Early outcomes of robotic extended cholecystectomy for the treatment of gallbladder cancer

Innovations in surgery for gallbladder cancer: A review of robotic surgery as a feasible and safe option

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted surgical techniques in the treatment of gallbladder cancer, comparing it with traditional open and laparoscopic methods.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature searched for comparative analyses of patient outcomes following robotic, open, and laparoscopic surgeries, focusing on oncological results and perioperative benefits.

RESULTS

Five total studies published between 2019 and 2023 were identified. Findings indicate that robotic-assisted surgery for gallbladder cancer is as effective as traditional methods in terms of oncological outcomes, with potential advantages in precision and perioperative recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery offers a viable and potentially advantageous alternative for gallbladder cancer treatment, warranting further research to confirm its benefits and establish comprehensive surgical guidelines.

Outcomes of Robotic Surgery in a Single-institution, High-volume Hepatobiliary Oncology Unit

Hepatobiliary surgery has traditionally been performed via an open approach. With the advent of robotic surgery, the minimal access approach in hepatobiliary oncology has gained impetus due to its technical superiority and favorable learning curve over laparoscopy. We present our experience with the Da Vinci Xi system in hepatobiliary oncology. This is a retrospective study from a prospectively maintained database. All patients who underwent surgery between June 2015 and July 2023 for suspected gallbladder cancer and primary or metastatic liver tumors were included. After excluding all inoperables and conversions, a total of 92 patients were included for analysis. There was a conversion rate of 15.6% (17 of 109 patients). Sixty-four (69.6%) patients underwent surgery for gallbladder-related pathologies that included 39 (60.9%) radical cholecystectomies, 24 (37.5%) simple cholecystectomies, and 1 (0.01%) revision cholecystectomy. Twenty-eight patients underwent surgeries for primary or metastatic liver tumors, which included 25 (92.9%) minor and 2 (7.1%) major hepatectomies. Significant morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade III or more) was seen in 8 (8.6%). There was no postoperative mortality. In the group with gallbladder cancer, the median lymph nodal yield was 7 (2-22) in patients who underwent lymph nodal dissection. The median follow-up was 63.9 (0.49-100.67) (IQR = 37.76) months. The 5-year OS and DFS were 76.4 and 71.3%, respectively. Robotic hepatobiliary surgery is feasible and can be performed safely after adequate training. Patient selection is of utmost importance and is the key to establishing a robust robotic hepatobiliary oncosurgery program.

Gallbladder cancer: surgical treatment, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy

Gallbladder cancer is a common type of biliary tract tumor. Optimal management for early stage cases typically involves radical excision as the primary treatment modality. Various surgical techniques, including laparoscopic, robotic, and navigational surgery, have demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes in radical gallbladder excision. Unfortunately, most patients are ineligible for surgical intervention because of the advanced stage of the disease upon diagnosis. Consequently, non-surgical interventions, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy, have become the mainstay of treatment for patients in advanced stages. This review focuses on elucidating various surgical techniques as well as advancements in immunotherapy and targeted therapy in the context of recent advancements in gallbladder cancer research.

Current Status of Robotic Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery

Laparoscopic surgery is performed worldwide and has clear economic and social benefits in terms of patient recovery time. It is used for most gastrointestinal surgical procedures, but laparoscopic surgery for more complex procedures in the esophageal, hepatobiliary, and pancreatic regions remains challenging. Minimally invasive surgery that results in accurate tumor dissection is vital in surgical oncology, and development of surgical systems and instruments plays a key role in assisting surgeons to achieve this. A notable advance in the latter half of the 1990s was the da Vinci Surgical System, which involves master-slave surgical support robots. Featuring high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) imaging with magnification capabilities and forceps with multi-joint function, anti-shake function, and motion scaling, the system compensates for the drawbacks of conventional laparoscopic surgery. It is expected to be particularly useful in the field of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, which requires delicate reconstruction involving complex liver anatomy with diverse vascular and biliary systems and anastomosis of the biliary tract, pancreas, and intestines. The learning curve is said to be short, and it is hoped that robotic surgery will be standardized in the near future. There is also a need for a standardized robotic surgery training system for young surgeons that can later be adapted to a wider range of surgeries. This systematic review describes trends and future prospects for robotic surgery in the hepatobiliary-pancreatic region.

