Minimally invasive hepatectomy is associated with decreased morbidity and resource utilization in the elderly

EAES/SAGES evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus on optimization of perioperative care in older adults

BACKGROUND

As the population ages, more older adults are presenting for surgery. Age-related declines in physiological reserve and functional capacity can result in frailty and poor outcomes after surgery. Hence, optimizing perioperative care in older patients is imperative. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) may influence surgical outcomes, but current use and impact on older adults patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations on perioperative care of older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Expert consensus determined working definitions for key terms and metrics related to perioperative care. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases for 24 pre-defined key questions in the topic areas of prehabilitation, MIS, and ERAS in major abdominal surgery (colorectal, upper gastrointestinal (UGI), Hernia, and hepatopancreatic biliary (HPB)) to generate evidence-based recommendations following the GRADE methodology.

RESULT

Older adults were defined as 65 years and older. Over 20,000 articles were initially retrieved from search parameters. Evidence synthesis was performed across the three topic areas from 172 studies, with meta-analyses conducted for MIS and ERAS topics. The use of MIS and ERAS was recommended for older adult patients particularly when undergoing colorectal surgery. Expert opinion recommended prehabilitation, cessation of smoking and alcohol, and correction of anemia in all colorectal, UGI, Hernia, and HPB procedures in older adults. All recommendations were conditional, with low to very low certainty of evidence, with the exception of ERAS program in colorectal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS and ERAS are recommended in older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery, with evidence supporting use in colorectal surgery. Though expert opinion supported prehabilitation, there is insufficient evidence supporting use. This work has identified evidence gaps for further studies to optimize older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

Surgical microwave ablation for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in 791 operations

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality and often arises in the setting of cirrhosis. The present series reviews outcomes following 791 operations.

METHODS

Retrospective review surgical MWA for HCC from March 2007 through December 2022 at a high-volume institution was performed using a prospective database. Primary outcome was overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 791 operations in 623 patients and 1156 HCC tumors were treated with surgical MWA. Median tumor size was 2 cm (range 0.25-10 cm) with an average of 1 tumor ablated per operation (range 1-7 tumors). Nearly 90 % of patients had cirrhosis with a median MELD score of 8 (IQR = 6-11). Mortality within 30 days occurred in 13 patients (1.6 %). Per tumor, the rate of incomplete ablation was 2.25 % and local recurrence was 2.95 %. Previous ablation and tumor size were risk factors for recurrence. One-year overall survival was 82.0 % with a median overall survival of 36.5 months (95 % CI 15.7-93.7) and median disease-free survival of 15.9 months (range 5.7-37.3 months).

CONCLUSION

Surgical MWA offers a low-morbidity approach for treatment of HCC, affording low rates of incomplete ablation and local recurrence.

10 years, 100 robotic major hepatectomies: a single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

Adoption of robotic liver resections has been gradually increasing throughout the HPB surgical community over the past decade. Currently there is limited literature which demonstrates a significant benefit of robotic surgery for major hepatectomies over open or laparoscopic. As one of the first centers to develop a robotic HPB program, we have experienced improved outcomes over time with increasing utilization of robotics. Herein, we present our 10-year experience and outcomes for major robotic liver resections.

METHODS

From 2012 to 2022, 361 robotic liver procedures were performed, including 100 major hepatectomies. A retrospective data review of the electronic medical record was performed evaluating outcomes after robotic major hepatectomy. Outcomes for the first 50 cases (Group A) and second 50 cases (Group B) were compared to identify any improvements in practice. Demographic and clinical outcome variables were analyzed. Data were assessed for normality, and Wilcoxon rank-sum, χ2 tests, and a logistic regression model were performed appropriate for the data. Stata v.17 was utilized, and significance was set as p < .05.

RESULTS

There was no difference in median operative time (258 vs 256 min), EBL (500 vs 500 mL), median LOS (5 vs 3.5 days), 90-day readmission (14% vs 24%), major complications (14% vs 20%), and 90-day mortality (6% vs 4%) between early and late cases, respectively. ICU admissions and conversion rates were significantly lower in group B (14.0% vs 48.0%), while expert level difficulty indices were higher (82% vs 58%).

CONCLUSION

Development of a robotic liver program with good outcomes is feasible over time. Our data suggest that our institutional learning curve for robotic major hepatectomy plateaued at approximately 50 cases.

