1
|
Keller DS, Curtis N, Burt HA, Ammirati CA, Collings AT, Polk HC, Carrano FM, Antoniou SA, Hanna N, Piotet LM, Hill S, Cuijpers ACM, Tejedor P, Milone M, Andriopoulou E, Kontovounisios C, Leeds IL, Awad ZT, Barber MW, Al-Mansour M, Nassif G, West MA, Pryor AD, Carli F, Demartines N, Bouvy ND, Passera R, Arezzo A, Francis N. EAES/SAGES evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus on optimization of perioperative care in older adults. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:4104-4126. [PMID: 38942944 PMCID: PMC11289045 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10977-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2024] [Accepted: 05/30/2024] [Indexed: 06/30/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah S Keller
- Department of Digestive Surgery, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, FR, USA
| | - Nathan Curtis
- Surgical Unit, Dorset County Hospital, Dorchester, Dorset, UK
| | | | | | - Amelia T Collings
- Department of Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA
| | - Hiram C Polk
- Department of Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA
| | - Francesco Maria Carrano
- Department of General and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Busto Arsizio Circolo Hospital, ASST-Valle Olona, Varese, Italy
| | - Stavros A Antoniou
- Department of General Surgery, Papageorgiou General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece
| | - Nader Hanna
- Department of Surgery, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | | | - Sarah Hill
- Department of Surgery, The University of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences, Toledo, OH, USA
| | - Anne C M Cuijpers
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Patricia Tejedor
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
| | - Marco Milone
- Department of Clinical and Surgical Gastrointestinal Diseases, University of Naples "Federico II", Via Pansini 5, Naples, Italy
| | - Eleni Andriopoulou
- Department of Surgery, Hellenic Red Cross Korgialeneio Benakeio NHS, Athens, Greece
| | - Christos Kontovounisios
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Chelsea and Westminster Campus and the Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
| | - Ira L Leeds
- Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Ziad T Awad
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Meghan Wandtke Barber
- Department of Surgery, The University of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences, Toledo, OH, USA
| | - Mazen Al-Mansour
- Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - George Nassif
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, AdventHealth, Orlando, FL, USA
| | - Malcolm A West
- Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
- Complex Cancer and Exenterative Service, University Hospitals Southampton, Southampton, UK
- NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, Perioperative and Critical Care Theme, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Aurora D Pryor
- Long Island Jewish Medical Center and System Chief for Bariatric Surgery, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Health, Great Neck, NY, USA
| | - Franco Carli
- Department of Anesthesia, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | | | - Nicole D Bouvy
- Innovative Surgical Techniques, Endoscopic and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Roberto Passera
- Division of Nuclear Medicine, University of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Alberto Arezzo
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Nader Francis
- Department of Surgery, Yeovil District Hospital, Higher Kingston, Yeovil, UK.
- The Griffin Institute, Northwick Park and St Mark's Hospital, Y Block, Watford Rd, Harrow, HA1 3UJ, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ricker AB, Baker EH, Strand MS, Kalabin A, Butano V, Wells A, Phillips M, Wang H, McKillop I, Iannitti G, Casingal J, Martinie JB, Vrochides D, Iannitti DA. Surgical microwave ablation for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in 791 operations. HPB (Oxford) 2024; 26:379-388. [PMID: 38102029 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2023.11.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2023] [Revised: 11/03/2023] [Accepted: 11/17/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ansley B Ricker
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Erin H Baker
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Matthew S Strand
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Aleksandr Kalabin
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Vincent Butano
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Alexandra Wells
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Michael Phillips
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Huaping Wang
- Carolinas Center for Surgical Outcomes Science, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Iain McKillop
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Giuliana Iannitti
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Joel Casingal
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - John B Martinie
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Dionisios Vrochides
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - David A Iannitti
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
McCarron F, Cochran A, Ricker A, Mantha R, Driedger M, Beckman M, Vrochides D, Martinie J. 10 years, 100 robotic major hepatectomies: a single-center experience. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:902-907. [PMID: 37845533 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10459-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Accepted: 09/06/2023] [Indexed: 10/18/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frances McCarron
- Division of Hepatobiliary & Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, 1025 Morehead Medical Dr. Suite 600, Charlotte, NC, 28204, USA.
