Comparison of minimally invasive and open colorectal resections for patients undergoing simultaneous R0 resection for liver metastases: a propensity score analysis

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.

Minimally invasive vs. open approach to the simultaneous treatment of colorectal tumors with synchronous liver metastasis: a single center, propensity-score matched analysis from Mayo clinic

BACKGROUND

Open combined resections of colorectal primary tumors and synchronous liver metastases have become common in selected cases. However, evidences favoring a minimally invasive (MIS) approach are still limited. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of MIS vs. open synchronous liver and colorectal resections.

METHODS

384 cases of synchronous colorectal and liver resections performed at one institution were identified during the study period. MIS vs open approach were compared after a propensity score matching; surgical outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

MIS cases featured longer operative time (399 vs 300 min, p < 0.001), fewer blood loss (200 vs 500 ml, p = 0.003), and shorter hospitalization (median LOS 4 vs 6 days, p = 0.001). No difference was observed between the two groups for use of Pringle maneuver (p = 0.083), intraoperative blood transfusion (p = 0.061), achievement of negative colorectal (p = 0.176) and liver margins (p = 1.000), postoperative complications (p = 1.000) and significant (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a) complications (p = 0.817), delay of adjuvant therapy due to complications (p = 0.555), 30- and 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Synchronous colorectal and liver metastases resections via a minimally-invasive approach in high-volume centers with appropriate expertise result in significantly lower blood loss and length of stay despite longer operative time in comparison to open, with no oncological inferiority.

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.

Laparoscopic versus open resection of primary colorectal cancers and synchronous liver metastasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Combined resection of primary colorectal cancer and associated liver metastases is increasingly common. This study compares peri-operative and oncological outcomes according to surgical approach.

METHODS

The study was registered with PROSPERO. A systematic search was performed for all comparative studies describing outcomes in patients that underwent laparoscopic versus open simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumours and liver metastases. Data was extracted and analysed using a random effects model via Rev Man 5.3 RESULTS: Twenty studies were included with a total of 2168 patients. A laparoscopic approach was performed in 620 patients and an open approach in 872. There was no difference in the groups for BMI (mean difference: 0.04, 95% CI: 0.63-0.70, p = 0.91), number of difficult liver segments (mean difference: 0.64, 95% CI:0.33-1.23, p = 0.18) or major liver resections (mean difference: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.69-1.35, p = 0.83). There were fewer liver lesions per operation in the laparoscopic group (mean difference 0.46, 95% CI: 0.13-0.79, p = 0.007). Laparoscopic surgery was associated with shorter length of stay (p < 0.00001) and less overall postoperative complications (p = 0.0002). There were similar R0 resection rates (p = 0.15) but less disease recurrence in the laparoscopic group (mean difference: 0.57, 95% CI:0.44-0.75, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Synchronous laparoscopic resection of primary colorectal cancers and liver metastases is a feasible approach in selected patients and does not demonstrate inferior peri-operative or oncological outcomes.

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.

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.

The Value of Laparoscopic Simultaneous Colorectal and Hepatic Resection for Synchronous Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis: A Propensity Score Matching Study

Purpose

The aim of this study is to investigate the value of total laparoscopic simultaneous colorectal and hepatic resection in patients with synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases (sCRLMs).

Methods

sCRLM patients who underwent simultaneous resection from December 2014 to December 2018 in Shanghai Cancer Center, Fudan University were recruited and analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into laparoscopic, open, and hybrid surgery groups. The intraoperative information, postoperative short-term outcome, and long-term survival were compared among the three groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance baselines.

Results

A total of 281 patients were recruited. After PSM, 34 patients were selected from both the laparoscopic and the open surgery group. Forty-seven patients were also selected from both the laparoscopic and the hybrid surgery group. The clinicopathologic baselines between the laparoscopic surgery group and the other two groups were well matched. All the operation-related indicators between laparoscopic surgery and hybrid surgery were similar. However, compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery showed significantly longer operation time (229.09 ± 10.94 min vs. 192.24 ± 9.49 min, p = 0.013) and less intraoperative blood loss [100.00 (50.00–300.00) ml vs. 200.00 (150.00–400.00) ml, p = 0.021]. For postoperative morbidity, there was no significant difference between the laparoscopic surgery group and the hybrid or the open surgery group (23.40% vs. 31.91% and 17.65% vs. 26.47%, p = 0.356 and p = 0.380). Long-term survival analysis showed that there were no significant differences in all 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival, liver recurrence-free survival (RFS), and whole RFS between laparoscopic surgery and hybrid surgery (p = 0.334, p = 0.286, and p = 0.558) or open surgery (p = 0.230, p = 0.348, and p = 0.450).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic simultaneous resection for sCRLM shows slight advantages in surgical safety and short-term outcome, and does not compromise long-term survival.

