Laparoscopic liver surgery for everyone: the hybrid method

Propensity score-matched analysis of laparoscopic-assisted and hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection versus pure laparoscopic liver resection: an international multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic-assisted (LALR) and hand-assisted (HALR) liver resections have been utilized during the early adoption phase by surgeons when transitioning from open surgery to pure LLR. To date, there are limited data reporting on the outcomes of LALR or HALR compared to LLR. The objective was to compare the perioperative outcomes after LALR and HALR versus pure LLR.

METHODS

This is an international multicentric analysis of 6609 patients undergoing minimal-invasive liver resection at 21 centers between 2004 and 2019. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed after propensity score matching (PSM) comparison between LALR and HALR versus LLR.

RESULTS

5279 cases met study criteria of whom 5033 underwent LLR (95.3%), 146 underwent LALR (2.8%) and 100 underwent HALR (1.9%). After 1:4 PSM, LALR was associated with inferior outcomes as evidenced by the longer postoperative stay, higher readmission rate, higher major morbidity rate and higher in-hospital mortality rate. Similarly, 1:6 PSM comparison between HALR and LLR also demonstrated poorer outcomes associated with HALR as demonstrated by the higher open conversion rate and higher blood transfusion rate. All 3 approaches technical variants demonstrated the same oncological radicality (R1 rate).

CONCLUSION

LALR and HALR performed during the learning curve was associated with inferior perioperative outcomes compared to pure LLR.

Clinical Experience of Mini-Open Hepatectomy to Aid a Laparoscopic Approach: A Case Series

Introduction

Laparoscopic surgery is recently becoming widespread in the area of liver treatment. However, mobilization of the liver is difficult using laparoscopy alone because of its volume and weight. Ensuring a wider visual field and controlling blood loss are also difficult. We used a hybrid approach involving direct vision and laparoscopy for performing hepatectomy through a small incision to overcome these problems.

Case Presentation

Mini-open hepatectomy was performed on 64 patients between January 2010 and December 2013. Mobilization of the liver was performed using the smallest possible laparotomy incision. Detachment of right or left triangular ligaments was done using laparoscopy because direct vision of the operation field was impossible. Hepatectomy was performed through a small laparotomy incision. Most operations (47%) involved partial resections. Of these, segmentectomies were performed on 20 patients, whereas lobectomy was performed on 7 patients. The median intraoperative bleeding was 565 mL, and the operative time was 247 minutes. The median postoperative hospital stay was 14 days. There was no postoperative mortality.

Conclusion

We present the clinical use of mini-open hepatectomy to aid the laparoscopic approach with satisfactory short-term results.

Feasibility and efficacy of repeat laparoscopic liver resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Repeat hepatectomy is an acceptable treatment for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, repeat laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has not been widely adopted due to its technical difficulty. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of repeat LLR compared with repeat open liver resection (OLR) for recurrent HCC.

METHODS

We performed 42 repeat OLR and 30 repeat LLR for cases of recurrent HCC between January 2007 and March 2018. This study retrospectively compared the patients' clinicopathological characteristics and operative and short-term outcomes including surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and postoperative complications between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the two groups except in terms of Child-Pugh grade. The repeat LLR group had lower median intraoperative blood loss (100 mL vs. 435 mL; P = 0.001) and shorter median postoperative hospital stay (10 days vs. 14.5 days; P = 0.002). The other results including postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups. Further, comparison of two subpopulations of the repeat LLR group stratified by previous hepatectomy type (open or laparoscopic) or tumor location (segments 7 and 8 or other) revealed no significant differences in the postoperative clinical characteristics between them, although the morbidity rate tended to be higher in patients who underwent open hepatectomy for primary HCC than in patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat LLR for recurrent HCC is feasible and useful with good short-term outcomes although an appropriate patient selection seems to be necessary.

Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Pure Laparoscopic Versus Hand-Assisted/Hybrid Major Hepatectomy at Two Western Centers

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is expanding, but little data exist comparing surgical approaches. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that pure laparoscopic liver resection (PLAP) has advantages over hand-assisted (HALS) or hybrid (HYB) resection for major hemi-hepatectomy at two western centers.

METHODS

Using propensity score matching, 65 cases of HALS + HYB (18 hand-assisted and 47 hybrid) were matched to 65 cases of PLAP. Baseline characteristics were well matched for gender, age, ASA score, Childs A cirrhosis, right/left hepatectomy, malignancy, tumor size, and type between the groups.

RESULTS

The HALS + HYB group had 27 right and 38 left major hepatectomies (n = 65) versus 29 right and 36 left (n = 65) in the PLAP group (p = NS). The median number of lesions resected was 1 in each group, with median size 5.6 cm (HALS + HYB) versus 6.0 cm (PLAP), (p = NS). The HALS + HYB group had shorter OR time (240 versus 330 min, p < 0.01), and less blood loss (EBL 150 ml vs. 300 ml, p < 0.01) versus the PLAP group, respectively. Median length of stay (LOS) was 4 days with HALS + HYB versus 5 days in the PLAP group (p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in use of the Pringle maneuver, transfusion rate, ICU stay, post-op morbidity, liver-specific complications, or R0 resection. Pain regimen/usage in each group is provided. There were no 30/90-day deaths in either group.

CONCLUSION

This is the first reported series of propensity score matching of HALS + HYB versus PLAP for major hepatectomy. The HALS + HYB group had non-inferior OR time, blood loss, and LOS versus the PLAP group, while the other perioperative parameters were comparable. We conclude that minimally invasive liver resection with either PLAP or HALS + HYB technique yields excellent results.

Current Status of Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

Before the first laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) was described in 1991, open hepatectomy (OH) was the only choice for surgical treatment of liver tumors. LH indications were initially based solely on tumor location, size, and type. Use of LH has spread rapidly worldwide because it reduces incision size. This review systematically assesses the current status of LH. As compared with OH, LH is significantly less complicated, requires shorter hospital stays, and results in less blood loss. The long-term survival rates of LH and OH are comparable. Development of new techniques and instruments will improve the conversion rate and reduce complications. Furthermore, development of surgical navigation will improve LH safety and efficacy. Laparoscopic major hepatectomy for HCC remains a challenging procedure and should only be performed by experienced surgeons. In the near future, a training system for young surgeons will become mandatory for standardization of LH, and LH will likely become better standardized and have broader applications.

Laparoscopy-assisted versus open and pure laparoscopic approach for liver resection and living donor hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted (hybrid) liver surgery is considered a minimally invasive technique, however there are doubts regarding loss of the benefits of laparoscopy due to the use of an auxiliary incision. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative results of hybrid vs. open and hybrid vs. pure laparoscopic approach to liver resection for focal lesions and living donation.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Central and LILACS databases. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

21 studies were included. Hybrid vs. open: operative time was lower in open group (mean difference [MD] = 34 min; 95%CI: 22-47; P < 0.001; N = 669). Hybrid technique was associated with a reduction in operative blood loss [MD = -43 ml; 95%CI: -74-(-13); P = 0.005, N = 1738]; shorter hospital stay [MD = -1.9 days; 95%CI: -3.2-(-0.5); P = 0.008; N = 833] and lower morbidity [risk difference (RD) = -0.05; 95%CI: -0.10-(-0.01); P = 0.010; N = 1359]. Hybrid vs. pure laparoscopic: There was no difference regarding blood loss, transfusion rate, hospital stay and morbimortality.