Comparing robotic and open surgical techniques in gallbladder cancer management: a detailed systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and oncological outcomes of robotic surgery compared to open surgery in treating gallbladder cancer (GBC). In October 2023, we performed a literature search across major global databases such as PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. We employed a Review Manager for parameter comparisons. This study has been registered with PROSPERO under the identifier CRD42023476686. Our final meta-analysis incorporated 5 cohort studies, encompassing a total of 353 patients. Compared to the Open Group (OG), the Robotic Group (RG) had reduced intraoperative blood loss (WMD - 217.72 ml, 95% CI - 371.08 to - 64.35; p = 0.005), shorter hospital stay (WMD - 1.80 days, 95% CI - 2.66 to - 0.95; p < 0.0001), and fewer overall complications (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.10-0.97; p = 0.04). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of operation duration, postoperative inpatient days, readmission rate, major complications, 1-year postoperative survival, 2-year postoperative survival, and mortality rates. In our study, we found that for patients with gallbladder cancer, robotic radical cholecystectomy offers certain potential advantages over open radical cholecystectomy. This suggests that robotic radical cholecystectomy might be the optimal choice for treating gallbladder cancer. However, further validation from high-quality randomized clinical trials is required.

Clinical outcomes of minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) versus open extended cholecystectomy: A multicenter propensity score matched study

BACKGROUND

This multicenter study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive extended cholecystectomy (MI-EC) versus open EC (O-EC) for patients with gallbladder cancer (GBC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent EC (cholecystectomy, wedge resection of the liver bed, and regional lymphadenectomy) for GBC between 2010 and 2020 in three centers were included in the study. The clinicopathological data were compared after propensity score matching. Additional subgroup analysis on laparoscopic and robotic EC (L-EC and R-EC) was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 377 patients were included: 308 for O-EC and 69 for MI-EC, respectively. The MI-EC group had a longer operative time (188.9 vs. 238.1 min, p < .001) and shorter hospital stay (9.0 vs. 7.2 days, p = .007), although no differences were found in operative blood loss, complication rate and survival outcome. In subgroup analysis, L-EC patients had a longer operative time (264.4 vs. 202.0 min, p = .001), compared to R-EC patients with comparable perioperative and survival outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Although patients with MI-EC had a longer operation time and higher medical costs, the advantages were enhanced recovery with comparable short- and long-term outcomes. The operation time was less for R-EC patients than for L-EC patients, though the high cost still remains. The surgery type for EC can be selected according to the patient's condition, social status and surgeon's preference.

Oncologic safety of robotic extended cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy is applicable for the treatment of early gallbladder cancer (GBC), minimally invasive surgery is not widely used for advanced GBC. This is because advanced GBCs necessitate complicated surgical techniques, including lymph node dissection and liver resection. Robotic extended cholecystectomy (REC) is thought to overcome the limitations of laparoscopic surgery, but oncological safety studies are lacking. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to evaluate the oncologic outcomes of REC compared with those of open extended cholecystectomy (OEC).

METHODS

A total of 125 patients, who underwent extended cholecystectomy for GBC with tentative T2 or higher stage between 2018 and 2021, were included and stratified by surgical methods. To minimize the confounding factors, 1:1 propensity-score matching was performed between the patients who underwent REC and those who underwent OEC.

RESULTS

Regarding short-term outcomes, the REC group showed significantly lower estimated blood loss (382.7 vs. 717.2 mL, P = 0.020) and shorter hospital stay (6.9 vs. 8.5 days, P = 0.042) than the OEC group. In addition, the REC group had significantly lower subjective pain scores than the OEC group from the day of surgery through the 5th postoperative day (P = 0.006). Regarding long-term outcomes, there were no significant differences in the 3-year [5-year] overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates between the REC group [OS, 92.3% (92.3%); DFS, 84.6% (72.5%)] and the OEC group [OS, 96.8% (96.8%); DFS, 78.2% (78.2%)] (P = 0.807 for OS and 0.991 for DFS).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, REC showed superior short-term outcomes to OEC and no difference in long-term survival outcomes. Additionally, REC was superior to OEC in terms of postoperative pain. Therefore, REC may be a feasible option with early recovery compared with OEC for patients with advanced GBC.

Robotic versus open extended cholecystectomy for T1a–T3 gallbladder cancer: A matched comparison

Background

The feasibility and safety of robotic extended cholecystectomy (REC) are still uncertain. This study was performed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of REC with those of open extended cholecystectomy (OEC) for T1a–T3 gallbladder cancer.

Methods

From January 2015 to April 2022, 28 patients underwent REC in our center. To minimize any confounding factors, a 1:2 propensity score-matching analysis was conducted based on the patients’ demographics, liver function indicators, T stage, and symptoms. The data regarding demographics, perioperative outcomes, and long-term oncologic outcomes were reviewed.

