Laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastases: a propensity score matching analysis. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:1853-1862. [PMID: 26275554 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4467-4]

Colorectal Cancer: Current Updates and Future Perspectives

Colorectal cancer is a frequent neoplasm in western countries, mainly due to dietary and behavioral factors. Its incidence is growing in developing countries for the westernization of foods and lifestyles. An increased incidence rate is observed in patients under 45 years of age. In recent years, the mortality for CRC is decreased, but this trend is slowing. The mortality rate is reducing in those countries where prevention and treatments have been implemented. The survival is increased to over 65%. This trend reflects earlier detection of CRC through routine clinical examinations and screening, more accurate staging through advances in imaging, improvements in surgical techniques, and advances in chemotherapy and radiation. The most important predictor of survival is the stage at diagnosis. The screening programs are able to reduce incidence and mortality rates of CRC. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of incidence, mortality, and survival rate for CRC.

Artificial Intelligence to Early Predict Liver Metastases in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: Current Status and Future Prospectives

BACKGROUND

Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based analysis represents an evolving medical field. In the last few decades, several studies have reported the diagnostic efficiency of AI applied to Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) to early detect liver metastases (LM), mainly from colorectal cancer. Despite the increase in information and the development of different procedures in several radiological fields, an accurate method of predicting LM has not yet been found. This review aims to compare the diagnostic efficiency of different AI methods in the literature according to accuracy, sensibility, precision, and recall to identify early LM.

METHODS

A narrative review of the literature was conducted on PubMed. A total of 336 studies were screened.

RESULTS

We selected 17 studies from 2012 to 2022. In total, 14,475 patients were included, and more than 95% were affected by colorectal cancer. The most frequently used imaging tool to early detect LM was found to be CT (58%), while MRI was used in three cases. Four different AI analyses were used: deep learning, radiomics, machine learning, and fuzzy systems in seven (41.18%), five (29.41%), four (23.53%), and one (5.88%) cases, respectively. Four studies achieved an accuracy of more than 90% after MRI and CT scan acquisition, while just two reported a recall rate ≥90% (one method using MRI and CT and one CT).

CONCLUSIONS

Routinely acquired radiological images could be used for AI-based analysis to early detect LM. Simultaneous use of radiomics and machine learning analysis applied to MRI or CT images should be an effective method considering the better results achieved in the clinical scenario.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Recent Advances in Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases-A Review

Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches to liver resection have been increasingly adopted into use for surgery on colorectal cancer liver metastases. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the outcomes when comparing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), robotic liver resection (RLR), and open liver resection (OLR) for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) in 39 studies (2009-2022) that include a case-matched series, propensity score analyses, and three randomized clinical trials. LLR is associated with less intraoperative blood loss and shorter hospital stay compared with OLR. LLR can be performed with comparable operative time. LLR has similar rates of perioperative complications and mortality as OLR. There were no significant differences in 5-year overall or disease-free survival between approaches. Robotic liver resection (RLR) has comparable perioperative safety to LLR and may improve rates of R0 resection in certain patients. Finally, MIS approaches to the hepatic resection of CRLM reduce the time from liver resection to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy. Thus, MIS liver surgery should be considered in the array of options for patients with CRLM, though thoughtful patient selection and surgeon experience should be part of that decision.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic, hybrid, and open resection in colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: a propensity score-matched study

We aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic, hybrid, and open resection for colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 647 patients with simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases between January 2006 and December 2018 at three tertiary referral hospitals. Patient’s baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, pathological examination results, liver-specific recurrence rate and survivals were compared between the propensity score-matched groups. Forty-two and 81 patients were selected for the laparoscopic vs. hybrid groups, and 48 and 136 patients for laparoscopic vs. open groups, respectively. The laparoscopic group had fewer wound complications (2.1 vs. 13.2%; p = 0.028) than the open group, and a shorter postoperative hospital stay than the hybrid and open groups (8 vs. 11 days, p < 0.001 for both). The 5-year liver-specific recurrence rates were 38.7% and 46.0% in the laparoscopic and hybrid groups, respectively (p = 0.270), and 34.0% and 37.0% in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively (p = 0.391). Simultaneous laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer and liver metastases can be performed safely with significantly enhanced postoperative recovery and comparable long-term outcomes compared to hybrid and open resection.

