An update on laparoscopic liver resection: The French Hepato-Bilio-Pancreatic Surgery Association statement

Safety and effectiveness of fluorescence laparoscopy in precise hepatectomy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To perform a systematic review of the safety and effectiveness of fluorescence laparoscopy-guided precise hepatectomy.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to December 1, 2022, using the search terms "indocyanine green," "ICG," "infracyanine green," "laparoscopy," "liver resection," and "hepatectomy." After performing a methodological quality assessment of the included studies, the overall results were subjected to meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

After screening, the meta-analysis included a total of 13 articles. The studies included 1,115 patients who were grouped into the fluorescence laparoscopy (490 patients) and conventional laparoscopy (625 patients) groups. All articles included in the meta-analysis were of high quality. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that compared to the conventional laparoscopy group, the fluorescence laparoscopy group had a higher R0 resection rate (odds ratio=4.03, 95% confidence interval [1.50, 10.83], P=0.006), lower blood transfusion rate (odds ratio=0.46, 95% confidence interval [0.21, 0.97], P=0.04) and lower blood loss (mean difference=-36.58; 95% confidence interval [-59.75, -13.41], P=0.002). However, the length of hospital stay, operative time, and incidence of postoperative complications did not differ significantly between both groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared to conventional laparoscopy, fluorescence laparoscopy provides better application effects in hepatectomy. The surgical procedure has demonstrated good safety and feasibility, which make it worthy of popularization.

Robotic versus laparoscopic major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: short-term outcomes from a single institution

BACKGROUND

Currently, an increasing number of robotic major hepatectomies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are being performed. Despite the advantages of robotic surgery over laparoscopic procedures, studies comparing robotic with laparoscopic major hepatectomy in terms of short-term results remain scarce. This study was performed to compare robotic major hepatectomy and laparoscopic major hepatectomy in terms of their intraoperative and postoperative results.

METHODS

Data regarding demographics and intraoperative and postoperative results of 131 patients undergoing robotic or laparoscopic major hepatectomy between January 2017 and March 2022 were retrieved from their medical records and compared between the two types of surgery.

RESULTS

Between January 2017 and March 2022, 44 robotic major hepatectomies and 87 laparoscopic major hepatectomies were performed at the Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Shenzhen People's Hospital. Patients undergoing robotic major hepatectomy were not significantly different from those undergoing laparoscopic major hepatectomy in terms of age (P = 0.397), sex (P = 0.624), body mass index (BMI) (P = 0.118), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) (P = 0.09), tumor size (P = 0.176), cirrhosis (P = 0.384), fatty liver (P = 0.162), preoperative antiviral treatment (P = 0.934), hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA (P = 0.646) and operation type (P = 0.054). Robotic major hepatectomy was associated with a longer operation time (median: 255.5 versus 206.8 min; P < 0.001) and less estimated blood loss (median: 118.9 versus 197.0 ml; P = 0.002) than laparoscopic major hepatectomy. However, robotic major hepatectomy was not significantly different from laparoscopic major hepatectomy regarding length of postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.849), open conversion (P = 0.077), ICU stay (P = 0.866), postoperative massive abdominal bleeding (P = 1.00), portal vein thrombosis (P = 1.00), abdominal infection (P = 1.00), pulmonary infection (P = 1.00), pulmonary embolism (P = 1.00), cardiac complications (P = 1.00), liver failure (P = 1.00), kidney failure (P = 1.00), biliary leak (P = 1.00), positive resection margin (P = 1.00), 30-day mortality (P = 1.00) and 90-day mortality (P = 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic major hepatectomy was as effective as laparoscopic surgery in terms of intraoperative and postoperative results but took longer and could more efficiently control intraoperative blood loss.

