Laparoscopic liver resection of benign liver tumors

Current Status of Laparoscopic Liver Resection

The evolution of laparoscopic liver surgery, originating in the 1990s, has been marked by significant advancements and milestones, overcoming initial technical hurdles and gaining widespread acceptance within the surgical community as a precise and safe alternative to open procedures. Along this journey, numerous challenges emerged, leading to the accumulation of evidence and the development of guidelines aimed at assisting surgeons in determining the safety, suitability, and complexity of laparoscopic liver resection. This chapter provides a thorough examination of key aspects of laparoscopic liver resection, including difficulty scoring systems, criteria for patient selection, technical considerations, outcomes across different types of liver lesions, and the innovative solutions developed to address challenges, thus offering a comprehensive overview of laparoscopic liver resection, and highlighting its evolving significance in modern hepatobiliary surgery.

Impact of COVID-19 lockdowns on postoperative morbidity after hepatectomy: A propensity-score matching study on a national French database

BACKGROUND

The impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on managing liver malignancies worldwide is unknown. This study aimed to determine the impact of lockdowns on patient clinical pathways and postoperative morbi-mortality.

METHODS

This study evaluated all adults' hospital stays for liver tumors between 2019 and 2021 from the national French discharge database. The primary outcome was the clinical pathway, especially surgical care and postoperative outcomes, between patients admitted during COVID-19 lockdown periods (lockdown group) and during the same periods of 2019 and 2021 (control groups).

RESULTS

The overall population included 58,508 patients: 18,907 patients in the lockdown group, 20,045 in the 2019 control group, and 19,556 in the 2021 control group. Surgical activity decreased by 11.6% during lockdowns, with 1,514 (8.0%) of patients in the lockdown group treated by surgery, 1,514 (8.6%) in the 2019 control group (P < .001), and 1,466 (7.4%) in the 2021 control group. Chemotherapy was considered more during the lockdowns (P < .001). More patients were operated in small-volume centers during the lockdowns (34% vs 32% vs 32%, P = .034), and fewer were hospitalized in highly populated regions (P < .001). Postoperative morbidity (47% vs 47% vs 47%, P = .90) and mortality (3.3% vs 3.6% vs 3.1%, P = .80) were comparable in the 3 periods, with no influence of lockdowns on morbidity (risk ratio = 0.94, 95% confidence interval = 0.81-1.09, P = .40) or mortality (odds ratio = 1.12, 95% confidence interval = 0.72-1.74, P = .6). Postoperative pulmonary (17% vs 13%, P = .024) and septic complications (20% vs 15%, P = .022) were significantly higher during the first lockdown compared to the second.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a French overview of liver malignancy management during the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, surgical activity decreased by 11.6% in high-volume centers, with no impact on postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Benign liver lesions 2022: Guideline for clinical practice of Associazione Italiana Studio del Fegato (AISF), Società Italiana di Radiologia Medica e Interventistica (SIRM), Società Italiana di Chirurgia (SIC), Società Italiana di Ultrasonologia in Medicina e Biologia (SIUMB), Associazione Italiana di Chirurgia Epatobilio-Pancreatica (AICEP), Società Italiana Trapianti d'Organo (SITO), Società Italiana di Anatomia Patologica e Citologia Diagnostica (SIAPEC-IAP) - Part II - Solid lesions

Benign liver lesions are increasingly diagnosed in daily clinical practice due to the growing use of imaging techniques for the study of the abdomen in patients who have non-specific symptoms and do not have an increased risk of hepatic malignancy. They include simple or parasitic hepatic cysts and solid benign tumors which differ widely in terms of prevalence, clinical relevance, symptoms and natural history and often lead to significant clinical problems relating to diagnosis and clinical management. Following the need to have updated guidelines on the management of benign focal liver lesions, the Scientific Societies mainly involved in their management have promoted the drafting of a new dedicated document. This document was drawn up according to the present Italian rules and methodologies necessary to produce clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic guidelines based on evidence. Here we present the second part of the guideline, concerning the diagnosis and clinical management of hemangioma, focal nodular hyperplasia, and hepatocellular adenoma.

Laparoscopic Treatment Strategies for Liver Echinococcosis

Liver echinococcosis is clinically mainly composed of hepatic cystic echinococcosis (CE) and hepatic alveolar echinococcosis (AE). At present, laparoscopy has been comprehensively applied in the treatment of two types of liver echinococcosis. For hepatic CE treatment, both laparoscopic total pericystectomy and laparoscopic hepatectomy can achieve radical results, but the former is considered the first choice owing to its being more minimally invasive; laparoscopic subtotal pericystectomy and laparoscopic partial pericystectomy can be accepted as complementary options, considering the presence of complicated cysts and the level of laparoscopic technique in remote hospitals; laparoscopic cystectomy is simple, but it is not currently recommended for treatment of hepatic CE owing to poor efficacy and high risk of postoperative complications. For hepatic AE treatment, laparoscopy not only achieves the same radical effect as open surgery in selected patients, but also is more minimally invasive, so it has a better prospect.

Minimally invasive liver surgery: the Charité experience

Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) was established as last abdominal surgical specialty through the 1990s. With a shift from mainly benign to malignant indications, MILS was shown to be equal to open liver surgery in terms of oncological outcomes, with benefits in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, postoperative complication rates, hospital length of stay and quality of life. With colorectal liver metastases and hepatocellular carcinoma as the most common indications, most liver resection can be performed minimally invasive nowadays, including patients with liver cirrhosis. Initially perceived limitations of laparoscopic liver surgery were weakened by gaining experience, technical progress and pioneering of new resection approaches. Lately robotic liver surgery was adopted to the field of MILS to further push the limits. To simplify first resections, technical variations of the minimally invasive approach can be utilized, and difficulty scores help to select resections suitable to the level of experience. We hereby give an overview of the establishing of a minimally invasive liver surgery program at our center.

