgical technique for LLH is practical, safe, and effective. The main advantage of this method compared to other techniques is the possibility of attaining rapid and precise control of vascular inflow, thus facilitating LLH.

Clinical impact of laparoscopic hepatectomy: technical and oncological viewpoints

The objective of this study was to assess the clinical impact of laparoscopic hepatectomy from technical and oncological viewpoints through the consecutive 5-year experience of an expert team. The subjects consisted of 491 consecutive hepatectomies performed over the course of 5 years. A total of 190 hepatectomies (38.6 %) were performed laparoscopically, and the remaining 301 (61.4 %) were open hepatectomies. Chronological trends of operative procedures and their indications were evaluated, and patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were analyzed from an oncological viewpoint. The proportion of laparoscopic hepatectomies performed increased significantly during the study period (from 17.6 to 49.5 %). According to chronological trends, right hepatectomy was standardized using consecutive steps after minor hepatectomy, left lateral sectionectomy, and left hepatectomy were standardized. The proportion of laparoscopic hepatectomies performed for HCC increased from 21.4 to 71.0 %. No significant difference was observed in the proportion of major hepatectomies performed for HCC between the open and laparoscopy groups (50.6 vs. 48.6 %, p = 0.8053), whereas that of anatomical segmentectomy for HCC was significantly lower in the laparoscopy group (28.7 vs. 11.1 %, p = 0.0064). All laparoscopic anatomical segmentectomies were of segments 5 and 6, and there was no segmentectomy of posterosuperior lesions. The present study shows the consecutive technical developmental processes for minor hepatectomy, left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy without compromising oncological principles. Laparoscopic anatomical segmentectomy for posterosuperior lesions may be the most technically demanding procedure, requiring individualized standardization.

Comparative Short-term Benefits of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: 9000 Cases and Climbing

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of worldwide literature on laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and compare short-term outcomes against open liver resections (OLR) by meta-analyses.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

There are no updated pooled data since 2009 about the current status and short-term outcomes of LLR worldwide.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All English language publications on LLR were screened. Descriptive worldwide data and short-term outcomes were obtained. Separate analyses were performed for minor-only and major-only resection series, and series in which minor/major resections were not differentiated. Apparent case duplications were excluded.

RESULTS

A set of 463 published manuscripts were reviewed. One hundred seventy-nine single-center series were identified that accounted for 9527 LLR cases worldwide. Minor-only, major-only, and combined major-minor series were 61, 18, and 100, respectively, including 32, 8, and 43 comparative series, respectively. Of the total 9527 LLR cases reported, 6190 (65%) were for malignancy and 3337 (35%) were for benign indications. There were 37 deaths reported (mortality rate = 0.4%). From the meta-analysis comparing case-matched LLR to OLR (N = 2900 cases), there was no increased mortality and significantly less complications, transfusions, blood loss, and hospital stay observed in LLR vs OLR.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest review of LLR available to date with over 9000 cases published. It confirms growing safety when performed in selected patients and by trained surgeons, and suggests that LLR may offer improved patient short-term outcomes compared with OLR. Improved levels of evidence, standardized reporting of outcomes, and assuring proper training are the next challenges of laparoscopic liver surgery.

Clinical Utility of the Difficulty Scoring System for Predicting Surgical Time of Laparoscopic Liver Resection

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has several problems, such as technical complexity and patient and tumor factors. A difficulty scoring system to preoperatively evaluate the difficulty of LLR was established at the second International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resection. The aim of this study was to explore the clinical usefulness of the difficulty scoring system for LLR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2010 to June 2015, the records of 78 patients who had undergone LLR were retrospectively reviewed. The patients' data were used to assign a difficulty score, and the correlations between scores and surgical outcomes were investigated.

RESULTS

The mean surgical time was 256 minutes, and the mean blood loss was 168 mL. The difficulty score significantly correlated with surgical time and blood loss, but not with morbidity and postoperative hospital stay. Multivariate analysis showed that the difficulty score was an independent predictor of prolonged surgical time.

CONCLUSIONS

The difficulty score was found to be an effective predictor of surgical time for LLR.

Safely extending the indications of laparoscopic liver resection: When should we start laparoscopic major hepatectomy?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is an innovative procedure that is still in the exploration phase. Although new surgical techniques have learning curves, safety should be maintained from the onset. This retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the safe introduction of LMH.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data from 245 consecutive patients who underwent pure laparoscopic liver resection. Patients were divided into three groups: Phase I, the first 64 cases, all minor hepatectomies; Phase II, cases from the first LMH case to the midmost of the LMH cases (n = 69, including 22 LMHs); Phase III, the most recent 112 cases, including 22 LMHs. Patient characteristics and surgical results were evaluated, and the learning curve was analysed with the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method.

