Circumstances and implications of conversion from minimally invasive to open liver resection: a multi-center analysis from the AMILES registry

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive approaches to liver resection (MILR) are associated with favorable outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine the implications of conversion to an open procedure on perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent MILR at 10 North American institutions were identified from the Americas Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (AMILES) database. Outcomes of patients who required conversion were compared to those who did not. Additionally, outcomes after conversion due to unfavorable findings (poor visualization/access, lack of progress, disease extent) versus intraoperative events (bleeding, injury, cardiopulmonary instability) were compared.

RESULTS

Of 1675 patients who underwent MILR, 102 (6.1%) required conversion. Conversion rate ranged from 4.4% for left lateral sectionectomy to 10% for right hepatectomy. The primary reason for conversion was unfavorable findings in 67 patients (66%) and intraoperative adverse events in 35 patients (34%). By multivariable analysis, major resection, cirrhosis, prior liver surgery, and tumor proximity to major vessels were identified as risk factors for conversion (p < 0.05). Patients who required conversion had higher blood loss, transfusion requirements, operative time, and length of stay, (p < 0.05). They also had higher major complication rates (23% vs. 5.2%, p < 0.001) and 30-day mortality (8.8% vs. 1.3%, p < 0.001). When compared to those who required conversion due to unfavorable findings, patients who required conversion due to intraoperative adverse events had significantly higher major complication rates (43% vs. 14%, p = 0.012) and 30-day mortality (20% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion from MILR to open surgery is associated with increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. Conversion due to intraoperative adverse events is rare but associated with significantly higher complication and mortality rates, while conversion due to unfavorable findings is associated with similar outcomes as planned open resection. High-risk patients may benefit from early conversion in a controlled fashion if difficulties are encountered or anticipated.

Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Centrally Located Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background and Objectives: The feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma (cHCC 1 cm of the hilum, major hepatic veins, and inferior vena cava) is still controversial. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LLR for cHCC and compare the perioperative outcomes with those of open liver resection (OLR). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 110 patients who underwent LLR (n = 59) or open liver resection (OLR) (n = 51) for cHCC between January 2004 and September 2018. LLR group was divided into the following two subgroups according to the date of operation: Group 1 (n = 19) and Group 2 (n = 40), to account for the advancement in the laparoscopic techniques. Results: No mortality within 3 months was observed. There were no significant differences in operation time (285 vs. 280 min; p = 0.938) and postoperative complication rate (22.0% vs. 27.5%; p = 0.510) between both groups. However, intraoperative blood loss (500 vs. 700 mL; p < 0.001), transfusion rate (10.2% vs. 31.4%; p = 0.006), and hospital stay (6 vs. 10 days; p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the LLR group than in the OLR group. In the LLR group, Group 2, showed a shorter hospital stay than Group 1 (6 vs. 8 days; p = 0.006). There were improvements in the operation time (280 vs. 360 min; p = 0.036) and less intraoperative blood loss (455 vs. 500 mL; p = 0.075) in Group 2. Conclusions: We demonstrated that LLR can be safely performed in highly selected patients with cHCC.

Liver Resection for Primary Hepatic Angiosarcoma: Bicentric Analysis of a Challenging Entity

Primary hepatic angiosarcoma (PHA) is a rare malignant tumor of the liver, and data on patient outcome after surgical treatment are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative morbidity and overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent hepatectomy for PHA. This is a bicentric retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients who underwent liver resection in curative intent for PHA between 2012 and 2019 at the University Hospital of Muenster and the University Hospital of Bern. Nine patients (five female, four male) were included from both centers. Median age was 72 years (44–82). Most lesions (77.8%) were larger than 5 cm, and mean size of the biggest lesion was 9.4 ± 4.5 cm. Major hepatectomy was performed in four (44.4%), and radical resection (R0) was achieved in six (66.7%) patients. Postoperative complication rate was 88.8%, including 44.4% higher than 3a in the Clavien–Dindo classification. OS survival rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 44.4%, 22.2%, and 12.5%, respectively, and median OS was 5 months. OS was significantly better after radical resection (R0: 15 months vs. R1: 0 months, p = 0.04), whereas presentation with tumor rupture at diagnosis was associated with the worst OS (0 months vs. 15 months, p = 0.005). Disease recurrence occurred in three patients (33.3%) between three and seven months after surgery. Radical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment option for PHA. However, postoperative morbidity is high, and the overall prognosis remains poor. Multimodal therapy options and management strategies are urgently needed and could improve the prognosis of patients suffering from PHA in the future.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is a highly demanding procedure with great variability. Previously published randomized trials have proven oncological safety of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) as compared to open surgery. However, these were started after the learning curve (LC) was established. This leaves the question of whether the LC of LLR in the early laparoscopic era has affected the survival of patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM).

