Comparative evaluation of laparoscopic liver resection for posterosuperior and anterolateral segments

Comparative cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were conducted. Surface under cumulative ranking area values, mean difference, odds ratio, and 95% credible intervals were calculated for all outcomes. Cluster analysis was performed to determine the most cost-effective clustering approach. Costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, and costs-efficacy were the primary outcomes assessed, with postoperative overall morbidity, mortality, and length of stay associated with total costs for open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic liver resection incurred the lowest total costs (laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection: mean difference -2,529.84, 95% credible intervals -4,192.69 to -884.83; laparoscopic liver resection versus robotic liver resection: mean difference -3,363.37, 95% credible intervals -5,629.24 to -1,119.38). Open liver resection had the lowest procedural costs but incurred the highest hospitalization costs compared to laparoscopic liver resection and robotic liver resection. Conversely, robotic liver resection had the highest total and procedural costs but the lowest hospitalization costs. Robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection had a significantly reduced length of stay than open liver resection and showed less postoperative morbidity. Laparoscopic liver resection resulted in the lowest readmission and liver-specific complication rates. Laparoscopic liver resection and robotic liver resection demonstrated advantages in costs-morbidity efficiency. While robotic liver resection offered notable benefits in mortality and length of stay, these were balanced against its highest total costs, presenting a nuanced trade-off in the costs-mortality and costs-efficacy analyses.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resection represents a more cost-effective option for hepatectomy with superior postoperative outcomes and shorter length of stay than open liver resection. Robotic liver resection, though costlier than laparoscopic liver resection, along with laparoscopic liver resection, consistently exceeds open liver resection in surgical performance.

Explainable artificial intelligence prediction-based model in laparoscopic liver surgery for segments 7 and 8: an international multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming more useful as a decision-making and outcomes predictor tool. We have developed AI models to predict surgical complexity and the postoperative course in laparoscopic liver surgery for segments 7 and 8.

METHODS

We included patients with lesions located in segments 7 and 8 operated by minimally invasive liver surgery from an international multi-institutional database. We have employed AI models to predict surgical complexity and postoperative outcomes. Furthermore, we have applied SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to make the AI models interpretable. Finally, we analyzed the surgeries not converted to open versus those converted to open.

RESULTS

Overall, 585 patients and 22 variables were included. Multi-layer Perceptron (MLP) showed the highest performance for predicting surgery complexity and Random Forest (RF) for predicting postoperative outcomes. SHAP detected that MLP and RF gave the highest relevance to the variables "resection type" and "largest tumor size" for predicting surgery complexity and postoperative outcomes. In addition, we explored between surgeries converted to open and non-converted, finding statistically significant differences in the variables "tumor location," "blood loss," "complications," and "operation time."

CONCLUSION

We have observed how the application of SHAP allows us to understand the predictions of AI models in surgical complexity and the postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic liver surgery in segments 7 and 8.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Liver Resections for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients With Metabolic Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To compare minimally invasive (MILR) and open liver resections (OLRs) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with metabolic syndrome (MS).

BACKGROUND

Liver resections for HCC on MS are associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. No data on the minimally invasive approach in this setting exist.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A multicenter study involving 24 institutions was conducted. Propensity scores were calculated, and inverse probability weighting was used to weight comparisons. Short-term and long-term outcomes were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 996 patients were included: 580 in OLR and 416 in MILR. After weighing, groups were well matched. Blood loss was similar between groups (OLR 275.9±3.1 vs MILR 226±4.0, P =0.146). There were no significant differences in 90-day morbidity (38.9% vs 31.9% OLRs and MILRs, P =0.08) and mortality (2.4% vs 2.2% OLRs and MILRs, P =0.84). MILRs were associated with lower rates of major complications (9.3% vs 15.3%, P =0.015), posthepatectomy liver failure (0.6% vs 4.3%, P =0.008), and bile leaks (2.2% vs 6.4%, P =0.003); ascites was significantly lower at postoperative day 1 (2.7% vs 8.1%, P =0.002) and day 3 (3.1% vs 11.4%, P <0.001); hospital stay was significantly shorter (5.8±1.9 vs 7.5±1.7, P <0.001). There was no significant difference in overall survival and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

MILR for HCC on MS is associated with equivalent perioperative and oncological outcomes to OLRs. Fewer major complications, posthepatectomy liver failures, ascites, and bile leaks can be obtained, with a shorter hospital stay. The combination of lower short-term severe morbidity and equivalent oncologic outcomes favor MILR for MS when feasible.

Procedural outcomes of laparoscopic caudate lobe resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A systematic review was conducted in compliance with PRISMA statement standards to identify all studies reporting outcomes of laparoscopic resection of benign or malignant lesions located in caudate lobe of liver. Pooled outcome data were calculated using random-effects models. A total of 196 patients from 12 studies were included. Mean operative time, volume of intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 225 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], 181-269 minutes), 134 mL (95% CI, 85-184 mL), and 7 days (95% CI, 5-9 days), respectively. The pooled risk of need for intraoperative transfusion was 2% (95% CI, 0%-5%). It was 3% (95% CI, 1%-6%) for conversion to open surgery, 6% (95% CI, 0%-19%) for need for intra-abdominal drain, 1% (95% CI, 0%-3%) for postoperative mortality, 2% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for biliary leakage, 2% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for intra-abdominal abscess, 1% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for biliary stenosis, 1% (95% CI, 0%-3%) for postoperative bleeding, 1% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for pancreatic fistula, 2% (95% CI, 1%-5%) for pulmonary complications, 1% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for paralytic ileus, and 1% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for need for reoperation. Although the available evidence is limited, the findings of the current study might be utilized for hypothesis synthesis in future studies. They can be used to inform surgeons and patients about estimated risks of perioperative complications until a higher level of evidence is available.

Laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resection for large (≥ 50 mm) colorectal metastases

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, patients with large liver tumors (≥ 50 mm) have been considered for anatomic major hepatectomy. Laparoscopic resection of large liver lesions is technically challenging and often performed by surgeons with extensive experience. The current study aimed to evaluate the surgical and oncologic safety of laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resection in patients with large colorectal metastases.

METHODS

Patients who primarily underwent laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resection (less than 3 consecutive liver segments) for colorectal liver metastases between 1999 and 2019 at Oslo University Hospital were analyzed. In some recent cases, a computer-assisted surgical planning system was used to better visualize and understand the patients' liver anatomy, as well as a tool to further improve the resection strategy. The surgical and oncologic outcomes of patients with large (≥ 50 mm) and small (< 50 mm) tumors were compared. Multivariable Cox-regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for survival.

RESULTS

In total 587 patients met the inclusion criteria (large tumor group, n = 59; and small tumor group, n = 528). Median tumor size was 60 mm (range, 50-110) in the large tumor group and 21 mm (3-48) in the small tumor group (p < 0.001). Patient age and CEA level were higher in the large tumor group (8.4 μg/L vs. 4.6 μg/L, p < 0.001). Operation time and conversion rate were similar, while median blood loss was higher in the large tumor group (500 ml vs. 200 ml, p < 0.001). Patients in the large tumor group had shorter 5 year overall survival (34% vs 49%, p = 0.027). However, in the multivariable Cox-regression analysis tumor size did not impact survival, unlike parameters such as age, ASA score, CEA level, extrahepatic disease at liver surgery, and positive lymph nodes in the primary tumor.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing resections for large colorectal liver metastases provide satisfactory short and long-term outcomes.