RESULTS

The first LMH was adopted after sufficient preparatory experience was gained from performing 64 minor hepatectomies. In cases of LMH, there were no significant differences in the surgical time between Phases II and III (356 vs. 309 min; P = 0.318), morbidity rate (22.7 vs. 31.8 %; P = 0.736), or major morbidity rate (18.2 vs. 9.1 %; P = 0.664); however, estimated blood loss was significantly reduced from Phase II to Phase III (236 vs. 68 mL; P = 0.018). The CUSUM for morbidity also showed similar outcomes through Phases II and III.

CONCLUSION

There is a learning curve associated with laparoscopic liver resection. To maintain a low morbidity rate, 60 laparoscopic minor hepatectomies could provide adequate experience before the adoption of LMH.

Robotic radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: perioperative and long-term outcomes of an initial series

BACKGROUND

Radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCa) is one of the most challenging abdominal procedures. Robotic-assisted approach is gaining popularity in hepatobiliary surgery but scarcely tried in the management of HCa. We herein report our initial experience of robotic radical resection for HCa.

METHODS

Between May 2009 and October 2012, 10 patients underwent fully robotic-assisted radical resection for HCa in a single institute. The perioperative and long-term outcomes were analyzed and compared with a contemporaneous 32 patients undergoing traditional open surgery.

RESULTS

The 10 patients presented one of Bismuth-Corlette type II, four of IIIa, one of IIIb and four of IV. There was no significant clinicopathological disparity between the robotic and open groups. The robotic radical resection involves hemihepatectomy plus caudate lobectomy or trisectionectomy, extrahepatic bile duct resection, radical lymphadenectomy and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy. No conversion to laparotomy occurred. Robotic resection compared unfavorably to traditional open resection in operative time (703 ± 62 vs. 475 ± 121 min, p < 0.001) and morbidity [90 (9/10) vs. 50 %, p = 0.031]. No significant difference was found in blood loss, mortality and postoperative hospital stay. Major complications (≥Clavien-Dindo III) occurred in three patients of robotic group. One patient died of posthepatectomy liver failure on postoperative day 18. The hospital expenditure was much higher in robotic group (USD 27,427 ± 21,316 vs. 15,282 ± 5957, p = 0.018). The tumor recurrence-free survival was inferior in robotic group (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Fully robotic-assisted radical resection for HCa is technically achievable in experienced hands and should be limited to highly selective patients. Our current results do not support continued practice of robotic surgery for HCa, until significant technical and instrumental refinements are demonstrated.

Harness Traction Technique (HARNESS): Novel Method for Controlling the Transection Plane During Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

We present our experience using a novel method for controlling the transection plane, which we termed as the Harness Traction Technique (HARNESS) and evaluate its usefulness. From May 2009 to March 2012, laparoscopic hepatectomies using HARNESS were performed on 35 patients. After the superficial hepatic parenchyma on the line was transected at 1 to 2 cm depth, 5 mm tape was placed along the groove of the line and tied to prevent it from slipping off. Tape was tied and pulled using a forceps toward the best direction for minimizing the bleeding, moving the transection point to the appropriate position and creating good tension for parenchymal transection at the transection point. There were no conversions to laparotomy or intraoperative complications. HARNESS is useful for controlling the dissection line during laparoscopic hepatectomy, leading to precise and safe laparoscopic liver parenchymal dissection.

Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Elderly Patients: A Comparative Study From a Single Center

The life expectancy continues to gradually increase worldwide. Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was recently reported to be a relatively safe procedure for treatment of liver disease because of the development of new techniques and instruments. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes of elderly patients who underwent LLR. Of these 61 patients who underwent LLR in our institute from January 2010 through April 2014, 21 were aged 75 years and above (group E), and 40 were aged below 75 years (group NE). Patient characteristics were retrospectively analyzed between the 2 groups. The results showed that patient characteristics were similar between the 2 groups, although the incidence of hypertension was significantly greater among patients in group E. There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications or length of hospital stay between the 2 groups. In conclusion, LLR for elderly patients was a feasible procedure compared with nonelderly patients.

Laparoscopy Decreases Pulmonary Complications in Patients Undergoing Major Liver Resection: A Propensity Score Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare both incidence and types of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) between laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) and open major hepatectomy (OMH).

BACKGROUND

LMHs are increasingly performed. Yet, the benefits of laparoscopy over laparotomy regarding PPCs remain unknown.

METHODS

In this multi-institutional study, all patients undergoing OMH or LMH between 1998 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Risk factors for PPCs were analyzed on multivariate analysis. Comparison of both overall rate and types of PPCs between OMH and LMH patients was performed after propensity score adjustment on factors influencing the choice of the approach.

