Outcome after laparoscopic and open resections of posterosuperior segments of the liver

Robotic or laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy after open hepatectomy: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Repeat hepatectomies are technically complex procedures. The evidence of robotic or laparoscopic (= minimally invasive) repeat hepatectomies (MIRH) after previous open hepatectomy is poor. Therefore, we compared postoperative outcomes of MIRH vs open repeat hepatectomies (ORH) in patients with liver tumors after previous open liver resections.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent repeat hepatectomies after open liver resections were identified from a prospective database between April 2018 and May 2023. Postoperative complications were graded in line with the Clavien-Dindo classification. We stratified patients by intention to treat into MIRH or ORH and compared outcomes. Logistic regression analysis was performed to define variables associated with the utilization of a minimally invasive approach.

RESULTS

Among 46 patients included, 20 (43%) underwent MIRH and 26 (57%) ORH. Twenty-seven patients had advanced or expert repeat hepatectomies (59%) according to the IWATE criteria. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the study groups. The use of a minimally invasive approach was not dependent on preoperative or intraoperative variables. All patients had negative resection margins on final histology. MIRH was associated with less blood loss (450 ml, IQR (interquartile range): 200-600 vs 600 ml, IQR: 400-1500 ml, P = 0.032), and shorter length of stay (5 days, IQR: 4-7 vs 7 days, IQR: 5-9 days, P = 0.041). Postoperative complications were similar between the groups (P = 0.298).

CONCLUSIONS

MIRH is feasible after previous open hepatectomy and a safe alternative approach to ORH. (German Clinical Trials Register ID: DRKS00032183).

Laparoscopic and open minor liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with clinically significant portal hypertension: a multicenter study using inverse probability weighting approach

BACKGROUND

Liver resection offers substantial advantages over open liver resection (OLR) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in terms of reduced intraoperative blood loss and morbidity. However, there is limited evidence comparing the indications and perioperative outcomes with the open versus laparoscopic approach for resection. This study aimed to compare postoperative outcomes between patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and OLR for HCC with clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH).

METHODS

A total of 316 HCC patients with CSPH (the presence of gastroesophageal varices or platelet count < 100,000/ml and spleen diameter > 12 cm) undergoing minor liver resection at eight centers were included in this study. To adjust for confounding factors between the LLR and OLR groups, an inverse probability weighting method analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 193 patients underwent LLR and 123 underwent OLR. After weighting, LLR was associated with a lower volume of intraoperative blood loss and the incidence of postoperative complications (including pulmonary complications, incisional surgical site infection, and paralytic ileus) compared to the OLR group. The 3-, 5-, and 7-year postoperative recurrence-free survival rates were 39%, 26%, and 22% in the LLR group and 49%, 18%, and 18% in the OLR group, respectively (p = 0.18). And, the 3-, 5-, and 7-year postoperative overall survival rates were 71%, 56%, and 44% in the LLR group and 76%, 51%, 44% in the OLR group, respectively (p = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR for HCC patients with CSPH is clinically advantageous by lowering the volume of intraoperative blood loss and incidence of postoperative complications, thereby offering feasible long-term survival.

Impact of liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension on minimally invasive limited liver resection for primary liver malignancies in the posterosuperior segments: An international multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

To assess the impact of cirrhosis and portal hypertension (PHT) on technical difficulty and outcomes of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) in the posterosuperior segments.

METHODS

This is a post-hoc analysis of patients with primary malignancy who underwent laparoscopic and robotic wedge resection and segmentectomy in the posterosuperior segments between 2004 and 2019 in 60 centers. Surrogates of difficulty (i.e, open conversion rate, operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion, and use of the Pringle maneuver) and outcomes were compared before and after propensity-score matching (PSM) and coarsened exact matching (CEM).

RESULTS

Of the 1954 patients studied, 1290 (66%) had cirrhosis. Among the cirrhotic patients, 310 (24%) had PHT. After PSM, patients with cirrhosis had higher intraoperative blood transfusion (14% vs. 9.3%; p = 0.027) and overall morbidity rates (20% vs. 14.5%; p = 0.023) than those without cirrhosis. After coarsened exact matching (CEM), patients with cirrhosis tended to have higher intraoperative blood transfusion rate (12.1% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.059) and have higher overall morbidity rate (22.8% vs. 12.5%; p = 0.007) than those without cirrhosis. After PSM, Pringle maneuver was more frequently applied in cirrhotic patients with PHT (62.2% vs. 52.4%; p = 0.045) than those without PHT.

CONCLUSION

MILR in the posterosuperior segments in cirrhotic patients is associated with higher intraoperative blood transfusion and postoperative morbidity. This parameter should be utilized in the difficulty assessment of MILR.

Efficacy of laparoscopic liver resection for small hepatocellular carcinoma located in the posterosuperior segments: A multi-institutional study using propensity score matching by the Kyushu Study Group of Liver Surgery

AIM

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in the posterosuperior segments (PS) have generally been considered more difficult than those for HCC in anterolateral segments (AL), but may be safe and feasible for selected patients with accumulated experience. In the present study, we investigated the effectiveness of LLR for single nodular HCCs ≤3 cm located in PS.

METHODS

In total, 473 patients who underwent partial liver resection for single nodular HCCs ≤3 cm at the 18 institutions belonging to the Kyusyu Study Group of Liver Surgery from January 2010 to December 2018 were enrolled. The short-term outcomes of laparoscopic partial liver resection and open liver resection (OLR) for HCCs ≤3 cm, with subgroup analysis of PS and AL, were compared using propensity score-matching analysis. Furthermore, results were also compared between LLR-PS and LLR-AL.

RESULTS

The original cohort of patients with HCC ≤3 cm included 328 patients with LLR and 145 with OLR. After matching, 140 patients with LLR and 140 with OLR were analyzed. Significant differences were found between groups in terms of volume of blood loss (median, 55 vs. 287 ml, p < 0.001), postoperative complications (0.71 vs. 8.57%, p = 0.003), and postoperative hospital stay (median, 9 vs. 14 days, p < 0.001). The results of subgroup analysis of PS were similar. Short-term outcomes did not differ significantly between LLR-PS and LLR-AL after matching.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic partial resection could be the preferred option for single nodular HCCs ≤3 cm located in PS.

Risk Factors and Outcomes of Open Conversion During Minimally Invasive Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study on 3880 Procedures Comparing the Laparoscopic and Robotic Approaches

INTRODUCTION

Despite the advances in minimally invasive (MI) liver surgery, most major hepatectomies (MHs) continue to be performed by open surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors and outcomes of open conversion during MI MH, including the impact of the type of approach (laparoscopic vs. robotic) on the occurrence and outcomes of conversions.

METHODS

Data on 3880 MI conventional and technical (right anterior and posterior sectionectomies) MHs were retrospectively collected. Risk factors and perioperative outcomes of open conversion were analyzed. Multivariate analysis, propensity score matching, and inverse probability treatment weighting analysis were performed to control for confounding factors.

RESULTS

Overall, 3211 laparoscopic MHs (LMHs) and 669 robotic MHs (RMHs) were included, of which 399 (10.28%) had an open conversion. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that male sex, laparoscopic approach, cirrhosis, previous abdominal surgery, concomitant other surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score 3/4, larger tumor size, conventional MH, and Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification III procedures were associated with an increased risk of conversion. After matching, patients requiring open conversion had poorer outcomes compared with non-converted cases, as evidenced by the increased operation time, blood transfusion rate, blood loss, hospital stay, postoperative morbidity/major morbidity and 30/90-day mortality. Although RMH showed a decreased risk of conversion compared with LMH, converted RMH showed increased blood loss, blood transfusion rate, postoperative major morbidity and 30/90-day mortality compared with converted LMH.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple risk factors are associated with conversion. Converted cases, especially those due to intraoperative bleeding, have unfavorable outcomes. Robotic assistance seemed to increase the feasibility of the MI approach, but converted robotic procedures showed inferior outcomes compared with converted laparoscopic procedures.

