The current role of laparoscopic liver resection for the treatment of liver tumors

Long-term oncological outcomes after laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing redo liver resections for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a European multi-center study

Background

Laparoscopic redo resections for colorectal metastases are poorly investigated. This study aims to explore long-term results after second, third, and fourth resections.

Material and methods

Prospectively updated databases of primary and redo laparoscopic liver resections in six European HPB centers were analyzed. Procedure-related overall survival after first, second, third, and fourth resections were evaluated. Furthermore, patients without liver recurrence after first liver resection were compared to those with one redo, two or three redo, and patients with palliative treatment for liver recurrence after first laparoscopic liver surgery. Survival was calculated both from the date of the first liver resection and from the date of the actual liver resection. In total, 837 laparoscopic primary and redo liver resections performed in 762 patients were included (630 primary, 172 first redo, 29 second redo, and 6 third redo). Patients were bunched into four groups: Group 1—without hepatic recurrence after primary liver resection (n = 441); Group 2—with liver recurrence who underwent only one laparoscopic redo resection (n = 154); Group 3—with liver recurrence who underwent two laparoscopic redo resections (n = 29); Group 4—with liver recurrence who have not been found suitable for redo resections (n = 138).

Results

No significant difference has been found between the groups in terms of baseline characteristics and surgical outcomes. Rate of positive resection margin was higher in the group with palliative recurrence (group 4). Five-year survival calculated from the first liver resection was 67%, 62%, 84%, and 7% for group 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Procedure-specific 5-year overall survival was 50% after primary laparoscopic liver resection, 52% after the 1st reoperation, 52% after the 2nd, and 40% after the 3rd reoperation made laparoscopic.

Conclusions

Multiple redo recurrences can be performed laparoscopically with good long-term results. Liver recurrence does not aggravate prognosis as long as the patient is suitable for reoperation.

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.

Impact of ERAS approach and minimally-invasive techniques on outcome of patients undergoing liver surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Aim of the study was to assess the impact of ERAS approach ("fluid restrictive and drainless") on open liver resections for HCC comparing their outcome with open resections in pre-ERAS period and with laparoscopic surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

207 patients undergoing minor liver resection for HCC were divided into three groups: Group A, open minor resections in pre-ERAS period (95 patients); Group B, laparoscopic ERAS resections (55 patients); Group C, open ERAS resections (57 patients).

RESULTS

Blood loss was lower in group C and B compared with group A. Postoperative morbidity was 26.5% in group A, 16.3% in group B and 12.1% in group C (p<0.05). Ascites was less frequent in group B (7.5%) and C (6.2%) compared with group A (12%). Median time for functional recovery in group B (3 days) and C (3 days) was shorter compared with group A (5 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic approach confirms to be associated with reduced blood loss and postoperative morbidity. In patients who cannot be candidates to minimally-invasive approach, ERAS management seems to allow blood loss and postoperative morbidity reduction: indeed, results achieved in this group of patients are more similar to those of laparoscopy than to pre-ERAS open surgery.

Intraoperative monitoring of stroke volume variation versus central venous pressure in laparoscopic liver surgery: a randomized prospective comparative trial

BACKGROUND

Central venous pressure (CVP) is used as a marker of cardiac preload to control intraoperative blood loss in open hepatectomies, while its reliability in laparoscopy is less certain. The aim of this randomized prospective trial was to evaluate the outcome of laparoscopic resections performed with stroke volume variation (SVV) or CVP monitoring.

METHODS

All candidates for laparoscopic liver resection were assigned randomly to SVV or to CVP groups. Outcome was evaluated included conversion rate, cause of conversion, intraoperative blood loss, need for transfusions, length of surgery and postoperative results.

RESULTS

Ninety consecutive patients were enrolled: both SVV and CVP groups included 45 patients each and were comparable in terms of patient and disease characteristics. A reduced rate of conversion was recorded in the SVV compared to the CVP group (6.7% and 17.8% respectively, p = 0.02). Blood loss was lower in the SVV group (150 mL), compared to the CVP group (300 mL, p = 0.04). Morbidity, mortality, length of stay and functional recovery were comparable. On multivariate analysis, lesion location, extent of hepatectomy and type of cardiac preload monitoring were associated significantly to risk of conversion.