RESULTS

LMH was performed in 226 (18.6%) of the 1214 included patients. PPCs occurred in 480 (39.5%) patients including symptomatic pleural effusion in 366 (30.1%) patients, respiratory insufficiency in 141 (11.6%), acute respiratory distress syndrome in 84 (6.9%), pulmonary infection in 80 (6.5%), and pulmonary embolism in 47 (3.8%) patients. On multivariate analysis, preoperative hypoprotidemia [hazard ratio (HR): 1.341, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.001-1.795; P = 0.049], open approach (HR: 2.481, 95% CI: 1.141-6.024; P = 0.024), right-sided hepatectomy (HR: 2.143, 95% CI: 1.544-2.975; P < 0.001), concomitant extrahepatic procedures (HR: 1.742, 95% CI: 1.103-2.750; P = 0.017), transfusion (HR: 2.851, 95% CI: 2.067-3.935; P < 0.001), and operative time more than 6 hours (HR: 1.510, 95% CI: 1.127-2.022; P = 0.006) were independently associated with PPCs. After propensity score matching, the overall incidence of PPCs (13.2% vs 40.5%, P < 0.001), symptomatic pleural effusion (11.6% vs 26.4%, P = 0.003), pleural effusion requiring drainage (1.7% vs 9.9%, P = 0.006), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (1.7% vs 9.9%, P = 0.006) were significantly lower in the laparoscopy group than in the open group.

CONCLUSIONS

Pure laparoscopy allows reducing PPCs in patients requiring major liver resection.

What is the Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomy?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is rapidly expanding with more than 9500 cases performed worldwide. While initial series reported non-anatomic resection of benign peripheral hepatic lesions, approximately 50-65 % of laparoscopic liver resections are now being done for malignant tumors, primarily hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or colorectal cancer liver metastases (mCRC).

METHODS

We performed a literature review of published studies evaluating outcomes of major laparoscopic liver resection, defined as three or more Couinaud segments.

RESULTS

Initial fears of adverse oncologic outcomes or tumor seeding have not been demonstrated, and dozens of studies have reported comparable 5-year disease-free and overall survival between laparoscopic and open resection of HCC or mCRC in case-cohort and propensity score-matched analyses. Increased experience has led to laparoscopic anatomic liver resections including laparoscopic major hepatectomy. A steep learning curve of 45-60 cases is evident for laparoscopic hepatic resection.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is safe and effective in the treatment of benign and malignant liver tumors when performed in specialized centers with dedicated teams. Comparable to other complex laparoscopic surgeries, laparoscopic major hepatectomy has a learning curve of 45-60 cases.

Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy by the Caudal Approach Versus Conventional Approach: A Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) is increasingly performed for the treatment of many liver diseases. However, it remains a challenging procedure and is limited to highly specialized centers. Increasing the safety and efficacy of LRH is crucial. This study evaluated the safety and feasibility of the novel caudal approach (CDA) in LRH and in comparison with the conventional approach (CA).

METHODS

Of a total of 40 patients who underwent LRH between June 2007 and July 2015 at our center, 10 cases underwent the CDA, while 30 underwent the CA. Operative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Clinical data and patient characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Only 1 patient required a laparoscopic-assisted procedure in the CDA group, while 14 patients were converted to laparotomy (n = 10) or laparoscopic-assisted procedures (n = 4) in the CA group, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .060). However, the difference in conversion to laparotomy between the two groups was significant (P = .043). In addition, when considering 23 patients with malignancies, the median surgical margin was significantly greater in the CDA group (n = 6) (20 mm versus 10 mm; P = .023) than in the CA group (n = 17). Other operative and postoperative outcomes were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CDA achieves safety and feasibility similar to that of the CA in LRH and requires relatively less conversion to laparotomy. In selected patients, the CDA offers an alternative option to the CA for LRH in experienced hands. Further studies with larger samples are warranted to evaluate the CDA.

Evidence supporting laparoscopic major hepatectomy

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been increasing in frequency with over 9,000 cases done worldwide. Benefits of laparoscopic resection include less blood loss, smaller incisions, decreased postoperative morbidity, and shorter length of stay compared to open liver resection. With increased experience, several centers have reported series of laparoscopic major hepatectomy, although this represents only about 25% of total LLR performed. Evidence is accumulating to support laparoscopic major hepatectomy with the understanding that there is a steep learning curve, and surgeons should begin with minor LLR before moving on to laparoscopic major hepatectomy. Controversy still remains concerning indications, techniques, learning curve, risks, and long-term cancer outcomes with laparoscopic major hepatectomy.