Results

The visual analogue scale score was significantly lower in the REC than OEC group immediately postoperatively (3.68 ± 2.09 vs. 4.73 ± 1.85, P = 0.008), on postoperative day 1 (2.96 ± 1.75 vs. 3.69 ± 1.41, P = 0.023), and on postoperative day 2 (2.36 ± 1.55 vs. 2.92 ± 1.21, P = 0.031). In addition, the REC group exhibited a shorter time to first ambulation (P = 0.043), a shorter time to drainage tube removal (P = 0.038), and a shorter postoperative stay (P = 0.037), but hospital costs were significantly higher in the REC group (P &lt; 0.001). However, no statistically significant difference was found in the operation time (P = 0.134), intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.467), or incidence of postoperative morbidity (P = 0.227) or mortality (P = 0.289) between the REC and OEC groups. In regard to long-term outcomes, the 3-year disease-free survival rate was comparable between the OEC and REC groups (43.1% vs. 57.2%, P = 0.684), as was the 3-year overall survival rate (62.8% vs. 75.0%, P = 0.619).

Conclusion

REC can be an effective and safe alternative to OEC for selected patients with T1a–T3 gallbladder cancer with respect to short- and long-term outcomes.

Robot-assisted radical cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer: A review

BACKGROUND

Radical cholecystectomy (RC) is recommended for Gallbladder cancer (GbC) patients with resectable T1b or higher stage. Traditionally, open RC is preferred over minimally invasive approach. Robotic surgery is increasingly gaining popularity and there are reports of robotic RC (RRC) for GbC. RRC is still new and mostly performed in high-volume centers with access to robotic technology.

AIM

This study aims to review the current literature on the safety and feasibility of RRC for GbC.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of RRC for GbC using PubMed and Embase until December 2020. The primary endpoint was major complications, while the secondary endpoints were conversion to open, R0 resection, and early recurrence.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 74 patients were included in the study. Overall, four patients (5.41%) required open conversion. Five out of 74 patients (6.76%) experienced post-operative complications. There was no post-operative mortality. Among the patients with surgical margins reported (n = 63), 61 patients had negative margins (96.8%) and only two patients had positive margins. Two-year survival outcomes were reported as 60.5-100%.

RELEVANCE FOR PATIENTS

This is the first review that summarizes the current evidence on RRC for GbC. The endpoints suggest that RRC is feasible and safe in selected patients and when done in experienced centers. Understanding the strengths and limitations of RRC compared to other established therapeutic options may potentially aid surgeons in formulating the optimal treatment plan for GbC patients.

Treatment of Resectable Gallbladder Cancer

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the most common biliary tract cancer worldwide and its incidence has significant geographic variation. A unique combination of predisposing factors includes genetic predisposition, geographic distribution, female gender, chronic inflammation, and congenital developmental abnormalities. Today, incidental GBC is the most common presentation of resectable gallbladder cancer, and surgery (minimally invasive or open) remains the only curative treatment available. Encouragingly, there is an important emerging role for systemic treatment for patients who have R1 resection or present with stage III-IV. In this article, we describe the pathogenesis, surgical and systemic treatment, and prognosis.

Cáncer de vesícula biliar, una visión actual

Introducción. El diagnóstico de cáncer de vesícula biliar se realiza generalmente de forma incidental durante el estudio de las piezas quirúrgicas o cuando la enfermedad está avanzada y se expresa por su diseminación. Muy pocas veces se diagnostica de forma preoperatoria. Corresponde a la neoplasia más común de las vías biliares y su incidencia varía de acuerdo a la región geográfica. La región andina en Latinoamérica presenta una de las mayores incidencias a nivel mundial. Métodos. Se realizó una revisión narrativa de la literatura, para presentar una información actualizada en lo referente a los factores de riesgo (incluyendo las alteraciones genéticas y moleculares), al diagnóstico y al tratamiento de esta patología. Basados en los datos actuales, presentamos algunas recomendaciones dirigidas al diagnóstico temprano, que permita un manejo más adecuado de nuestros pacientes. Resultados. Se han implicado nuevos factores de riesgo relacionados con la etiología del cáncer de vesícula biliar, como la obesidad, factores genéticos y moleculares. A pesar de la disponibilidad de los métodos diagnósticos imagenológicos, no ha ocurrido una importante variación porcentual en cuanto al estadio al momento del diagnóstico. Conclusiones. El manejo quirúrgico del cáncer de vesícula biliar está indicado en los estadios más tempranos de la enfermedad y es importante evaluar las opciones terapéuticas en pacientes con enfermedad avanzada. Se considera de suma importancia el estudio anatomopatológico de la pieza quirúrgica y la revisión del informe por parte del cirujano

Limits of serum carcinoembryonic antigen and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 as the diagnosis of gallbladder cancer

Purpose

Although serum CEA and CA 19-9 have been widely utilized for the diagnosis of gallbladder cancer (GBC), few studies have examined the diagnostic performance of them. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic performance of these 2 biomarkers and demonstrate their clinical usefulness in diagnosing GBC.