Incidence and predictors of textbook outcome after simultaneous liver and rectal surgeries for Stage IV rectal cancer

AIM

Textbook outcome (TO) is a new surgical quality measure that combines structure, process and surgical outcomes into a single element. Our study aimed to determine the incidence of TO after simultaneous rectal and liver surgery and to use the achievement of TO as a tool to identify the best candidates for these complex procedures.

METHODS

In total, 256 patients who underwent simultaneous liver and rectal surgery for Stage IV rectal cancer between January 2004 and August 2019 at five tertiary centres were enrolled. TO was defined as a lack of complication, prolonged length of stay, readmission and death.

RESULTS

Mortality rate at 90 days and major morbidity rate were 2.3% and 15.6%, respectively. An overall TO was achieved in 59% of the patients, which is associated with significantly improved overall (median TO 86.3 months vs. no TO 37.4 months) and disease-free (median TO 70.6 months vs. no TO 24.9 months) survival. On multivariate analysis the presence of multi-comorbidities (OR 3.073) was associated with a reduced likelihood of achieving TO. Left lateral sectionectomy/limited resection was a protective factor (OR 0.416).

CONCLUSION

TO was achieved in six of 10 patients undergoing simultaneous resections for rectal cancer and liver metastases. Achieving a TO is strongly associated with improved long-term survival. The best candidates for these procedures were patients without multiple comorbidities and those treated with left lateral sectionectomy/limited resection.

The impact of synchronous liver resection on the risk of anastomotic leakage following elective colorectal resection. A propensity score match analysis on behalf of the iCral study group

INTRODUCTION

how best to manage patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastasis is still controversial, with specific concerns of increased risk of postoperative complications following combined resection. We aimed at analyzing the influence of combined liver resection on the risk of anastomotic leak (AL) following colorectal resection.

METHODS

we reviewed the iCral prospectively maintained database to compare the relative risk of AL of patients undergoing colorectal resection for cancer to that of patients receiving simultaneous liver and colorectal resection for cancer with isolated hepatic metastases. The incidence of AL was the primary outcome of the analysis. Perioperative details and postoperative complications were also appraised.

RESULTS

out of a total of 996 patients who underwent colorectal resection for cancer, 206 receiving isolated colorectal resection were compared with a matched group of 53 patients undergoing simultaneous liver and colorectal resection. Combined surgery had greater operative time and resulted in longer postoperative hospitalization compared to colorectal resection alone. The proportion of overall morbidity following combined resection was significantly higher than after isolated colorectal resection (56.6% vs. 37.9%, p = 0.021). Overall, the two groups of patients did not differ neither on the rate of major postoperative complications, nor in terms of AL (9.4% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.381). At specific multivariate analysis, the duration of surgery was the only risk factor independently associated with the likelihood of AL.

CONCLUSIONS

combining hepatic with colorectal resection for the treatment of synchronous liver metastasis from colorectal cancer does not increase significantly the incidence of AL.

Open Resection Compared to Mini-Invasive in Colorectal Cancer and Liver Metastases: A Meta-Analysis

Background: We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery and open surgery in the simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases. Methods: A systematic literature search up to April 2021 was done and 13 studies included 1,181 subjects with colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases at the start of the study; 425 of them were using minimally invasive surgery and 756 were open surgery. They were reporting relationships between the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery and open surgery in the simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) or the mean difference (MD) with 95% CIs to assess the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery and open surgery in the simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases using the dichotomous or continuous method with a random or fixed-effect model. Results: Minimally invasive surgery in subjects with colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases was significantly related to longer operation time (MD, 35.61; 95% CI, 7.36-63.87, p = 0.01), less blood loss (MD, -151.62; 95% CI, -228.84 to -74.40, p < 0.001), less blood transfusion needs (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42-0.89, p = 0.01), shorter length of hospital stay (MD, -3.26; 95% CI, -3.67 to -2.86, p < 0.001), lower overall complications (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45-0.79, p < 0.001), higher overall survival (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.21-2.29, p = 0.002), and higher disease-free survival (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.13-1.97, p = 0.005) compared to open surgery. Conclusions: Minimally invasive surgery in subjects with colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases may have less blood loss, less blood transfusion needs, shorter length of hospital stay, lower overall complications, higher overall survival, and higher disease-free survival with longer operation time compared with the open surgery. Furthers studies are required to validate these findings.

