Safety and efficacy of synchronous robotic surgery for colorectal cancer with liver metastases. J Robot Surg. 2018;12:603-606. [PMID: 29704203 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-018-0813-6]

Transcatheter arterial perfusion chemotherapy combined with lipiodol chemoembolization for advanced colorectal cancer complicated by obstruction

Background

Obstruction is a common complication of advanced colorectal cancer. This study was aimed at investigating the safety, efficacy, and feasibility of transcatheter arterial perfusion chemotherapy combined with lipiodol chemoembolization for treating advanced colorectal cancer complicated by obstruction.

Patients and methods

This retrospective analysis was conducted using clinical data of patients with advanced colorectal cancer who received arterial infusion chemotherapy combined with lipiodol chemoembolization treatment at our center. Treatment efficacy was evaluated in terms of obstruction-free survival and overall survival, and treatment complications were monitored.

Results

Fifty-four patients with colorectal cancer complicated by obstruction were included. All patients successfully underwent transcatheter arterial infusion combined with lipiodol chemoembolization treatment. The average lipiodol dose administered was 2.62 ± 1.45 ml (0.5-5.5 ml). No serious complications such as perforation or tumor dissemination occurred. The clinical success rate was 83.3% (45/54). One month after treatment, the objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 66.67% and 88.9%, respectively. The median obstruction-free survival was 5.0 months. No serious adverse events occurred. As of the last follow-up, 6 patients survived, 44 died, and 4 were lost to follow-up.

Conclusion

Our findings revealed that transcatheter arterial infusion chemotherapy combined with lipiodol chemoembolization is safe and effective for treating advanced colorectal cancer complicated by obstruction. It may serve as a new treatment strategy for patients with advanced colorectal cancer complicated by obstruction.

Experience with Laparoscopic and Robotic Colon Surgery Together with Other Major Minimally Invasive Procedures for Unrelated Pathologies

Background: Indications for combined colon surgery together with other procedures include oncologic multivisceral resections and abdominal trauma. It is unclear if combining minimally invasive (MI) colon surgery with unrelated other procedures increases the risk for complications. Patients and Methods: The surgical database from two institutions during a 10-year period was queried for combined colon surgeries together with other interventions. All open cases, combined cases performed for one pathology and MI colectomies together with a minor procedure, were excluded. Results: Median age of the 6 men and 7 women was 64.4 (range 42.7-75.4) years. Colon surgeries included right (5), sigmoid (4) transverse (1) colectomies, rectum resection (1), rectopexy (1), and colostomy reversal (1) with indications of colorectal cancer (5), diverticulitis (3), benign ileocecal mass (1), colonic volvulus (3) and rectal prolapse (1). Second procedures included two splenectomies (sarcoidosis, ITP), paraesophageal hernia repairs (4), right diaphragmatic repairs [eventration (2) and Morgagni type hernia]; cholecystectomies (2), appendectomy (acute appendicitis), duodenal wedge resection (carcinoid), reversal of a gastric bypass (Roux limb stricture) one each. Cases were done laparoscopically (7) and robotic assisted (6). In most cases only 4 trocars were used. Median OR time was 4.3 (range 2.5 to 6.6) hours. No anastomotic breakdown was observed. Conclusions: Combining MI colectomy and other major abdominal surgeries can be safely done and in this series did not increase morbidity or mortality but avoids a second operation. Patient selection seems important and port placement may need to be altered to achieve good exposure for both procedures.

A Synchronous Robotic Resection of Colorectal Cancer and Liver Metastases-Our Initial Experience

INTRODUCTION

Synchronous robotic colorectal and liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is gaining popularity. This case series describes our initial institutional experience.

METHODS

A retrospective study of synchronous robotic colorectal and liver resections for metastatic colorectal cancer (March 2020 to December 2021).