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Laparoscopic Versus Open Simultaneous Resection of Primary Colorectal Cancer and Associated Liver Metastases: A Comparative Retrospective Study

PURPOSE

The aim was to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) undergoing laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection with simultaneous resection for liver metastases. Currently there is a lack of studies that have investigated the oncosurgical aspects and the short and long-term outcomes from these procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study of patients who underwent simultaneous resections for CRC and synchronous liver metastases between 2008 and 2019 in 2 university affiliated medical centers.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were identified of whom 21 had successful laparoscopic simultaneous resections. In 43% of patients, the primary tumor was located in the right colon. The 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were 87% and 48%, respectively. When compared with a separate control group of 42 patients who underwent conventional open resections, the laparoscopic approach was associated with an increased operative time (286 vs. 225 min, P=0.05), but a shorter hospital stay (6 vs. 8 d, P=0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and parenchymal sparing liver resection for metastatic CRC is safe, feasible, and it is a preferable approach because of better short-term outcome compared with open surgery while not compromising survival and disease recurrence.

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

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

Clinical Impact of Operative Order in Laparoscopic Simultaneous Resection for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

Curative resection for colorectal cancer and their synchronous liver metastases are increasingly performed. However, it is still unclear whether the operative order affects the surgical outcome in laparoscopic simultaneous resection of primary and liver metastatic lesions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 27 patients underwent laparoscopic simultaneous resection of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases at Kumamoto University Hospital. They were divided into two groups based on the order of resection: Colon-first (n=11) and liver-first (n=16) groups. The surgical outcomes between the two groups were retrospectively compared.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the perioperative surgical outcomes between the two groups except for operative blood loss, which was significantly less in the liver-first group [164 (range=5-820) versus 560 (range=95-2,016) ml, respectively] (p=0.0299).

CONCLUSION

In the simultaneous resection of primary and liver metastatic lesions, the operative order does not affect the short-term surgical outcomes except for operative blood loss.

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

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

Minimally invasive robotic-assisted combined colorectal and liver excision surgery: feasibility, safety and surgical technique in a pilot series

Different strategies may be adopted in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (LM). The role of laparoscopy has been investigated to define the benefits of minimally invasive surgery in a single-stage operation. In our study, we report our experience of 28 Minimally Invasive Robotic-Assisted combined Colorectal and Liver Excision Surgery (MIRACLES). From October 2012 to December 2019, 135 Robotic liver resections and 218 Robotic Colorectal resections were performed in our center. Twenty-eight patients underwent MIRACLES resection with 37 nodules removed. Fifty-two lesions in 28 patients were resected in minimally invasive robot-assisted surgery. Eighteen lesions were located in postero-superior liver segments (eight in segment VII, two in segment VIII, eight in segment IVa). Nine right colectomies, seven left colectomies, ten anterior rectal resections, one Hartmann and one MILES procedures were performed. The median surgical time of MIRACLES procedures was 332 min. Two conversions to open approach were necessary. Four major complications (> III) were observed. No postoperative mortality was recorded. The median hospital stay was 8 days. The median overall survival was 27.5 months. The MIRACLES approach is feasible and safe for colorectal resection and hepatic nodules located in all segments, with a low rate of postoperative complications. Surgical technique is demanding and should be reserved, presently, to tertiary centers.

Open and/or laparoscopic one-stage resections of primary colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: An observational study

One-stage resections of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases have been reported to be feasible and safe. Minimally invasive approaches have become more common for both colorectal and hepatic surgeries. This study aimed to investigate outcomes of these combined surgical procedures among different approaches.We retrospectively analyzed patients diagnosed as having primary colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases and who underwent 1-stage primary resection and hepatectomy with curative intent in our hospital. According to the surgical approach for the primary tumor and hepatic lesions, namely open laparotomy (Op) or laparoscopic approach (Lap), patients were classified into Op-Op, Lap-Op (laparoscopic colorectal resection plus open hepatectomy), and Lap-Lap groups, respectively. Clinicopathological factors were reviewed, and short- and long-term outcomes were compared among the groups.The Op-Op, Lap-Op, and Lap-Lap groups comprised 36, 18, and 17 patients, respectively. The superior/posterior hepatic segments were more frequently resected via an open approach. There was no laparoscopic major hepatectomy. The median volume of intraoperative blood loss was smaller in the Lap-Lap and Lap-Op groups (290 and 270 mL) than in the Op-Op group (575 mL, P = .008). The hospital stay after surgery was shorter in the Lap-Lap and Lap-Op groups (median: 17 days and 15 days, vs 19 days for the Op-Op group, P = .033). The postoperative complication rates and survivals were similar among the groups.Application of laparoscopy to 1-stage resections of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases may offer advantages of enhanced recovery from surgical treatment, given appropriate patient selection.