Augmented reality in laparoscopic liver resection evaluated on an ex-vivo animal model with pseudo-tumours

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the performance of our augmented reality (AR) software (Hepataug) during laparoscopic resection of liver tumours and compare it to standard ultrasonography (US).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety pseudo-tumours ranging from 10 to 20 mm were created in sheep cadaveric livers by injection of alginate. CT-scans were then performed and 3D models reconstructed using a medical image segmentation software (MITK). The livers were placed in a pelvi-trainer on an inclined plane, approximately perpendicular to the laparoscope. The aim was to obtain free resection margins, as close as possible to 1 cm. Laparoscopic resection was performed using US alone (n = 30, US group), AR alone (n = 30, AR group) and both US and AR (n = 30, ARUS group). R0 resection, maximal margins, minimal margins and mean margins were assessed after histopathologic examination, adjusted to the tumour depth and to a liver zone-wise difficulty level.

RESULTS

The minimal margins were not different between the three groups (8.8, 8.0 and 6.9 mm in the US, AR and ARUS groups, respectively). The maximal margins were larger in the US group compared to the AR and ARUS groups after adjustment on depth and zone difficulty (21 vs. 18 mm, p = 0.001 and 21 vs. 19.5 mm, p = 0.037, respectively). The mean margins, which reflect the variability of the measurements, were larger in the US group than in the ARUS group after adjustment on depth and zone difficulty (15.2 vs. 12.8 mm, p < 0.001). When considering only the most difficult zone (difficulty 3), there were more R1/R2 resections in the US group than in the AR + ARUS group (50% vs. 21%, p = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resection using AR seems to provide more accurate resection margins with less variability than the gold standard US navigation, particularly in difficult to access liver zones with deep tumours.

Meta-analysis of indocyanine green fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was conducted to systematically evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic hepatectomy.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted of the literature on ICG fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic hepatectomy in randomized, semi-randomized controlled trials and observational studies. The found publications and conference papers in English were manually searched and the references included in the literature were traced. The retrieval period was up to February 2021. After evaluating the quality of the included studies, the meta-analysis was conducted using the STATA 15.1 software.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 6 studies comprising 417 patients with liver disease. The meta-results showed that compared to the control group, ICG fluorescence imaging-guided laparoscopic hepatectomy can significantly shorten the operative time [weighted mean differences (WMD) = -20.81, 95% CI, -28.02--13.59, p = 0.000], reduce intraoperative bleeding  [WMD = -108.16, 95% CI, -127.88--88.44, p = 0.000], shorten hospital stay  [WMD= -1.23,95% CI, -1.50--0.95, p = 0.000], and reduce the incidence of postoperative complications  [OR = 0.49,95% CI, 0.26-0.91, p = 0.025]. There were no differences in blood transfusion, hilar occlusion time, and surgical margin.

CONCLUSION

The application of ICG fluorescence imaging technology in laparoscopic hepatectomy can effectively reduce the operative time, blood loss, hospital stay and the incidence of postoperative complications. However, more multicenter large-sample randomized controlled trials are needed to further confirm its advantages.

Long-term abdominal wall benefits of the laparoscopic approach in liver left lateral sectionectomy: a multicenter comparative study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is nowadays considered as the standard approach for hepatic left lateral sectionectomy (LLS), but its value in the prevention of incisional hernia (IH) has not been demonstrated.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2017, patients undergoing laparoscopic (LLLS) or open LLS (OLLS) in 8 centers were compared. Patients undergoing a simultaneous major abdominal procedure were excluded. The incidence of IH was assessed clinically and morphologically on computed tomography (CT) using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and multivariable regression analysis.