DISCUSSION

Hybrid technique had perioperative outcomes that were more in keeping with pure laparoscopic outcomes than open surgery. Hybrid liver surgery should be considered a minimally invasive approach.

Fully laparoscopic left hepatectomy - a technical reference proposed for standard practice compared to the open approach: a retrospective propensity score model

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) may be an alternative to open (OLH). There are several original variations in the technical aspects of LLH, and no accepted standard. The aim of this study is to assess the safety and effectiveness of the technique developed at Henri Mondor Hospital since 1996.

METHODS

The technique of LLH was conceived for safety and training of two mature generations of lead surgeons. The technique includes full laparoscopy, ventral approach to the common trunk, extrahepatic pedicle dissection, CUSA^® parenchymal transection, division of the left hilar plate laterally to the Arantius ligament, and ventral transection of the left hepatic vein. The outcomes of LLH and OLH were compared. Perioperative analysis included intra- and postoperative, and histology variables. Propensity Score Matching was undertaken of background covariates including age, ASA, BMI, fibrosis, steatosis, tumour size, and specimen weight.

RESULTS

17 LLH and 51 OLH were performed from 1996 to 2014 with perioperative mortality rates of 0% and 6%, respectively. In the LLH group, two patients underwent conversion to open surgery. Propensity matching selected 10 LLH/OLH pairs. The LLH group had a higher proportion of procedures for benign disease. LLH was associated with longer operating time and less blood loss. Perioperative complications occurred in 30% (LLH) and 10% (OLH) (p = 1). Mortality and ITU stay were similar.

CONCLUSION

This technique is recommended as a possible technical reference for standard LLH.

Advances and challenges in laparoscopic surgery in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the fifth most common malignancy and the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. From the wide variety of treatment options, surgical resection and liver transplantation are the only therapeutic ones. However, due to shortage of liver grafts, surgical resection is the most common therapeutic modality implemented. Owing to rapid technological development, minimally invasive approaches have been incorporated in liver surgery. Liver laparoscopic resection has been evaluated in comparison to the open technique and has been shown to be superior because of the reported decrease in surgical incision length and trauma, blood loss, operating theatre time, postsurgical pain and complications, R0 resection, length of stay, time to recovery and oral intake. It has been reported that laparoscopic excision is a safe and feasible approach with near zero mortality and oncologic outcomes similar to open resection. Nevertheless, current indications include solid tumors in the periphery < 5 cm, especially in segments II through VI, while according to the consensus laparoscopic major hepatectomy should only be performed by surgeons with high expertise in laparoscopic and hepatobiliary surgery in tertiary centers. It is necessary for a surgeon to surpass the 60-cases learning curve observed in order to accomplish the desirable outcomes and preserve patient safety. In this review, our aim is to thoroughly describe the general principles and current status of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, as well as future prospects.

The First Comparative Study of the Perioperative Outcomes Between Pure Laparoscopic Donor Hepatectomy and Laparoscopy-Assisted Donor Hepatectomy in a Single Institution

BACKGROUND

In a statement from the second International Consensus Conference for Laparoscopic Liver Resection, adult-to-adult laparoscopic donor surgery was the earliest phase of development. It was recommended that the procedure be performed under institutional ethical approval and a reporting registry.

METHOD

At our institute, we started laparoscopy-assisted donor hepatectomy (LADH) in 2007 and changed to pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (PLDH) in 2012. This study included 40 living donors who underwent LADH and 14 live donors who underwent PLDH. We describe the technical aspects and outcomes of our donor hepatectomy from assist to pure and examine the liver allograft outcomes of the recipients after LADH and PLDH.

RESULTS

There was significantly less blood loss in the PLDH group (81.07 ± 52.78 g) than that in the LADH group (238.50 ± 177.05 g), although the operative time was significantly longer in the PLDH group (454.93 ± 85.60 minutes) than in the LADH group (380.40 ± 44.08 minutes). And there were no significant differences in postoperative complication rate in the 2 groups. The liver allograft outcomes were acceptable and comparable with open living donor hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

By changing our routine approach from assist to pure, PLDH can be performed safely, with better exposure due to magnification, and with less blood loss under pneumoperitoneal pressure. PLDH, which has become our promising donor procedure, results in less blood loss, better cosmesis, and the donor's complete rehabilitation without deterioration in donor safety.

Evolution of Laparoscopic Liver Surgery from Innovation to Implementation to Mastery: Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes of 2,238 Patients from 4 European Specialized Centers

BACKGROUND

First seen as an innovation for select patients, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has evolved since its introduction, resulting in worldwide use. Despite this, it is still limited mainly to referral centers. The aim of this study was to evaluate a large cohort undergoing LLR from 2000 to 2015, focusing on the technical approaches, perioperative and oncologic outcomes, and evolution of practice over time.

STUDY DESIGN

The demographics and indications, intraoperative, perioperative, and oncologic outcomes of 2,238 patients were evaluated. Trends in practice and outcomes over time were assessed.

RESULTS

The percentage of LLR performed yearly has increased from 5% in 2000 to 43% in 2015. Pure laparoscopy was used in 98.3% of cases. Wedge resections were the most common operation; they were predominant at the beginning of LLR and then decreased and remained steady at approximately 53%. Major hepatectomies were initially uncommon, then increased and reached a stable level at approximately 16%. Overall, 410 patients underwent resection in the posterosuperior segments; these were more frequent with time, and the highest percentage was in 2015 (26%). Blood loss, operative time, and conversion rate improved significantly with time. The 5-year overall survival rates were 73% and 54% for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), respectively. The 5-year, recurrence-free survival rates were 50% and 37% for HCC and CRLM, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Since laparoscopy was introduced, a long implementation process has been necessary to allow for standardization and improvement in surgical care, mastery of the technique, and the ability to obtain good perioperative results with safe oncologic outcomes.

Are Hybrid Liver Resections Truly Minimally Invasive? A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

Hybrid liver resection is considered a modality of minimally invasive surgery; however, there are doubts regarding loss of benefits of laparoscopy due to the use of an auxiliary incision. We compared perioperative results of patients undergoing hybrid × open and hybrid × pure laparoscopic resections.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing liver resection between June 2008 and January 2016 were studied. Study groups were compared after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Six hundred forty-four resections were included in the comparative analysis: 470 open, 120 pure laparoscopic, and 54 hybrids. After PSM, 54 patients were included in each group. Hybrid × open: hybrid technique had shorter operative time (319.5 ± 108.6 × 376.2 ± 155.8 minutes, P = .033), shorter hospital stay (6.0 ± 2.7 × 8.1 ± 5.6 days, P = .001), and lower morbidity (18.5% × 40.7%, P = .003). Hybrid × pure laparoscopic: hybrid group had lower conversion rate (0% × 13%, P = .013). There was no difference regarding estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, hospital stay, complications, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid resection has better perioperative results than the open approach and is similar to pure laparoscopy. The hybrid technique should be considered a minimally invasive approach.