Impact on operative outcomes of laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of laparoscopic simultaneous resection of primary colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM) remains unclear.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated data from 258 patients who had undergone simultaneous curative resection of the primary tumor and SCRLM from 2006 to 2017. We compared surgical outcomes between open, hybrid (laparoscopic colorectal resection and open hepatectomy), and pure laparoscopic approaches. Surgical outcomes were also evaluated between the open hepatectomy (OH) group (ie, open/hybrid surgery) and the laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) group (ie, pure laparoscopic surgery) in 141 patients later in the study period (2013-2017), when the clinical indications for laparoscopic hepatectomy were restricted to simple wedge resection and/or left lateral sectionectomy in our center.

RESULTS

The pure laparoscopic approach was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and a significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay than the open and hybrid approaches. Late in the study period, operative outcomes in the LH group (n = 37) were more favorable than for the OH group (n = 104) in terms of intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay. In patients with rectal cancer, however, earlier postoperative recovery in the LH group did not differ significantly from the OH group.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic simultaneous resection of SCRLM with the primary tumor by simple hepatectomy is safe and may enhance patients' postoperative recovery, especially in patients with colon cancer.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of liver metastases from extrahepatic primary cancers 2021

BACKGROUND

Hepatectomy is standard treatment for colorectal liver metastases; however, it is unclear whether liver metastases from other primary cancers should be resected or not. The Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery therefore created clinical practice guidelines for the management of metastatic liver tumors.

METHODS

Eight primary diseases were selected based on the number of hepatectomies performed for each malignancy per year. Clinical questions were structured in the population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) format. Systematic reviews were performed, and the strength of recommendations and the level of quality of evidence for each clinical question were discussed and determined. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations.

RESULTS

The eight primary sites were grouped into five categories based on suggested indications for hepatectomy and consensus of the guidelines committee. Fourteen clinical questions were devised, covering five topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) operative treatment, (3) ablation therapy, (4) the eight primary diseases, and (5) systemic therapies. The grade of recommendation was strong for one clinical question and weak for the other 13 clinical questions. The quality of the evidence was moderate for two questions, low for 10, and very low for two. A flowchart was made to summarize the outcomes of the guidelines for the indications of hepatectomy and systemic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines were developed to provide useful information based on evidence in the published literature for the clinical management of liver metastases, and they could be helpful for conducting future clinical trials to provide higher-quality evidence.

Simultaneous colorectal and parenchymal-sparing liver resection for advanced colorectal carcinoma with synchronous liver metastases: Between conventional and mini-invasive approaches

The optimal timing of surgery in case of synchronous presentation of colorectal cancer and liver metastases is still under debate. Staged approach, with initial colorectal resection followed by liver resection (LR), or even the reverse, liver-first approach in specific situations, is traditionally preferred. Simultaneous resections, however, represent an appealing strategy, because may have perioperative risks comparable to staged resections in appropriately selected patients, while avoiding a second surgical procedure. In patients with larger or multiple synchronous presentation of colorectal cancer and liver metastases, simultaneous major hepatectomies may determine worse perioperative outcomes, so that parenchymal-sparing LR should represent the most appropriate option whenever feasible. Mini-invasive colorectal surgery has experienced rapid spread in the last decades, while laparoscopic LR has progressed much slower, and is usually reserved for limited tumours in favourable locations. Moreover, mini-invasive parenchymal-sparing LR is more complex, especially for larger or multiple tumours in difficult locations. It remains to be established if simultaneous resections are presently feasible with mini-invasive approaches or if we need further technological advances and surgical expertise, at least for more complex procedures. This review aims to critically analyze the current status and future perspectives of simultaneous resections, and the present role of the available mini-invasive techniques.

Benefits of simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal surgery and liver resection for colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: Retrospective case-matched study

Introduction

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer and liver tumors are accepted as alternative procedure to open surgery. However, few studies reported outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic surgery of these two procedures. The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open approach.

Materials and methods

Between June 2010 to December 2019, simultaneous laparoscopic cases were retrospectively matched (1:2) to open cases. Peri-operative and short-term outcomes were compared between both groups.

Results

Twelve patients in laparoscopic group were matched to 24 patients in open group according to age, gender, body mass index, american society of anesthesiologists physical status, preoperative laboratory data, number and size of liver metastases and extent of colorectal and liver resection, Most patients in each group had left-sided colon or rectal cancer and underwent wedge liver resection. The mean number of liver metastases was 1.3 vs 1.5 and size of liver metastases was 2.2 ± 1.4 vs 2.7 ± 1.1 cm in laparoscopic compared to open group. Estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay were significantly lower in laparoscopic group. However, operative time was significantly longer in laparoscopic group. Peri-operative complication was not significant difference between both groups and there was no mortality.

