The difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection

Outcomes after laparoscopic or open liver resection for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-associated hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score-matching study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is rapidly gaining popularity; however, its efficacy for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)-associated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (NAFLD-HCC) has been not evaluated. The purpose of this study was to compare short- and long-term outcomes between LLR and open liver resection (OLR) among patients with NAFLD-HCC.

METHODS

We used a single-institution database to analyze data for patients who underwent LLR or OLR for NAFLD-HCC from January 2007 to December 2022. We performed propensity score-matching analyses to compare overall postoperative complications, major morbidities, duration of surgery, blood loss, transfusion, length of stay, recurrence, and survival between the two groups.

RESULTS

Among 210 eligible patients, 46 pairs were created by propensity score matching. Complication rates were 28% for OLR and 11% for LLR (p = 0.036). There were no significant differences in major morbidities (15% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.522) or duration of surgery (199 min vs. 189 min, p = 0.785). LLR was associated with a lower incidence of blood transfusion (22% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.013), less blood loss (415 vs. 54 mL, p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (9 vs. 6 days, p < 0.001). Differences in recurrence-free survival and overall survival between the two groups were not statistically significant (p = 0.222 and 0.301, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR was superior to OLR for NAFLD-HCC in terms of overall postoperative complications, blood loss, blood transfusion, and postoperative length of stay. Moreover, recurrence-free survival and overall survival were comparable between LLR and OLR. Although there is a need for careful LLR candidate selection according to tumor size and location, LLR can be regarded as a preferred treatment for NAFLD-HCC over OLR.

Mid- to long-term outcome of laparoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation for malignant hepatic tumors

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of fully laparoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (LURFA) in malignant hepatic tumors that are difficult to curatively treat with the percutaneous approach or laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2021, 62 patients with malignant hepatic tumors (37 hepatocellular carcinomas [HCCs] and 25 metastatic colorectal cancers [mCRCs]), who were not feasible to be curatively treated by percutaneous radiofrequency ablation or LLR, were enrolled and treated only by LURFA. Patients who underwent concurrent surgical resection were excluded. The cumulative incidence rates of local recurrence (LR) and survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

All 93 tumors with a median diameter of 22.0 mm (IQR, 8.0-50.0) and a median number of 1.5 tumors (IQR, 1.0-6.0) in 62 patients were successfully treated. According to the IWATE criteria for LLR, 33 of 62 patients (53.2%) had tumors in difficult locations (segments I, VII, VIII, and IVa). Over a median follow-up period of 92.4 months (IQR, 60.0-128.0), the 1-, 2-, 3-, 5-, 8-, and 10-year cumulative incidence rates of LR were 6.9%, 13.8%, 17.2%, 17.2%, 20.9%, and 20.9%, respectively. In patients with HCC, 1-, 3-, 5-, and 8-year survival rates were 97.2%, 80.6%, 55.6%, and 40.1%, respectively. In patients with mCRC, 1-, 3-, 5-, and 8-year survival rates were 100.0%, 36.4%, 27.3%, and 16.4%, respectively. Adverse events of grade 3 occurred in only 3 of 62 patients (4.8%).

CONCLUSION

Full LURFA is a safe and effective treatment for malignant hepatic tumors, even in difficult percutaneous ablation or LLR areas.

Nomogram predicting surgical risk of laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomy for hepatolithiasis

OBJECTIVE

To explore the surgical risk factors of laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomy for hepatolithiasis and establish and validate a nomogram to estimate the corresponding surgical risks.

METHODS

Patients with hepatolithiasis who underwent laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomy were retrospectively enrolled. Demographic data, clinicopathological parameters, and surgical factors were collected. Three hundred fifty-three patients were enrolled and randomly divided into training set (n=267) and validation set (n=86) by 3:1. Conversion to laparotomy was used as a surrogate index to evaluate the surgical risk. Univariate analysis was used to screen potential surgical risk factors, and multivariate analysis using logistic regression model was used to screen independent surgical risk factors. Nomogram predicting the surgical risks was established based on the independent risk factors. Discrimination, calibration, decision curve, and clinical impact analyses were used to evaluate the performance of the nomogram on the statistical and clinical aspects both in the training and validation sets.

RESULTS

Five independent surgical risk factors were identified in the training set, including recurrent abdominal pain, bile duct stricture, ASA classification ≥2, extent of liver resection, and biliary tract T tube drainage. No collinearity was found among these five factors, and a nomogram was established. Performance analyses of the nomogram showed good discrimination (AUC=0.850 and 0.817) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, p=0.530 and 0.930) capabilities both in the training and validation sets. Decision curve and clinical impact analyses also showed that the prediction performance was clinically valuable.

CONCLUSIONS

A nomogram was established and validated to be effective in evaluating and predicting the surgical risk of patients undergoing laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomies for hepatolithiasis.

Risk Factors and Outcomes of Open Conversion During Minimally Invasive Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study on 3880 Procedures Comparing the Laparoscopic and Robotic Approaches

INTRODUCTION

Despite the advances in minimally invasive (MI) liver surgery, most major hepatectomies (MHs) continue to be performed by open surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors and outcomes of open conversion during MI MH, including the impact of the type of approach (laparoscopic vs. robotic) on the occurrence and outcomes of conversions.