Laparoscopic Hepatectomy versus Open Hepatectomy After Conversion Therapy Using Transarterial Chemoembolization or Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy for Patients with Initially Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is more advantageous than open hepatectomy (OH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, surgical methods of conversion resection for patients with HCC have not been compared. We aimed to compare LH with OH for HCC after conversion therapy.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the data of 334 patients who underwent conversion resection between January 2016 and December 2020 at Sun Yat-sen University, China. Propensity score matching (PSM) of patients in a ratio of 1:2 was conducted, and 62 patients and 121 patients who underwent LH and OH, respectively, were matched.

Results

The LH and OH groups differed at baseline in terms of ALT (P=0.008), AFP (P=0.042), largest tumor size (P=0.028), macrovascular invasion (P=0.006), BCLC stages (P=0.021), and CNLC stages (P=0.048). The incidences of postoperative complications before and after PSM were lower in the LH group than in the OH group (P=0.007 and 0.003, respectively). There were no significant differences in the overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the two groups (P=0.79 and 0.8, respectively). According to the multivariable Cox regression analyses, the largest tumor size (P<0.0001) and tumor number (P=0.004) were significant and independent prognostic factors of OS.

Conclusion

In our study, we found that LH is technically feasible and safe in patients after conversion therapy. Compared with OH, LH showed similar OS and RFS and was associated with fewer postoperative complications.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) after open hepatectomy compared to minimally invasive liver resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Even though the risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) after liver resection is well recognized, the association between surgical approach and VTE risk is unknown. This study aims to compare VTE rates following open liver resection (OLR) and minimally invasive liver resection (MILR).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Web Of Sciences and EMBASE databases were interrogated to identify eligible studies published between February 2016 and August 2022. Studies were considered suitable if they reported a comparison between OLR and MILR (including laparoscopic liver resection [LLR] or robotic liver resection [RLR]).

RESULTS

Fourteen studies including 11 356 patients met the inclusion criteria. 5622 patients underwent OLR and 5734 patients underwent MILR. The VTE rate was higher among patients who underwent OLR compared to MILR (2.8% vs 1.4%, OR (95% CI) = 1.84, p=<00001). Similarly, the subgroup analysis showed a higher rate of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (1.4% vs 0.7%, OR (95% CI) = 1.98, p = 0.02) and pulmonary embolism (PE) (1.3% vs 0.7%, OR (95% CI) = 1.88, p = 0.002) in patients who underwent OLR compared to MILR.

DISCUSSION

Patients who undergo open hepatectomy have a higher incidence of postoperative VTE when compared to those undergoing minimally invasive liver resection. This finding was consistent for both DVT and PE.

Implementation of an ERAS protocol on elderly patients in liver resection

BACKGROUND

The increase of quality of life, the improvement in the perioperative care programs, the use of the frailty index, and the surgical innovation has allowed to access of complex abdominal surgery for elderly patients like liver resection. Despite of this, in patients aged 70 or older there is a limitation for the implementation ERAS protocolos. The aim of this study is to evaluate the implementation ERAS protocol on elderly patients (≥70 years) undergoing liver resection.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of patients who underwent liver resection from December 2017 to December 2019 with an ERAS program. We compare the outcomes in patients ≥70 years (G ≥ 70) versus <70 years (G < 70). The frailty was measured with the Physical Frailty Phenotype score.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients were included. 32 of these (31.6%) were patients ≥70 years. 90% of the both groups had performed >70% of the ERAS. Oral diet tolerance and mobilization on the first postoperative day were quicker in <70 years group. The hospital stay was similar in both groups (3.07days/2.7days). Morbidity and mortality were similar; Clavien I-II(G ≥ 70:41% vs G < 70:30,5%) and Clavien ≥ III (G ≥ 70:6% vs G < 70:8.5%), like hospital readmissions. Mortality was <1%. ERAS protocol compliance was associated with a decrease in complications (ERAS < 70%:80% vs ERAS > 90%:20%; p = 0.02) and decrease in severity of complications in both study groups. Frailty was found in 6% of the elderly group; the only patient who died had a frailty index of 4.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of ERAS protocol for elderly patients is possible, with major improvements in perioperative outcomes, without an increase in morbidity, mortality neither readmissions.

Perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for BCLC stage A large hepatocellular carcinoma patients in difficult segments: A two-centre, propensity score matching analysis

Background

The differences in short- and long-term outcome between laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) for BCLC stage A large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in difficult segments (I, IVa, VII, VIII) remain unclear. This PSM two-centre study aimed to compare perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of LLR with OLR for this HCC.

Methods

HCC patients with BCLC stage A who underwent OLR or LLR in two medical centres were enrolled in the study. PSM analysis was performed to match patients between the LLR cohort and OLR cohort. Survival was analysed based on the Kaplan–Meier method. Independent risk factors were identified by Cox regression.

Results

After PSM, 35 patients remained in the LLR cohort, and 84 remained in the OLR cohort. Patients in the LLR cohort had more intraoperative blood loss (p=0.036) and shorter hospital stays after surgery (p&lt;0.001). The LLR cohort and OLR cohort had no difference in intraoperative blood transfusion, surgical margin or postoperative short-term outcomes. The OS and RFS were not significantly different between the two cohorts. The OS and RFS of these two cohorts were not different in the subgroup analysis. Surgical margin was identified as an independent risk factor for tumour recurrence.

Conclusion

For BCLC stage A large HCC patients with lesions in difficult segments, LLR was feasible and had shorter hospital stay than OLR. In addition, a surgical margin ≥1 cm could significantly decrease the recurrence probability for large HCC located in different segments without compromising short-term outcomes.

Transatlantic registries for minimally invasive liver surgery: towards harmonization

BACKGROUND

Several registries focus on patients undergoing minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS). This study compared transatlantic registries focusing on the variables collected and differences in baseline characteristics, indications, and treatment in patients undergoing MILS. Furthermore, key variables were identified.

METHODS

The five registries for liver surgery from North America (ACS-NSQIP), Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, and Europe were compared. A set of key variables were established by consensus expert opinion and compared between the registries. Anonymized data of all MILS procedures were collected (January 2014-December 2019). To summarize differences for all patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome, the relative and absolute largest differences (RLD, ALD) between the smallest and largest outcome per variable among the registries are presented.

RESULTS

In total, 13,571 patients after MILS were included. Both 30- and 90-day mortality after MILS were below 1.1% in all registries. The largest differences in baseline characteristics were seen in ASA grade 3-4 (RLD 3.0, ALD 46.1%) and the presence of liver cirrhosis (RLD 6.4, ALD 21.2%). The largest difference in treatment was the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (RLD 4.3, ALD 20.6%). The number of variables collected per registry varied from 28 to 303. From the 46 key variables, 34 were missing in at least one of the registries.

CONCLUSION

Despite considerable variation in baseline characteristics, indications, and treatment of patients undergoing MILS in the five transatlantic registries, overall mortality after MILS was consistently below 1.1%. The registries should be harmonized to facilitate future collaborative research on MILS for which the identified 46 key variables will be instrumental.

Laparoscopic liver resection reduces postoperative infection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score-based analysis

BACKGROUND

This study is aimed to compare the occurrence of postoperative infections between patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and those undergoing open liver resection (OLR).