Conclusion

Simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal surgery and minor liver resection is feasible and safe. Laparoscopic approach has better peri-operative outcome in term of shorter length of hospital stay compared to open approach.

•

Outcome of simultaneous laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases remains controversy.

•

This study showed comparable peri-operative outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic compared to open surgery.

•

Simultaneous laparoscopic surgery had shorter length of hospital stay and less operative blood loss.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Trial registration

CRD42020151176

Survival Advantage of Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection For Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data From Randomized Trials and Propensity-score Matched Studies

OBJECTIVE

To perform an individual participant data meta-analysis using randomized trials and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies which compared laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM).

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials and PSM studies constitute the highest level of evidence in addressing the long-term oncologic efficacy of laparoscopic versus open resection for CLM. However, individual studies are limited by the reporting of overall survival in ways not amenable to traditional methods of meta-analysis, and violation of the proportional hazards assumption.

METHODS

Survival information of individual patients was reconstructed from the published Kaplan-Meier curves with the aid of a computer vision program. Frequentist and Bayesian survival models (taking into account random-effects and nonproportional hazards) were fitted to compare overall survival of patients who underwent laparoscopic versus open surgery. To handle long plateaus in the tails of survival curves, we also exploited "cure models" to estimate the fraction of patients effectively "cured" of disease.

RESULTS

Individual patient data from 2 randomized trials and 13 PSM studies involving 3148 participants were reconstructed. Laparoscopic resection was associated with a lower hazard rate of death (stratified hazard ratio = 0.853, 95% confidence interval: 0.754-0.965, P = 0.0114), and there was evidence of time-varying effects (P = 0.0324) in which the magnitude of hazard ratios increased over time. The fractions of long-term cancer survivors were estimated to be 47.4% and 18.0% in the laparoscopy and open surgery groups, respectively. At 10-year follow-up, the restricted mean survival time was 8.6 months (or 12.1%) longer in the laparoscopy arm (P < 0.0001). In a subgroup analysis, elderly patients (≥65 years old) treated with laparoscopy experienced longer 3-year average life expectancy (+6.2%, P = 0.018), and those who live past the 5-year milestone (46.1%) seem to be cured of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This patient-level meta-analysis of high-quality studies demonstrated an unexpected survival benefit in favor of laparoscopic over open resection for CLM in the long-term. From a conservative viewpoint, these results can be interpreted to indicate that laparoscopy is at least not inferior to the standard open approach.

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

Purpose:

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

Methods:

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

Results:

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

Conclusions:

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

A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open hepatectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The evidence of pairwise meta-analysis of Robotic Hepatectomy (RH) vs Laparoscopic Hepatectomy (LH) and RH vs Open Hepatectomy (OH) is inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this study, was to compare the outcomes of RH, LH and OH by performing a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in the following databases: Pubmed, Google scholar, EMBASE and Cochrane library. Cost-effectiveness and survival benefits were selected as primary outcomes.

RESULTS

The cost was less in OH compared to both minimally invasive procedures, LH demonstrated lower cost compared to RH, but the differences were not statistically significant. Both the RH and LH cohorts demonstrated significantly lower estimated blood loss, reduced major morbidity rate and shorter length of stay compared to OH cohort. The LH and OH cohorts demonstrated significantly shorter operative time and duration of clamping compared to the RH cohort. The LH cohort included significantly smaller tumours compared to the OH cohort.

CONCLUSION

The present network meta-analysis, demonstrated that both RH and LH in malignant and benign conditions were associated with lower morbidity rates, shorter hospital stay and the procedure related costs were statistically nonsignificant between RH, LH and OH.

The "Short-Cut" Laparoscopic Reverse Approach: A Novel Strategy for Synchronous Colorectal Cancer and Liver Metastases Requiring Major or Complex Procedures?

AIM

To report on the feasibility and the safety of a novel strategy in patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases (SLM) requiring major or complex procedures for both the primary and liver deposits.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The strategy consisted in performing the two major procedures (liver first and colorectal) by laparoscopy within a short interval in order to keep both oncological advantages and short-terms outcome benefits.

RESULTS

Two patients were treated with this strategy: one with a laparoscopic resection of segment VIII extended to the segment IVb followed by the laparosopic rectal resection; the second with a laparoscopic left hepatectomy with a microwave ablation of the lesion located in the segment VII followed by the laparoscopic resection of the sigmoid colon. Postoperative courses were uneventful.

