Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma for various resection extent

Significance of anatomical resection and wide surgical margin for HCC patients with MVI undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy: A multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of surgical resection margin and hepatic resection type on prognosis and compare their prognostic significance on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with or without microvascular invasion (MVI) who underwent laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 320 patients with HCC who underwent LLR. According to the grading of MVI, patients were classified as M0, M1 and M2. Patients were divided into the anatomical resection (AR) and nonanatomical resection (NAR) groups according to the hepatic resection type. Survival and Cox regression analyses were performed to explore the effects of AR and NAR, wide and narrow resection margin on overall survival (OS) and time to recurrence (TTR).

RESULTS

In the whole cohort, narrow resection margin was an independent risk factor for OS and TTR, whereas NAR was not. Subgroup analysis showed that narrow resection margin and NAR were both independent risk factors for OS and TTR in HCC patients with MVI. The 5-year OS and TTR rates of the two groups (NAR-wide resection margin and AR-narrow resection margin) with M1 were 85.3 % versus 62 % and 34.4 % versus 60.2 %. Similarly, the 5-year OS and TTR rates of the two groups (NAR-wide resection margin and AR-narrow resection margin) with M2 were 80.2 % versus 47.9 % and 30.8 % versus 64.8 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomical hepatectomy and wide resection margin were independent protective factors for HCC patients with MVI receiving LLR. Nonetheless, wide resection margin had a greater impact on prognosis than anatomical hepatectomy.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy is a feasible and safe choice for primary hepatocellular carcinoma located at favorable location during the development period of a tertiary hospital: A case-control study

Objectives

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been well known for its advantages in the past 10 years, but little is known regarding its oncologic outcomes while the technique is being developed at an institution. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of LH for patients with primary HCC at favorable locations, focusing on postoperative short- and long-term outcomes during the development period.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients diagnosed with primary HCC who underwent hepatectomy between January 2013 and December 2019 at Hualien Tzu Chi Hospital. Patients with HCC at favorable locations (anterolateral segments) were collected and divided into laparoscopic and open hepatectomy (OH) groups. The data for long-term outcomes, as the primary endpoint, and postoperative outcomes, as the secondary endpoint, were collected.

Results

The review included 159 patients, among which 42 and 44 patients in favorable locations underwent open and laparoscopic hepatectomies, respectively. There were no significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, major complication rate, and 90-day mortality rate between the two groups. The laparoscopic group had a lower transfusion rate, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and lower 90-day readmission rate. There were no significant differences in 12-, 36-, and 60-month overall survival and disease-free survival.

Conclusion

LH for favorably located HCC is the preferred surgical approach compared to OH due to the decreased transfusion rate, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and lower 90-day readmission rate. LH did not compromise the 90-day mortality rate with sustained long-term overall and disease-free survival. LH for favorably located HCC is a safe and effective surgical approach even during the development period.

Effects of enhance recovery after surgery nursing program on the surgical site wound infection in patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis

Our study aimed to investigate the effects of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) nursing program on surgical site wound infections (SSWI) and postoperative complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for hepatocellular carcinoma. Computer searches of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang databases were conducted to gather randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that were published from inception to September 2023. The target studies evaluated the effects of the ERAS nursing program in patients undergoing LH for hepatocellular carcinoma. Two independent authors screened the literature, extracted the data and performed quality assessments. Dichotomous variables were analysed using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), as effect analysis statistics. Stata software (version 17.0) was used for data analysis. Eleven RCTs with 765 patients were included, with 383 patients in the ERAS group and 382 in the control group. The results revealed that the incidence of SSWI (OR = 0.32, 95%CI:0.15-0.71, p = 0.004) and postoperative complications (OR = 0.23, 95%CI:0.15-0.34, p < 0.001) were both significantly reduced in the ERAS group, compared with the control group. The ERAS nursing program, when applied to patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatic cancer resection, can effectively reduce the incidence of SSWI and postoperative complications, thus promoting postoperative recovery.

Analysis of survival outcomes following robotic hepatectomy for malignant liver diseases

BACKGROUND

Despite increased adoption of the robotic platform for complex hepatobiliary resections for malignant disease, little is known about long-term survival outcomes. This is the first study to evaluate the postoperative outcomes, and short- and long-term survival rates after a robotic hepatectomy for five major malignant disease processes.

METHODS

A prospectively collected database of patients who underwent a robotic hepatectomy for malignant disease was reviewed. Pathologies included colorectal liver metastases (CLM), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), Klatskin tumor, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC), and gallbladder cancer (GC). Data are presented as median (mean ​± ​standard deviation) for illustrative purposes.