Trocar layouts in laparoscopic liver surgery

BACKGROUND

Since the first laparoscopic wedge resection reported by Reich, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been progressively developed, acquiring safety and feasibility. The time has witnessed a milestone leap for laparoscopic hepatectomy from pure laparoscopic partial hepatectomy to anatomical hepatectomy and from minor liver resection to major liver resection. The numerous previous studies have paid more attention to the short-time and long-time surgical outcomes caused by surgical techniques corresponding to various segments and approaches. However, focus on trocar layouts remains poorly described, but it plays an indispensable role in surgical process.

METHODS

We have searched PubMed for English language articles with the key words "trocar," "laparoscopic liver resection," and "liver resection approaches."

RESULTS

This review highlighted each type of trocar layouts corresponding to specific circumstances, including targeted resection segments with various approaches. Notably, surgeon preferences and patients body habitus affect the trocar layouts to some extent as well.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there were fewer researches focus on trocar layouts, they determine the operation field and manipulation space and be likely to have an impact on outcomes of surgery. Therefore, further studies are warranted to firm the role of trocar layouts in LLR.

The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy vs. open approach: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS) is one of the most technically challenging and potentially hazardous procedures in laparoscopic liver resection. Although some available literature works demonstrated the safety and feasibility of LRPS, these data are limited to reports from a single institution and a small sample size without support from evidence-based medicine. So, we performed a meta-analysis to assess further the safety and feasibility of LRPS by comparing it with open right posterior sectionectomy (ORPS).

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for eligible studies comparing LRPS and open approaches. Random and fixed-effects models were used to calculate outcome measures.

Results

Four studies involving a total of 541 patients were identified for inclusion: 250 in the LRPS group and 291 in the ORPS group. The postoperative complication and margin were not statistically different between the two groups (OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.18 to 1.35, P = 0.17) (MD: 0.05, 95% CI: −0.47 to 0.57, P = 0.86), respectively. LRPS had a significantly longer operative time and shorter hospital stay (MD: 140.32, 95% CI: 16.73 to 263.91, P = 0.03) (MD: −1.64, 95% CI: −2.56 to −0.72, P = 0.0005) respectively.

Conclusion

Data from currently available literature suggest that LRPS performed by an experienced surgeon is a safe and feasible procedure in selected patients and is associated with a reduction in the hospital stay.

Pure laparoscopic vs. hand-assisted liver surgery for segments 7 and 8: propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection of tumors located in segments 7 and 8 are considered a complex resection. The aim of this study was to compare the intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes of patients operated by pure laparoscopic (PLS) vs hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS).

METHODS

From January 2003 to January 2021, we included patients with minimally invasive surgery for lesions located in segments 7 and 8. To overcome selection bias, we performed 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) between HALS and PLS cohorts, including 30 patients in each of the groups. Of the 60 patients who underwent PSM, we compared the first 30 patients with the following 30 patients.

RESULTS

A total of 79 LLRs were performed, 46 by HALS and 33 by PLS. After PSM, in the PLS cohort, cirrhosis was more frequent (33.3% vs. 13.3%, p = 0.02). The surgical time, blood loss, Pringle maneuver, clamping time, and morbidity were similar between both groups, but with a lower hospital stay in the PLS group (3 days vs. 4 days, p < 0.01). In the first 30 patients who underwent LLR, the use of PLS was lower than the use of HALS, increasing due to the learning curve (16.7% in the first period vs. 83.3% in the second period; p < 0.01). The hospital stay was lower in the second period due to the more frequent use of PLS (3 vs. 4 days, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

PLS presents similar intraoperative and early postoperative results with lower hospital stay for lesions located in segments 7 and 8 compared to HALS. In centers with experience in LLRs, PLS could be performed safely in these segments.

Laparoscopic versus open resections in the posterosuperior liver segments within an enhanced recovery programme (ORANGE Segments): study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A shift towards parenchymal-sparing liver resections in open and laparoscopic surgery emerged in the last few years. Laparoscopic liver resection is technically feasible and safe, and consensus guidelines acknowledge the laparoscopic approach in the posterosuperior segments. Lesions situated in these segments are considered the most challenging for the laparoscopic approach. The aim of this trial is to compare the postoperative time to functional recovery, complications, oncological safety, quality of life, survival and costs after laparoscopic versus open parenchymal-sparing liver resections in the posterosuperior liver segments within an enhanced recovery setting.

METHODS

The ORANGE Segments trial is an international multicentre randomised controlled superiority trial conducted in centres experienced in laparoscopic liver resection. Eligible patients for minor resections in the posterosuperior segments will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to undergo laparoscopic or open resections in an enhanced recovery setting. Patients and ward personnel are blinded to the treatment allocation until postoperative day 4 using a large abdominal dressing. The primary endpoint is time to functional recovery. Secondary endpoints include intraoperative outcomes, length of stay, resection margin, postoperative complications, 90-day mortality, time to adjuvant chemotherapy initiation, quality of life and overall survival. Laparoscopic liver surgery of the posterosuperior segments is hypothesised to reduce time to functional recovery by 2 days in comparison with open surgery. With a power of 80% and alpha of 0.04 to adjust for interim analysis halfway the trial, a total of 250 patients are required to be randomised.

DISCUSSION

The ORANGE Segments trial is the first multicentre international randomised controlled study to compare short- and long-term surgical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open resections in the posterosuperior segments within an enhanced recovery programme.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03270917 . Registered on September 1, 2017. Before start of inclusion.

PROTOCOL VERSION

version 12, May 9, 2017.

The learning curve of laparoscopic liver resection utilising a difficulty score

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate the learning curve of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of a single surgeon.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of liver resections was conducted. 171 patients undergoing pure LLRs between April 2008 and April 2021 were analysed. The Halls difficulty score (HDS) for theoretical predictions of intraoperative complications (IOC) during LLR was applied. IOC was defined as blood loss over 775 mL, unintentional damage to the surrounding structures, and conversion to an open approach. Theoretical association between HDS and the predicted probability of IOC was utilised to objectify the shape of the learning curve.

RESULTS

The obtained learning curve has resulted from thirteen years of surgical effort of a single surgeon. It consists of an absolute and a relative part in the mathematical description of the additive function described by the logarithmic function (absolute complexity) and fifth-degree regression curve (relative complexity). The obtained learning curve determines the functional dependency of the learning outcome versus time and indicates several local extreme values (peaks and valleys) in the learning process until proficiency is achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

This learning curve indicates an ongoing learning process for LLR. The proposed mathematical model can be applied for any surgical procedure with an existing difficulty score and a known theoretically predicted association between the difficulty score and given outcome (for example, IOC).

Laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for tumors located in right posterior segment: A single institution study

OBJECT

With the gradual advancement of laparoscopic technology, surgeries can be successfully performed with the help of laparoscopy increasingly. This study initially explored the difference between laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS) and open right posterior sectionectomy (ORPS)of liver in our center, discussed the effectiveness, benefits and safety of LRPS and introduce some surgical techniques in our center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyze 96 cases of liver tumor located in the right posterior lobe of liver in our institution from January 2015 to January 2018. There were 46 cases performed the LRPS surgery and 50 cases performed the ORPS surgery. Through analysis of the perioperative outcomes of these two groups by a case control study, we compare the differences between these two groups.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the LRPS and ORPS group in demographic and baseline characteristics before surgery. Patients in the LRPS group were significantly superior to ORPS in terms of postoperative liver function recovery, postoperative inflammatory factor level, pain sensation (3.03 ± 0.79 vs 4.58 ± 1.25), abdominal incision length (6.25 ± 2.34 vs 32.15 ± 3.21), carrying abdominal drainage tube time (3.26 ± 0.77 vs 4.83 ± 0.76), recovery of bowel function time (1.6 ± 0.61 VS 3.05 ± 0.85)and postoperative hospital stay (5.73 ± 0.99 vs 7.16 ± 0.95) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the traditional ORPS, LRPS has the advantages of minor injury, faster recovery and mild inflammatory reaction. The LRPS is safe and feasible, and it should be gradually promoted in clinical practice.

One-stage laparoscopic parenchymal sparing liver resection for bilobar colorectal liver metastases: safety, recurrence patterns and oncologic outcomes

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) of bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are challenging and the safety and long-term outcomes are unclear. In this study, the short- and long-term outcomes and recurrence patterns of one-stage LLR for bilobar CRLM were compared to single laparoscopic resection for CRLM.

METHODS

This single-center study consisted of all patients who underwent a parenchymal sparing LLR for CRLM between October 2011 and December 2018. Demographics, perioperative outcomes, short-term outcomes, oncologic outcomes and recurrence patterns were compared. Data were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

Thirty six patients underwent a LLR for bilobar CRLM and ninety patients underwent a single LLR. Demographics were similar among groups. More patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the bilobar group (55.6% vs 34.4%, P = 0.03). There was no difference in conversion rate, R0 resection and transfusion rate. Blood loss and operative time were higher in the bilobar group (250 ml (IQR 150-450) vs 100 ml (IQR 50-250), P < 0.001 and 200 min (IQR 170-230) vs 130 min (IQR 100-165), P < 0.001) and hospital stay was longer (5 days (IQR 4-7) vs 4 days (IQR 3-6), P = 0.015). The bilobar group had more technically major resections (88.9% vs 56.7%, P < 0.001). Mortality was nil in both groups and major morbidity was similar (2.8% vs 3.3%, P = 1.0). There was no difference in recurrence pattern. Overall survival (OS) was similar (1 yr: 96% in both groups and 5 yr 76% vs 66%, P = 0.49), as was recurrence-free survival (RFS) (1 yr: 64% vs 73%, 3 yr: 38 vs 42%, 5 yr: 38% vs 28%, P = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, LLR for bilobar CRLM can be performed safely with similar oncologic outcomes as patients who underwent a single LLR for CRLM.

Evaluation of accuracy of laparoscopic liver mono-segmentectomy using the Glissonian approach with indocyanine green fluorescence negative staining by comparing estimated and actual resection volumes: A single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver mono-segmentectomy (LLMS) may improve patient outcomes, but it is difficult and its accuracy and safety are unknown. We evaluated the accuracy of LLMS using Glissonian approach with indocyanine green fluorescence (ICG) negative staining.

METHODS

Seventy-four patients eligible for LLMS except for segment 1 were enrolled. Preoperative three-dimensional CT-based surgical simulation was used to determine estimated liver resection volume (ELRV), which was compared with modified actual liver resection volume (ALRV) obtained from actual liver resection mass. The LLMS accuracy was also evaluated based on operator's experience (attending surgeon [AS] or trainee surgeon [TS]).

RESULTS

Estimated liver resection volumes significantly correlated with ALRVs (r = .82) in all cases. Moreover, TS-conducted LLMS also showed acceptable difference between ELRV and ALRV compared with AS-conducted LLMS. There were no intergroup differences in estimated blood loss, operation time, time of Pringle maneuver, postoperative complications, and length of postoperative hospitalization (P < .05). Moreover, R0 resection was comparable between the AS and TS groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver mono-segmentectomy with Glissonian approach using ICG negative imaging ensured safe and accurate procedure owing to facilitated visualization of the resection line. Our approach was effective in avoiding postoperative liver dysfunction and securing radical resection. In addition, it might be helpful in TS education of LLMS.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Tumors in the Posterosuperior Segments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection for tumors in the posterosuperior segments.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement standards. We conducted a search of electronic information sources to identify all studies comparing outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection for tumors in the posterosuperior segments. We used the Risk Of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. Fixed-effect or random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data.

RESULTS

We identified 11 observational studies, enrolling a total of 1023 patients. The included population in both groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics. Laparoscopic approach was associated with lower risks of total complications [odds ratio (OR): 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33, 0.61; P<0.00001], major complications (Dindo-Clavien III or more) (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.36, 0.73; P=0.0002), and intraoperative blood loss [mean difference (MD): -114.71; 95% CI: -165.64, -63.79; P<0.0001]. Laparoscopic approach was associated with longer operative time (MD: 50.28; 95% CI: 22.29, 78.27; P=0.0004) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD: -2.01; 95% CI: -2.09, -1.92; P<0.00001) compared with open approach. There was no difference between the 2 groups in terms of need for blood transfusion (OR: 1.23; 95% CI: 0.75, 2.02; P=0.41), R0 resection (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.66, 1.81; P=0.72), postoperative mortality (risk difference: -0.00; 95% CI: -0.02, 0.02; P=0.68), and need for readmission (OR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.19, 2.60; P=0.60). In terms of oncological outcomes, there was no difference between the groups in terms disease recurrence (OR: 1.58; 95% CI: 0.95, 2.63; P=0.08), overall survival (OS) at maximum follow-up (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.66, 1.81; P=0.73), 1-year OS (OR: 1.53; 95% CI: 0.48, 4.92; P=0.47), 3-year OS (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.67, 2.37; P=0.48), 5-year OS (OR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.41, 1.99; P=0.80), disease-free survival (DFS) at maximum follow-up (OR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.65, 1.27; P=0.56), 1-year DFS (OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.60, 1.81; P=0.88), 3-year DFS (OR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.75, 1.69; P=0.57), and 5-year DFS (OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.44, 1.24; P=0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the open approach in liver resection for tumors in the posterosuperior segments, the laparoscopic approach seems to be associated with a lower risk of postoperative morbidity, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter length of hospital stay with comparable survival and oncological outcomes. The best available evidence is derived from observational studies with moderate quality; therefore, high-quality randomized controlled trials with adequate statistical power are required to provide a more robust basis for definite conclusions.

Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Liver Resections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Theoretical advantages of robotic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery include improved instrument dexterity, 3D visualization, and better ergonomics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine advantages of robotic surgery over laparoscopic surgery in patients undergoing liver resections.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was conducted for studies comparing robotic assisted or totally laparoscopic liver resection. Meta-analysis of intraoperative (operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, conversion rate), oncological (R0 resection rates), and postoperative (bile leak, surgical site infection, pulmonary complications, 30-day and 90-day mortality, length of stay, 90-day readmission and reoperation rates) outcomes was performed using a random effects model.

