Feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection for caudate lobe: technical strategy and comparative analysis with anteroinferior and posterosuperior segments

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 versus open surgery for hepatic caudate lobectomy: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to investigate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic hepatic caudate lobectomy (LHCL) for treating liver tumor by comparing with the open hepatic caudate lobectomy (OHCL).

METHODS

In the LHCL group, we included 24 patients with liver tumor received LHCL in Qilu Hospital of the Shandong University from January 2014 to January 2019. Meanwhile, 24 matched liver tumor patients underwent OHCL in our hospital served as control. Then we compared the patient characteristics, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes between LHCL group and OHCL group.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in gender, age, degree of cirrhosis, tumor size, preoperative liver function, Child-Pugh grading, proportion of liver cirrhosis, and tumor size between LHCL group and OHCL group (P > 0.05). No death was reported in both groups. The length of incision in LHCL group was significantly lower than that in OHCL group (4.22 ± 1.14 cm vs. 22.46 ± 4.40 cm, P < 0.001). The intraoperative blood loss in LHCL group was significantly lower than that of OHCL group (116.82 ± 71.61 ml vs. 371.74 ± 579.35 ml, P = 0.047). The total operation time, Pringle maneuver occlusion time, and blocking rate in LHCL group showed no statistical difference compared with those of the OHCL group (P > 0.05). The VAS scores at postoperative 24 and 48 h showed no statistical differences between LHCL group and OHCL group (P > 0.05). Compared with the OHCL group, significant decrease was noticed in the proportion of patients with severe pain 48 h after surgery (0 vs. 4.25 ± 0.46, P < 0.001) and dezocine consumption (90.45 ± 45.77 mg vs. 131.6 ± 81.30 mg, P = 0.0448) in the LHCL group.

CONCLUSION

LHCL is effective and feasible for treating liver tumor, which is featured by reducing intraoperative blood loss and serious pain.

Feasibility of laparoscopic enucleation for hemangioma in special hepatic segments

Background and aim

This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic enucleation for liver hemangioma in special hepatic segments.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 58 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for hepatic hemangioma at a single center from January 2016 to January 2022. Segments I, IVa, VII, and VIII are defined as special hepatic segments, attributing to the bad visualization and adjacent to important vessels such as hepatic veins and inferior vena cava that lead to a high risk in laparoscopic surgery. Patients were categorized into a special location group (SLG) and a normal location group (NLG) according to the location of hemangioma. General data, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, and postoperative complications of the two groups were compared and analyzed.

Results

There were no significant differences in age (p = 0.288), gender (p = 0.331), body mass index (p = 0.168), the maximum diameter of hemangioma (p = 0.330), ASA risk grading (p = 0.615), and comorbidities (p > 0.05) between the two groups. The operation time (p < 0.001), intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001), and intraoperative blood transfusion rate (p = 0.047) were significantly higher in the SLG. The rate of conversion to laparotomy was higher in the SLG, but there was no significant difference (p = 0.089). In addition, the exhaust time (p = 0.03) and postoperative hospital stay (p < 0.01) were significantly shorter in the NLG. The postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups, and there were no perioperative deaths.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic enucleation of hemangioma in special hepatic segments is difficult and has a critical risk of massive bleeding during surgery. Meanwhile, it is also safe, feasible, and effective.

Location of Hemangioma is an Individual Risk Factor for Massive Bleeding in Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

Background and Objectives:

The scope of laparoscopic surgery has expanded to encompass hepatic resections, specifically hepatic hemangioma. The most serious intraoperative complication is bleeding, often requiring laparotomy. Because risk factors associated with such massive blood loss have not been well evaluated, the intent of this retrospective study was to analyze these risk factors associated with laparoscopic resection of hepatic hemangiomas.

Methods:

From June 1, 2011 to January 31, 2021, 140 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic surgery for hepatic hemangioma in our hospital. According to quantity of intraoperative blood loss, they were divided into massive (≥ 800 ml) and minor blood loss (< 800 ml) groups. Perioperative data were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses with logistic regression to identify the risk factors for potential massive blood loss during laparoscopic resection.