Assessing the learning curve for totally laparoscopic major-complex liver resections: a single hepatobiliary surgeon experience

BACKGROUND

Encouraging results have been reported in terms of feasibility, safety, and oncologic, outcomes even for major (≥ 3 segments) or complex for location-specific (right posterior segments) laparoscopic liver resections. Despite this, technically challenging issues and advanced laparoscopic skills required to perform it have limited its use in few highly specialized centers. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curve for major-complex totally laparoscopic liver resections (TLLR) performed by a single HPB surgeon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From October 2008 to February 2012, a total of 70 TLLR were performed; 24 (33.3%) were major-complex resections. This series was divided in 2 groups according to time of operation: group A (12 cases early series) and group B (12 cases late series); perioperative outcomes were retrospectively analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

Comparing the 2 groups, a statistically significant improvement was found in terms of operative time (P=0.017), blood loss (P=0.004), number of cases requiring a Pringle maneuver (P=0.006), and blood transfusion (P=0.001) from case number ten onward.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that a minimum of 10 cases are required to obtain a significant improvement in perioperative outcome for surgeons with specific training on hepatobiliary surgery and advanced laparoscopic surgical procedures. More studies are required to clarify the minimum standard of training to perform safely this kind of advanced laparoscopic liver surgery on a large scale.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy in cirrhotics: safe if you adjust technique

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver surgery is a growing field, and a small number of recent reports have suggested that laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is feasible even in patients with cirrhosis. However, parenchymal transection of the cirrhotic liver is challenging due to fibrosis and portal hypertension. There is a paucity of data regarding the technical modifications necessary to safely transect the diseased parenchyma.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LLR by a single surgeon between 2008 and 2015 were reviewed. Patients with cirrhosis were compared to those without cirrhosis to examine differences in surgical technique, intraoperative characteristics, and outcomes (including liver-related morbidity and general postoperative complication rates).

RESULTS

A total of 167 patients underwent LLR during the study period. Forty-eight (29 %) had cirrhosis, of which 43 (90 %) had hepatitis C. Most had Child-Pugh class A disease (85 %). Compared to noncirrhotics, patients with cirrhosis were older, had more comorbidities, and were more likely to have hepatocellular carcinoma. Precoagulation before parenchymal transection was used more frequently in cirrhotics (65 vs. 15 %, P < 0.001), and mean portal triad clamping time was longer (32 vs. 22 min, P = 0.002). There were few conversions to open surgery, though hand-assisted laparoscopy was used as an alternative to converting to open in three patients with cirrhosis. Blood loss was relatively low for both groups. Although there were more postoperative complications among cirrhotics (38 vs. 13 %, P = 0.001), this was almost entirely due to a higher rate of minor (Clavien-Dindo I or II) complications. Liver-related morbidity, major complications, and mortality rates were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR is safe for selected patients with cirrhosis. The added complexity associated with the division of diseased liver parenchyma may be overcome with some form of technique modification, including more liberal use of precoagulation, portal triad clamping, or a hand-assist port.

Laparoscopic parenchymal preserving hepatic resections in semiprone position for tumors located in the posterosuperior segments

INTRODUCTION

All patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resections in the posterosuperior segments (LPSS) at our center were positioned in semiprone since August 2011. The aims of this study were to assess differences in perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomies (LLLS) performed in supine position and LPSS in semiprone position.

METHODS

We reviewed our prospectively collected database of all liver resections performed between January 2012 and January 2015. LLLS and LPSS were compared with respect to demographics and perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients underwent LLLS (n = 20) or LPSS (n = 25). There were no differences in patient demographics or tumor diameter (p = 0.946). There were no conversions. Pringle maneuver was not used in both groups. There was no difference in peroperative central venous pressure (p = 0.511). The median operative time in the LLLS group was 100 min (60-260) and 160 min (95-270) in the LPSS group (p = 0.002) with median intraoperative blood loss in the LLLS group of 50 ml (0-550) versus a larger 150 ml (50-700) (p = 0.010) for patients receiving LPSS. No patients required transfusion. Intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were similar in both groups. Median hospital stay was 6 days in both groups (p = 0.554).

CONCLUSION

LPSS in semiprone can be performed with similar clinical outcomes as a minor laparoscopic liver resection except for longer operative time and larger intraoperative blood loss without the need for transfusion.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Experience based guidelines

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been progressively developed along the past two decades. Despite initial skepticism, improved operative results made laparoscopic approach incorporated to surgical practice and operations increased in frequency and complexity. Evidence supporting LLR comes from case-series, comparative studies and meta-analysis. Despite lack of level 1 evidence, the body of literature is stronger and existing data confirms the safety, feasibility and benefits of laparoscopic approach when compared to open resection. Indications for LLR do not differ from those for open surgery. They include benign and malignant (both primary and metastatic) tumors and living donor liver harvesting. Currently, resection of lesions located on anterolateral segments and left lateral sectionectomy are performed systematically by laparoscopy in hepatobiliary specialized centers. Resection of lesions located on posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8) and major liver resections were shown to be feasible but remain technically demanding procedures, which should be reserved to experienced surgeons. Hand-assisted and laparoscopy-assisted procedures appeared to increase the indications of minimally invasive liver surgery and are useful strategies applied to difficult and major resections. LLR proved to be safe for malignant lesions and offers some short-term advantages over open resection. Oncological results including resection margin status and long-term survival were not inferior to open resection. At present, surgical community expects high quality studies to base the already perceived better outcomes achieved by laparoscopy in major centers’ practice. Continuous surgical training, as well as new technologies should augment the application of laparoscopic liver surgery. Future applicability of new technologies such as robot assistance and image-guided surgery is still under investigation.