RESULTS

After IPTW, 84 LLLS were compared to 48 OLLS. Compared to OLLS, LLLS patients had reduced blood loss (100 [IQR: 50-200] ml vs. 150 [IQR: 50-415] ml, p = 0.023) and shorter median hospital stay (5 [IQR: 4-7] days vs. 7 [6-9] days, p < 0.001), but experienced similar rate of postoperative complications (mean comprehensive complication index: 12 ± 19 after OLLS versus 13 ± 20 after LLLS, p = 0.968). Long-term radiological screening was performed with a median follow-up of 27.4 (12.1-44.9) months. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of clinically relevant IH (10.7% [n = 9] after LLLS, 8.3% [n = 4] after OLLS, p = 0.768). The rate of IH detected on computed tomography was lower after LLLS than after OLLS (11.9% [n = 10] versus 29.2% [n = 14], p = 0.013). On multivariable analysis, the laparoscopic approach was the only independent factor influencing the risk of morphological IH (OR = 0.290 [95% CI: 0.094-0.891], p = 0.031). The 2 preferential sites for specimen extraction after LLLS were Pfannenstiel and midline incisions, with rates of IH across the extraction site of 2.3% [n = 1/44] and 23.8% [n = 5/21], respectively (p = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach for LLS decreases the risk of long-term IH as evidenced on morphological examinations, with limited clinical impact. Pfannenstiel's incision should be preferred to midline incision for specimen extraction after LLLS.

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic hepatectomy of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Almost all liver tumours can be removed laparoscopically, but some difficult tumour locations complicate laparoscopic surgery. Recurrent liver tumours often pose great difficulties to laparoscopic surgery due to adhesions caused by previous operations. Referring to laparoscopic adrenalectomy, a retroperitoneal approach is proposed to remove liver tumours near the adrenal gland, which will provide a new method for liver surgery.

CASE PRESENTATION

Our case involves a patient with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) whose last operation was laparoscopic hepatectomy in our department, with a recurrence of HCC 2 years after the first surgery. In this case, based on preoperative CT and MRI, through a retroperitoneal approach, combined with intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) localization and indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence navigation, laparoscopic hepatectomy was successfully performed to precisely resect recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma in segment VII. The patient was discharged on the third day after the operation. The AFP decreased to normal levels on the 28th postoperative day.

CONCLUSIONS

Retroperitoneal hepatectomy has the advantages of less trauma, shorter operation times, fewer complications and faster recovery for hepatic tumours near the adrenal gland. Accurate localization of tumours is needed to ensure accurate resection; therefore, IOUS and ICG fluorescence are very important. Liver parenchyma was severed strictly according to fluorescent labelling during hepatectomy, which prevented the deviation of liver parenchyma from the plane and ensured that the margin of hepatectomy was tumour-free. In order to ensure a radical resection of the tumour, it may be necessary to enter the abdominal cavity.

New frontiers in liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver resection is one of the main curative options for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis and is the treatment of choice in non-cirrhotic patients. However, careful patient selection is required to balance the risk of postoperative liver failure and the potential benefit on long-term outcomes. In the last decades, improved surgical techniques and perioperative management, as well as better patient selection, have enabled the indications for liver resection to be expanded. In this review, we aim to describe the main indications for liver resection in the management of HCC, its role compared to percutaneous ablation and liver transplantation in the therapeutic algorithm, as well as the recent advances in liver surgery that could be used to improve the prognosis of patients with HCC.

Clinical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open right hepatectomy for liver tumors: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) is one of the most challenging procedures. Right liver resections have been always performed in open procedure and open right hepatectomy (ORH) was initially considered as routine way. Moreover, it is unclear how beneficial the minimally invasive technique is to patients; thus, we conducted a meta-analysis to acquire a more reliable conclusion about the feasibility and safety of LRH compared with ORH.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library using the key words. Meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager, with results expressed as odds ratio and weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals. The fixed-effect model was selected initially if high heterogeneity was not present between the studies; otherwise, the randomized-effect model was used. Subgroup analysis was performed based on different surgical methods of pure laparoscopic operation or hand-assisted operation.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 467 patients were included. In the overall analysis, less intraoperative blood loss (MD = -155.17; 95% CI, -238.89, -71.45; P = .0003) and a shorter length of stay (MD = -4.45; 95% CI, -5.84, -3.07; P < .00001) were observed in the LRH group compared to the ORH group. There were fewer overall complications (OR = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.10, 0.90; P = 0.03) and severe complications (OR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10, 0.58; P = .002;) in the LRH group than in the ORH group. The disadvantage of LRH was the longer operative time (MD = 49.39; 95% CI, 5.33, 93.45; P = .03). No significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in portal occlusion, rate of R0 resection, transfusion rate, mild complications, and postoperative mortality. In the subgroup analysis, intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the pure LRH group and hand-assist LRH group compared with ORH group. Length of stay was shorter by use of pure LRH and hand-assisted LRH manners than ORH. The incidence rate of complications was lower in the pure LRH group than in the ORH group. In contrast, there was no significant difference between hand-assisted LRH group and ORH group.