CONCLUSION

The "short-cut" laparoscopic reverse approach may represent an attractive option for patients requiring major liver and colorectal resections for SLM provided expertise in laparoscopic surgery in both fields is ensured.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Highlights, limitations and future challenges of laparoscopic resection for colorectal liver metastases

The liver is the most common site for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRLM). Despite advances in oncologic treatment, resection of metastases is still the only curative option. Although laparoscopic surgery for primary colorectal cancer is well documented and widely used, laparoscopic surgery for liver metastases has developed more slowly. However, in spite of some difficulties, laparoscopic approach demonstrated strong advantages including minimal parietal damage, decreased morbidity (reduced blood loss and need for transfusion, fewer pulmonary complications), and simplification of subsequent iterative hepatectomy. Up to now, more than 9 000 laparoscopic procedures have been reported worldwide and long-term results in colorectal liver metastases seem comparable to the open approach. Only one recent randomized controlled trial has compared the laparoscopic and the open approach. The purpose of the present update was to identify the barriers limiting widespread acceptance of laparoscopic approach, the benefits and the limits of laparoscopic hepatectomies in CRLM.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Safety evaluation of simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastasis after neoadjuvant therapy: A propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Considering the surgical safety and perioperative complications, simultaneous resection after neoadjuvant therapy is not commonly recommended.

METHODS

A total of 253 patients were included in study. Comparison of the short-term outcomes was performed after propensity score adjustment in Group A (n = 96) and Group B (neoadjuvant therapy, n = 96).

RESULTS

There was no postoperative mortality. After matching, the differences from surgical confounders were well-balanced. Morbidity (15.6% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.981), and Clavien-Dindo grade of complications (p = 0.710) were similar. No difference was found when the complications were divided according to the origin (general, colorectal and hepatic). Length of the hospital stays also did not differ between the groups (p = 0.482). More importantly, there was no increase in the number of patients with delayed adjuvant treatment after surgery in Group B.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant treatment did not increase morbidity, length of hospital stays and influence adjuvant treatment after simultaneous resection.

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

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

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been proposed as a safe and feasible treatment option for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). However, the short-term and oncologic outcomes of LLR versus open liver resection (OLR) for CRLM have not been adequately assessed. Thus, we herein provide an updated systematic review comparing short-term and oncologic outcomes of CRLM patients undergoing LLR versus OLR.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in the Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases (until November 2, 2016) with a limitation to the publications in English. Quality assessment was performed based on the modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR), and continuous data were calculated by weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies enrolling 4591 patients with CRLM were included. With respect to short-term outcomes, patients in LLR group showed significantly reduced blood loss (WMD: -143.64; 95% CI: -180.56 to -106.73; I2 = 86%; P < 0.001), lower operative transfusion requirement (OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.30-0.53; I2 = 0%; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (WMD: -2.47; 95% CI: -2.99 to -1.94; I2 = 82%; P < 0.001), reduced overall postoperative morbidity (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.42-0.66; I2 = 38%; P < 0.001) and reduced severe morbidity (OR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.32-0.60; I2 = 35%; P < 0.001). Regarding oncologic outcomes, there were no significant differences between the two surgical procedures in recurrence and 1-, 3-, and 5-overall survival and disease-free survival except for slightly higher R0 resection rate in LLR group was slightly higher than that of OLR group (OR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.03-1.97; I2 = 37%; P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR should be the standard approach for selected patients with CRLM, and further research should focus on determining which patients would benefit most from LLR.

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

Background

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

Patients and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Laparoscopic resections of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: a case controlled study

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic simultaneous resections of colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM), relative to open surgery.

METHODS

Between 1 January 2009 and 20 April 2014, 20 of 25 patients who underwent laparoscopic simultaneous colorectal cancer and SCRLM resections were matched with 20 of 29 patients who underwent an open approach, based on prognostic propensity scores. Perioperative results and survival outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic and open groups were comparable in demographics, cancer characteristics, surgery characteristics, and chemotherapy treatment. No postoperative mortality occurred in either group. The estimated blood loss and postoperative stay were significantly greater in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (all, p < .05). All other perioperative results and postoperative complications were similar between the two groups, as well as three-year overall and disease-free survival rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The postoperative complications and survival rates of patients given laparoscopic simultaneous colorectal cancer and SCRLM resections were similar to those treated with an open approach, but with greater short-term benefits. Laparoscopy in this setting by an experienced surgical team appears safe and effective, and is a feasible alternative to an open approach for selected patients.

Evolution and revolution of laparoscopic liver resection in Japan

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

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

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