METHODS

This study included 446 patients who underwent initial curative liver resection for HCC 5 cm or less in size without macroscopic vascular invasion. To adjust for confounding factors between the LLR and OLR groups, propensity score matching and inverse probability weighting (IPW) analysis were performed. The incidence rates of postoperative infection, including incisional surgical site infection (SSI), organ/space SSI, and remote infection (RI), were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

An imbalance in several confounding variables, including period of surgery, extent of liver resection, difficult location, proximity to a major vessel, tumor size ≥ 3 cm, and multiple tumors, was observed between the two groups in the original cohort. After matching and weighting, the imbalance between the two groups significantly decreased. Compared with OLR, LLR was associated with a lower volume of intraoperative blood loss (140 vs. 350 mL, P < 0.001 in the matched cohort; 120 vs. 320 mL, P < 0.001 in the weighted cohort) and reduced risk of postoperative infection (2.0% vs. 12%, P = 0.015 in the matched cohort; 2.9% vs. 14%, P = 0.005 in the weighted cohort). Of the types of postoperative infections, organ/space SSI and RI were less frequently observed in the LLR group than in the OLR group in the matched cohort (1.0% vs. 6.0%, P = 0.091 for organ/space SSI; 0% vs. 6.0%, P < 0.001 for RI) and in the weighted cohort (1.2% vs. 7.8%, P < 0.001 for organ/space SSI; 0.3% vs. 5.1%, P = 0.009 for RI).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with OLR, LLR for HCC might reduce postoperative infections, including organ/space SSI and RI.

Comparison Between Minimally Invasive Right Anterior and Right Posterior Sectionectomy vs Right Hepatectomy: An International Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched and Coarsened-Exact-Matched Analysis of 1,100 Patients

BACKGROUND

The role of minimally invasive right anterior and right posterior sectionectomy (MI-RAS/MI-RPS) for right-sided liver lesions remains debatable. Although technically more demanding, these procedures might result in faster recovery and lower postoperative morbidity compared with minimally invasive right hemihepatectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

This is an international multicenter retrospective analysis of 1,114 patients undergoing minimally invasive right hemihepatectomy, MI-RAS, and MI-RPS at 21 centers between 2006 and 2019. Minimally invasive surgery included pure laparoscopic, robotic, hand-assisted, or a hybrid approach. A propensity-matched and coarsened-exact-matched analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1,100 cases met study criteria, of whom 759 underwent laparoscopic, 283 robotic, 11 hand-assisted, and 47 laparoscopic-assisted (hybrid) surgery. There were 632 right hemihepatectomies, 373 right posterior sectionectomies, and 95 right anterior sectionectomies. There were no differences in baseline characteristics after matching. In the MI-RAS/MI-RPS group, median blood loss was higher (400 vs 300 mL, p = 0.001) as well as intraoperative blood transfusion rate (19.6% vs 10.7%, p = 0.004). However, the overall morbidity rate was lower including major morbidity (7.1% vs 14.3%, p = 0.007) and reoperation rate (1.4% vs 4.6%, p = 0.029). The rate of close/involved margins was higher in the MI-RAS/MI-RPS group (23.4% vs 8.9%, p < 0.001). These findings were consistent after both propensity and coarsened-exact matching.

CONCLUSIONS

Although technically more demanding, MI-RAS/MI-RPS is a valuable alternative for minimally invasive right hemihepatectomy in right-sided liver lesions with lower postoperative morbidity, possibly due to the preservation of parenchyma. However, the rate of close/involved margins is higher in these procedures. These findings might guide surgeons in preoperative counselling and in selecting the appropriate procedure for their patients.

Indications for open hepatectomy in the era of laparoscopic liver resection: a high volume single institutional study

Background/Aim

Since the introduction of laparoscopy for liver resection in the 1990s, the performance of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been steadily increasing. However, there is currently no data on the extent to which laparoscopy is used for liver resection. Herein, we investigated the extent to which laparoscopy is performed in liver resection and sought to determine whether surgeons prefer laparoscopy or laparotomy in the posterosuperior (PS) segment.

Methods

For this retrospective observational study, we enrolled patients who had undergone liver resection at the Samsung Medical Center between January 2020 and December 2021. The proportion of LLR in liver resection was calculated, and the incidence and causes of open conversion were investigated.

Results

A total of 1,095 patients were included in this study. LLR accounted for 79% of the total liver resections. The percentage of previous hepatectomy (16.2% vs. 5.9%, P<0.001) and maximum tumor size (median 4.8 vs. 2.8, P<0.001) were higher in the open liver resection (OLR) group. Subgroup analysis revealed that tumor size (median 6.3 vs. 2.9, P<0.001) and surgical extent (P<0.001) in the OLR group were larger than those in the LLR group. The most common cause of open conversion (OC) was adhesion (57%), and all OC patients had tumors in the PS.

Conclusions

We investigated the recent preference of practical surgeons in liver resection, and found that surgeons preferred OLR to LLR when treating a large tumor located in the PS.

Parenchymsparende Operationen oder anatomische Resektionen bei Lebermetastasen des kolorektalen Karzinoms?

Darmkrebs ist eine der häufigsten Todesursachen in der westlichen Welt. Die Hälfte der Patienten entwickelt kolorektale Lebermetastasen (CRLM), dabei weisen weniger als 30% der Patienten zum Zeitpunkt der Diagnose eine chirurgisch resektable Metastasierung auf. Im Falle einer Resektabilität bietet die klassische anatomische (Major-)Hepatektomie eine hohe R0-Resektionsrate, allerdings bei gleichzeitig erhöhter Morbidität und Mortalität. In den letzten 2 Jahrzehnten wurden die potenziellen Vorteile der parenchymsparenden Hepatektomie (PSH) in Bezug auf die onkologischen Gesamtergebnisse, das Überleben und die Re-Resektion im Falle eines Rezidivs („Salvageability“) nachgewiesen. Der Beitrag fasst die aktuellen Erkenntnisse zur PSH als chirurgische Therapieoption zusammen und diskutiert den aktuellen „state of the art“ in verschiedenen Szenarien.

Outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic, hybrid, and open resection in colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: a propensity score-matched study

We aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic, hybrid, and open resection for colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 647 patients with simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases between January 2006 and December 2018 at three tertiary referral hospitals. Patient’s baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, pathological examination results, liver-specific recurrence rate and survivals were compared between the propensity score-matched groups. Forty-two and 81 patients were selected for the laparoscopic vs. hybrid groups, and 48 and 136 patients for laparoscopic vs. open groups, respectively. The laparoscopic group had fewer wound complications (2.1 vs. 13.2%; p = 0.028) than the open group, and a shorter postoperative hospital stay than the hybrid and open groups (8 vs. 11 days, p < 0.001 for both). The 5-year liver-specific recurrence rates were 38.7% and 46.0% in the laparoscopic and hybrid groups, respectively (p = 0.270), and 34.0% and 37.0% in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively (p = 0.391). Simultaneous laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer and liver metastases can be performed safely with significantly enhanced postoperative recovery and comparable long-term outcomes compared to hybrid and open resection.

Perioperative management of living donor liver transplantation: Part 2 - Donors

Living donor liver transplantation was first developed to mitigate the limited access to deceased donor organs in Asia in the 1990s. This alternative liver transplantation method has become a widely practiced and established transplantation option for adult patients suffering with end-stage liver disease, and it has successfully helped address the shortage of deceased donors. The Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia and the Korean Society of Transplantation Anesthesiologists jointly reviewed published studies on the perioperative management of adult live liver donors undergoing donor hemi-hepatectomy. The goal of the review is to offer transplant anesthesiologists and critical care physicians a comprehensive overview of the perioperative management of adult live donors. We featured the current status, donor selection process, outcomes and complications, surgical procedure, anesthetic management, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols, avoidance of blood transfusion, and considerations for emergency donation. Recent surgical advances, including laparoscopic donor hemi-hepatectomy and robotic laparoscopic donor surgery, are also addressed.

Laparoscopic versus open resections in the posterosuperior liver segments within an enhanced recovery programme (ORANGE Segments): study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A shift towards parenchymal-sparing liver resections in open and laparoscopic surgery emerged in the last few years. Laparoscopic liver resection is technically feasible and safe, and consensus guidelines acknowledge the laparoscopic approach in the posterosuperior segments. Lesions situated in these segments are considered the most challenging for the laparoscopic approach. The aim of this trial is to compare the postoperative time to functional recovery, complications, oncological safety, quality of life, survival and costs after laparoscopic versus open parenchymal-sparing liver resections in the posterosuperior liver segments within an enhanced recovery setting.

