Laparoscopic versus open two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases: A bi-institutional, propensity score-matched study

Hybrid operating room applications for precision hepatobiliary surgery: A narrative review

This review summarizes the key applications of a hybrid operating room (HOR) in hepatobiliary surgery and explores the advantages, limitations, and future directions of its utilization. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed to identify articles reporting on the utilization of HORs in liver surgery. So far, the HOR has been limitedly applied in hepatobiliary surgery. It can offer an optimal environment for combining radiological and surgical interventions and for performing image-guided surgical navigation.

Laparoscopic Portal Vein Ligation and Embolization During First-Stage Hepatectomy for Initially Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

Two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) is the only treatment for the patients with multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRMs) who are not candidates for one-step hepatectomy because of insufficient future remnant liver volume and/or impaired liver function.1-5 Although laparoscopic approaches have been introduced for TSH,6-8 the postoperative morbidity and mortality remains high because of the technical difficulties during second-stage hepatectomy.9,10 The authors present a video of laparoscopic TSH with portal vein (PV) ligation and embolization, which minimizes adhesions and PV thrombosis risk in the remnant liver, thereby facilitating second-stage hepatectomy.

METHODS

Three patients with initially unresectable bilateral CRMs received a median of chemotherapy 12 cycles, followed by conversion TSH. After right PV ligation, laproscopic PV embolization was performed by injection of 100% ethanol into the hepatic side of the right PV using a 23-gauge winged needle. After PV embolization, a spray adhesion barrier (AdSpray, Terumo, Tokyo, Japan)11 was applied.

RESULTS

During the first stage of hepatectomy, two patients underwent simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal resection (left hemicolectomy and high anterior resection). In the initial hepatectomy, two patients underwent two limited hepatectomies each, and one patient underwent six hepatectomies in the left lobe. After hepatectomy, all the patients underwent right PV embolization. During the second stage, two patients underwent open extended right hepatectomy (right adrenalectomy was performed because of adrenal invasion in one patient), and one patient underwent laparoscopic extended right hepatectomy. No postoperative complications occurred in the six surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic TSH with PV embolization is recommended for safe completion of the second hepatectomy.

Extended Right Hepatectomy following Clearance of the Left Liver Lobe and Portal Vein Embolization for Curatively Intended Treatment of Extensive Bilobar Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Single-Center Case Series

BACKGROUND

Two-staged hepatectomy (TSH) including portal vein embolization (PVE) may offer surgical treatment for extensive bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and outcomes of extended right hepatectomy (ERH) within TSH including PVE for patients with extended CRLM.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data of patients who underwent TSH for extended CRLM between 2015 and 2021 at our institution. Clearance of the left liver lobe (clear-up, CU) associated with PVE was followed by ERH.

RESULTS

Minimally invasive (n = 12, 46%, MIH) or open hepatectomy (n = 14, 54%, OH) was performed. Postoperative major morbidity and 90-day mortality were 54% and 0%. Three-year overall survival was 95%. Baseline characteristics, postoperative and long-term outcomes were comparable between MIH and OH. However, hospital stay was significantly shorter after MIH (8 vs. 15 days, p = 0.008). Additionally, the need for intraoperative transfusions tended to be lower in the MIH group (17% vs. 50%, p = 0.110).

CONCLUSIONS

ERH following CU and PVE for extended CRLM is feasible and safe in laparoscopic and open approaches. MIH for ERH may result in shorter postoperative hospital stays. Further high-volume, multicenter studies are required to evaluate the potential superiority of MIH.

Effect of screening colonoscopy frequency on colorectal cancer mortality in patients with a family history of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is a common malignant tumor in China, and its incidence in the elderly is increasing annually. Inflammatory bowel disease is a group of chronic non-specific intestinal inflammatory diseases, including ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease.

AIM

To assess the effect of screening colonoscopy frequency on colorectal cancer mortality.

METHODS

We included the clinicopathological and follow-up data of patients with colorectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic colectomy or open colectomy at our Gastrointestinal Department between January 2019 and December 2022. Surgical indicators, oncological indicators, and survival rates were compared between the groups. The results of 104 patients who met the above criteria were extracted from the database (laparoscopic colectomy group = 63, open colectomy group = 41), and there were no statistically significant differences in the baseline data or follow-up time between the two groups.