RESULTS

Eight patients underwent synchronous robotic resections. The median age was 59 (45-72), and the median body mass index was 29 (20-33). Seven received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and five rectal cancers received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. One patient had a low anterior resection with major hepatectomy, two had low anterior resection with minor hepatectomy, and one had abdominoperineal resection with major hepatectomy. One patient had a left colectomy with minor hepatectomy, and two had right colectomies with minor hepatectomy. We used five robotic 8/12 mm ports in all cases. Extraction incisions were Pfannenstiel in four patients, colostomy site in two patients, one perineal incision, and one supra-umbilical incision. The median estimated blood loss was 200 mL (25-500), and the median operative time was 448 min (374-576). There were no intra-operative complications or conversions. Five patients had the liver resection first, and two of six anastomoses were performed before the liver resection. The Median length of stay was 4 days (3-14). There were two post-operative complications, prolonged ileus and DVT, with a Clavien-Dindo complication grade of I and II, respectively. There were no readmissions or reoperations. All colorectal and liver resection margins were negative.

CONCLUSIONS

Synchronous robotic colorectal and liver resection can be performed effectively utilizing one port configuration with acceptable short-term outcomes and quality of oncologic resection.

Survival Study: International Multicentric Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases (SIMMILR-2)

Introduction: Study: International Multicentric Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases (SIMMILR-CRLM) was a propensity score matched (PSM) study that reported short-term outcomes of patients with CRLM who met the Milan criteria and underwent either open (OLR), laparoscopic (LLR) or robotic liver resection (RLR). This study, designated as SIMMILR-2, reports the long-term outcomes from that initial study, now referred to as SIMMILR-1. Methods: Data regarding neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic (NC) and neoadjuvant biological (NB) treatments received were collected, and Kaplan−Meier curves reporting the 5-year overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for OLR, LLR and RLR were created for patients who presented with synchronous lesions only, as there was insufficient follow-up for patients with metachronous lesions. Results: A total of 73% of patients received NC and 38% received NB in the OLR group compared to 70% and 28% in the LLR group, respectively (p = 0.5 and p = 0.08). A total of 82% of patients received NC and 40% received NB in the OLR group compared to 86% and 32% in the RLR group, respectively (p > 0.05). A total of 71% of patients received NC and 53% received NB in the LLR group compared to 71% and 47% in the RLR group, respectively (p > 0.05). OS at 5 years was 34.8% after OLR compared to 37.1% after LLR (p = 0.4), 34.3% after OLR compared to 46.9% after RLR (p = 0.4) and 30.3% after LLR compared to 46.9% after RLR (p = 0.9). RFS at 5 years was 12.1% after OLR compared to 20.7% after LLR (p = 0.6), 33.3% after OLR compared to 26.3% after RLR (p = 0.6) and 22.7% after LLR compared to 34.6% after RLR (p = 0.6). Conclusions: When comparing OLR, LLR and RLR, the OS and RFS were all similar after utilization of the Milan criteria and PSM. Biological agents tended to be utilized more in the OLR group when compared to the LLR group, suggesting that highly aggressive tumors are still managed through an open approach.

Application Effect of Robot-Assisted Laparoscopy in Hepatectomy for Colorectal Cancer Patients with Liver Metastases

Objective

Application effect of Leonardo's robot-assisted laparoscopy in hepatectomy for colorectal cancer patients with liver metastases.

Methods

A total of 122 patients with sCRLM treated in our hospital from May 2015 to June 2018 were selected and divided into observation group (n = 61) and control group (n = 61) according to random number table method. The observation group was treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic hepatectomy, while the control group was treated with conventional laparoscopic hepatectomy. The perioperative time, intraoperative blood transfusion, intraoperative blood loss, average intraoperative blood transfusion, and hepatic portal occlusion time of the two groups were observed. Serum cortisol (Cor), norepinephrine (NE), and glucose (Glu) levels were detected before and after surgery in the two groups. The oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide output of patients were measured 1 day before surgery and 1~3 days after surgery, and the resting energy expenditure (REE) value was calculated. The levels of CD3+, CD4+, and CD8+ were determined by flow cytometry. The incidence of complications was compared between the two groups. Patients were followed up for 3 years after discharge, and Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the survival of the two groups.