RESULTS

Of the 210 consecutive patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy for malignant disease, 75 (35 ​%) had CLM, 69 (33 ​%) had HCC, 27 (13 ​%) had Klatskin tumor, 20 (10 ​%) had IHCC, and 19 (9 ​%) had GC. Patients were 66 (65 ​± ​12.4) years old with a BMI of 29 (29 ​± ​6.5) kg/m2. R0 resection was achieved in 91 ​%, and 65 ​% underwent a major hepatectomy. Postoperative major complication rate was 6 ​%, length of stay was four (5 ​± ​4.3) days, and 30-day readmission rate was 17 ​%. Survival at 1, 3, and 5-years were 93 ​%/75 ​%/72 ​% for CLM, 84 ​%/71 ​%/64 ​% for HCC, 73 ​%/55 ​%/55 ​% for Klatskin tumor, 80 ​%/69 ​%/69 ​% for IHCC, 79 ​%/65 ​%/65 ​% for GC.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests a favorable 5-year overall survival benefit with use of the robotic platform in hepatic resection for colorectal metastases, hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, Klatskin tumor, and gallbladder cancer. The robotic platform facilitates fine dissection in complex hepatobiliary operations, with a high rate of R0 resections and excellent perioperative clinical outcomes.

Pedunculated Focal Nodular Hyperplasia: When in Doubt, Should We Cut It Out?

Focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) is the second most common benign hepatic tumor and can rarely present as an exophytic solitary mass attached to the liver by a stalk. Most FNH cases are usually detected as incidental findings during surgery, imaging or physical examination and have a high female predominance. However, the pedunculated forms of FNH are particularly rare and commonly associated with severe complications and diagnostic challenges. Hence, our study aims to provide a comprehensive summary of the available data on the pedunculated FNH cases among adults and children. Furthermore, we will highlight the role of different therapeutic options in treating this clinical entity. The use of imaging techniques is considered a significant addition to the diagnostic toolbox. Regarding the optimal treatment strategy, the main indications for surgery were the presence of symptoms, diagnostic uncertainty and increased risk of complications, based on the current literature. Herein, we also propose a management algorithm for patients with suspected FNH lesions. Therefore, a high index of suspicion and awareness of this pathology and its life-threatening complications, as an uncommon etiology of acute abdomen, is of utmost importance in order to achieve better clinical outcomes.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection: A Case-control Study With Propensity Score Matching

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of patients with benign and malignant liver lesions scheduled for laparoscopic and open surgery using a propensity score-matched approach to analyze additional cofactors influencing outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this study, we retrospectively reviewed 270 patients who underwent laparoscopic or open liver resection at our institute between October 2016 and November 2021. Patients were divided into open and laparoscopic liver resection groups and compared according to the intention to treat principle. In the purification process for the nonrandom nature of the study, a matching analysis was performed at a 1:1 case-control ratio. The PS model included selected data on body mass index, additional data on the American Society of Anesthesiology score, cirrhosis, lesion <2 cm from the hilum, lesion <2 cm from the hepatic vein or inferior vena cava, and type of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The operation time and 30- and 90-day mortality rates were similar between the groups. The average length of hospital stay was 11 days in the open surgery group and 9 days in the laparoscopic surgery group after matching ( P =0.011). The 30-day morbidity rate was statistically different between the groups before and after matching, favoring the laparoscopic group ( P =0.001 and 0.006, respectively). After the propensity score-matched approch, the open group's Pringle time was shorter than that of the laparoscopic group. The total operative time was longer in the laparoscopic than in the open surgery group. This did not change after matching (300 vs. 240 min).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery is a feasible and safe treatment option for patients with liver tumors, with promising results in terms of morbidity and hospital stay.

Laparoscopic liver resection is associated with less significant muscle loss than the conventional open approach

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) have been shown a treatment approach comparable to open liver resections (OLR) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the influence of procedural type on body composition has not been investigated. The aim of the current study was to compare the degree of skeletal muscle loss between LLR and OLR for HCC.

METHODS

By using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis, 64 pairs of patients were enrolled. The change of psoas muscle index (PMI) after the operation was compared between the matched patients in the LLR and OLR. Risk factors for significant muscle loss (defined as change in PMI > mean change minus one standard deviation) were further investigated by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Among patients enrolled, there was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between the two groups. The PMI was significantly decreased in the OLR group (P = 0.003). There were also more patients in the OLR group who developed significant muscle loss after the operations (P = 0.008). Multivariate analysis revealed OLR (P = 0.023), type 2 diabetes mellitus, indocyanine green retention rate at 15 min (ICG-15) > 10%, and cancer stage ≧ 3 were independent risk factors for significant muscle loss. In addition, significant muscle loss was associated with early HCC recurrence (P = 0.006). Metabolomic analysis demonstrated that the urea cycle may be decreased in patients with significant muscle loss.