Persistent poverty impacts access to minimally invasive surgery among patients with hepatopancreatobiliary cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been successfully adopted in hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) cancer, and has been associated with improved perioperative and comparable oncological outcomes. We sought to define the impact of county-level duration of poverty on access to MIS and clinical outcomes among patients with HPB cancer undergoing surgical treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data on patients diagnosed with HPB cancer were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data (2010-2016). County-level poverty data were obtained from the American Community Survey and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and categorized into three groups: never high poverty (NHP), intermittent high poverty (IHP), and persistent poverty (PP). Multivariable regression was used to assess the relationship between PP and MIS.

RESULTS

Among 8098 patients, 82% (n = 664) resided in regions with NHP, 13.6% (n = 1104) resided in regions with IHP, and 4.4% (n = 350) resided in regions with PP. Median age at the diagnosis was 71 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 67-77). Patients from IHP and PP counties had lower odds of undergoing MIS (IHP/PP vs. NHP, odds ratio [OR]: 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-0.96, p = 0.034) and being discharged home (IHP/PP vs. NHP, OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.43-0.99, p = 0.043), as well as a higher risk of 1-year mortality (IHP/PP vs. NHP, HR: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.036-2.209, p = 0.032) compared with patients residing in NHP counties.

CONCLUSIONS

Duration of county-level poverty was associated with lower receipt of MIS and unfavorable clinical and survival outcomes among patients with HPB cancer. There is a need to improve access to modern surgical treatment options among vulnerable, PP populations.

Propensity score matched comparison of robotic and open major hepatectomy for malignant liver tumors

BACKGROUND

Outcome data on robotic major hepatectomy are lacking. This study was undertaken to compare robotic vs. 'open' major hepatectomy utilizing patient propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

With institutional review board approval, we prospectively followed 183 consecutive patients who underwent robotic or 'open' major hepatectomy, defined as removal of three or more Couinaud segments. 42 patients who underwent 'open' approach were matched with 42 patients who underwent robotic approach. The criteria for PSM were age, resection type, tumor size, tumor type, and BMI. Survival was individually stratified for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC), and colorectal liver metastases (CLM). The data are presented as: median (mean ± SD).

RESULTS

Operative duration for the robotic approach was 293 (302 ± 131.5) vs. 280 (300 ± 115.6) minutes for the 'open' approach (p = NS). Estimated Blood Loss (EBL) was 200 (239 ± 183.6) vs. 300 (491 ± 577.1) ml (p = 0.01). There were zero postoperative complications with a Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ III for the robotic approach and three for the 'open' approach (p = NS). ICU length of stay (LOS) was 1 (1 ± 0) vs. 2 (3 ± 2.0) days (p = 0.0001) and overall LOS was 4 (4 ± 3.3) vs. 6 (6 ± 2.7) days (p = 0.003). In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, overall survival was similar for patients with IHCC and CLM regardless of the approach. However, patients with HCC who underwent robotic resection lived significantly longer (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Utilizing propensity score matched analysis, the robotic approach was associated with a lower EBL, shorter ICU LOS, and shorter overall LOS while maintaining similar operative duration and promoting survival in patients with HCC. We believe that the robotic approach is safe and efficacious and should be considered a preferred alternative approach for major hepatectomy.

What Is the Current Role and What Are the Prospects of the Robotic Approach in Liver Surgery?

Simple Summary

Robotic liver surgery is being applied with increasing frequency. Comparable, and in specific settings superior, perioperative outcomes compared to laparoscopic liver surgery have been reported. In its current form, the most commonly mentioned advantage of robotic surgery is improved dexterity. Important obstacles to its wider implementation in daily clinical practice are the associated costs, technical difficulties, and a scarce amount of evidence. Robotic liver surgery will likely continue to evolve in parallel with technological developments that enhance the robots’ abilities.