| | - Allyson Cochran
- Carolinas Center for Surgical Outcomes Science, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Ansley Ricker
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Rohit Mantha
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Michael Driedger
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Michael Beckman
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Dionisios Vrochides
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - John Martinie
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rawicz-Pruszyński K, Woldesenbet S, Endo Y, Munir MM, Katayama E, Waqar U, Khan MMM, Khalil M, Rueda BO, Resende V, Dillhoff M, Cloyd J, Ejaz A, Pawlik TM. Persistent poverty impacts access to minimally invasive surgery among patients with hepatopancreatobiliary cancer. J Surg Oncol 2023; 128:823-830. [PMID: 37377037 DOI: 10.1002/jso.27379] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2023] [Revised: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 06/16/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karol Rawicz-Pruszyński
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland
| | - Selamawit Woldesenbet
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Yutaka Endo
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Muhammad M Munir
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Erryk Katayama
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Usama Waqar
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Muhammad Muntazir Mehdi Khan
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Mujtaba Khalil
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Belisario Ortiz Rueda
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Vivian Resende
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Mary Dillhoff
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Jordan Cloyd
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Aslam Ejaz
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Timothy M Pawlik
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Sucandy I, Shapera E, Syblis CC, Crespo K, Przetocki VA, Ross SB, Rosemurgy AS. Propensity score matched comparison of robotic and open major hepatectomy for malignant liver tumors. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:6724-6732. [PMID: 34981238 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08948-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2021] [Accepted: 12/06/2021] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iswanto Sucandy
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite 500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA.
| | - Emanuel Shapera
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite 500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Cameron C Syblis
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite 500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Kaitlyn Crespo
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite 500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Valerie A Przetocki
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite 500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Sharona B Ross
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite 500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Alexander S Rosemurgy
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite 500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
What Is the Current Role and What Are the Prospects of the Robotic Approach in Liver Surgery? Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14174268. [PMID: 36077803 PMCID: PMC9454668 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14174268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2022] [Revised: 08/24/2022] [Accepted: 08/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
7
|
Vining CC, Kuchta K, Al Abbas AI, Hsu PJ, Paterakos P, Schuitevoerder D, Sood D, Roggin KK, Talamonti MS, Hogg ME. Bile leak incidence, risk factors and associated outcomes in patients undergoing hepatectomy: a contemporary NSQIP propensity matched analysis. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:5710-5723. [PMID: 35467144 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08938-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2021] [Accepted: 12/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles C Vining
- Department of Surgery, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, USA
| | - Kristine Kuchta
- Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Walgreens Building-Floor 2, 2650 Ridge Road, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA
| | - Amr I Al Abbas
- Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, USA
| | - Phillip J Hsu
- Department of Surgery, University of Chicago, Chicago, USA
| | - Pierce Paterakos
- Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Walgreens Building-Floor 2, 2650 Ridge Road, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA
| | | | - Divya Sood
- Department of Surgery, University of Chicago, Chicago, USA
| | - Kevin K Roggin
- Department of Surgery, University of Chicago, Chicago, USA
| | - Mark S Talamonti
- Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Walgreens Building-Floor 2, 2650 Ridge Road, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA
| | - Melissa E Hogg
- Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Walgreens Building-Floor 2, 2650 Ridge Road, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kim JM, Rhu J, Ha SY, Choi GS, Kwon CHD, Kim G, Joh JW. Realization of improved outcomes following liver resection in hepatocellular carcinoma patients aged 75 years and older. Ann Surg Treat Res 2021; 101:257-265. [PMID: 34796141 PMCID: PMC8564081 DOI: 10.4174/astr.2021.101.5.257] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Revised: 09/01/2021] [Accepted: 09/24/2021] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jong Man Kim
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jinsoo Rhu
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Sang Yun Ha
- Department of Pathology and Translational Genomics, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Gyu-Seong Choi
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Choon Hyuck David Kwon
- Department of Surgery, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Gaabsoo Kim
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jae-Won Joh
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Hildebrand N, Verkoulen K, Dewulf M, Heise D, Ulmer F, Coolsen M. Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy in the elderly patient: systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford) 2021; 23:984-993. [PMID: 33632653 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.01.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2020] [Revised: 11/04/2020] [Accepted: 01/29/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole Hildebrand
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, the Netherlands.