RESULT

Twenty-six non-randomized studies including 2630 patients (950 robotic and 1680 laparoscopic) were included, of which 20% had major robotic liver resection and 14% had major laparoscopic liver resection. Intraoperatively, robotic liver resection was associated with significantly less blood loss (mean: 286 vs 301 mL, p < 0.001) but longer operating time (mean: 281 vs 221 min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in conversion rates or transfusion rates between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. Postoperatively, there were no significant differences in overall complications, bile leaks, and length of hospital stay between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. However, robotic liver resection was associated with significantly lower readmission rates than laparoscopic liver resection (odds ratio: 0.43, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Robotic liver resection appears to offer some advantages compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, although both techniques appear equivalent. Importantly, the quality of evidence is generally limited to cohort studies and a high-quality randomized trial comparing both techniques is needed.

Stepwise development of laparoscopic liver resection skill using rubber traction technique

BACKGROUND

To improve patient safety, we standardized our surgical technique and implemented a stepwise strategy for surgeons learning to perform laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). The aim of the study is to describe how the stepwise training approach and standardized LLR affects surgical outcomes.

METHODS

Data from 272 consecutive patients who underwent LLR from January 2009 to December 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) of surgical failures (conversion to laparotomy, blood transfusion, or Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3) and the CUSUM of operative time were used to determine optimal number of operations needed to achieve the best surgical outcome.

RESULTS

As the surgeon moved from simple to complex procedures, the complication rates, need for transfusions, and conversion rates did not increase over time. After 53 cases of minor LLR, a learning curve of 21 cases was achieved for right hepatectomy. Blood loss and operative time significantly improved thereafter. For minor anterolateral and posterosuperior segment resections, blood loss, and operative time significantly improved at the 37th and 31st case, respectively, given that the anterolateral segments had more complex surgeries performed.

CONCLUSION

Standardization of the operative technique and the implementation of a stepwise approach to training surgeons to perform LLRs could considerably improve surgical outcomes.

Laparoscopic Anatomical Segment VII Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using the Glissonian Approach with Indocyanine Green Dye Fluorescence

BACKGROUND

Many studies confirm that anatomical resection was associated with favorable oncologic outcomes for patients with HCC who had preserved as much of the remnant liver tissue as possible.^1,2 In recent years, laparoscopic liver resection has been widely extended from minor resection to complex hepatectomy,³ However, surgery on tumors located in the posterosuperior segment remains a demanding procedure regardless of the extent of resection.⁴ Laparoscopic anatomical segment VII resection has one of the highest difficulty scores based on the tumor location due to poor accessibility, hard to exposure, and difficulty in obtaining sufficient surgical margins.^5,6 Here, we report a totally laparoscopic anatomical VII resection using the Glissonian approach with indocyanine green dye fluorescence.

METHODS

A 74-year-old man with a body mass index of 31.9 kg/m² suffered from HBV-related cirrhosis was admitted to our institution. The preoperative Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI showed a 2.7-cm HCC located in segment VIII. The preoperative AFP is 3431 ng/ml. A true anatomical segmentectomy was performed by using selective occlusion of segment VII Glissonian pedicle, which was identified from the liver hilum. Indocyanine green (ICG) dye demarcation was used as a guidance during parenchymal transection.

RESULTS

The operative time was 270 min with an estimated blood loss of 200 mL. The postoperative course was uneventful. Drainage tube was pulled out on the fourth day. The pathology confirmed the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and the surgical margin was negative. The patient was discharged on the 8th day after operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Totally laparoscopic anatomical segment VII resection is a technically challenging operation. Advanced laparoscopic skills are necessary to complete such a difficult procedure safely. Glissonian approach and ICG fluorescence imaging guide parenchyma resection could be help.

Laparoscopic versus open unisegmentectomy in two specialized centers. Feasibility and short-term results

BACKGROUND

Anatomical segmentectomy is defined as the complete removal of the Couinaud's segment. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic (LS) versus open (OS) unisegmentectomy in two high volume centers.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all consecutive unisegmentectomies from 2007 to 2017 was performed at the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and at the Hepatobiliary Center of Paul Brousse Hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 177 patients underwent unisegmentectomy: 58 LS vs 52 OS in the anterolateral segments, 33 LS vs 34 OS in the posterosuperior segments. HCC were more frequent in the OS group, whereas colorectal liver metastases were more frequently treated with LS. Blood loss (200 vs. 400 ml, p = 0.006), operative time (238 vs. 267 min, p = 0.048) and median length of stay (6 vs. 8 days, p = 0.036) were significantly lower in the LS group. The resection margins (4 mm vs. 2 mm, p = 0.763) and the overall morbidity did not differ between the two groups. In the posterosuperior segment, OS group had more pulmonary complications (9 vs. 29%, p = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic anatomical unisegmentectomies for selected patients, even with postero-superior based tumors, in specialized centers seems to be safe and feasible.

Expanding indications for laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing resection of posterosuperior liver segments in patients with colorectal metastases: comparison with open hepatectomy for immediate and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of posterosuperior segments (PSS) is still technically demanding procedure for highly selective patients. There is no long-term survival comparative estimation after LLR and open liver resection (OLR) for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) located in PSS. We aimed to compare long-term overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) after parenchyma-sparing LLR with expanding indications and open liver resection (OLR) of liver PSS in patients with CRLM.

METHODS

Two Russian centers took part in the study. Patients with missing data, hemihepatectomy and extrahepatic tumors were excluded. One of contraindications for LLR was suspicion for tumor invasion in large hepatic vessels. Logistic regression was used for 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

PSS were resected in 77 patients, which accounted for 42% of the total number of liver resections for CRLM. LLR were performed in 51 (66%) patients. Before and after matching, no differences were found between groups in the following factors: median size of the largest metastatic tumor; proximity to the large liver vessels; the rate of anatomical parenchyma sparing resection of PSS; a positive response to chemotherapy before and after surgery. Regardless of matching, the size of the largest metastases was above 50 mm in more than one-third of patients who received LLR. Before matching, intraoperative blood loss, ICU stay and hospital stay were significantly greater in the group of OLR. No 90-day mortality was observed within both groups. There were no differences in long-term oncological outcomes: 5-year OS after PSM was 78% and 63% after LLR and OLR, respectively; 4-year DFS after PSM was 27% in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing resection of PSS for CRLM are justified in majority of patients who have an indication for OLR if performed in high volume specialized centers expertized in laparoscopic liver surgery.

Feasibility of purely laparoscopic right anterior sectionectomy

BACKGROUND

Right anterior sectionectomy is complex in comparison to other liver resections. Thus, the operation has not been widely performed via a laparoscopic approach. We herein present a purely laparoscopic method for right anterior sectionectomy using the standardized techniques.

