Long-term and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases with propensity score matching: a multi-institutional Japanese study

Evolution of minimally invasive liver surgery in France over the last decade

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence of benefits on postoperative outcomes, minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) had a very low diffusion up to 2014, and recent evolution is unknown. Our aim was to analyze the recent diffusion and adoption of MILS and compare the trends in indications, extent of resection, and institutional practice with open liver surgery (OLS).

METHODS

We analyzed the French nationwide, exhaustive cohort of all patients undergoing a liver resection in France between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2022. Average annual percentage changes (AAPC) in the incidence of MILS and OLS were compared using mixed-effects log-linear regression models. Time trends were analyzed in terms of extent of resection, indication, and institutional practice.

RESULTS

MILS represented 25.2% of 74,671 liver resections and year incidence doubled from 16.5% in 2013 to 35.4% in 2022. The highest AAPC were observed among major liver resections [+ 22.2% (19.5; 24.9) per year], primary [+ 10.2% (8.5; 12.0) per year], and secondary malignant tumors [+ 9.9% (8.2; 11.6) per year]. The highest increase in MILS was observed in university hospitals [+ 14.7% (7.7; 22.2) per year] performing 48.8% of MILS and in very high-volume (> 150 procedures/year) hospitals [+ 12.1% (9.0; 15.3) per year] performing 19.7% of MILS. OLS AAPC decreased for all indications and institutions and accelerated over time from - 1.8% (- 3.9; - 0.3) per year in 2013-2018 to - 5.9% (- 7.9; - 3.9) per year in 2018-2022 (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first reported trend reversal between MILS and OLS. MILS has considerably increased at a national scale, crossing the 20% tipping point of adoption rate as defined by the IDEAL framework.

Colorectal Cancer: Current Updates and Future Perspectives

Colorectal cancer is a frequent neoplasm in western countries, mainly due to dietary and behavioral factors. Its incidence is growing in developing countries for the westernization of foods and lifestyles. An increased incidence rate is observed in patients under 45 years of age. In recent years, the mortality for CRC is decreased, but this trend is slowing. The mortality rate is reducing in those countries where prevention and treatments have been implemented. The survival is increased to over 65%. This trend reflects earlier detection of CRC through routine clinical examinations and screening, more accurate staging through advances in imaging, improvements in surgical techniques, and advances in chemotherapy and radiation. The most important predictor of survival is the stage at diagnosis. The screening programs are able to reduce incidence and mortality rates of CRC. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of incidence, mortality, and survival rate for CRC.

Minimal Invasive Versus Open Surgery for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Multicenter German StuDoQ|Liver Registry-Based Cohort Analysis in Germany

Objective

To compare the outcome of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) to open liver surgery (OLS) for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) on a nationwide level.

Background

Colorectal cancer is the third most common malignancy worldwide. Up to 50% of all patients with colorectal cancer develop CRLM. MILS represents an attractive alternative to OLS for treatment of CRLM.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study using the prospectively recorded German Quality management registry for liver surgery. Propensity-score matching was performed to account for variance in the extent of resection and patient demographics.

Results

In total, 1037 patients underwent liver resection for CRLM from 2019 to 2021. MILS was performed in 31%. Operative time was significantly longer in MILS (234 vs 222 minutes, P = 0.02) compared with OLS. After MILS, median length of hospital stay (LOS) was significantly shorter (7 vs 10 days; P < 0.001). Despite 76% of major resections being OLS, postoperative complications and 90-day morbidity and mortality did not differ. The Pringle maneuver was more frequently used in MILS (48% vs 40%, P = 0.048). After propensity-score matching for age, body mass index, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, and extent of resection, LOS remained shorter in the MILS cohort (6 vs 10 days, P < 0.001) and operative time did not differ significantly (P = 0.2).

Conclusion

MILS is not the standard for resection of CRLM in Germany. Drawbacks, such as a longer operative time remain. However, if technically possible, MILS is a reasonable alternative to OLS for resection of CRLM, with comparable postoperative complications, reduced LOS, and equal oncological radicality.

Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resections: propensity-matched comparison of two-center experience

BACKGROUND

The advantages of the robotic approach in minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) are still debated. This study compares the short-term outcomes between laparoscopic (LLR) and robotic (RLR) liver resections in propensity score matched cohorts.

METHODS

Data regarding minimally invasive liver resections in two liver surgery units were retrospectively reviewed. A propensity score matched analysis (1:1 ratio) identified two groups of patients with similar characteristics. Intra- and post-operative outcomes were then compared. The difficulty of MILS was based on the IWATE criteria.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-nine patients underwent MILS between January 2014 and December 2021 (LLR = 192; RLR = 77). Propensity score matching identified 148 cases (LLR = 74; RLR = 74) consisting of compensated cirrhotic patients (100%) underwent non-anatomic resection of IWATE 1-2 class (90.5%) for a solitary tumor < 5 cm in diameter (93.2%). In such patients, RLRs had shorter operative time (227 vs. 250 min, p = 0.002), shorter Pringle's cumulative time (12 vs. 28 min, p < 0.0001), and less blood loss (137 vs. 209 cc, p = 0.006) vs. LLRs. Conversion rate was nihil (both groups). In RLRs compared to LLRs, R0 rate (93 vs. 96%, p > 0.71) and major morbidity (4.1 vs. 5.4%, p > 0.999) were similar, without post-operative mortality. Hospital stay was shorter in the robotic group (6.2 vs. 6.6, p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

This study supports the non-inferiority of RLR over LLR. In compensated cirrhotic patients underwent resection of low-to-intermediate difficulty for a solitary nodule < 5 cm, RLR was faster, with less blood loss despite the shorter hilar clamping, and required shorter hospitalization compared to LLR.

Editorial (Preface) for the Special Issue on Advances in Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Cancer Therapies

After the initial reports of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in the early 1990s, minimally invasive liver resection has been rapidly developing based on technical and instrumental improvements [...].