RESULTS

Intraoperative blood loss, time to first ambulation, and time to first fluid intake were significantly lower in the laparoscopic colectomy group than in the open colectomy group. The differences in overall mortality, tumor-related mortality, and recurrence rates between the two groups were not statistically significant, and survival analysis showed that the differences in the cumulative overall survival, tumor-related survival, and cumulative recurrence-free rates between the two groups were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

In elderly patients with colorectal cancer, laparoscopic colectomy has better short-term outcomes than open colectomy, and laparoscopic colectomy has superior long-term survival outcomes compared with open colectomy.

Laparoscopic Right Hemihepatectomy after Future Liver Remnant Modulation: A Single Surgeon's Experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy (L-RHH) is still considered a technically complex procedure, which should only be performed by experienced surgeons in specialized centers. Future liver remnant modulation (FLRM) strategies, including portal vein embolization (PVE), and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS), might increase the surgical difficulty of L-RHH, due to the distortion of hepatic anatomy, periportal inflammation, and fibrosis. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the safety and feasibility of L-RHH after FLRM, when compared with ex novo L-RHH.

METHODS

All consecutive right hemihepatectomies performed by a single surgeon in the period between October 2007 and March 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes of L-RHH after FLRM and ex novo L-RHH were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 33 underwent FLRM. Patients undergoing FLRM prior to L-RHH were most often male (93.9% vs. 42.3%, p < 0.001), had an ASA-score >2 (45.5% vs. 9.5%, p = 0.006), and underwent a two-stage hepatectomy (45.5% vs. 3.8% p < 0.001). L-RHH after FLRM was associated with longer operative time (median 360 vs. 300 min, p = 0.008) and Pringle duration (31 vs. 24 min, p = 0.011). Intraoperative blood loss, unfavorable intraoperative incidents, and conversion rates were similar in both groups. There were no significant differences in length of hospital stay and 30-day overall and severe morbidity rates. Radical resection margin (R0) and textbook outcome rates were equal. One patient who underwent an extended RHH in the FLRM group deceased within 90 days of surgery, due to post-hepatectomy liver failure.

CONCLUSION

L-RHH after FLRM is more technically complex than L-RHH ex novo, as objectified by longer operative time and Pringle duration. Nevertheless, this procedure appears safe and feasible in experienced hands.

Safety and Feasibility of Laparoscopic Right or Extended Right Hemi Hepatectomy Following Modulation of the Future Liver Remnant in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Systematic Review

Background: Major hepatectomies after future liver remnant (FLR) modulation are technically demanding procedures, especially when performed as minimally invasive surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to assess current evidence regarding the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic right or extended right hemihepatectomies after FLR modulation. Materials and Methods: The Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched for studies involving laparoscopic right or extended right hemihepatectomies after FLR modulation, from their inception to December 2021. Two reviewers independently selected eligible articles and assessed their quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). Baseline characteristics and outcomes were extracted from the included studies and summarized. Results: Six studies were included. In these studies, the median length of stay after the second stage ranged from 4.5 to 15.5 days and postoperative complication rates between 4.5% and 42.8%. Overall, 7.4% of patients developed liver failure, and 90-day mortality occurred in 3.2% of patients. The R0 resection rate was 93.5%. Only one study reported long-term outcomes, describing comparable 3-year overall survival rates following laparoscopic and open surgery (80% versus 54%, P = .154). Conclusions: The current evidence is scarce, but it suggests that in experienced centers, laparoscopic right or extended right hemihepatectomy, following FLR modulation, is a safe and feasible procedure.

Surgical Approach to Liver Metastases in GEP-NET in a Tertiary Reference Center

Indications for liver resection in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NET) vary from liver resection with curative intent to tumor debulking or tissue sampling for histopathological characterization. With increasing expertise, the number of minimally invasive liver surgeries (MILS) in GEP-NET patients has increased. However, the influence on the oncological outcome has hardly been described. The clinicopathological data of patients who underwent liver resection for hepatic metastases of GEP-NET at the Department of Surgery, Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to compare MILS with open liver surgery (OLS). In total, 22 patients underwent liver surgery with curative intent, and 30 debulking surgeries were analyzed. Disease-free survival (DFS) was longer than progression-free survival (PFS) (10 vs. 24 months), whereas overall survival (OS) did not differ significantly (p = 0.588). Thirty-nine (75%) liver resections were performed as OLS, and thirteen (25%) as MILS. After PSM, a shorter length of hospital stay was found for the MILS group (14 vs. 10 d, p = 0.034), while neither DFS/PFS nor OS differed significantly. Both curative intended and cytoreductive resection of hepatic GEP-NET metastases achieved excellent outcomes. MILS led to a reduced length of hospital, while preserving a good oncological outcome.

