Laparoscopic liver resection: preliminary results from a UK centre

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 hepatectomy for hepatic colorectal metastases -- a retrospective comparative cohort analysis and literature review

Background

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for management of hepatic colorectal metastases (HCRM) is commonly being performed; however, there are limited reports comparing LH outcomes with those of open hepatectomy (OH) procedure. The aim of the present study was to compare perioperative outcomes between the LH and OH procedures performed at a single medical center.

Methods

From Jan 2008 to May 2012, 30 patients with pathologically confirmed HCRM underwent LH, and 140 patients underwent OH at our hospital. Patients' demographics, perioperative outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

2 patients (6.7%) in the LH group underwent laparotomies for intraoperative hemorrhage. The LH group had an increased surgical duration (235 min vs. 365 min, (P<0.001), shorter hospital stay (7.5 days vs. 11.5 days, P<0.001), and fewer complications (26.2% vs. 55%, P<0.001) than the OH group. However, in a matched cohort comparison of 30 LH cases and 30 OH cases, no significant variations were observed in the following parameters: surgical duration (235 min vs. 255 min, P = 0.23), positive margin rates (6.7% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.27), or postoperative hematological changes. LH patients had less estimated blood loss (215 ml vs. 385 ml, P<0.001), less morbidity (26.2% vs. 50%, P = 0.02), shorter hospital stay (7.5 days vs. 11.5 days, P<0.001), and lower analgesic requests than with those in the OH group.

Conclusions

LH for metastatic colorectal cancer is a safe and feasible treatment, even in patients who underwent prior laparotomy surgeries and provides significantly less morbidity and shorter hospital stay than OH, without compromising curability or increasing morbidity.

A survey in the hepatopancreatobiliary community on ways to enhance patient recovery

OBJECTIVES

Both laparoscopic techniques and multimodal enhanced recovery programmes have been shown to improve recovery and reduce length of hospital stay. Interestingly, evidence-based care programmes are not widely implemented, whereas new, minimally invasive surgical procedures are often adopted with very little evidence to support their effectiveness. The present survey aimed to shed light on experiences of the adoption of both methods of optimizing recovery.

METHODS

An international, web-based, 18-question, electronic survey was composed in 2010. The survey was sent out to 673 hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) centres worldwide in June 2010 to investigate international experiences with laparoscopic liver surgery, fast-track recovery programmes and surgery-related equipoise in open and laparoscopic techniques and to assess opinions on strategies for adopting laparoscopic liver surgery in HPB surgical practice.

RESULTS

A total of 507 centres responded (response rate: 75.3%), 161 of which finished the survey completely. All units reported performing open liver resections, 24.2% performed open living donor resections, 39.1% carried out orthotopic liver transplantations, 87.6% had experience with laparoscopic resections and 2.5% performed laparoscopic living donor resections. A median of 50 (range: 2-560) open and 9.5 (range: 1-80) laparoscopic liver resections per surgical unit were performed in 2009. Patients stayed in hospital for a median of 7 days (range: 2-15 days) after uncomplicated open liver resection and a median of 4 days (range: 1-10 days) after uncomplicated laparoscopic liver resection. Only 28.0% of centres reported having experience with fast-track programmes in liver surgery. The majority considered the instigation of a randomized controlled trial or a prospective register comparing the outcomes of open and laparoscopic techniques to be necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

Worldwide dissemination of laparoscopic liver resection is substantial, although laparoscopic volumes are low in the majority of HPB centres. The adoption of enhanced recovery programmes in liver surgery is limited and should be given greater attention.

Has laparoscopy increased surgical indications for benign tumors of the liver?

BACKGROUND

We aimed to analyze the risk of an increased surgical indication rate in patients with benign tumors of the liver since the development of laparoscopy. Previous articles have reported increased numbers of laparoscopic procedures in different surgical fields.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE (PubMed), Google Scholar, and The Cochrane Library was carried out. All articles that analyzed benign liver tumors (hemangiomas, focal nodular hyperplasia, and adenoma) were divided in two groups: group I included all manuscripts with open procedures between 1971 at 1990, and group II included all manuscripts with open or laparoscopic procedures between 1991 and 2010. Group II articles were divided into two subgroups. Subgroup IIA patients were treated by open or laparoscopic procedures between 1991 and 2000, and subgroup IIB patients were treated by open or laparoscopic procedures between 2001 and 2010.