Results:

There were 24 and 116 patients in the massive and minor blood loss groups, respectively. Of four risk factors significantly associated with massive blood loss by univariate logistic regression analysis (location of hemangioma in the liver, postcaval or hepatic venous compression, hilar compression, and body mass index exceeding 28) the multifactorial logistic model identified only location in the liver of the hemangioma as statistically (P = 0.012) associated with intraoperative massive blood loss.

Conclusions:

Location of the hepatic hemangioma was the single statistically significant risk factor for massive blood loss during laparoscopic surgery for hepatic hemangioma. Of particular importance, location in Couinaud liver segments I, IVa, VII, and VIII necessitates precautions to mitigate the risk of massive blood loss.

Safety and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Caudate Lobectomy: A Systematic Review

Resection of the caudate lobe of the liver is considered a highly challenging type of liver resection due to the region’s intimacy with critical vascular structures and deep anatomic location inside the abdominal cavity. Laparoscopic resection of the caudate lobe is considered one of the most challenging laparoscopic liver procedures. The objective of our systematic review was to evaluate the safety, technical feasibility and main outcomes of laparoscopic caudate lobectomy LCL. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken for studies published until September 2021. A total of 20 studies comprising 221 patients were included. Of these subjects, 36% were women, whereas the vast majority of resections (66%) were performed for malignant tumors. Tumor size varied significantly between 2 and 160 mm in the largest diameter. The mean operative time was 210 min (range 60–740 min), and estimated blood loss was 173.6 mL (range 50–3600 mL). The median hospital length of stay LOS was 6.5 days (range 2–15 days). Seven cases of conversion to open were reported. The vast majority of patients (93.7%) underwent complete resection (R0) of their tumors. Thirty-six out of 221 patients developed postoperative complications, with 5.8% of all patients developing a major complication (Clavien–Dindo classification ≥ III).No perioperative deaths were reported by the included studies. LCL seems to be a safe and feasible alternative to open caudate lobectomy OCL in selected patients when undertaken in high-volume centers by experienced surgeons.

Comparative long-term outcomes of laparoscopic hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma located in the anterolateral segments of the liver

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is considered the standard surgical approach for resecting small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) located in the anterolateral segments of the liver. However, few studies have compared LLR and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in such cases.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared the short- and long-term outcomes of 101 patients who underwent LLR and 264 patients who underwent RFA because of a newly diagnosed single, small (≤4 cm) HCC located in the anterolateral segments of the liver. By applying 1:1 propensity score matching, we matched 61 patients in both groups.

RESULTS

Although the 5-year overall survival rates were similar (83.6% vs 84.5%; P = .913), the 5-year disease-free survival rate was greater in the LLR group (56.4% vs 41.8%; P = .009). In patients with an α-fetoprotein level of ≥100 ng/mL, the 5-year overall (100% vs 80.0%; P = .022) and disease-free survival (76.6% vs 45.5%; P = .006) rates were greater in the LCC group.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with a single, small HCC located in the anterolateral segments of the liver, LLR was associated with similar complication and overall survival rates, but better disease-free survival compared with RFA. LLR may be recommended for patients with higher α-fetoprotein levels.

Laparoscopic liver resection versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) play central roles to treat early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, ≤3 cm, 1-3 nodules, and no macrovascular involvement), although data are lacking regarding whether LLR or RFA is preferable. This study aimed to compare outcomes of both treatments for small HCCs.

METHODS

Treatment outcomes of small HCCs were compared between all the minor LLRs performed between 2005 and 2016 and RFAs performed between 2011 and 2016 at Kyoto University.

RESULTS

A total of 85 and 136 patients underwent LLR and RFA, respectively. Patients that underwent LLR had higher incidence of blood transfusions, complications, and longer hospital stay. Overall and disease-specific survival rates were similar between LLR and RFA; however, recurrence-free (49.2% vs. 22.1% at 3-year) and local recurrence-free survival rates (94.9% vs. 63.6% at 3-year) were higher after LLR. Multivariate analyses identified that multiple nodules and 65-year-old and above are predictors of disease-specific survival, and that RFA is a predictor of recurrence and local recurrence.

CONCLUSION

RFA is less invasive, although both LLR and RFA are safe and effective. LLR provides better local control with superior recurrence-free and local-recurrence free survival. These results help optimize treatment selection based on patient-specific factors.