Early experience with totally laparoscopic major hepatectomies: single institution experience with 31 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Totally laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is a technically challenging procedure with limited studies mainly from high-volume expert centers reported. In this study, we report our initial experience with totally LMH.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospective database of 340 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection at a single institution was conducted. Thirty-one consecutive patients who underwent attempted totally LMH between March 2011 to December 2016 were identified. Major hepatectomies were defined as resection of ≥3 contiguous segments which included only right/left hepatectomies, extended hepatectomies or central hepatectomies.

RESULTS

The procedures included 11 right hepatectomies, one extended right hepatectomy, nine left hepatectomies (two including middle hepatic vein), two extended left hepatectomies, two left hepatectomies with caudate lobe and six central hepatectomies. The median tumor size was 40 (range, 12-100) mm and the median operation time was 435 (range, 245-585) min. Median blood loss was 500 (range, 100-1900) mls and 10 (32.3%) patients required blood transfusion. There were three (9.7%) open conversions of which two occurred during the first five cases. There was one (3.2%) major (>grade 2) morbidity and there were no 30-day/in-hospital mortalities or reoperations. The median postoperative stay was 5 (range, 3-14) days.

CONCLUSION

Our initial experience confirms the feasibility and safety of LMH. There was an increase in the number and proportion of LMH performed at our institution over time.

Evolution and revolution of laparoscopic liver resection in Japan

Due to important technological developments and improved endoscopic techniques, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now considered the approach of choice and is increasingly performed worldwide. Recent systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of observational data reported that LLR was associated with less bleeding, fewer complications, and no oncological disadvantage; however, no prospective randomized trials have been conducted. LLR will continue to evolve as a surgical approach that improves patient's quality of life. LLR will not totally supplant open liver surgery, and major LLR remains to be technically challenging procedure. The success of LLR depends on individual learning curves and adherence to surgical indications. A recent study proposed a scoring system for stepwise application of LLR, which was based on experience at high‐volume Japanese centers. A cluster of deaths after major LLR was sensationally reported by the Japanese media in 2014. In response, the Japanese Society of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Surgery conducted emergency data collection on operative mortality. The results demonstrated that mortality was not higher than that for open procedures except for hemi‐hepatectomy with biliary reconstruction. An online prospective registry system for LLR was established in 2015 to be transparent for patients who might potentially undergo treatment with this newly developed, technically demanding surgical procedure.

Pure Laparoscopic Versus Open Left Lateral Sectionectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Single-Center Experience

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy has been proven to be a safe and effective treatment for liver lesions. However, most of the literatures only reported this treatment method on benign lesion or colorectal metastases. The data on long-term outcome of laparoscopic left lateral section resection in patients with HCC and cirrhosis are still limited. The aim of this study is to analyze the survival outcome of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy when compared to open approach in patients with HCCs.

METHOD

Between January 2004 and September 2014, 967 patients had primary HCC with hepatectomy performed. Twenty-four patients had undergone pure laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Twenty-nine patients with case-matched tumor characteristics and liver functions but received open left lateral sectionectomy for HCC were included for comparison.

RESULTS

Comparing laparoscopic group to open resection group, the median operation time was 190.5 versus 195 min (P = 0.734); the median blood loss was 100 versus 300 ml (P < 0.001). Hospital stay was 5 days in laparoscopic group versus 6 days in the open group (P = 0.057). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of complications (P = 0.495). The median survival in laparoscopic group was >115 months versus >125 months in the open group (P = 0.853).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy for HCC is a safe and simple procedure associated with less blood loss. The survival outcome is comparable with conventional open approach. It is becoming a more favorable treatment option even for patients with HCC and cirrhosis.

Minimally-invasive liver resection in pediatric patients: initial experience and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (MILR) is an evolving procedure in the adult population for benign and malignant lesions, offering less morbidity while maintaining acceptable outcomes. However, there lacks a published MILR experience in the pediatric population besides case reports. This report describes a pediatric MILR experience in terms of pathology, clinical specifics, and patient outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 36 pediatric patients undergoing MILR for benign and malignant conditions. MILR was performed by pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopy, and a hybrid laparoscopic assisted method. Data points reviewed include patient demographics, pathology, operative technique, complications, and recurrence.

RESULTS

Patients with benign (15) and malignant (21) conditions underwent segmentectomy, sectionectomy, or hemihepatectomy by MILR. Thirty-one were completed with pure laparoscopy and 20 underwent hemihepatectomy. Operative time and blood loss correlated with magnitude of resection with five patients requiring a blood transfusion. Complications were minor and included a seroma, port infection, port dehiscence, line infection, and hypertrophic scar. At median follow-up of 12 months (range 6-36 months), there were no mortalities, re-operations, or recurrences.

DISCUSSION

MILR can be performed in pediatric patients for benign and malignant conditions with good technical and oncologic outcomes and low morbidity.

What is the Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomy?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is rapidly expanding with more than 9500 cases performed worldwide. While initial series reported non-anatomic resection of benign peripheral hepatic lesions, approximately 50-65 % of laparoscopic liver resections are now being done for malignant tumors, primarily hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or colorectal cancer liver metastases (mCRC).

METHODS

We performed a literature review of published studies evaluating outcomes of major laparoscopic liver resection, defined as three or more Couinaud segments.

RESULTS

Initial fears of adverse oncologic outcomes or tumor seeding have not been demonstrated, and dozens of studies have reported comparable 5-year disease-free and overall survival between laparoscopic and open resection of HCC or mCRC in case-cohort and propensity score-matched analyses. Increased experience has led to laparoscopic anatomic liver resections including laparoscopic major hepatectomy. A steep learning curve of 45-60 cases is evident for laparoscopic hepatic resection.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is safe and effective in the treatment of benign and malignant liver tumors when performed in specialized centers with dedicated teams. Comparable to other complex laparoscopic surgeries, laparoscopic major hepatectomy has a learning curve of 45-60 cases.

Minimally Invasive Hepatic Surgery

This review provides an overview of the background and progress that has been made in minimally invasive liver surgery. The essential steps of minimally invasive right and left lobectomy as well as left lateral sectionectomy are reviewed. In addition, existing data regarding the feasibility and oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive hepatic resection for malignancy are discussed.

