Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Robotic versus Laparoscopic Liver Resections for Colorectal Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide, and the liver is the most common localization of metastatic disease. The incidence of minimally invasive liver surgery is increasing, and robotic surgery (RLR) is believed to overcome some limitations of a laparoscopic approach (LRL). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of operative and short-term oncologic outcomes of the laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. An online search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane databases was performed. Eight studies involving 3210 patients were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. In the LRL group, a higher conversion to open rate (12.4%) was observed compared to the RLR (6.7%; p = <0.001). 30-day mortality was 0.7% for the LRL group compared to 0.5% for the RLR group (p = 0.76). Mortality in longer periods among LLR and RLR amounted to 18.2% vs. 8.0% for 1-year mortality (p = 0.07), 34.1% vs. 26.7% for 2-year mortality (p = 0.13), and 52.3% vs. 48.3% for 3-year mortality (p = 0.46). The length of hospital stay was 5.6 ± 2.5 vs. 5.8 ± 2.1 days, respectively (p = 0.47). There were no significant differences between the incidence of individual complications in the LRL and RLR groups (p = 0.78). Laparoscopic or robotic approaches for colorectal liver metastases are comparable in terms of safety and effectiveness. There are significant advantages to robotic surgery, although there is still no long-term evidence concerning overall survival, and the number of patients operated on using RLR remains small.

Goal-directed fluid therapy during post-resection phase in low central venous pressure assisted laparoscopic hepatectomy: a randomized controlled superiority trial

PURPOSE

The purpose of this prospective single blinded randomized controlled trial was to find out whether goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) strategy in post-transection period in low central venous pressure (CVP) assisted laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has more benefit than traditional fluid strategy.

METHODS

Between April 2020 and Dec 2021, patients who were scheduled for laparoscopic liver resection surgery were eligible to participate in the study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: control group that received traditional fluid strategy in post-transection period in low CVP assisted laparoscopic hepatectomy and GDFT strategy group that received GDFT strategy in post-transection period. The primary outcome parameter is the incidence of postoperative complications. Secondary outcome parameters include perioperative clinical outcomes, postoperative clinical outcomes, length of hospital stay after surgery, postoperative lactic acid, fluids and vasoactive medications during the operation.

RESULTS

A total of 159 patients in the control group and 160 patients in the GDFT were included. Two groups had no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications including pneumonia (P = 0.34), acute kidney injury (P = 0.72), hepatic insufficiency (P = 0.25), pleural effusion (P = 0.08) and seroperitoneum (P = 1.00), respectively. The amount of perioperative urine output is fewer in GDFT group than in the control group (P = 0.0354), while other perioperative variables and postoperative variables were comparable between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show the implementation of GDFT strategy is not associated with fewer postoperative complications. GDFT strategy did not result in improved outcomes in low CVP-assisted laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Minimal Invasive Versus Open Surgery for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Multicenter German StuDoQ|Liver Registry-Based Cohort Analysis in Germany

Objective

To compare the outcome of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) to open liver surgery (OLS) for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) on a nationwide level.

Background

Colorectal cancer is the third most common malignancy worldwide. Up to 50% of all patients with colorectal cancer develop CRLM. MILS represents an attractive alternative to OLS for treatment of CRLM.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study using the prospectively recorded German Quality management registry for liver surgery. Propensity-score matching was performed to account for variance in the extent of resection and patient demographics.

Results

In total, 1037 patients underwent liver resection for CRLM from 2019 to 2021. MILS was performed in 31%. Operative time was significantly longer in MILS (234 vs 222 minutes, P = 0.02) compared with OLS. After MILS, median length of hospital stay (LOS) was significantly shorter (7 vs 10 days; P < 0.001). Despite 76% of major resections being OLS, postoperative complications and 90-day morbidity and mortality did not differ. The Pringle maneuver was more frequently used in MILS (48% vs 40%, P = 0.048). After propensity-score matching for age, body mass index, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, and extent of resection, LOS remained shorter in the MILS cohort (6 vs 10 days, P < 0.001) and operative time did not differ significantly (P = 0.2).

Conclusion

MILS is not the standard for resection of CRLM in Germany. Drawbacks, such as a longer operative time remain. However, if technically possible, MILS is a reasonable alternative to OLS for resection of CRLM, with comparable postoperative complications, reduced LOS, and equal oncological radicality.

Operative and Hepatic Function Outcomes of Laparoscopic vs. Open Liver Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Liver resection is a pivotal treatment for various liver diseases, and the choice between laparoscopic (LR) and open (OR) methods is debatable. This study aims to compare their respective complications and hepatic outcomes comprehensively, providing critical insights to guide clinical decisions and optimize patient results. We conducted a comprehensive review across PubMed, SCOPUS, WOS, and the Cochrane Library until September 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopic (LR) and open (OR) liver resections were included. Data screening, extraction, and quality assessments utilized the Risk of Bias (ROB-2). We conducted our analysis using Review Manager (RevMan 5.4) software, and the data were presented as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Our comprehensive research yielded 3,192 relevant records, and 9 RCTs were finally included. LR exhibited reduced operative bleeding (MD = -82.87 ml, 95% CI: -132.45 to -33.30, P=0.001) and shorter hospital stays (MD = -2.32 days, 95% CI: -3.65 to -0.98, P=0.0007). The risk of complications was significantly lower in the LR group (RR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.43-0.76, P<0.0001), especially in Clavian-Dindo classification degree 1 and 2 complications (RR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.28-0.79, P=0.005). LR patients also had lower postoperative AST levels at one day (MD = -123.16 U/L, 95% CI: -206.08 to -40.24, P=0.004) and three days (MD = -35.95 U/L, 95% CI: -65.83 to -6.06, P=0.02). These findings underscore LR's superiority, emphasizing its potential to significantly enhance patient outcomes, reduce complications, and improve recovery in liver resection procedures.