Technical feasibility and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic isolated caudate lobe resection: an IgoMILS (Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery) registry-based study

Background

Although isolated caudate lobe (CL) liver resection is not a contraindication for minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS), feasibility and safety of the procedure are still poorly investigated. To address this gap, we evaluate data on the Italian prospective maintained database on laparoscopic liver surgery (IgoMILS) and compare outcomes between MILS and open group.

Methods

Perioperative data of patients with malignancies, as colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), non-colorectal liver metastases (NCRLM) and benign liver disease, were retrospectively analyzed. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance the potential selection bias for MILS and open group.

Results

A total of 224 patients were included in the study, 47 and 177 patients underwent MILS and open isolated CL resection, respectively. The overall complication rate was comparable between the two groups; however, severe complication rate (Dindo–Clavien grade ≥ 3) was lower in the MILS group (0% versus 6.8%, P = ns). In-hospital mortality was 0% in both groups and mean hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MILS group (P = 0.01). After selection of 42 MILS and 43 open CL resections by PSM analysis, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes remained similar except for the hospital stay which was not significantly shorter in MILS group.

Conclusions

This multi-institutional cohort study shows that MILS CL resection is feasible and safe. The surgical procedure can be technically demanding compared to open resection, whereas good perioperative outcomes can be achieved in highly selected patients.

Safety assessment of laparoscopic liver resection: A project study of the Endoscopic Liver Surgery Study Group of Japan

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been expanded rapidly and has been accepted worldwide; however, the safety assessment of LLR has not been fully conducted with a large-scale cohort. The aim of this study was to assess safety and identify clinical factors associated with postoperative major complications in LLR.

METHODS

This project study retrospectively collected the data of LLRs performed before October 2015 in Japan. Patient characteristics, details of LLRs, and surgical outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 4122 patients from 66 institutions were enrolled. The main indications were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases. The majority of the procedures were performed for solitary tumor-located liver segment 2, 3, 5, and 6 and the partial resection and left-lateral sectionectomy occupied 77.3%. The rate of conversion, accidental events were 7.1% and 2.1%, respectively. Postoperative major complication occurred in 205 cases (5.0%), and 14 in-hospital deaths were found among HCC patients with chronically diseased liver. Occurrence of postoperative major complication was associated with operation time (≥360 minutes), intraoperative blood loss (≥250 mL), red blood cell transfusion (yes), and the difficulty score (≥6). The 30- and 90-day mortality was 0.14% and 0.41%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection was performed with an acceptable rate of conversion, accidental events, morbidity, and mortality. The indications for LLR should be cautiously judged considering tumor location, planned operative procedure, and liver function.

Safety and feasibility for laparoscopic versus open caudate lobe resection: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy has been used widely due to its advantages as a minimally invasive surgery. However, multicenter, large-scale, population-based laparoscopic caudate lobe resection (LCLR) versus open caudate lobe resection (OCLR) has rarely been reported. We assessed the feasibility and safety of LCLR compared with OCLR using meta-analysis.

METHODS

Relevant literature was retrieved using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Ovid Medline, Web of Science, CNKI, and WanFang Med databases up to July 30th, 2020. Multiple parameters of feasibility and safety were compared between the treatment groups. Quality of studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3. Results are expressed as odds ratio (OD) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for fixed- and random-effects models.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 237 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with OCLR, the LCLR group had a lower intraoperative blood loss (MD - 180.84; 95% CI - 225.61 to - 136.07; P < 0.0001), shorter postoperative hospital stays (MD - 4.38; 95% CI - 7.07 to - 1.7; P = 0.001), shorter operative time (MD - 50.24; 95% CI - 78.57 to - 21.92; P = 0.0005), and lower rates in intraoperative blood transfusion (OR 0.12; P = 0.01). However, there were no statistically significant differences between LCLR and OCLR regarding hospital expenses (MD 0.92; P = 0.12), pedicle clamping (OR 1.57; P = 0.32), postoperative complications (OR 0.58; P = 0.15), bile leak (P = 0.88), ascites (P = 0.34), and incisional infection (P = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

LCLR has multiple advantages over OCLR, especially intraoperative blood loss and hospital stays. LCLR is a very useful technology and feasible choice in patients with caudate lobe lesions.

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.