METHODS

The ORANGE Segments trial is an international multicentre randomised controlled superiority trial conducted in centres experienced in laparoscopic liver resection. Eligible patients for minor resections in the posterosuperior segments will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to undergo laparoscopic or open resections in an enhanced recovery setting. Patients and ward personnel are blinded to the treatment allocation until postoperative day 4 using a large abdominal dressing. The primary endpoint is time to functional recovery. Secondary endpoints include intraoperative outcomes, length of stay, resection margin, postoperative complications, 90-day mortality, time to adjuvant chemotherapy initiation, quality of life and overall survival. Laparoscopic liver surgery of the posterosuperior segments is hypothesised to reduce time to functional recovery by 2 days in comparison with open surgery. With a power of 80% and alpha of 0.04 to adjust for interim analysis halfway the trial, a total of 250 patients are required to be randomised.

DISCUSSION

The ORANGE Segments trial is the first multicentre international randomised controlled study to compare short- and long-term surgical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open resections in the posterosuperior segments within an enhanced recovery programme.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03270917 . Registered on September 1, 2017. Before start of inclusion.

PROTOCOL VERSION

version 12, May 9, 2017.

Laparoscopic Minor Liver Resections for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Posterosuperior Segments Using the Rubber Band Technique

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic minor liver resections (LLR) of posterosuperior (PS) segments are technically challenging, several expert centers are increasingly performing this procedure. In the present study, we introduced novel techniques, including the rubber band traction method and positional changes, and compared surgical outcomes of LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in PS segments with open minor liver resection (OLR).

METHODS

From January 2008 to August 2019, 113 patients underwent laparoscopic (n = 55) or open (n = 58) minor liver resections for single small HCCs (<5 cm) located in PS segments. Propensity score matching in a 1:1 ratio was conducted to minimize preoperative selection bias, and surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There was no intraoperative mortality or reoperation in either group. One conversion to open surgery was necessary due to severe post-operative adhesions. The matched LLR group compared to OLR had significantly shorter operative time (215.16 vs. 251.41 min, P = 0.025), lesser blood loss (218.11 vs. 358.92 mL, P = 0.046), lower complication rate (8.1% vs. 29.7%, P = 0.018), and shorter hospital stay (7.03 vs. 11.78 days, P = 0.001). Intraoperative transfusion, R0 resection, resection margin, 5-year disease-free survival and 5-year overall survival were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Our standardized LLR provided improved short-term outcomes and similar long-term outcomes, when compared with OLR. With advanced techniques and accumulated surgical experience, LLR can be the first option for HCC in PS segments at expert centers.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Is Superior to Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases in the Posterosuperior Segments

Introduction: Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) of colorectal metastasis located in posterosuperior segments (1, 4A, 7 and 8) are challenging and highly demanding. The aim of our study is to determine the safety and feasibility of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) in the resections of the posterosuperior lesions and to compare the peri-operative, short-term and long-term outcomes with the open liver resection (OLR) approach.

Methods and Results: A retrospective study of patients who underwent either HALS or OLR for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) located in the posterosuperior segments of the liver between 2008 and 2018 in two university affiliated medical centers.

Results: A total of 187 patients were identified, of whom 78 underwent HALS and 109 underwent OLR. There was no difference between the HALS and OLR with regard to preoperative factors (age, primary CRC tumor location, number and anatomical distribution of liver metastasis, pre-operative neo-adjuvant treatment, operative time, blood transfusion rate, and resection margins positivity). On the other hand, HALS compared to OLR had a significantly shorter mean hospital stay (4 vs. 6 days; P = 0.003), and a lower total complications rate (25 vs. 47% P = 0.006). Both groups had no 30-day mortality. Also, patients who underwent HALS vs. OLR had similar liver metastases recurrence (55 vs. 51%. P = 0.65) and 5-year survival (47 vs. 45%. P = 0.72).

Conclusions: HALS for mCRC located in posterosuperior liver segments is safe and feasible and it is a preferable approach due to its lower complication rate and shorter hospital stay while not compromising survival and disease recurrence.

Impact of laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing resection of lesions in the right posterosuperior liver segments on surgical outcomes: A multicenter study based on propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatic lesions is increasingly performed worldwide. However, parenchyma-sparing laparoscopic liver resection for hepatic lesions in the right posterosuperior segments is very technically demanding. This study aimed to compare postoperative outcomes between patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection and open liver resection for hepatic lesions in the right posterosuperior segments.

METHODS

In total, 617 patients who underwent liver resection of hepatic lesions in the right posterosuperior segments (segment Ⅶ or Ⅷ) at 8 centers were included in this study. We lessened the impact of confounders through propensity score matching, inverse probability weighting, and double/debiased machine learning estimations.

RESULTS

After matching and weighting, the imbalance between the 2 groups significantly decreased. Compared with open liver resection, laparoscopic liver resection was associated with a lower volume of intraoperative blood loss and incidence of postoperative complications in the matched and weighted cohorts. After surgery, the incidence of pulmonary complication and cardiac disease was lower in the laparoscopic liver resection group than in the open liver resection group in both the matched and weighted cohorts. The odds ratios of laparoscopic liver resection for postoperative complications in the matched and weighted cohorts were 0.49 (95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.83) and 0.40 (95% confidence interval, 0.25%-0.64%), respectively. The double/debiased machine learning risk difference estimator for postoperative complications of laparoscopic liver resection was -19.8% (95% confidence interval, -26.8% to -13.4%).

CONCLUSION

Parenchyma-sparing laparoscopic liver resection for hepatic lesions in the right posterosuperior segments had clinical benefits, including lower volume of intraoperative blood loss and incidence of postoperative complications.

The Applications of 3D Imaging and Indocyanine Green Dye Fluorescence in Laparoscopic Liver Surgery

Laparoscopic liver resections have gained widespread popularity among hepatobiliary surgeons and is nowadays performed for both standard and more complex hepatectomies. Given the increased technical challenges, preoperative planning and intraoperative guidance is pivotal in laparoscopic surgery to safely carry out complex and oncologically safe hepatectomies. Modern tools can help both preoperatively and intraoperatively and allow surgeons to perform more precise hepatectomies. Preoperative 3D reconstructions and printing as well as augmented reality can increase the knowledge of the specific anatomy of the case and therefore plan the surgery accordingly and tailor the procedure on the patient. Furthermore, the indocyanine green retention dye is an increasingly used tool that can nowadays improve the precision during laparoscopic hepatectomies, especially when considering anatomical resection. The use of preoperative modern imaging and intraoperative indocyanine green dye are key to successfully perform complex hepatectomies such as laparoscopic parenchymal sparing liver resections. In this narrative review, we discuss the aspects of preoperative and intraoperative tools that are nowadays increasingly used in experienced hepatobiliary centers.

Laparoscopic versus open resection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The exact role of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and underlying liver cirrhosis (LC) is not well defined. In this meta-analysis, both long- and short-term outcomes following LLR versus open liver resection (OLR) were analysed.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched systematically for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies reporting outcomes of LLR versus OLR of HCC in patients with cirrhosis. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). This was analysed using one-stage (individual participant data meta-analysis) and two-stage (aggregate data meta-analysis) approaches. Secondary outcomes were operation duration, blood loss, blood transfusion, Pringle manoeuvre utilization, overall and major complications, length of hospital stay (LOHS), 90-day mortality and R0 resection rates.

RESULTS

Eleven studies comprising 1618 patients (690 LLR versus 928 OLR) were included for analysis. In the one-stage meta-analysis, an approximately 18.7 per cent lower hazard rate (HR) of death in the LLR group (random effects: HR 0.81, 95 per cent confidence interval [C.I.] 0.68 to 0.96; P = 0.018) was observed. Two-stage meta-analysis resulted in a pooled HR of 0.84 (95 per cent C.I. 0.74 to 0.96; P = 0.01) in the overall LLR cohort. This indicated a 16-26 per cent reduction in the HR of death for patients with HCC and cirrhosis who underwent LLR. For secondary outcomes, LLR was associated with less blood loss (mean difference [MD] -99 ml, 95 per cent C.I. -182 to -16 ml), reduced overall complications (odds ratio 0.49, 95 per cent C.I. 0.37 to 0.66) and major complications (odds ratio 0.45, 95 per cent C.I. 0.26 to 0.79), and shorter LOHS (MD -3.22 days, 95 per cent C.I. -4.38 to -2.06 days).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resection of HCC in patients with cirrhosis is associated with improved survival and perioperative outcomes.