Results

The operation time, intraoperative blood transfusion, intraoperative blood loss, and average intraoperative blood transfusion in the observation group were all less than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Three days after operation, the levels of serum Cor, NE, and Glu were increased in both groups, and the observation group was lower than the control group; the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The REE level of observation group was lower than that of control group after 1 day, 2 days, and 3 days after surgery, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Three days after operation, the levels of serum CD3+ and CD4+ were decreased in both groups, and the observation group was higher than the control group; the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The incidence of complications in the observation group (3.28%) was lower than that in the control group (13.11%); the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05).There was no significant difference in survival rate between the two groups after 1, 2, and 3 years of follow-up (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The application of robot-assisted laparoscopy in patients with sCRLM can effectively improve the perioperative situation of patients, reduce stress, energy metabolism, and immune damage, and reduce the incidence of complications.

Simultaneous Resection of Colorectal Carcinoma and Hepatic Metastases is Safe and Effective: Examining the Role of the Robotic Approach

BACKGROUNDS AND OBJECTIVES

Up to 50% of patients with colorectal carcinoma (CRC) present with liver metastases (CLM) throughout their course. Complete resection of both sites provides the only chance for cure. Either a staged or simultaneous resection is feasible. The latter avoids delays in adjuvant systemic chemotherapy but may increase technical complexity and perioperative complications. We aim to evaluate our initial outcomes of simultaneous CRC and CLM resections with a focus on the robotic technique.

METHOD

With institutional review board approval, we followed 26 consecutive patients who underwent simultaneous/concomitant liver and colorectal resection. Major liver resection is defined as resection of ≥3 contiguous Couinaud segments. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD).

RESULTS

Patients were 64 (63 ± 14.0) years old. Body mass index was 29 (29 ± 5.7) kg/m². 54% of patients had prior abdominal operation(s). A majority of patients were >ASA class III (73%), underwent major liver resection (62%) with robotic approach (77%). In the robotic cohort, there were no unplanned conversions to open. Estimated blood loss was 150 (210 ± 181.8) ml. Total operative duration was 446 (463 ± 93.6) minutes. Negative margins (R0) were obtained in all patients. Postoperative complication of Clavien-Dindo≥3 occurred in three patients, including one requiring reoperation with end ileostomy for anastomotic leak. Length of stay was 5 (6 ± 3.5) days. Three patients were readmitted within 30 days after discharge, none for reoperation. There was no 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Our cohort of concomitant CRC and CLM resection demonstrates safety and efficacy via both the open and robotic approach.

Analysis of surgical approach and tumor distance to margin after liver resection for colorectal liver metastasis

This study was undertaken to compare tumor distance to margin after robotic vs. open hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) and to determine the relationship between perioperative variables, surgical approach and tumor distance to margin with overall survival. With IRB approval, we followed 56 patients who underwent a robotic or open hepatectomy for treatment of CLM. The relationships between the tumor distance to margin, operative approach, perioperative variables and survival was determined. The robotic approach yielded greater margins than the open approach (p = 0.04). The robotic vs. open approach had an operative duration of 375 vs. 269 min (p = 0.05), ICU length of stay (LOS) of 0 vs. 1 day (p = 0.01), and hospital LOS of 4 vs. 7 days (p = 0.04). Patients with a tumor distance to margin of ≤ 1 mm and 1.1-9.9 mm had an estimated median survival of 49 months and 24 months, respectively. Estimated median survival for patients with tumor distance to margin of ≥ 10 mm has not been reached but is > 84 months. The use of the robotic approach is associated with greater tumor distance to margin and shorter hospital LOS, but with longer operations. The robotic approach does not compromise oncological margins during resection for CLM.

Multivisceral Resection in Robotic Liver Surgery

Simple Summary

Liver surgery can be performed simultaneously with operations to remove other organs in certain circumstances, such as removal of colorectal cancer in the colon or rectum at the same time as metastatic lesions to the liver. These types of operations have been performed as open or laparoscopic procedures; however, more recently, they can be performed with a robotic approach. In this article, we review the literature and describe robotic liver resections performed with robotic resection of other organs, including colon, rectum, and pancreas. These published reports demonstrate that, in select cases and experienced hands, robotic multivisceral resection can be safely performed with good outcomes.