Robotic hepatic resection in postero-superior region of liver

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic hepatectomy in the posterosuperior hepatic region is technically challenging and demanding. However, minimally invasive procedures carried out using the Da Vinci robot provide potential advantages in complex hepatectomy. This study reported the experience of a single center on robotic hepatectomy in the posterosuperior hepatic region.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the general characteristics and perioperative outcomes of consecutive patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy in the posterosuperior hepatic region at our center from March 2015 to January 2020.

RESULTS

For 100 patients who were included into this study, 53 underwent anatomical segmentectomy or subsegmentectomy and 47 non-anatomical partial hepatectomy. There was no conversion to laparotomy. The R0 resection rate was 100%. The following perioperative outcomes were compared between patients who underwent anatomical segmentectomy/subsegmentectomy versus those who underwent non-anatomical partial hepatectomy: operation times of 160 versus 126 min, intraoperative blood losses of 100 versus 50 ml, intraoperative blood transfusion rates of 7.54% versus 4.26%, postoperative lengths of hospital stay of 5 versus 4 days, Clavien-Dindo Grade I-II complications rates of 15.09% versus 19.15%, Grade III-V complications rates of 3.77% versus 0%, bile leakage rates of 4% versus 7% and pleural effusion rates of also 4% versus 7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The results indicated the safety and feasibility of robotic anatomical and non-anatomical liver resections in the posterosuperior hepatic region. The robotic transabdominal approach is an option for hepatectomy in the posterosuperior hepatic region.

Robotic isolated partial and complete hepatic caudate lobectomy: A single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Current reports on robotic hepatic caudate lobectomy are limited to Spiegel lobectomy. This study aimed to compare the safety and feasibility of robotic isolated partial and complete hepatic caudate lobectomy.

METHODS

Clinical data of 32 patients who underwent robotic resection of the hepatic caudate lobe in our department from May 2016 to January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into three groups according to the lobectomy location: left dorsal segment lobectomy (Spiegel lobectomy), right dorsal segment lobectomy (caudate process or paracaval portion lobectomy), and complete caudate lobectomy. General information and perioperative results of the three groups were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the 32 patients, none had conversion to laparotomy, three received intraoperative blood transfusion (9.38%), and none had complications of Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher or died in the perioperative period. Among them, 17 patients (53.13%) underwent Spiegel lobectomy, 7 (21.88%) underwent caudate process or paracaval portion lobectomy, and 8 (25.00%) underwent complete caudate lobectomy. The operative time and blood loss in the left dorsal segment lobectomy group were significantly better than those in the right dorsal segment lobectomy and complete caudate lobectomy groups (operative time: P = 0.010 and P = 0.005; blood loss: P = 0.005 and P = 0.017, respectively). The postoperative hospital stay in the left dorsal segment lobectomy group was significantly shorter than that in the complete caudate lobectomy group (P = 0.003); however, there was no difference in the postoperative hospital stay between the left dorsal segment lobectomy group and right dorsal segment lobectomy group (P = 0.240).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic isolated partial and complete caudate lobectomy is safe and feasible. Spiegel lobectomy is relatively straightforward and suitable for beginners.

Robotic anatomic isolated complete caudate lobectomy: Left-side approach and techniques

BACKGROUND

To demonstrate the surgical procedures and techniques of the robotic anatomical isolated complete caudate lobectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on the demographic, operative, postoperative outcomes of seven patients who underwent robotic anatomical isolated complete caudate lobectomy at our department from January 2018 to November 2019. Mobilization of the left lateral and Spiegel lobe, dissection of the short hepatic veins and liver parenchyma transection from the dorsal plane of middle and right hepatic vein were crucial procedures for the robotic left-side approach. Anatomic complete caudate lobectomy was defined as total removal of the caudate lobe, in which the dorsal middle and right hepatic vein, the inferior vena cava and its right side were fully exposed on the raw surface.

RESULTS

All patients successfully underwent the robotic anatomical isolated caudate lobectomy with a left-side approach without conversion to laparotomy, and without Clavien-Dindo Grade III or higher complications. The average tumor diameter was 65.00 ± 10.61 mm, the average operation time was 212.00 ± 74.53 min, the median bleeding loss was 100 mL, and the average postoperative hospital stay was 8.71 ± 4.89 d, respectively. There were four patients with primary hepatocellular carcinoma, one with tumor recurrence five months after surgery and three patients were free of recurrence. All patients survived at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Robotic anatomical isolated complete caudate lobectomy with a left-sided approach is safe and feasible for selected patients.