CONCLUSION

SVV monitoring in laparoscopic liver surgery improves intraoperative outcome, thus enhancing the benefits of the minimally-invasive approach and fast-track protocols.

Learning curve of self-taught laparoscopic liver surgeons in left lateral sectionectomy: results from an international multi-institutional analysis on 245 cases

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy was suggested as gold standard for left lateral sectionectomy (LLS), thanks to recognized benefits compared to open approach. Aim of this study was to define learning curve (LC) of laparoscopic LLS (LLLS) using operative time (OT) as tool to analyze outcome of procedures performed by four experienced surgeons. Reproducibility and safety of LC in LLLS among independent surgeons were also analyzed as essential features of "standard procedure" concept.

METHODS

LLLS performed by four experienced surgeons was collected. Multivariate analysis was carried out to screen factors affecting OT. A cumulative LC was created calculating median OT. Skewness of OT was analyzed, and ROC curve was carried out to identify the cutoff for LC. The impact of LC on outcomes (morbidity and mortality, blood loss, conversions, surgical margins and length of stay) was determined.

RESULTS

A total of 245 LLLSs were collected. Conversion rate was 1.2 %. Median OT was 141 min, blood loss 100 mL, morbidity 11.4 % and mortality 0.4 %. "Associated procedures" was the only independent factor affecting OT. The skewness of the OT was calculated, and the cutoff point for LC was determined after 15 LLLSs. LLLS performed during and after LC period had similar outcomes.

CONCLUSION

LLLS is feasible with low morbidity, mortality and conversion rate. LC in LLLS is shorter compared to minor liver resections. Furthermore, it is reproducible and safe since it does not negatively affect clinical outcome. A reproducible, safe and short LC contributes to considering laparoscopy as the gold standard approach to perform LLS.

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.

Laparoscopic Parenchymal-Sparing Resections for Nonperipheral Liver Lesions, the Diamond Technique: Technical Aspects, Clinical Outcomes, and Oncologic Efficiency

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of liver lesions has moved toward "parenchymal-sparing" strategies. Although open parenchymal-sparing liver resections are supported by encouraging results, the applicability of the laparoscopic approach for nonperipheral tumors is still questionable. Our aim was to assess the feasibility, safety, and oncologic adequacy of laparoscopic parenchymal-sparing liver resection for nonperipheral lesions with a description of the technique adopted in this setting.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospectively collected single-center database of 517 laparoscopic liver resections was reviewed. Laparoscopic nonperipheral parenchymal-sparing liver resections (LapPSLRs), that is, entirely intraparenchymal limited resections performed on nonperipheral lesions, were selected. Intra- and perioperative outcomes were analyzed along with 3-year actuarial survival for patients with colorectal liver metastases.

RESULTS

The group comprised 49 LapPSLRs. Colorectal liver metastases were the most frequent diagnosis (n = 24 patients). Lesions were located in segments 8, 7, 4a, and 3 in 51%, 8.2%, 36.7%, and 4.1% of cases, respectively. Conversion occurred in 4 patients (8%). Intra- and postoperative short-term outcomes were calculated for the 24 isolated LapPSLR (not associated with any concurrent liver resection). Median operative time and blood loss were 215 minutes and 225 mL, respectively. Pringle maneuver was used in 75% of cases. Postoperative 90-day mortality was nil and morbidity rate was 12.5%. Median postoperative stay was 3 days. Median tumor-free margin was 4 mm and 100% R0 rate was achieved for all LapPSLRs with curative intent. Three-year overall, recurrence-free, and disease-free survival rates were 100%, 65.2%, and 69.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic parenchymal-sparing liver resections for nonperipheral liver lesions are feasible and can be performed safely without compromising perioperative and oncological outcomes.

Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) surgery for left-lateral hepatic sectionectomy as an alternative to traditional laparoscopy: case-matched analysis from a single center

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is considered the "gold standard" to perform left-lateral sectionectomy with results identical to those of open surgery, yielding decreased postoperative pain and disability, reduced hospital stay, and shortened patient recovery time. As the emphasis on minimizing the invasiveness of surgical techniques continues, laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) surgery is quickly evolving. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of laparoscopic left-lateral sectionectomy performed using the traditional approach or LESS approach with a case-matched analysis for tumor size, type of resection, and surgical indications.