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

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

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 procedure is associated with lower morbidity for simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases: an updated meta-analysis

Background

It has been demonstrated that simultaneous resection of both primary colorectal lesion and metastatic hepatic lesion is a safe approach with low mortality and postoperative complication rates. However, there are some controversies over which kind of surgical approach is better. The aim of study was to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic surgeries and open surgeries for simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastasis (SCRLM).

Methods

A systemic search of online database including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase was performed until June 5, 2019. Intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and long-term outcomes were synthesized by using STATA, version 15.0. Cumulative and single-arm meta-analyses were also conducted.

Results

It contained twelve studies with 616 patients (273 vs 343, laparoscopic surgery group and open surgery group, respectively) and manifested latest surgical results for the treatment of CRC and SCRLM. Among patients who underwent laparoscopic surgeries, they had lower rates of postoperative complications (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.96, P = 0.028), less intraoperative blood loss (weight mean difference (WMD) = − 113.31, 95% CI: − 189.03 to − 37.59, P = 0.003), less time in the hospital and recovering after surgeries (WMD = − 2.70, 95% CI: − 3.99 to − 1.40, P = 0.000; WMD = − 3.20, 95% CI: − 5.06 to − 1.34, P = 0.001), but more operating time (WMD = 36.57, 95% CI: 7.80 to 65.35, P = 0.013). Additionally, there were no statistical significance between two kinds of surgical approaches in disease-free survival and overall survival. Moreover, cumulative meta-analysis indicated statistical difference in favor of laparoscopic surgery in terms of morbidity was firstly detected in the 12th study in 2018 (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.96, P = 0.028) as the 95% CI narrowed.

Conclusion

Compared with open surgeries, laparoscopic surgeries are safer (postoperative complications and intraoperative blood loss) and more effective (length of hospital stay and postoperative stay), and it can be considered as the first option for management of SCRLM in high-volume laparoscopic centers.

Trial registration

CRD42020151176

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.

Decision making process in simultaneous laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases. Review of literature

Purpose:

The benefits of laparoscopic approaches to treat colorectal cancer (CRC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) separately are well established. However, there is no consensus about the optimal timing to approach the primary tumor and CRLM, whether simultaneously or staged. The objective of this review with practical reports is to discuss technical aspects required for patient selection to perform simultaneous laparoscopic approaches for CRC and CRLM.

Methods:

Literature review of oncological factors associated with patient selection for surgical treatment of CRLM and the use of laparoscopy in those cases, and report of technical aspects for simultaneous CRC and CRLM approaches.

Results:

Simultaneous laparoscopic resection has been successful in many series of selected patients, although it seems to be safer to perform minor and major liver resection with non-extended colorectal resections, and to avoid two high-risk procedures at the same time.

Conclusions:

Simultaneous CRC and CRLM resections seem to be safe when patients are carefully selected, also considering the risk of recurrence concerning oncologic outcomes. The pre-planning of simultaneous resection is mandatory to plan trocar positioning, procedure sequencing, and patient position.

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.

Mini-invasive vs open resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The safety and feasibility of the simultaneous resection of primary colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM) have been demonstrated in some studies. Combined resection is expected to be the optimal strategy for patients with CRC and SCRLM. However, traditional laparotomy is traumatic, and the treatment outcome of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is still obscure.

AIM

To compare the treatment outcomes of MIS and open surgery (OS) for the simultaneous resection of CRC and SCRLM.