Successful robotic radical resection of hepatic echinococcosis located in posterosuperior liver segments

BACKGROUND

Radical resection is an important treatment method for hepatic echinococcosis. The posterosuperior segments of the liver remain the most challenging region for laparoscopic or robotic hepatectomy.

AIM

To demonstrate the safety and preliminary experience of robotic radical resection of cystic and alveolar echinococcosis in posterosuperior liver segments.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 5 patients with a median age of 37 years (21-56 years) with cystic and alveolar echinococcosis in difficult liver lesions admitted to two centers from September to December 2019. The surgical methods included total pericystectomy, segmental hepatectomy, or hemihepatectomy.

RESULTS

Among the 5 patients, 4 presented with cystic echinococcosis and 1 presented with alveolar echinococcosis, all of whom underwent robotic radical operation successfully without conversion to laparotomy. Total caudate lobectomy was performed in 2 cases, hepatectomy of segment VII in 1 case, total pericystectomy of segment VIII in 1 case, and right hemihepatectomy in 1 case. Operation time was 225 min (175-300 min); blood loss was 100 mL (50-600 mL); and postoperative hospital stay duration was 10 d (5-19 d). The Clavien-Dindo complication grade was I in 4 cases and II in 1 case. No recurrence of echinococcosis was found in any patient at the 3 mo of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Robotic radical surgery for cystic and selected alveolar echinococcosis in posterosuperior liver segments is safe and feasible.

A multicenter cohort analysis of laparoscopic hepatic caudate lobe resection

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic resection of the hepatic caudate lobe (LRCL) requires a high level of expertise due to its challenging anatomical area. Only case reports, case series, and single-center cohort studies have been published. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of this laparoscopic procedure.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study including all patients who underwent LRCL in 4 high-volume hepatobiliary units between January 2000 and May 2018 was performed. Perioperative, postoperative, and survival outcomes were assessed. Postoperative morbidity was stratified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification with severe complications defined by grade III or more. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 32 patients were included, including 22 (68.8%) with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM), one (3.1%) with cholangiocarcinoma, four (12.5%) with other malignancies, and five (15.6%) with symptomatic benign lesions. Simultaneous colorectal and/or additional liver resection was performed in 20 (62.5%) patients. The median (IQR) operative time was 155 (121-280) minutes, blood loss was 100 (50-275) ml, conversion rate was 9.4% (n = 3), severe complications were observed in 2 patients (6.3%), and median (range) length of hospital stay was 3 [1-39] days. No 90-day postoperative mortality was noticed. The median (IQR) follow-up for the CRLM group was 14 [10-23] months. Five-year overall survival rate was 82% in this subgroup. Small interinstitutional differences were observed without major impact on surgical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

LRCL is safe and feasible when performed in high-volume centers. Profound anatomical knowledge, advanced laparoscopic skills, and mastering intraoperative ultrasound are essential. No major interinstitutional differences were ascertained.

Laparoscopic caudate lobectomy: a multicenter, propensity score-matched report of safety, feasibility, and early outcomes

BACKGROUND

Caudate lobectomy via laparoscopic surgery has rarely been described. This multicenter, propensity score-matched study was performed to assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic caudate lobectomy (LCL).

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study was performed including all patients who underwent LCL and open caudate lobectomy (OCL) in four institutions from January 2013 to December 2018. In total, 131 patients were included in this study and divided into LCL (n = 19) and OCL (n = 112) groups. LCLs were matched to OCLs (1:2) using a propensity score matching (PSM) based on nine preoperative variables, including patient demographics and tumor characteristics. The pathological results, perioperative and postoperative parameters, and short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

After PSM, there were 18 and 36 patients in the LCL and OCL groups, respectively. Baseline characteristics were comparable after matching. LCL was associated with less blood (100 vs. 300 ml, respectively; P < 0.001) and a shorter postoperative stay (6.0 vs 8.0 days, respectively; P = 0.003). Most patients' resection margins were > 10 mm in the LCL group (P = 0.021), and all patients with malignancy in both groups achieved R0 resection. In terms of early postoperative outcomes, the overall morbidity rate was identical in each group (11.1% vs. 11.1%, respectively; P = 1.000). No mortality occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy is a feasible choice for resection of tumors located in the caudate lobe with acceptable perioperative results.