RESSECÇÃO LAPAROSCÓPICA DE TUMORES BENIGNOS DO FÍGADO: POSIÇÃO ATUAL

The main indications of the use of laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS), in the early days, were benign liver lesions. As LLS became more popular, indications for malignant diseases outnumbered those for benign ones. This study aims to rule out the indications and results of LLS for the treatment of benign liver tumors.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection: A 7-Year Experience of 123 Resections in a Single Institution

There has been a significant increase in the use of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) over the past 2 decades. This study aimed to analyze the outcomes associated with LLR at a single tertiary care hospital. Patients with benign or malignant tumors who underwent LLR by a single surgeon from January 2012 to November 2019 were identified. There were 123 patients who underwent LLR in the study period; 52% were men, and the median age was 61 (24-90) years. Five patients (4.1%) had unplanned conversion to open resection. Ninety-five patients (77.2%) had a wedge resection or single segmentectomy, and 28 (22.8%) underwent resection of 2+ liver segments. Seventy-one cases (57.7%) were for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), 24 (19.5%) for colorectal metastasis, and 28 (22.8%) were for other benign and malignant tumors. Median operative time was 239 (range 89-526) minutes. Mean estimated blood loss was 192 (range 0-1800) mL. The median length of stay (LOS) overall was 2 (range 0-9) days. From 2017 to 2019, the mean LOS was 1.2 days, compared to a mean LOS of 3.3 days from 2012 to 2016. More cases were performed as same-day surgery from 2017 onward; 19 patients (33.9%) had same-day surgery from 2017 to 2019, in comparison to only 1 patient (1.5%) in the period of 2012-2016 (P < .0001). Overall, 28 patients (22.8%) experienced postoperative morbidity; major postoperative morbidity occurred in 4 patients (3.3%). The 90-day mortality was .8%, and the 30-day readmission rate was 5.7%. In conclusion, LLR can be performed safely to treat liver tumors, and LOS decreased over time. Although overall morbidity is moderate, serious morbidity is low, as was the readmission rate. Laparoscopic wedge resection may be a feasible option as an outpatient procedure in select patients.

Clinical application of accelerated rehabilitation surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal malignant tumors are the most common malignant tumors in elderly people in China, resulting in an increasing trend of morbidity and mortality. We conducted a non-randomized controlled trial to compare the effect of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) versus Routine care on clinical outcomes in elderly patients after colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

This is a single center, non-random, parallel-controlled clinical trial, 60 patients aged ≥65 years will be randomized for Case group ERAS and Control group (routine care).

RESULTS

This study will help to evaluate the clinical feasibility, safety and effectiveness of ERAS in elderly patients undergoing colorectal resection compared with routine care.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2000034984.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiation Therapy Compared With Surgery and Radiofrequency Ablation in Two Patient Cohorts: Metastatic Liver Cancer and Hepatocellular Carcinoma

AIMS

To compare the cost-effectiveness of stereotactic ablative body radiation therapy (SABR) with radiofrequency ablation and surgery in adult patients with metastatic liver cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two patient cohorts were assessed: liver oligometastases and HCC. For each patient cohort, a decision analytic model was constructed to assess the cost-effectiveness of interventions over a 5-year horizon. A Markov process was embedded in the decision model to simulate the possible prognosis of cancer. Data on transition probabilities, survival, side-effects, quality of life and costs were obtained from published sources and the SABR Commissioning through Evaluation (CtE) scheme. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with respect to quality-adjusted life-years. The robustness of the results was examined in a sensitivity analysis. Analyses were conducted from a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis, which assumed that all three interventions were associated with the same cancer progression rates and mortality rates, SABR was the most cost-effective intervention for both patient cohorts. This conclusion was sensitive to the cancer progression rate, mortality rate and cost of interventions. Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the probability that SABR is cost-effective was 57% and 50% in liver oligometastases and HCC, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate a potential for SABR to be cost-effective for patients with liver oligometastases and HCC. This finding supports further investigation in clinical trials directly comparing SABR with surgery and radiofrequency ablation.

Focal Nodular Hyperplasia and Hepatic Adenoma: Evaluation and Management

Focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatocellular adenoma are benign liver lesions that occur most frequently in women and may be found as incidental findings on imaging. hepatocellular adenomas may be infrequently associated with malignant progression or risk of rupture and as such, require surveillance or definitive treatments based on their size threshold. It is important clinically to differentiate these lesions, and utilizing imaging modalities such as contrast enhanced ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging can be helpful in diagnosis. Further molecular subtyping of hepatocellular adenoma lesions may be beneficial to describe risk factors and potential future clinical complications.

Laparoscopic liver resection: indications, limitations, and economic aspects

Background

Minimally invasive techniques have increasingly found their way into liver surgery in recent years. A multitude of mostly retrospective analyses suggests several advantages of laparoscopic over open liver surgery. Due to the speed and variety of simultaneous technical and strategic developments, it is difficult to maintain an overview of the current status and perspectives in laparoscopic liver surgery.

Purpose

This review highlights up-to-date aspects in laparoscopic liver surgery. We discuss established indications with regard to their development over time as well as continuing limitations of applied techniques. We give an assessment based on the current literature and according to our own center experiences, not least with regard to a highly topical cost discussion.

Conclusions

While in the beginning mainly benign tumors were laparoscopically operated on, liver metastasis and hepatocellular carcinoma are now among the most frequent indications. Technical limitations remain and should be evaluated with the overall aim not to endanger quality standards in open surgery. Financial aspects cannot be neglected with the necessity of cost-covering reimbursement.

Robotic, laparoscopic or open hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas over 10 cm in diameter

Background

To evaluate the clinical efficacy of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas.

Methods

From April 2011 to April 2017, consecutive patients who underwent hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas were included in this study. According to the type of operation, these patients were divided into the robotic hemihepatectomy (RH) group, the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) group, and the open hemihepatectomy (OH) group. The perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared among the three groups. The study was reported following the STROCSS criteria.

Results

There were no significant differences in age, sex, tumour location, body surface area (BSA), future liver remnant volume (FLR), standard liver volume (SLV), liver haemangioma volume, FLR/SLV, resected normal liver volume/resected volume, hepatic disease, rates of blood transfusion, liver function after 24 h of surgery, operative morbidity and mortality among the three groups. Compared with patients in the RH group (n = 19) and the LH group (n = 13), patients in the OH group (n = 25) had a significantly longer postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.05), time to oral intake (P < 0.05), and time to get-out-of-bed (P < 0.05); a higher VAS score after 24 h of surgery (P < 0.05); and a shorter operative time (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in these postoperative outcomes (P>0.05) between the RH group and the LH group. When the setup time in the RH group was excluded, the operative time in the RH group was significantly shorter than that in the LH group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the operative time between the RH group and the OH group (P>0.05). The amount of intraoperative blood loss in the RH group was the lowest among the three groups (P<0.05), and the amount of intraoperative blood loss in the LH group was less than that in the OH group (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Robotic and laparoscopic hemihepatectomies were associated with less intraoperative blood loss,better postoperative recovery and lower pain score. Compared with laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, robotic hemihepatectomy was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter operative time.

Laparoscopic versus open limited liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with liver cirrhosis: a propensity score matching study with the Hiroshima Surgical study group of Clinical Oncology (HiSCO)

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has evolved as a safe and effective alternative to conventional open liver resection (OLR) for malignant lesions. However, LLR in cirrhotic patients remains challenging. This study analyzed the perioperative and oncological outcomes of LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with cirrhosis compared with OLR using propensity score matching.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective analysis of records of patients who underwent limited liver resection for HCC and were histologically diagnosed with liver cirrhosis between January 2009 and December 2017 in the eight institutions belonging to the Hiroshima Surgical study group of Clinical Oncology was performed. The patients were divided into two groups: the LLR and OLR groups. After propensity score matching, we compared clinicopathological features and outcomes.