Postoperative infectious complications are associated with diminished overall survival of patients undergoing resection for colorectal liver metastases

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative infectious complications (PIC) remain one of the most common complications after surgery. The influence of PIC on long-term survival for patients after liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) needs further investigation.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2012 and 2017 at the Department of Surgery, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin were evaluated. Overall survival (OS) was stratified according to the development of PIC. Independent predictors of PIC and diminished survival were identified using regression models.

RESULTS

Of 270 patients, eighty-four (31%) patients developed PIC including intraabdominal infections (n = 51, 61%), cholangitis (n = 5, 6%), pneumonia (n = 12, 14%), wound infections (n = 28, 33%), urinary tract infections (n = 5, 6%), or central line-associated bloodstream infections (n = 4, 5%). PIC were associated with a significantly diminished five-year OS (30% vs. 43%, p = 0.008). Age >65 years (p = 0.016, hazard ratio [HR] = 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2-4.0), comorbidity (p = 0.019, HR [95% CI] = 2.4 [1.2-4.9]), simultaneous resection of primary tumor (p = 0.005, HR [95% CI] = 4.3 [1.6-11.9]), biliary drainage (p < 0.001, HR [95% CI] = 4.1 [2.0-8.5]), and length of procedure ≥272 min (p = 0.012, HR [95% CI] = 2.2 [1.2-4.1]) were independent predictors for the development of PIC. Body-mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m2 (p = 0.002, HR [95% CI] = 2.4 [1.4-4.0]), postoperative major complications (p = 0.003, HR [95% CI] = 2.2 [1.3-3.8]), and 3- or 4-MRGN bacteria (p = 0.001, HR [95% CI] = 7.7 [2.2-27.3]) were independently associated with diminished OS.

CONCLUSIONS

PIC are associated with diminished OS after resection for CRLM. Age >65 years, comorbidities, simultaneous resection of the primary tumor, and biliary drainages were identified as independent risk factors for the development of PIC. High BMI, postoperative major morbidity and 3-/4-MRGN bacteria were independently predictive of worse OS. These factors need to be considered in perioperative management for patients with CRLM.

Outcomes and Patient Selection in Laparoscopic vs. Open Liver Resection for HCC and Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) are the two most common malignant tumors that require liver resection. While liver transplantation is the best treatment for HCC, organ shortages and high costs limit the availability of this option for many patients and make resection the mainstay of treatment. For patients with CRLM, surgical resection with negative margins is the only potentially curative option. Over the last two decades, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been increasingly adopted for the resection of a variety of tumors and was found to have similar long-term outcomes compared to open liver resection (OLR) while offering the benefits of improved short-term outcomes. In this review, we discuss the current literature on the outcomes of LLR vs. OLR for patients with HCC and CRLM. Although the use of LLR for HCC and CRLM is increasing, it is not appropriate for all patients. We describe an approach to selecting patients best-suited for LLR. The four common difficulty-scoring systems for LLR are summarized. Additionally, we review the current evidence behind the emerging robotically assisted liver resection technology.

Safety and long-term prognosis of simultaneous versus staged resection in synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The optimal time point for surgical resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLMs) is still controversial. This meta-analysis evaluated the safety and long-term prognoses of simultaneous and staged resection of SCLM to provide a reference for clinical selection.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for studies published by October 2022 was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library. The evaluated outcome parameters were total, gastrointestinal and hepatic complications, as well as perioperative mortality, intraoperative blood loss, total hospital stay, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 5-year overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 22 nonrandomised and one randomised study comprising 4862 patients. The patients undergoing simultaneous resection of SCLM had similar total (OR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.66-1.19], P = 0.409), gastrointestinal (OR = 1.19, 95% CI [0.89-1.59], P = 0.241) and hepatic (OR = 1.04, 95% CI [0.83-1.31], P = 0.734) complications, as well as perioperative mortality (OR = 1.79, 95% CI [0.88-3.64], P = 0.108), 5-year DFS (HR = 1.26, 95% CI [0.96-1.66], P = 0.098) and 5-year OS (HR = 1.13, 95% CI [0.95-1.34], P = 0.164). Lower intraoperative blood loss (SMD = - 0.39, 95% CI [- 0.60 to - 0.18], P < 0.001) and shorter total hospital stay (WMD = - 5.43, 95% CI [- 7.29 to - 3.58], P < 0.001) were observed in the simultaneous-resection group versus the staged group.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous resection is safe and effective for SCLM patients. The long-term prognosis is equivalent to that of the traditional staged resection. Correct selection of resectable SCLM patients for the simultaneous resection of the primary tumour and liver metastases can be the first choice. Owing to the potential heterogeneity, more RCTs should be included to verify our conclusions.