An exploratory human study of superstable homogeneous lipiodol-indocyanine green formulation for precise surgical navigation in liver cancer

The clinical applications of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) conversion therapy combined with hepatectomy have been severely restricted by ill-defined tumoral boundaries and miniscule hidden lesions. Fluorescent surgical navigation is a promising method for overcoming these barriers. However, sufficient delivery of the fluorescent probe into the tumor region after long-term TAE is challenging due to blockade of the tumor-supplying artery. Here, a super-stable homogeneous intermix formulating technology (SHIFT) to physically mix lipiodol and indocyanine green (ICG) formulation (SHIFT and ICG) for fluorescent surgical navigation after long-term TAE conversion therapy is provided. Through the retrospective study of 45 clinical liver cancer patients, it is found that SHIFT and ICG formulation have excellent tumor deposition effect and safety. During surgical resection after long-term TAE conversion therapy, SHIFT and ICG could clearly identify in real time the full tumor regions and boundaries and had a high signal-to-normal tissues ratio-even the indistinguishable satellite lesions could be identified with a strong fluorescence intensity. Meanwhile, SHIFT and ICG could improve operative, anesthetic, and postoperative variables associated with postoperative complications. This simple and effective SHIFT could provide precise fluorescent navigation for surgical resection following long-term embolization therapy in clinical practice and has great potential for a translational pipeline.

Multiple Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases

Over the past decades, liver cancer's minimally invasive approach has primarily become as a new standard of oncological care. Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are one of the most developed indications of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). CRLM resection is still the best treatment known in terms of survival. As multiple CRLM are found in up to 80% of cases at diagnosis (Manfredi S. and al, Annals of Surgery 2006), a lot of possible technical management approaches are described. With the development of the parenchymal-sparing strategy, multiple concomitant laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) are gaining acceptance. However, no recommendation is available regarding its indications and feasibility. Also, laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy is developing for bilobar CRLM, and this also does not have established recommendation. The purpose of this paper was to highlight novelty and updates in the field of multiple minimally invasive liver resections. A review of the international literature was performed. The feasibility of laparoscopic concomitant multiple LLR and two-stage hepatectomy for CRLM as well as their outcomes were discussed. These clarifications could further guide the implementation of minimal resection in multiple colorectal liver metastases therapies.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Liver Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations 2022

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has been widely applied in liver surgery since the publication of the first ERAS guidelines in 2016. The aim of the present article was to update the ERAS guidelines in liver surgery using a modified Delphi method based on a systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. A modified Delphi method including 15 international experts was used. Consensus was judged to be reached when >80% of the experts agreed on the recommended items. Recommendations were based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations system.

RESULTS

A total of 7541 manuscripts were screened, and 240 articles were finally included. Twenty-five recommendation items were elaborated. All of them obtained consensus (>80% agreement) after 3 Delphi rounds. Nine items (36%) had a high level of evidence and 16 (64%) a strong recommendation grade. Compared to the first ERAS guidelines published, 3 novel items were introduced: prehabilitation in high-risk patients, preoperative biliary drainage in cholestatic liver, and preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation at least 4 weeks before hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines based on the best available evidence allow standardization of the perioperative management of patients undergoing liver surgery. Specific studies on hepatectomy in cirrhotic patients following an ERAS program are still needed.

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

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

Impact of anatomical liver resection on patient survival in KRAS-wild-type colorectal liver metastasis: A multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is a standard therapy for colorectal liver metastasis. However, the impact of anatomical resection and nonanatomical resection on the survival in patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type and Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated colorectal liver metastasis remain unclear. We investigated whether anatomical resection versus nonanatomical resection improves survival in colorectal liver metastasis stratified by Kirsten rat sarcoma mutational status.