Liver cirrhosis grading Child-Pugh class B: a Goliath to challenge in laparoscopic liver resection?-prior experience and matched comparisons

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is highly difficult in the background of liver cirrhosis. In this case series, we aimed to summarize our prior experience of LH in liver cirrhosis grading Child-Pugh class B.

METHODS

In the LH database of Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital in Zhejiang, China, patients who were pathologically diagnosed with cirrhosis and graded as Child-Pugh class B or C were reviewed.

RESULTS

Five patients grading Child B were included. There was no Child C case in our LH database. For included cases, median blood loss (BL) was 800 (range, 240-1,000) mL, median operative time was 135 (range, 80-170) minutes, and median length of hospital stay was 9 (range, 7-15) days. Forty percent (2/5) of patients was converted to open. The postoperative complication (PC) rate was 20.0% (1/5). When these Child B cases were compared with Child A cases undergoing LH, there was no statistical significance in BL, complication rate, operative time, open rate and hospital stay (HS) (P>0.05). This finding was confirmed by two ways of matched comparisons (a 1:2 comparison based on age and gender, and a 1:1 propensity score matching).

CONCLUSIONS

Although relevant literatures had suggested feasibility of LH in cirrhotic cases grading Child A, this study was the first one to discuss the value of LH in Child B cases. Our prior experience showed that in selected patients, LH in Child B patients had the potential to be as safe as in Child A cases. The efficacy of LH in Child C patients needs further exploration.

Laparoscopic liver resection for posterosuperior and anterolateral lesions-a comparison experience in an Asian centre

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery has been one of the recent developments in liver surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was initially performed for benign lesions at easily accessible locations. As the surgical techniques, technology and experience improved over the past decades, LLR surgery had evolved to tackle malignant lesions, major resections and even in difficult locations without compromising safety and principles of oncology. It was also shown to be beneficial in cirrhotic patients. We describe our initial experience with LLR in a population with significant proportion having cirrhosis, emphasising our approach for lesions in the posterosuperior (PS) segments of the liver (segments 1, 4a, 7, and 8).

METHODS

A review of patients undergoing LLR in single institution from 2006 to 2015 was performed from a prospective surgical database. Clinicopathological, operative and perioperative parameters were analyzed to compare outcomes in patients who underwent LLR for PS vs. anterolateral lesions (AL).

RESULTS

LLR was performed in consecutive 197 patients, with a mean age of 60 years. The indications for resection were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (n=105; 53%), colorectal cancer liver metastasis (n=31; 16%), other malignancies (n=19; 10%) and benign lesions (n=42; 21%). A significant proportion had liver cirrhosis (25.9%). More females underwent surgery in the AL group and indications for surgery were similar between both groups. Major liver resection was performed more frequently for the PS group than for the AL group (P<0.001) and significantly more PS resections was performed in our latter experience (P=0.02). The mean operative time and the conversion rate were significantly greater in the PS group than in the AL group (P≤0.001 and 0.03, respectively). However, the estimated blood loss (EBL), rate of blood transfusion and mean postoperative stay were similar in the two groups (P=0.04, 0.88 and 0.92, respectively). The overall 90-day morbidity and mortality rate was 21.3% and 0.5% respectively, with no differences between the two groups. Surrogates of difficulty such as operative time, blood loss, conversion and outcomes e.g., morbidity and mortality, were similar in patients who underwent PS resections with or without cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR in selected patients is technically feasible and safe including cirrhotic patients with lesions in the PS segments.

Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomy-Technique and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

With technological innovations especially newer parenchymal transection devices, improved understanding of hepatic anatomy facilitated by better imaging, and reconstructions along with experiences gained from advanced minimal invasive procedures, laparoscopic liver surgery is gaining momentum with more than 5300 reported cases worldwide. Most of the published literature comprises nonanatomical and segmental resections with only few case series having major hepatic resections performed by minimally invasive approach. Aim of this article is to share our technique and experience of total laparoscopic major hepatectomy.

METHODS

It is a retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained database of 56 patients, who underwent laparoscopic major hepatectomy for various indications during 2001 to 2013.