METHODS

Data on 3880 MI conventional and technical (right anterior and posterior sectionectomies) MHs were retrospectively collected. Risk factors and perioperative outcomes of open conversion were analyzed. Multivariate analysis, propensity score matching, and inverse probability treatment weighting analysis were performed to control for confounding factors.

RESULTS

Overall, 3211 laparoscopic MHs (LMHs) and 669 robotic MHs (RMHs) were included, of which 399 (10.28%) had an open conversion. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that male sex, laparoscopic approach, cirrhosis, previous abdominal surgery, concomitant other surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score 3/4, larger tumor size, conventional MH, and Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification III procedures were associated with an increased risk of conversion. After matching, patients requiring open conversion had poorer outcomes compared with non-converted cases, as evidenced by the increased operation time, blood transfusion rate, blood loss, hospital stay, postoperative morbidity/major morbidity and 30/90-day mortality. Although RMH showed a decreased risk of conversion compared with LMH, converted RMH showed increased blood loss, blood transfusion rate, postoperative major morbidity and 30/90-day mortality compared with converted LMH.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple risk factors are associated with conversion. Converted cases, especially those due to intraoperative bleeding, have unfavorable outcomes. Robotic assistance seemed to increase the feasibility of the MI approach, but converted robotic procedures showed inferior outcomes compared with converted laparoscopic procedures.

Delimiting Low Level of Difficulty Scoring System Based on the Extent of Resection Difficulty Scoring System for Laparoscopic Liver Resection

Background: The difficulty scoring system based on the extent of resection (DSS-ER) is a common tool for assessing the difficulty and risk of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), but DSS-ER fails to comprehensively and accurately assess low level for beginners. Methods: The 93 cases of LLRs for primary liver cancer in the general surgery department of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University from 2017 to 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The low level of DSS-ER difficulty scoring system was reclassified into three grades. The intraoperative and postoperative complications were compared among different groups. Results: There were significant differences in the operative time, blood loss, intraoperative allogeneic blood transfusion, conversion to laparotomy, and allogeneic blood transfusion among the different groups. Meanwhile, the postoperative complications were mainly pleural effusion and pneumonia, and the incidence of grade III was higher compared with other two grades. No significant difference existed in the postoperative biliary leakage and liver failure among three grades. Conclusions: This reclassified low level of DSS-ER difficulty scoring system has certain clinical value for LLR beginners to complete the corresponding learning curve.

Assessment of Factors Associated with Morbidity and Textbook Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Obese Patients: A French Nationwide Study

BACKGROUND

Liver surgeons need to know the expected outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in obese patients.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study is to assess morbidity, mortality and textbook outcomes (TO) after LLR in obese patients.

METHODS

This is a French multicenter study of patients undergoing LLR between 1996 and 2018. Obesity was defined by a BMI at or above 30 kg/m 2 . Short-term outcomes and TO were compared between obese (ob) and nonobese (non-ob) patients. Factors associated with severe morbidity and TO were investigated.

RESULTS

Of 3,154 patients included, 616 (19.5%) were obese. Ob-group patients had significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and higher incidence of metabolic syndrome and chronic liver disease and were less likely to undergo major hepatectomy. Mortality rates were similar between ob and non-ob groups (0.8 vs 1.1%; p = 0.66). Overall morbidity and hospital stay were significantly increased in the ob group compared with the non-ob group (39.4 vs 34.7%, p = 0.03; and 9.5 vs 8.6 days, p = 0.02), whereas severe 90-day morbidity (at or above Clavien-Dindo grade III) was similar between groups (8% in both groups; p = 0.90). TO rate was significantly lower for the ob group than the non-ob group (58.3 vs 63.7%; p = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, obesity did not emerge as a risk factor for severe 90-day morbidity but was associated with a lower TO rate after LLR (odds ratio = 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-1.0; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR in obese patients is safe and effective with acceptable mortality and morbidity. Obesity had no impact on severe morbidity but was a factor for failing to achieve TO after LLR.

Perioperative Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection and Risk Factors for Adverse Events

PURPOSE

The perioperative outcomes and risk factors associated with adverse events (AEs) after initial laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) are unclear. We studied the outcomes of LLR and identified the predictive factors for AEs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 100 adults who underwent LLR between April 2014 and February 2020 were reviewed. Baseline characteristics, surgery details, intraoperative data, and postoperative outcomes were tabulated. The AEs included conversion to open surgery, morbidity, and mortality.

RESULTS

Major and minor LLRs accounted for 16% and 84% of cases, respectively. Of the indications for LLR, 88% were malignancies. Conversion to open surgery was necessary for 7% of the patients, the overall morbidity rate was 21%, the major morbidity rate was 7%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 1%. Although the incidence of AEs was higher after major LLR (37.5%) than after minor LLR (21.4%), the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.095); the rate of AEs in the resection of posterosuperior segments (43.7%) did not significantly differ from that of the anteroinferior segments (19.2%; P=0.095). Multivariable analysis revealed that the significant predictors of AEs included American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class III (odds ratio, 5.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.74-19.1; P=0.003) and an operative time longer than 5 hours (odds ratio, 9.20; 95% confidence interval, 2.41-35.07; P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

To improve outcomes in LLR, patients with ASA class III and those in whom surgery is expected to last longer than 5 hours should be taken into account for better patient selection.