Laparoscopic and Open Liver Resections for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis in the Ukrainian State Center

Background Minimally invasive liver resections for metastatic colorectal cancer have been increasingly performed all over the world with promising results. We planned the current study to review our experience on this matter and compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM). Materials and methods This is a single-center retrospective analysis of patients with CRLM who underwent laparoscopic (n=86) and open (n=96) surgical treatment for metastatic liver lesions between March 2016 and November 2022. Tumor characteristics, intra- and postoperative results, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were analyzed and compared. Results LLR was associated with significantly shorter surgery duration (180 minutes versus 295 minutes, p=0.03). There was no significant difference in blood loss between the two groups (100 mL versus 350 mL, p=0.061). Additionally, the laparoscopic approach was associated with significantly shorter hospital stays (6 days versus 9 days, p=0.004). The rate of major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ 3) was lower in the LLR group (5.8% versus 16.6%, p=0.037). There was no mortality in the LLR group, and in the OLR group, one lethal case was induced by mesenteric thrombosis on the fifth postoperative day. We did not find a statistically significant difference in the OS rate between the two groups at one, three, and five years: 97.3%, 74.7%, and 43.4%, respectively, in the OLR group and 95.1%, 70.3%, and 49.5%, respectively, in the LLR group (p=0.53). DFS at one, three, and five years were 88.7%, 52.3%, and 25.5%, respectively, in the LLR group and 71.9%, 53.1%, and 19.3%, respectively, in the OLR group (p=0.66). Conclusions This study showed that laparoscopic liver surgery is a safe and effective method of CRLM treatment in our center. LLR was associated with a decrease in major morbidity, shorter surgery duration, and reduced postoperative hospital stay. Minimally invasive liver resections showed similar oncological outcomes to the open approach in terms of overall and disease-free survival.

Outcomes and Patient Selection in Laparoscopic vs. Open Liver Resection for HCC and Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis

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.

Long-term oncological outcomes for HALS/Hybrid vs pure laparoscopic approach in colorectal liver metastases: a propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing hand-assisted laparoscopic (HALS)/Hybrid and pure laparoscopic (PLS) resection for colorectal cancer liver metastasis have focused on short-term results, while long-term oncological outcomes remain understudied.

METHODS

We established a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study from four centers with experience in minimally invasive surgery between 2004 and 2020. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Other endpoints analyzed were intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize baseline differences.

RESULTS

A total of 219 HALS/Hybrid (57.8%) and 160 PLS (42.2%) patients were included. After PSM, 155 patients remained in each group. Operative time (182 vs. 248 min, p = 0.012), use of intraoperative ablation (12.3 vs. 4.5%, p = 0.024), positive resection margin (4.5 vs 13.2%, p = 0.012), and pringle time (21 vs. 37 min, p = 0.001) were higher in PLS group. DFS at 1, 3, 5, and 7 years in HALS/Hybrid and PLS groups were 65.4%, 39.3%, 37.5%, and 36.3% vs. 64.9%, 38.0%, 33.1%, and 33.1%, respectively (p = 0.84). OS at 1, 3, 5, and 7 years in HALS/Hybrid and PLS groups were 94.5%, 71.4%, 54.3%, and 46.0% vs. 96.0%, 68.5%, 51.2%, and 41.2%, respectively (p = 0.73).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests no differences in long-term oncologic outcomes between the two techniques. We discovered that longer total operative, pringle time, higher rates of intraoperative ablation, and positive resection margins were associated with PLS. These differences in favor of HALS/Hybrid could be due to a shorter learning curve and a greater ability to control hemorrhage.

Positioning of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From Laparoscopic to Robot-Assisted Liver Resection

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is widely accepted in the surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) through international consensus conferences and the development of difficulty classifications. LLR has been reported to result in earlier postoperative recovery and fewer postoperative complications than open liver resection (OLR) for HCC. However, the prevalence of liver cirrhosis, obesity, the elderly, HCC recurrence (repeat liver resection), and major resection must be considered for LLR for HCC. Some systematic reviews, meta-analysis studies, and large cohort studies indicated that LLR is technically feasible for selected patients with HCC with these factors that led to less intraoperative blood loss, fewer transfusions and postoperative complication incidences, and shorter hospital stays than OLR. Furthermore, some reported LLR prevents postoperative loss of independence. No difference was reported in long-term outcomes among patients with HCC who underwent LLR and OLR; however, some recent reports indicated better long-term outcomes with LLR. In recent years, robot-assisted liver resection (RALR) has gradually become popular, and its short- and long-term results for HCC are not different from those of LLR. Additionally, RALR is expected to become the mainstay of minimally invasive surgery in the future.

Neuraxial anesthesia in hepato-pancreatic-bilio surgery: a first western pilot study of 46 patients

The most common anesthetic approach in hepato-pancreatic-biliary (HPB) surgery is general anesthesia (GA), but it may result in increased morbidity and mortality and peri-operative risks especially in frail patients. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of neuraxial anesthesia (NA) in HPB in a pilot clinical series. This analysis was conducted on 46 consecutive patients undergoing HPB surgery in an Italian Tertial referral center. Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA), combined spino-epidural anesthesia (CSEA) and peridural anesthesia (PA) were used in major and minor hepatectomies and bilio-pancreatic surgery instead of GA. NA was evaluated by analyzing the surgical and anesthesiological short-term outcomes. 46 patients were considered eligible for the study between February 2018 and May 2020. The average age was 69.07 (±  9.95) years. 22 were males and 24 were females. According to the ASA score, 19 (41.30%) patients had ASA II, 22 (47.83%) had ASA III and 5 (10.87%) had ASA IV. 22 (47.83%) patients underwent CSA, 20 (43.48%) CSEA and 4 (8.69%) PA. We performed 8 major and 19 minor hepatectomies, 7 bilio-digestive derivations, 5 Whipple procedures, 4 iatrogenic biliary duct injuries, 2 splenopancreatectomies and 1 hepatic cyst fenestration. Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 was observed in 3 patients. The conversion rate to endotracheal intubation occurring in 3 of 46 (6.52%) patients. After surgery, no local or pulmonary complications and delirium were reported in our series. The present study demonstrates that NA is a safe and feasible option in selected patients, if performed in referral centers by well-trained anaesthesiologists and surgeons.

Recent Advances in Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases-A Review

Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches to liver resection have been increasingly adopted into use for surgery on colorectal cancer liver metastases. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the outcomes when comparing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), robotic liver resection (RLR), and open liver resection (OLR) for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) in 39 studies (2009-2022) that include a case-matched series, propensity score analyses, and three randomized clinical trials. LLR is associated with less intraoperative blood loss and shorter hospital stay compared with OLR. LLR can be performed with comparable operative time. LLR has similar rates of perioperative complications and mortality as OLR. There were no significant differences in 5-year overall or disease-free survival between approaches. Robotic liver resection (RLR) has comparable perioperative safety to LLR and may improve rates of R0 resection in certain patients. Finally, MIS approaches to the hepatic resection of CRLM reduce the time from liver resection to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy. Thus, MIS liver surgery should be considered in the array of options for patients with CRLM, though thoughtful patient selection and surgeon experience should be part of that decision.