CONCLUSION

Compared to ORH, LRH has short-term surgical advantages and leads to a shorter recovery time in selected patients. We speculate that the operative time of LRH is closer with ORH. Overall, LRH can be considered a feasible choice in routine clinical practice with experienced surgeons, although more evidence is needed to make a definitive conclusion.

Techniques for laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection

Laparoscopic liver surgery has gained wide acceptance resulting in a paradigm shift of liver surgery. Technical innovations and accumulation of surgeon's experience have allowed laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) to become an effective procedure with favorable peri- and post-operative outcomes. Through the overall process of LLR, liver parenchymal transection remains the most critical step with the aim of minimizing blood loss and secures the appropriate cutting line, i.e., securing major vessels and obtaining adequate surgical margin clearance for malignancies. Multiple preoperative imaging modalities and intraoperative ultrasonography findings may contribute to the best determination of the appropriate cutting line during the LLR; however, technical expertise in minimizing and controlling bleeding during liver parenchymal transection is still a challenge for safe LLR, and therefore represents a major concern for hepatobiliary surgeons. Along with the historical fact that the technique of liver parenchymal transection itself is chosen according to surgeon's preference and "savoir-faire", the best technical modality in laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection remains to be determined. However, better understanding the technical issue may serve a contribution to the standardization of LLR. This review article therefore focuses on the technical aspects of the laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection.

Long-term perioperative outcomes of pure laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has increased. We retrospectively compared the perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) with those of open liver resection (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in well-matched patient groups using propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

We reviewed medical records of patients with HCC who underwent liver resection between July 2007 and April 2016 at our center. In total, 2335 patients were included in this study and divided into LLR (n = 264) and OLR (n = 2071) groups. For group comparisons, 1:2 PSM was used with covariates of baseline characteristics, including tumor characteristics and surgical liver resection procedures.

RESULTS

After PSM, there were 217 and 434 patients in the LLR and OLR groups, respectively. The LLR group had shorter hospital stays (8.9 vs. 14.8 days; P < 0.001) and lower postoperative morbidity (6.5% vs. 12.0%; P = 0.022). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 98.1%, 87.0%, and 78.6%, respectively, for the LLR group, and 98.3%, 90.8%, and 84.3%, respectively, for the OLR group (P = 0.570). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 81.0%, 62.0%, and 49.1%, respectively, for the LLR group, and 85.3%, 64.7%, and 56.2%, respectively, for the OLR group (P = 0.563).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term oncological outcomes were comparable between LLR and OLR for selected patients. LLR was associated with multiple benefits, even for selected patients with cirrhosis who underwent major hepatectomy. LLR for HCC performed by an experienced surgeon could be considered a safe and feasible alternative to OLR for selected patients.

Perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with well-preserved liver function and cirrhotic background: a propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has advanced into a safe and effective alternative to conventional open liver resection (OLR), it has not been widely accepted by surgeons. This article aimed to investigate the perioperative and long-term benefits of LLR versus OLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in selected patients with well-preserved liver function and cirrhotic background.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 1085 patients with HCC who underwent liver resection at Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University from July 2010 to July 2015, and 346 patients with well-preserved liver function and cirrhotic background were selected. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), which is the best option to overcome selection bias, was conducted to compare the surgical outcomes and long-term prognosis between LLR and OLR. After PSM, a logistic regression analysis was used to identify the predictive risk factors of posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF).

RESULTS

By using PSM, the two groups were well balanced with 86 patients in each group. In the LLR group, only the median operation time was significantly longer than the OLR group, but the hospital stay, overall morbidity, and the incidence of PHLF were significantly decreased compared to OLR. There were no significant differences in the overall survival and disease-free survival rates between the two groups. On multivariate analysis, OLR was identified to be the only independent risk factor for PHLF.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected HCC patients with well-preserved liver function and cirrhotic background, LLR could be a better option compared to OLR.