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.

Does liver cirrhosis have an impact on the results of different hepatic inflow occlusion methods in laparoscopic liver resection? a propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

Few studies have analyzed the impact of liver cirrhosis on different hepatic inflow occlusion methods in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). Intermittent Pringle (IP) was compared to continuous hemihepatic vascular inflow occlusion (CHVIO) in LLR in patients with or without cirrhosis.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LLR at the West China Hospital of Sichuan University form January 2015 to October 2017 were grouped according to occlusion methods and severity of cirrhosis. A matched propensity score analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Among patients without cirrhosis, there were no significant differences in blood loss (238 ± 30 ml VS 265 ± 46 ml, P = 0.653), operative time (228 ± 9 min VS 265 ± 20 min, P = 0.437) or other postoperative results between the IP and CHVIO groups after propensity score matching. Among patients with cirrhosis, blood loss (279 ± 24 ml VS 396 ± 35 ml, P = 0.012) and operative time (237 ± 11 min VS 285 ± 24 min, P = 0.041) were significantly lower in the IP group, while postoperative liver function did not significantly differ between the two groups after propensity score matching.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without cirrhosis, IP is as efficient and as safe as CHVIO in cirrhotic patients. IP offers the advantages of shorter operative time and less blood loss and does not result in worse postoperative liver function.

Minimally invasive resection of posterosuperior liver tumors in the supine position using intra-abdominal trocars

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of posterosuperior (PS) segment liver tumors is technically challenging with confusion about optimal patient positioning and trocar placement (i.e., transabdominal vs. transcostal). The aim of this study is to describe our technique and outcomes with LLR of these tumors.

METHODS

This is an IRB-approved retrospective review of a prospective database. Between 2005 and 2017, patients with benign and malignant lesions underwent LLR. Perioperative outcomes of PS (segments 4A, 7, and 8) and anterolateral (AL) resections were compared. All patients were operated through intra-abdominal trocars in the supine position.

RESULTS

304 patients underwent LLR for AL (n = 217) and PS (n = 87) segmental lesions. Minor liver resections were performed in 274 patients and major resections in 30. Groups were comparable for age, sex, pathology, and tumor size (mean 4.2 and 3.7 cm for AL and PS). Inflow occlusion was more frequently performed for PS resections, but precoagulation rates were similar. PS resections more frequently required hand assistance (50% vs. 20%, p < 0.001) and conversion to open (18% vs. 7%, p = 0.04). For PS versus AL resections, operative time (253 vs. 205 min, p ≤ 0.001) was longer and associated with more blood loss (307 vs. 211 mL, p < 0.001) and more frequent need for blood transfusion (15% vs. 7%, p = 0.04). However, the rate of negative resection margin, 90-day complication rates, and length of stay were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that LLR of PS located liver tumors is more challenging compared to AL lesions. Nevertheless, it can be performed successfully in the majority of patients with supine positioning and intra-abdominal trocar placement, without compromising oncologic principles. Liberal uses of hand assistance and inflow occlusion were the technical tips helping us to successfully resect these tumors laparoscopically.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial hepatic caudate lobectomy