Impact of Three-Dimensional (3D) Visualization on Laparoscopic Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The impact of three-dimensional (3D) visualization on laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma is largely unknown.

METHODS

A retrospective review with propensity-score matched analysis of 3D and two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic hepatectomy performed in a tertiary hepatobiliary surgery center.

RESULTS

Since the availability of 3D laparoscopy, the proportion of laparoscopic major hepatectomies has significantly expanded (1.7% vs. 24.0%, p < 0.0001) and the percentage of difficult resections among patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy has also increased (12.6% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.0001). A total of 305 patients (92 in the 3D group and 213 in the 2D group) underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy between 2002 and 2019. The 3D group had better liver function, larger tumors at more difficult locations, more major resections, and more difficult surgeries. After propensity score matching, 144 patients were analyzed (72 in both the 3D and 2D groups). Patients were comparable in terms of liver status, tumor status, and complexity of liver surgery. Operative time (218 vs. 218 mins, p = 0.50) and blood loss (0.2 vs. 0.2L, p = 0.49) were comparable between the two groups, however overall complications were higher in the 2D group (1.4 vs. 11.1%, p = 0.03). Patients who underwent 3D laparoscopic major hepatectomy had a shorter hospital stay than their comparable counterparts operated through an open approach (7 vs. 6 days, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

3D visualization enhanced the feasibility of laparoscopic major hepatectomy and difficult laparoscopic liver resection. 3D resection was potentially associated with fewer operative morbidities and the 3D laparoscopic approach did not jeopardize the outcome of major hepatectomy.

Minimally invasive liver resection for huge (≥10 cm) tumors: an international multicenter matched cohort study with regression discontinuity analyses

Background

The application and feasibility of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) for huge liver tumours (≥10 cm) has not been well documented.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of data on 6,617 patients who had MILR for liver tumours were gathered from 21 international centers between 2009-2019. Huge tumors and large tumors were defined as tumors with a size ≥10.0 cm and 3.0-9.9 cm based on histology, respectively. 1:1 coarsened exact-matching (CEM) and 1:2 Mahalanobis distance-matching (MDM) was performed according to clinically-selected variables. Regression discontinuity analyses were performed as an additional line of sensitivity analysis to estimate local treatment effects at the 10-cm tumor size cutoff.

Results

Of 2,890 patients with tumours ≥3 cm, there were 205 huge tumors. After 1:1 CEM, 174 huge tumors were matched to 174 large tumors; and after 1:2 MDM, 190 huge tumours were matched to 380 large tumours. There was significantly and consistently increased intraoperative blood loss, frequency in the application of Pringle maneuver, major morbidity and postoperative stay in the huge tumour group compared to the large tumour group after both 1:1 CEM and 1:2 MDM. These findings were reinforced in RD analyses. Intraoperative blood transfusion rate and open conversion rate were significantly higher in the huge tumor group after only 1:2 MDM but not 1:1 CEM.

Conclusions

MILR for huge tumours can be safely performed in expert centers It is an operation with substantial complexity and high technical requirement, with worse perioperative outcomes compared to MILR for large tumors, therefore judicious patient selection is pivotal.

Validation and comparison of the Iwate, IMM, Southampton and Hasegawa difficulty scoring systems for primary laparoscopic hepatectomies

BACKGROUND

Various difficulty scoring systems (DSS) have been formulated to grade the complexity of laparoscopic hepatectomies (LH). This study aims to externally validate and compare 4 contemporary DSS including the Iwate, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris (IMM), Southampton and Hasegawa DSS in predicting the intraoperative technical difficulty and postoperative outcomes after LH.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 548 consecutive patients who underwent LH of which 455 met the study inclusion criteria. Outcomes measures of technical difficulty included operation time, Pringles maneuver, blood loss and blood transfusion rate. Postoperative outcomes measured included morbidity, major morbidity and postoperative hospital stay.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant progressive increase in blood loss, blood transfusion rate, operation time and postoperative stay associated with all 4 DSS. There was also good calibration with respect to blood loss, operation time, Pringles maneuver, open conversion rate, postoperative morbidity, postoperative major morbidity and postoperative stay for all 4 DSS. The Southampton score demonstrated the poorest calibration in terms of operation time and discrimination in terms of application of Pringles maneuver and major morbidity amongst all 4 systems.

CONCLUSION

All 4 DSS significantly correlated with outcome measures associated with intraoperative technical difficulty and postoperative outcomes. The Southampton DSS was the poorest system in our cohort of patients.

Laparoscopic and open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis: multicentre propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Child-Pugh A cirrhosis has been demonstrated as beneficial. However, the role of laparoscopy in Child-Pugh B cirrhosis is undetermined. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare open and laparoscopic resection for HCC with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis.

METHODS

Data on liver resections were gathered from 17 centres. A 1 : 1 propensity score matching was performed according to 17 predefined variables.