RESULTS

Of 56 patients operated, 37 had malignant disease and 19 had benign lesions with mean size of 6.0 ± 2.8 cm. Thirty-four patients underwent right hepatectomy and 22 left with mean age of 54.8 ± 15.3 years. Mean operating time was 227.4 ± 51.8 min with mean blood loss 265.5 ± 143.4 ml and transfusion needed in 10.7 %. Pringle's maneuver was used in 19.6 % with mean occlusion time of 34.0 ± 11.4 min. Liver-specific complications were observed in 12.5 % and overall complications in 19.6 %. Mean resection margin length in malignant lesions was 2.1 ± 0.9 cm, with <1 cm margin noted in 5.4 %. Median hospital stay was 8 days (6-29) with readmission rate of 8.9 %, re-intervention rate of 5.3 % and 90 days mortality of 1.7 %.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic major liver resection is a formidable task. It requires considerable expertise in both, advanced laparoscopy, and liver surgery. It can be feasible, safe, and oncologically adequate in well-selected cases in experience hands.

Incidence, risk factors and consequences of bile leakage following laparoscopic major hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Bile leakage (BL) remains a common cause of major morbidity after open major liver resection but has only been poorly described in patients undergoing laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH). The present study aimed to determine the incidence, risk factors and consequences of BL following LMH.

METHODS

All 223 patients undergoing LMH between 2000 and 2013 at two tertiary referral centres were retrospectively analysed. BL was defined according to the International Study Group of Liver Surgery, and its incidence and consequences were assessed. Risk factors for BL were determined on multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

BL occurred in 30 (13.5 %) patients, and its incidence remained stable over time (p = 0.200). BL was diagnosed following the presence of bile into the abdominal drain in 14 (46.7 %) patients and after drainage of symptomatic abdominal collections in 16 (53.3 %) patients without intra-operative drain placement. Grade A, B and C BL occurred in 3 (10.0 %), 23 (76.6 %) and 4 (13.4 %) cases, respectively. Interventional procedures for BL included endoscopic retrograde cholangiography, percutaneous and surgical drainage in 10 (33.3 %), 23 (76.7 %) and 4 (13.3 %) patients, respectively. BL was associated with significantly increased rates of symptomatic pleural effusion (30.0 vs. 11.4 %, p = 0.006), multiorgan failure (13.3 vs. 3.6 %, p = 0.022), postoperative death (10.0 vs. 1.6 %, p = 0.008) and prolonged hospital stay (18 vs. 8 days, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, BMI > 28 kg/m(2) (OR 2.439, 95 % CI 1.878-2.771, p = 0.036), history of hepatectomy (OR 1.675, 95 % CI 1.256-2.035, p = 0.044) and biliary reconstruction (OR 1.975, 95 % CI 1.452-2.371, p = 0.039) were significantly associated with increased risk of BL.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

After LMH, BL occurred in 13.5 % of the patients and was associated with significant morbidity. Patients with one or several risk factors for BL should benefit intra-operative drain placement.

The learning curve of laparoscopic liver resection after the Louisville statement 2008: Will it be more effective and smooth?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been proven to be feasible and safe. However, it is a difficult and complex procedure with a steep learning curve. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve of LLR at our institutions since 2008.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-six consecutive LLRs were included from May 2008 to December 2014. Patient characteristics, operative data, and surgical outcomes were collected prospectively and analyzed.

RESULTS

The median tumor size was 25 mm (range 5-90 mm), and 96 % of the resected tumors were malignant. 41.3 % (52/126) of patients had pathologically proven liver cirrhosis. The median operation time was 216 min (range 40-602 min) with a median blood loss of 100 ml (range 20-2300 ml). The median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range 2-10 days). Six major postoperative complications occurred in this series, and there was no 90-day postoperative mortality. Regarding the incidence of major operative events including operation time longer than 300 min, perioperative blood loss above 500 ml, and major postoperative complications, the learning curve [as evaluated by the cumulative sum (CUSUM) technique] showed its first reverse after 22 cases. The indication of laparoscopic resection in this series extended after 60 cases to include tumors located in difficult locations (segments 4a, 7, 8) and major hepatectomy. CUSUM showed that the incidence of major operative events proceeded to increase again, and the second reverse was noted after an additional 40 cases of experience. Location of the tumor in a difficult area emerged as a significant predictor of major operative events.

CONCLUSIONS

In carefully selected patients, CUSUM analysis showed 22 cases were needed to overcome the learning curve for minor LLR.

Video assisted resections. Increasing access to minimally invasive liver surgery?