Current status of minimally invasive liver surgery for cancers

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients have chronic liver disease with functional deterioration and multicentric oncogenicity. Liver surgeries for the patients should be planned on both oncological effects and sparing liver function. In colorectal patients with post-chemotherapy liver injury and multiple bilateral tumors, handling multiple tumors in a fragile/easy-to-bleed liver is an important issue. Liver surgery for biliary tract cancers is often performed as a resection of large-volume functioning liver with extensive lymphadenectomy and bile duct resection/reconstruction. Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) for HCC is applied with the advantages of laparoscopic for cases of cirrhosis or repeat resections. Small anatomical resections using the Glissonian, indocyanine green-guided, and hepatic vein-guided approaches are under discussion. In many cases of colorectal liver metastases, MILS is applied combined with chemotherapy owing to its advantage of better hemostasis. Two-stage hepatectomy and indocyanine green-guided tumor identification for multiple bilateral tumors are under discussion. In the case of biliary tract cancers, MILS with extensive lymphadenectomy and bile duct resection/reconstruction are developing. A robot-assisted procedure for dissection of major vessels and handling fragile livers may have advantages, and well-simulated robot-assisted procedure may decrease the difficulty for biliary tract cancers.

Is Laparoscopic Hepatectomy Safe for Giant Liver Tumors? Proposal from a Single Institution for Totally Laparoscopic Hemihepatectomy Using an Anterior Approach for Giant Liver Tumors Larger Than 10 cm in Diameter

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of laparoscopic liver resections for liver tumors that are larger than 10 cm remain unclear. We developed a safe laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy for giant liver tumors using an anterior approach.

METHODS

Eighty patients who underwent laparoscopic hemihepatectomy between January 2011 and December 2021 were divided into a nongiant tumor group (n = 65) and a giant tumor group (n = 15) for comparison.

RESULTS

The median operating time, amount of blood loss, and length of postoperative hospital stay did not differ significantly between the nongiant and giant tumor groups. The sizes of the tumors and weights of the resected liver were significantly larger in the giant tumor group. A comparison between a nongiant group (n = 23) and a giant group (n = 12) treated with laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy showed similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, especially that performed on the right side, for giant tumors larger than 10 cm can be performed safely. Surgical techniques for giant liver tumors have been standardized, and their application is expected to spread widely in the future.

Safely Modified Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Segment VI and/or VII Hepatic Lesions Using the Left Lateral Decubitus Position

Purpose

To explore the feasibility and safety of using the left lateral decubitus position (LLDP) to perform laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for the treatment of hepatic lesions in segment VI and/or VII.

Patients and Methods

Clinical data concerning 50 patients underwent LLR including 25 patients in the LLDP and the other 25 patients in the routine operative position (ROP) at Shulan (Hangzhou) Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Shuren University Shulan International Medical College (Hangzhou, China) and Shulan (Quzhou) Hospital between March 2019 and May 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. All of the patients underwent LLR while in the LLDP or the ROP for the treatment of hepatic lesions located in segment VI and/or VII.

Results

The preoperative clinical and laboratory parameters were comparable between the two groups (P > 0.05). All patients completed the surgery successfully. There were two patients required conversion to open resection in the ROP comparing with zero in the LLDP. The mean operative time was 256.9 ± 132.7 minutes in LLDP and 255.7 ± 92.1 minutes in ROP, while the median perioperative blood loss was 100 mL (range: 50–300 mL) in LLDP and 200 mL (range: 50–425 mL), respectively. The postoperative pathological examination showed that margin-negative resection was achieved all of the cases. The important postoperative parameters all returned to normal within five days after the LLR. The mean postoperative hospital stay (15.6 vs 19.3 days; p < 0.05) and the extraction of the drainage tube time (7.8 vs 10.4 days; p < 0.05) were shorter for patients in LLDP.

Conclusion

The LLDP represents a safe and feasible position for performing LLR in selected patients with lesions in segment VI and/or VII. LLR in the LLDP is helpful in terms of the exposure of the surgical field and the recovery of the patient.

Perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus laparotomic hepatectomy for BCLC stages 0-A hepatocellular carcinoma patients associated with or without microvascular invasion: a multicenter, propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

To analyze the long-term oncological outcomes of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stages 0-A hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients associated with or without microvascular invasion (MVI) treated with laparoscopic versus laparotomic liver resection.

METHODS

Clinicopathological data of HCC patients with BCLC stages 0-A from four medical centers were retrospectively reviewed. The survival outcomes of patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy were compared with those who underwent laparotomic hepatectomy. Subgroup analyses in terms of MVI were further performed to explore the effect of surgical approaches on the long-term survival outcomes. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to match patients between the laparoscopic and laparotomic resection groups in a 1:1 ratio.

RESULTS

495 HCC patients at BCLC stages 0-A were enrolled, including 243 in the laparoscopic resection group and 252 in the laparotomic resection group. Laparoscopic resection group had a shorter operation time, less blood loss, a lower frequency of blood transfusion and postoperative complication rates. The laparoscopic resection group had a significantly better overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) than the laparotomic resection group before and after PSM. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that OS and RFS of patients without MVI were remarkably better in the laparoscopic resection group compared with the laparotomic resection group. However, no significant differences in OS and RFS between the two groups were found in patients with MVI after PSM.

CONCLUSIONS

Pure laparoscopic hepatectomy for patients with BCLC stages 0-A HCC can be performed safely with favorable perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes at high-volume liver cancer centers, regardless of the presence of MVI.

Laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy following a novel optimized portal vein embolization: a video case report

Background

This article is the first report of laparoscopic major hepatectomy of Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following optimized portal vein embolization (oPVE).

Case presentation

The patient was diagnosed with a single 3 × 3.5 cm HCC located in segment 5 and 8 detected by enhanced computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. The lesion was adjacent to the right anterior and posterior portal veins, making it difficult to confirm the adequate liver functional remnant volume, surgical margin and R0 resection. In addition, the liver cirrhosis induced by a long history of chronic hepatitis B virus increased the potential risk of postoperative liver failure and refractory ascites. Therefore, we conducted a laparoscopic surgery following oPVE, by which the safe tumor margin was ensured and the outcome of the surgery was improved. The patient was discharged on the seventh day after the surgery. The AFP gradually decreased to a normal level during the 90-day follow-up.

Conclusion

This case report demonstrates that, in experienced hands for selected patients, laparoscopic hepatectomy after portal vein embolization is feasible and may be an alternative to open liver resection.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12876-022-02321-x.

Minimally Invasive vs Open Major Hepatectomies for Liver Malignancies: a Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

The majority of evidence with regards to minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) favors its application in minor hepatectomies. We conducted a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis to determine its feasibility and safety in major hepatectomies (MIMH) for liver malignancies.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 130 patients who underwent MIMH and 490 patients who underwent open major hepatectomy (OMH) for malignant pathologies was performed. PSM in a 1:1 ratio identified two groups of patients with similar baseline clinicopathological characteristics. Perioperative outcomes were then compared. Major hepatectomies included traditional major (>3 segments) and technical major hepatectomies (right anterior and right posterior sectionectomies).