METHODS

Among 639 consecutive patients with colorectal liver metastasis who underwent primary liver resection between January 2008 and December 2017, 349 patients were excluded due to their unknown Kirsten rat sarcoma mutational status, or due to receiving anatomical resection with concomitant non-anatomical resection, radiofrequency, or R2 resection. Accordingly, 290 patients with colorectal liver metastasis were retrospectively assessed. The relationships between resection types and survival were investigated in Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type and -mutated groups.

RESULTS

Anatomical resection was performed in 77/186 (41%) and 44/104 (42%) patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type and Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated genetic statuses, respectively. For both, the clinical-pathologic factors were comparable, except a larger maximum tumor size and surgical margin were observed in anatomical resection cases. Anatomical resection patients had significantly longer recurrence-free survival and overall survival than nonanatomical resection cases in the Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type group (recurrence-free survival, P < .001; overall survival, P = .005). No significant recurrence-free survival or overall survival differences were observed between Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated anatomical resection and non-anatomical resection (recurrence-free survival, P = .132; overall survival, P = .563). Although, intrahepatic recurrence in Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type and -mutated colorectal liver metastasis was comparable (P = .973), extrahepatic recurrence was increased in Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated versus -wild-type colorectal liver metastasis (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In contrast to Kirsten rat sarcoma-mutated colorectal liver metastasis with higher extrahepatic recurrence after liver resection, local liver control via anatomical resection improved the postoperative survival in patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma-wild-type colorectal liver metastasis.

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

(1) Background: Here we report on a retrospective study of an international multicentric cohort after minimally invasive liver resection (SIMMILR) of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) from six centers. (2) Methods: Resections were divided by the approach used: open liver resection (OLR), laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR). Patients with macrovascular invasion, more than three metastases measuring more than 3 cm or a solitary metastasis more than 5 cm were excluded, and any remaining heterogeneity found was further analyzed after propensity score matching (PSM) to decrease any potential bias. (3) Results: Prior to matching, 566 patients underwent OLR, 462 LLR and 36 RLR for CRLM. After PSM, 142 patients were in each group of the OLR vs. LLR group and 22 in the OLR vs. RLR and 21 in the LLR vs. RLR groups. Blood loss, hospital stay, and morbidity rates were all highly statistically significantly increased in the OLR compared to the LLR group, 636 mL vs. 353 mL, 9 vs. 5 days and 25% vs. 6%, respectively (p < 0.001). Only blood loss was significantly decreased when RLR was compared to OLR and LLR, 250 mL vs. 597 mL, and 224 mL vs. 778 mL, p < 0.008 and p < 0.04, respectively. (4) Conclusions: SIMMILR indicates that minimally invasive approaches for CRLM that follow the Milan criteria may have short term advantages. Notably, larger studies with long-term follow-up comparing robotic resections to both OLR and LLR are still needed.

Pure laparoscopic major liver resection after yttrium90 radioembolization: a case-matched series analysis of feasibility and outcomes

Background

Liver surgery after radioembolization (RE) entails highly demanding and challenging procedures due to the frequent combination of large tumors, severe RE-related adhesions, and the necessity of conducting major hepatectomies. Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and its associated advantages could provide benefits, as yet unreported, to these patients. The current study evaluated feasibility, morbidity, mortality, and survival outcomes for major laparoscopic liver resection after radioembolization.

Material and methods

In this retrospective, single-center study patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma or metastases from colorectal cancer undergoing major laparoscopic hepatectomy after RE were identified from institutional databases. They were matched (1:2) on several pre-operative characteristics to a group of patients that underwent major LLR for the same malignancies during the same period but without previous RE.

Results

From March 2011 to November 2020, 9 patients underwent a major LLR after RE. No differences were observed in intraoperative blood loss (50 vs. 150 ml; p = 0.621), operative time (478 vs. 407 min; p = 0.135) or pedicle clamping time (90.5 vs 74 min; p = 0.133) between the post-RE LLR and the matched group. Similarly, no differences were observed on hospital stay (median 3 vs. 4 days; p = 0.300), Clavien–Dindo ≥ III complications (2 vs. 1 cases; p = 0.250), specific liver morbidity (1 vs. 1 case p = 1.000), or 90 day mortality (0 vs. 0; p = 1.000).

Conclusion

The laparoscopic approach for post radioembolization patients may be a feasible and safe procedure with excellent surgical and oncological outcomes and meets the current standards for laparoscopic liver resections. Further studies with larger series are needed to confirm the results herein presented.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00423-022-02474-z.