Abstract

Minimally invasive surgery techniques are expanding in utilization in liver resections and now include robotic approaches. Robotic liver resection has been demonstrated to have several benefits, including surgeon ergonomics, wrist articulation, and 3D visualization. Similarly, for multivisceral liver resections, the use of minimally invasive techniques has evolved and expanded from laparoscopy to robotics. The aim of this article is to review the literature and describe multivisceral resections, including hepatectomy, using a robotic technique. We describe over 50 published cases of simultaneous robotic liver resection with colon or rectal resection. In addition, we describe several pancreatectomies performed with liver resection and one extra-abdominal pulmonary resection with liver resection. In total, these select reported cases at experienced centers demonstrate the safety of robotic multivisceral resection in liver surgery with acceptable morbidity and rare conversion to open surgery. As robotic technology advances and experience with robotic techniques grows, robotic multivisceral resection in liver surgery should continue to be investigated in future studies.

Systematic Review Comparing the Effectiveness of Robotic verse Laparoscopic Liver Surgery in Colorectal Liver Metastasis (CRLM)

Introduction: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the world. The liver is the most common site of metastasis with 15 to 25% of patients presenting with synchronous colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). This study is aimed at evaluating the long- and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic CRLM surgery, and directly comparing their respective effectiveness. Methodology: A literature search was performed and all studies that reported on operative characteristics, oncological outcomes for CRLM, morbidity or mortality and cost-effectiveness on robotic or laparoscopic surgery were included. The study design was in keeping with the PRISMA guidelines. Results: From the initial 606 manuscripts identified, 19 studies were included in the final qualitative analysis. A total of 1340 patients with 1194 LLR (Laparoscopic Liver Resection) and 146 RLR (Robotic Liver Resection) cases were analysed. Within the LLR group, the average tumour size excised was 32.1 mm compared to the RLR group of 33.8 mm. The average operative time in the LLR was 193 min, CI of 95% (147.4 min to 238.6 min) compared to RLR 257 min, CI of 95% (201.5 min to 313.8 min) with a p-value < 0.0001. Estimated blood loss was lower in the RLR group (210 mL) compared with the LLR group (246 mL). Conclusion: Despite the higher operative cost, RLRs do not result in statistically better treatment outcomes, with the exception of lower estimated blood loss and excision of larger CRLMs. Operative time and total complication rate are significantly more favourable with LLRs. Our study has shown that robotic liver surgery is safe and feasible in well-selected patients.

Robotic surgery for colorectal liver metastases resection: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The role of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLMs) has never been investigated in large series.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was carried out on PubMed and Cochrane libraries.

RESULTS

We selected nine studies between 2008 and 2021. Two hundred sixty-two patients were included. One hundred thirty-one patients underwent simultaneous resections. The mean blood loss was 309.4 ml (range, 200-450 ml), the mean operative time was 250.5 min (range, 198.5-449.0 min). The mean length of hospital stay was 7.98 days (range, 4.5 to 12 days). The overall postoperative mortality was 0.4%. The overall morbidity rate was 37.0%, Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV complications were 8.4%. The mean 3-year overall survival was 55.25% (range, 44.4-66.1%), the mean 3-year disease free survival was 37% (range, 33.3-41.9%) CONCLUSION: We can conclude that robotic-assisted surgery might be considered as a technical upgrade option for minimally invasive approach to CRCLM resections even for simultaneous operations and challenging cases.

Simultaneous Robot Assisted Colon and Liver Resection for Metastatic Colon Cancer

Introduction

Simultaneous robot assisted colon and liver resections are being performed more frequently at present due to the expanded adoption of the robotic platform for surgical management of metastatic colon cancer. However, this approach has not been studied in detail with only case series available in the literature. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current body of evidence on the feasibility of performing simultaneous robotic colon and liver resections.

Methods

A systematic review was performed through PubMed to identify relevant articles describing simultaneous colon and liver resections for metastatic colon cancer.