RESULTS

In total 256 patients with histological liver cirrhosis who underwent limited liver resection for HCC were included in this study; 58 patients had undergone LLR, and the remaining 198 patients OLR. The number of tumors was higher, tumor size was larger, and difficulty score was significantly higher in the OLR group before propensity matching. After the matching, the data of the well-matched 58 patients in each group were evaluated; the intraoperative blood loss was lower in the LLR group (p = 0.004), and incidence of the postoperative complications was significantly higher in the OLR group (p = 0.019). The duration of the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LLR group (p < 0.001). There were no differences between two groups in overall survival and recurrent-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR decreased the incidences of postoperative complications, shortened the duration of postoperative hospital stay. Thus, LLR is a safe and feasible procedure even in patients with cirrhosis.

Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery Is Feasible and Safe for Hepatic Left Lateral Sectionectomy for Benign Liver Lesions

Background and Objectives

The feasibility and safety of single-port laparoscopic surgery for left lateral liver lobectomy are largely unknown. This study is aimed at comparing the effectiveness and safety between single-port laparoscopic (SPL) and conventional multiport laparoscopic (CL) surgeries for hepatic left lateral sectionectomy.

Methods

A total of 65 patients receiving laparoscopic hepatic left lateral sectionectomy between January 2008 and July 2015 were included and divided into the SPL group (n = 40) and the CL group (n = 25).

Results

There was no significant difference in the operative time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, and incidences of postoperative complications (biliary leakage, hemorrhage, and contusion at incision) between groups (all P > 0.05). However, the SPL group had a significantly lower VAS pain score (at 24 h but not 7 days postoperation) and higher cosmetic satisfaction scores (at both 2 months and 6 months postoperation) than the CL group (all P < 0.01). Moreover, multivariate linear regression analysis further confirmed the superior pain score and cosmetic outcome in the SPL group.

Conclusions

Single-port laparoscopic hepatic left lateral sectionectomy is a safe and feasible treatment for patients with lesions in the left hepatic lobe. Patients with benign lesions in the left hepatic lobe are more suitable to receive single-port laparoscopic hepatic left lateral sectionectomy than those with malignancies.

Laparoscopic vs. open left lateral sectionectomy: An update meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) is thought to be the anatomical liver resection most suitable for the laparoscopic approach. Despite increasing popularity, comparative analysis of laparoscopic and open LLS are mostly limited to retrospective, underpowered studies with small sample size. Recent population-based studies and prospective trials have generated new data; however, this new body of knowledge has not been submitted systematic reviews or meta-analyses and high quality evidence regarding the actual benefits of minimally invasive LLS is lacking.

METHODS

Systematic review of studies published until December 31st, 2017 and indexed in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Central and Scielo/LILACS databases. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing perioperative results of laparoscopic and open LLS were included. Studies with patients submitted to LLS for living donation were excluded. Treatment outcomes, including conversion rates, estimated blood loss, transfusion rates, operative time, length of in-hospital stay, morbidity and mortality rates, were evaluated.

RESULTS

The primary search yielded 2838 articles, 23 of which (21 observational studies and 2 randomized controlled trials; 3415 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall conversion rate was 7.4%. Patients submitted to laparoscopic LLS had less blood loss (mean difference, MD = -119.81 ml, 95% CI = -127.90, -111.72, P < .00001, I² = 32%, N = 618), lower transfusion rates (4.1% vs. 10.1%; risk difference, RD = - 0.06, 95% CI = - 0.08, - 0.05, P < .00001, I² = 13%, N = 2968) and shorter length of in-hospital stay (MD = - 2.02 days, 95% CI = - 2.15, - 1.89, P < .00001, I² = 77%, N = 3160) compared to those undergoing open surgery. Marginally decreased overall complication (21.4% vs. 27.5%; RD = - 0.03, 95% CI = - 0.06, 0.00, P = .05, I² = 0%, N = 3268) and perioperative mortality (0.3% vs. 1.5%; RD = - 0.01, 95% CI = - 0.02, - 0.00, P = .01, I² = 0%; N = 3332) rates were also observed. Operative time and biliary, cardiac or pulmonary complication rates did not differ significantly between groups.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence supports the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic LLS. The laparoscopic approach is associated with reduced blood loss, lower transfusion rates and shorter length of in-hospital stay and should be considered the gold-standard for LLS.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus open hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

To date, there are few studies comparing the outcomes of robotic hepatectomy (RH) versus open hepatectomy (OH). We report the first systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of RH versus OH.

METHODS

A systemic review was performed of all comparative studies of RH versus OH that reported the perioperative outcome(s) of interest.

RESULTS

Seven retrospective cohort studies were included. There was no significant difference in patients' baseline characteristics. RH was associated with a longer operation time (mean difference (MD) 61.47 min; 95% confidence interval (CI) (7.03, 115.91); P = 0.03), shorter hospital stay (MD -2.57 days; 95% CI (-3.31, -1.82); P < 0.001), lower costs, less overall (risk ratio (RR) 0.63; 95% CI (0.46, 0.86); P = 0.004), minor (RR 0.64; 95% CI (0.43, 0.95); P = 0.03) and major (RR 0.45; 95% CI (0.22, 0.94); P = 0.03) post-operative complications compared to OH.

CONCLUSION

RH had superior perioperative outcomes and was not cost prohibitive compared to OH, but had longer operation times.

Surgical outcome of laparoscopic hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: A matched case-control study with propensity score matching

Background:

Although the number of reports on laparoscopic hepatic resection (LHR) has increased, studies of long-term outcomes regarding tumor recurrence and patient survival compared to the conventional open approach are limited. We evaluated the long-term survival and feasibility of LHR in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Patients and Methods:

A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of patients who underwent hepatic resection for primary HCC between August 2000 and December 2013. The patients were divided into the LHR or open hepatic resection (OHR) groups. To control for selection bias in the two groups, propensity score matching was used at a 1:1 ratio based on the following covariates: Child–Pugh grade, tumour size, tumour number and tumour location. Following propensity score matching, thirty patients were included in the LHR group and thirty were included in the OHR group.

Results:

The respective disease-free survival rates at 1 year, 3 years and 5 years were 78.4%, 61.1% and 38.9%, respectively, for the LHR group, and 89.3%, 57.5% and 47.9%, respectively, for the OHR group (P = 0.89). Also, the overall survival rates at 1 year, 3 years and 5 years were 96.4%, 68.2% and 62.5%, respectively, for the LHR group and 100.0%, 95.8% and 72.3%, respectively, for the OHR group (P = 0.44).

Conclusions:

According to our study, using propensity score matching, LHR for HCC is safe, feasible and comparative, with good oncologic results.