Minimally invasive versus open hepatectomy for the resection of colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

While surgical resection has a demonstrated utility for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), it is unclear whether minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or an open approach should be used. This review sought to assess the efficacy and safety of MIS versus open hepatectomy for isolated, resectable CRLM when performed separately from (Key Question (KQ) 1) or simultaneously with (KQ2) the resection of the primary tumor.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane CENTRAL, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative studies published during January 2000-September 2020. Two independent reviewers screened literature for eligibility, extracted data from included studies, and assessed internal validity using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 Tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed using risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD).

RESULTS

From 2304 publications, 35 studies were included for meta-analysis. For staged resections, three RCTs and 20 observational studies were included. Data from RCTs indicated MIS having similar disease-free survival (DFS) at 1-year (RR 1.03, 95%CI 0.70-1.50), overall survival (OS) at 5-years (RR 1.04, 95%CI 0.84-1.28), fewer complications of Clavien-Dindo Grade III (RR 0.62, 95%CI 0.38-1.00), and shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) (MD -6.6 days, 95%CI -10.2, -3.0). For simultaneous resections, 12 observational studies were included. There was no evidence of a difference between MIS and the open group for DFS-1-year, OS-5-year, complications, R0 resections, blood transfusions, along with lower blood loss (MD -177.35 mL, 95%CI -273.17, -81.53) and shorter LOS (MD -3.0 days, 95%CI -3.82, -2.17).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence regarding the optimal approach for CRLM resection demonstrates similar oncologic outcomes between MIS and open techniques, however MIS hepatectomy had a shorter LOS, lower blood loss and complication rate, for both staged and simultaneous resections.

Novel Hemostatic Technique During Laparoscopic Liver Parenchymal Transection: Saline-Linked Electrocautery Combined With Wet Oxidized Cellulose (SLiC-WOC) Method

Introduction: Although laparoscopic hepatectomy has the potential advantage of reducing intraoperative blood loss, it is more difficult to control bleeding laparoscopically compared to an open approach. We introduced a novel hemostatic technique, the saline-linked electrocautery combined with wet oxidized cellulose (SLiC-WOC) method, during laparoscopic hepatectomy where a combination of saline-linked electrocautery (SLiC) and wet oxidized cellulose (WOC) is used. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of employing the SLiC-WOC method for laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Methods: Thirteen patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection with the SLiC-WOC method between 2019 and 2020 were included in this study. The number of bleeding episodes in which the SLiC-WOC method was applied was counted, and the time required to achieve complete hemostasis was measured.

Results: Among the bleeding events that were difficult to achieve hemostasis by SLiC alone, 94% were safely and efficiently controlled. Additionally, 69% of hemostasis was achieved within 60 seconds and 91% within 120 seconds. Postoperatively, most patients experienced no complications and no operative mortality was observed.

Conclusions: The SLiC-WOC method can provide safe and time-efficient hemostasis during laparoscopic hepatectomy. This is especially crucial for bleeding, which is difficult to control using electrocautery alone.

Liver Resection for Primary Hepatic Angiosarcoma: Bicentric Analysis of a Challenging Entity

Primary hepatic angiosarcoma (PHA) is a rare malignant tumor of the liver, and data on patient outcome after surgical treatment are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative morbidity and overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent hepatectomy for PHA. This is a bicentric retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients who underwent liver resection in curative intent for PHA between 2012 and 2019 at the University Hospital of Muenster and the University Hospital of Bern. Nine patients (five female, four male) were included from both centers. Median age was 72 years (44–82). Most lesions (77.8%) were larger than 5 cm, and mean size of the biggest lesion was 9.4 ± 4.5 cm. Major hepatectomy was performed in four (44.4%), and radical resection (R0) was achieved in six (66.7%) patients. Postoperative complication rate was 88.8%, including 44.4% higher than 3a in the Clavien–Dindo classification. OS survival rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 44.4%, 22.2%, and 12.5%, respectively, and median OS was 5 months. OS was significantly better after radical resection (R0: 15 months vs. R1: 0 months, p = 0.04), whereas presentation with tumor rupture at diagnosis was associated with the worst OS (0 months vs. 15 months, p = 0.005). Disease recurrence occurred in three patients (33.3%) between three and seven months after surgery. Radical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment option for PHA. However, postoperative morbidity is high, and the overall prognosis remains poor. Multimodal therapy options and management strategies are urgently needed and could improve the prognosis of patients suffering from PHA in the future.

Modified Two-Surgeon Technique for Laparoscopic Liver Resection

While minimizing intraoperative blood loss during liver resection is one of the most important tasks, it is more difficult to control the refractory bleeding during laparoscopic liver resection than with an open approach. We herein provide a modification of the two-surgeon technique that enables laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection to be performed as quickly and securely as open liver resection. To achieve proper "role sharing," the "transection mode" and the "hemostatic mode" are independent sets in place in this procedure, and these modes are switched rigidly according to the surgical field condition. By thoroughly sharing the roles, rapid laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection comparable to open liver resection can be accomplished. The present modified approach achieves satisfactory transection and hemostasis of the liver parenchyma and is also advantageous for teaching young surgeons and the entire surgical team.