Abstract

In parallel with the historical development of minimally invasive surgery, the laparoscopic and robotic approaches are now frequently utilized to perform major abdominal surgical procedures. Nevertheless, the role of the robotic approach in liver surgery is still controversial, and a standardized, safe technique has not been defined yet. This review aims to summarize the currently available evidence and prospects of robotic liver surgery. Minimally invasive liver surgery has been extensively associated with benefits, in terms of less blood loss, and lower complication rates, including liver-specific complications such as clinically relevant bile leakage and post hepatectomy liver failure, when compared to open liver surgery. Furthermore, comparable R0 resection rates to open liver surgery have been reported, thus, demonstrating the safety and oncological efficiency of the minimally invasive approach. However, whether robotic liver surgery has merits over laparoscopic liver surgery is still a matter of debate. In the current literature, robotic liver surgery has mainly been associated with non-inferior outcomes compared to laparoscopy, although it is suggested that the robotic approach has a shorter learning curve, lower conversion rates, and less intraoperative blood loss. Robotic surgical systems offer a more realistic image with integrated 3D systems. In addition, the improved dexterity offered by robotic surgical systems can lead to improved intra and postoperative outcomes. In the future, integrated and improved haptic feedback mechanisms, artificial intelligence, and the introduction of more liver-specific dissectors will likely be implemented, further enhancing the robots’ abilities.

Bile leak incidence, risk factors and associated outcomes in patients undergoing hepatectomy: a contemporary NSQIP propensity matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in surgical technique, bile leak remains a common complication following hepatectomy. We sought to identify incidence of, risk factors for, and outcomes associated with biliary leak.

STUDY DESIGN

This is an ACS-NSQIP study. Distribution of bile leak stratified by surgical approach and hepatectomy type were identified. Univariate and multivariate factors associated with bile leak and outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Robotic hepatectomy was associated with less bile leak (5.4% vs. 11.4%; p < 0.001) compared to open. There were no significant differences in bile leak between robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomy (5.4% vs. 5.3%; p = 0.905, respectively). Operative factors risk factors for bile leak in patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy included right hepatectomy [OR 4.42 (95% CI 1.74-11.20); p = 0.002], conversion [OR 4.40 (95% CI 1.39-11.72); p = 0.010], pringle maneuver [OR 3.19 (95% CI 1.03-9.88); p = 0.044], and drain placement [OR 28.25 (95% CI 8.34-95.72); p < 0.001]. Bile leak was associated with increased reoperation (8.7% vs 1.7%, p < 0.001), 30-day readmission (26.6% vs 6.8%, p < 0.001), 30-day mortality (2% vs 0.9%, p < 0.001), and complications (67.2% vs 23.4%, p < 0.001) for patients undergoing MIS hepatectomy.

CONCLUSION

While MIS confers less risk for bile leak than open hepatectomy, risk factors for bile leak in patients undergoing MIS hepatectomy were identified. Bile leaks were associated with multiple additional complications, and the robotic approach had an equal risk for bile leak than laparoscopic in this time period.

Realization of improved outcomes following liver resection in hepatocellular carcinoma patients aged 75 years and older

Purpose

Little is known about liver resection (LR) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients older than 75 years of age. This study aimed to compare the postoperative and long-term outcomes of hepatectomy in this patient population according to operation period.

Methods

This study included 130 elderly patients who underwent LR for solitary treatment-naïve HCC between November 1998 and March 2020. Group 1 included patients who underwent LR before 2016 (n = 68) and group 2 included those who underwent LR during or after 2016 (n = 62).

Results

The proportion of major LR, anatomical LR, and laparoscopic LR (LLR) in group 1 was significantly lower than those in group 2. Also, the median operation time, amount of blood loss, hospitalization length, rates of intraoperative blood transfusion, and complications in group 2 were less than those in group 1. In the subgroup analysis of group 1, high proteins induced by vitamin K absence or antagonist-II, long hospitalization, and LLR were closely associated with mortality. In the subgroup analysis of group 2, however, none of the factors increased mortality. Nevertheless, the presence of tumor grade 3 or 4 and the incidence of microvascular invasion were higher in group 1 than in group 2, and the disease-free survival and overall survival were better in group 2 than in group 1 because of minimized blood loss and quicker recovery period by increased surgical techniques and anatomical approach, and LLR.

Conclusion

LR in elderly HCC patients has been frequently performed recently, and the outcomes have improved significantly compared to the past.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy in the elderly patient: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Favorable outcomes of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) over open hepatectomy (OH) have been demonstrated. LH offers less postoperative morbidity, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay, while maintaining oncological safety. Only limited evidence about outcomes of LH in elderly is currently available. Therefore, this study aimed to compare short term outcomes of LH to OH for patients >65 years.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to Cochrane guidelines. Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched to identify eligible studies. Studies were included if they compared LH to OH, and focused on an elderly population, or had a majority of patients >65 years. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 1174 patients (LH:532, OH:642) were included for analysis. When compared to OH, elderly undergoing LH had significantly less postoperative complications (risk ratio [RR]0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI):0.43-0.63), less blood loss (mean difference [MD]-198.58; 95% CI:-299.88 to -97.28), and shorter length of stay (MD-4.83; 95%CI:-7.91 to -1.84), while oncological safety was non-inferior (RR1.04; 95%CI:1.00-1.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the elderly population LH seems to be superior to OH, concerning short-term outcomes. However, for broader applicability more trials are needed including more difficult and major resections.