Methods

All consecutive LLRs performed by a single surgeon between 2000 and 2019 were retrospectively analysed. A risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) chart for conversion rate and the log regression analysis of the blood loss identified two phases in the LC. This was then applied to patients with CRLM, and the two subgroups were compared for recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS). The analysis was repeated with propensity score-matched (PSM) groups

Results

A total of 286 patients were included in the LC analysis, which identified two distinct phases, the early (EP; 68 patients) and the late (LP; 218 patients) phases. The LC was applied to 192 patients with colorectal liver metastasis (EPc, 45 patients; LPc, 147 patients). For patients with CRLM, R0 resection was achieved in 93 per cent: 100 per cent in the EPc group and 90 per cent in the LPc group (P = 0.026). Median OS and RFS were 60 and 16 months, respectively. The 5-year OS and RFS were 51 per cent and 32.7 per cent, respectively. OS (hazard ratio (h.r.) 0.78, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.51 to 1.2; P = 0.286) and RFS (h.r. 0.94, 95 per cent c.i. 0.64 to 1.37; P = 0.760) were not compromised by the learning curve. The results were replicated after PSM.

Conclusion

In our experience, the development of a laparoscopic liver resection programme can be achieved without adverse effects on the long-term survival of patients with CRLM.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy is safe and effective for the management of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases in a population-based analysis in Ontario, Canada. A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has been deemed safe, and, in the case of minor hepatectomy, the standard of care. Short-, long-term outcomes and costs of LH compared with open hepatectomy (OH) in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases have not been well described at the population level.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer undergoing hepatectomy were included in this population-based retrospective cohort study from 2006- to 2014. Postoperative complications (per Clavien-Dindo) and survival were analyzed using a linear mixed model and Cox-Proportional hazards model respectively. Costs of surgery and the 90-day postoperative period were considered in 2018 Canadian dollars and compared from the perspective of a third-party payer.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 56 months, 95% confidence interval (CI): 51 to 68), there were 2991 hepatectomies (OH: 2551 (85%) and LH: 440 (15%)). LH compared to OH was more common for patients >70 years-old (30% vs. 22%, p = 0.004) and for minor hepatectomy (52% vs. 32%, p < 0.001) respectively. By multivariable analyses, OH was associated with similar 90-day mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% CI: 0.56-1.97), and overall survival (Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.08, 95% CI: 0.90-1.29), but higher rates of major postoperative complications (OR 1.34, 95% CI: 1.03-1.76), higher cost (median difference $6,163, 95% CI: $3229 to $9096), and longer length of hospital stay (LOS) (mean difference 3.04 days, 95% CI: 2.7 to 3.91).

CONCLUSION

LH was associated with lower postoperative complications, shorter LOS, which translated into lower costs to the healthcare system, without differences in postoperative mortality and survival.

Long noncoding RNA MAFG-AS1 promotes proliferation, migration and invasion of hepatocellular carcinoma cells through downregulation of miR-6852

Long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) have been shown to participate in the development and progression of a number of different types of cancer, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A recent report has indicated that lncRNA MAFG-antisense 1 (AS1) promotes colorectal cancer. However, the role of MAFG-AS1 in other types of cancer remains unclear. The aim of the present study was to examine the effect of lncRNA MAFG-AS1 in HCC. Based on The Cancer Genome Atlas database and reverse transcription-quantitative PCR results, it was determined that lncRNA MAFG-AS1 expression was increased in HCC tissues and cell lines. Following knockdown of lncRNA MAFG-AS1, a Cell Counting Kit-8 assay and Transwell assay demonstrated that the proliferation, migration and invasion of HCC cell lines were significantly inhibited. It was additionally demonstrated that there was a negative regulatory association between lncRNA MAFG-AS1 and miR-6852. Inhibition of miR-6852 increased proliferation, migration and invasion of HCC cell lines. LncRNA MAFG-AS1 promoted HCC development by dampening miR-6852 function and may thus be a novel target for treating patients with HCC.