METHODS

Between May 2017 and December 2018, ten pure laparoscopic right anterior sectionectomies were performed for hepatic malignancy. To perform laparoscopic anatomical liver resection safely and securely, we developed an original surgical procedure based on the isolation of the targeted Glissonean pedicle at the hilum, with appropriate transection planes built sequentially according to anatomical landmarks. The extrahepatic right anterior Glissonean pedicle was isolated without parenchymal destruction by utilizing a unique view in the laparoscopic approach. The selective right anterior segment inflow was temporary occluded, consequently liver parenchymal transection consisted of four planes according to the demarcation line, middle hepatic vein (MHV), right anterior Glissonean pedicle, and right hepatic vein (RHV), which were used as anatomical landmarks. Transection was started between the demarcation line and ventral of the MHV (plane 1). Transection of the parenchyma was then performed from dorsal of the MHV to the right anterior Glissonean pedicle (plane 2). Parenchyma was then transected from dorsal of the RHV to the right anterior Glissonean pedicle (plane 3). We subsequently divide the right anterior Glissonean pedicle with a linear stapler. Finally, the resection plane was completed by performing parenchymal transection between the demarcation line and ventral of the RHV (plane 4).

RESULTS

The mean operation time was 446 min with 334 ml of estimated blood loss. No cases required conversion to open surgery. Bile leakage occurred as a postoperative complication in one patient. There was no mortality.

CONCLUSION

Isolating the extrahepatic Glissonean pedicle at the hilum and transection along four planes determined according to anatomical landmarks made purely laparoscopic right anterior sectionectomy feasible.

Laparoscopic or open approaches for posterosuperior and anterolateral liver resections? A propensity score based analysis of the degree of advantage

BACKGROUND

Benefits over the open technique are demonstrated for laparoscopic liver resections. Whether the degree of advantage is different for anterolateral and posterosuperior resections is investigated in this retrospective study.

METHODS

Laparoscopic anterolateral and posterosuperior resections (Lap-AL/Lap-PS) were compared with open (Open-AL/Open-PS) after propensity score matching. Mean/median differences of relevant parameters were calculated after bootstrap sampling. The degree of advantage was compared between anterolateral and posterosuperior resections and expressed as delta of differences (Δ-difference).

RESULTS

239 Lap-AL were compared with 239 matched Open-AL, and 176 Lap-PS with 176 matched Open-PS. Lap-AL showed reduced blood loss, morbidity, time to orally-controlled pain, mobilization and total stay; Lap-PS showed reduced blood loss, transfusions, morbidity, time to orally-controlled pain, mobilization, functional recovery and total stay. The degree of advantage of Lap-PS resulted significantly greater than Lap-AL blood loss (Δ-difference: 101 mL, p 0.017), transfusions (Δ-difference: 6.3%, p 0.008), morbidity (Δ-difference: 7.6%, p 0.034), time to orally-controlled pain (Δ-difference: 1 day, p 0.020) and functional recovery (Δ-difference: 1 day, p 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

While both resulting in benefit, the advantage of laparoscopy is greater for posterosuperior than anterolateral resections. Despite their technical difficulty, these should be considered among the most worthwhile laparoscopic liver resections.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection in the posterosuperior segments: a sub-group analysis from the OSLO-COMET randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection in the posterosuperior segments is technically challenging. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes for laparoscopic and open resection of colorectal liver metastases located in the posterosuperior segments.

METHODS

This was a subgroup analysis of the OSLO-COMET randomized controlled trial, where 280 patients were randomly assigned to open or laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resections of colorectal metastases. Patients with tumors in the posterosuperior segments were identified, and perioperative outcomes and health related quality of life (HRQoL) were compared.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 136 patients, 62 in the laparoscopic and 74 in the open group. The postoperative complication rate was 26% in the laparoscopic and 31% in the open group. The blood loss was less in the open group (500 vs. 250 ml, P = 0.006), but the perioperative transfusion rate was similar. The operative time was similar, while postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (2 vs. 4 days, P < 0.001). HRQoL was significantly better after laparoscopy at 1 month.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing laparoscopic or open liver resection of colorectal liver metastases in the posterosuperior segments, laparoscopic surgery was associated with shorter hospital stay and comparable perioperative outcomes.

Pure laparoscopic versus open hemihepatectomy: a critical assessment and realistic expectations - a propensity score-based analysis of right and left hemihepatectomies from nine European tertiary referral centers

INTRODUCTION

A stronger evidence level is needed to confirm the benefits and limits of laparoscopic hemihepatectomies.

METHODS

Laparoscopic and open hemihepatectomies from nine European referral centers were compared after propensity score matching (right and left hemihepatectomies separately, and benign and malignant diseases sub-analyses).

RESULTS

Five hundred and forty-five laparoscopic hemihepatectomies were compared with 545 open. Laparoscopy was associated with reduced blood loss (P < 0.001), postoperative stay (P < 0.001) and minor morbidity (P = 0.002), supported by a lower Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) (P = 0.035). Laparoscopic right hemihepatectomies were associated with lower ascites (P = 0.016), bile leak (P = 0.001) and wound infections (P = 0.009). Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomies exhibited a lower incidence of bile leak and cardiovascular complications (P = 0.024; P = 0.041), lower minor and major morbidity (P = 0.003; P = 0.044) and reduced CCI (P = 0.002). Laparoscopic major hepatectomies (LMH) for benign disease were associated with lower blood loss (P = 0.001) and bile leaks (P = 0.037) and shorter total stay (P < 0.001). LMH for malignancy were associated with lower blood loss (P < 0.001) and minor morbidity (P = 0.027) supported by a lower CCI (P = 0.021) and shorter stay (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This multicenter study confirms some associated advantages of laparoscopic left and right hemihepatectomies in malignant and benign conditions highlighting the need for realistic expectations of the minimally invasive approach based on the resected hemiliver and the patients treated.

Multicentre analysis of the learning curve for laparoscopic liver resection of the posterosuperior segments

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection demands expertise and a long learning curve. Resection of the posterosuperior segments is challenging, and there are no data on the learning curve. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve for laparoscopic resection of the posterosuperior segments.

METHODS

A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis of the difficulty score for resection was undertaken using patient data from four specialized centres. Risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis of duration of operation, blood loss and conversions was performed, adjusting for the difficulty score of the procedures. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify the completion of the learning curve.

RESULTS

According to the CUSUM analysis of 464 patients, the learning curve showed an initial decrease in the difficulty score followed by an increase and, finally, stabilization. More patients with cirrhosis or previous surgery were operated in the latest phase of the learning curve. A smaller number of wedge resections and a larger number of anatomical resections were performed progressively. Dissection using a Cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator and the Pringle manoeuvre were used more frequently with time. Risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis showed a progressive decrease in operating time. Blood loss initially increased slightly, then stabilized and finally decreased over time. A similar trend was found for conversions. The learning curve was estimated to be 40 procedures for wedge and 65 for anatomical resections.

CONCLUSION

The learning curve for laparoscopic liver resection of the posterosuperior segments consists of a stepwise process, during which accurate patient selection is key.

Laparoscopic liver resection for segment VII lesion using a combination of rubber band retraction method and flexible laparoscope

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for tumors involving segment VII has been considered a contraindication. Herein, our proposed laparoscopic technique for segment VII lesions using a rubber band retraction method and flexible laparoscope is introduced.

METHODS

A combination of elastic rubber band retraction method and flexible laparoscope was applied to access segment VII lesion. The perioperative outcomes and pathologic results were compared between patients with segment VII lesions (group 1) and patients with tumors in other segments (group 2) to evaluate feasibility and safety of the proposed laparoscopic approach for segment VII lesions.