Multiple focal nodular hyperplasia: MRI features

PURPOSE

To describe MRI features of multiple Focal Nodular Hyperplasia (FNHs).

METHODS

40 consecutive subjects (37 females, mean age, 38.8years) were included. All studies were independently reviewed. This was an observational study to define the radiological features of multifocal FNH.

RESULTS

130 lesions were evaluated. The majority (88.5%), were peripheral in location. 92.3% lesions were lobulated. Marked enhancement was present in 94.6% lesions. In the portal venous and delayed phase, 46.2% and 47.7% lesions were mildly hyperintense. Central scar was present in 77% lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Distinctive features included predominant subcapsular location and mild hyperintensity in the delayed phase, seen in nearly 50% of FNHs.

What is Changing in Indications and Treatment of Focal Nodular Hyperplasia of the Liver. Is There Any Place for Surgery?

Focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) is a common benign liver tumor, which occurs in the vast majority of the cases in young women. FNH represents a polyclonal lesion characterized by local vascular abnormalities and is a truly benign lesion without any potential for malignant transformation. A retrospective single institution analysis of 227 FNH patients, treated from 1990 to 2016 and a review of studies reporting surgical therapy of overall 293 patients with FNH was performed. Indications for resection with a focus on diagnostic workup, patient selection, surgical mode and operative mortality and morbidity have been analysed. Ninety three patients underwent elective hepatectomy and 134 patients observation alone, where median follow-up was 107 months. Postoperative complications were recorded in 14 patients, 92% of patients reported an improvement with respect to their symptoms. Overall among 293 patients underwent surgery in the series, included to this review, there was a morbidity of 13%, where median follow-up was 53 months. Systematic follow-up remains the gold standard in asymptomatic patients with FNH. However elective surgery should be considered in symptomatic patients, in those with marked enlargement and in case of uncertainty of diagnosis. Surgery for FNH is a safe procedure with low morbidity and very good long term results as far as quality of life after surgery is concerned and surely an integral part of the modern management of FNH.

Diffusion, outcomes and implementation of minimally invasive liver surgery: a snapshot from the I Go MILS (Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery) Registry

The Italian Group of MILS (I Go MILS) prospective registry was established in 2014 with the goals to create a hub for data and projects on a national basis and to promote the diffusion and implementation of MILS programs on a national scale. The primary endpoint of the present study is to give a snapshot of the real diffusion and outcomes of MILS in Italy, while analyzing the role of the registry in the implementation of MILS programs nationwide. The I Go MILS Registry is a prospective and intention-to-treat registry opened to any Italian center performing MILS, without restriction criteria based on number of procedures. The Registry is developed through the eClinical, an electronic platform for the management of clinical trials and is based on 34 clinical variables, regarding indication, intra- and postoperative course. Clinical outcomes and data regarding implementation of MILS activity have been analyzed for the aim of the study. Between November 2014 and June 2017, data from 1678 MILS performed in 48 centers have been collected (mean number of procedures per center 35, range 1-302). 22% of procedures were performed for benign and 78% for malignant disease (HCC constituted the 49.1% and CRLM the 31.2% of malignant tumors). Major liver resections (>3 liver segments), including right and left hepatectomies, trisectionectomies and ALPPS procedures were 10% of the series. Mean blood loss was 200 ± 230 mL Morbidity rate was 20.5% and mortality was 0.3%. 10.4% of cases were converted to open approach. Median length of stay was 5 days. MILS/total resections ratio in 13 experienced centers increased from 14 to 30% after Registry establishment. MILS programs are well established in Italy, with progressive increase both in the number of cases and in the numerosity of centers. The I Go MILS Registry is playing a crucial role in monitoring the development of MILS in the real world on a national basis while giving a significant contribution to the implementation of MILS programs.

Retrospective study on timing of resection of hepatocellular adenoma

Background

Hepatocellular adenoma (HCA) is a benign liver tumour that may be complicated by bleeding or malignant transformation. Present guidelines advise cessation of oral contraceptives and surgical resection if the lesion is still larger than 5 cm at 6 months after diagnosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether this 6-month interval is sufficient to expect regression of a large HCA to 5 cm or smaller.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included all patients with an HCA larger than 5 cm diagnosed between 1999 and 2015 with follow-up of at least 6 months. Medical records were reviewed for patient characteristics, clinical presentation, lesion characteristics, management and complications. Differences in characteristics were assessed between patients kept under surveillance and those who underwent treatment for an HCA larger than 5 cm.

Results

Some 194 patients were included, of whom 192 were women. Eighty-six patients were kept under surveillance and 108 underwent HCA treatment. Patients in the surveillance group had a significantly higher BMI (P = 0·029), smaller baseline HCA diameter (P &lt; 0·001), more centrally located lesions (P &lt; 0·001) and were more likely to have multiple lesions (P = 0·001) than those in the treatment group. There were no significant differences in sex, age at diagnosis, symptoms, complication rates and HCA subtype distribution. Time-to-event analysis in patients managed conservatively and those still undergoing treatment more than 6 months after diagnosis showed that 69 of 118 HCAs (58·5 per cent) regressed to 5 cm or smaller after a median of 104 (95 per cent c.i. 80–128) weeks. Larger HCAs took longer to regress (P &lt; 0·001). No complications were documented during follow-up.

Conclusion

This study suggests that a 6-month cut-off point for assessment of regression of HCA larger than 5 cm to no more than 5 cm is too early. As no complications were documented during follow-up, the cut-off point in women with typical, non-β-catenin-activated HCA could be prolonged to 12 months, irrespective of baseline diameter.

Evolution and revolution of laparoscopic liver resection in Japan

Due to important technological developments and improved endoscopic techniques, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now considered the approach of choice and is increasingly performed worldwide. Recent systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of observational data reported that LLR was associated with less bleeding, fewer complications, and no oncological disadvantage; however, no prospective randomized trials have been conducted. LLR will continue to evolve as a surgical approach that improves patient's quality of life. LLR will not totally supplant open liver surgery, and major LLR remains to be technically challenging procedure. The success of LLR depends on individual learning curves and adherence to surgical indications. A recent study proposed a scoring system for stepwise application of LLR, which was based on experience at high‐volume Japanese centers. A cluster of deaths after major LLR was sensationally reported by the Japanese media in 2014. In response, the Japanese Society of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Surgery conducted emergency data collection on operative mortality. The results demonstrated that mortality was not higher than that for open procedures except for hemi‐hepatectomy with biliary reconstruction. An online prospective registry system for LLR was established in 2015 to be transparent for patients who might potentially undergo treatment with this newly developed, technically demanding surgical procedure.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection of Right Posterior Segments for Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now widely adopted for the treatment of liver malignancies. Liver resection with laparoscopic approach was first adopted for tumors located in the peripheral portion of the anterolateral segments of the liver, but recent experiences in literature modified the attitude toward that approach. We herein report our technique and outcomes of LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in the right-posterior segments of the liver (VI and VII).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our prospectively maintained database, comparing peri- and postoperative outcomes of patients who underwent laparoscopic (13 patients) or open (51 patients) resections for HCC localized in the right-posterior segments between 2000 and 2014.