Tissue management with tri-staple technology in major and minor laparoscopic liver resections

One of the most relevant technologic advancements in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is owing to the improved ability to safely secure and divide vascular and biliary structures and the liver parenchyma by the use of endostaplers. We compared, retrospectively, 35 LLRs with the Tri-Staple technology versus 57 LLRs without, during a 14-month period. Colorectal liver metastases were overall the main indication for LLR. Neither major hepatectomy nor left lateral sectionectomy was done in the nonstapled group. Mean surgical time and blood loss were similar, whereas the tumor number and size were significantly larger in the stapled group (P ≤ 0.01). The conversion rate was 0% and 3.5% (n = 2); and the morbidity rate was 9% (n = 3) and 12% (n = 7), respectively, in the stapled and nonstapled group (P = 0.8). No overall 3-month mortality was recorded. Endo GIA Reloads with Tri-Staple technology allow a proper division of the intrahepatic vessels and biliary structure. These devices in LLRs are safe and feasible, allowing major hepatectomy and complex cases as 2-staged procedures and laparoscopic living donor liver resections.

Less cost by using hanging maneuver and Pringle maneuver in left lateral hepatectomy through small laparotomy wound--experience of Southern Taiwan

Background

Laparoscopic segmentectomy for liver tumor located in the left lateral segment (LLS) is thought to be a standard protocol nowadays with several advantages, such as small wound, few blood loss, and short hospital stay. However, there are still many disadvantages during executing laparoscopic LLS segmentectomy. This manuscript aims to present the technique to execute LLS segmentectomy with small incision, hanging maneuver without Pringle maneuver in patients with tumor at LLS of the liver.

Material and methods

Between November 2010 and July 2011, hepatectomies through small incision for nine patients with benign and malignant tumors were performed at Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan. Perioperative and postoperative results, such as operation time, blood loss, incisional width, and postoperative stay were used to determine consequents for this technique.

Result

Results demonstrated that modified LLS segmentectomy by the author’s team was performed successfully in patient with liver tumor with fewer blood loss, smaller incisional width, and lower hospital cost than traditional open surgery. In addition, the instrument cost and blood loss in our series were less than that in laparoscopic LLS segmentectomy in published literature.

Conclusion

Authors concluded that minimally incisional segmentectomy, with less cost and technical demanding, could be an alternative choice in patient with liver tumor at LLS.

Video assisted resections. Increasing access to minimally invasive liver surgery?

Objective: To evaluate perioperative outcomes, safety and feasibility of video-assisted resection for primary and secondary liver lesions. Methods : From a prospective database, we analyzed the perioperative results (up to 90 days) of 25 consecutive patients undergoing video-assisted resections in the period between June 2007 and June 2013. Results : The mean age was 53.4 years (23-73) and 16 (64%) patients were female. Of the total, 84% were suffering from malignant diseases. We performed 33 resections (1 to 4 nodules per patient). The procedures performed were non-anatomical resections (n = 26), segmentectomy (n = 1), 2/3 bisegmentectomy (n = 1), 6/7 bisegmentectomy (n = 1), left hepatectomy (n = 2) and right hepatectomy (n = 2). The procedures contemplated postero-superior segments in 66.7%, requiring multiple or larger resections. The average operating time was 226 minutes (80-420), and anesthesia time, 360 minutes (200-630). The average size of resected nodes was 3.2 cm (0.8 to 10) and the surgical margins were free in all the analyzed specimens. Eight percent of patients needed blood transfusion and no case was converted to open surgery. The length of stay was 6.5 days (3-16). Postoperative complications occurred in 20% of patients, with no perioperative mortality. Conclusion : The video-assisted liver resection is feasible and safe and should be part of the liver surgeon armamentarium for resection of primary and secondary liver lesions.

Modified hepatic vascular occlusion facilitates hepatectomy for malignant hepatic tumor in laparoscopy

PURPOSE

The parenchymal transection and bleeding are important problems in laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH). The study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LH for a malignant hepatic tumor (MHT) with hepatic vascular occlusion (HVO) only using a monopolar electrocautery.

METHODS

A total of 31 patients' profiles, operative data, clinical outcomes, pathologic findings, and follow-up information were collected who underwent LH with HVO.

RESULTS

The median operative time was 176 minutes and the median postoperative hospital stay was 9 days. The median estimated blood loss was 310 mL. The median tumor size was 4.6 cm and the median surgical margin was 12 mm.The ischemia injury to the liver in patients subjected to selective HVO was less than that in patients subjected to the Pringle maneuver.

CONCLUSIONS

HVO facilitates LH in transecting liver parenchyma and reduces bleeding, making LH safe and feasible only using monopolar electrocautery in selected patients with malignancies. Moreover, the selective HVO have more advantages over the Pringle maneuver in decreasing ischemic injury.

Approaches to laparoscopic liver resection: a meta-analysis of the role of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery and the hybrid technique

Laparoscopic liver resection has been established as a safe and feasible treatment option. Surgical approaches include pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopy (HALS), and the hybrid technique. The role of these three approaches, and their superiority over open laparotomy, is not yet known. A literature review was performed using specific search phrases, relating to hand-assisted or hybrid approaches to laparoscopic liver resection. Surgical results from 18 case series (HALS, nine series; hybrid technique, nine series), each with ≥ 10 patients, were analyzed. Results indicated that HALS was associated with a mean operative time of 82-264.5 min, an estimated blood loss of 82-300 mL, and a complication rate of 3.8-27.1%. Analysis of series involving the hybrid technique indicated a mean operative time of 111-366.5 min, an estimated blood loss of 93-936 mL, and a complication rate of 3.4-23.5%. In conclusion, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that any single approach is superior to the others, although HALS and the hybrid technique are useful when dealing with difficulties associated with pure laparoscopy. Conversely, the need for these two methods, which can function as a bridge to pure laparoscopic liver resection, may be overcome with appropriate training.

Laparoscopic liver resection using a rubber band retraction technique: usefulness and perioperative outcome in 100 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly performed worldwide, surgeons still face technical challenges because of the variety of procedures used according to tumor location. In the current study, we introduce a unique retraction method using an elastic rubber band and present its learning curve in addition to the perioperative outcomes of 100 consecutive patients.

METHODS

A series of 100 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection using a rubber band technique between August 2008 and June 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. All the study patients underwent the rubber band technique as a method to expose the parenchymal resection plane.

RESULTS

The study subjects consisted of 56 males and 44 females with a mean age of 56.7 ± 9.6 years. There were a total of four open conversions. There was no postoperative mortality. Eighty-five patients underwent minor resection, and 15 patients underwent major resection. Among the 85 patients who underwent a minor resection, 65 patients who had favorably located tumors were compared with the 20 patients who had unfavorably located tumors. A comparison of perioperative outcomes revealed a significant difference in operative time (197.3 ± 81.9 vs. 245.9 ± 116.8 min, P = 0.040) but no differences in any other parameters. There were three (4.6 %) and one (5 %) open conversions in the favorable and unfavorable tumor location group, respectively (P = 0.954). The postoperative complication rates were not statistically different between the two groups [4 (6.2 %) vs. 1 (5 %), P = 0.848]. In the learning curve analysis, operative time and blood loss for left lateral sectionectomy (n = 14) and left hepatectomy (n = 12) and minor limited resections for posterosuperior lesions (n = 20) reached a plateau after approximately ten cases.