Results

A total of 28 patients underwent simultaneous resections robotically with an average operative time of 420.3 minutes and average blood loss of 275.6 ml. Postoperative stay was 8.6 days on average with all cases achieving negative surgical margins.

Conclusions

Robotic simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer with liver metastases is technically feasible and seems oncologically equivalent to open or laparoscopic surgery. Further studies are urgently needed to assess benefits of robotic surgery in the patient population.

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

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

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

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

Simultaneous robotic-assisted resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: a systematic review

Simultaneous resections of primary colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have emerged as safe and efficient procedures for selected patients. Besides the traditional open approach for simultaneous resections, similar outcomes have been reported for minimally invasive approaches. Over the past years, a number of studies have sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of simultaneous robotic-assisted resections (SRAR) for patients with synchronous CRC and CRLM. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the safety, technical feasibility and outcomes of SRAR of the primary CRC and CRLM. A comprehensive review of the literature was undertaken. Nine studies comprising a total of 29 patients (16 males) who underwent SRAR were considered eligible for inclusion. The primary tumor site was the rectum in 22 (76%) patients and the colon in 7 (24%) patients. A minor liver resection was performed in the majority of the cases (n = 24; 82%). The median operative time and estimated blood loss were 399.5 min (range 300-682) and 274 ml (range 10-780 ml), respectively. No cases of conversion to open were reported. The median LOS was 7 days (range 2-28 days). All patients reportedly underwent R0 resection. Overall and major morbidity rates were 38% and 7%, respectively, while no perioperative deaths were reported. Despite the limited number of studies, SRAR seems to be a safe and efficient minimally invasive approach for highly selected patients always implemented in the context of multidisciplinary patient management.

Full robotic multivisceral resections: the Modena experience and literature review

The robotic platform is becoming a multidisciplinary tool, versatile, and suitable for multiple procedures. Combined multivisceral resections may represent an alternative to sequential procedures with a potential favorable impact on postoperative morbidity, and on the timing of administration of adjuvant chemotherapy. We herein present our initial experience with full robotic multivisceral resections, and a review of the literature available. Between January 2018 and April 2020, 11 patients underwent multivisceral full robotic abdominal surgery: 4 patients presented with two synchronous tumors, 4 with primary cancer associated with a benign condition and 3 cases involved deep infiltrating endometriosis. Surgical teams enrolled were: General Surgery, Urology and Gynecology. A systematic bibliographic research up to April 2020 was conducted in PubMed. 4 colorectal resections combined with partial or radical nephrectomy were performed, as well as 2 right colectomies in combination with right adrenalectomy and gastric banding removal, 2 radical prostatectomies with Nissen Fundoplication and abdominal wall hernia repair, and 3 resections of deep pelvic endometriosis with colorectal involvement. Mean total operative time was 367 min. No intraoperative complication or conversion to open was registered. Overall postoperative complication rate was 18.2%. 26 papers were included in the review (10 case series and 16 case reports) with a total of 156 combined multivisceral robotic procedures recorded. Robotic combined multivisceral resections proved to be safe and feasible when performed in high volume centers by expert surgeons. The heterogeneity of reports does not allow for a standardization of the procedure. Further studies and accumulation of experience are needed.

The art of robotic colonic resection: a review of progress in the past 5 years

Surgery is developing in the direction of minimal invasiveness, and robotic surgery is becoming increasingly adopted in colonic resection procedures. The ergonomic improvements of robot promote surgical performance, reduce workload for surgeons and benefit patients. Compared with laparoscopy-assisted colon surgery, the robotic approach has the advantages of shorter length of hospital stay, lower rate of conversion to open surgery, and lower rate of intraoperative complications for short-term outcomes. Synchronous robotic liver resection with colon cancer is feasible. The introduction of the da Vinci Xi System (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has introduced more flexibility to colonic operations. Optimization of the suprapubic surgical approach may shorten the length of hospital stay for patients who undergo robotic colonic resection. Single-port robotic colectomy reduces the number of robotic ports for better looking and faster recovery. Intestinal anastomosis methods using totally robotic surgery result in shorter time to bowel function recovery and tolerance to a solid diet, although the operative time is longer. Indocyanine green is used as a tracer to assess blood supplementation in the anastomosis and marks lymph nodes during operation. The introduction of new surgical robots from multiple manufacturers is bound to change the landscape of robotic surgery and yield high-quality surgical outcomes. The present article reviews recent advances in robotic colonic resection over the past five years.