RESULTS

Among 167 patients who underwent LLR from May 2014 to October 2017, the study population included 17 patients with tumors in segment VII (group 1) and 66 patients with tumors in other segments (group 2). The demographics of the two groups were comparable. One open conversion occurred in group 2 due to bleeding. The mean tumor size was 2.6 ± 1.0 and 2.5 ± 1.5 cm (p = 0.392) and surgical margin was 1.2 ± 0.7 and 1.3 ± 1.2 cm (p = 0.344) in group 1 and group 2, respectively. The mean operation time was 151 ± 63 and 131 ± 57 min (p = 0.596) and estimated mean blood loss was 294 ± 281 and 306 ± 405 mL (p = 0.610), in group 1 and group 2, respectively. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 6.1 ± 1.5 and 6.4 ± 2.7 days (p = 0.064) in group 1 and group 2. Two postoperative complications in both groups and no postoperative mortality occurred.

CONCLUSION

The combination technique of rubber band retraction and flexible laparoscopic camera allowed feasible and safe LLR for segment VII lesions that showed postoperative outcomes comparable to other segment lesions.

Laparoscopic Parenchymal-Sparing Hepatectomy: the New Maximally Minimal Invasive Surgery of the Liver-a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies (PSH) are liver resections with preservation of as much liver parenchyma as possible. PSH can be performed laparoscopically (LPSH), but access to the posterosuperior segments is difficult and they are challenging when there are multiple bilobar lesions; the procedure may require repositioning and may be long and cumbersome. The objective of this systematic review is to analyze the feasibility and limitations of laparoscopic PSH in the literature.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Resections were categorized by segment(s), and data regarding operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, and R0 resection were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 351 studies screened for relevance, 48 studies were reviewed. Ten publications fulfilled inclusion criteria, reporting data from 579 patients undergoing LPSH. The most common indication was CRLM (58%) followed by hepatocellular carcinoma (16%). Only 92 patients were reported to have resections of more than one tumor; the maximum number of lesions resected was seven. Of resected lesions, 21.5% were located in the cranial segments. Mean operating time was 335.2 min, estimated blood loss was 462 cc, and hospital stay was 7.6 days. Conversion rate was 9.7%, and complications occurred in 19.4% of cases. No perioperative mortality was reported. R0 resections were achieved in 87.7% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic PSH is performed and reported, but the data quality is low so far. The main limitation of LPSH is the low number of lesions resected, especially for bilobar, metastatic disease. Prospective reports with tumor-specific oncological data are desirable.

[Early outcomes of robot-assisted liver resection]

AIM

To assess an experience of robot-assisted liver resection using CUSUM-test.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The results of 46 robot-assisted liver resections were retrospectively analyzed by using of CUSUM-test.

RESULTS

There were 3 periods in development of the technology. The 1^st period - procedures with the lowest index of difficulty (n=16), the 2^nd period - expansion of the indications for difficult resections (n=18) and the 3^rd period - stabilization of the results (n=12). The dynamics of difficulty index, intraoperative blood loss, duration of procedure and morbidity (Clavien-Dindo Grade II-V) were evaluated. Five liver resections were needed to decrease blood loss and duration of the procedure. Expansion of indications was feasible after 16 procedures. Stable results were obtained after 34 liver resections.

The clinical and biological impacts of the implementation of fast-track perioperative programs in complex liver resections: A propensity score-based analysis between the open and laparoscopic approaches

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the fast-track approach in patients undergoing complex liver procedures and to analyse factors that influence morbidity and functional recovery.

METHODS

Hepatic resections (2014-2016) were stratified according to difficulty score, obtaining a group of 215 complex resections (102 laparoscopic, 163 open). The laparoscopic group was matched by propensity score with open patients to obtain the minimally invasive liver surgery group (n = 102) and the open group (n = 102).

RESULTS

Groups were similar in terms of patient and disease characteristics. The postoperative morbidity was 31.4% in the minimally invasive liver surgery and 38.2% in the open group (P = .05), and functional recovery was shorter in the minimally invasive liver surgery (respectively 4 versus 6 days, P = .041). The adherence to fast-track was high in both groups, with several items with higher penetrance in the minimally invasive liver surgery group. Among factors associated with morbidity and functional recovery, a laparoscopic approach and strict adherence to a fast-track protocol resulted in protective factors.

CONCLUSION

The combination of minimally invasive approaches and fast-track protocols allows a reduced rate of postoperative morbidity and satisfactory functional recovery even in the setting of complex liver resections. When the laparoscopic approach is not feasible, strict adherence to a fast-track program is associated with the achievement of adequate results and should be implemented.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Difficult Lesions: A Meta-Analysis

Background: The value of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for difficult lesions (located in segments I, IVa, VII, and VIII) is still controversial nowadays. The aim of this study was to summarize quantitatively the evidence related to this issue. Materials and Methods: Two investigators independently searched the Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Cochrane Library databases for eligible studies published before December 2017. The RevMan 5.3 software was utilized for statistical meta-analysis. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively. Results: Five studies with a total number of 638 patients were included in the present meta-analysis, with 274 patients in the LLR group and 364 in the open liver resection (OLR) group. The LLR did not increase the operative time (WMD 12.42 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI] -8.54 to 33.38 minutes; P = .25) or blood transfusion requirement (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.40-1.64; P = .57) compared with OLR. Conversely, LLR was associated with significantly lower intraoperative blood loss (WMD -140.57 mL; 95% CI -203.39 to -77.76 mL; P < .001), shorter hospital stay (WMD -2.88 days; 95% CI -4.84 to -0.92 days; P = .004), and lower overall morbidity (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.28-0.65; P < .001). The oncologic outcomes of R0 resection rate, surgical margin, and tumor recurrence were comparable in the two groups. Conclusion: LLR for difficult lesions in selected patients is safe, technically feasible, and advantageous when performed by experienced surgeons.

Systematic review of the feasibility and future of laparoscopic liver resection for difficult lesions

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now performed widely, but is difficult to accomplish in some anatomical locations, such as the posterosuperior segments (S7 and S8) and caudate lobe (S1). An international survey revealed that lesions in these locations are less frequently indicated for LLR than those in other segments. Recent reports from experienced centers document several case series and present technical tips for treating such lesions. The lateral approach using intercostal (transdiaphragmatic) trocars was reported to be useful for lesions in the posterosuperior segments with a semi- to full-decubitus position. The thoracoscopic approach was also reported to be useful for lesions just under the diaphragm dome, but the tumor location and patient selection should be considered carefully because pneumoperitoneum pressure and Pringle's maneuver cannot be applied. Several case series have described the feasibility of LLR for caudate lobe lesions, with similar operative outcomes to lesions in the posterosuperior segments, but this demands technical expertise. The caudal view of laparoscopy is advantageous for approaching the caudate lobe. We conducted a systematic review to clarify the feasibility of LLR for difficult lesions and discuss its current and future status.

Laparoscopic Parenchyma-sparing Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases

Background

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) is increasingly performed in specialized centers. While there is a trend towards a parenchyma-sparing strategy in multimodal treatment for CLM, its role is yet unclear. In this study we present short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resection (LPSLR) at a single center.

Patients and methods

LLR were performed in 951 procedures between August 1998 and March 2017 at Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. Patients who primarily underwent LPSLR for CLM were included in the study. LPSLR was defined as non-anatomic hence the patients who underwent hemihepatectomy and sectionectomy were excluded. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. The Accordion classification was used to grade postoperative complications. The median follow-up was 40 months.