CONCLUSION

The retraction technique describes here using an elastic rubber band is a useful approach that results in a safe laparoscopic liver resection. Moreover, this can be applied proficiently after a reasonable learning curve.

Section 17. Laparoscopic and minimal incisional donor hepatectomy

Living donor hepatectomy is now a well-established surgical procedure. However, a large abdominal incision is still required, which results in a large permanent scar, especially for a right liver graft. This report reviews our techniques of minimally invasive or minimal incisional donor hepatectomy using a transverse incision.Twenty-five living donors underwent right hepatectomy with a transverse incision and 484 donors with a conventional incision between April 2007 and December 2012. Among the donors with a transverse incision, two cases were totally laparoscopic procedures using a hand-port device; 11 cases were laparoscopic-assisted hepatectomy (hybrid technique), and 14 cases were open procedures using a transverse incision without the aid of the laparoscopic technique. Currently, a hybrid method has been exclusively used because of the long operation time and surgical difficulty in totally laparoscopic hepatectomy and the exposure problems for the liver cephalic portion during the open technique using a transverse incision.All donors with a transverse incision were women except for one. Twenty-four of the grafts were right livers without middle hepatic vein (MHV) and one with MHV. The donors' mean BMI was 21.1 kg/m. The median operation time was 355 minutes, and the mean estimated blood loss was 346.1±247.3 mL (range, 70-1200). There was no intraoperative transfusion. These donors had 29 cases of grade I [14 pleural effusions (56%), 11 abdominal fluid collections (44%), 3 atelectasis (12%), 1bile leak (4%)], 1 case of grade II (1 pneumothorax) and two cases of grade III complications; two interventions were needed because of abdominal fluid collections by Clavien-Dindo classification. Meanwhile, donors with a conventional big incision, which included the Mercedes-Benz incision or an inverted L-shaped incision, had 433 cases of grade I, 19 cases of grade II and 18 cases of grade III complications. However, the liver enzymes and total bilirubin of all donors were normalized within 1 month, and they recovered fully. Additionally, in a survey inquiring about cosmetic outcomes with a numeric scale of 1 through 10 (1, Not confident; 10, Very confident), the transverse incision had more satisfactory scores compared to the conventional big incision (9.80 vs. 6.17, P=0.001). In conclusion, the hybrid technique can be safely performed in donor right hepatectomy, with a minimal transverse skin incision, resulting in a good cosmetic outcome.

Laparoscopy-assisted hybrid left-side donor hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection developed for live liver donors has the advantage of reducing the physical and mental stress in donors. However, its safety and efficacy still remain to be established. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of laparoscopy-assisted hybrid donor hepatectomy (LADH) to obtain left side grafts.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 31 consecutive live liver donors of left side liver grafts underwent LADH, including left lateral segmentectomy (n = 17) and left liver resection with or without the caudate lobe (n = 14) (LADH group). We compared the clinical data between the LADH group and the group of donors in whom traditional open donor hepatectomy was performed to procure the liver graft (open donor hepatectomy [ODH] group, n = 79).

RESULTS

Laparoscopy-assisted hybrid donor hepatectomy was feasible in all patients, and there was no mortality over a follow-up period of 13.9 ± 9.8 months. The operative time to procure a left-lobe graft was significantly longer in the LADH group (510 ± 90 min) than in the ODH group (P < 0.001). A large right lobe on CT (RPv distance) was identified as a significant risk factor for prolonged operative time (P = 0.007). Evaluation using the SF36-v2 questionnaire revealed faster recovery of the physical component summary score and bodily pain score in the LADH group than in the ODH group.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy-assisted hybrid donor hepatectomy for procuring left side grafts was safe and effective up to the left liver with the caudate lobe. Left-lobe LADH in donors with a large right lobe should be carefully planned in view of the potential surgical difficulty.

Laparoscopic liver resection: personal experience with 107 cases

OBJECTIVE

To analyze our experience after 107 laparoscopic hepatectomies and discuss the technical evolution of laparoscopic hepatectomy in the last five years.

METHODS

Between April 2007 and April 2012 we performed 107 laparoscopic hepatectomies in 105 patients. The mean age was 53.9 years (17 to 85). Fifty-three patients were male. All interventions were performed by the authors.

RESULTS

from the total of 107 operations, there was need for conversion to open technique in three cases (2.8%). Sixteen patients (14.9%) had complications. Two patients died, a mortality of 1.87%. One death was due to massive myocardial infarction, unrelated to the procedure, which was uneventful and showed no conversion or bleeding. The other death was due to failure of the stapler. Twenty patients (18.7%) required blood transfusion. The most frequent type of hepatectomy was bisegmentectomy of segments 2-3, (33 cases), followed by right hepatectomy (22 cases). Seventy-two procedures (67.3%) were performed by the technique of Glissonian access.

CONCLUSION

The dissemination of results is of utmost importance. The technical difficulties, complications and even death, inherent in this complex type of surgery, need to be clearly disclosed. This procedure should be performed in a specialized center with knowledgeable staff. The technique of laparoscopic Glissonian access, described by our staff, facilitates the realization of anatomical hepatectomies.

Risk factors and management of conversions to an open approach in laparoscopic liver resection: analysis of 265 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

As a consequence of continuous technical developments in liver surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is increasingly performed worldwide.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and December 2011, 265 LLR were performed in 242 patients for various diseases. The experience of LLR is reported focusing on risk factors of conversion and their management.

RESULTS

The overall conversion rate was 17/265 (6.4%), equally distributed over the period of the study. Statistically significant factors for conversion were found to be LLR of the postero-superior (P-S) segments (SI, SIVa; SVII; SVIII) (12.7% converted versus 2.5% non-converted groups, P = 0.01) and a major compared with a minor hepatectomy (15.2% vs. 4.6%, P = 0.02 respectively). A R0 resection was achieved in 93.2% of cases. According to Dindo's classification, complications were recorded as grade I (n = 20); grade II (6); grade III (11) and grade IV(1) events (total morbidity rate of 14%). Univariate analysis identified a major hepatectomy and resection involving P-S segments as prognostic factors for conversion whereas multivariate analysis identified the latter as an independent risk factor [P = 0.003, odds ratio (OR) = 5.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.8-18.8].

CONCLUSIONS

LLR can be safely performed with low overall morbidity. According to this experience and irrespective of the learning curve, resections of P-S segments were identified as an independent risk factor for conversion in LLR.