RESULTS

Of 382 available liver resections, 100 laparoscopic and 100 open resections were matched and analysed. The 90-day postoperative mortality rate was similar in open and laparoscopic groups (4.0 versus 2.0 per cent respectively; P = 0.687). Laparoscopy was associated with lower blood loss (median 110 ml versus 400 ml in the open group; P = 0.004), less morbidity (38.0 versus 51.0 per cent respectively; P = 0.041) and fewer major complications (7.0 versus 21.0 per cent; P = 0.010), and ascites was lower on postoperative days 1, 3 and 5. For laparoscopic resections, patients with portal hypertension developed more complications than those without (26 versus 12 per cent respectively; P = 0.002), and patients with a Child-Pugh B9 score had higher morbidity rates than those with B8 and B7 (7 of 8, 10 of 16 and 21 of 76 respectively; P < 0.001). Median hospital stay was 7.5 (range 2-243) days for laparoscopic liver resection and 18 (3-104) days for the open approach (P = 0.058). The 5-year overall survival rate was 47 per cent for open and 65 per cent for laparoscopic resection (P = 0.142). The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 32 and 37 per cent respectively (P = 0.742).

CONCLUSION

Patients without preoperative portal hypertension and Child-Pugh B7 cirrhosis may benefit most from laparoscopic liver surgery.

Robotic ICG guided anatomical liver resection in a multi-centre cohort: an evolution from "positive staining" into "negative staining" method

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major anatomical liver resection is challenging. The robotic liver resection (RLR) approach, with Firefly indocyanine green (ICG) imaging, was proposed to overcome the limitations of laparoscopy. The aim of this multi-centre international study was to evaluate the use of Firefly ICG imaging in anatomical RLR.

METHODS

A retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing RLR anatomical resection with intra-operative ICG administration from January 2015 to July 2018 were enrolled. Patients who underwent simultaneous or en-bloc resections of other organs were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 52 patients were recruited of which 32 patients were healthy donors, 17 with malignancy and 3 for benign conditions. 12 patients had cirrhosis. 28 patients underwent a right hepatectomy (53.8%) with left hepatectomy performed with 18 patients. 40 patients underwent negative staining and 12 patients via direct portal vein injection for positive staining. ICG demarcation line was visualized in 43 patients and was clearer than the ischaemic demarcation line in 29 patients. All resections for malignancy had clear margins. There were no 30-day/inpatient mortalities.

CONCLUSION

Robotic ICG guided hepatectomy technique for anatomical liver resection is safe, feasible and has the benefit for improved visualization in healthy donors and cirrhotic patients.

The Shift from Multiport to Single Port Increases the Amount of Bleeding in Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomy

Background: Bleeding is a negative outcome predictor in liver surgery. Reduction in the abdominal wall trauma in major hepatectomy is challenging but might offer possible benefits for the patient. This study was conducted to assess hemostasis techniques in single-port major hepatectomies (SP-MajH) as compared to multiport major hepatectomies (MP-MajH). Methods: The non-randomized study comprised 34 SP-MajH in selected patients; 14 MP-MajH served as the control group. Intraoperative blood loss and number of blood units transfused served as the primary endpoints. Secondary endpoints were complications and oncologic five-year outcome. Results: All resections were completed without converting to open surgery. Time for hepatectomy did not differ between SP-MajH and MP-MajH. Blood loss and number of patients with blood loss > 25 mL were significantly larger in MP-MajH (p = 0.001). In contrast, bleeding control was more difficult in SP-MajH, resulting in more transfusions (p = 0.008). One intestinal laceration (SP-MajH) accounted for the only intraoperative complication; 90-day mortality was zero. Postoperative complications were noted in total in 20.6% and 21.4% of patients for SP-MajH and MP-MajH, respectively. No incisional hernia occurred. During a median oncologic follow-up at 61 and 56 months (SP-MajH and MP-MajH), no local tumor recurrence was observed. Conclusions: SP-MajH requires sophisticated techniques to ensure operative safety. Substantial blood loss requiring transfusion is more likely to occur in SP-MajH than in MP-MajH.

Middle and left hepatic vein trunk control during laparoscopic liver resection (with video)

BACKGROUND

While inflow control can be easily applied by Pringle maneuver, outflow control of the left liver has not been formally described. We report here a safe and reproductible technique of middle and left hepatic veinous trunk control (MLHVC) before parenchymal transection during laparoscopic left hepatectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective review of laparoscopic liver resection was conducted from January 2013 to March 2018 from our prospective database. All cases of laparoscopic left hepatectomy (LLH) were included, and intra- and postoperative outcomes data collected. We collected cases where the middle and left hepatic vein trunk control has been attempted and clamping used, and we analyzed outcomes associated with this maneuver.

RESULTS

MLHVC was attempted in 28 cases (77.8) of the 36 LLH identify in a monocentric study. It was technically not feasible only in 3 cases (8.3%) and clamping applied in 15 cases (41.7%). No significant intraoperative unexpected event occurred.

CONCLUSION

We present here a technique for left liver outflow control that can be safely added to the armamentarium of laparoscopic liver surgery.