Objective: To evaluate perioperative outcomes, safety and feasibility of video-assisted resection for primary and secondary liver lesions. Methods : From a prospective database, we analyzed the perioperative results (up to 90 days) of 25 consecutive patients undergoing video-assisted resections in the period between June 2007 and June 2013. Results : The mean age was 53.4 years (23-73) and 16 (64%) patients were female. Of the total, 84% were suffering from malignant diseases. We performed 33 resections (1 to 4 nodules per patient). The procedures performed were non-anatomical resections (n = 26), segmentectomy (n = 1), 2/3 bisegmentectomy (n = 1), 6/7 bisegmentectomy (n = 1), left hepatectomy (n = 2) and right hepatectomy (n = 2). The procedures contemplated postero-superior segments in 66.7%, requiring multiple or larger resections. The average operating time was 226 minutes (80-420), and anesthesia time, 360 minutes (200-630). The average size of resected nodes was 3.2 cm (0.8 to 10) and the surgical margins were free in all the analyzed specimens. Eight percent of patients needed blood transfusion and no case was converted to open surgery. The length of stay was 6.5 days (3-16). Postoperative complications occurred in 20% of patients, with no perioperative mortality. Conclusion : The video-assisted liver resection is feasible and safe and should be part of the liver surgeon armamentarium for resection of primary and secondary liver lesions.

Laparoscopic Transabdominal With Transdiaphragmatic Access Improves Resection of Difficult Posterosuperior Liver Lesions

OBJECTIVE

We describe the technical details and evaluate the safety, feasibility, and usefulness of a combined lateral and abdominal (CLA) approach for laparoscopic resection of liver segments 7 and 8.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection of lesions in the posterosuperior area of segments 7 and 8 is technically challenging, and currently there is no standardized laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

Through review of a prospectively maintained database, we identified 44 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of lesions in segment 7 or 8. Twenty-five patients required the CLA approach because their lesions were more posterosuperior and intraparenchymal; 19 patients underwent resection with a regular abdominal-only approach of more accessible anteroinferior lesions. We reviewed operative details and video footage of these operations and compared the outcomes of the 2 groups.

RESULTS

In the group treated with the CLA approach, deep location was more frequent (88% vs 42%; P = 0.035), median tumor diameter was larger (24.5 mm vs 15 mm; P = 0.114), and the median weight of the excised parenchyma was greater (56.5 g vs 23 g; P = 0.093). Median operative time was longer in the CLA approach group (217.5 minutes vs 165 minutes; P = 0.046), but blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, surgical margin status, morbidity, and mortality were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CLA approach permits safe laparoscopic resection of lesions in the posterosuperior area of segments 7 and 8, allowing surgeons to overcome the difficulties of limited visualization and access to the target lesions.

Laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases

Background

Despite the gradual diffusion of laparoscopic liver resection, the feasibility and results of laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) for bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have not been described frequently. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic TSH for bilobar CRLM.

Methods

All patients eligible for laparoscopic TSH among those treated for bilobar CRLM from 2000 to 2013 were included. Demographics, tumour characteristics, surgical procedures, and short- and long-term outcomes were analysed.

Results

Laparoscopic TSH was planned in 34 patients with bilobar CRLM, representing 17·2 per cent of all 198 patients treated for bilobar CRLM. Thirty patients received preoperative chemotherapy, and 20 had portal vein occlusion to increase the volume of the remnant liver. Laparoscopic resection of the primary colorectal tumour was integrated within the first-stage hepatectomy in 11 patients. After a median interval of 3·1 months, 26 patients subsequently had a successful laparoscopic second-stage hepatectomy, including 18 laparoscopic right or extended right hepatectomies. The mortality rate for both stages was 3 per cent (1 of 34), and the overall morbidity rate for the first and second stages was 50 per cent (17 of 34) and 54 per cent (14 of 26) respectively. Mean length of hospital stay was 6·1 and 9·0 days respectively. With a median follow-up of 37·8 (range 6–129) months, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates in patients who completed TSH were 78 and 41 per cent respectively. The 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 26 and 13 per cent respectively.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic TSH for bilobar CRLM is safe and does not jeopardize long-term outcomes in selected patients.

Laparoscopic Parenchymal-Sparing Resections for Nonperipheral Liver Lesions, the Diamond Technique: Technical Aspects, Clinical Outcomes, and Oncologic Efficiency

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of liver lesions has moved toward "parenchymal-sparing" strategies. Although open parenchymal-sparing liver resections are supported by encouraging results, the applicability of the laparoscopic approach for nonperipheral tumors is still questionable. Our aim was to assess the feasibility, safety, and oncologic adequacy of laparoscopic parenchymal-sparing liver resection for nonperipheral lesions with a description of the technique adopted in this setting.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospectively collected single-center database of 517 laparoscopic liver resections was reviewed. Laparoscopic nonperipheral parenchymal-sparing liver resections (LapPSLRs), that is, entirely intraparenchymal limited resections performed on nonperipheral lesions, were selected. Intra- and perioperative outcomes were analyzed along with 3-year actuarial survival for patients with colorectal liver metastases.