Does laparoscopic hepatectomy offer benefits for patients with COPD? A propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

To date, it remains unclear whether laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is safe and feasible for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Thus, we compared the perioperative outcomes of LH versus open hepatectomy (OH) in this special cohort of patients.

METHODS

Between February 2014 and October 2020, 162 patients who underwent hepatectomy met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of this study. Perioperative data were compared between the two groups by propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

After PSM, 55 patients with well-balanced baseline data were included in each group. Intraoperative blood loss, overall postoperative complications, and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) were significantly lower in the LH group than in the OH group (P < 0.001, P = 0.047, and P = 0.020 after PSM, respectively). However, major complications, early readmission, and early mortality were comparable between the two groups. According to multivariate analysis, high stage of COPD, preoperative tobacco use, and long operative time were independent risk factors for PPCs, whereas treatment with LH was a protective factor.

CONCLUSION

LH is safe and feasible for selected patients with COPD when performed by experienced surgeons, and it has superior perioperative outcomes (especially regarding PPCs) when compared to OH.

Laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases - short- and long-term outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

For well-selected patients and procedures, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become the gold standard for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) when performed in specialized centers. However, little is currently known concerning patient-related and peri-operative factors that could play a role in survival outcomes associated with LLR for CRLM.

AIM

To provide an extensive summary of reported outcomes and prognostic factors associated with LLR for CRLM.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library using the keywords "colorectal liver metastases", "laparoscopy", "liver resection", "prognostic factors", "outcomes" and "survival". Only publications written in English and published until December 2019 were included. Furthermore, abstracts of which no accompanying full text was published, reviews, case reports, letters, protocols, comments, surveys and animal studies were excluded. All search results were saved to Endnote Online and imported in Rayyan for systematic selection. Data of interest were extracted from the included publications and tabulated for qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 1064 articles retrieved by means of a systematic and grey literature search, 77 were included for qualitative analysis. Seventy-two research papers provided data concerning outcomes of LLR for CRLM. Fourteen papers were eligible for extraction of data concerning prognostic factors affecting survival outcomes. Qualitative analysis of the collected data showed that LLR for CRLM is safe, feasible and provides oncological efficiency. Multiple research groups have reported on the short-term advantages of LLR compared to open procedures. The obtained results accounted for minor LLR, as well as major LLR, simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and liver resection, LLR of posterosuperior segments, two-stage hepatectomy and repeat LLR for CRLM. Few research groups so far have studied prognostic factors affecting long-term outcomes of LLR for CRLM.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, LLR for CRLM provides good short- and long-term outcomes, independent of the complexity of the procedure.

The Italian Consensus on minimally invasive simultaneous resections for synchronous liver metastasis and primary colorectal cancer: A Delphi methodology

At the time of diagnosis synchronous colorectal cancer, liver metastases (SCRLM) account for 15-25% of patients. If primary tumour and synchronous liver metastases are resectable, good results may be achieved performing surgical treatment incorporated into the chemotherapy regimen. So far, the possibility of simultaneous minimally invasive (MI) surgery for SCRLM has not been extensively investigated. The Italian surgical community has captured the need and undertaken the effort to establish a National Consensus on this topic. Four main areas of interest have been analysed: patients' selection, procedures, techniques, and implementations. To establish consensus, an adapted Delphi method was used through as many reiterative rounds were needed. Systematic literature reviews were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses instructions. The Consensus took place between February 2019 and July 2020. Twenty-six Italian centres participated. Eighteen clinically relevant items were identified. After a total of three Delphi rounds, 30-tree recommendations reached expert consensus establishing the herein presented guidelines. The Italian Consensus on MI surgery for SCRLM indicates possible pathways to optimise the treatment for these patients as consensus papers express a trend that is likely to become shortly a standard procedure for clinical pictures still on debate. As matter of fact, no RCT or relevant case series on simultaneous treatment of SCRLM are available in the literature to suggest guidelines. It remains to be investigated whether the MI technique for the simultaneous treatment of SCRLM maintain the already documented benefit of the two separate surgeries.

Feasibility and outcomes of multiple simultaneous laparoscopic liver resections

INTRODUCTION

Surgeons often remain reluctant to consider laparoscopic approach in multiple liver tumors. This study assessed feasibility and short-term results of patients who had more than 3 simultaneous laparoscopic liver resections (LLR).

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent LLR for primary or secondary malignancies between 2009 and 2019 were analyzed. After exclusion of major LLR, patients were divided into three groups: less than three (Group A), between three and five (Group B), and more than five resections (Group C) in the same procedure. Intraoperative details, postoperative outcomes, and textbook outcome (TO) were compared in the 3 groups.

RESULTS

During study period, 463 patients underwent minor LLR. Among them, 412 (88.9%) had less than 3 resections, 38 (8.2%) between 3 and 5 resections, and 13 (2.8%) more than 5 resections. Despite a difficulty score according to IMM classification comparable in the 3 groups (with high difficulty grade 3 procedures of 16.5% vs. 15.7% vs. 23.1% in Group A, B, and C, respectively, p = 0.124), mean operative time was significantly longer in Group C (p = 0.039). Blood loss amount (p = 0.396) and conversion rate (p = 0.888) were similar in the 3 groups. Rate of R1 margins was not significantly different between groups (p = 0.078). Achievement of TO was not different between groups (p = 0.741). In multivariate analysis, non-achievement of TO was associated with difficulty according to IMM classification (OR = 2.29 (1.33-3.98)).

CONCLUSION

Since intra- and post-operative outcomes and quality of resection are comparable, multiple liver resections should not preclude the laparoscopic approach.

Does Chemotherapy-Induced Liver Injury Impair Postoperative Outcomes After Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases?

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-associated liver injuries (CALI) have been associated with poor postoperative outcome after open liver resection. To date, no data concerning any correlation of CALI and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) are available. In the present study, we evaluated the impact of CALI on short-term outcomes in patients undergoing LLR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent in our department LLR for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) from 2000 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided in 4 groups according to their pathological histology. In group 1 patients had normal liver parenchyma. Group 2 included patients with steatosis and steatohepatitis. Patients with sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) and nodular regenerative hyperplasia (NRH) were allocated to group 3, whereas the remaining with fibrosis and cirrhosis, were assigned to group 4.

RESULTS

A total of 490 LLR for CRLM were included in the study. Perioperative details and morbidity did not differ significantly between the four groups. Subgroup analysis showed that NRH was associated with higher amount of blood loss (p = 0.043), overall (p = 0.021) and liver-specific morbidity (p = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

NRH is a severe form of CALI that may worsen the short-term outcomes of patients undergoing LLR for CRLM. However, the remaining forms of CALI do not have a significant impact on perioperative outcomes after LLR.