RESULTS

Both cohorts were well-matched for baseline characteristics after PSM. Of 130 MIMH cases, there were 12 conversions to open. Comparison of perioperative outcomes demonstrated a significant association of MIMH with longer operation time and more frequent application of Pringle's maneuver (PM), but decreased postoperative stay. These results were consistent on a subgroup analysis that only included patients undergoing traditional major hepatectomies. A second subgroup analysis restricted to cirrhotic patients demonstrated that while perioperative outcomes were equivalent, MIMH was similarly associated with a longer operative time. Subset analyses of resections performed after 2015 demonstrated that MIMH was additionally associated with a lower postoperative morbidity compared to OMH.

CONCLUSION

Comparison of perioperative and short-term oncological outcomes between MIMH and OMH for malignancies demonstrated that MIMH is feasible and safe. It is associated with a shorter hospital stay at the expense of a longer operation time compared to OMH.

Is laparoscopic liver resection safe for super-elderly patients (aged ≥80)? A propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The safety of laparoscopic liver resection in super-elderly patients with comorbidities is unknown. We used propensity score matching to evaluate the utility and safety of laparoscopic liver resection in super-elderly patients.

METHODS

Two-hundred and five patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection were retrospectively reviewed. They were classified into two groups based on age: ≥80 years (elderly group, n = 49) and <80 years (control group, n = 156). Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed based on preoperative clinical parameters. The intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

After matching, 45 patients were included in each group. The intraoperative blood loss was identical between the control and elderly groups (60 vs 60 mL, respectively, P = .588); the frequency of serious postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo class ≥3, 1/45 vs 1/45, P = 1.00) was also similar. There was no significant difference in terms of the exacerbation of malignancy (22.2% vs 11.1%, P = .258) or other diseases (8.9% vs 22.2%, P = .144). There was no difference in overall survival before and after PSM. However, 5-year overall survival excluding primary cancer-related death showed a difference after PSM (90.7% vs 70.4%; P = .048).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection is feasible and safe in super-elderly patients. The long-term prognosis was poor in patients affected by other illnesses compared to the younger population with similar risk profiles, but there was no difference in overall survival.

Current Surgical Management Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases

Simple Summary

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancer diagnoses in the world. At least half of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer will develop metastatic disease, with most being identified in the liver. Surgical resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is potentially curative. Surgical resection of CRLM, however, remains underutilized despite the continued expansion of operative strategies available. This is likely due to differing views on resectability. Resectability is a surgical assessment, and the classification of CRLM as unresectable should only be made by an experienced hepatobiliary surgeon. Obtaining a surgical evaluation at the time of liver metastasis discovery may help mitigate the challenge of assessing resectability and the determination of potential operative time windows within current multimodal management strategies. The aim of this review is to help facilitate discussions surrounding resectability as well as the timing and sequencing of both surgical and non-surgical therapies.

Abstract

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer diagnosis in the world, and the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths. Despite significant progress in management strategies for colorectal cancer over the last several decades, metastatic disease remains difficult to treat and is often considered incurable. However, for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), surgical resection offers the best opportunity for survival, can be curative, and remains the gold standard. Unfortunately, surgical treatment options are underutilized. Misperceptions regarding resectable and unresectable CRLM likely play a role in this. The assessment of factors that impact resectability status like medical fitness, technical considerations, and disease biology can be difficult, necessitating careful multidisciplinary input and discussion. The identification of ideal operative time windows that align with the multimodal management of these patients can also be perplexing. For all patients with CRLM it may therefore be advantageous to obtain surgical evaluation at the time of discovering liver metastases to mitigate these challenges and minimize the risk of undertreatment. In this review we summarize current surgical management strategies for CRLM and discuss factors to be considered when determining resectability.

Laparoscopic vs open liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of surgical margin status and survival

BACKGROUND

Liver resection represents the curative treatment of choice for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Laparoscopic hepatectomy in CRLM is considered a safe approach. However, the information on their oncological results in the different series is deficient. This study aimed to compare the surgical margin, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with oncological resections of CRLM according to the type of surgical approach performed.

METHODS

Between April 2007 and June 2017, 263 patients with CRLM underwent hepatic resection. Inclusion criteria were initial resectability, tumor size ≤ 50 mm, 3 or less metastases, no bilobar involvement, and absence of extrahepatic disease. A propensity score was performed to adjust the indication bias.

RESULTS

Eighty-two patients were included (56 open and 26 laparoscopic). Twenty-eight (50%) patients had synchronous presentation in the open approach and 6 (23%) in the laparoscopic approach (p = 0.021), with more frequent simultaneous open resections (p = 0.037). The resection margin was positive (R1) in 5 patients with an open approach and 2 with a laparoscopic approach (8.9% and 7.6% respectively; p = 0.852). Nine patients (16%) with conventional approach and 2 (7.7%) with laparoscopic approach had local complications (p = 0.3). There was one death in the open group and none in the laparoscopic. There were no significant differences in OS and DFS rate between both groups (1-3 years, OS: 92-77% and 96-75% respectively; 1-3 years, DFS: 63-20% and 73-36% respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in terms of surgical margin, OS rate, and DFS rate between the laparoscopic and open approach in patients with CRLM.

Indications of Laparoscopic Repeat Liver Resection for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the indications of laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma from the viewpoint of its difficulty.

METHODS

One hundred and one patients who underwent LRLR and 59 patients who underwent open repeat liver resection (ORLR) were included. The difficulty was classified according to the preoperative predictive factors for difficult LRLR, including an open approach during previous liver resection, history of two or more previous liver resections, history of previous major liver resection, tumor near the resected site of the previous liver resection, and intermediate or high difficulty with the difficulty scoring system. We compared the surgical outcomes between the LRLR and ORLR groups based on the difficulty class (low- or intermediate difficiulty class, 0 to 3 predictive factors; high difficiulty class, 4 or 5 factors).

RESULTS

In the low- or intermediate difficiulty class, intraoperative blood loss and the proportion of patients with postoperative complications were significantly lower in LRLR than in ORLR, and the duration of the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in LRLR than in ORLR. In the high difficiulty class, total operative time and operative time before starting hepatic parenchymal resection were significantly longer in LRLR than in ORLR, and there were no significant differences in other surgical outcomes between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

LRLR is recommended for patients in the low or intermediate difficulty class. However, LRLR does not have an advantage with longer operative time for patients in the high difficulty class compared with ORLR.

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.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Report of an international multicenter cohort study with propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is a rare disease with a poor prognosis. In patients where surgical resection is possible, outcome is influenced by perioperative morbidity and lymph node status. Laparoscopic liver resection is associated with improved clinical and oncological outcomes in primary and metastatic liver cancer compared with open liver resection, but evidence on intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is still insufficient. The primary aim of this study was to compare overall survival for a large series of patients treated for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma by open or laparoscopic approach. Secondary objectives were to compare disease-free survival, predictors of death, and recurrence.