Laparoscopic Resection of Synchronous Liver Metastasis Involving the Left Hepatic Vein and the Common Trunk Bifurcation: A Strategy of Parenchyma-Sparing Resection with Left Sectionectomy and 4a Subsegmentectomy by Arantius Approach

When colorectal cancer presents with liver metastasis, hepatic resection remains the most important factor in prolonging survival, and new paradigms have been proposed to augment resectability. An adequate liver remnant and vascularisation are the only limits in complex liver resection, and parenchyma-sparing surgery is a strategy for minimising the complications, preserving liver function, and allowing patients to undergo further liver resection. The laparoscopic approach represents a new challenge, especially when lesions are located in the superior or posterior part of the liver. We discuss the case of an 81-year-old patient with a single synchronous liver metastasis involving the left hepatic vein and leaning into the middle hepatic vein at the common trunk, where we performed a simultaneous laparoscopic colonic resection with a left sectionectomy extended to segment 4a. The strategic approach to the Arantius ligament by joining the left and middle hepatic vein allowed us to avoid a major liver hepatectomy, preserve the liver parenchyma, reduce complications, enhance patient recovery, and perform the entire procedure by laparoscopy. Our example suggests that the Arantius approach to the left hepatic vein and the common trunk could be a feasible approach to consider in laparoscopic surgery for lesions located in their proximity.

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.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is a highly demanding procedure with great variability. Previously published randomized trials have proven oncological safety of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) as compared to open surgery. However, these were started after the learning curve (LC) was established. This leaves the question of whether the LC of LLR in the early laparoscopic era has affected the survival of patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM).

Methods

All consecutive LLRs performed by a single surgeon between 2000 and 2019 were retrospectively analysed. A risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) chart for conversion rate and the log regression analysis of the blood loss identified two phases in the LC. This was then applied to patients with CRLM, and the two subgroups were compared for recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS). The analysis was repeated with propensity score-matched (PSM) groups

Results

A total of 286 patients were included in the LC analysis, which identified two distinct phases, the early (EP; 68 patients) and the late (LP; 218 patients) phases. The LC was applied to 192 patients with colorectal liver metastasis (EPc, 45 patients; LPc, 147 patients). For patients with CRLM, R0 resection was achieved in 93 per cent: 100 per cent in the EPc group and 90 per cent in the LPc group (P = 0.026). Median OS and RFS were 60 and 16 months, respectively. The 5-year OS and RFS were 51 per cent and 32.7 per cent, respectively. OS (hazard ratio (h.r.) 0.78, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.51 to 1.2; P = 0.286) and RFS (h.r. 0.94, 95 per cent c.i. 0.64 to 1.37; P = 0.760) were not compromised by the learning curve. The results were replicated after PSM.

Conclusion

In our experience, the development of a laparoscopic liver resection programme can be achieved without adverse effects on the long-term survival of patients with CRLM.

International multicentre propensity score-matched analysis comparing robotic versus laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive right posterior sectionectomy (RPS) is a technically challenging procedure. This study was designed to determine outcomes following robotic RPS (R-RPS) and laparoscopic RPS (L-RPS).

METHODS

An international multicentre retrospective analysis of patients undergoing R-RPS versus those who had purely L-RPS at 21 centres from 2010 to 2019 was performed. Patient demographics, perioperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were analysed retrospectively from a central database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed, with analysis of 1 : 2 and 1 : 1 matched cohorts.

RESULTS

Three-hundred and forty patients, including 96 who underwent R-RPS and 244 who had L-RPS, met the study criteria and were included. The median operating time was 295 minutes and there were 25 (7.4 per cent) open conversions. Ninety-seven (28.5 per cent) patients had cirrhosis and 56 (16.5 per cent) patients required blood transfusion. Overall postoperative morbidity rate was 22.1 per cent and major morbidity rate was 6.8 per cent. The median postoperative stay was 6 days. After 1 : 1 matching of 88 R-RPS and L-RPS patients, median (i.q.r.) blood loss (200 (100-400) versus 450 (200-900) ml, respectively; P < 0.001), major blood loss (> 500 ml; P = 0.001), need for intraoperative blood transfusion (10.2 versus 23.9 per cent, respectively; P = 0.014), and open conversion rate (2.3 versus 11.4 per cent, respectively; P = 0.016) were lower in the R-RPS group. Similar results were found in the 1 : 2 matched groups (66 R-RPS versus 132 L-RPS patients).

CONCLUSION

R-RPS and L-RPS can be performed in expert centres with good outcomes in well selected patients. R-RPS was associated with reduced blood loss and lower open conversion rates than L-RPS.