Fast-track two-stage hepatectomy by concurrent portal vein embolization at first-stage hepatectomy in hybrid interventional radiology / operating suite

OBJECTIVES

In two-stage hepatectomy for bilateral liver metastases, patient dropout between stages is a major issue. We recently proposed a novel approach of fast-track two-staged hepatectomy (FT-TSH), in which patients undergo concurrent first-stage hepatectomy (FSH) with portal vein embolization (PVE) in a hybrid interventional radiology surgical suite. However, its efficacy remains unclear.

METHODS

Patients with bilateral liver metastases scheduled for FT-TSH at MD Anderson Cancer Center between October 2017 and December 2020 were included on a prospective registry. The effectiveness and feasibility were evaluated.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients were scheduled for FT-TSH. Primary site of tumor was colon/rectum in 18 patients and ovary in one patient. Median number of tumors was 10 and median size of largest tumor before surgery was 2.4 cm. Two (11%) patients did not undergo PVE and seventeen patients (89%) completed FSH + PVE. None of the patients had a major complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III) after FSH + PVE. Median kinetic growth rate after FSH + PVE was 2.9%/week (range 0.8-5.6). Twelve patients (71%) among the seventeen who underwent FSH + PVE proceeded to second-stage hepatectomy, and ten patients (59%) finally completed second-stage hepatectomy. Median interval between stages was 5.6 weeks (4.0-20.1). One patient (10%) had a major morbidity after SSH, and there was no 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

FT-TSH is safe and allows for short intervals between hepatectomy stages while achieving favorable liver hypertrophy. Further investigation is needed to evaluate the true efficacy of FT-TSH.

Laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases - short- and long-term outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

For well-selected patients and procedures, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become the gold standard for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) when performed in specialized centers. However, little is currently known concerning patient-related and peri-operative factors that could play a role in survival outcomes associated with LLR for CRLM.

AIM

To provide an extensive summary of reported outcomes and prognostic factors associated with LLR for CRLM.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library using the keywords "colorectal liver metastases", "laparoscopy", "liver resection", "prognostic factors", "outcomes" and "survival". Only publications written in English and published until December 2019 were included. Furthermore, abstracts of which no accompanying full text was published, reviews, case reports, letters, protocols, comments, surveys and animal studies were excluded. All search results were saved to Endnote Online and imported in Rayyan for systematic selection. Data of interest were extracted from the included publications and tabulated for qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 1064 articles retrieved by means of a systematic and grey literature search, 77 were included for qualitative analysis. Seventy-two research papers provided data concerning outcomes of LLR for CRLM. Fourteen papers were eligible for extraction of data concerning prognostic factors affecting survival outcomes. Qualitative analysis of the collected data showed that LLR for CRLM is safe, feasible and provides oncological efficiency. Multiple research groups have reported on the short-term advantages of LLR compared to open procedures. The obtained results accounted for minor LLR, as well as major LLR, simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and liver resection, LLR of posterosuperior segments, two-stage hepatectomy and repeat LLR for CRLM. Few research groups so far have studied prognostic factors affecting long-term outcomes of LLR for CRLM.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, LLR for CRLM provides good short- and long-term outcomes, independent of the complexity of the procedure.

Shorter operation time and improved surgical outcomes in laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy compared with open donor right hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy is a complex procedure, and the safety and feasibility of this operation remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and learning curve of this operation performed by a single surgeon.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the initial 100 donors who underwent pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy or open donor right hepatectomy by a single surgeon from December 2012 to May 2019. Endpoints analyzed included intraoperative results, postoperative complications, and learning curve, which was evaluated using the cumulative sum method based on the operation time. We divided the pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy group into initial and recent groups based on the time point of overcoming the learning curve.

RESULTS

The operative time was significantly shorter in the recent pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy group (n = 57; 181.0 ± 35.7 min) than in the open donor right hepatectomy (n = 50; 203.0 ± 37.3 min) and initial pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (n = 43; 282.2 ± 59.2 min) groups (P < .001). Moreover, the length of hospital stay in the recent pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy group was significantly reduced compared to that in the open donor right hepatectomy group (7.7 ± 1.2 vs 5.8 ± 1.4; P < .001). The complication rate was reduced from 10% in the open donor right hepatectomy group and 8% in the initial pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy group to 2% in the recent pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy group.