METHODS

Patients treated with laparoscopic or open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from 2000 to 2018 from 3 large international databases were analyzed retrospectively. Each patient in the laparoscopic resection group (case) was matched with 1 open resection control (1:1 ratio), through a propensity score calculated on clinically relevant preoperative covariates. Overall and disease-free survival were compared between the matched groups. Predictors of mortality and recurrence were analyzed with Cox regression, and the Textbook Outcomes were described.

RESULTS

During the study period, 855 patients met the inclusion criteria (open liver resection = 709, 82.9%; laparoscopic liver resection = 146, 17.1%). Two groups of 89 patients each were analyzed after propensity score matching, with no significant difference regarding pre- and postoperative variables. Overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 92%, 75%, and 63% in the laparoscopic liver resection group versus 92%, 58%, and 49% in the open liver resection group (P = .0043). Adjusted Cox regression revealed severe postoperative complications (hazard ratio: 10.5, 95% confidence interval [1.01-109] P = .049) and steatosis (hazard ratio: 13.8, 95% confidence interval [1.23-154] P = .033) as predictors of death, and transfusion (hazard ratio: 19.2, 95% confidence interval [4.04-91.4] P < .001) and severe postoperative complications (hazard ratio: 4.07, 95% confidence interval [1.15-14.4] P = .030) as predictors of recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The survival advantage of laparoscopic liver resection over open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is equivocal, given historical bias and missing data.

Laparoscopic Surgery for a Patient With Multiple Liver Metastases of Unknown Origin Concomitant With Gallbladder Tumor

BACKGROUND

The liver is the digestive organ where metastatic adenocarcinoma of unknown primary site is most often observed.

CASE REPORT

A 74-year-old man was diagnosed with a growing gallbladder tumor and multiple liver tumors limited to the left lateral sector. Liver tumors were suggested to be primary or secondary adenocarcinoma with no relation to the gallbladder tumor. Also for diagnostic purposes, laparoscopic full-thickness resection of the gallbladder, laparoscopic lateral sectionectomy and lymph node sampling were performed. The final histopathological diagnosis was hyperplastic polyp of the gallbladder and metastatic poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma of the liver. Liver tumors were suspected to originate from the stomach, duodenum, or small intestine; however, the primary sites could not be identified. The patient has been closely followed up without any chemotherapy 3 months after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery can be strongly recommended for patients with multiple liver tumors of unknown origin concomitant with a gallbladder tumor.

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.

Safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy in patients with severe comorbidities - A propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is nowadays considered as the standard of care for various liver malignancies. However, studies focusing on perioperative outcome after LH in patients with severe comorbidities are still sparse.

METHODS

247 patients, who underwent LH between January 2016 and March 2020 at European surgical center Aachen Maastricht (ESCAM) were retrospectively analyzed regarding surgical outcome. All patients were categorized according to the ASA guidelines and a propensity score matched (PSM) analysis was performed to compare patients with severe comorbidities with patients with minor or no comorbidities.

RESULTS

After PSM, no statistically significant differences regarding clinical characteristics were observed. We performed major resections in 26.4% of h-ASA (ASA > 2) patients and 19.4% of l-ASA (ASA≤2) patients, respectively (P = .322). Overall morbidity (Clavien-Dindo≥1) was observed more frequently in the h-ASA group (h-ASA: 25.0% vs. l-ASA: 8.3%; P = .007) while analysis of major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo≥3b) showed a non-significant tendency for more complications in h-ASA patients (h-ASA: 8.3% vs. l-ASA: 1.4%; P = .053). A subgroup analysis identified major resection (HR = 5.05; P = .006) as an independent risk factor for the occurrence of any postoperative complication and chronic kidney disease (HR = 22.59; P = .030) and liver fibrosis (HR = 30.16; P = .031) as risk factors for the occurrence of major complications in h-ASA patients.

CONCLUSION

LH in patients with severe systemic comorbidities shows a strong tendency towards an increased rate of major complications. Careful patient selection with respect to the planned extent of resection and the presence of chronic kidney disease and liver fibrosis should be performed to improve perioperative results.

Multicenter Propensity Score-Based Study of Laparoscopic Repeat Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Subgroup Analysis of Cases with Tumors Far from Major Vessels

Simple Summary

Less morbidity is considered among the advantages of laparoscopic liver resection for HCC patients. However, our previous international, multi-institutional study of laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) failed to prove it. We hypothesize that these results may be since the study included complex cases performed during the procedure’s developing stage. To examine it, subgroup analysis based on propensity score were performed, defining the proximity of the tumors to major vessels as the complexity. A propensity score matching earned 115 each patient of LRLR and open repeat liver resection (ORLR) without the proximity to major vessels, and the outcomes were compared. With comparable operation time and long-term outcome, less blood loss and less morbidity were shown in LRLR group than ORLR. Even in its worldwide developing stage, LRLR for HCC patients could be beneficial in blood loss and morbidity for the patients with less complexity in surgery.

Abstract

Less morbidity is considered among the advantages of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for HCC patients. However, our previous international, multi-institutional, propensity score-based study of emerging laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) failed to prove this advantage. We hypothesize that these results may be since the study included complex LRLR cases performed during the procedure’s developing stage. To examine it, subgroup analysis based on propensity score were performed, defining the proximity of the tumors to major vessels as the indicator of complex cases. Among 1582 LRLR cases from 42 international high-volume liver surgery centers, 620 cases without the proximity to major vessels (more than 1 cm far from both first–second branches of Glissonian pedicles and major hepatic veins) were selected for this subgroup analysis. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed based on their patient characteristics, preoperative liver function, tumor characteristics and surgical procedures. One hundred and fifteen of each patient groups of LRLR and open repeat liver resection (ORLR) were earned, and the outcomes were compared. Backgrounds were well-balanced between LRLR and ORLR groups after matching. With comparable operation time and long-term outcome, less blood loss (283.3±823.0 vs. 603.5±664.9 mL, p = 0.001) and less morbidity (8.7 vs. 18.3 %, p = 0.034) were shown in LRLR group than ORLR. Even in its worldwide developing stage, LRLR for HCC patients could be beneficial in blood loss and morbidity for the patients with less complexity in surgery.

Hepatic Xanthogranuloma that Originated from a Liver Cyst and Mimicked a Malignant Tumor

BACKGROUND/AIM

Hepatic xanthogranuloma is a very rale disease and formation process is unknown.

CASE REPORT

A 69-year-old woman previously diagnosed as simple liver cyst. Two years before, a 36-mm liver cyst was found in segment 5, while one year later, the hemorrhagic cyst was 40 mm in diameter and a thin septum had formed. The most recent T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed a regular 21-mm hepatic mass with a hyperintense 11-mm center and a hypointense periphery. Peripheral enhancement was seen on gadolinium enhanced MRI. Hepatobiliary cystadenoma or cystadenocarcinoma was suspected because of wall thickness and slight enhancement. Microscopic examination following laparoscopic partial liver resection revealed fibroblasts, dense collagen fibers, and a double layer of hemosiderin-laden as well as foamy macrophages attached to the fibrous capsule.