METHODS

A systematic search through December 22, 2018 was conducted in electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library). All studies comparing the clinical outcomes of MIS and OS for patients with CRC and SCRLM were included by eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Software. The quality of the pooled study was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The publication bias was evaluated by a funnel plot and the Begg’s and Egger’s tests. Fixed- and random-effects models were applied according to heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Ten retrospective cohort studies involving 502 patients (216 patients in the MIS group and 286 patients in the OS group) were included in this study. MIS was associated with less intraoperative blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -130.09, 95% confidence interval (CI): -210.95 to -49.23, P = 0.002] and blood transfusion [odds ratio (OR) = 0.53, 95%CI: 0.29 to 0.95, P = 0.03], faster recovery of intestinal function (WMD = -0.88 d, 95%CI: -1.58 to -0.19, P = 0.01) and diet (WMD = -1.54 d, 95%CI: -2.30 to -0.78, P < 0.0001), shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = -4.06 d, 95%CI: -5.95 to -2.18, P < 0.0001), and lower rates of surgical complications (OR = 0.60, 95%CI: 0.37 to 0.99, P = 0.04). However, the operation time, rates and severity of overall complications, and rates of general complications showed no significant differences between the MIS and OS groups. Moreover, the overall survival and disease-free survival after MIS were equivalent to those after OS.

CONCLUSION

Considering the studies included in this meta-analysis, MIS is a safe and effective alternative technique for the simultaneous resection of CRC and SCRLM. Compared with OS, MIS has less intraoperative blood loss and blood transfusion and quicker postoperative recovery. Furthermore, the two groups show equivalent long-term outcomes.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the short- and long-term outcomes for laparoscopic and open liver resections for liver metastases from colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic approach to liver resection has experienced exponential growth in recent years. However, evidence-based guidelines are needed for its safe future progression. The main aim of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resections for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

METHODS

To identify all the comparative manuscripts between laparoscopic and open liver resections for CRLM, all published English language studies with more than ten cases were screened. In addition to the primary meta-analysis, 3 specific subgroup analyses were performed on patients undergoing minor-only, major-only and synchronous resections. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology and Newcastle-Ottawa Score.

RESULTS

From the initial 194 manuscripts identified, 21 were meta-analysed, including results from the first randomized trial comparing open and laparoscopic resections of CRLM. Five of these were specific to patients undergoing a synchronous resection (399 cases), while six focused on minor (3 series including 226 cases) and major (3 series including 135 cases) resections, respectively. Thirteen manuscripts compared 2543 cases but could not be assigned to any of the above sub-analyses, so were analysed independently. The majority of short-term outcomes were favourable to the laparoscopic approach with equivalent rates of negative resection margins. No differences were observed between the approaches in overall or disease-free survival at 1, 3 or 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resection for CRLM offers improved short-term outcomes with comparable long-term outcomes when compared to open approach.

Synchronous abdominal tumors: is combined laparoscopic surgery in a single approach a safe option?

Background and Purpose:

Recent advances in cancer treatment have resulted in bet- ter prognosis with impact on patient's survival, allowing an increase in incidence of a second primary neoplasm. The development of minimally invasive surgery has provided similar outcomes in comparison to open surgery with potentially less mor- bidity. Consequently, this technique has been used as a safe option to simultaneously treat synchronous abdominal malignancies during a single operating room visit. The objective of this study is to describe the experience of two tertiary cancer hospitals in Brazil, in the minimally invasive treatment of synchronous abdominal neoplasms and to evaluate its feasibility and peri-operative results.

Materials and Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed the data from patients who were submitted to combined laparoscopic procedures performed in two tertiary hospitals in Brazil from May 2009 to February 2015.

Results:

A total of 12 patients (9 males and 3 females) with a mean age of 58.83 years (range: 33 to 76 years) underwent combined laparoscopic surgeries for the treatment of at least one urological disease. The total average duration of surgery was 339.8 minutes (range: 210 to 480 min). The average amount of intraoperative bleeding was 276.6mL (range: 70 to 550mL) and length of hospitalization was 5.08 days (range: 3 to 10 days). Two patients suffered minor complications regarding Clavien system during the immediate postoperative period.

Conclusions:

Combined laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of synchronous tumors is feasible, viable and safe. In our study, there was a low risk of postoperative morbidity.

Long term outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic versus open resection for colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Because of the advancements in the surgical techniques of liver resection and improvements in anesthesia and postoperative critical care, the simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis either by the laparoscopic procedure or by the open resection method has been considered as a safe and acceptable option. However, there is limited information on the comparison of postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery. This study investigated the clinical results and postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis in comparison with those of open surgery.