Laparoscopic vs. open left lateral sectionectomy: An update meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) is thought to be the anatomical liver resection most suitable for the laparoscopic approach. Despite increasing popularity, comparative analysis of laparoscopic and open LLS are mostly limited to retrospective, underpowered studies with small sample size. Recent population-based studies and prospective trials have generated new data; however, this new body of knowledge has not been submitted systematic reviews or meta-analyses and high quality evidence regarding the actual benefits of minimally invasive LLS is lacking.

METHODS

Systematic review of studies published until December 31st, 2017 and indexed in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Central and Scielo/LILACS databases. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing perioperative results of laparoscopic and open LLS were included. Studies with patients submitted to LLS for living donation were excluded. Treatment outcomes, including conversion rates, estimated blood loss, transfusion rates, operative time, length of in-hospital stay, morbidity and mortality rates, were evaluated.

RESULTS

The primary search yielded 2838 articles, 23 of which (21 observational studies and 2 randomized controlled trials; 3415 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall conversion rate was 7.4%. Patients submitted to laparoscopic LLS had less blood loss (mean difference, MD = -119.81 ml, 95% CI = -127.90, -111.72, P < .00001, I² = 32%, N = 618), lower transfusion rates (4.1% vs. 10.1%; risk difference, RD = - 0.06, 95% CI = - 0.08, - 0.05, P < .00001, I² = 13%, N = 2968) and shorter length of in-hospital stay (MD = - 2.02 days, 95% CI = - 2.15, - 1.89, P < .00001, I² = 77%, N = 3160) compared to those undergoing open surgery. Marginally decreased overall complication (21.4% vs. 27.5%; RD = - 0.03, 95% CI = - 0.06, 0.00, P = .05, I² = 0%, N = 3268) and perioperative mortality (0.3% vs. 1.5%; RD = - 0.01, 95% CI = - 0.02, - 0.00, P = .01, I² = 0%; N = 3332) rates were also observed. Operative time and biliary, cardiac or pulmonary complication rates did not differ significantly between groups.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence supports the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic LLS. The laparoscopic approach is associated with reduced blood loss, lower transfusion rates and shorter length of in-hospital stay and should be considered the gold-standard for LLS.

Totally Laparoscopic Radical Resection of Gallbladder Cancer: Technical Aspects and Long-Term Results

INTRODUCTION

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is a rare tumor in developed countries. Chile has one of the highest incidences worldwide. For patients affected by resectable T1b or more advanced GBC, radical cholecystectomy (RC) is considered the standard therapy. Our aim is to describe the surgical technique and clinical-pathological results of patients undergoing totally laparoscopic radical resection of GBC.

METHODS

Patients undergo laparoscopic radical resection for primary and incidental GBC, between the years 2009 and 2016 in two centers from Chile. Patients in whom suspected bile duct invasion, frozen biopsy did not confirm cancer and para-aortic lymph node sampling was positive were excluded.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were operated, 77.8% were female with median age of 60.5 year, and 16 patients had previous cholecystectomy with incidental cancer finding. The median operative time was 490 min (400-550). No conversion to open surgery occurred. All patients achieved a R0 resection. Postoperative complications occurred in 2 patients (11.1%), and there was not mortality. After a median follow-up of 59 months, the 5-year survival was 80.7%.

CONCLUSION

This study shows the technical feasibility of the totally laparoscopic approach for radical resection of GBC with the same principles of classical open surgery. It appears that long-term oncological findings would also be similar at least in less advanced lesions.

Glissonian approach combined with major hepatic vein first for laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy remains challenging because of the complex interior structures of the liver. Our novel strategy includes the Glissonian approach and the major hepatic vein first, which serves to define the external and internal landmarks for laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy.