| | - Koen Verkoulen
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, the Netherlands
| | - Maxime Dewulf
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, the Netherlands
| | - Daniel Heise
- Department of General-, Visceral-, and Transplant Surgery, Uniklinikum Aachen, Germany
| | - Florian Ulmer
- Department of General-, Visceral-, and Transplant Surgery, Uniklinikum Aachen, Germany
| | - Marielle Coolsen
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, the Netherlands; Department of General-, Visceral-, and Transplant Surgery, Uniklinikum Aachen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Mangano A, Valle V, Masrur MA, Bustos RE, Gruessner S, Giulianotti PC. Robotic liver surgery: literature review and future perspectives. Minerva Surg 2021; 76:105-115. [PMID: 33908236 DOI: 10.23736/s2724-5691.21.08495-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alberto Mangano
- Division of General, Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA -
| | - Valentina Valle
- Division of General, Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Mario A Masrur
- Division of General, Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Roberto E Bustos
- Division of General, Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Stephan Gruessner
- Division of General, Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Pier C Giulianotti
- Division of General, Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Duarte VC, Coelho FF, Valverde A, Danoussou D, Kruger JAP, Zuber K, Fonseca GM, Jeismann VB, Herman P, Lupinacci RM. Minimally invasive versus open right hepatectomy: comparative study with propensity score matching analysis. BMC Surg 2020; 20:260. [PMID: 33126885 PMCID: PMC7602349 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-020-00919-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2020] [Accepted: 10/20/2020] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vinícius Campos Duarte
- Liver Surgery Unit, Digestive Surgery Division, Department of Gastroenterology, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, Rua Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 255-9º Andar-sala 9025, São Paulo, SP, CEP 05403-900, Brazil.
| | - Fabricio Ferreira Coelho
- Liver Surgery Unit, Digestive Surgery Division, Department of Gastroenterology, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, Rua Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 255-9º Andar-sala 9025, São Paulo, SP, CEP 05403-900, Brazil
| | - Alain Valverde
- Digestive Surgery Unit, Diaconesses Croix Saint Simon Hospital, 125, Rue d'Avron, 75020, Paris, France
| | - Divia Danoussou
- Digestive Surgery Unit, Diaconesses Croix Saint Simon Hospital, 125, Rue d'Avron, 75020, Paris, France
| | - Jaime Arthur Pirola Kruger
- Liver Surgery Unit, Digestive Surgery Division, Department of Gastroenterology, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, Rua Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 255-9º Andar-sala 9025, São Paulo, SP, CEP 05403-900, Brazil
| | - Kevin Zuber
- Research and Biostatistics Unit, Rothschild Foundation Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Gilton Marques Fonseca
- Liver Surgery Unit, Digestive Surgery Division, Department of Gastroenterology, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, Rua Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 255-9º Andar-sala 9025, São Paulo, SP, CEP 05403-900, Brazil
| | - Vagner Birk Jeismann
- Liver Surgery Unit, Digestive Surgery Division, Department of Gastroenterology, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, Rua Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 255-9º Andar-sala 9025, São Paulo, SP, CEP 05403-900, Brazil
| | - Paulo Herman
- Liver Surgery Unit, Digestive Surgery Division, Department of Gastroenterology, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, Rua Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 255-9º Andar-sala 9025, São Paulo, SP, CEP 05403-900, Brazil
| | - Renato Micelli Lupinacci
- Digestive Surgery Unit, Diaconesses Croix Saint Simon Hospital, 125, Rue d'Avron, 75020, Paris, France.,AP-HP, Department of Digestive, Oncologic and Metabolic Surgery, Ambroise Paré Hospital, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.,Versailles St-Quentin-en-Yvelines/Paris Saclay University, UFR des Sciences de la Santé Simone Veil, Montigny-Le-Bretonneux, France
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Kim JM, Kim S, Rhu J, Choi GS, Kwon CHD, Joh JW. Elderly Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients: Open or Laparoscopic Approach? Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:cancers12082281. [PMID: 32823929 PMCID: PMC7466133 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12082281] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2020] [Revised: 07/12/2020] [Accepted: 08/11/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jong Man Kim
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea; (J.M.K.); (S.K.); (J.R.); (G.-S.C.)
| | - Sangjin Kim
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea; (J.M.K.); (S.K.); (J.R.); (G.-S.C.)
| | - Jinsoo Rhu
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea; (J.M.K.); (S.K.); (J.R.); (G.-S.C.)
| | - Gyu-Seong Choi
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea; (J.M.K.); (S.K.); (J.R.); (G.-S.C.)
| | - Choon Hyuck David Kwon
- Department of Surgery, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA;
| | - Jae-Won Joh
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea; (J.M.K.); (S.K.); (J.R.); (G.-S.C.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +82-2-3410-3466; Fax: +82-2-3410-0040
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Kose E, Karahan SN, Berber E. Robotic Liver Resection: Recent Developments. CURRENT SURGERY REPORTS 2020. [DOI: 10.1007/s40137-020-00254-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|