METHODS

Patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastasis who underwent simultaneous resection at Shuang Ho Hospital from 2009 to 2017 were identified. The patient demographics, perioperative morbidity, and survival rates were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients underwent simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis. Laparoscopic procedure was performed for 16 patients, and the remaining 22 patients underwent open surgery. No significant differences were observed in the patient characteristics between the two groups. There was no perioperative mortality in both groups. The 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 56% and 35% in the laparoscopic group and 70% and 15% in the open surgery group, respectively. The 1- and 3-year overall survival rates were 100% and 84% in the laparoscopic group and 73% and 48% in the open surgery group, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, laparoscopic surgery for simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis seems to be safe and had a similar outcome to that of open surgery.

Safety and efficacy of synchronous robotic surgery for colorectal cancer with liver metastases

Timing of resection and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) with liver metastases varies based on patient characteristics and center protocols. Concerns of increased morbidity and mortality (M&M) related to anesthetic time and blood loss have limited widespread adaptation of synchronous colorectal and liver resections. Furthermore, technical challenges have made minimally invasive synchronous resections less common. We present our series of synchronous robotic surgery for CRC with liver metastases. Retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients with stage IV CRC with liver metastases treated at a tertiary center from February 2013 to June 2014. Patients who underwent synchronous robotic surgery for CRC with liver metastasis(es) were included and selected by a multidisciplinary cancer committee. Data included patient demographics, disease stage, OR time, EBL, and complications. All resections were performed robotically by the same well-experienced surgeons. A radiologist was present for intraoperative ultrasound. Liver treatment was performed first in consideration of intraoperative bleeding risk. Sixty-six patients with Stage IV CRC were seen at the tertiary center during the study period. Six patients met inclusion criteria (2 male, 4 female). Mean age was 59.3 years and mean BMI was 23.46. Mean of 2.25 liver segments were resected and mean of 1.75 liver segments were ablated. Four patients underwent metastatectomy; three with concurrent microwave ablation. One patient had ablation without resection and another had no identifiable lesion on ultrasound. The colonic resections included 3 low anterior resections, 2 abdominal perineal resections (APR), and 1 right hemicolectomy. Mean operative time was 401 min (349-506 min) with mean EBL of 316 mL (150-1000 mL). No conversions to an open approach occurred. Median length of stay (LOS) was 4.5 days (3-10 days). Complications included delayed wound healing after an APR and a delayed rectal anastomotic failure after ileostomy reversal. There was no 30-day mortality. At a mean follow-up of 19 months, one death occurred at 26 months and the remaining patients had documented metastatic disease. Synchronous resection for metastatic CRC carries risks. We report our series of synchronous robotic surgery for CRC with liver metastases. The robotic approach contributed to low blood loss, appropriate LOS, and no 30-day mortality. Morbidity experienced was consistent with the procedures and not related to the robotic technique. This series supports the potential benefits of synchronous resection from a technical standpoint. Further data are required to determine treatment and survival benefits. Limitations include small number and retrospective review of data.

Minimally Invasive versus Open Simultaneous Resections of Colorectal Cancer and Synchronous Liver Metastases: A Meta-Analysis

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of simultaneous resections between the minimally invasive approach (MIA) and the open approach (OA) for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM). A systematic search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE and Ovid databases (until May 5, 2016). Studies comparing the perioperative results and long-term outcomes for patients undergoing simultaneous CRC and SCRLM resections between the two approaches were evaluated. Six studies were identified, which included 164 minimally invasive and 213 open simultaneous resections of CRC and SCRLM. MIA was associated with lesser surgical blood loss (mean difference = -155.85 mL; 95% confidence interval: -305.64 to -6.06, P = 0.04) and shorter length of postoperative stay (mean difference = -3.16 days; 95% confidence interval: -4.00 to -2.31, P < 0.00001.). The other perioperative results, including operating time, operative blood transfusion, intestinal function recovery time, and postoperative complications, did not differ significantly. No significant difference in the disease-free survival and overall survival rates between the two approaches was observed. In conclusion, compared with the OA, the MIA for simultaneous CRC and SCRLM resections is safe and effective for the treatment of SCRLM with lesser surgical blood loss and shorter length of postoperative stay. The MIA may be an alternative to the OA for simultaneous CRC and SCRLM resections for appropriately selected patients with resectable SCRLM.

Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS): surgical techniques and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Right posterior sectionectomy is one of the most technically challenging laparoscopic liver resections. Currently, there is limited published data regarding the technique and results required to better understand its safety and feasibility.

AIM

To report our experience, results and techniques, highlighting a variety of tips and tricks to facilitate this resection. A video is attached for technical demonstration.

METHODS

Retrospective review of prospectively maintained databases from June 2006 to June 2016. Three different techniques were used: resection following hilar inflow control, inflow control at Rouviere's sulcus and resection with intra parenchymal control.

RESULTS

29 LRPS were performed over a 10-year period. Median operative time was 240 min (150-480). Pringle's manoeuvre was performed in 19 (65.5%) with a median total duration of 35 (20-75) min. Median perioperative blood loss was 600 (100-2500) ml. Additional liver resections were performed in 16 (55.1%). There were two(6.9%) laparoscopic to open conversions. Median postoperative hospital stay was 5 (2-30) days. The median size of the tumour resected was 25 (10-54) mm with median number of resected lesions were 2 (1-4), median free resection margin was 9.5 (1-45) mm, margins were infiltrated (R1) in two (6.7%) cases. There was one death within 30-days (3.4%).

CONCLUSION

LRPS is feasible, efficient and safe. However, it is a technically challenging procedure and requires advance skills in liver and laparoscopic surgery. Surgeons should be familiar with a variety of approaches as each offers different advantages depending on the location and nature of the lesion, surgical preference and intraoperative findings.

Simultaneous Pure Laparoscopic Resection of Primary Colorectal Cancer and Synchronous Liver Metastases: A Single Institution Experience with Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background

The aim of the study was to compare the outcome of pure laparoscopic and open simultaneous resection of both the primary colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM).

Patients and methods

From 2000 to 2016 all patients treated by simultaneous resection were assessed for entry in this single center, clinically nonrandomized trial. A propensity score matching was used to compare the laparoscopic group (LAP) to open surgery group (OPEN). Primary endpoints were perioperative and oncologic outcomes. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

Results

Of the 82 patients identified who underwent simultaneous liver resection for SCLM, 10 patients underwent LAP. All these consecutive patients from LAP were matched to 10 comparable OPEN. LAP reduced the length of hospital stay (P = 0.044) and solid food oral intake was faster (P = 0.006) in this group. No patient undergoing the laparoscopic procedure experienced conversion to the open technique. No difference was observed in operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, narcotics requirement, clinical risk score, resection margin, R0 resections rate, morbidity, mortality and incisional hernias rate. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of the 3-year OS rate (90 vs. 75%; P = 0.842) and DFS rate (60 vs. 57%; P = 0.724).

Conclusions

LAP reduced the length of hospital stay and offers faster solid food oral intake. Comparable oncologic and survival outcomes can be achieved. LAP is beneficial for well selected patients in high volume centers with appropriate expertise.

Short-term outcomes of open liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection: Secondary analysis of data from a multicenter prospective study (CSGO-HBP-004)

The aim of the present study was to compare short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection (LLR and OLR, respectively), and we first analyzed a preoperatively enrolled and prospectively collected database. We carried out a secondary analysis using a preoperative enrolled database that included the details of 786 patients who had been enrolled in a previously carried out randomized controlled trial to assess short-term outcomes, including morbidities. Statistical analyses included logistic regression, propensity score matching (PSM) with replacement, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses. Among 780 liver resections, OLR was carried out in 543 patients and LLR was carried out in 237 patients. LLR was selected in patients with a worse liver function and was related to a smaller resected liver weight and/or partial resection. Logistic regression, PSM, and IPTW analyses revealed that LLR was associated with less blood loss and a lower incidence of morbidities, but a longer operating time. LLR was found to be a preferred factor in biliary leakage by IPTW only. LLR was a preferred factor for blood loss, morbidities and hospital stay, but was associated with a longer operating time. UMIN-CTR, UMIN000003324.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The effects of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) on oncological outcomes for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CCLM) remain inconclusive. Major databases were searched from January 1992 to October 2016. Effects of LLR vs OLR were determined. The primary endpoints were oncological outcomes. In total, 32 eligible non-randomized studies with 4697 patients (LLR: 1809, OLR: 2888) were analyzed. There were higher rates of clear surgical margins (OR: 1.64, 95%CI: 1.32 to 2.05, p < 0.00001) in the LLR group, without significant differences in disease recurrence, 3- or 5-year overall survival(OS) and disease free survival(DFS) between the two approaches. LLR was associated with less intraoperative blood loss (WMD: −147.46 [−195.78 to −99.15] mL, P < 0.00001) and fewer blood transfusions (OR: 0.41 [0.30–0.58], P < 0.00001), but with longer operation time (WMD:14.44 [1.01 to 27.88] min, P < 0.00001) compared to OLR. Less overall morbidity (OR: 0.64 [0.55 to 0.75], p < 0.00001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD: −2.36 [−3.06 to −1.66] d, p < 0.00001) were observed for patients undergoing LLR, while there was no statistical difference in mortality. LLR appears to be a safe and feasible alternative to OLR in the treatment of CCLM in selected patients.