[Image-guided, minimally invasive surgery and other local therapeutic procedures for primary liver tumors]

BACKGROUND

The incidence of primary liver tumors is rising. Modern minimally invasive, image-guided procedures offer a potentially curative therapy option.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the multitude of image-guided minimally invasive procedures concerning their evidence-based effect on local tumor control and overall survival.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE focused on hepatocellular cancer, minimally invasive treatment, local ablative therapy, therapeutic stratification and comparative studies was performed.

RESULTS

The level of evidence varied greatly depending on the procedure used. The highest quality evidence including prospective randomized studies was found for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of hepatocellular cancer. The RFA is superior with respect to local tumor control and overall survival in comparison to other ablative procedures. Prospective randomized studies comparing surgery and RFA showed diverging and contradictory results. Microwave ablation and robotic stereotactic irradiation showed sufficient potential in retrospective studies in comparison to RFA and surgery in order to confirm the techniques in randomized studies. There is only anecdotal evidence concerning high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and irreversible electroporation. Percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), cryoablation and laser-induced thermal therapy (LITT) were inferior techniques to RFA in most studies.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive resection and local ablative therapies based on structured imaging and image reporting can improve the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular cancer even in patients that exceed the BCLC 0/A stage.

Laparoscopic hand-assisted liver resection for tumours in the left lateral section

Context:

The role of the laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) is debatable, and Level-1 data are lacking.

Aims:

The aim of the study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of this approach.

Settings and Design:

This was a retrospective study.

Subjects and Methods:

From 2007 to 2014, patients undergoing LLLS were identified from two institutions.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Continuous variables were compared between groups with Student's t-test or Mann–Whitney test, as appropriate by type of distribution. Categorical variables were compared with Chi-square or Fisher's exact test, depending on the number of observations.

Results:

Thirty-eight patients were included in the study. The mean age was 63.5 + 13 years (range, 31–89), and the mean number of tumours was 1.7 + 1.5. Eleven (29%) patients underwent LLS combined with an additional liver resection (combined resections group). The mean duration of the operation and the mean estimated blood loss were significantly decreased in the LLS group compared to the combined resection group (101 + 71 min vs. 208 + 98 min and 216 + 217 ml vs. 450 + 223 ml; P < 0.05 for both, respectively). The major complications rate was 8% and no mortality occurred.

Conclusions:

In a subset of carefully selected cases, LLLS may provide the benefits of laparoscopy. This does not appear to compromise perioperative morbidity rates. We believe that this approach may serve as a training platform for surgical trainees.

Outcomes following laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The role of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) remains uncertain in current liver surgery. This meta-analysis aimed to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of LMH versus open major hepatectomy (OMH).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database to identify all relevant publications. The statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3. Continuous variables were calculated by standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas dichotomous variables were calculated by odds ratio (OR) with 95%CI.

RESULTS

A total of 10 eligible studies with 1130 patients were identified, of which 455 (40.3%) patients in the LMH group and 675 (59.7%) patients in the OMH group. LMH was associated with less blood loss (SMD = -0.30, 95%CI: -0.43 to -0.18, p < .00001), less transfusion requirement (OR = 0.49, 95%CI: 0.29-0.82, p = .007), decreased postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.56, 95%CI: 0.42-0.76, p = .0001), and shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.46, 95%CI: -0.69 to -0.24, p < .0001) when compared with the OMH group. But the operative time was significantly longer in LMH group (SMD = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.79-1.86, p = .01). Both the two groups achieved similar surgical margin and R0 resection rate for malignant lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis demonstrated that LMH appeared to be feasible and safe in current liver surgery. LMH is associated with less blood loss, decreased postoperative morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and comparable oncological outcomes compared with OMH.

Transition from open to laparoscopic ALPPS for patients with very small FLR: the initial experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic ALPPS (Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein ligation for Staged hepatectomy) has previously been reported but has been the authors' default option since 2015 in patients with small future liver remnant.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients undergoing ALPPS at a single referral center was performed using a prospective database from July 2011 to June 2016. Feasibility was studied by assessing conversions. The 90-day mortality and complications were analyzed using a Dindo-Clavien score and the comprehensive complication index. Operative time, blood loss, volumetric growth, and hospital stay were examined. The CUSUM analysis was performed.