Perioperative and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopy-assisted hemicolectomy for left-sided colon cancers: a retrospective study

The objective of this study is to evaluate the perioperative and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted hemicolectomy (RAH) versus laparoscopy-assisted hemicolectomy (LAH) for left-sided colon cancers. Patients who underwent RAH and LAH from January 2012 to December 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. Patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. Follow-up consultations were conducted to evaluate the long-term outcomes of these procedures. A total of 460 patients were included (RAH, n = 205; LAH, n = 255). There was no difference in patient characteristics between the two groups. Compared with the LAH group, the RAH group showed longer operative time (150.23 ± 43.77 min vs. 125.85 ± 38.67 min, p < 0.001) and higher surgery cost (6.33 ± 1.50 vs. 2.88 ± 0.72 thousand $, p < 0.001) and total hospital cost (14.97 ± 3.05 vs. 9.05 ± 2.31 thousand $, p < 0.001). No significant differences in tumor pathology, TNM staging, and perioperative outcomes were observed. There were no obvious differences in the 3-year and 5-year overall survival (OS) or 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival. Cox multivariate analyses showed that age, body mass index, and intravascular cancer embolus were independent risk factors for OS. Moreover, the robotic approach was not an independent risk factor for prognosis of left-sided colon cancers. RAH is an appropriate operation method for left-sided colon cancer, with perioperative and long-term outcomes comparable to those of laparoscopy. Meanwhile, RHA has longer operative time and higher cost.

Robotic and laparoscopic liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases: an experience from a German Academic Center

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is increasing in incidence. The aim of this work was to present our experience by reporting short-term and long-term outcomes after MILS for CRLM with comparative analysis of laparoscopic (LLS) and robotic liver surgery (RLS).

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with CRLM, who underwent MILS between May 2012 and March 2020, were selected from our retrospective registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS). Thirteen of these patients underwent LLS and 12 RLS. Short-term and long-term outcomes of both groups were analyzed.

RESULTS

Operating time was significantly longer in the RLS vs. the LLS group (342.0 vs. 200.0 min; p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the laparoscopic vs. the robotic group regarding length of postoperative stay (8.8 days), measured blood loss (430.4 ml), intraoperative blood transfusion, overall morbidity (20.0%), and liver surgery related morbidity (4%). The mean BMI was 27.3 (range from 19.2 to 44.8) kg/m². The 30-day mortality was 0%. R0 resection was achieved in all patients (100.0%) in RLS vs. 10 patients (76.9%) in LLS. Major resections were carried out in 32.0% of the cases, and 84.0% of the patients showed intra-abdominal adhesions due to previous abdominal surgery. In 24.0% of cases, the tumor was bilobar, the maximum number of tumors removed was 9, and the largest tumor was 8.5 cm in diameter. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 84, 56.9, and 48.7%, respectively. The 1- and 3-year overall recurrence-free survival rates were 49.6 and 36.2%, respectively, without significant differences between RLS vs. LLS.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive liver surgery for CRLM is safe and feasible. Minimally invasive resection of multiple lesions and large tumors is also possible. RLS may help to achieve higher rates of R0 resections. High BMI, previous abdominal surgery, and bilobar tumors are not a barrier for MILS. Laparoscopic and robotic liver resections for CRLM provide similar long-term results which are comparable to open techniques.

Effectiveness of surgical resection for complicated liver cancer and its influencing factors: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is the preferred method for patients with complex liver cancer. But the tumor is in a special position, the surgery is highly risky, postoperative complications can easily occur, and the prognosis is not ideal.

AIM

To investigate the effectiveness of surgical resection for complex liver cancer and its influencing factors.