Is minimally invasive surgery of lesions in the right superior segments of the liver justified? A multi-institutional study of 245 patients

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive resection for lesions in segments 7 or 8. We compare outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and Open parenchymal sparing liver resections at two high-volume centers.

METHODS

From 2003 to 2016 we identified patients who underwent MIS or Open resections for lesions in segments 7 or 8 at two institutions (MSKCC and SGH). Outcomes were compared using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and forty-five patients underwent resection of lesions in segments 7 or 8 (MIS 30% and Open 70%). Compared to the Open group, the MIS group had longer operative time (223 ± 88 vs 188 ± 72 minutes, P = .003), lower blood loss (297 ± 287 vs 448 ± 670 mL, P = .03), and shorter mean length of stay (5.2 ± 7.4 vs 8.3 ± 11.7 days, P < .001), which remained significant on multivariate analysis. No differences in Pringle time, rate of postoperative complications, or R0 resections were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

With appropriately selected patients treated by experienced MIS hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons, MIS resection of segments 7 or 8 is safe with similar rates of complications and R0 resections, with significantly less blood loss and shorter length of stay.

Major Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Based on Surgeons' Learning Curve

BACKGROUND

Surgical complications for surgeons still in the learning phase of major laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) have been frequently observed. We aimed to compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery based on the surgeons' learning curve for LLR after propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of all patients with a histologic diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent major hepatectomy between January 2013 and December 2018. A PSM analysis was used to compare the groups of patients who underwent LLR and open major liver resection (OLR) before and after the learning curve was maximized.

RESULTS

Among 405 patients, 106 underwent LLR and 299 underwent OLR. The learning curve was maximized after 42 cases. Compared with OLR, LLR had more liver-related injury and grade III or higher complications during the learning phase. The LLR group had less blood loss, fewer transfusion requirements, and fewer liver-related complications during the 'experienced' phase. Hospital stay was significantly shorter during and after maximization of the learning curve in LLR compared with OLR. Operative time was comparable in the two phases. Overall, LLR was associated with less blood loss, fewer complications, and shorter hospital stay compared with open surgery. There was no significant difference in long-term survival outcomes between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR had a higher incidence of liver-related complications during the surgeon's learning phase compared with OLR. This association was significantly diminished with surgeon experience. Overall perioperative outcomes such as estimated blood loss, surgical complications, and hospital stay remained better for LLR compared with OLR.

A propensity-matched study of full laparoscopic versus hand-assisted minimal-invasive liver surgery

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The implications of multi-incision (MILS) and hand-assisted (HALS) laparoscopic techniques for minimally invasive liver surgery with regard to perioperative outcomes are not well defined. The purpose of this study was to compare MILS and HALS using propensity score matching.

METHODS

309 patients underwent laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) between January 2013 and June 2018. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed after a 1:1 propensity score match. Subgroup analyses of matched groups, i.e., radical lymphadenectomy (LAD) as well as resections of posterosuperior segments (VII and/or VIII), were performed.

RESULTS

MILS was used in 187 (65.2%) and HALS in 100 (34.8%) cases, with a significant decrease of HALS resections over time (p = 0.001). There were no significant differences with regard to age, sex, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Score, previous abdominal surgery and cirrhosis between both groups. Patients scheduled for HALS were characterized by a significantly higher rate of malignant tumors (p < 0.001) and major resections (p < 0.001). After propensity score matching (PMS), 70 cases remained in each group and all preoperative variables as well as resection extend were well balanced. A significantly higher rate of radical LAD (p = 0.039) and posterosuperior resections was found in the HALS group (p = 0.021). No significant differences between the matched groups were observed regarding operation time, conversion rate, frequency of major complications, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, overall hospital stay and R1 rate.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis suggests MILS and HALS to be equivalent regarding postoperative outcomes. HALS might be particularly helpful to accomplish complex surgical procedures during earlier stages of the learning curve.

Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy: application of the difficulty scoring system

BACKGROUND

The development of robotic system may help to relieve the difficulties encountered during laparoscopic hepatectomy. A difficulty scoring system (DSS) was developed to assess the difficulty of various laparoscopic liver resection procedures. The aim of this study is to explore if the DSS is applicable in robotic hepatectomy and to compare the outcomes of robotic hepatectomy and laparoscopic hepatectomy among different difficulty levels.

METHODS

Clinical data from all consecutive patients who underwent robotic and conventional laparoscopic hepatectomy at the Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, were prospectively collected and reviewed. The difficulty level of operations was graded using the DSS. Perioperative outcomes of robotic and conventional laparoscopic hepatectomy were compared at each difficulty level.

RESULTS

A total of 107 and 94 patients underwent robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomy during the study period, respectively. Among them, 16 and 2 patients were operated for recurrent pyogenic cholangitis, respectively, and were excluded because no mark for tumour location can be assigned. For robotic hepatectomy, a higher DSS was significantly correlated with higher minor complication rate (p = 0.001), more intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.002), longer operation time (p < 0.001) and longer post-operative hospital stay (p < 0.001). The mean DSS scores of robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomy were 4.5 and 3.6, respectively. (p = 0.004). For cases with low (DSS 1-3) and intermediate (DSS 4-6) difficulty level, there was no significant difference in operative blood loss, operation time and overall complications rate. Only 2 cases (2.2%) with high difficulty level were operated with laparoscopic approach while 20% of patients operated with robotic approach had DSS > 6.