CONCLUSION

As technology advances, the surgical outcomes of pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy are comparable and the operation time of pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy is superior to those of open donor hepatectomy.

Induction of liver hypertrophy for extended liver surgery and partial liver transplantation: State of the art of parenchyma augmentation-assisted liver surgery

Background

Liver surgery and transplantation currently represent the only curative treatment options for primary and secondary hepatic malignancies. Despite the ability of the liver to regenerate after tissue loss, 25–30% future liver remnant is considered the minimum requirement to prevent serious risk for post-hepatectomy liver failure.

Purpose

The aim of this review is to depict the various interventions for liver parenchyma augmentation–assisting surgery enabling extended liver resections. The article summarizes one- and two-stage procedures with a focus on hypertrophy- and corresponding resection rates.

Conclusions

To induce liver parenchymal augmentation prior to hepatectomy, most techniques rely on portal vein occlusion, but more recently inclusion of parenchymal splitting, hepatic vein occlusion, and partial liver transplantation has extended the technical armamentarium. Safely accomplishing major and ultimately total hepatectomy by these techniques requires integration into a meaningful oncological concept. The advent of highly effective chemotherapeutic regimen in the neo-adjuvant, interstage, and adjuvant setting has underlined an aggressive surgical approach in the given setting to convert formerly “palliative” disease into a curative and sometimes in a “chronic” disease.

[Evidence of minimally invasive oncological surgery of the liver]

BACKGROUND

The evidence for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of the liver has significantly increased with the increasing number of publications on this topic in recent years; however, this technique has not yet gained broad acceptance among surgeons.

OBJECTIVE

Analysis and presentation of the current literature on MIS of the liver.

MATERIAL UND METHODS

Structured PubMed literature search and analysis.

RESULTS

According to the literature, MIS and open liver surgery are equivalent regarding the oncological quality. In addition to parenchyma-preserving resections, major hepatectomies (e.g. hemihepatectomy and sectorectomy), two-stage concepts and re-resections have increasingly been reported. The MIS of the liver is associated with less blood loss and other immunological advantages in addition to a shorter hospital stay. The highest level of evidence has been achieved for colorectal liver metastases for which a systematic review even revealed a survival benefit for patients undergoing MIS surgery. From an oncological perspective, laparoscopic and robotic liver surgery are considered to be equivalent.

CONCLUSION

According to the current literature MIS of the liver is recommended for the resection of colorectal liver metastases and hepatocellular carcinoma.

Benchmark performance of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy and right hepatectomy in expert centers

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Herein, we aimed to establish benchmark values - based on a composite indicator of healthcare quality - for the performance of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) and laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) using data from expert centers.

METHODS

Data from a nationwide multicenter survey including all patients undergoing LLLS and LRH between 2000 and 2017 were analyzed. Textbook outcome (TO) completion was considered in patients fulfilling all 6 of the following characteristics: negative margins, no transfusion, no complication, no prolonged hospital stay, no readmission and no mortality. For each procedure, a cut-off laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) volume by center was associated with TO on multivariable analysis. These cut-offs defined the expert centers. The benchmark values were set at the 75th percentile of median outcomes among these expert centers.

RESULTS

Among 4,400 LLRs performed in 29 centers, 855 patients who underwent LLLS and 488 who underwent LRH were identified. The overall incidences of TO after LLLS and LRH were 43.7% and 23.8%, respectively. LLR volume cut-offs of 25 LLR/year (odds ratio [OR] 2.45; bootstrap 95% CI 1.65-3.69; p = 0.001) and 35 LLR/year (OR 2.55; bootstrap 95% CI 1.34-5.63; p = 0.003) were independently associated with completion of TO after LLLS and LRH, respectively. Eight centers for LLLS and 6 centers for LRH, including 516 and 346 patients undergoing LLLS/LRH respectively, reached these cut-offs and were identified as expert centers. After LLLS, benchmark values of severe complication, mortality and TO completion were defined as ≤5.3%, ≤1.2% and ≥46.6%, respectively. After LRH, benchmark values of severe complication, mortality and TO completion were ≤20.4%, ≤2.8% and ≥24.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an up-to-date reference on the benchmark performance of LLLS and LRH in expert centers.