Robotic liver surgery: literature review and future perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) have been gaining popularity over the last decades. MILR provides superior peri-operative outcome. Despite these advantages, the penetrance of MILR in the clinical setting has been limited, and it was slowed down, among other factors, also by the laparoscopic technological limitations.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature review has been carried out (Pubmed, Embase and Scopus platforms) focusing on the role of robotic surgery in MILR.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The literature review results are presented and our additional remarks on the topic are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic MILR has been helping to expand the penetrance of MIS in liver surgery by making possible increasingly more challenging procedures. Minor resections still represent most of the robotic liver surgery data currently available. Robotic liver surgery is safe and effective, and it shows perioperative outcomes comparable with laparoscopic and open surgery. The oncological efficacy, within the limitations of the current level of evidence (mostly retrospective studies and literature heterogeneity), seems to show promising result. High quality prospective randomized studies, the use of prospective registry data, and multi-institutional efforts are needed.

Minimally invasive versus open right hepatectomy: comparative study with propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver resections (MILRs) have been increasingly performed in recent years. However, the majority of MILRs are actually minor or limited resections of peripheral lesions. Due to the technical complexity major hepatectomies remain challenging for minimally invasive surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the short and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing minimally invasive right hepatectomies (MIRHs) with contemporary patients undergoing open right hepatectomies (ORHs) METHODS: Consecutive patients submitted to anatomic right hepatectomies between January 2013 and December 2018 in two tertiary referral centers were studied. Study groups were compared on an intention-to-treat basis after propensity score matching (PSM). Overall survival (OS) analyses were performed for the entire cohort and specific etiologies subgroups RESULTS: During study period 178 right hepatectomies were performed. After matching, 37 patients were included in MIRH group and 60 in ORH group. The groups were homogenous for all baseline characteristics. MIRHs had significant lower blood loss (400 ml vs. 500 ml, P = 0.01), lower rate of minor complications (13.5% vs. 35%, P = 0.03) and larger resection margins (10 mm vs. 5 mm, P = 0.03) when compared to ORHs. Additionally, a non-significant decrease in hospital stay (ORH 9 days vs. MIRH 7 days, P = 0.09) was observed. No differences regarding the use of Pringle's maneuver, operative time, overall morbidity or perioperative mortality were observed. OS was similar between the groups (P = 0.13). Similarly, no difference in OS was found in subgroups of patients with primary liver tumors (P = 0.09) and liver metastasis (P = 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

MIRHs are feasible and safe in experienced hands. Minimally invasive approach was associated with less blood loss, a significant reduction in minor perioperative complications, and did not negatively affect long-term outcomes.

Elderly Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients: Open or Laparoscopic Approach?

It remains unclear whether the short-term benefits and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) accrue to elderly patients with medical comorbidities. The aim of the present study was to compare the outcomes between LLR and open liver resection (OLR) in elderly patients (≥65 years) with solitary, treatment-naïve solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). From January 2013 to August 2017, 256 elderly patients with solitary treatment-naive HCC underwent liver resection. All patients were Child–Pugh class A and older than 65 years. The OLR and LLR groups contained 160 and 96 patients, respectively. The median tumor size in the OLR group was significantly larger than that in the LLR group (3.9 vs. 2.6 cm), but the tumor size did not differ between the two groups after matching. The median operation time, blood loss, transfusion rate, and postoperative complications in the OLR group did not differ from those in the LLR group, but the operation time in the LLR group was longer than that in the OLR group after matching. The median hospitalization in the LLR group was significantly shorter than that in the OLR group. Disease-free survival (DFS) in the LLR group was better than that in the OLR group before and after matching, but the difference was not significant. Patient survival (PS) in the LLR group was similar to that in the OLR group. LLR is feasible and safe for elderly patients with solitary, treatment-naïve HCC. The short- and long-term benefits of LLR are evident in geriatric oncological liver surgery patients.