Parenchymal Sparing Anatomical Liver Resections With Full Laparoscopic Approach: Description of Technique and Short-term Results

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe laparoscopic anatomical parenchymal sparing liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) and report the short-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Anatomical resections (ARs) have better oncological outcomes compared to partial resections in patients with HCC, and some suggest should be performed also for CRLM as micrometastasis occurs through the intrahepatic structures. Furthermore, remnant liver ischemia after partial resections has been associated with worse oncological outcomes. Few experiences on laparoscopic anatomical resections have been reported and no data on limited AR exist.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 86 patients undergoing full laparoscopic anatomical parenchymal sparing resections with preoperative surgical simulation and standardized procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 55 patients had HCC, whereas 31 had CRLM with a median of 1 lesion and a size of 30 mm. During preoperative three-dimensional (3D) simulation, a median resection volume of 120 mL was planned. Sixteen anatomical subsegmentectomies, 56 segmentectomies, and 14 sectionectomies were performed. Concordance between preoperative 3D simulation and intraoperative resection was 98.7%. Two patients were converted, and 7 patients experienced complications. Subsegmentectomies had comparable blood loss (166 mL, P = 0.59), but longer operative time (426 min, P = 0.01) than segmentectomies (blood loss 222 mL; operative time 355 min) and sectionectomies (blood loss 120 mL; operative time 295 min). R0 resection and margin width remained comparable among groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A precise preoperative planning and a standardized surgical technique allow to pursue the oncological quality of AR enhancing the safety of the parenchyma sparing principle, reducing surgical stress through a laparoscopic approach.

Laparoscopic and open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis: multicentre propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Child-Pugh A cirrhosis has been demonstrated as beneficial. However, the role of laparoscopy in Child-Pugh B cirrhosis is undetermined. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare open and laparoscopic resection for HCC with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis.

METHODS

Data on liver resections were gathered from 17 centres. A 1 : 1 propensity score matching was performed according to 17 predefined variables.

RESULTS

Of 382 available liver resections, 100 laparoscopic and 100 open resections were matched and analysed. The 90-day postoperative mortality rate was similar in open and laparoscopic groups (4.0 versus 2.0 per cent respectively; P = 0.687). Laparoscopy was associated with lower blood loss (median 110 ml versus 400 ml in the open group; P = 0.004), less morbidity (38.0 versus 51.0 per cent respectively; P = 0.041) and fewer major complications (7.0 versus 21.0 per cent; P = 0.010), and ascites was lower on postoperative days 1, 3 and 5. For laparoscopic resections, patients with portal hypertension developed more complications than those without (26 versus 12 per cent respectively; P = 0.002), and patients with a Child-Pugh B9 score had higher morbidity rates than those with B8 and B7 (7 of 8, 10 of 16 and 21 of 76 respectively; P < 0.001). Median hospital stay was 7.5 (range 2-243) days for laparoscopic liver resection and 18 (3-104) days for the open approach (P = 0.058). The 5-year overall survival rate was 47 per cent for open and 65 per cent for laparoscopic resection (P = 0.142). The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 32 and 37 per cent respectively (P = 0.742).

CONCLUSION

Patients without preoperative portal hypertension and Child-Pugh B7 cirrhosis may benefit most from laparoscopic liver surgery.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Tumors in the Posterosuperior Segments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection for tumors in the posterosuperior segments.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement standards. We conducted a search of electronic information sources to identify all studies comparing outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection for tumors in the posterosuperior segments. We used the Risk Of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. Fixed-effect or random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data.

RESULTS

We identified 11 observational studies, enrolling a total of 1023 patients. The included population in both groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics. Laparoscopic approach was associated with lower risks of total complications [odds ratio (OR): 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33, 0.61; P<0.00001], major complications (Dindo-Clavien III or more) (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.36, 0.73; P=0.0002), and intraoperative blood loss [mean difference (MD): -114.71; 95% CI: -165.64, -63.79; P<0.0001]. Laparoscopic approach was associated with longer operative time (MD: 50.28; 95% CI: 22.29, 78.27; P=0.0004) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD: -2.01; 95% CI: -2.09, -1.92; P<0.00001) compared with open approach. There was no difference between the 2 groups in terms of need for blood transfusion (OR: 1.23; 95% CI: 0.75, 2.02; P=0.41), R0 resection (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.66, 1.81; P=0.72), postoperative mortality (risk difference: -0.00; 95% CI: -0.02, 0.02; P=0.68), and need for readmission (OR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.19, 2.60; P=0.60). In terms of oncological outcomes, there was no difference between the groups in terms disease recurrence (OR: 1.58; 95% CI: 0.95, 2.63; P=0.08), overall survival (OS) at maximum follow-up (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.66, 1.81; P=0.73), 1-year OS (OR: 1.53; 95% CI: 0.48, 4.92; P=0.47), 3-year OS (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.67, 2.37; P=0.48), 5-year OS (OR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.41, 1.99; P=0.80), disease-free survival (DFS) at maximum follow-up (OR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.65, 1.27; P=0.56), 1-year DFS (OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.60, 1.81; P=0.88), 3-year DFS (OR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.75, 1.69; P=0.57), and 5-year DFS (OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.44, 1.24; P=0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the open approach in liver resection for tumors in the posterosuperior segments, the laparoscopic approach seems to be associated with a lower risk of postoperative morbidity, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter length of hospital stay with comparable survival and oncological outcomes. The best available evidence is derived from observational studies with moderate quality; therefore, high-quality randomized controlled trials with adequate statistical power are required to provide a more robust basis for definite conclusions.

Laparoscopic versus Open Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Elderly Patients: A Single-Institutional Propensity Score Matching Comparison

BACKGROUND

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in elderly patients is increasing worldwide. Although open hepatectomy (OH) yields acceptable outcomes, high morbidity rate is concerned. Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has evolved to improve perioperative outcomes. However, comparative study between both techniques for elderly patients with HCC is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare outcomes between LH and OH specifically.

METHODS

HCC patients aged ≥70 years after hepatectomy (2003-2018) were included. The propensity score matching (PSM) and comparative analyses between groups were performed.

RESULTS

After PSM, there were 41 patients in each group with similar demographics, radiographic tumor characteristics, cirrhotic status, and extent of resection. The LH group had a shorter hospital stay (7 vs. 11 days, p = 0.002) compared with the OH group. The completeness of resection and complication rates were not statistically different between groups. The 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival rates were 86.7 and 43.4% in the LH group and 62.2 and 30.8% in the OH group (p = 0.221 and 0.500).

CONCLUSION

Our study confirmed the operative and oncological safety of LH in elderly HCC patients with improved perioperative outcomes compared with OH.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resections of posterolateral liver segments - a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic resection has become an accepted approach to liver tumour surgery. However, it is considered difficult, especially in unfavourably located lesions.

AIM

To compare the outcomes of laparoscopic (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) of posterolateral segments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases from inception to 30 September 2019. Full text articles and conference abstracts were included for further analysis. This review follows the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

From 643 articles, 15 studies (N = 1196 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. All of them were non-randomised. Our findings showed that LLR had significantly lowered overall morbidity compared to OLR (MD = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.51-0.86; p = 0.002). Length of hospital stay (MD = 2.48; 95% CI: -3.87, -1.08; p < 0.001) was also shorter in the LLR group. Operative time (MD = 55.65; 95% CI: 24.14-87.16; p < 0.001) was significantly shorter in the OLR group. In terms of blood loss, major complications, R0 resection rates, and resection margin, there were no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis showed that the laparoscopic approach to resections of posterolateral liver segments is beneficial. However, the results are based on non-randomised trials, and further research is needed to fully establish their clinical application.

Is minimally invasive surgery of lesions in the right superior segments of the liver justified? A multi-institutional study of 245 patients

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive resection for lesions in segments 7 or 8. We compare outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and Open parenchymal sparing liver resections at two high-volume centers.

METHODS

From 2003 to 2016 we identified patients who underwent MIS or Open resections for lesions in segments 7 or 8 at two institutions (MSKCC and SGH). Outcomes were compared using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and forty-five patients underwent resection of lesions in segments 7 or 8 (MIS 30% and Open 70%). Compared to the Open group, the MIS group had longer operative time (223 ± 88 vs 188 ± 72 minutes, P = .003), lower blood loss (297 ± 287 vs 448 ± 670 mL, P = .03), and shorter mean length of stay (5.2 ± 7.4 vs 8.3 ± 11.7 days, P < .001), which remained significant on multivariate analysis. No differences in Pringle time, rate of postoperative complications, or R0 resections were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

With appropriately selected patients treated by experienced MIS hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons, MIS resection of segments 7 or 8 is safe with similar rates of complications and R0 resections, with significantly less blood loss and shorter length of stay.