LAY SUMMARY

In a nationwide French survey of laparoscopic liver resection, expert centers were defined according to the completion of a textbook outcome, which is a composite indicator of healthcare quality. Benchmark values regarding intra-operative details and outcomes were established using data from 516 patients with laparoscopic left lateral sectionectiomy and 346 patients with laparoscopic right hepatectomy from expert centers. These values should be used as a reference point to improve the quality of laparoscopic resections.

Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma comorbid with cirrhosis

Introduction

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is very difficult to perform in patients with cirrhosis because of the haemorrhagic and fibrotic nature of the liver, although there are various advantages to laparoscopic surgery.

Aim

To investigate the surgical outcomes, and efficacy and safety of LH versus open hepatectomy (OH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) resection.

Material and methods

A total of 112 patients with cirrhosis, who underwent hepatectomy, were analysed retrospectively. We investigated the safety and efficacy of LH for HCC with cirrhosis. Student's t and χ² tests, Mann-Whitney's U test, Wilcoxon's signed-rank test, and Fisher's exact test were used in the statistical analysis.

Results

Seventy-one patients underwent LH, and 41 underwent OH. The conversion rate from LH to OH was 12.7%. After propensity score matching, the estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the LH group than in the OH group (25 vs. 310 ml; p < 0.001), and there was a significant difference between the groups in the operative time (p = 0.091). The LH group had complication rates of 3.6% and 0% for refractory ascites and pleural effusion, respectively, while those were 17.9% and 10.7%, respectively, in the OH group (p = 0.019 and p = 0.005, respectively). The LH group had no mortality, whereas the OH group had a mortality rate of 10.7% (p = 0.038). The postoperative length of stay was significantly longer in the LH group than in the OH group (9 days vs. 14 days) (p = 0.002).

Conclusions

LH can be performed safely for HCC with cirrhosis. More favourable results are achieved with LH than with OH in terms of surgical outcomes.

Laparoscopic liver resection: indications, limitations, and economic aspects

Background

Minimally invasive techniques have increasingly found their way into liver surgery in recent years. A multitude of mostly retrospective analyses suggests several advantages of laparoscopic over open liver surgery. Due to the speed and variety of simultaneous technical and strategic developments, it is difficult to maintain an overview of the current status and perspectives in laparoscopic liver surgery.

Purpose

This review highlights up-to-date aspects in laparoscopic liver surgery. We discuss established indications with regard to their development over time as well as continuing limitations of applied techniques. We give an assessment based on the current literature and according to our own center experiences, not least with regard to a highly topical cost discussion.

Conclusions

While in the beginning mainly benign tumors were laparoscopically operated on, liver metastasis and hepatocellular carcinoma are now among the most frequent indications. Technical limitations remain and should be evaluated with the overall aim not to endanger quality standards in open surgery. Financial aspects cannot be neglected with the necessity of cost-covering reimbursement.

Current status of laparoscopic liver resection for the management of colorectal liver metastases

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies worldwide. The commonest site of spread is the liver, with up to 40% of patients developing colorectal liver metastasis (CLRM) during the course of their lifetime. Significant advances in surgical techniques, as well as breakthroughs in chemotherapy and biologic agents, have resulted in dramatic improvements in prognosis. A multimodal approach comprising of liver resection coupled with systemic therapy offers these patients the best chance of cure. The arrival of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) within the last 3 decades has added a whole new dimension to the management of this condition. Today, CLRM is one of the most frequent indications for LLR globally. Meta-analyses of retrospective studies and two randomized trials have demonstrated superior short-term outcomes following LLR, with no differences in mortality rates. Oncologically, R0 resection rates are comparable to the open approach, while overall and disease-free survival rates are also similar. As surgeons gain confidence, boundaries are pushed even further. High-volume centers have published their early experiences with complex LLR of recurrent CLRM as well as totally laparoscopic synchronous resection of CRC and liver metastases, with very encouraging results. In the presence of extensive bilobar CLRM, two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) and associating liver partition with portal vein ligation (ALPPS) may be adopted to augment an inadequate future liver remnant to facilitate metastasectomy. Interestingly, the adoption of LLR for these techniques also seem to confer additional benefits. Despite the plethora of advantages, LLR comes with its own unique set of limitations such as a steep learning curve and high cost. The surgical world eagerly awaits the results of prospective trials currently underway in order to further advance the management of this disease.