METHODS

Eleven cases underwent laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy, including three right hepatectomies, three left hepatectomies, three right posterior hepatectomies, and two mesohepatectomies. The Glissonian approach was used to transect the hepatic pedicles as external demarcation. The major hepatic vein near the hepatic portal was exposed and served as the internal landmark for parenchymal transection. The liver parenchyma below and above the major hepatic vein was transected along the major hepatic vein. Fifty-nine subjects were used to compare the distance between the major hepatic vein and secondary Glisson pedicles among different liver diseases.

RESULTS

The average operative time was 327 min with an estimated blood loss of 554.55 mL. Only two patients received three units of packed red blood cells. The others recovered normally and were discharged on postoperative day 7. The distance between right posterior Glissonian pedicle and right hepatic vein was shorter in the patients with cirrhosis than that without cirrhosis, and this distance was even shorter in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

CONCLUSION

The Glissonian approach with the major hepatic vein first is easy and feasible for laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy, especially in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhosis.

Hand-assisted Approach as a Model to Teach Complex Laparoscopic Hepatectomies: Preliminary Results

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are limited and scarce models to teach complex liver resections by laparoscopy. The aim of this study is to present a hand-assisted technique to teach complex laparoscopic hepatectomies for fellows in liver surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Laparoscopic hand-assisted approach for resections of liver lesions located in posterosuperior segments (7, 6/7, 7/8, 8) was performed by the trainees with guidance and intermittent intervention of a senior surgeon. Data as: (1) percentage of time that the senior surgeon takes the surgery as main surgeon, (2) need for the senior surgeon to finish the procedure, (3) necessity of conversion, (4) bleeding with hemodynamic instability, (5) need for transfusion, (6) oncological surgical margins, were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 12 cases of complex laparoscopic liver resections were performed by the trainee. All cases included deep lesions situated on liver segments 7 or 8. The senior surgeon intervention occurred in a mean of 20% of the total surgical time (range, 0% to 50%). A senior intervention >20% was necessary in 2 cases. There was no need for conversion or reoperation. Neither major bleeding nor complications resulted from the teaching program. All surgical margins were clear.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary report shows that hand-assistance is a safe way to teach complex liver resections without compromising patient safety or oncological results. More cases are still necessary to draw definitive conclusions about this teaching method.

Laparoscopic left liver resections: how far can we go?

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to analyse the outcomes of laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomies of the left liver segments.

METHODS

This is a retrospective multicentre study including all patients operated on laparoscopically divided into unisegmentectomy of 2, 3 or 4 (Group 1), left lobectomy (or left lateral sectionectomy LLS) (Group 2), left hepatectomy (Group 3) and extended left hepatectomy (Group 4) between 2000 and 2016. These four groups were compared in terms of demographics, intraoperative data and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Among the 190 selected patients, the groups 1, 2, 3, 4 included 25 (13.2%), 116 (61.0%), 27 (14.2%) and 22 (11.6%) patients, respectively. The cohorts were comparable except for the number of lesions (p = 0.001) and tumour diameter (p = 0.004). The operative time, blood loss and the use of vascular clamping were more frequent in the Groups 3 and 4 (p = 0.0001), as is the rate of conversion to laparotomy (p = 0.001). Total morbidity was 23.3%, and major complications were more frequent in Group 4 (p = 0.0001). The prevalence of hepatic complications (11.6%), intra-abdominal collections (7.4%) and respiratory complications (3.7%) was proportionally correlated to the hepatectomy extension (p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

All laparoscopic left liver resections seem safe and feasible even though extended hepatectomy is associated with a significant morbidity.

Pure Laparoscopic Hepatectomy Versus Open Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in 110 Patients With Liver Cirrhosis: A Propensity Analysis at a Single Center

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the long-term outcomes of pure laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with background cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy has been gaining popularity, but has not been widely accepted, because published data were gathered from small numbers of patients.

METHODS

Data of patients diagnosed with HCC and cirrhosis treated by hepatectomy were reviewed. The outcomes of pure laparoscopic hepatectomy were compared with those of open hepatectomy. Propensity score matching of patients in a ratio of 1:3 was conducted.