METHODS

Thirteen patients who underwent LESS left-lateral sectionectomy are considered the study group (LESS group) and compared with 13 patients who underwent left-lateral sectionectomy with traditional laparoscopic approach (conventional group).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between groups for length of surgery (165 min in conventional group vs. 195 min in LESS group), blood loss (150 mL in conventional group vs. 175 mL in LESS group), conversion to open surgery, histological tumor exposure, and requirements of postoperative analgesics. One patient in the LESS group died of cardiac failure due to an unknown severe aortic valve stenosis. No differences were recorded for postoperative complications (23.1% in both groups) and median length of postoperative stay (4 days in both groups).

CONCLUSIONS

For left-lateral hepatic sectionectomy, LESS surgery is technically feasible and as safe as traditional laparoscopic surgery in terms of intraoperative and postoperative results, even though requiring both hepatobiliary and laparoscopic technique experience.

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.

World review of laparoscopic liver resection-2,804 patients

OBJECTIVE

To provide a review of the world literature on laparoscopic liver resection.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Initially described for peripheral, benign tumors resected by nonanatomic wedge resections, minimally invasive liver resections are now being performed more frequently, even for larger, malignant tumors located in challenging locations. Although a few small review articles have been reported, a comprehensive review on laparoscopic liver resection has not been published.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search using Pubmed, screening all English publications on laparoscopic liver resections. All data were analyzed and apparent case duplications in updated series were excluded from the total number of patients. Tumor type, operative characteristics, perioperative morbidity, and oncologic outcomes were tabulated.

RESULTS

A total of 127 published articles of original series on laparoscopic liver resection were identified, and accounted for 2,804 reported minimally invasive liver resections. Fifty percent were for malignant tumors, 45% were for benign lesions, 1.7% were for live donor hepatectomies, and the rest were indeterminate. Of the resections, 75% were performed totally laparoscopically, 17% were hand-assisted, and 2% were laparoscopic-assisted open hepatic resection (hybrid) technique, with the remainder being other techniques or conversions to open hepatectomies. The most common laparoscopic liver resection was a wedge resection or segmentectomy (45%) followed by anatomic left lateral sectionectomy (20%), right hepatectomy (9%), and left hepatectomy (7%). Conversion from laparoscopy to open laparotomy and from laparoscopy to hand-assisted approach occurred in 4.1% and 0.7% of reported cases, respectively. Overall mortality was 9 of 2,804 patients (0.3%), and morbidity was 10.5%, with no intraoperative deaths reported. The most common cause of postoperative death was liver failure. Postoperative bile leak was observed in 1.5% of cases. For cancer resections, negative surgical margins were achieved in 82% to 100% of reported series. The 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates after laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma were 50% to 75% and 31% to 38.2%, respectively. The 3-year overall and disease-free survival rates after laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal metastasis to the liver were 80% to 87% and 51%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, laparoscopic liver resections are safe with acceptable morbidity and mortality for both minor and major hepatic resections. Oncologically, 3- and 5-year survival rates reported for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal cancer metastases are comparable to open hepatic resection, albeit in a selected group of patients.

Open versus laparoscopic resection for liver tumours

BACKGROUND

The issue under debate is whether laparoscopic liver resections for malignant tumours produce outcomes which are comparable with conventional, open liver resections.

METHODS

Literature review on liver resection and laparoscopy.

RESULTS

There are no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published that provide any evidence for the benefits of laparoscopic liver resections for liver tumours. In case-control series reporting short-term outcomes, laparoscopic liver resection has been shown to have the advantage of a reduced length of hospital stay. There are as yet, however, no adequate long-term survival studies demonstrating that laparoscopic liver resection is oncologically equivalent to open resection.

DISCUSSION

The challenge for the near future is to test the oncological integrity of laparoscopic liver resection in controlled trials in the same way that we have learned from the RCTs carried out in laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. It is likely that laparoscopic liver resection will then have to compete with fast-track, open liver resection. Already, concerns have been raised regarding the learning curve required to master the techniques of laparoscopic liver resection.