RESULTS

The two populations were homogeneous, showing no statistically significant differences in terms of gender, age, body mass index, and cirrhosis prevalence. Alpha-fetoprotein levels were higher in the open group (P = .04) and etiology of cirrhosis varied in a statistically significant manner (P = .01). The laparoscopic group showed an improved perioperative outcome with statistically significant less postoperative morbidity (P = .01) and less in-hospital stay (P = .0001). No differences were found in terms of blood loss or operative time, but any Pringle maneuver was needed (P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients affected by HCC localized in the right-posterior segments of the liver can be safely treated with laparoscopic approach. However, this kind of procedure can be challenging and should be performed in tertiary referral hospitals to provide the patient the best care, with the integration of different specialties.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy significantly shortens the time to postoperative chemotherapy in patients undergoing major hepatectomies

BACKGROUND

The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy occurs with early initiation, but is commonly delayed due to postoperative complications. Minimally invasive surgery is proven to significantly reduce complications and hospital length of stay. This study compares open versus laparoscopic liver resection in patients requiring adjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

120 consecutive patients with metastatic colorectal liver cancer who underwent liver resection between 2007 through 2012 were reviewed from an IRB prospective database.

RESULTS

44 laparoscopic cases were compared to 76 open cases having equivalent resections. Laparoscopic liver resection patients had lower blood loss (276 ml) than patients with open resection (614 ml). Patients with laparoscopy had shorter length of hospital stay (5 days) than patients with open resection (9 days). Patients with laparoscopic resection had a shorter time of chemotherapy initiation postoperatively (24 days v 39 days). Overall complication rates were higher, but statistically insignificant in patients with open resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data showed that the shorter LOS with laparoscopic major hepatectomies allows earlier initiation of chemotherapy compared to the open group, without jeopardizing surgical margins or extent of resection.

SUMMARY

Over the past decade multiple authors have established that, despite occasional longer operating times, laparoscopic liver surgery is associated with reduced blood loss, reduced postoperative morbidity and shorter hospital stay. The purpose of this analysis was to determine if the advantages of a minimally invasive approach correspond to shorter initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy versus an open approach.

Comparative Short-term Benefits of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: 9000 Cases and Climbing

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of worldwide literature on laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and compare short-term outcomes against open liver resections (OLR) by meta-analyses.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

There are no updated pooled data since 2009 about the current status and short-term outcomes of LLR worldwide.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All English language publications on LLR were screened. Descriptive worldwide data and short-term outcomes were obtained. Separate analyses were performed for minor-only and major-only resection series, and series in which minor/major resections were not differentiated. Apparent case duplications were excluded.

RESULTS

A set of 463 published manuscripts were reviewed. One hundred seventy-nine single-center series were identified that accounted for 9527 LLR cases worldwide. Minor-only, major-only, and combined major-minor series were 61, 18, and 100, respectively, including 32, 8, and 43 comparative series, respectively. Of the total 9527 LLR cases reported, 6190 (65%) were for malignancy and 3337 (35%) were for benign indications. There were 37 deaths reported (mortality rate = 0.4%). From the meta-analysis comparing case-matched LLR to OLR (N = 2900 cases), there was no increased mortality and significantly less complications, transfusions, blood loss, and hospital stay observed in LLR vs OLR.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest review of LLR available to date with over 9000 cases published. It confirms growing safety when performed in selected patients and by trained surgeons, and suggests that LLR may offer improved patient short-term outcomes compared with OLR. Improved levels of evidence, standardized reporting of outcomes, and assuring proper training are the next challenges of laparoscopic liver surgery.

Laparoscopic parenchymal preserving hepatic resections in semiprone position for tumors located in the posterosuperior segments

INTRODUCTION

All patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resections in the posterosuperior segments (LPSS) at our center were positioned in semiprone since August 2011. The aims of this study were to assess differences in perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomies (LLLS) performed in supine position and LPSS in semiprone position.

METHODS

We reviewed our prospectively collected database of all liver resections performed between January 2012 and January 2015. LLLS and LPSS were compared with respect to demographics and perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients underwent LLLS (n = 20) or LPSS (n = 25). There were no differences in patient demographics or tumor diameter (p = 0.946). There were no conversions. Pringle maneuver was not used in both groups. There was no difference in peroperative central venous pressure (p = 0.511). The median operative time in the LLLS group was 100 min (60-260) and 160 min (95-270) in the LPSS group (p = 0.002) with median intraoperative blood loss in the LLLS group of 50 ml (0-550) versus a larger 150 ml (50-700) (p = 0.010) for patients receiving LPSS. No patients required transfusion. Intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were similar in both groups. Median hospital stay was 6 days in both groups (p = 0.554).

CONCLUSION

LPSS in semiprone can be performed with similar clinical outcomes as a minor laparoscopic liver resection except for longer operative time and larger intraoperative blood loss without the need for transfusion.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Experience based guidelines

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been progressively developed along the past two decades. Despite initial skepticism, improved operative results made laparoscopic approach incorporated to surgical practice and operations increased in frequency and complexity. Evidence supporting LLR comes from case-series, comparative studies and meta-analysis. Despite lack of level 1 evidence, the body of literature is stronger and existing data confirms the safety, feasibility and benefits of laparoscopic approach when compared to open resection. Indications for LLR do not differ from those for open surgery. They include benign and malignant (both primary and metastatic) tumors and living donor liver harvesting. Currently, resection of lesions located on anterolateral segments and left lateral sectionectomy are performed systematically by laparoscopy in hepatobiliary specialized centers. Resection of lesions located on posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8) and major liver resections were shown to be feasible but remain technically demanding procedures, which should be reserved to experienced surgeons. Hand-assisted and laparoscopy-assisted procedures appeared to increase the indications of minimally invasive liver surgery and are useful strategies applied to difficult and major resections. LLR proved to be safe for malignant lesions and offers some short-term advantages over open resection. Oncological results including resection margin status and long-term survival were not inferior to open resection. At present, surgical community expects high quality studies to base the already perceived better outcomes achieved by laparoscopy in major centers’ practice. Continuous surgical training, as well as new technologies should augment the application of laparoscopic liver surgery. Future applicability of new technologies such as robot assistance and image-guided surgery is still under investigation.