Simultaneous resection for colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases is a safe procedure: Outcomes at a single center in Turkey

The optimal surgical strategy for treating colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases is subject to debate. The current study sought to evaluate the outcomes of simultaneous colorectal cancer and liver metastases resection in a single center. Prospectively collected data on all patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases who underwent simultaneous resection with curative intent were analyzed retrospectively. Patient outcomes were compared depending on the primary tumor location and type of liver resection (major or minor). Between January 2005 and August 2016, 108 patients underwent simultaneous resection of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases. The tumor was localized to the right side of the colon in 24 patients (22%), to the left side in 40 (37%), and to the rectum in 44 (41%). Perioperative mortality occurred in 3 patients (3%). Postoperative complications were noted in 32 patients (30%), and most of these complications (75%) were grade 1 to 3 according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Neither perioperative mortality nor the rate of postoperative complications after simultaneous resection differed among patients with cancer of the right side of the colon, those with cancer of the left side of the colon, and those with rectal cancer (4%, 2.5%, and 2%, respectively, p = 0.89) and (17%, 33%, and 34%, respectively; p = 0.29)]. The 5-year overall survival of the entire sample was 54% and the 3-year overall survival was 67 %. In conclusion, simultaneous resection for primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases is a safe procedure and can be performed without excess morbidity in carefully selected patients regardless of the location of the primary tumor and type of hepatectomy.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for colorectal cancer liver metastases: comparative study with propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to compare the results of laparoscopic hepatectomy with those of open hepatectomy for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CCLM) using a propensity score matching (PSM) in two university hospital settings.

METHODS

A patient in the laparoscopic approach (LA) surgery group was randomly matched with another patient in the open approach (OA) group using a 1:1 allocated ratio with the nearest estimated propensity score. No patients of the LA group were excluded for the matching. Matching criteria included age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American society anesthesiologists score, potential co-morbidities, hepatopathies, synchronous or metachronous lesions, size and number of CCLM, preoperative chemotherapy, minor or major liver resections. Intraoperative, postoperative data, and survival were compared in both groups.

RESULTS

From January 2012 to January 2015, a total of 242 hepatectomies were consecutively performed, of which 119 for CCLM, namely 101 in the OA group (84.9%) and 18 in the LA group (15.1%). The conversion rate was 5.6% (n=1). The mortality rate was 1% in the OA group and 0% in the LA group. Prior to PSM, there was a statistically significant difference favorable to the LA group regarding operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay and the rate of medical complications. After PSM, there was no difference regarding operative time or length of hospital stay. However, there was a trend towards less blood loss (P=0.066) and fewer medical complications (44.4% vs.16.7%, P=0.07). The R0 resection rate was 94.4% (n=17) in the two groups. In addition, there was no difference regarding overall survival (P=0.358) and recurrence-free survival [HR =0.99 (0.1-12.7); P=0.99].

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resections for CCLM seem to yield short- and long-term results, which are similar to open hepatectomies, and could well be considered an alternative to open surgery and become the gold standard in carefully selected patients.