CONCLUSION

The patient was diagnosed with a hepatic xanthogranuloma that originated from a hemorrhagic liver cyst. Intracystic hemorrhage may be one of the reasons for hepatic xanthogranuloma formation.

Safety assessment of laparoscopic liver resection: A project study of the Endoscopic Liver Surgery Study Group of Japan

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been expanded rapidly and has been accepted worldwide; however, the safety assessment of LLR has not been fully conducted with a large-scale cohort. The aim of this study was to assess safety and identify clinical factors associated with postoperative major complications in LLR.

METHODS

This project study retrospectively collected the data of LLRs performed before October 2015 in Japan. Patient characteristics, details of LLRs, and surgical outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 4122 patients from 66 institutions were enrolled. The main indications were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases. The majority of the procedures were performed for solitary tumor-located liver segment 2, 3, 5, and 6 and the partial resection and left-lateral sectionectomy occupied 77.3%. The rate of conversion, accidental events were 7.1% and 2.1%, respectively. Postoperative major complication occurred in 205 cases (5.0%), and 14 in-hospital deaths were found among HCC patients with chronically diseased liver. Occurrence of postoperative major complication was associated with operation time (≥360 minutes), intraoperative blood loss (≥250 mL), red blood cell transfusion (yes), and the difficulty score (≥6). The 30- and 90-day mortality was 0.14% and 0.41%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection was performed with an acceptable rate of conversion, accidental events, morbidity, and mortality. The indications for LLR should be cautiously judged considering tumor location, planned operative procedure, and liver function.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection Using a Silicone Band Retraction Method (With Video)

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The success of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) depends on stable and full exposure of the parenchymal transection plane. We evaluated the efficacy of LLR using a silicone band retraction method for lesions in the anterolateral and posterosuperior segments.

Operative Time, Age, and Serum Albumin Predict Surgical Morbidity After Laparoscopic Liver Surgery

Background. Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has emerged as a considerable alternative to conventional liver surgery. However, the increasing complexity of liver resection raises the incidence of postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for postoperative morbidity in a monocentric cohort of patients undergoing LLR. Methods. All consecutive patients who underwent LLR between 2015 and 2019 at our institution were analyzed for associations between complications with demographics and clinical and operative characteristics by multivariable logistic regression analyses. Results. Our cohort comprised 156 patients who underwent LLR with a mean age of 60.0 ± 14.4 years. General complications and major perioperative morbidity were observed in 19.9% and 9.6% of the patients, respectively. Multivariable analysis identified age>65 years (HR = 2.56; P = .028) and operation time>180 minutes (HR = 4.44; P = .001) as significant predictors of general complications (Clavien ≥1), while albumin<4.3 g/dl (HR = 3.66; P = .033) and also operative time (HR = 23.72; P = .003) were identified as predictors of major postoperative morbidity (Clavien ≥3). Conclusion. Surgical morbidity is based on patient- (age and preoperative albumin) and procedure-related (operative time) characteristics. Careful patient selection is key to improve postoperative outcomes after LLR.

Anatomical Versus Nonanatomical Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastasis

BACKGROUND

Anatomical resection (AR) for colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) is disputable. We investigated the impact of AR on short-term outcomes and survival in CLM patients.

METHODS

Patients having hepatectomy with AR or nonanatomical resection (NAR) for CLM were reviewed. Comparison was made between AR and NAR groups. Group comparison was performed again after propensity score matching with ratio 1:1.

RESULTS

AR group (n = 234 vs n = 89 in NAR group) had higher carcinoembryonic antigen level (20 vs 7.8 ng/mL, p ≤ 0.001), more blood loss (0.65 vs 0.2 L, p < 0.001), more transfusions (19.2% vs 3.4%, p = 0.001), longer operation (339.5 vs 180 min, p < 0.001), longer hospital stay (9 vs 6 days, p < 0.001), more tumors (p < 0.001), larger tumors (4 vs 2 cm, p < 0.001), more bilobar involvement (20.9% vs 7.9%, p = 0.006), and comparable survival (overall, p = 0.721; disease-free, p = 0.695). After propensity score matching, each group had 70 patients, with matched tumor number, tumor size, liver function, and tumor marker. AR group had more open resections (85.7% vs 68.6%, p = 0.016), more blood loss (0.556 vs 0.3 L, p = 0.001), more transfusions (17.1% vs 4.3%, p = 0.015), longer operation (310 vs 180 min, p < 0.001), longer hospital stay (8.5 vs 6 days, p = 0.002), comparable overall survival (p = 0.819), and comparable disease-free survival (p = 0.855).

CONCLUSION

Similar disease-free survival and overall survival of CLM patients were seen with the use of AR and NAR. However, AR may entail a more eventful postoperative course. NAR with margin should be considered whenever feasible.

Laparoscopic resection reduces superficial surgical site infection in liver surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is beneficial compared to open liver resection. This study aimed to evaluate whether laparoscopic liver resection could reduce postoperative infections.

METHODS

This study included 125 and 115 patients with liver tumors who underwent open and pure laparoscopic partial resections or left lateral sectionectomies, respectively. Propensity score matching and stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting were carried out to compare the postoperative infectious complication rates between the two groups.

RESULTS

Patients with tumors located in Couinaud segment 1, 7, or 8; with tumors adjacent to major vessels; or who underwent repeated resections were more likely to receive open resection. After propensity score matching, the superficial incisional surgical site infection rate tended to be lower in the laparoscopic liver resection group than in the open liver resection group. Moreover, overall infectious complication rate and superficial incisional surgical site infection rate were lower in the laparoscopic group (the cohort formed by the stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the laparoscopic approach for partial resections and left lateral sectionectomies for liver tumors, the superficial incisional surgical site infection rate could be reduced.

Long-Term and Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter, Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

To assess long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted liver resection (RLR) for colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases as compared to a propensity-matched cohort of laparoscopic liver resections (LLR). Although safety and short-term outcomes of RLR have been described and previously compared to LLR, long-term and oncologic data are lacking.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed of all patients who underwent RLR and LLR for CRC metastases at six high-volume centers in the USA and Europe between 2002 and 2017. Propensity matching was used to match baseline characteristics between the two groups. Data were analyzed with a focus on postoperative and oncologic outcomes, as well as long-term recurrence and survival.