RESULTS

Specific analysis of each kind of tumor observed in the two groups showed fewer surgically treated patients for hepatic hemangioma and hepatic adenoma in group II compared with group I and a greater number of patients for focal nodular hyperplasia. Fewer patients were treated with laparoscopic procedures in subgroup IIA than in subgroup IIB. A chi-square test with Yates' correction gave a P value of <0.001.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy has increased the rate of hepatic resection for benign tumors with doubtful indications.

Open versus laparoscopic left lateral hepatic sectionectomy within an enhanced recovery ERAS® programme (ORANGE II-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

The use of lLaparoscopic liver resection in terms of time to functional recovery, length of hospital stay (LOS), long-term abdominal wall hernias, costs and quality of life (QOL) has never been studied in a randomised controlled trial. Therefore, this is the subject of the international multicentre randomised controlled ORANGE II trial.

Methods

Patients eligible for left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) of the liver will be recruited and randomised at the outpatient clinic. All randomised patients will undergo surgery in the setting of an ERAS programme. The experimental design produces two randomised arms (open and laparoscopic LLS) and a prospective registry. The prospective registry will be based on patients that cannot be randomised because of the explicit treatment preference of the patient or surgeon, or because of ineligibility (not meeting the in- and exclusion criteria) for randomisation in this trial. Therefore, all non-randomised patients undergoing LLS will be approached to participate in the prospective registry, thereby allowing acquisition of an uninterrupted prospective series of patients. The primary endpoint of the ORANGE II trial is time to functional recovery. Secondary endpoints are postoperative LOS, percentage readmission, (liver-specific) morbidity, QOL, body image and cosmetic result, hospital and societal costs over 1 year, and long-term incidence of incisional hernias. It will be assumed that in patients undergoing laparoscopic LLS, length of hospital stay can be reduced by two days. A sample size of 55 patients in each randomisation arm has been calculated to detect a 2-day reduction in LOS (90% power and α = 0.05 (two-tailed)).

The ORANGE II trial is a multicenter randomised controlled trial that will provide evidence on the merits of laparoscopic surgery in patients undergoing LLS within an enhanced recovery ERAS programme.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00874224.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and power analysis

PURPOSE

A previous meta-analysis study demonstrated that bleeding and the duration of the hospital stay following laparoscopic hepatectomy (Lap) were significantly smaller and shorter, respectively, than for patients undergoing an open approach (Op). The aim of the present study was to re-evaluate perioperative variables and adverse outcomes in patients undergoing Lap versus (vs) Op after 2000.

METHODS

A PubMed and Ovid Medline search identified clinical studies that compared the outcomes of Lap vs Op patients after 2000. A meta-analysis and power analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Operative time was not significantly different between the two approaches (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.063 to 0.992). Patient bleeding in the Lap group was significantly lower than in the Op group (95% CI: -1.027 to -0.390). Complications with Lap patients were significantly less frequent (95% CI: 0.231-0.642), and the duration of the hospital stay for Lap patients was significantly shorter (95% CI: -0.950 to -0.530) than for Op patients. Only one paper presented 80% power with 0.05 α-errors in all four outcomes, whereas four studies did not have sufficient statistical power.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical benefits of Lap include a smaller incidence of complications and a shorter duration of hospital stay at the current time. Several studies had too few cases to sufficiently evaluate these factors, although other studies were appropriately analyzed.