Minimally invasive liver surgery: the Charité experience

Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) was established as last abdominal surgical specialty through the 1990s. With a shift from mainly benign to malignant indications, MILS was shown to be equal to open liver surgery in terms of oncological outcomes, with benefits in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, postoperative complication rates, hospital length of stay and quality of life. With colorectal liver metastases and hepatocellular carcinoma as the most common indications, most liver resection can be performed minimally invasive nowadays, including patients with liver cirrhosis. Initially perceived limitations of laparoscopic liver surgery were weakened by gaining experience, technical progress and pioneering of new resection approaches. Lately robotic liver surgery was adopted to the field of MILS to further push the limits. To simplify first resections, technical variations of the minimally invasive approach can be utilized, and difficulty scores help to select resections suitable to the level of experience. We hereby give an overview of the establishing of a minimally invasive liver surgery program at our center.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy in the elderly patient: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Favorable outcomes of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) over open hepatectomy (OH) have been demonstrated. LH offers less postoperative morbidity, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay, while maintaining oncological safety. Only limited evidence about outcomes of LH in elderly is currently available. Therefore, this study aimed to compare short term outcomes of LH to OH for patients >65 years.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to Cochrane guidelines. Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched to identify eligible studies. Studies were included if they compared LH to OH, and focused on an elderly population, or had a majority of patients >65 years. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 1174 patients (LH:532, OH:642) were included for analysis. When compared to OH, elderly undergoing LH had significantly less postoperative complications (risk ratio [RR]0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI):0.43-0.63), less blood loss (mean difference [MD]-198.58; 95% CI:-299.88 to -97.28), and shorter length of stay (MD-4.83; 95%CI:-7.91 to -1.84), while oncological safety was non-inferior (RR1.04; 95%CI:1.00-1.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the elderly population LH seems to be superior to OH, concerning short-term outcomes. However, for broader applicability more trials are needed including more difficult and major resections.

Comparison of clinical and economic outcomes between minimally invasive liver resection and open liver resection: a propensity-score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) has gained momentum in recent years. This study of contemporary data compares economic and clinical outcomes between MILR and open liver resection (OLR).

METHODS

We extracted data for patients undergoing liver resection between October 2015-September 2018 from the Premier Healthcare Database. We conducted a propensity score matched analysis to compare complications, in-hospital mortality, inpatient readmissions, discharge to institutional post-acute care, operating room time (ORT), length of stay (LOS), and total hospital cost between MILR and OLR patients.

RESULTS

From the eligible OLR (n = 3349) and MILR (n = 1367) patients, we propensity score matched 1261 from each cohort at a 1:1 ratio. After matching, MILR was associated with lower rates of complications (bleeding: 8.2% vs. 17.4%; respiratory failure: 5.5% vs. 10.9%; intestinal obstruction: 3.6% vs. 6.0%, and pleural effusion: 1.9% vs. 4.9%), in-hospital mortality (0.5% vs. 3.0%), 90-day inpatient readmissions (10.4% vs. 14.3%), discharge to institutional post-acute care (6.9% vs. 12.3%), shorter ORT (257 vs. 308 min) and LOS (4.3 vs. 7.2 days), and lower hospital costs ($19463 vs. $29119) (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

MILR was associated with lower risk of complications and reduced hospital resource utilizations as compared with OLR.

Surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastasis

Liver metastasis is the most common form of distant metastasis in colorectal cancer and is a key factor for prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer. Surgery may be the only way to cure colorectal liver metastases. This paper mainly summarizes the latest progress in surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastases, including how to increase resection rate of liver metastases with neoadjuvant therapy or staged hepatectomy, the effect of surgical margin on the prognosis of patients, the timing of surgery in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastasis, the impact of laparoscopic hepatectomy of liver metastases, the application of liver transplantation in patients with colorectal liver metastases, etc, with an aim to help develop an optimal treatment for patients with colorectal liver metastases through combination of surgical innovations with individualized treatment, thereby improving patients' disease-free survival and overall survival.

Is Single-Incision Laparoscopic Liver Surgery Safe and Efficient for the Treatment of Malignant Hepatic Tumors? A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The objective of this review was to evaluate the safety and efficiency of single-incision laparoscopic liver surgery (SILLS) for malignant liver lesions.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the Medline database was performed, including studies published up to February 2019.

RESULTS

Overall, 69 patients (50 males) with a median age of 61 years (range, 31-90) from 16 studies underwent SILLS for malignant liver disease and were included in this review. The majority of patients underwent resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 52, 75 %), followed by metastatic disease (n = 15, 22 %). The hepatic lesions were located in anterolateral liver segments in 62 patients (90 %) and in posterosuperior liver segments in 7 patients (10 %). Sixty-five patients (94 %) underwent minor liver resection. The median blood loss was 200 mL (range 0-2500), while 4 patients that underwent single-port resection were converted to either conventional laparoscopy or open resections. Two cases were reported to be associated with postoperative complications in the single-port group (1 [1.7 %] grade Dindo-Clavien I-II, 1 [1.7 %] grade Dindo-Clavien III-IV), while no complications were noted in the multiport group. All patients successfully underwent R0 resection.

CONCLUSIONS

SILLS seems to be a safe and efficient treatment modality for malignant liver disease when performed by experienced surgeons in carefully selected patients. More studies are needed to better identify which patients may benefit from such an operative approach.

Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes After Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases : A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Despite the recent worldwide dissemination of laparoscopic liver surgery, no high-level evidence supports the oncologic safety of this approach.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic versus open liver resection in patients with colorectal metastases.

DESIGN

A single-center, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial (OSLO-COMET [Oslo Randomized Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases Trial]). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01516710).

