1
|
Birgin E, Reißfelder C, Rahbari NN. Robot with the scissorhands: scissor hepatectomy for parenchymal transection in robotic liver resection. J Gastrointest Surg 2024; 28:99-101. [PMID: 38353085 DOI: 10.1016/j.gassur.2023.11.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2023] [Revised: 11/13/2023] [Accepted: 11/15/2023] [Indexed: 02/16/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Emrullah Birgin
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany; Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Christoph Reißfelder
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Nuh N Rahbari
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany; Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ziogas IA, Kakos CD, Moris DP, Kaltenmeier C, Tsoulfas G, Montenovo MI, Alexopoulos SP, Geller DA, Pomfret EA. Systematic review and meta-analysis of open versus laparoscopy-assisted versus pure laparoscopic versus robotic living donor hepatectomy. Liver Transpl 2023; 29:1063-1078. [PMID: 36866856 DOI: 10.1097/lvt.0000000000000115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2022] [Accepted: 02/13/2023] [Indexed: 03/04/2023]
Abstract
The value of minimally invasive approaches for living donor hepatectomy remains unclear. Our aim was to compare the donor outcomes after open versus laparoscopy-assisted versus pure laparoscopic versus robotic living donor hepatectomy (OLDH vs. LALDH vs. PLLDH vs. RLDH). A systematic literature review of the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus databases was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement (up to December 8, 2021). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed separately for minor and major living donor hepatectomy. The risk of bias in nonrandomized studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A total of 31 studies were included. There was no difference in donor outcomes after OLDH versus LALDH for major hepatectomy. However, PLLDH was associated with decreased estimated blood loss, length of stay (LOS), and overall complications versus OLDH for minor and major hepatectomy, but also with increased operative time for major hepatectomy. PLLDH was associated with decreased LOS versus LALDH for major hepatectomy. RLDH was associated with decreased LOS but with increased operative time versus OLDH for major hepatectomy. The scarcity of studies comparing RLDH versus LALDH/PLLDH did not allow us to meta-analyze donor outcomes for that comparison. There seems to be a marginal benefit in estimated blood loss and/or LOS in favor of PLLDH and RLDH. The complexity of these procedures limits them to transplant centers with high volume and experience. Future studies should investigate self-reported donor experience and the associated economic costs of these approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ioannis A Ziogas
- Department of Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
- Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
- Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
- Surgery Working Group, Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece
| | - Christos D Kakos
- Surgery Working Group, Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitrios P Moris
- Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Christof Kaltenmeier
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Georgios Tsoulfas
- Department of Transplantation Surgery, Hippokration General Hospital, Aristotle University School of Medicine, Thessaloniki, Greece
| | - Martin I Montenovo
- Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | | | - David A Geller
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Elizabeth A Pomfret
- Department of Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Outcomes and Patient Selection in Laparoscopic vs. Open Liver Resection for HCC and Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15041179. [PMID: 36831521 PMCID: PMC9954110 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15041179] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2022] [Revised: 02/06/2023] [Accepted: 02/10/2023] [Indexed: 02/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) are the two most common malignant tumors that require liver resection. While liver transplantation is the best treatment for HCC, organ shortages and high costs limit the availability of this option for many patients and make resection the mainstay of treatment. For patients with CRLM, surgical resection with negative margins is the only potentially curative option. Over the last two decades, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been increasingly adopted for the resection of a variety of tumors and was found to have similar long-term outcomes compared to open liver resection (OLR) while offering the benefits of improved short-term outcomes. In this review, we discuss the current literature on the outcomes of LLR vs. OLR for patients with HCC and CRLM. Although the use of LLR for HCC and CRLM is increasing, it is not appropriate for all patients. We describe an approach to selecting patients best-suited for LLR. The four common difficulty-scoring systems for LLR are summarized. Additionally, we review the current evidence behind the emerging robotically assisted liver resection technology.