Tissue management with tri-staple technology in major and minor laparoscopic liver resections

One of the most relevant technologic advancements in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is owing to the improved ability to safely secure and divide vascular and biliary structures and the liver parenchyma by the use of endostaplers. We compared, retrospectively, 35 LLRs with the Tri-Staple technology versus 57 LLRs without, during a 14-month period. Colorectal liver metastases were overall the main indication for LLR. Neither major hepatectomy nor left lateral sectionectomy was done in the nonstapled group. Mean surgical time and blood loss were similar, whereas the tumor number and size were significantly larger in the stapled group (P ≤ 0.01). The conversion rate was 0% and 3.5% (n = 2); and the morbidity rate was 9% (n = 3) and 12% (n = 7), respectively, in the stapled and nonstapled group (P = 0.8). No overall 3-month mortality was recorded. Endo GIA Reloads with Tri-Staple technology allow a proper division of the intrahepatic vessels and biliary structure. These devices in LLRs are safe and feasible, allowing major hepatectomy and complex cases as 2-staged procedures and laparoscopic living donor liver resections.

Laparoscopic vs. open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma of cirrhotic liver: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is considered a safe and feasible alternative to open surgery for malignant liver lesions. However, laparoscopic surgery in cirrhotic patients remains challenging. The aim of this retrospective case-control study was to compare morbidity, mortality, and long-term patient survival between laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and open liver resections (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with histologically proven cirrhosis.

METHODS

A total of 45 patients treated with LLR were matched by cause of cirrhosis, Child-Pugh score, type of surgical resection (subsegmentectomy, segmentectomy, and bisegmentectomy), tumor number, tumor size, and alpha-fetoprotein value with 45 patients treated with OLR. Pre-, intra-, and post-operative variables were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Compared with OLR, the LLR group displayed a significantly shorter operative time (140 vs. 180 min; p = 0.02), shorter hospital stay (7 vs. 12 days; p < 0.0001), and lower morbidity rate (20 vs. 45 % of patients; p = 0.01). A higher rate of R0 resection was observed in the LLR group than in the OLR group (95 vs. 85 %; p = 0.03). Postoperative ascites was more frequently observed in the OLR group (18 vs. 2 %; p = 0.01). Mortality, patient, and disease-free survival rates were similar between groups. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates were 88, 59, and 12 %, respectively, in the LLR group and 63, 44, and 22 % in the OLR group (p = 0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

Significantly shorter operative times, better resection margins, lower postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stay were observed in the LLR group compared with the OLR group. LLR and OLR have similar overall and disease-free survival rates in cirrhotic HCC patients.

Outcomes of robotic vs laparoscopic hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic liver resections.

METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library Central. Participants of any age and sex, who underwent robotic or laparoscopic liver resection were considered following these criteria: (1) studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic liver resection; (2) studies reporting at least one perioperative outcome; and (3) if more than one study was reported by the same institute, only the most recent was included. The primary outcome measures were set for estimated blood loss, operative time, conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and mortality rates, hospital stay and major hepatectomy rates.

RESULTS: A total of 7 articles, published between 2010 and 2014, fulfilled the selection criteria. The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significant reduction in blood loss and lower operative time (MD = 83.96, 95%CI: 10.51-157.41, P = 0.03; MD = 68.43, 95%CI: 39.22-97.65, P < 0.00001, respectively). No differences were found with respect to conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and hospital stay.

CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic liver resection resulted in reduced blood loss and shorter surgical times compared to robotic liver resections. There was no difference in conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and length of postoperative stay.

Comparison of laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation versus open resection in the treatment of symptomatic-enlarging hepatic hemangiomas: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been demonstrated to be a promising therapy for symptomatic large hepatic hemangioma. However, there is a lack of studies to demonstrate the benefits and disadvantages of RFA as compared with surgical resection for managing hepatic hemangioma. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of RFA compared with conventional open resection (ORES) for the treatment of symptomatic-enlarging hepatic hemangiomas.

METHODS

A total of 66 patients with symptomatic-enlarging hepatic hemangiomas (4 cm ≤ diameter < 10 cm) who required surgical treatment were divided into two groups: 32 patients underwent laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) and the other 34 patients underwent ORES. We compared the two groups in terms of radiologic response, clinical response, operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain score and analgesic requirement, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications and hospital cost.

RESULTS

The radiologic and clinical responses were comparable between groups. LRFA had significantly shorter operative time (138 vs. 201 min, P < 0.001) and less blood loss (P < 0.001) than ORES. Patients after LRFA experienced significantly less pain and required less analgesia use. Moreover, patients underwent LRFA had significantly shorter length of hospital stay (P < 0.001) and lower hospital cost (P = 0.017). No severe morbidities or mortality was observed, and the overall morbidity rate was similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

As a new minimal invasive treatment option, laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation is as safe and effective a procedure as open resection for patients with symptomatic-enlarging hepatic hemangiomas smaller than 10 cm.

How surgical technology translates into practice: the model of laparoscopic liver resections performed in France

OBJECTIVES

Analyze, at a national level, the adoption and practice of laparoscopic liver resections (LAP), compared to open resections (OPEN).

BACKGROUND

LAP initiated 20 years ago, has been described for all hepatectomies, and is considered as the reference technique for some resections. There are, however, no data on its adoption outside selected specialty centers.

METHODS

French Healthcare databases were screened to identify all patients who underwent an elective LAP or OPEN between 2007 and 2012. Patients' demographics, associated conditions, indication for surgery, hepatectomy performed, and hospital type and hepatectomy caseload were retrieved. Patients who had possible overcoding of biopsies as wedge resections were identified to select REAL resections. Time trend analyses were performed using a piecewise linear regression and the average annual percent change (AAPC) calculated.

RESULTS

There were 7881 (17.8%) LAP and 36,359 (82.2%) OPEN performed in an average of 483 hospitals. Of these, biopsies accounted for 29.9% of the LAP (7.3% of the OPEN, P<0.0001) and the incidence of LAP biopsies increased after 2009. The AAPC of the incidence of real LAP increased more than that of real OPEN (7.0% vs 1.3%) but most were minor resections (61.1% vs 28.9% for OPEN, P<0.0001), only 15% of patients were operated by LAP and intermediate (or major) resections were performed in 19.5% (or 4.8%) of hospitals performing liver resections. The proportion of resections performed by LAP was inversely related to annual caseload. The overall incidence of resections performed for benign conditions did not increase.

CONCLUSIONS

LAP is not developing, has not been adopted for intermediate/major resections, does not result in overuse for benign indications and some of the 2009 -consensus statements are not applied.

National trends in the use of surgery for benign hepatic tumors in the United States

BACKGROUND

The widespread use of diagnostic imaging has led to an increase in the incidence and diagnosis of benign liver tumors. The objective of this study was to define the overall use and temporal trends of operative procedures for benign liver tumors using a nationally representative cohort.

METHODS

All patients who underwent liver surgery for benign liver tumors between 2000 and 2011 were identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. Trends in annual volume of liver procedures were analyzed using the average annual percent change (AAPC) assessed by joinpoint analysis.