Methods

Between January 2000 and March 2020, a total of 751 GBC patients and 2,310 normal controls were included. Serum CEA and CA 19-9 were measured preoperatively. Receiver operating characteristic curves were obtained, and the sensitivity and specificity of each biomarker were evaluated.

Results

In terms of differentiating GBC from the control, the sensitivity and specificity of serum CEA at 5 ng/mL was 12.1% and 99.1%, respectively, and those of serum CA 19-9 at 37 IU/mL were 28.7% and 94.5%, respectively. The optimal cutoff values of CEA and CA 19-9 were set to 2.1 ng/mL and 26 IU/mL in the receiver operating characteristic curves, respectively. The sensitivities of CEA and CA 19-9 at new cutoff values slightly increased but remained low (CEA, 42.9%; CA 19-9, 38.2%). When differentiating early-stage GBC from advanced tumor, the sensitivity and specificity, were 14.2% and 96.1% for CEA (cutoff value, 5 ng/mL) and 33.6% and 90.1% for CA 19-9 (cutoff value, 37 IU/mL), respectively.

Conclusion

Serum CEA and CA 19-9 levels are not suitable for screening GBC patients from controls. New promising biomarkers with higher sensitivity should be explored.

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.

Essential updates 2019/2020: Surgical treatment of gallbladder cancer

Gallbladder cancer is a biliary tract cancer that originates in the gallbladder and cystic ducts and is recognized worldwide as a refractory cancer with early involvement of the surrounding area because of its anatomical characteristics. Although the number of cases is increasing steadily worldwide, the frequency of this disease remains low, making it difficult to plan large-scale clinical studies, and there is still much discussion about the indications for surgical resection and the introduction of multidisciplinary treatment. Articles published between 2019 and 2020 were reviewed, focusing mainly on the indications for surgical resection for each tumor stage, the treatment of incidental gallbladder cancer, and current trends in minimally invasive surgery for gallbladder cancer.

Vascular disorders of the gallbladder and bile ducts: Imaging findings

Vascular disorders of the gallbladder and biliary tree are many and varied. In the acute setting, the clinical presentation of vascular conditions such as hemorrhagic cholecystitis and gangrenous cholecystitis are non-specific and rely on imaging for diagnosis and triaging for emergent surgery. These hemorrhagic and ischemic complications of acute cholecystitis are uncommon but potentially fatal. Hemorrhage into the gallbladder and biliary tree, from other causes, may itself result in acute cholecystitis. Knowledge of vascular anatomy of the gallbladder and biliary tree is essential for surgeons to prevent significant operative bleeding complications, particularly in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The unique venous drainage of the gallbladder and biliary tree, with their connections to the portal venous system, lends itself to less well-recognised vascular phenomena such as gallbladder varices, portal biliopathy, and gallbladder bed perfusion abnormalities.

Efficacy of superb microvascular imaging of ultrasound for diagnosis of gallbladder lesion

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The diagnosis of gallbladder (GB) lesions is occasionally difficult. Recently, superb microvascular imaging (SMI) of ultrasound has been developed as a novel microvascular imaging technique. We evaluated the feasibility of SMI for the diagnosis of GB lesions and compared microvascular imaging between benign and malignant GB lesions.

METHODS

Twenty patients with GB-protruded lesions or wall thickening who underwent SMI from August 2015 to July 2017 were included in this retrospective study. The measured outcomes were the quality of microvascular imaging when compared between normal SMI (N-SMI) and contrast-enhanced SMI (CE-SMI), and the microvascular findings (vascularity, vascular morphology, presence of branching, and presence of caliber change) when compared between benign and malignant GB lesions.

RESULTS

The quality of microvascular imaging of CE-SMI was evaluated as better than that of N-SMI, showing a significant difference (P < .001). From the CE-SMI microvascular findings, the evaluation of vascular morphology and the presence of caliber change showed a significant difference between benign and malignant GB lesions (P = .005, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The evaluation of GB lesions using SMI was feasible with a contrast agent. Vascular morphology and the presence of caliber change may help in the differential diagnosis of GB lesions.