RESULTS

The group comprised 49 LapPSLRs. Colorectal liver metastases were the most frequent diagnosis (n = 24 patients). Lesions were located in segments 8, 7, 4a, and 3 in 51%, 8.2%, 36.7%, and 4.1% of cases, respectively. Conversion occurred in 4 patients (8%). Intra- and postoperative short-term outcomes were calculated for the 24 isolated LapPSLR (not associated with any concurrent liver resection). Median operative time and blood loss were 215 minutes and 225 mL, respectively. Pringle maneuver was used in 75% of cases. Postoperative 90-day mortality was nil and morbidity rate was 12.5%. Median postoperative stay was 3 days. Median tumor-free margin was 4 mm and 100% R0 rate was achieved for all LapPSLRs with curative intent. Three-year overall, recurrence-free, and disease-free survival rates were 100%, 65.2%, and 69.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic parenchymal-sparing liver resections for nonperipheral liver lesions are feasible and can be performed safely without compromising perioperative and oncological outcomes.

Traditional versus robot-assisted full laparoscopic liver resection: a matched-pair comparative study

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery was introduced as a means of overcoming the limitations of traditional laparoscopy. This report describes the results of a matched comparative study between traditional (TLLR) and robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection (RLLR) performed in two European centers.

METHODS

From January 2008-April 2013, 46 patients underwent RLLR at San Matteo degli Infermi Hospital. Each patient was matched to a patient who had undergone TLLR at Antoine Béclère Hospital. The variables evaluated were operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were included in each group. Despite matching, more tumors were solitary in the TLLR group (P = 0.02) and more were localized in the superior and posterior segments in the RLLR group (P = 0.003). The median duration of surgery was 210 and 176 min in the RLLR and TLLR groups, respectively (P = 0.12). Conversion rate, blood loss, morbidity, and length of stay were similar in both groups. In multivariate analysis in all cohorts of patients, the sole independent risk factor of postoperative complications was the operative duration [OR = 1.016; P = 0.007].

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic LLR is associated with outcomes similar to those obtained with TLLR. However, robotics may facilitate LLR in patients with superior and posterior liver tumors.

Totally laparoscopic living donor right hepatectomy in a donor with trifurcation of bile duct

Donor operation in adult living donor liver transplantation is associated with significant postoperative morbidity. To avoid laparotomy wound complications and shorten postoperative recovery, laparoscopic liver graft harvest has been developed recently. However, to determine the cut point of bile duct is challenging. Herein, we report the application of totally laparoscopic approach for right liver graft harvest in a donor with trifurcation of the bile duct. A19-year-old man volunteered for living donation to his father who suffered from hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis of liver and hepatocellular carcinoma. The graft was 880 mL with a single right hepatic artery and portal vein. The graft to recipient weight ratio was 1.06. The middle hepatic vein was preserved for the donor and the liver remnant was 42.3%. Two branches of middle hepatic veins were > 5 mm in diameter and needed reconstruction with cryopreserved allograft. Ductoplasty using laparoscopic intracorporeal suture technique was done to achieve single orifice of the graft bile duct. The postoperative course was uneventful for the donor. This report adds evidence of the feasibility of pure laparoscopic right donor hepatectomy and describes the necessary steps for bile duct division in donors with trifurcation of bile duct.

Minimally invasive liver surgery in a hepato-biliary unit: learning curve and indications

Operative indications and type of resection represent a crucial issue of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS), and they should not be modified by the increased experience of laparoscopic liver surgeons. The aim of this study was to define the indications for MILS and the learning curve in a high-volume hepatobiliary surgery Unit. Between 2009 and 2014, 993 liver resections were performed in our unit, and MILS was performed in 81 of these (8.2%). The proportion of MILS significantly increased over the study period of time and was significantly higher during the last 2 years than during the first 2 years (10.8 vs. 6.4%; p = 0.042). Rate of liver resections for benign disease between the first 2 years and the last 2 years of the study period was not significantly different (14.7 vs. 10.5%; p = 0.098). Rate of MILS for malignant disease significantly increased from the first 2 years to the last 2 years: 3.2 vs. 7.5% (p < 0.001). Indication for left lateral sectionectomy in the whole series was rare. It was performed in 37 cases as the only liver surgical procedure, on 993 liver resections (3.7%). In 25 (67.6%) of these, a minimally invasive approach was used. Rate of left lateral sectionectomies between the first 2 years and the last 2 years of the study period was not significantly different: 4.5 vs. 3.8% (p = 0.645). This study shows that the proportion of MILS significantly increased over the study period of time in our high-volume hepatobiliary surgery Unit without changing surgical indications for benign disease and type of resections.

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.