SETTING

Oslo University Hospital, the only provider of liver surgery for the 3 million inhabitants of southeastern Norway.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases were randomly assigned to have open or laparoscopic liver resection.

INTERVENTION

From February 2012 to January 2016, a total of 280 patients were included in the trial (laparoscopic surgery: n = 133; open surgery: n = 147).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was postoperative morbidity within 30 days. Five-year rates of overall and recurrence-free survival were predefined secondary end points.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 70 months, rates of 5-year overall survival were 54% in the laparoscopic group and 55% in the open group (between-group difference, 0.5 percentage point [95% CI, -11.3 to 12.3 percentage points]; hazard ratio, 0.93 [CI, 0.67 to 1.30]; P = 0.67). Rates of 5-year recurrence-free survival were 30% in the laparoscopic group and 36% in the open group (between-group difference, 6.0 percentage points [CI, -6.7 to 18.7 percentage points]; hazard ratio, 1.09 [CI, 0.80 to 1.49]; P = 0.57).

LIMITATION

The trial was not powered to detect differences in secondary end points and was not designed to address a noninferiority hypothesis for survival outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In this randomized trial of laparoscopic and open liver surgery, no difference in survival outcomes was found between the treatment groups. However, differences in 5-year overall survival up to about 10 percentage points in either direction cannot be excluded. This trial should be followed by pragmatic multicenter trials and international registries.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

The South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority.

Robotic and laparoscopic liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases: an experience from a German Academic Center

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is increasing in incidence. The aim of this work was to present our experience by reporting short-term and long-term outcomes after MILS for CRLM with comparative analysis of laparoscopic (LLS) and robotic liver surgery (RLS).

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with CRLM, who underwent MILS between May 2012 and March 2020, were selected from our retrospective registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS). Thirteen of these patients underwent LLS and 12 RLS. Short-term and long-term outcomes of both groups were analyzed.

RESULTS

Operating time was significantly longer in the RLS vs. the LLS group (342.0 vs. 200.0 min; p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the laparoscopic vs. the robotic group regarding length of postoperative stay (8.8 days), measured blood loss (430.4 ml), intraoperative blood transfusion, overall morbidity (20.0%), and liver surgery related morbidity (4%). The mean BMI was 27.3 (range from 19.2 to 44.8) kg/m². The 30-day mortality was 0%. R0 resection was achieved in all patients (100.0%) in RLS vs. 10 patients (76.9%) in LLS. Major resections were carried out in 32.0% of the cases, and 84.0% of the patients showed intra-abdominal adhesions due to previous abdominal surgery. In 24.0% of cases, the tumor was bilobar, the maximum number of tumors removed was 9, and the largest tumor was 8.5 cm in diameter. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 84, 56.9, and 48.7%, respectively. The 1- and 3-year overall recurrence-free survival rates were 49.6 and 36.2%, respectively, without significant differences between RLS vs. LLS.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive liver surgery for CRLM is safe and feasible. Minimally invasive resection of multiple lesions and large tumors is also possible. RLS may help to achieve higher rates of R0 resections. High BMI, previous abdominal surgery, and bilobar tumors are not a barrier for MILS. Laparoscopic and robotic liver resections for CRLM provide similar long-term results which are comparable to open techniques.

Minimal-Invasive Versus Open Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: Bicentric Analysis of Postoperative Outcomes and Long-Term Survival Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Minimal-invasive hepatectomy (MIH) has been increasingly performed for benign and malignant liver lesions with most promising short-term results. However, the oncological role of MIH in the treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) needs further investigation. Clinicopathological data of patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2012 and 2017 at the Department of Surgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, and the Inselspital Bern were assessed. Postoperative outcomes und long-term survivals of patients following MIH were compared with those after conventional open hepatectomy (OH) after 1:1 propensity score matching. During the study period, 229 and 91 patients underwent liver resection for CRLM at the Charité Berlin and the Inselspital Bern, respectively. Patients who underwent MIH in one of the two centers (n = 69) were compared with a matched cohort of patients who underwent OH. MIH was associated with lower complication rates (23% vs. 44%, p = 0.011), shorter length of intensive care unit stay (ICU, 1 vs. 2 days, p = 0.043), shorter length of hospital stay (7 vs. 11 days, p < 0.0001), and a reduced need for intraoperative transfusions (12% vs. 25%, p = 0.047) compared to OH. R0 status was achieved in 93% and 75% of patients after MIH and OH, respectively (p = 0.005). After a median follow-up of 31 months, MIH resulted in similar five-year overall survival (OS) rate (56% vs. 48%, p = 0.116) in comparison to OH. MIH for CRLM is associated with lower postoperative morbidity, shorter length of ICU and hospital stay, reduced need for transfusions, and comparable oncologic outcomes compared to the established OH. Our findings suggest that MIH should be considered as the preferred method for the treatment of curatively resectable CRLM.

Survival Advantage of Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection For Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data From Randomized Trials and Propensity-score Matched Studies

OBJECTIVE

To perform an individual participant data meta-analysis using randomized trials and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies which compared laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM).

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials and PSM studies constitute the highest level of evidence in addressing the long-term oncologic efficacy of laparoscopic versus open resection for CLM. However, individual studies are limited by the reporting of overall survival in ways not amenable to traditional methods of meta-analysis, and violation of the proportional hazards assumption.