RESULTS

RLR was performed in 115 patients, and 514 patients underwent LLR. Following propensity matching 115 patients in each cohort were compared. Perioperative outcomes including mortality, morbidity, reoperation, readmission, intensive care requirement, length-of-stay and margin status were not statistically different. Both prematching and postmatching analyses demonstrated similar overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between RLR and LLR at 5 years (61 vs. 60% OS, p = 0.87, and 38 vs. 31% DFS, p = 0.25, prematching; 61 vs. 60% OS, p = 0.78, and 38 vs. 44% DFS, p = 0.62, postmatching).

CONCLUSIONS

Propensity score matching with a large, multicenter database demonstrates that RLR for colorectal metastases is feasible and safe, with perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes and survival that are largely comparable to LLR.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of liver metastases from extrahepatic primary cancers 2021

BACKGROUND

Hepatectomy is standard treatment for colorectal liver metastases; however, it is unclear whether liver metastases from other primary cancers should be resected or not. The Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery therefore created clinical practice guidelines for the management of metastatic liver tumors.

METHODS

Eight primary diseases were selected based on the number of hepatectomies performed for each malignancy per year. Clinical questions were structured in the population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) format. Systematic reviews were performed, and the strength of recommendations and the level of quality of evidence for each clinical question were discussed and determined. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations.

RESULTS

The eight primary sites were grouped into five categories based on suggested indications for hepatectomy and consensus of the guidelines committee. Fourteen clinical questions were devised, covering five topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) operative treatment, (3) ablation therapy, (4) the eight primary diseases, and (5) systemic therapies. The grade of recommendation was strong for one clinical question and weak for the other 13 clinical questions. The quality of the evidence was moderate for two questions, low for 10, and very low for two. A flowchart was made to summarize the outcomes of the guidelines for the indications of hepatectomy and systemic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines were developed to provide useful information based on evidence in the published literature for the clinical management of liver metastases, and they could be helpful for conducting future clinical trials to provide higher-quality evidence.

Simultaneous colorectal and parenchymal-sparing liver resection for advanced colorectal carcinoma with synchronous liver metastases: Between conventional and mini-invasive approaches

The optimal timing of surgery in case of synchronous presentation of colorectal cancer and liver metastases is still under debate. Staged approach, with initial colorectal resection followed by liver resection (LR), or even the reverse, liver-first approach in specific situations, is traditionally preferred. Simultaneous resections, however, represent an appealing strategy, because may have perioperative risks comparable to staged resections in appropriately selected patients, while avoiding a second surgical procedure. In patients with larger or multiple synchronous presentation of colorectal cancer and liver metastases, simultaneous major hepatectomies may determine worse perioperative outcomes, so that parenchymal-sparing LR should represent the most appropriate option whenever feasible. Mini-invasive colorectal surgery has experienced rapid spread in the last decades, while laparoscopic LR has progressed much slower, and is usually reserved for limited tumours in favourable locations. Moreover, mini-invasive parenchymal-sparing LR is more complex, especially for larger or multiple tumours in difficult locations. It remains to be established if simultaneous resections are presently feasible with mini-invasive approaches or if we need further technological advances and surgical expertise, at least for more complex procedures. This review aims to critically analyze the current status and future perspectives of simultaneous resections, and the present role of the available mini-invasive techniques.

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.

Feasibility and efficacy of repeat laparoscopic liver resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Repeat hepatectomy is an acceptable treatment for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, repeat laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has not been widely adopted due to its technical difficulty. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of repeat LLR compared with repeat open liver resection (OLR) for recurrent HCC.

METHODS

We performed 42 repeat OLR and 30 repeat LLR for cases of recurrent HCC between January 2007 and March 2018. This study retrospectively compared the patients' clinicopathological characteristics and operative and short-term outcomes including surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and postoperative complications between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the two groups except in terms of Child-Pugh grade. The repeat LLR group had lower median intraoperative blood loss (100 mL vs. 435 mL; P = 0.001) and shorter median postoperative hospital stay (10 days vs. 14.5 days; P = 0.002). The other results including postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups. Further, comparison of two subpopulations of the repeat LLR group stratified by previous hepatectomy type (open or laparoscopic) or tumor location (segments 7 and 8 or other) revealed no significant differences in the postoperative clinical characteristics between them, although the morbidity rate tended to be higher in patients who underwent open hepatectomy for primary HCC than in patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat LLR for recurrent HCC is feasible and useful with good short-term outcomes although an appropriate patient selection seems to be necessary.

Benefits of simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal surgery and liver resection for colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: Retrospective case-matched study

Introduction

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer and liver tumors are accepted as alternative procedure to open surgery. However, few studies reported outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic surgery of these two procedures. The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open approach.

Materials and methods

Between June 2010 to December 2019, simultaneous laparoscopic cases were retrospectively matched (1:2) to open cases. Peri-operative and short-term outcomes were compared between both groups.

Results

Twelve patients in laparoscopic group were matched to 24 patients in open group according to age, gender, body mass index, american society of anesthesiologists physical status, preoperative laboratory data, number and size of liver metastases and extent of colorectal and liver resection, Most patients in each group had left-sided colon or rectal cancer and underwent wedge liver resection. The mean number of liver metastases was 1.3 vs 1.5 and size of liver metastases was 2.2 ± 1.4 vs 2.7 ± 1.1 cm in laparoscopic compared to open group. Estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay were significantly lower in laparoscopic group. However, operative time was significantly longer in laparoscopic group. Peri-operative complication was not significant difference between both groups and there was no mortality.

Conclusion

Simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal surgery and minor liver resection is feasible and safe. Laparoscopic approach has better peri-operative outcome in term of shorter length of hospital stay compared to open approach.

•

Outcome of simultaneous laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases remains controversy.

•

This study showed comparable peri-operative outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic compared to open surgery.

•

Simultaneous laparoscopic surgery had shorter length of hospital stay and less operative blood loss.

The actual management of colorectal liver metastases

Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent cancers in the world and between 50% and 60% of patients will develop colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) during the disease. There have been great improvements in the management of CRLM during the last decades. The combination of modern chemotherapeutic and biological systemic treatments with aggressive surgical resection strategies is currently the base for the treatment of patients considered unresectable until few years ago. Furthermore, several new treatments for the local control of CRLM have been developed and are now part of the arsenal of multidisciplinary teams for the treatment of these complex patients. The aim of this review was to summarize and update the management of CRLM, its controversies and relevant evidence.

Survival Advantage of Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection For Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data From Randomized Trials and Propensity-score Matched Studies

OBJECTIVE

To perform an individual participant data meta-analysis using randomized trials and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies which compared laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM).

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials and PSM studies constitute the highest level of evidence in addressing the long-term oncologic efficacy of laparoscopic versus open resection for CLM. However, individual studies are limited by the reporting of overall survival in ways not amenable to traditional methods of meta-analysis, and violation of the proportional hazards assumption.