RESULTS

There were 2,489 open (94.5%) and 144 (5.5%) minimally invasive surgical (MIS) procedures. Partial hepatectomy accounted for 43.8% of all cases (n = 1,153). Surgery for patients with benign liver tumors increased from 156 in 2000 to 272 in 2011 (AAPC, 5.8%; 95% CI, 3.2-8.6%). There was decline in the relative use of open operative procedures from 98.1% in 2000 to 92.3% in 2011 (AAPC, -0.4%; 95% CI, -0.7 to -0.1%). In contrast, the proportion of MIS procedures increased from 1.9% in 2000 to 7.7% in 2011 (AAPC, 7.4%; 95% CI, 1.9-13.3%). The median duration of stay among all patients was 5 days (interquartile range, 4-7; 5 days [open] vs 3 days [MIS]; P < .001). Inpatient mortality was 0.6% (n = 15 [open] vs n = 0 [MIS]; P = .43) and did not change during the study period (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Overall volume of surgical management of benign liver tumors has increased substantially over the past decade. There has been a relative shift away from open procedures toward MIS procedures.

Review of the treatment of liver hydatid cysts

A review was carried out in Medline, LILACS and the Cochrane Library. Our database search strategy included the following terms: “hydatid cyst”, “liver”, “management”, “meta-analysis” and “randomized controlled trial”. No language limits were used in the literature search. The latest electronic search date was the 7^th of January 2014. Inclusion and exclusion criteria: all relevant studies on the assessment of therapeutic methods for hydatid cysts of the liver were considered for analysis. Information from editorials, letters to publishers, low quality review articles and studies done on animals were excluded from analysis. Additionally, well-structured abstracts from relevant articles were selected and accepted for analysis. Standardized forms were designed for data extraction; two investigators entered the data on patient demographics, methodology, recurrence of HC, mean cyst size and number of cysts per group. Four hundred and fourteen articles were identified using the previously described search strategy. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria detailed above, 57 articles were selected for final analysis: one meta-analysis, 9 randomized clinical trials, 5 non-randomized comparative prospective studies, 7 non-comparative prospective studies, and 34 retrospective studies (12 comparative and 22 non-comparative). Our results indicate that antihelminthic treatment alone is not the ideal treatment for liver hydatid cysts. More studies in the literature support the effectiveness of radical treatment compared with conservative treatment. Conservative surgery with omentoplasty is effective in preventing postoperative complications. A laparoscopic approach is safe in some situations. Percutaneous drainage with albendazole therapy is a safe and effective alternative treatment for hydatid cysts of the liver. Radical surgery with pre- and post-operative administration of albendazole is the best treatment option for liver hydatid cysts due to low recurrence and complication rates.

Focal nodular hyperplasia: a review of current indications for and outcomes of hepatic resection

BACKGROUND

Focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) is a common benign disease of the liver with no recognized potential for malignant transformation. The term describes an entity of lobular proliferation of normally differentiated hepatocytes, frequently around a central fibrous scar. Two key issues influence surgical decision making in FNH: diagnostic certainty, and symptomatic assessment.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies reporting hepatic resections of FNH was performed. Indications and outcomes in adult populations were examined with a focus on diagnostic workup, patient selection and operative mortality and morbidity.

RESULTS

Diagnostic modalities in the majority of studies involved ultrasound and computed tomography. Fewer than half employed magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In instances in which MRI was not available, diagnostic accuracy was inferior.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous biopsy should be avoided to prevent the risk for tumour seeding. Patients presenting with asymptomatic definitive FNH can be safely managed conservatively. In symptomatic patients surgical resection is a safe and effective treatment for which acceptable rates of morbidity (14%) and zero mortality are reported. However, evidence of symptom resolution is reported with conservative strategies. Diagnostic uncertainty remains the principal valid indication for FNH resection, but only in patients in whom contrast-enhanced MRI forms part of preoperative assessment.

Laparoscopic surgery for benign and malign diseases of the digestive system: Indications, limitations, and evidence

The laparoscopic technique was introduced in gastrointestinal surgery in the mid 1980s. Since then, the development of this technique has been extraordinary. Triggered by technical innovations (stapling devices or coagulation/dissecting devices), nowadays any type of gastrointestinal resection has been successfully performed laparoscopically and can be performed laparoscopically dependent on the patient’s condition. This summary gives an overview over 30 years of laparoscopic surgery with focus on today’s indications and evidence. Main indications remain the more common procedures, e.g., appendectomy, cholecystectomy, bariatric procedures or colorectal resections. For all these indications, the laparoscopic approach has become the gold standard with less perioperative morbidity. Regarding oncological outcome there have been several high-quality randomized controlled trials which demonstrated equivalency between laparoscopic and open colorectal resections. Less common procedures like esophagectomy, oncological gastrectomy, liver and pancreatic resections can be performed successfully as well by an experienced surgeon. However, the evidence for these special indications is poor and a general recommendation cannot be given. In conclusion, laparoscopic surgery has revolutionized the field of gastrointestinal surgery by reducing perioperative morbidity without disregarding surgical principles especially in oncological surgery.

World review of laparoscopic treatment of liver cystic echinococcosis--914 patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to provide a review of the world literature on the laparoscopic treatment of liver hydatid cyst.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search using PubMed, screening all English language publications on the laparoscopic treatment of liver hydatid cysts. Operative characteristics, perioperative morbidity, and clinical outcomes were tabulated.

RESULTS

A total of 57 published articles including 914 patients with 1116 hydatid cysts were identified. Of the resections done in the 914 patients, 89.17% were performed totally laparoscopically and 5.58% were gasless. The most common procedure was cystectomy (60.39%), followed by partial pericystectomy (14.77%) and pericystectomy (8.21%); the rest were segmentectomies. Conversion to open laparotomy occurred in 4.92% of reported cases (45/914). The common cause of conversion was anatomical limitations/inaccessible locations (16/45). The overall mortality was 0.22% (2/914 patients) and morbidity was 15.07%, with no intraoperative deaths reported. The most common complication was bile leakage (57/914). The postoperative recurrence was 1.09% (10/914 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach is safe with acceptable mortality and morbidity for both conservative and radical resections in selected patients. Clinical outcomes are comparable to open surgery, albeit in a selected group of patients.

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy as a training procedure for surgeons learning laparoscopic hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection remains limited to a relatively small number of institutions because of insufficient hepatic and laparoscopic surgical experience and few training opportunities. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of an improved laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy technique as a training procedure for new surgeons.

METHODS

Twenty-four laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomies (LLLSs) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into 3 groups with 8 patients in each: those undergoing surgery by expert surgeons prior to 2008 (Group A); those undergoing surgery by expert surgeons after 2008, when a standardized LLLS technique was adopted (Group B); and those undergoing LLLS by junior surgeons being trained (Group C).