Pure laparoscopic full-left living donor hepatectomy for calculated small-for-size LDLT in adults: proof of concept

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (A2ALDLT) is an accepted mode of treatment for end-stage liver disease. Right-lobe grafts have usually been preferred in view of the higher graft volume, which lowers the risk of a small-for-size syndrome. However, donor left hepatectomy is associated with less morbidity than when it is compared to right hepatectomy. Laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (LDH) has been considered almost exclusively in pediatric transplantation. The results of laparoscopic left-liver graft procurement for calculated small-for-size A2ALDLT in four donors are presented. The graft-to-recipient body weight ratio was <0.8 in all recipients. The mean portal vein flow and the pressure and hepatic artery flows were measured at 190 ± 56 mL/min/100 g, 13 ± 1.4 mm/Hg and 109 ± 19 mL/min, respectively. No early postoperative donor complications were recorded. One graft was lost due to intrahepatic abscesses. Asymptomatic stenosis of a right posterior duct was treated with a Roux-en-Y loop 4 months later in one donor. We show that LDH of the full-left lobe is feasible. LDH is a very demanding operation, potentially decreasing donor morbidity. Standardization of this procedure, making it accessible to the growing number of experienced laparoscopic liver surgeons, could help renewing the interest for A2ALDLT in the Western world.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy: pure laparoscopic approach versus hand-assisted technique

Laparoscopic liver resections are being performed with increasing frequency, with several groups having reported minimally invasive approaches for major anatomic hepatic resections. Some surgeons favor a pure laparoscopic approach, while others prefer a hand-assisted approach for major laparoscopic liver resections. There are clear advantages and disadvantages to a hand-assisted technique. The purpose of this study is to summarize the literature comparing pure laparoscopic and hand-assisted approaches for minimally invasive hepatic resection, and to describe our approach in 432 laparoscopic liver resections.

The learning curve in laparoscopic major liver resection

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy remains a relatively rare operation because it is a difficult and technically demanding procedure, and a standard, safe, reproducible technique has not been widely adopted. This is compounded by "major hepatectomy" encompassing multiple different operations each with their own anatomic and procedural considerations. In 2010, we investigated our learning curve for laparoscopic liver resection. We found a significant increase in the number of major hepatectomies performed over a 12-year period, with concurrent reductions in the use of hand-assistance, pedicle clamping, median clamping time, median operative time, blood loss and morbidity. This learning curve was confirmed by a subsequent multinational study. Both hospital and surgeon volume have been shown to affect outcomes, and defining a sufficient number of repetitions before the learning curve plateaus is not easy for laparoscopic major hepatectomy. We recommend that laparoscopic competencies be developed upon a foundation of open liver surgery and that laparoscopic major hepatectomy should only be attempted after competency with less technically complex laparoscopic resections. A center advanced along its institutional learning curve provides the collective expertise necessary for safe patient selection and management. An environment with colleagues willing to share their acquired proficiency allows the surgeon to observe and critique his or her performance against colleagues. Also, the guidance of like-minded surgeons supports technical development and improved outcomes. In conclusion, steady progress can be made along the learning curve through committed practice of increasingly complex tasks and with proper coaching in a high-volume environment.

Laparoscopic resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is the only curative treatment for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Laparoscopic hepatectomy has been used to treat several types of liver neoplasms. However, technical issues have limited the adoption of laparoscopy for the treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. To date there is only one report of minimally invasive procedure for hilar cholangiocarcinoma in the literature. The present video-assisted procedure shows a laparoscopic resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

PATIENT AND METHODS

A 43-year-old woman with progressive jaundice due to left-sided hilar cholangiocarcinoma was referred for treatment. The decision was to perform a laparoscopic left hepatectomy with lymphadenectomy and resection of extrahepatic bile ducts. Biliary reconstruction was performed using the hybrid method.

RESULTS

Operative time was 300 minutes with minimum blood loss and no need for blood transfusion. Recovery was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on postoperative Day 7. Pathology revealed a well-differentiated cholangiocarcinoma with negative lymph nodes and clear surgical margins. The patient is well with no signs of the disease 18 months after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic left hepatectomy with lymphadenectomy is safe and feasible in selected patients and when performed by surgeons with expertise in liver surgery and minimally invasive techniques. The use of a hybrid method may be needed for biliary reconstruction, especially in cases where position and size of remnant bile ducts may jeopardize the anastomosis. Further studies are still needed to confirm the benefit of this approach over conventional surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

Laparoscopic resection of the liver for cancer

Although most laparoscopic hepatic procedures are performed for benign disease, an increasing fraction is for malignant disease, including primary and metastatic liver tumors. Data suggest that minor and major hepatic resections are feasible and can be performed safely. The limited data currently available suggest that survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal metastatic disease may be comparable to that achieved with open hepatectomy. The benefits of the laparoscopic approach seem to be shorter hospitalization, smaller incisions, and less blood loss. Despite the progress to date, concern continues about the potential for significant intraoperative hemorrhagic complications and oncologic outcomes.

Laparoscopic versus open resection of colorectal liver metastasis

BACKGROUND

Findings have shown laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) to be feasible and safe, but the data in the literature regarding oncologic outcomes are scant. This study aimed to compare the perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes between LLR and open resection of colorectal liver metastasis (CLM).

METHODS

Between January 2006 and April 2012, 40 patients underwent LLR of CLM. These patients were compared with a consecutive matched group of 40 patients who underwent open resection within the same period. Data were obtained from a prospective institutional review board (IRB)-approved database. Statistical analysis was performed using t test, Chi-square, and Kaplan-Meier survival.

RESULTS

The groups were similar in terms of age, gender, tumor size, number of tumors, and type of resections performed. The operative time was similar in the two groups, but the estimated blood loss was less in the LLR group than in the open resection group. The length of stay was shorter in the LLR group (3.7 vs 6.5 days; p < 0.001). The 2-year overall survival rate was 89 % for LLR and 81 % for open resection. The median disease-free survival time was 23 months in each group.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that LLR is associated with less blood loss and a shorter hospital stay than open resection for CLM. According to our short-term results, LLR is equivalent to open resection in terms of oncologic outcomes.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Current role and limitations

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for the treatment of benign and malignant liver lesions is often performed at specialized centers. Technological advances, such as laparoscopic ultrasonography and electrosurgical tools, have afforded surgeons simultaneous improvements in surgical technique. The utilization of minimally invasive techniques for liver resection has been reported to reduce operative time, decrease blood loss, and shorten length of hospital stay with equivalent postoperative mortality and morbidity rates compared to open liver resection (OLR). Non-anatomic liver resection and left lateral sectionectomy are now routinely performed laparoscopically at many institutions. Furthermore, major hepatic resections are performed by pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted technique, and the hybrid method. In addition, robotic surgery and single port surgery are revealing early promising results. The consensus recommendation for the treatment of benign liver disease and malignant lesions remains unchanged when considering a laparoscopic approach, except when comorbidities and anatomic limitations of the liver lesion preclude this technique. Disease free and survival rates after LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma and metastatic colon cancer correspond to OLR. Patient selection is a significant factor for these favorable outcomes. The limitations include LLR of superior and posterior liver lesions; however, adjustments in technique may now consider a laparoscopic approach as a viable option. As growing data continue to reveal the feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic liver surgery, this skill is increasingly being adopted by hepatobiliary surgeons. Although the full scope of laparoscopic liver surgery remains infrequently used by many general surgeons, this technique will become a standard in the treatment of liver diseases as studies continue to show favorable outcomes.