METHODS

Survival information of individual patients was reconstructed from the published Kaplan-Meier curves with the aid of a computer vision program. Frequentist and Bayesian survival models (taking into account random-effects and nonproportional hazards) were fitted to compare overall survival of patients who underwent laparoscopic versus open surgery. To handle long plateaus in the tails of survival curves, we also exploited "cure models" to estimate the fraction of patients effectively "cured" of disease.

RESULTS

Individual patient data from 2 randomized trials and 13 PSM studies involving 3148 participants were reconstructed. Laparoscopic resection was associated with a lower hazard rate of death (stratified hazard ratio = 0.853, 95% confidence interval: 0.754-0.965, P = 0.0114), and there was evidence of time-varying effects (P = 0.0324) in which the magnitude of hazard ratios increased over time. The fractions of long-term cancer survivors were estimated to be 47.4% and 18.0% in the laparoscopy and open surgery groups, respectively. At 10-year follow-up, the restricted mean survival time was 8.6 months (or 12.1%) longer in the laparoscopy arm (P < 0.0001). In a subgroup analysis, elderly patients (≥65 years old) treated with laparoscopy experienced longer 3-year average life expectancy (+6.2%, P = 0.018), and those who live past the 5-year milestone (46.1%) seem to be cured of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This patient-level meta-analysis of high-quality studies demonstrated an unexpected survival benefit in favor of laparoscopic over open resection for CLM in the long-term. From a conservative viewpoint, these results can be interpreted to indicate that laparoscopy is at least not inferior to the standard open approach.

Difficulty classifications of laparoscopic repeated liver resection in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to investigate the predictive factors and classifications for difficulty of laparoscopic repeated liver resection (LRLR) in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

Sixty patients who underwent LRLR were included. Potential predictive factors for difficult LRLR included the approach of the previous liver resection (laparoscopic or open), the number of previous liver resections, a history of cholecystectomy in previous liver resection, the operative procedure of previous liver resection, whether the tumor was near the resected site of the previous liver resection, non-surgical treatments before the present surgery, and the difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic liver resection. The relationship between these factors and perioperative outcomes were evaluated to investigate the predictive factor for difficult LRLR.

RESULTS

Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated that an open approach during previous liver resection, two or more previous liver resections, a history of previous liver resection with not less than sectionectomy, tumor near the resected site of the previous liver resection, and intermediate or high difficulty in the difficulty scoring system were independent risk factors for prolonged operative time and/or severe adhesion of LRLR. Three difficulty classifications were then suggested based on the number of these five predictive factors. The difficulty classification reflected operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and incidence of postoperative complication.

CONCLUSION

The difficulty of LRLR may be predicted by three difficulty classifications using five preoperative predictive factors.

New device with force sensors for laparoscopic liver resection - investigation of grip force and histological damage

Introduction: As the benefits of minimally invasive surgery are recognized, the rate of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is rapidly increasing. Liver tissue is fragile compared to tissue of the stomach and colon. In endoscopic and robotic surgery, sufficient tactile sensation is yet to be obtained. Therefore, it is necessary to measure and indicate the grip force of forceps during surgery. We developed a new device consisting of force sensors and investigated its grip force and the resulting histological damage to liver tissue.Material and methods: We measured the grip force generated during laparoscopic surgery in pigs using the forceps with pressure sensors developed by us. Throughout the hepatectomy, we measured the grip force generated by the forceps in real time. We investigated the histological damage to the liver caused by using the forceps with different grip forces.Results: The subject produced a mean grip force of 1.75 N during the procedures. The maximum grip force was 3.38 N. By grasping the tissues of the liver with forceps, bleeding and destruction of the hepatic lobules were observed in a manner dependent on increasing grip force.Conclusion: The new device is necessary for preventing liver damage in laparoscopic hepatic resection.

A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open hepatectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The evidence of pairwise meta-analysis of Robotic Hepatectomy (RH) vs Laparoscopic Hepatectomy (LH) and RH vs Open Hepatectomy (OH) is inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this study, was to compare the outcomes of RH, LH and OH by performing a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in the following databases: Pubmed, Google scholar, EMBASE and Cochrane library. Cost-effectiveness and survival benefits were selected as primary outcomes.

RESULTS

The cost was less in OH compared to both minimally invasive procedures, LH demonstrated lower cost compared to RH, but the differences were not statistically significant. Both the RH and LH cohorts demonstrated significantly lower estimated blood loss, reduced major morbidity rate and shorter length of stay compared to OH cohort. The LH and OH cohorts demonstrated significantly shorter operative time and duration of clamping compared to the RH cohort. The LH cohort included significantly smaller tumours compared to the OH cohort.

CONCLUSION

The present network meta-analysis, demonstrated that both RH and LH in malignant and benign conditions were associated with lower morbidity rates, shorter hospital stay and the procedure related costs were statistically nonsignificant between RH, LH and OH.

Incidence of incisional hernia after laparoscopic liver resection

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive techniques have been broadly introduced to liver surgery during the last couple of years. In this study, we aimed to report the incidence and potential risk factors for incisional hernia (IH) as well as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after laparoscopic liver resections (LLR).

METHODS

All patients undergoing LLR between January 2014 and June 2017 were contacted for an outpatient hernia examination. In all eligible patients, photo documentation of the scar was performed and IH was evaluated by clinical examination and by ultrasound. Patients also completed a questionnaire to evaluate IH-specific symptoms and HRQoL. Obtained results were retrospectively analyzed with regard to patients' characteristics, perioperative outcomes and applied minimally invasive techniques, such as multi-incision laparoscopic liver surgery or hand-assisted/single-incision laparoscopic surgery (HALS/SILS).

RESULTS

Of 184 patients undergoing surgery, 161 (87.5%) met the inclusion criteria and 49 patients (26.6%) participated in this study. After a median time of 26 months (range 19-50 months) after surgery, we observed an overall incidence of IH of 12%. Five of 6 patients were overweight or obese (BMI ≥ 25) and 5 of 6 hernias were located at the umbilical site. Univariate analysis suggested the performance status at time of operation (ASA score ≥ 3; HR 5.616, 95% CI 1.012-31.157, p = 0.048) and the approach (HALS/SILS, HR 6.571, 95% CI 1.097-39.379, p = 0.039) as potential risk factors for IH. A higher frequency of hernia-related physical restrictions (HRR; p = 0.058) and a decreased physical functioning (p = 0.17) were noted in patients with IH; however, both being short of statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Advantages of laparoscopic surgery with regard to low rates of IH can be translated to minimally invasive liver surgery. Even though there are low rates of IH, patients with poor performance status at the time of operation should be monitored closely. While patients' characteristics are hard to influence, it might be worth focusing on surgical factors such as the approach and the closure of the umbilical site to further minimize the rate of IH.