METHODS

Fifty-seven patients who had complicated liver cancer and underwent surgical resection at our hospital from August 2015 to August 2016 were enrolled in this study. All patients were followed for three years, and their postoperative complications, survival, and factors that impacted their survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

The total incidence of postoperative complications was 45.61%, and the incidence of pleural effusion was the highest at 28.07%. There were no correlations between the 2-year and 3-year survival rates and sex, age, and HbsAg of the patients (P > 0.05). In terms of pathological parameters, the 2-year and 3-year survival rates were significantly different according to the presence of a tumor capsule, degree of liver cirrhosis, satellite or focal lesions, hepatic vein thrombosis, portal vein tumor thrombus, and intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of surgical resection for complex hepatocellular carcinoma may be affected by factors such as the presence of a tumor capsule, cirrhosis degree, satellite or focal lesions, hepatic vein embolization, portal vein tumor thrombus, and intraoperative blood loss. Therefore, these factors should be controlled and prevented during surgery to help improve patient survival after surgery.

Robotic simultaneous resection for colorectal liver metastasis: feasibility for all types of liver resection

BACKGROUND

A laparoscopic approach is increasingly being utilized in simultaneous colorectal and liver resection (SCLR) for colorectal cancer with liver metastasis. However, this approach is technically challenging and hence has not been widely adopted. Robotic surgical systems could potentially overcome this problem. We aim to describe the feasibility and outcomes of robotic SCLR for colorectal carcinoma with liver metastasis.

METHODS

The medical records of 12 patients who underwent robotic SCLR for colorectal cancer with liver metastasis between January 2008 and September 2018 were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The mean age was 59 years (range, 37-77 years). The liver resections were comprised of two right hepatectomies, one left hepatectomy, one left lateral sectionectomy, one segmentectomy of S3 and wedge resection (segment 7), one caudate lobectomy, one associated liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy, and five wedge resections involving segments 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8. The colorectal procedures involved seven low-anterior resections, two anterior resections, two right hemicolectomies, and one left hemicolectomy. The mean operative time was 449 min (range, 135-682 min) with a mean estimated blood loss of 274.3 mL (range, 40-780 mL). The mean length of hospital stay was 12 days (range, 5-28 days). No patients required conversion to laparotomy. Liver resection-related complications were two liver abscesses (Clavien-Dindo classification, one grade II and one grade III) and one case of ascites (grade I), whereas colorectal resection-related complications included one anastomosis leak (grade III) and one superficial wound infection (grade II). There were no deaths reported within 30 days of the procedure. With a mean follow-up duration of 31.5 ± 26.1 months, the overall survival and disease-free survival values were 75.2 and 47.1 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Robotic SCLR for colorectal neoplasm with liver metastasis can be performed safely even in cases requiring major liver resections, especially in a specialized center with a well-trained team.

Robotic approach to the liver: Open surgery in a closed abdomen or laparoscopic surgery with technical constraints?

The application of the minimally invasive approach has shown to be safe and effective for liver surgery and is in constant growth. The indications for laparoscopic surgery are steadily increasing across the field. In the early 2000s, robotic surgery led to some additional improvements, such as tremor filtration, instrument stability, 3D view and more comfort for the surgeon. These techniques bring in some advantages compared to the traditional OLR: less blood loss, shorter admissions, fewer adhesions, and a faster postoperative recovery and better outcomes in case of further hepatectomy for tumor recurrence has been shown. Concerning which is the best minimally invasive approach between laparoscopic and robotic surgery, the evidence is still conflicting. The latter shows good potential, since the endo-wristed instruments work similarly to the surgeon's hands, even with an intact abdominal wall. However, the technique is still under development, burdened by important costs, and limited by the lack of some instruments available for the laparoscopic approach. The paucity of universally accepted and proven data, especially concerning long-term outcomes, hampers drawing univocal acceptance at present. Furthermore, the number of variables related both to the patient and the disease further complicates the decision leading to a treatment tailored to each patient with strict selection. This review aims to explore the main differences between laparoscopic and robotic surgery, focusing on indications, operative technique and current debated clinical issues in recent literature.