Minimally invasive liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: a multi-institutional, international report of safety, feasibility, and early outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a multicenter, international series on minimally invasive liver resection for colorectal carcinoma (CRC) metastasis.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Multiple single series have been reported on laparoscopic liver resection for CRC metastasis. We report the first collaborative multicenter, international series to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and oncologic integrity of laparoscopic liver resection for CRC metastasis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent minimally invasive liver resection for CRC metastasis from February 2000 to September 2008 from multiple medical centers from the United States and Europe. The multicenter series of patients were accumulated into a single database. Patient demographics, preoperative, operative, and postoperative characteristics were analyzed. Actuarial overall survival was calculated with Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 109 patients underwent minimally invasive liver resection for CRC metastasis. The median age was 63 years (range, 32-88 years) with 51% females. The most common sites of primary colon cancer were sigmoid/rectum (51%), right colon (25%), and left colon (13%). Synchronous liver lesions were present in 11% of patients. For those with metachronous lesions liver lesions, the median time interval from primary colon cancer surgery to liver metastasectomy was 12 months. Preoperative chemotherapy was administered in 68% of cases prior to liver resection. The majority of patients underwent prior abdominal operations (95%). Minimally invasive approaches included totally laparoscopic (56%) and hand-assisted laparoscopic (41%), the latter of which was employed more frequently in the US medical centers (85%) compared with European centers (13%) (P = 0.001). There were 4 conversions to open surgery (3.7%), all due to bleeding. Extents of resection include wedge/segmentectomy (34%), left lateral sectionectomy (27%), right hepatectomy (28%), left hepatectomy (9%), extended right hepatectomy (0.9%), and caudate lobectomy (0.9%). Major liver resections (> or =3 segments) were performed in 45% of patients. Median OR time was 234 minutes (range, 60-555 minutes) and blood loss was 200 mL (range, 20-2500 mL) with 10% receiving a blood transfusion. There were no reported perioperative deaths and a 12% complication rate. Median length of hospital stay for the entire series was 4 days (range, 1-22 days) with a shorter stay in medical centers in the United States (3 days) versus that seen in Europe (6 days) (P = 0.001). Negative margins were achieved in 94.4% of patients. Actuarial overall survivals at 1-, 3-, and 5-year for the entire series were 88%, 69%, and 50%, respectively. Disease-free survivals at 1-, 3-, and 5-year were 65%, 43%, and 43%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive liver resection for colorectal metastasis is safe, feasible, and oncologically comparable to open liver resection for both minor and major liver resections, even with prior intra-abdominal operations, in selected patients and when performed by experienced surgeons.

Bleeding and hemostasis in laparoscopic liver surgery

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver resection is gaining acceptance worldwide. However, the laparoscopic approach often is reserved for small segmental resections due to the fear of significant blood loss. The expansion of laparoscopic liver surgery will depend on the ability of expert surgeons and technological advances to address the management of bleeding and hemostasis with any new approach. The 4(1/2)- year experience of a single center performing totally laparoscopic liver resections is presented, with special reference to the techniques the authors have developed to limit blood loss.

METHODS

Between 2003 and 2007, 80 patients underwent laparoscopic liver surgery for benign and malignant conditions including colorectal cancer metastases (n = 31), hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 6), neuroendocrine tumor (n = 3), cystic lesion (n = 10), adenoma (n = 8), and focal nodular hyperplasia (n = 7). Totally laparoscopic resections included sectionectomy (n = 27), hemihepatectomy (n = 10), and single/multiple segmentectomies (n = 21). Data for all resections were recorded and analyzed retrospectively to assess blood loss, hospital stay, and morbidity.

RESULTS

The median operative time was 150 min, and the median blood loss was 120 ml, with significantly more blood loss for right-sided transections than for the left liver surgery (821 vs 147 ml; p = 0.012). Four (57%) of seven resections converted to open procedures because of bleeding. No deaths occurred, and only two patients required intraoperative blood transfusions. There were eight complications and one bile leak. The median length of hospital stay was 3 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' experience with 80 totally laparoscopic liver resections over a 4(1/2)-year period demonstrates that laparoscopic liver surgery is safe and effective in experienced hands for major resections. An intimate knowledge of the technology and techniques available for preventing and managing significant hemorrhage during laparoscopic liver resection is required for all surgeons performing laparoscopic liver surgery.

Laparoscopic liver resection: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) are not clarified. The objective of this article is to depict the state of the art of LLR by means of a systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

Studies about LLR published before September 2008 were identified and their results summarized.

RESULTS

Indications for laparoscopic hepatectomy do not differ from those for open surgery. Technical feasibility is the only limiting factor. Bleeding is the major intraoperative concern, but, if managed by an expert surgeon, do not worsen outcomes. Hand assistance can be useful in selected cases to avoid conversion. Patient selection must take both tumor location and size into consideration. Potentially good candidates are patients with peripheral lesions requiring limited hepatectomy or left lateral sectionectomy; their outcomes, including reduced blood loss, morbidity, and hospital stay, are better than those of their laparotomic counterparts. The same advantages have been observed in cirrhotics. Laparoscopic major hepatectomies and resections of postero-superior segments need further evaluation. The results of LLR in cancer patients seem to be similar to those obtained with the laparotomic approach, especially in cases of hepatocellular carcinoma, but further analysis is required.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection is safe and feasible. The laparoscopic approach can be recommended for peripheral lesions requiring limited hepatectomy or left lateral sectionectomy. Preliminary oncological results suggest non-inferiority of laparoscopic to laparotomic procedures.