RESULTS

ALPPS was performed in 30 patients, 10 of whom underwent a laparoscopic approach. There was no mortality and no complication grade ≥3A observed in laparoscopic ALPPS. In open ALPPS, 10 of 20 patients experienced complications grade ≥3A (p = 0.006) and one patient died. Liver failure was not observed after laparoscopic ALPPS, but two patients in the open ALPPS group developed complications that precluded the second stage. The total hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic ALPPS group.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic ALPPS is feasible as the default procedure for patients with very small FLR, and it is not inferior to the open approach. Surgeons experienced with complex laparoscopy should be encouraged to use a laparoscopic approach to ALPPS.

Can laparoscopic liver resection provide a favorable option for patients with large or multiple intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas?

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for large or multiple intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (ICCs) remains equivocal. The main concerns are potential risks of inadequate resection margin, tumor rupture, uncontrollable bleeding, tumor seeding, and inadequate lymph node sampling. In this study, we aimed to determine the safety, feasibility, and oncological efficacy of LLR for large (≥5 cm) or multiple (≥2) ICCs.

METHODS

Among 50 patients receiving liver resection for ICC between May 2004 and January 2016, 12 patients who had undergone LLR for large or multiple ICCs (Group A, n = 12) were compared with 18 patients who had undergone LLR for small solitary ICCs (Group B, n = 18), as well were compared with 20 patients who had undergone open liver resection for large or multiple ICCs (Group C, n = 20). Perioperative and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Compared with Group B, Group A had fewer patients with T1 tumors (58.3 vs. 100%; P = 0.006) and a longer hospital stay (14 vs. 9 days; P = 0.039); operating time, blood loss, surgical margin, cases receiving lymph node dissection, conversion rates, and morbidity were comparable. There were no life-threatening complications and no mortality. No tumor rupture or dissemination occurred, nor did port-site recurrence follow surgery. After a median follow-up of 22 months, no difference was noted in 3-year overall survival (56.3 vs. 59.5%; P > 0.05) and recurrence-free survival (43.8 vs. 50%; P > 0.05) between the two groups. Similarly, perioperative and long-term outcomes were comparable between Group A and Group C.

CONCLUSION

LLR for large or multiple ICCs is technically safe, feasible, and oncologically effective in select patients. It provides a favorable option for patients seeking curative treatment. The minimally invasive nature will benefit these patients without compromising the oncological efficacy. Future larger-scale studies and well-designed randomized trials are warranted to evaluate this issue.

A comparison of perioperative outcomes in elderly patients with malignant liver tumors undergoing laparoscopic liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is the treatment option with the best chance for cure in patients with malignant liver tumors. However, there are concerns regarding postoperative recovery in elderly patients, which may lead to a preference of non-resectional therapies over hepatectomy in this patient population. Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is associated with a faster recovery compared to open hepatectomy, there are scant data on how elderly patients tolerate LLR. The aim of this study was to analyze the perioperative outcomes of LLR in elderly patients with hepatic malignancies, with a comparison to laparoscopic RFA (LRFA).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospective database for liver tumors identified a total of 82 patients older than 65 years who underwent laparoscopic treatment of their liver tumors in a single tertiary care center between 2000 and 2014. These patients were equally distributed into LLR and LRFA treatment arms.

RESULTS

Mean age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and tumor type (predominantly metastatic colorectal cancer) were similar in both groups. Patients in the LRFA group had more tumors (2.1 ± 1.8 vs. 1.2 ± 0.6, p < 0.01), whereas tumors were larger in the LLR group (3.8 ± 1.6 vs. 2.8 ± 1.1 cm, p < 0.01). Although the operative time (116 vs. 214 min, p < 0.01) and hospital stay (2.1 vs. 3.4 days, p = 0.010) were shorter for the LRFA versus LLR group, respectively, morbidity (4.8 vs. 7.3 %) and mortality (0 vs. 0 %) were similar. Local recurrence was significantly higher in the LRFA versus LLR group (29 vs. 2.4 %, respectively, p = 0.002). However, there was no statistical difference in disease-free and overall survival between two groups (28 vs. 30 and 51 vs. 54 months, p = 0.443 and 0.768, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that LLR was tolerated as well as LRFA in elderly patients with similar comorbidities. We suggest LLR to be considered as an option in selected elderly patients who are deemed poor candidates for open hepatectomy.