RESULTS

The median operative time was significantly shorter for Group B (103 min; range, 99-109 min) and C (107 min; range, 85-135 min) patients than for Group A (153 min; range, 95-210 min) patients. There were no significant differences in blood loss or hospital stay. In Groups B and C, no conversions to open laparotomy or complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

The standardized LLLS procedure was both safe and feasible as a technique for training surgeons in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Risk factors and management of conversions to an open approach in laparoscopic liver resection: analysis of 265 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

As a consequence of continuous technical developments in liver surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is increasingly performed worldwide.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and December 2011, 265 LLR were performed in 242 patients for various diseases. The experience of LLR is reported focusing on risk factors of conversion and their management.

RESULTS

The overall conversion rate was 17/265 (6.4%), equally distributed over the period of the study. Statistically significant factors for conversion were found to be LLR of the postero-superior (P-S) segments (SI, SIVa; SVII; SVIII) (12.7% converted versus 2.5% non-converted groups, P = 0.01) and a major compared with a minor hepatectomy (15.2% vs. 4.6%, P = 0.02 respectively). A R0 resection was achieved in 93.2% of cases. According to Dindo's classification, complications were recorded as grade I (n = 20); grade II (6); grade III (11) and grade IV(1) events (total morbidity rate of 14%). Univariate analysis identified a major hepatectomy and resection involving P-S segments as prognostic factors for conversion whereas multivariate analysis identified the latter as an independent risk factor [P = 0.003, odds ratio (OR) = 5.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.8-18.8].

CONCLUSIONS

LLR can be safely performed with low overall morbidity. According to this experience and irrespective of the learning curve, resections of P-S segments were identified as an independent risk factor for conversion in LLR.

The role of laparoscopy in the management of liver hydatid cyst: a single-center experience and world review of the literature

Surgery is still the main modality in the treatment of hepatic hydatid disease. Laparoscopic methods, with their low morbidity, have gained prominence in many fields and, in some cases, have nearly replaced open surgery. In this report, a laparoscopic method for the treatment of hepatic hydatid disease is described, and the results in the 46 cases are presented and the published articles were reviewed. The method involves laparoscopic cystectomy, pericystectomy, and liver resection for hydatid disease. The postoperative courses of the patients were very comfortable and no complication related to the laparoscopic technique occurred. The postoperative parameters and the early follow-up results (average, 18 mo) are very encouraging. Laparoscopic treatment of liver hydatid disease is safe and effective in selected patients and offers all the advantages of a laparoscopic surgery. In experienced hands, laparoscopic pericystectomy have lower morbidity and recurrence rate compared with cystectomy.

Complications of liver resection: laparoscopic versus open procedures

Complications appear to be lower in laparoscopic cases versus open cases for anterolateral and posterosuperior hepatic segment surgery.

Background and Objective:

Minimally invasive surgery for liver resection remains controversial. This study was designed to compare open versus laparoscopic surgical approaches to liver resection.

Methods:

We performed a single-center retrospective chart review.

Results:

We compared 45 laparoscopic liver resections with 17 open cases having equivalent resections based on anatomy and diagnosis. The overall complication rate was 25.8%. More open resection patients had complications (52.9% vs 15.5%, P < .008). The conversion rate was 11.1%. The mean blood loss was 667.1 ± 1450 mL in open cases versus 47.8 ± 89 mL in laparoscopic cases (P < .0001). Measures of intravenous narcotic use, intensive care unit length of stay, and hospital length of stay all favored the laparoscopic group. Patients were more likely to have complications or morbidity in the open resection group than in the laparoscopic group for both the anterolateral (P < .085) and posterosuperior (P < .002) resection subgroups.

Conclusion:

In this series comparing laparoscopic and open liver resections, there were fewer complications, more rapid recovery, and lower morbidity in the laparoscopic group, even for those resections involving the posterosuperior segments of the liver.

Caudal approach to pure laparoscopic posterior sectionectomy under the laparoscopy-specific view

AIM: To study our novel caudal approach laparoscopic posterior-sectionectomy with parenchymal transection prior to mobilization under laparoscopy-specific view.

METHODS: Points of the procedure are: (1) Patients are put in left lateral position and posterior sector is not mobilized; (2) Glissonian pedicle of the sector is encircled and clamped extra-hepatically and divided afterward during the transection; (3) Dissection of inferior vena cava (IVC) anterior wall behind the liver is started from caudal. Simultaneously, liver transection is performed to search right hepatic vein (RHV) from caudal; (4) Liver transection proceeds to the bifurcation of the vessels from caudal to cranial, exposing the surfaces of IVC and RHV. Since the remnant liver sinks down, the cutting surface is well-opend; and (5) After the completion of transection, dissection of the resected liver from retroperitoneum is easily performed using the gravity. This approach was performed for a 63 years old woman with liver metastasis close to RHV.

RESULTS: RHV exposure is required for R0 resection of the lesion. Although the cutting plane is horizontal in supine position and the gravity obstructs the exposure in the small subphrenic space, the use of specific characteristics of laparoscopic hepatectomy, such as the good vision for the dorsal part of the liver and IVC and facilitated dissection using the gravity with the patient positioning, made the complete RHV exposure during the liver transection easy to perform. The operation time was 341 min and operative blood loss was

1356 mL. Her postoperative hospital stay was uneventfull and she is well without any signs of recurrences 14 mo after surgery.

CONCLUSION: The new procedure is feasible and useful for the patients with tumors close to RHV and the need of the exposure of RHV.

Long-term survival analysis of pure laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: a single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic liver resection has been reported as a safe and effective approach to the management of liver cancer. However, studies of long-term outcomes regarding tumor recurrence and patient survival in comparison with the conventional open approach are limited. The aim of this study was to analyze the survival outcome of laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between October 2002 and September 2009, 32 patients underwent pure laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Case-matched control patients (n = 64) who received open liver resection for HCC were included for comparison. Patients were matched in terms of cancer stage, tumor size, location of tumor, and magnitude of resection. Immediate operation outcomes, operation morbidity, disease-free survival, and overall survival were compared between groups.

RESULTS

With the laparoscopic group compared with the open resection group, operation time was 232.5 minutes versus 204.5 minutes (P = 0.938), blood loss was 150 mL versus 300 mL (P = 0.001), hospital stay was 4 days versus 7 days (P < 0.0001), postoperative complication was 2 (6.3%) versus 12 (18.8%) (P = 0.184), disease-free survival was 78.5 months versus 29 months (P = 0.086), and overall survival was 92 months versus 71 months (P = 0.142). The disease-free survival for stage II HCC was 22.1 months versus 12.4 months (P = 0.075).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection for HCC is associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and fewer postoperative complications in selected patients with no compromise in survival.