Results

296 patients underwent primary LPSLR for CLM. A single specimen was resected in 204 cases, multiple resections were performed in 92 cases. 5 laparoscopic operations were converted to open. The median operative time was 134 minutes, blood loss was 200 ml and hospital stay was 3 days. There was no 90-day mortality in this study. The postoperative complication rate was 14.5%. 189 patients developed disease recurrence. Recurrence in the liver occurred in 146 patients (49%), of whom 85 patients underwent repeated surgical treatment (liver resection [n = 69], ablation [n = 14] and liver transplantation [n = 2]). Five-year overall survival was 48%, median overall survival was 56 months.

Conclusions

LPSLR of CLM can be performed safely with the good surgical and oncological results. The technique facilitates repeated surgical treatment, which may improve survival for patients with CLM.

Comparative analysis of learning curve in complex robot-assisted and laparoscopic liver resection

BACKGROUND

There is no comparative analysis of the learning curves for robot-assisted and laparoscopic liver resection. We aimed to compare learning curves in complex robotic and conventional laparoscopic liver resections with regards to estimation of the difficulty index score.

METHODS

The results of 131 consecutive liver resections were analyzed retrospectively (40 robot-assisted and 91 laparoscopic). The learning curve evaluation was based on calculation of procedures number before significant change of the difficulty index for minimally invasive liver resection or the rate of posterosuperior segments resection. Groups of early and late experience were compared in every type of approach (robot-assisted and laparoscopic).

RESULTS

Significant increase of difficulty index (from 5.0 [3.0-7.7] to 7.3 [4.3-10.2]) of robotic procedures required 16 procedures. It was necessary to perform 29 laparoscopic resections in order to significantly increase the rate of laparoscopic posterosuperior segments resection but without significant increase of difficulty index. The implementation of minimally invasive liver resection started with the robotic approach.

CONCLUSION

The learning curve for robot-assisted liver resections is shorter in comparison with laparoscopic resections. The inclusion of robot-assisted resections in a minimally invasive liver surgery program may be useful to rapidly increase the complexity of laparoscopic liver resections.

Laparoscopic liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma. Can we extend the surgical indication in cirrhotic patients?

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the value of laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and severe cirrhosis is still lacking. The aim of this study is to assess surgical and oncological outcomes of LLR in cirrhotic HCC patients.

METHODS

The analysis included 403 LLR for HCC from seven European centres. 333 cirrhotic and 70 non-cirrhotic patients were compared. A matched comparison was performed between 100 Child-Pugh A and 25 Child-Pugh B patients.

RESULTS

There was no difference in blood loss (250 vs. 250 mL, p 0.465) and morbidity (28.6 vs. 26.4%, p 0.473) between cirrhotics and non-cirrhotics, and liver-specific complications were similar (12.8 vs. 12%, p 0.924). The sub-analysis revealed similar perioperative outcomes in either Child-Pugh A or B patients. Noteworthy, ascitis (11 vs. 12%, p 0.562) and liver failure (3 vs. 4%, p 0.595) were not different. ASA score (OR 1.76, p 0.034) and conversion (OR 2.99, p 0.019) were risk factors for major morbidity. Despite lower recurrence-free survival in cirrhotics (43 vs. 55 months, p 0.034), overall survival was similar to non-cirrhotic patients (84 vs. 76.5, p 0.598).

CONCLUSION

LLR for HCC appear equally safe in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients, and the advantages can be witnessed in those with advanced cirrhosis. Severe comorbidities and conversion should be considered risk factors for complications-rather than the severity of cirrhosis and portal hypertension-when liver resection is performed laparoscopically. Such results may be of great interest to liver surgeons and hepatologists when deciding on the management of HCC within cirrhosis.

Evolution of a laparoscopic liver resection program: an analysis of 203 cases

BACKGROUND

Techniques for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) have been developed over the past two decades. The aim of this study is to analyze the outcomes and trends of LLR.

METHODS

203 patients underwent LLR between 2006 and 2015. Trends in techniques and outcomes were assessed dividing the experience into 2 periods (before and after 2011).

RESULTS

Tumor type was malignant in 62%, and R0 resection was achieved in 87.7%. Procedures included segmentectomy/wedge resection in 64.5%. Techniques included a purely laparoscopic approach in 59.1% and robotic 12.3%. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 6.4% cases. Mean hospital stay was 3.7 ± 0.2 days. 90-day mortality was 0% and morbidity 20.2%. Pre-coagulation and the robot were used less often, while the performance of resections for posteriorly located tumors increased in the second versus the first period.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the safety and efficacy of LLR, while describing the evolution of a program regarding patient and technical selection. With building experience, the number of resections performed for posteriorly located tumors have increased, with less reliance on pre-coagulation and the robot.

Totally laparoscopic anatomical liver resection for centrally located tumors: A single center experience

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is a common procedure that has been reported frequently; however, laparoscopic resection of centrally located tumors involving segments 4, 5, and 8 remains a technically difficult procedure because it requires 2 transection planes and dissection of numerous branches of the hepatic vein and glissonean capsule compared to hemi-hepatectomy. Here, we present 7 cases of totally laparoscopic right anterior sectionectomy (Lap-RAS) and 3 cases of totally laparoscopic central bisectionectomy (Lap-CBS).Between May 2013 and January 2015, 10 totally laparoscopic anatomical resections of centrally located tumors were performed in our institution. The median age of the patients was 54.2 (38-72) years and the median ICG-R15 was 10.4 (3.9-17.4). There were 8 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and 2 with metastatic colorectal cancer. All the HCC patients has the liver function impairment on the degree of Child-Pugh score A.The mean operation time was 330 ± 92.7 minutes with an estimated blood loss of 325 ± 234.5 mL. Only 1 patient required transfusion during surgery. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 9.5 ± 3.4 day and postop complication was reported only 1 case that has the fluid collection at the resection margin of the liver. Mean resection margin was 8.5 ± 6.1 mm and tumor size was 2.9 ± 1.9 cm.Totally lap-RAS and lap-CBS are feasible operative procedures in patients with centrally located tumor of the liver and particularly in patients with limited liver function such as those with cirrhosis.

Prospective cohort study of laparoscopic and open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with a diameter of 5 cm or less is well recognized. The role of laparoscopy in treating large HCC (5-10 cm) remains controversial. This prospective cohort study was undertaken to assess the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic hepatectomy for large HCC and to compare this approach with open hepatectomy.

METHODS

Patients with a solitary HCC (diameter 5-10 cm) who underwent open or laparoscopic hepatectomy were enrolled in a prospective observational study from January 2012 to April 2015. Perioperative and follow-up data were analysed.

RESULTS

Some 128 patients underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy and 207 had an open hepatectomy. One and two perioperative deaths were reported in the laparoscopic and open groups respectively. Laparoscopic hepatectomy was converted to an open procedure in 12 (9·4 per cent) of 128 patients. More patients in the laparoscopic group underwent an anatomical hepatectomy than in the open group (45·3 versus 21·7 per cent; P = 0·001). The postoperative complication rate was 20·3 per cent for the laparoscopic group versus 35·7 per cent for the open group (P = 0·003). Mean(s.d.) duration of hospital stay was 11·4(3·1) and 15·8(7·7) days respectively (P < 0·001). One- and 3-year overall survival rates in the laparoscopic and open groups were 94·4 versus 93·6 per cent (P = 0·875), and 81·4 versus 82·2 per cent (P = 0·802), respectively. One- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 89·4 versus 88·7 per cent (P = 0·825), and 67·3 versus 66·7 per cent (P = 0·902), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic hepatectomy is safe and feasible for the treatment of patients with large HCC.