Minimally invasive evaluation and treatment of colorectal liver metastases

Minimally invasive techniques used in the evaluation and treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) include ultrasonography (US), computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, percutaneous and operative ablation therapy, standard laparoscopic techniques, robotic techniques, and experimental techniques of natural orifice endoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic techniques range from simple staging laparoscopy with or without laparoscopic intraoperative US, through intermediate techniques including simple liver resections (LRs), to advanced techniques such as major hepatectomies. Hereins, we review minimally invasive evaluation and treatment of CRLM, focusing on a comparison of open LR (OLR) and minimally invasive LR (MILR). Although there are no randomized trials comparing OLR and MILR, nonrandomized data suggest that MILR compares favorably with OLR regarding morbidity, mortality, LOS, and cost, although significant selection bias exists. The future of MILR will likely include expanding criteria for resectability of CRLM and should include both a patient registry and a formalized process for surgeon training and credentialing.

Elective living donor liver transplantation by hybrid hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery and short upper midline laparotomy

BACKGROUND

Although the technique of liver transplantation is well developed, the invasiveness of the operation can be decreased with laparoscopic procedures.

METHODS

We performed elective living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) through a short midline incision combined with hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS). Nine selected patients with end stage liver disease underwent the procedure between July, 2010 and February, 2011 (median age 60, median Child-Pugh 9, median MELD score 14). Splenectomy was performed simultaneously in 7 cases. The liver (and spleen) were mobilized by a sealing device under a HALS procedure with an 8-cm upper midline incision, followed by explantation of the diseased liver (and spleen) through the upper midline incision which was extended to 12 to 15 cm. Partial liver grafts were implanted through the upper midline incision.

RESULTS

The median duration of the operation was 741 minutes, the median time needed for anastomosis was 48 minutes, the median blood loss was 3,940 g, and the median liver weight was 866 g. Eight recipients are alive and have good graft function. A difficult implantation for one patient required an additional right transverse incision. When compared with 13 recent liver recipients who underwent LDLT with a regular Mercedes-Benz-type incision, no clinically relevant drawbacks of the HALS hybrid procedure were observed.

CONCLUSION

We have shown the feasibility and safety of LDLT performed through a short midline incision without abdominal muscle disruption with the aid of HALS.

Liver allograft outcomes after laparoscopic-assisted and minimal access live donor hepatectomy for transplantation

BACKGROUND

The critical shortage of deceased organ donors has led to live-donor hepatectomy as an alternative donor option for transplantation. Although laparoscopic hepatectomy has been well described for management of liver tumors and can be performed safely, few studies have examined early recipient allograft outcomes after laparoscopic live-donor hepatectomy. We describe our initial experience with laparoscopic-assisted and minimal-access donor hepatectomy and its potential as a safe alternative with graft function comparable with open resection in live-donor liver transplantation.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of our past 30 successive live-donor transplants between 2005 and 2009. Fifteen allografts were procured by standard open live-donor (OLD) hepatectomy, and 15 by laparoscopic-assisted (LALD) or minimal-access (MA) live-donor hepatectomy. Left lateral segment grafts were subcategorized and analyzed further.

RESULTS

Mean donor age, sex, and liver anatomy were comparable between donor groups. Early graft function as measured by peak total bilirubin level, aspartate aminotransferase level, alanine aminotransferase level, and international normalized ratio on postoperative days 2, 7, 30, and 90 were similar between groups, although the international normalized ratio was slightly more increased on postoperative day 7 in LALD grafts (1.75 ± .45 vs 1.28 ± .16; P = .02). Perioperative allograft biliary (2 of 15 vs 0 of 15; P = .48) and vascular (3 of 15 vs 1 of 15; P = .6) complication rates also were comparable between OLD and LALD/MA grafts. One-year graft and patient survival for LALD/MA was 100% compared with 93% for OLD.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience shows that LALD or MA live-donor hepatectomy is a safe procedure and produces early graft function comparable with standard OLD hepatectomy. Multicenter, larger-volume experience will determine the widespread application of this technique.

Laparoscopic resection for liver tumors: initial experience in a single center

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resections are 1 of the most complex procedures in hepatobiliary surgery. During the last 20 years, laparoscopic liver surgery has had an important development in specialized centers.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the initial experience in laparoscopic liver resection for benign and malignant tumors, to assess its indications and outcomes, and to describe technical aspects of these resections.

METHODS

Review of the records of 28 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection between November 2000 and November 2007. Analysis of the data regarding preoperative management and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-six liver resections were performed laparoscopically (20 purely laparoscopic, 3 hand assisted, and 3 hybrid technique) and 2 were converted to open surgery. The laparoscopic approach was attempted in 6% (28 out of 459) of the liver resections carried out in the analyzed period. Indications for resection were: benign tumors in 22 patients (78%) and malignant tumors in 6 patients (22%). Resections were minor in 27 patients (96%) and major in 1 patient (4%). Pringle maneuver was performed in 14 patients (50%). Margins were negative in all the cases. Mean operative time was 170 minutes (range 70 to 350), and the mean length of stay was 3 days (range 1 to 6). Mortality rate was 0%. Only 2 patients (7%) had postoperative minor complications (self-limited bile leaks).

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients with benign and malignant liver tumors, laparoscopic liver resections can be safely performed. This procedure must be carried out by the surgeons trained in both the hepatobiliary and laparoscopic surgery.

Laparoscopic liver resection--current update

An increasing number of studies are reporting the outcomes and benefits of laparoscopic liver resection. This article reviews the literature with emphasis on a recent consensus conference on laparoscopic liver resection in 2008, the learning curve for laparoscopic liver surgery, laparoscopic major hepatectomies, oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal cancer liver metastases, and the comparative benefits of laparoscopic versus open liver resection. Current evidence suggests that minimally invasive hepatic resection is safe and feasible with short-term benefits, no economic disadvantage, and no compromise to oncologic principles.

Evolution of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy without the Pringle maneuver: through resection of benign and malignant tumors to living liver donation

Background

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) has gained popularity in its use for benign and malignant tumors. This report describes the evolution of the authors’ experience using laparoscopic LLS for different indications including living liver donation.

Methods

Between January 2004 and January 2009, 37 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic LLS for benign, primary, and metastatic liver diseases, and for one case of living liver donation. Resection of malignant tumors was indicated for 19 (51%) of the 37 patients.