CONCLUSIONS

DSS significantly correlated with surgical outcomes in patient who underwent robotic hepatectomy. Perioperative outcomes following robotic and conventional laparoscopic hepatectomy were similar in cases with low and intermediate difficulty. However, robotic system allowed minimally invasive approach in cases with higher difficulty level.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection Difficulty Score-a Validation Study

OBJECTIVE(S)

The technical complexity of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) poses unique challenges distinct from open surgery. An objective scoring system was developed that preoperatively quantifies the difficulty of LRR to help guide surgeon decision-making regarding the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive approaches. The aim of this multiinstitutional study was to externally validate this scoring system.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LLR at two institutions were reviewed. LLR difficulty score (LDS) was calculated based on patient, tumor, and anatomic characteristics by two independent, blinded hepatobiliary surgeons. Surrogates of case complexity (e.g., conversion rate, operative time) were used for validation of this index.

RESULTS

From 2006 to 2016, 444 LLR were scored as low (n = 94), intermediate (n = 98), and high difficulty (n = 152) with respective conversion rates of 5.3%, 15.7%, and 25%. Cases of higher LDS correlated with larger mean blood loss (203 ml vs. 331 ml vs. 635 ml). Mean operative and Pringle maneuver used were associated with increasing LDS (155 min vs. 202 min vs. 315 min and 14.4% vs. 29.7% vs. 45.1% respectively). These operative surrogates of difficulty correlated significantly with the LDS (all p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive external validation of the LDS is robust and applicable in diverse patient populations. This LDS serves as a useful objective predictor of technical difficulty for LLR to help surgeons in selecting patients according to their individual operative experience and is valuable for preoperative risk estimation and stratification in randomized trials.

Surgical outcomes of hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection vs. open liver resection: A retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study

Objective

Hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection has the advantages of open and laparoscopic surgeries. There is still lack of comparison of surgical outcomes between hand-assistied laparoscopic liver resection (HALLR) and open liver resection (OLR). This study compared the surgical outcomes of the two approaches between well-matched patient cohorts.

Methods

Patients who received liver resection during January 2014 and October 2017 in Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College were included in this retrospective study. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce selection bias between the two groups. Operation and short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the well matched groups.

Results

During this period, 232 patients with a median age of 55.1 years old received OLR, while 49 patients with a median age of 54.7 years old received HALLR. Compared with HALLR group, OLR group has a higher proportion in male patients (190/232, 81.9% vs. 34/49, 69.4%, P=0.048) and lower albumin (43.2±4.5 vs. 44.8±3.7, P=0.020). After PSM, 49 patients from each group were included in the following analysis. Two groups were well balanced in their baseline characteristics, liver functions, preoperative treatments, abdominal surgery history, and surgical difficulty. None perioperative mortality was observed in both groups. Operation time and postoperative complications were similar in two groups (P=0.935, P=0.056). The HALLR group showed less bleeding amount (177.8±217.1 mL vs. 283.1±225.0 mL, P=0.003) and shorter postoperative stay period (6.9±2.2 d vs. 9.0±3.5 d, P=0.001).

Conclusions

We demonstrated that hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery is feasible and safe for liver resection, including some difficult cases. HALLR can provide better bleeding control and faster recovery after surgery.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Right Posterior Sectionectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in a High-Volume Center: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

While minimal invasive surgery is becoming popular in liver resection, right posterior sectionectomy (RPS) is still considered as a difficult procedure. We summarize the clinical data and investigate the feasibility of laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by comparing its outcomes with those of open right posterior sectionectomy (ORPS).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 191 patients who underwent RPS for HCC during January 2009 to August 2016 at Samsung Medical Center. After 1:2 propensity score matching, 53 patients in LRPS group were matched to 97 patients in ORPS group.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference in preoperative data. While operation time was significantly longer in LRPS group (381.1 ± 118.7 vs. 234.4 ± 63.7 min, P < 0.001), transfusion rate (13.2 vs. 2.1%, P = 0.061) and complication rate (9.4 vs. 8.3%, P = 0.709) were not statistically different between groups. Clustered Cox proportional hazards regression analysis for matched paired data showed no difference in both disease-free survival (P = 0.607) and overall survival (P = 0.858).

CONCLUSIONS

In HCC, LRPS can be performed safely compared to ORPS, regarding the operative outcome, patient recovery, and oncological outcomes.

Changing trends and outcomes associated with the adoption of minimally invasive hepatectomy: a contemporary single-institution experience with 400 consecutive resections

BACKGROUND

Several studies published mainly from pioneers and early adopters have documented the evolution of minimally invasive hepatectomy (MIH). However, questions remain if these reported experiences are applicable and reproducible today. This study examines the changing trends, safety, and outcomes associated with the adoption of MIH based on a contemporary single-institution experience.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 400 consecutive patients who underwent MIH between 2006 and 2017 of which 360 cases (90%) were performed since 2012. To determine the evolution of MIH, the study population was stratified into four equal groups of 100 patients. Analyses were also performed of predictive factors and outcomes of open conversion.