Background: Hepatic caudate lobectomy is considered to be a technically difficult surgery because of the unique anatomy and deep location of the hepatic caudate lobe. Here, we assessed the technical feasibility and safety of robotic partial caudate lobectomy using the da Vinci^® Surgical System and compared it with traditional open/laparoscopic surgery.Material and methods: Six patients diagnosed with liver cancer (primary liver cancer, 5; metastasis of breast cancer, 1) who underwent caudate lobectomy were prospectively enrolled. Two patients underwent robotic surgery, one underwent laparoscopic surgery, and three underwent traditional/open surgery. Surgical procedure, recovery, and characteristics of robotic surgery were noted and compared with other approaches.Results: All surgeries were successfully completed, and no serious postsurgical complications were observed. In the robotic group, the time taken to complete the surgery and the estimated intraoperative bleeding were 150 and 90 min and 50 and 100 ml in patient 1 and patient 2, respectively. The patients were able to tolerate fluid diet on the following postsurgical day. These two patients had no postsurgical complications and were discharged from the hospital on days 5 and 6 after recovery, respectively. Pathologically, the margins of specimens obtained from these two patients were tumor-free (R0 resection). Tumor size in the traditional/open group was larger than that in the robotic and laparoscopic groups. Blood loss in the laparoscopic case was 50 ml and was less than that in the traditional/open surgery cases (300, 2100, and 1500 ml).Conclusions: Robot-assisted partial hepatic caudate lobectomy is a technically feasible surgery. Our study illustrated an advantage of robotic hepatic caudate lobectomy over laparoscopic or traditional/open surgery and suggested that da Vinci^® minimally invasive hepatectomy is applicable in even more technically challenging anatomic locations.

Laparoscopic liver resection: a review of current indications and surgical techniques

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been the most impressive development in the field of liver surgery in recent two decades. Technical innovations and experience accumulation have made LLR a safe and effective procedure with faster postoperative recovery. Despite the fast spreading of the procedure, details regarding the indications, oncological outcomes and technical essentials were still disputable. To address these issues, two international consensus conferences were hold to update the knowledge in this field. The statements of the both conferences were not conclusive and more high-quality researches are required. In this article, we reviewed the development and the current state of LLR. Indications, outcomes, surgical techniques and devices used in LLR were also discussed.

Laparoscopic liver resection: the current status and the future

Dramatic progresses had been made in the operation in the past 26 years. Procedure was extended to major liver resection, isolated resection of caudate lobe, living donor liver resection and associating liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS). Laparoscopic liver resection became a new group of HPB surgery and the international laparoscopic liver society was established in Paris followed by the first international congress of the society held in Paris in July 2017. This biannual congress would be top convention for surgeons specialized in laparoscopic liver surgery. The advantage of laparoscopic liver resection had been recognized by patients and surgeons and is gradually replacing conventional open liver resection in some experienced institutes worldwide. Most procedures, such as laparoscopic local resection and left lateral segmentectomy, could be routinely performed, but some procedures including laparoscopic hemihepatectomy still need to be further evaluated. For now, the establishment of a training system for laparoscopic liver surgeons became the most important issue for the popularization of laparoscopic liver resection.

Surgical Technique and Clinical Analysis of Twelve Cases of Isolated Laparoscopic Resection of the Hepatic Caudate Lobe

Objective

To describe the surgical procedures of laparoscopic caudate lobectomy and analyze its clinical efficiency for treating cancer.

Methods

Twelve consecutive patients of hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatic hemangioma, and focal nodular hyperplasia who received laparoscopic caudate lobectomy in Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from January 2013 to January 2017 were included in this study. The clinical data, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were assessed.

Results

All 12 patients received totally laparoscopic technique. The operative time was 140.8 ± 95.34 minutes. The average estimated blood loss was 97.92 ± 90.54 ml, and no blood transfusions were required. The mean duration of hospital stay was 9.17 ± 2.88 days. There was no perioperative complication or patient mortality in this series.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic caudate lobectomy is safe and feasible in the selected patients.

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 Total Caudate Lobectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Caudate lobe is located in the deep dorsal area of the liver between the portal triad and the inferior vena cava (IVC). Torrential bleeding can occur from the IVC and short hepatic veins during dissection. Isolated total caudate lobe resection is still rare and technically demanding. We herein present a video on the technical aspect of laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy.

METHOD

A 61-year-old woman was admitted for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma detected on imaging. She had history of multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma in July 2015 and underwent open cholecystectomy, segment 6 and segment 8 tumorectomy. Ten months later, the computed tomography scan and magnetic resonance imaging showed a 1 cm arterial enhancing lesion in segment I (S1) with no other foci of recurrence. Laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy was contemplated.

RESULTS

The operative time was 270 minutes. The intraoperative blood loss was 200 mL and blood transfusion was not necessary. The patient was discharged on the fourth postoperative day without any complications.

CONCLUSION

This report showed the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy. Nonetheless, it is a technically demanding procedure. It should be performed in carefully selected patients and by experienced hepatobiliary surgeons proficient in laparoscopic liver resection.