Simultaneous Minimally Invasive Treatment of Colorectal Neoplasm with Synchronous Liver Metastasis

Purpose. To analyse perioperative and oncological outcomes of minimally invasive simultaneous resection of primary colorectal neoplasm with synchronous liver metastases. Methods. A Medline revision of the current published literature on laparoscopic and robotic-assisted combined colectomy with hepatectomy for synchronous liver metastatic colorectal neoplasm was performed until February 2015. The specific search terms were "liver metastases", "hepatic metastases", "colorectal", "colon", "rectal", "minimally invasive", "laparoscopy", "robotic-assisted", "robotic colorectal and liver resection", "synchronous", and "simultaneous". Results. 20 clinical reports including 150 patients who underwent minimally invasive one-stage procedure were retrospectively analysed. No randomized trials were found. The approach was laparoscopic in 139 patients (92.7%) and robotic in 11 cases (7.3%). The rectum was the most resected site of primary neoplasm (52.7%) and combined liver procedure was in 89% of cases a minor liver resection. One patient (0.7%) required conversion to open surgery. The overall morbidity and mortality rate were 18% and 1.3%, respectively. The most common complication was colorectal anastomotic leakage. Data concerning oncologic outcomes were too heterogeneous in order to gather definitive results. Conclusion. Although no prospective randomized trials are available, one-stage minimally invasive approach seems to show advantages over conventional surgery in terms of postoperative short-term course. On the contrary, more studies are required to define the oncologic values of the minimally invasive combined treatment.

Laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastases: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Preliminary series have shown the feasibility of combined laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM). The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes for matched patients undergoing combined resections.

METHODS

An international multicenter database of 142 patients that underwent combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM between 1997 and 2013 was compared to a database of 241 patients treated by open during the same period. Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes was performed after propensity score adjustment.

RESULTS

After matching, 89 patients were compared in each group including mostly ASA I-II patients, presenting with mean number of 1.5 CRLM, with a mean diameter of 30 mm, and resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy. A rectal resection was required in 46 and 43 % of laparoscopic and open procedures, respectively (p = 0.65). There was no difference in global operative time, blood loss and transfusion rates between the two groups. A conversion was required in 7 % of the laparoscopic procedures. Morbidity rates were similar in the two groups (p = 1.0). The 3-year overall survival in the laparoscopy and open groups were 78 and 65 %, respectively (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without severe comorbidities presenting with one, small (≤3 cm), CRLM resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy, combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM allowed similar short- and long-term outcomes compared with the open approach.

Laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastases: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Preliminary series have shown the feasibility of combined laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM). The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes for matched patients undergoing combined resections.

METHODS

An international multicenter database of 142 patients that underwent combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM between 1997 and 2013 was compared to a database of 241 patients treated by open during the same period. Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes was performed after propensity score adjustment.

RESULTS

After matching, 89 patients were compared in each group including mostly ASA I-II patients, presenting with mean number of 1.5 CRLM, with a mean diameter of 30 mm, and resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy. A rectal resection was required in 46 and 43 % of laparoscopic and open procedures, respectively (p = 0.65). There was no difference in global operative time, blood loss and transfusion rates between the two groups. A conversion was required in 7 % of the laparoscopic procedures. Morbidity rates were similar in the two groups (p = 1.0). The 3-year overall survival in the laparoscopy and open groups were 78 and 65 %, respectively (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without severe comorbidities presenting with one, small (≤3 cm), CRLM resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy, combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM allowed similar short- and long-term outcomes compared with the open approach.

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

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to clarify the surgical outcome and long-term prognosis of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) compared with conventional open liver resection (OLR) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

METHODS

A one-to-two propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was applied. Covariates (P < 0.2) used for PSM estimation included preoperative levels of CEA and CA19-9; primary tumor differentiation; primary pathological lymph node metastasis; number, size, location, and distribution of CRLM; existence of extrahepatic metastasis; extent of hepatic resection; total bilirubin and prothrombin activity levels; and preoperative chemotherapy. Perioperative data and long-term survival were compared.

RESULTS

From 2005 to 2010, 1,331 patients with hepatic resection for CRLM were enrolled. By PSM, 171 LLR and 342 OLR patients showed similar preoperative clinical characteristics. Median estimated blood loss (163 g vs 415 g, P < 0.001) and median postoperative hospital stay (12 days vs 14 days; P < 0.001) were significantly reduced in the LLR group. Morbidity and mortality were similar. Five-year rates of recurrence-free, overall, and disease-specific survival did not differ significantly. The R0 resection rate was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected CRLM patients, LLR is strongly associated with lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay and has equivalent long-term survival comparable with OLR.