RESULTS

Four hundred patients underwent MIH of which 379 (94.8%) were totally laparoscopic/robotic. Eighty-eight (22.0%) patients underwent major hepatectomy and 160 (40.0%) had resection of tumors located in the posterosuperior segments. There were 38 (9.5%) open conversions. Comparison across the four groups demonstrated that patients were older, had higher ASA score, and had increased frequency of previous abdominal surgery and repeat liver resections. There was also an increase in the proportion of patients who underwent totally laparoscopic/robotic surgery, major liver resection, resection of ≥ 3 segments, and multiple resections. Comparison of outcomes demonstrated that there was a significant decrease in open conversion rate, longer operation time, and increased use of Pringles maneuver. The presence of cirrhosis and institution experience (1st 100 cases) were independent predictors of open conversion. Patients who required open conversion had significantly increased operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion rate, morbidity, and mortality.

CONCLUSION

The case volume of MIH performed increased rapidly at our institution over time. Although the indications of MIH expanded to include higher risk patients and more complex hepatectomies, there was a decrease in open conversion rate and no change in other perioperative outcomes.

Comprehensive evaluation of liver resection procedures: surgical mind development through cognitive task analysis

Background

Liver resection is a complex procedure for trainee surgeons. Cognitive task analysis (CTA) facilitates understanding and decomposing tasks that require a great proportion of mental activity from experts.

Methods

Using CTA and video-based coaching to compare liver resection by open and laparoscopic approaches, we decomposed the task of liver resection into exposure (visual field building), adequate tension made at the working plane (which may change three-dimensionally during the resection process), and target processing (intervention strategy) that can bridge the gap from the basic surgical principle.

Results

The key steps of highly-specialized techniques, including hanging maneuvers and looping of extra-hepatic hepatic veins, were shown on video by open and laparoscopic approaches.

Conclusions

Familiarization with laparoscopic anatomical orientation may help surgeons already skilled at open liver resection transit to perform laparoscopic liver resection smoothly. Facilities at hand (such as patient tolerability, advanced instruments, and trained teams of personnel) can influence surgical decision making. Application of the rationale and realizing the interplay between the surgical principles and the other paramedical factors may help surgeons in training to understand the mental abstractions of experienced surgeons, to choose the most appropriate surgical strategy effectively at will, and to minimize the gap.

Clinical, Anatomical, and Pathological Grading Score to Predict Technical Difficulty in Laparoscopic Splenectomy for Non-traumatic Diseases

BACKGROUND

We aimed to develop a grading system based on preoperative parameters that would predict surgical difficulty and morbidity in elective laparoscopic splenectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

We retrospectively assessed morbidity in 439 patients who underwent laparoscopic splenectomy for benign and malignant disorders between 1993 and 2013. Medical and surgical records were reviewed and analyzed. We compared preoperative data concerning demographic, clinical, pathological, anatomical, laboratory, and radiological factors with three surgical outcomes: operative time, intraoperative bleeding, and surgical conversion. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify statistically significant variables. A logistic regression model was used to identify determinant variables and to compose a predictive score. External validation of the score was performed using an independent cohort of 353 patients.

RESULTS

Four preoperative parameters (age, male sex, type of pathology, and spleen size based on final spleen weight) were significantly related with operative time, operative bleeding, and conversion to open surgery. Using these results, we developed a classification system with three levels of difficulty: low (≤4 points), medium (4.5-5.5 points), and high (≥6 points), based on the four preoperative parameters. The correlation was highly significant (p = <0.001) according to Spearman's correlation. The area under the ROC curve was 0.671 (95 % CI 0.596-0.745). The external validation showed significant correlations with the present model.

CONCLUSIONS

The grading score described here is simple to calculate from the physical examination, laboratory tests, and US or CT images, and we believe it could be useful to preoperatively assess the technical complexity of laparoscopic splenectomy.

Critical appraisal of the impact of individual surgeon experience on the outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection in the modern era: collective experience of multiple surgeons at a single institution with 324 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Most studies analyzing the learning experience of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) focused on the experience of one or two expert pioneering surgeons. This study aims to critically analyze the impact of individual surgeon experience on the outcomes of LLR based on the contemporary collective experiences of multiple surgeons at single institution.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 324 consecutive LLR from 2006 to 2016. The cases were performed by 10 surgeons over various time periods. Four surgeons had individual experience with <20 cases, four surgeons with 20-30 cases, and two surgeons with >90 cases. The cohort was divided into two groups: comparing a surgeon's experience between the first 20, 30, 40, and 50 cases with patients treated thereafter. Similarly, we performed subset analyses for anterolateral lesions, posterosuperior lesions, and major hepatectomies.

RESULTS

As individual surgeons gained increasing experience, this was significantly associated with older patients being operated, decreased hand-assistance, larger tumor size, increased liver resections, increased major resections, and increased resections of tumors located at the posterosuperior segments. This resulted in significantly longer operation time and increased use of Pringle maneuver but no difference in other outcomes. Analysis of LLR for tumors in the posterosuperior segments demonstrated that there was a significant decrease in conversion rates after a surgeon had experience with 20 LLR. For major hepatectomies, there was a significant decrease in morbidity, mortality, and length of stay after acquiring experience with 20 LLR.