METHODS

Survival information of individual patients was reconstructed from the published Kaplan-Meier curves with the aid of a computer vision program. Frequentist and Bayesian survival models (taking into account random-effects and nonproportional hazards) were fitted to compare overall survival of patients who underwent laparoscopic versus open surgery. To handle long plateaus in the tails of survival curves, we also exploited "cure models" to estimate the fraction of patients effectively "cured" of disease.

RESULTS

Individual patient data from 2 randomized trials and 13 PSM studies involving 3148 participants were reconstructed. Laparoscopic resection was associated with a lower hazard rate of death (stratified hazard ratio = 0.853, 95% confidence interval: 0.754-0.965, P = 0.0114), and there was evidence of time-varying effects (P = 0.0324) in which the magnitude of hazard ratios increased over time. The fractions of long-term cancer survivors were estimated to be 47.4% and 18.0% in the laparoscopy and open surgery groups, respectively. At 10-year follow-up, the restricted mean survival time was 8.6 months (or 12.1%) longer in the laparoscopy arm (P < 0.0001). In a subgroup analysis, elderly patients (≥65 years old) treated with laparoscopy experienced longer 3-year average life expectancy (+6.2%, P = 0.018), and those who live past the 5-year milestone (46.1%) seem to be cured of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This patient-level meta-analysis of high-quality studies demonstrated an unexpected survival benefit in favor of laparoscopic over open resection for CLM in the long-term. From a conservative viewpoint, these results can be interpreted to indicate that laparoscopy is at least not inferior to the standard open approach.

Comparative analysis of the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic versus open caudate lobe resection

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic hepatectomy has been used widely in liver disease due to its advantages as a minimally invasive surgery. However, laparoscopic caudate lobe resection (LCLR) has been reported rarely. We aimed to investigate the safety and feasibility of LCLR by comparing it with open liver surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed including all patients who underwent LCLR and open caudate lobe resection (OCLR) between January 2015 and August 2019. Twenty-two patients were involved in this study and divided into LCLR (n = 10) and OCLR (n = 12) groups based on preoperative imaging, tumor characteristics, and blood and liver function test. Patient demographic data and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant inter-group differences between gender, age, preoperative liver function, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, and comorbidities (P > 0.05). The LCLR showed significantly less blood loss (50 vs. 300 ml, respectively; P = 0.004), shorter length of hospital stay (15 vs. 16 days, respectively; P = 0.034), and shorter operative time (216.50 vs. 372.78 min, respectively; P = 0.012) than OCLR, but hospital expenses (5.02 vs. 6.50 WanRMB, respectively; P = 0.208) showed no statistical difference between groups. There was no statistical difference in postoperative bile leakage (P = 0.54) and wound infection (P = 0.54) between LCLR and OCLR. Neither LCLR nor OCLR resulted in bleeding or liver failure after operation. There were no deaths.

CONCLUSION

LCLR is a very useful technology, and it is a feasible choice in selected patients with benign and malignant tumors in the caudate lobe.

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.

Does the difficulty grade of laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases correlate with long-term outcomes?

INTRODUCTION

Prognosis of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is strongly correlated with the oncological outcome after liver resection. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) difficulty score (IMM difficulty score) on the oncological results in patients treated for CRLM.

METHODS

All patients who underwent LLRs for CRLM from 2000 to 2016 in our department, were retrospectively reviewed. Data regarding difficulty classification, -according to the Institute Mutualiste Montsouris score (IMM)-, recurrence rate, recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) and data regarding margin status were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 520 patients were included. Patients were allocated into 3 groups based on IMM difficulty score of the LLR they underwent: there were 227 (43,6%), 84 (16,2%) and 209 (40,2%) patients in groups I, II and III, respectively. The R₁ resection rate in group I, II and III were 8,8% (20/227), 11,9% (10/84) and 12,4% (26/209) respectively (p = 0.841). Three- and 5-year RFS rates were 77% and 73% in group I, 58% and 51% in group II, 61% and 53% in group III, respectively (p = 0.038). Three and 5-year OS rates were 87% and 80% for group I, 77% and 66% for group II, 80% and 69% for group III respectively (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

The higher LLR difficulty score correlates with significant morbidity and worse RFS and OS, although the more technically demanding and difficult cases are not associated with increased rates of positive resection margins and recurrence.

A stepwise learning curve to define the standard for technical improvement in laparoscopic liver resections: complexity-based analysis in 1032 procedures

The objective of this study is to define the learning curve in a series of procedures grouped according to their complexity calculated by difficulty index to define a standard for technical improvement. 1032 laparoscopic liver resections performed in a single tertiary referral center were stratified by difficulty scores: low difficulty (LD, n = 362); intermediate difficulty (ID, n = 332), and high difficulty (HD, n = 338). The learning curve effect was analyzed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method taking into consideration the expected risk of conversion. The ratio of laparoscopic/total liver resections increased from 5.8% (2005) to 71.1% (2018). The CUSUM analysis per group showed that the average value of the conversion rate was reached at the 60th case in the LD Group and at the 15th in the ID and HD groups. The evolution from LD to ID and HD procedures occurred only when learning curve in LD resections was concluded. Reflecting different degree of complexity, procedures showed significantly different blood loss, morbidity, and conversions among groups. A standard educational model-stepwise and progressive-is mandatory to allow surgeons to define the technical and technological backgrounds to deal with a specific degree of difficulty, providing a help in the definition of indications to laparoscopic approach in each phase of training.