RESULTS

There were 110 patients and 330 patients in the laparoscopic group and the open group, respectively. The laparoscopic group had less blood loss (150 vs 400 mL; P < 0.001), shorter operation time (185 vs 255 minutes; P < 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (4vs 7 days; P < 0.001). The median overall survival was 136 months in the laparoscopic group and 120 months in the open group. The 1, 3, and 5-year overall survival rates were 98.9%, 89.8%, and 83.7%, respectively, in the laparoscopic group, and 94%, 79.3%, and 67.4%, respectively, in the open group (P = 0.033). The median disease-free survival was 66.37 months in the laparoscopic group and 52.4 months in the open group. The 1, 3, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 87.7%, 65.8%, and 52.2%, respectively, in the laparoscopic group, and 75.2%, 56.3%, and 47.9%, respectively, in the open group (P = 0.141).

CONCLUSIONS

Pure laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC can be carried out safely with favorable short-term and long-term outcomes even in cirrhotic patients at high-volume liver cancer centers.

Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: Risk Factors and Treatment Strategies

PURPOSE

To investigate the risk factors for recurrence and treatment strategies after patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergo total laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH).

METHODS

The study included 109 patients who underwent LH (laparoscopy resection [LR] group, n = 50) or open hepatectomy [OH] (open resection [OR] group, n = 59) for HCC in our hospital between March 2011 and June 2016. Perioperative outcomes, disease recurrence, survival, and risk factors for recurrence were analyzed.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics did not significantly differ between groups. The 1- and 3-year survival rates were 90.7% and 78.1%, respectively, for the LR group and 83.1% and 74.4%, respectively, for the OR group (P = .71). The 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 89.6% and 51.4%, respectively, for the LR group and 84.7% and 59.6%, respectively, for the OR group (P = .935). Tumor size, differentiation, vascular invasion, surgical bleeding, and surgical resection margin were risk factors for tumor recurrence after LH.

CONCLUSION

LH for HCC did not increase the risk of recurrence compared with OH. Tumor size, differentiation, vascular invasion, surgical bleeding, and surgical resection margin were risk factors for tumor recurrence. Reducing bleeding during surgery and ensuring sufficient surgical margins were the most important measures to reduce postoperative recurrence of HCC.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic vs. open liver resection for hepatocellular adenoma: a multicenter propensity score adjustment analysis by the AFC-HCA-2013 study group

BACKGROUND

Patients with hepatocellular adenomas are, in selected cases, candidates for liver resection, which can be approached via laparoscopy or laparotomy. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of the surgical approach on the postoperative morbidities of both minor and major liver resections.

METHODS

In this multi-institutional study, all patients who underwent open or laparoscopic hepatectomies for hepatocellular adenomas between 1989 and 2013 in 27 European centers were retrospectively reviewed. A multiple imputation model was constructed to manage missing variables. Comparisons of both the overall rate and the types of complications between open and laparoscopic hepatectomy were performed after propensity score adjustment (via the standardized mortality ratio weighting method) on the factors that influenced the choice of the surgical approach.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic approach was selected in 208 (38%) of the 533 included patients. There were 194 (93%) women. The median age was 38.9 years. After the application of multiple imputation, 208 patients who underwent laparoscopic operations were compared with 216 patients who underwent laparotomic operations. After adjustment, there were 20 (9.6%) major liver resections in the laparoscopy group and 17 (7.9%) in the open group. The conversion rate was 6.3%. The two surgical approaches exhibited similar postoperative morbidity rates and severities. Laparoscopic resection was associated with significantly less blood loss (93 vs. 196 ml, p < 0.001), a less frequent need for pedicle clamping (21 vs. 40%, p = 0.002), a reduced need for transfusion (8 vs. 24 red blood cells units, p < 0.001), and a shorter hospital stay (5 vs. 7 days, p < 0.001). The mortality was nil.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy can achieve short-term outcomes similar to those of open surgery for hepatocellular adenomas and has the additional benefits of a reduced blood loss, need for transfusion, and a shorter hospital stay.