Laparoscopic Liver Resections for Tumors in the Posterosuperior Segments: A Single-center Experience of 174 Consecutive Cases

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic posterosuperior liver resection is a technically difficult and complex surgery. These patients are seen as poor candidates for laparoscopic surgery. This study aimed to show the safe and effective applicability of the posterosuperior segment resections by experienced surgeons in advanced centers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic posterosuperior liver resection between October 2011 and October 2019 at the Groeninge Hospital were evaluated retrospectively. Demographic and perioperative data were obtained from the prospectively maintained database. Resection of at least 3 consecutive Couinaud segments was accepted as a major surgery (trisegmentectomy). Postoperative complications were registered according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

The median age of the 174 patients was 68 years [interquartile range (IQR): 60 to 75]. The semiprone position was used in the majority of operations (82.2%). Nonanatomic resection was performed in more than half of the operations (55.1%). A total of 5 patients underwent major hepatic resection. The median time of surgery was 150 (IQR: 120 to 190) minutes. Median blood loss was determined to be 150 (IQR: 50 to 300) mL. Malignancy was detected in 95% of the cases. The surgical margin was reported to be R0 in 93.3% of the specimens. The median hospitalization time was 4 (IQR: 3 to 6) days. The major complication rate was 1.7%, and only 1 patient died. Overall survival rates for patients who underwent a resection for colorectal liver metastases in the first and fifth years were 97.5% and 62.2%, and disease-free survival rates were 69.8% and 35.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resections in the posterosuperior segments can be performed safely in experienced hands with good short and long term (oncologial) outcomes.

Does the difficulty grade of laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases correlate with long-term outcomes?

INTRODUCTION

Prognosis of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is strongly correlated with the oncological outcome after liver resection. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) difficulty score (IMM difficulty score) on the oncological results in patients treated for CRLM.

METHODS

All patients who underwent LLRs for CRLM from 2000 to 2016 in our department, were retrospectively reviewed. Data regarding difficulty classification, -according to the Institute Mutualiste Montsouris score (IMM)-, recurrence rate, recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) and data regarding margin status were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 520 patients were included. Patients were allocated into 3 groups based on IMM difficulty score of the LLR they underwent: there were 227 (43,6%), 84 (16,2%) and 209 (40,2%) patients in groups I, II and III, respectively. The R₁ resection rate in group I, II and III were 8,8% (20/227), 11,9% (10/84) and 12,4% (26/209) respectively (p = 0.841). Three- and 5-year RFS rates were 77% and 73% in group I, 58% and 51% in group II, 61% and 53% in group III, respectively (p = 0.038). Three and 5-year OS rates were 87% and 80% for group I, 77% and 66% for group II, 80% and 69% for group III respectively (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

The higher LLR difficulty score correlates with significant morbidity and worse RFS and OS, although the more technically demanding and difficult cases are not associated with increased rates of positive resection margins and recurrence.

Is laparoscopic liver resection suitable for selected patients with BCLC stage B HCC? A propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment for patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial given the variability of tumour status within this group of patients. This aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) to transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in a subset of selected patients with BCLC stage B HCC.

METHODS

Patients with resectable BCLC stage B HCC who underwent treatment between April 2015 and October 2018 were identified for further analysis. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to minimize effect of confounding factors. Perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups and multivariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors related to the overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

From a total of 224 patients 70 were included into each group after PSM. The overall and major morbidity were comparable between the LLR and TACE groups (P = 0.700 and P = 0.500 after PSM, respectively). The OS in LLR group was significantly better than that in the TACE group (P < 0.001). Tumor number ≥4, the diameter of the biggest tumor >5 cm, and patients who underwent TACE were independent predictors of poorer OS.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR for selected patients with BCLC stage B HCC is safe and feasible and has improved survival as compared to TACE.

Oncological Resection for Liver Malignancies: Can the Laparoscopic Approach Provide Benefits?

: Laparoscopic surgery has become an increasingly popular alternative approach to open surgery, resulting in a paradigm shift in liver surgery. Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was initially indicated for small benign and peripheral tumors, at present more than half of LLRs are performed in malignant tumors. Several studies have reported the feasibility of LLR in malignant disease and suggested various short-term benefits compared to open liver resection, including decreased blood loss and postoperative complications and a shorter hospital stay. Although these benefits are important to surgeons, patients, and providers, the main goal of surgery for malignancies is to achieve a maximum oncologic benefit.The relevance of the laparoscopic approach must be assessed in relation to the possibility of respecting basic oncological rules and the expertise of the center. Easy LLRs can be safely performed by most surgeons with minimum expertise in liver surgery and laparoscopy, and can therefore probably provide an oncological benefit. On the other hand, intermediate or difficult LLRs require technical expertise and an oncological benefit can only be achieved in expert centers. Technical standardization is the only way to obtain an oncological benefit with this type of resection, and many problems must still be solved.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes between pure laparoscopic surgery and open right hepatectomy in living donor hepatectomy: Propensity score matching analysis

Pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (PLDRH) is not a standard procedure for living donor liver transplantation but is safe and reproducible in the hands of experienced surgeons. However, the perioperative outcomes of PLDRH have not been fully evaluated yet. We used propensity score matching to compare the perioperative complications and postoperative short-term outcomes of donors undergoing PLDRH and open donor right hepatectomy (ODRH). A total of 325 consecutive donors who underwent elective, adult-to-adult right hepatectomy were initially screened. After propensity score matching, all patients were divided into two groups: PLDRH (n = 123) and ODRH (n = 123) groups. Perioperative complications and postoperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. Postoperative pulmonary complications were significantly more common in the ODRH than in the PLDRH group (54.5 vs. 31.7%, P < 0.001). The biliary complications (leak and stricture) were higher in PLDRH group than in the ODRH group (8% vs. 3%), but it failed to reach statistical significance (P = 0.167). Overall, surgical complication rates were similar between the two groups (P = 0.730). The opioid requirement during the first 7 postoperative days was higher in the ODRH group (686 vs. 568 mg, P < 0.001). The hospital stay and time to the first meal were shorter in the PLDRH than in the ODRH group (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, respectively). PLDRH reduced the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications and afforded better short-term postoperative outcomes compared to ODRH. However, surgical complication rates were similar in both groups.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection of Segments 7 and 8: from the Initial Restrictions to the Current Indications

Since the beginning of laparoscopic liver surgery, resection of the posterosuperior segments has been considered one of the most challenging procedure due to its difficult access. The main drawbacks of the laparoscopic approach to dome lesions are poor visualization, the difficulty of instrumentation and the greater complexity in the control of bleeding. In the evolution of minimally invasive techniques from hybrid techniques to the current purely laparoscopic approaches, the different authors have established gradually the currents indications and surgical techniques to operate these segments with a similar feasibility and safety than open approach. The standardization in the patient position, the use of intercostal trocars, the learning curve in laparoscopic liver surgery, the management of the hepatic blood flow and the refinement of the technique in the extrahepatic and intrahepatic Glissonean pedicle approaches, has allowed to leave behind the initial contraindications about the laparoscopic approach in these segments. In the present review of the literature, the accumulated experience of the different groups in minimally invasive liver surgery together with the technological advances in the different laparoscopic devices have facilitated the resection of tumors in segments 7 and 8 with similar and even better results than open surgery.

Expanding indications for laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing resection of posterosuperior liver segments in patients with colorectal metastases: comparison with open hepatectomy for immediate and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of posterosuperior segments (PSS) is still technically demanding procedure for highly selective patients. There is no long-term survival comparative estimation after LLR and open liver resection (OLR) for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) located in PSS. We aimed to compare long-term overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) after parenchyma-sparing LLR with expanding indications and open liver resection (OLR) of liver PSS in patients with CRLM.