Comparison study between open and laparoscopic liver resection in a Saudi tertiary center

Objectives:

To compare King Saud University Medical City experience in laparoscopic liver resection with our previously established database for open resections.

Methods:

A retrospective study was conducted at King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. All adult patients who underwent liver resection from 2006 to 2017 were included. Patients who had their procedure converted to open were excluded.

Results:

Among the 111 liver resections included, 22 (19.8%) were performed laparoscopically and 89 (80.1%) were performed using the open technique. Malignancy was the most common indication in both groups (78.5%). The mean operative time was 275 min (SD 92.2) in the laparoscopic group versus 315 min (SD 104.3) in the open group. Intraoperative blood transfusion was required in the laparoscopic (9%) and open groups (31.4%). The morbidity rate was 13.6% in the laparoscopic group and 31.4% in the open group, and the mortality rate was 0% in the laparoscopic group and 5.6% in the open group.

Conclusion:

Laparoscopic liver resection appears to be a safe technique and can be performed in various benign and malignant cases.

Current status of surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastases

Liver metastasis (LM) is one of the major causes of death in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Approximately 60% of CRC patients develop LM during the course of their illness. About 85% of these patients have unresectable disease at the time of presentation. Surgical resection is currently the only curative treatment for patients with colorectal LM (CRLM). In recent years, with the help of modern multimodality therapy including systemic chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery, the outcomes of CRLM treatment have significantly improved. This article summarizes the current status of surgical treatment of CRLM including evaluation of resectability, treatment for resectable LM, conversion therapy and liver transplantation for unresectable cases, liver resection for recurrent CRLM and elderly patients, and surgery for concomitant hepatic and extra-hepatic metastatic disease (EHMD). We believe that with the help of modern multimodality therapy, an aggressive oncosurgical approach should be implemented as it has the possibility of achieving a cure, even when EHMD is present in patients with CRLM.

Recurrence patterns after laparoscopic resection of colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

The major issue after liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is the high incidence of recurrence. Unlike open liver resection (OLR), recurrence following laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is not well documented. The aim of this study was to analyze recurrence patterns and treatment following LLR for CRLM.

STUDY DESIGN

All patients who underwent LLR for CRLM from 2000 to 2016 were reviewed. Patients who presented with recurrence were compared to those who did not. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and risk of recurrence and survival prognostic factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, 273 patients were included, of which 157 (57.5%) were treated for one liver metastasis (LM). Median follow-up was 41 (12-187) months and associated extrahepatic disease was present in 27% of patients (mainly pulmonary, 65%). After a median of 16 (3-151) months, 197 (72%) patients presented with recurrence. Recurrences were early (< 6 months) in 22.8% of cases, occured in a single site in 66% and were intrahepatic, extrahepatic, or both in 44, 30, and 26%, respectively. Recurrences were treated with surgery or chemotherapy only in 45 and 47%, respectively. 3-, 5-, and 10-year OS was 82, 71, and 43%, respectively. Independent risk factors for recurrence were node-positive primary tumor, extrahepatic disease before hepatectomy, and R1 resection.

CONCLUSION

LLR for CRLM does not seem to be associated with distinctive recurrence patterns. LLR for CRLM yielded satisfying RFS and OS and should therefore be considered whenever possible.

[Milestones in liver surgery]

Numerous outstanding summarizing publications on the milestones of the rapid development of liver surgery in the twentieth century came to light around the year 2000, therefore in this summary only the newest principles and novelties of liver surgery after the second millennium are presented. Among the new principles, the newest indications, the bloodless surgery and the vascular exclusion of the liver, the "associating liver partition and portal vein occlusion for staged hepatectomy" (ALPPS) - as presently the fastest and most successful method for liver regeneration, and the "downsizing of tumors" treatment for the interest of resection of unresectable tumours are analyzed and evaluated. Open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver surgery are discussed by comparing blood loss, operating time, cost, and long-term results. Laparoscopic liver surgery on the basis of evidences has become "the method of choice" in our days. Robotic liver surgery needs further evidence-based data for determination of its place in the clinical practice. An intention is also composed in terms of place-determination of liver surgery between gastrointestinal, hepatopancreatobiliary, liver transplantation, and oncologic surgery. The mortality rate has decreased to 1% recently; the data regarding morbidity are variable; the modified Clavien-Dindo, the modified Accordion complication system and the comprehensive complication index are intended to move the different evaluations to a common ground. The up-to-date idea of hepatic surgeon, liver center and liver surgery are defined in close cooperation with international theoretical and practical outcome, in the limelight of multidisciplinarity and multimodality. The internationally observed inequalities in liver surgery are also discussed from the point of view of tackling with the inequalities existing in the universal healthcare systems on a local, national and global level by collecting and controlling the results systematically, and developing and implying international guidelines on the basis of evidences. Orv Hetil. 2018; 159(10): 375-383.

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

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