Current status and future perspective of laparoscopic surgery in hepatobiliary disease

Recent advances in minimally invasive surgery include laparoscopic and robotic surgery. These surgical techniques have changed the paradigm of surgical treatment for hepatobiliary diseases. Minimally invasive surgery has the advantages of minimal wound extension for cosmetic effect, early postoperative recovery, and few postoperative complications in patients. For laparoscopic liver resection, the indications have been expanded and oncological outcome was proven to be similar with open surgery in the malignant disease. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a classical operation for benign gallbladder diseases and the effort to decrease the surgical wound resulted to perform single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. For choledochal cyst, laparoscopic surgery is applied gradually despite of the difficulties associated with anastomosis, and robotic surgery for hepatobiliary disease is also performed for more minimally invasive surgery; however, while admitting the advantage of robotic surgery, robotic technology should be improved for development of more convenient and cheaper instrument and continuous efforts to enhance surgical technique to overcome long operation is necessary. In this review, the status and future perspectives of minimally invasive surgery for hepatobiliary diseases are summarized and discussed.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection: a systematic review and pooled analysis of minor and major hepatectomies

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery has been introduced to overcome the limitations of conventional laparoscopy. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the safety and feasibility for three subgroups of robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection: (i) minor resections of easily accessible segments: 2/3, 4B, 5, 6, (ii) minor resections of difficult located segments: 1, 4A, 7, 8 and (iii) major resections: ≥ 4 segments.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library.

RESULTS

Twelve observational, mostly retrospective studies reporting on 363 patients were included. Data were pooled and analyzed. For subgroup (i) (n = 81) the weighted mean operative time was 215 ± 65 min. One conversion (1%) to laparotomy was needed. Weighted mean operative time for subgroup (ii) (n = 17) was 220 ± 60 min. No conversions were needed. For subgroup (iii) (n = 99) the weighted mean operative time was 405 ± 100 min. In this subgroup 8 robotic procedures (8%) were converted to open surgery.

CONCLUSION

Data show that robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection is feasible in minor resections of all segments and major resections. Larger, prospective studies are warranted to compare the possible advantages of robot-assisted surgery with conventional laparoscopy and open surgery.

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.

Laparoscopic liver resection for posterosuperior and anterolateral lesions-a comparison experience in an Asian centre

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery has been one of the recent developments in liver surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was initially performed for benign lesions at easily accessible locations. As the surgical techniques, technology and experience improved over the past decades, LLR surgery had evolved to tackle malignant lesions, major resections and even in difficult locations without compromising safety and principles of oncology. It was also shown to be beneficial in cirrhotic patients. We describe our initial experience with LLR in a population with significant proportion having cirrhosis, emphasising our approach for lesions in the posterosuperior (PS) segments of the liver (segments 1, 4a, 7, and 8).

METHODS

A review of patients undergoing LLR in single institution from 2006 to 2015 was performed from a prospective surgical database. Clinicopathological, operative and perioperative parameters were analyzed to compare outcomes in patients who underwent LLR for PS vs. anterolateral lesions (AL).

RESULTS

LLR was performed in consecutive 197 patients, with a mean age of 60 years. The indications for resection were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (n=105; 53%), colorectal cancer liver metastasis (n=31; 16%), other malignancies (n=19; 10%) and benign lesions (n=42; 21%). A significant proportion had liver cirrhosis (25.9%). More females underwent surgery in the AL group and indications for surgery were similar between both groups. Major liver resection was performed more frequently for the PS group than for the AL group (P<0.001) and significantly more PS resections was performed in our latter experience (P=0.02). The mean operative time and the conversion rate were significantly greater in the PS group than in the AL group (P≤0.001 and 0.03, respectively). However, the estimated blood loss (EBL), rate of blood transfusion and mean postoperative stay were similar in the two groups (P=0.04, 0.88 and 0.92, respectively). The overall 90-day morbidity and mortality rate was 21.3% and 0.5% respectively, with no differences between the two groups. Surrogates of difficulty such as operative time, blood loss, conversion and outcomes e.g., morbidity and mortality, were similar in patients who underwent PS resections with or without cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR in selected patients is technically feasible and safe including cirrhotic patients with lesions in the PS segments.

Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Liver

Operations on the liver have been undertaken for centuries for numerous indications including trauma, infections, and even for malignancy, but it was not until the past few decades that rates dramatically increased. This expanse in liver operations is due to a multitude of factors, including broader indications as well as improved safety. Our understanding of metastatic disease to the liver, especially colorectal cancer metastases, has vastly amplified the number of patients who would be candidates for hepatic resections and liver-directed therapies. We will focus our discussion here on planned minimally invasive operations for benign and malignant tumors as the majority of the literature relates to this setting.

Laparoscopic Transabdominal With Transdiaphragmatic Access Improves Resection of Difficult Posterosuperior Liver Lesions

OBJECTIVE

We describe the technical details and evaluate the safety, feasibility, and usefulness of a combined lateral and abdominal (CLA) approach for laparoscopic resection of liver segments 7 and 8.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection of lesions in the posterosuperior area of segments 7 and 8 is technically challenging, and currently there is no standardized laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

Through review of a prospectively maintained database, we identified 44 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of lesions in segment 7 or 8. Twenty-five patients required the CLA approach because their lesions were more posterosuperior and intraparenchymal; 19 patients underwent resection with a regular abdominal-only approach of more accessible anteroinferior lesions. We reviewed operative details and video footage of these operations and compared the outcomes of the 2 groups.

RESULTS

In the group treated with the CLA approach, deep location was more frequent (88% vs 42%; P = 0.035), median tumor diameter was larger (24.5 mm vs 15 mm; P = 0.114), and the median weight of the excised parenchyma was greater (56.5 g vs 23 g; P = 0.093). Median operative time was longer in the CLA approach group (217.5 minutes vs 165 minutes; P = 0.046), but blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, surgical margin status, morbidity, and mortality were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CLA approach permits safe laparoscopic resection of lesions in the posterosuperior area of segments 7 and 8, allowing surgeons to overcome the difficulties of limited visualization and access to the target lesions.

Appraisal of Laparoscopic Liver Resection in the Treatment of Liver Metastasis with Special Reference to Outcome in Colorectal Malignancies

Treatment of metastatic liver disease is at the crossroads of an evolutionary transformation with more and more reports reiterating the benefits of resectional therapy in various cancers. A quest for application of laparoscopic approaches to the management of liver metastasis has arisen due to the projected benefits of less morbidity, early recovery, and equivalent oncological outcome in selected malignancies. However, the diverse and heterogenous data on indications, operative technique, and outcome evaluation make a comparative analysis of these studies difficult. This review is an appraisal of technique and outcome of minimally invasive liver resection as reported in the current literature with special reference to treatment of metastatic colorectal cancers.