Short and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic compared to open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is now established as standard of care for a variety of gastrointestinal procedures for benign and malignant indications. However, due to concerns regarding superiority to open liver resection (OLR), the uptake of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been slow. Data on long-term outcomes of LLR for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remain limited. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of short and long-term outcomes of LLR compared to OLR for CRLM.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were systematically searched for studies comparing LLR and OLR for CRLM and reporting on survival outcomes. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and recurrence free survival (RFS). Secondary outcomes were operative time, estimated blood loss, post-operative major morbidity, mortality, length of stay (LOS), and resection margins.

RESULTS

Eight non-randomized studies (NRS) were included (n=2,017 total patients). Six were matched cohort studies. LLR reduced estimated blood loss [mean difference: -108.9; 95% confidence interval (CI), -214.0 to -3.7) and major morbidity [relative risk (RR): 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83], but not mortality. No difference was observed in operative time, LOS, resection margins, R0 resections, and recurrence. Survival data could not be pooled. No studies reported inferior survival with LLR. OS varied from 36% to 60% for LLR and 37% to 65% for OLR. RFS ranged from 14% to 30% for LLR and 22% to 38% for OLR. According to the grade classification, the strength of evidence was low to very low for all outcomes. The use of parenchymal sparing resections with LLR and OLR could not be assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on limited retrospective evidence, LLR offers reduced morbidity and blood loss compared to OLR for CRLM. Comparable oncologic outcomes can be achieved. Although LLR cannot be considered as standard of care for CRLM, it is beneficial for well-selected patients and lesions. Therefore, LLR should be part of the liver surgeon's armamentarium.

A Novel Ultrasound-Based Registration for Image-Guided Laparoscopic Liver Ablation

Background Patient-to-image registration is a core process of image-guided surgery (IGS) systems. We present a novel registration approach for application in laparoscopic liver surgery, which reconstructs in real time an intraoperative volume of the underlying intrahepatic vessels through an ultrasound (US) sweep process. Methods An existing IGS system for an open liver procedure was adapted, with suitable instrument tracking for laparoscopic equipment. Registration accuracy was evaluated on a realistic phantom by computing the target registration error (TRE) for 5 intrahepatic tumors. The registration work flow was evaluated by computing the time required for performing the registration. Additionally, a scheme for intraoperative accuracy assessment by visual overlay of the US image with preoperative image data was evaluated. Results The proposed registration method achieved an average TRE of 7.2 mm in the left lobe and 9.7 mm in the right lobe. The average time required for performing the registration was 12 minutes. A positive correlation was found between the intraoperative accuracy assessment and the obtained TREs. Conclusions The registration accuracy of the proposed method is adequate for laparoscopic intrahepatic tumor targeting. The presented approach is feasible and fast and may, therefore, not be disruptive to the current surgical work flow.

Segmentectomy: is minimally invasive surgery going to change a liver dogma?

Nowadays, the respective approach to hepatic resections (for malignant or benign liver lesions) is oriented toward minimal parenchymal resection. This surgical behavior is sustained by several observations that surgical margin width is not correlated with recurrence of malignancies. Parenchymal-sparing resection reduces morbidity without changing long-term results and allows the possibility of re-do liver resection in case of recurrence. Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is performed worldwide and is considered a standard of care for many surgical procedures. MILS is associated with less blood loss, less analgesic requirements, and shorter length of hospital with a better quality of life. One of the more frequent criticisms to MILS is that it represents a more challenging approach for anatomical segmentectomies and that in most cases a non-anatomical resection could be performed with thinner resection margins compared with open surgery. But even in the presence of reduced surgical margins, oncological results in the short- and long-term follow-up seem to be the same such as open surgery. The purpose of this review is to try to understand whether chasing at any cost laparoscopic anatomical segmentectomies is still necessary whereas non-anatomical resections, with a parenchymal-sparing behavior, are feasible and overall recommended also in a laparoscopic approach. The message coming from this review is that MILS is opening more and more new frontiers that are still need to be supported by further experience.