Results

All but three patients (deceased due to metastatic cancer disease) are alive and well after a median follow-up period of 20 months (range, 8–46 months). Liver cell adenomas (72%) were the main indication among benign tumors, and colorectal liver metastases (84%) were the first indication of malignancy. One case of live liver donation was performed. Whereas 16 patients (43%) had undergone a previous abdominal surgery, 3 patients (8%) had LLS combined with bowel resection. The median operation time was of 195 min (range, 115–300 min), and the median blood loss was of 50 ml (range, 0–500 ml). Mild to severe steatosis was noted in 7 patients (19%) and aspecific portal inflammation in 11 patients (30%). A median free margin of 5 mm (range, 5–27 mm) was achieved for all cancer patients. The overall recurrence rate for colorectal liver metastases was of 44% (7 patients), but none recurred at the surgical margin. No conversion to laparotomy was recorded, and the overall morbidity rate was 8.1% (1 grade 1 and 2 grade 2 complications). The median hospital stay was 6 days (range, 2–10 days).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic LLS without portal clamping can be performed safely for cases of benign and malignant liver disease with minimal blood loss and overall morbidity, free resection margins, and a favorable outcome. As the ultimate step of the learning curve, laparoscopic LLS could be routinely proposed, potentially increasing the donor pool for living-related liver transplantation.

Comparing the clinical and economic impact of laparoscopic versus open liver resection

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has thus far not gained widespread acceptance among liver surgeons. Valid questions remain regarding the relative clinical superiority of the laparoscopic approach as well as whether laparoscopic hepatectomy carries any economic benefit compared with open liver surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work is to compare the clinical and economic impact of laparoscopic versus open left lateral sectionectomy (LLS).

METHODS

Between May 2002 and July 2008, 44 laparoscopic LLS and 29 open LLS were included in the analysis. Deviation-based cost modeling (DBCM) was utilized to compare the combined clinical and economic impact of the open and laparoscopic approaches.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic approach compared favorably with the open approach from both a clinical and economic standpoint. Not only was the median length of stay (LOS) shorter by 2 days in the laparoscopic group (3 versus 5 days, respectively, P = 0.001), but the laparoscopic cohort also benefited from a significant reduction in postoperative morbidity (P = 0.001). Because the groups differed significantly in age and ratio of benign to malignant disease, a subgroup analysis limited to patients with malignant disease was undertaken. The same reduction in LOS and postoperative morbidity was evident within the malignant subgroup undergoing laparoscopic LLS (P = 0.003). The economic impact of the laparoscopic approach was noteworthy, with the laparoscopic approach US$1,527-2,939 more cost efficient per patient compared with the open technique.

CONCLUSION

Our study seems not only to corroborate the safety and clinical benefit of the laparoscopic approach but also suggests a fiscally important cost advantage for the minimally invasive approach.

The learning curve in laparoscopic liver resection: improved feasibility and reproducibility

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the "learning curve" effect on feasibility and reproducibility of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

LLR is currently limited to few centers and to few procedures. Its reproducibility is still debated.

METHODS

: Patients undergoing LLR between 1996 and 2008 were included. Indications and type of hepatectomies were compared with those of open resections performed in the same period, considering 3 periods (1996-1999, 2000-2003, and 2004-2008). LLRs were divided into 3 equal groups of 58 cases and technical data and outcomes were compared. Risk-adjusted Cumulative Sum model was used for determining the learning curve based on the need for conversion.

RESULTS

Of 782, 174 (22.3%) patients underwent LLR. Proportion of LLR progressively increased (17.5%, 22.4%, and 24.2%), such as hepatocellular carcinoma (17.6%, 25.6%, and 39.4%, P < 0.05), colorectal metastases (0%, 6.5%, and 13.1%, P < 0.05), major hepatectomies (1.1%, 9.1%, 8.5%, P < 0.05), and right hepatectomies (0%, 13.2%, and 13.1%, P < 0.05). Comparing groups, results of LLR significantly improved in terms of conversion rate (15.5%, 10.3%, and 3.4%, P < 0.05), operative time (210, 180, and 150 minutes, P < 0.05), blood loss (300, 200, and 200 mL, P < 0.05), and morbidity (17.2%, 22.4%, and 3.4%, P < 0.05). Pedicle clamping was less used over time (77.6%, 62.1%, and 17.2%, P < 0.05) and for shorter durations (45, 30, and 20 minutes, P < 0.05). Having adjusted for case-mix, the Cumulative Sum analysis demonstrated a learning curve for laparoscopic hepatectomies of 60 cases.

CONCLUSION

A slow but constant evolution of LLR occurred: indications and magnitude of procedures increased and technical outcomes improved. The learning curve demonstrated in this study suggests that LLR is reproducible in liver units but specific training to advanced laparoscopy is required.

Laparoscopic liver surgery

Great advances have occurred in the field of laparoscopic hepatic surgery. It is now clear that in experienced hands, the laparoscopic method of liver resection is as safe as an open procedure. The key phrase in this last sentence is "in experienced hands". The new devices that are available might make an inexperienced hepatic surgeon, well-trained in laparoscopic surgery, embark on hepatic resection without thorough knowledge of hepatic anatomy. The converse may also be true. As no criteria for credentialing of laparoscopic hepatic surgeons exist, the decision as to who is sufficiently trained to perform these procedures is left to individual hospital credentialing boards. While a certification procedure defined by leaders in this field and supported by surgical societies would be welcomed, the ability to achieve and enforce these guidelines appear to be more of a challenge. In addition, while most comparison studies in this area conclude by suggesting that a randomized, clinical trial would be needed to definitively arrive at an answer regarding the benefits of minimally invasive liver surgery compared with open surgery, it would likely be extremely difficult to accrue patients, given the data presented in articles regarding the success of laparoscopic hepatic resections. The authors conclude that an internationalregistry of all laparoscopic cases should b e established to insure patient safety and a mechanism for self-monitoring.

Laparoscopy-assisted and open living donor right hepatectomy: a comparative study of outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver surgery is a rapidly advancing field with demonstrated applicability to living donation. In this paper, we compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy-assisted donor right hepatectomy (LADRH) to open donor right hepatectomy (ODRH).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective, comparative analysis of 33 LADRH to the most recent 33 ODRH performed at our institution, evaluating donor complications, costs, and recipient outcomes.

RESULTS

Donor demographics including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and vascular and biliary anomalies were comparable. Donor complication rates were equivalent for LADRH and ODRH. Donor operative times were shorter for LADRH (LADRH 265 minutes, ODRH 316; P < .001) even after adjusting for BMI. Blood loss and length of stay were comparable. Additionally, total hospitalization costs were equivalent (LADRH $1.11, ODRH $1.00; P = .19). Higher operative supply costs for LADRH were balanced by higher time-based operative costs for ODRH resulting in no significant differences in total operative costs. Finally, there were no differences in graft size, recipient patient or graft survival, or recipient vascular or biliary complications.

CONCLUSION

Our experience suggests that LADRH compares favorably with ODRH with equivalent safety, resource utilization, and effectiveness. We believe that LADRH provides potential physical and psychological benefits without an adverse effect on outcomes.