CONCLUSION

LLR can be safely adopted today especially for lesions in the anterolateral segments. LLR for lesions in the difficult posterosuperior segments and major hepatectomies especially in cirrhosis should only be attempted by surgeons who have acquired a minimum experience with 20 LLR.

Diffusion, outcomes and implementation of minimally invasive liver surgery: a snapshot from the I Go MILS (Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery) Registry

The Italian Group of MILS (I Go MILS) prospective registry was established in 2014 with the goals to create a hub for data and projects on a national basis and to promote the diffusion and implementation of MILS programs on a national scale. The primary endpoint of the present study is to give a snapshot of the real diffusion and outcomes of MILS in Italy, while analyzing the role of the registry in the implementation of MILS programs nationwide. The I Go MILS Registry is a prospective and intention-to-treat registry opened to any Italian center performing MILS, without restriction criteria based on number of procedures. The Registry is developed through the eClinical, an electronic platform for the management of clinical trials and is based on 34 clinical variables, regarding indication, intra- and postoperative course. Clinical outcomes and data regarding implementation of MILS activity have been analyzed for the aim of the study. Between November 2014 and June 2017, data from 1678 MILS performed in 48 centers have been collected (mean number of procedures per center 35, range 1-302). 22% of procedures were performed for benign and 78% for malignant disease (HCC constituted the 49.1% and CRLM the 31.2% of malignant tumors). Major liver resections (>3 liver segments), including right and left hepatectomies, trisectionectomies and ALPPS procedures were 10% of the series. Mean blood loss was 200 ± 230 mL Morbidity rate was 20.5% and mortality was 0.3%. 10.4% of cases were converted to open approach. Median length of stay was 5 days. MILS/total resections ratio in 13 experienced centers increased from 14 to 30% after Registry establishment. MILS programs are well established in Italy, with progressive increase both in the number of cases and in the numerosity of centers. The I Go MILS Registry is playing a crucial role in monitoring the development of MILS in the real world on a national basis while giving a significant contribution to the implementation of MILS programs.

Prediction of surgical outcomes of laparoscopic liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma by defining surgical difficulty

BACKGROUND

Several classification systems for assessing the surgical difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) have been proposed. We evaluated three current classification systems, including traditional Major/Minor Classification, Complexity Classification, and the Difficulty Scoring System for predicting the surgical outcomes after LLR.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data of 301 patients who underwent LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma between March 1, 2004 and June 30, 2015. We compared the intraoperative, pathologic, and postoperative outcomes according to the three classifications. We also compared the prognostic value of the three classifications using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

The Major/Minor Classification, Complexity Classification, and the Difficulty Scoring System efficiently differentiated surgical difficulty in terms of blood loss (P = 0.001, P = 0.009, and P < 0.001, respectively) and operation time (all P < 0.001). Regarding intraoperative outcomes, the Difficulty Scoring System and Complexity Classification successfully differentiated the transfusion rate (P = 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). However, only the Complexity Classification adequately predicted severe postoperative complications (P = 0.032), the severity of complications (P < 0.001), and the length of hospital stay (P = 0.005). In ROC curve analysis, the Complexity Classification (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.611) outperformed the Major/Minor Classification (AUC = 0.544) and the Difficulty Scoring System (AUC = 0.530) for predicting severe postoperative complications. None of the classification systems predicted recurrence or patient survival.

CONCLUSION

The Complexity Classification was superior to the other methods for assessing surgical difficulty and predicting complications after LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Conventional Approaches for Major or Challenging Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

The benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for low-risk or minor liver resection are well established. There is growing interest in MIS for major hepatectomy (MH) and other challenging resections, but there remain unanswered questions of safety that prevent broad adoption of this technique.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing hepatectomy at 65 hospitals participating in the NSQIP Hepatopancreatobiliary Collaborative in 2014. We assessed serious morbidity or mortality (SMM; including organ/space infection and organ failure). Secondary outcomes included transfusion, bile leak, liver failure, reoperation or intervention, and 30-day readmission. We also measured factors considered to make resection more challenging (ie large tumors, cirrhosis, ≥3 concurrent resections, previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and morbid obesity).

RESULTS

There were 2,819 patients who underwent hepatectomy (aged 58 ± 14 years; 53% female; 25% had MIS). After adjusting for clinical and operative factors, the odds of SMM (odds ratio [OR] = 0.57; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.96; p = 0.03) and reoperation or intervention (OR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.93; p = 0.03) were significantly lower for patients undergoing MIS compared with open. In the MH group (n = 1,015 [13% MIS]), there was no difference in the odds of SMM after MIS (OR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.11; p = 0.08); however, minimally invasive MH met criteria for noninferiority. There were no differences in liver-specific complications or readmission between the groups. Odds of SMM were significantly lower after MIS among patients who had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 0.33; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.70; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large study of minimally invasive MH, we found safety outcomes that are equivalent or superior to conventional open surgery. Although the decision to offer MIS might be influenced by factors not included in this evaluation (eg surgeon experience and other patient factors), these findings support its current use in MH.