Collapse
|
4
|
Machado MAC, Lobo-Filho MM, Mattos BH, Ardengh AO, Makdissi FF. ROBOTIC LIVER RESECTION. REPORT OF THE FIRST 50 CASES. ARQUIVOS DE GASTROENTEROLOGIA 2021; 58:514-519. [PMID: 34909859 DOI: 10.1590/s0004-2803.202100000-92] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2021] [Accepted: 06/07/2021] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robotic surgery has gained growing acceptance in recent years, expanding to liver resection. OBJECTIVE The aim of this paper is to report the experience with our first fifty robotic liver resections. METHODS This was a single-cohort, retrospective study. From May 2018 to December 2020, 50 consecutive patients underwent robotic liver resection in a single center. All patients with indication for minimally invasive liver resection underwent robotic hepatectomy. The indication for the use of minimally invasive technique followed practical guidelines based on the second international laparoscopic liver consensus conference. RESULTS The proportion of robotic liver resection was 58.8% of all liver resections. Thirty women and 20 men with median age of 61 years underwent robotic liver resection. Forty-two patients were operated on for malignant diseases. Major liver resection was performed in 16 (32%) patients. Intrahepatic Glissonian approach was used in 28 patients for anatomical resection. In sixteen patients, the robotic liver resection was a redo hepatectomy. In 10 patients, previous liver resection was an open resection and in six it was minimally invasive resection. Simultaneous colon resection was done in three patients. One patient was converted to open resection. Two patients received blood transfusion. Four (8%) patients presented postoperative complications. No 90-day mortality was observed. CONCLUSION The use of the robot for liver surgery allowed to perform increasingly difficult procedures with similar outcomes of less difficult liver resections.
Collapse
|
5
|
Dogeas E, Tohme S, Geller DA. Laparoscopic liver resection: Global diffusion and learning curve. ANNALS OF THE ACADEMY OF MEDICINE, SINGAPORE 2021; 50:736-738. [PMID: 34755166 DOI: 10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2021371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Epameinondas Dogeas
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sucandy I, Shapera E, Jacob K, Luberice K, Crespo K, Syblis C, Ross SB, Rosemurgy AS. Robotic resection of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Institutional outcomes of bile duct cancer surgery using a minimally invasive technique. J Surg Oncol 2021; 125:161-167. [PMID: 34524689 DOI: 10.1002/jso.26674] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2021] [Revised: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 08/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study is to report our early experience and outcomes, the first in North America, of Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma (EHC) resection with Roux-en Y Hepaticojejunostomy reconstruction via the robotic approach. METHODS With Institutional Review Board approval, 15 patients who underwent robotic resection of EHC were studied. RESULTS Patients were 74 (73 ± 8.9) years of age. There were 9 men and 6 women. Average body mass index was 24 (27 ± 6.3) kg·m-2 . Mean & Median ASA class was 3. Median Tumor size was 2 (2 ± 1.3) cm. There were no intraoperative complications. Operative duration was 453 (443 ± 85.0) minutes and the estimated blood loss was 150 (182 ± 138.4) ml. No patient required admission to the intensive care unit. Hospital length of stay was 4 (6 ± 3.2) days. There was one patient with Clavien-Dindo Class 3 or greater complication. No mortality was seen in this series. DISCUSSION Robotic resection of EHC is safe, feasible, and reproducible with excellent clinical outcomes. Consequently, the robotic technique should be considered in some patients requiring EHC resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iswanto Sucandy
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Emanuel Shapera
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Kevin Jacob
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Kenneth Luberice
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Kaitlyn Crespo
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Cameron Syblis
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Sharona B Ross
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Surgical Treatment of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Current and Emerging Principles. J Clin Med 2020; 10:jcm10010104. [PMID: 33396821 PMCID: PMC7796337 DOI: 10.3390/jcm10010104] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2020] [Revised: 12/22/2020] [Accepted: 12/28/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is a rare, aggressive cancer of the biliary tract. It often presents with locally advanced or metastatic disease, but for patients with early-stage disease, surgical resection with negative margins and portahepatis lymphadenectomy is the standard of care. Recent advancements in ICC include refinement of staging, improvement in liver-directed therapies, clarification of the role of adjuvant therapy based on new randomized controlled trials, and advances in minimally invasive liver surgery. In addition, improvements in neoadjuvant strategies and surgical techniques have enabled expanded surgical indications and reduced surgical morbidity and mortality. However, recurrence rates remain high and more effective systemic therapies are still necessary to improve recurrence-free and overall survival. In this review, we focus on current and emerging surgical principals for the management of ICC including preoperative evaluation, current indications for surgery, strategies for future liver remnant augmentation, technical principles, and the role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies.
Collapse
|