METHODS

Two Russian centers took part in the study. Patients with missing data, hemihepatectomy and extrahepatic tumors were excluded. One of contraindications for LLR was suspicion for tumor invasion in large hepatic vessels. Logistic regression was used for 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

PSS were resected in 77 patients, which accounted for 42% of the total number of liver resections for CRLM. LLR were performed in 51 (66%) patients. Before and after matching, no differences were found between groups in the following factors: median size of the largest metastatic tumor; proximity to the large liver vessels; the rate of anatomical parenchyma sparing resection of PSS; a positive response to chemotherapy before and after surgery. Regardless of matching, the size of the largest metastases was above 50 mm in more than one-third of patients who received LLR. Before matching, intraoperative blood loss, ICU stay and hospital stay were significantly greater in the group of OLR. No 90-day mortality was observed within both groups. There were no differences in long-term oncological outcomes: 5-year OS after PSM was 78% and 63% after LLR and OLR, respectively; 4-year DFS after PSM was 27% in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing resection of PSS for CRLM are justified in majority of patients who have an indication for OLR if performed in high volume specialized centers expertized in laparoscopic liver surgery.

Laparoscopically anatomical versus non-anatomical liver resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopically anatomical resection (LAR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear due to the more demanding technique required in laparoscopy. This study is to analyze the clinical impact of LAR compared to laparoscopically non-anatomical resection (LNAR) for HCC.

METHODS

All patients received laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC (diameter 5-10 cm) from January 2015 to December 2018 were retrospectively enrolled in this study. Patients were divided into LAR and LNAR groups. The perioperative and oncological outcomes were evaluated based on propensity score matching (PSM) method.

RESULTS

After PSM, 51 patients in each group were enrolled. The operative time in LAR group was longer (240 vs 195.0 min, p = 0.012) and blood loss was more (200.0 vs 150.0 mL, p = 0.030) than those of LNAR group, respectively. The total complication rates were comparable between them (21.6% vs 17.6%, p = 0.500). The 3-year overall survival rates were 59.4% in LAR group and 38.7% in LNAR group, respectively (p = 0.045). The 3-year disease-free survival rates were 52.3% in LAR group and 27.0% in LNAR group, respectively (p = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

LAR could be feasibly performed with comparable perioperative outcomes and contributed to improve long-term survival in patients with HCC (diameter 5-10 cm) when compared to LNAR.

Laparoscopic or open approaches for posterosuperior and anterolateral liver resections? A propensity score based analysis of the degree of advantage

BACKGROUND

Benefits over the open technique are demonstrated for laparoscopic liver resections. Whether the degree of advantage is different for anterolateral and posterosuperior resections is investigated in this retrospective study.

METHODS

Laparoscopic anterolateral and posterosuperior resections (Lap-AL/Lap-PS) were compared with open (Open-AL/Open-PS) after propensity score matching. Mean/median differences of relevant parameters were calculated after bootstrap sampling. The degree of advantage was compared between anterolateral and posterosuperior resections and expressed as delta of differences (Δ-difference).

RESULTS

239 Lap-AL were compared with 239 matched Open-AL, and 176 Lap-PS with 176 matched Open-PS. Lap-AL showed reduced blood loss, morbidity, time to orally-controlled pain, mobilization and total stay; Lap-PS showed reduced blood loss, transfusions, morbidity, time to orally-controlled pain, mobilization, functional recovery and total stay. The degree of advantage of Lap-PS resulted significantly greater than Lap-AL blood loss (Δ-difference: 101 mL, p 0.017), transfusions (Δ-difference: 6.3%, p 0.008), morbidity (Δ-difference: 7.6%, p 0.034), time to orally-controlled pain (Δ-difference: 1 day, p 0.020) and functional recovery (Δ-difference: 1 day, p 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

While both resulting in benefit, the advantage of laparoscopy is greater for posterosuperior than anterolateral resections. Despite their technical difficulty, these should be considered among the most worthwhile laparoscopic liver resections.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Major Hepatectomy: Analysis of Clinical Outcomes and Cost Effectiveness in a High-Volume Center

BACKGROUND

Considering the increasing evidence on the feasibility of laparoscopic major hepatectomies (LMH), their clinical outcomes and associated costs were herein evaluated compared to open (OMH).

METHODS

Major contributors of perioperative expenses were considered. With respect to the occurrence of conversion, a primary intention-to-treat analysis including conversions in the LMH group (ITT-A) was performed. An additional per-protocol analysis excluding conversions (PP-A) was undertaken, with calculation of additional costs of conversion analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five LMH and 61 OMH were included (14.5% conversion rate). At the ITT-A, LMH showed lower blood loss (p < 0.001) and morbidity (global p 0.037, moderate p 0.037), shorter hospital stay (p 0.035), and a lower need for intra- and postoperative red blood cells transfusions (p < 0.001), investigations (p 0.004), and antibiotics (p 0.002). The higher intraoperative expenses (+ 32.1%, p < 0.001) were offset by postoperative savings (- 27.2%, p 0.030), resulting in a global cost-neutrality of LMH (- 7.2%, p 0.807). At the PP-A, completed LMH showed also lower severe complications (p 0.042), interventional procedures (p 0.027), and readmission rates (p 0.031), and postoperative savings increased to - 71.3% (p 0.003) resulting in a 29.9% cost advantage of completed LMH (p 0.020). However, the mean additional cost of conversion was significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Completed LMH exhibit a high potential treatment effect compared to OMH and are associated to significant cost savings. Despite some of these benefits may be jeopardized by conversion, a program of LMH can still provide considerable clinical benefits without cost disadvantage and appears worth to be implemented in high-volume centers.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection in the posterosuperior segments: a sub-group analysis from the OSLO-COMET randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection in the posterosuperior segments is technically challenging. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes for laparoscopic and open resection of colorectal liver metastases located in the posterosuperior segments.

METHODS

This was a subgroup analysis of the OSLO-COMET randomized controlled trial, where 280 patients were randomly assigned to open or laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resections of colorectal metastases. Patients with tumors in the posterosuperior segments were identified, and perioperative outcomes and health related quality of life (HRQoL) were compared.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 136 patients, 62 in the laparoscopic and 74 in the open group. The postoperative complication rate was 26% in the laparoscopic and 31% in the open group. The blood loss was less in the open group (500 vs. 250 ml, P = 0.006), but the perioperative transfusion rate was similar. The operative time was similar, while postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (2 vs. 4 days, P < 0.001). HRQoL was significantly better after laparoscopy at 1 month.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing laparoscopic or open liver resection of colorectal liver metastases in the posterosuperior segments, laparoscopic surgery was associated with shorter hospital stay and comparable perioperative outcomes.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for lesions located in posterosuperior segments: a meta-analysis of short-term and oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for lesions located in posterosuperior (PS) segments remains a matter of development to be further assessed. This systematic review aims to compare the short-term and oncological outcomes between laparoscopic and open liver resection (OLR) in PS lesions.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library were searched from date of inception to June 2019. This meta-analysis was performed using the STATA 12.0 statistical software. Standardized mean differences (SMDs), odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for continuous variables, dichotomous variables and long-term variables, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 788 patients from eight studies were identified for the final analysis, with 371 patients in the LLR group and 417 in the OLR group. Although the operation time (SMD 0.22; 95% CI 0.08-0.36; P = 0.003) was longer whereas overall complication rate (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.36-0.70; P < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (SMD - 0.45; 95% CI - 0.59 to - 0.30; P = 0.003) were lower in the LLR group than in the OLR group, no significant differences in blood loss (SMD - 0.14; 95% CI - 0.28 to 0.00; P = 0.054), transfusion rate (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.56-1.54; P = 0.764), major complication rate (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.38-1.05; P = 0.079), R0 resection rate (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.55-1.96; P = 0.902), and disease-free survival (DFS) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (HR 1.43; 95% CI 0.95-2.17), DFS for colorectal liver metastases (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.61-1.81), overall survival for HCC (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.43-2.30) were noted between the groups.

CONCLUSION

LLR is technically feasible and safe without compromising long-term oncological outcomes for selected patients with lesions in the PS segments of the liver.