CONCLUSION

LLR for HCC was associated with less significant muscle loss than OLR. Since significant muscle loss was a predictive factor for early tumor recurrence and associated with impaired liver metabolism, LLR may subsequently result in a more favorable outcome.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy for the treatment of pyogenic liver abscess: A retrospective case-control study

Percutaneous catheter drainage is the first-line treatment for pyogenic liver abscess (PLA). Some patients need hepatectomy because of underling hepatobiliary pathology or unresponsiveness to nonoperative treatment, the traditional method is open hepatectomy (OH). Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for PLA is rarely reported. The purpose of this study is to describe our experience of LH for treating PLA and to compare LH with OH. The medical records of patients who underwent LH for treating PLA were retrospectively analyzed, and the results were compared with those of patients with OH. From January 2015 to December 2021, 61 patients with PLA underwent hepatectomy, and 28 patients who underwent LH (LH group) were compared with 33 patients who underwent OH (OH group). There were no significant differences in the basic data between the 2 groups. Two patients in the LH group were converted to open surgery due to hemorrhage and dense perihepatic adhesions, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the operation time (186.2 ± 85.6 vs. 175.9 ± 76.7 minutes, P = .239), Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification, extent of hepatectomy and drainage tube removal time, however, the blood loss (200.0 ± 100.5 vs. 470.9 ± 120.1 mL, P = .003), numerical rating scale (5.2 ± 1.8 vs. 9.1 ± 1.6, P = .042), the time to resume oral diet (12.3 ± 6.5 vs. 24.6 ± 10.2 hours, P = .005), the ambulant time (20.2 ± 7.3 vs. 40.2 ± 10.8 hours, P = .010), incidence of postoperative complications (14.3% vs.33.3%, P = .002), comprehensive complication index (46.2 vs. 60.6, P = .013), postoperative hospital stay (8.5 ± 7.3 vs. 13.5 ± 10.2 days, P = .025) in the LH group was significantly less than that in the OH group. Wit experience laparoscopic surgeons, treating PLA by LH is safe and feasible and compares favorably with OH.

Four-year experience with more than 1000 cases of total laparoscopic liver resection in a single center

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become a safe surgical procedure that needs additional summarization.

AIM

To review 4 years of total LLR surgeries, exceeding 1000 cases, which were performed at a single center.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LLR at West China Hospital of Sichuan University between January 2015 and December 2018 were identified. Surgical details, including the interventional year, category of liver disease, and malignant liver tumors prognosis, were evaluated. The learning curve for LLR was evaluated using the cumulative sum method. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to perform survival analysis.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 1098 patients were identified. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was the most common disease that led to the need for LLR at the center (n = 462, 42.08%). The average operation time was 216.94 ± 98.51 min. The conversion rate was 1.82% (20/1098). The complication rate was 9.20% (from grade II to V). The 1-year and 3-year overall survival rates of HCC patients were 89.7% and 81.9%, respectively. The learning curve was grouped into two phases for local resection (cases 1-106 and 107-373), three phases for anatomical segmentectomy (cases 1-44, 45-74 and 75-120), and three phases for hemihepatectomy (cases 1-17, 18-48 and 49-88).

CONCLUSION

LLR may be considered a first-line surgical intervention for liver resection that can be performed safely for a variety of primary, secondary, and recurrent liver tumors and for benign diseases once technical competence is proficiently attained.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in older patients: a propensity score matching analysis

Background

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) requiring surgical treatment in older patients has been continuously increasing. This study aimed to examine the safety and feasibility of performing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) versus open liver resection (OLR) for HCC in older patients at a Japanese institution.

Methods

Between January 2010 and June 2021, 133 and 145 older patients (aged ≥ 70 years) who were diagnosed with HCC underwent LLR and OLR, respectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis with covariates of baseline characteristics was performed. The intraoperative and postoperative data were evaluated in both groups.

Results

After PSM, 75 patients each for LLR and OLR were selected and the data compared. No significant differences in demographic characteristics, clinical data, and operative times were observed between the groups, although less than 10% of cases in each group underwent a major resection. Blood loss (OLR: 370 mL, LLR: 50 mL; P < 0.001) was lower, and the length of postoperative hospital stay (OLR: 12 days, LLR: 7 days; P < 0.001) and time to start of oral intake (OLR: 2 days, LLR: 1 day; P < 0.001) were shorter in the LLR group than in the OLR group. The incidence of complications ≥ Clavien–Dindo class IIIa was similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

LLR, especially minor resections, is safely performed and feasible for selected older patients with HCC.

Current status of laparoscopic hepatectomy for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) was first introduced in the 1990s and has now become widely accepted for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is considered a safe and effective approach for liver disease. However, the role of laparoscopic hepatectomy in HCC with cirrhosis remains controversial and needs to be further assessed, and the present literature review aimed to review the surgical and oncological outcomes of Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH). According to Hong and colleagues laparoscopic resection for liver cirrhosis is a very safe and feasible procedure for both ideal cases and select patients with high risk factors [29]. The presence of only 1 of these factors does not represent an absolute contraindication for LH.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We selected 23 studies involving about 1363 HCC patients treated with LH. 364 (27%) patients experienced major resections. The mean operative time was 244.9 minutes, the mean blood loss was 308.1 mL and blood transfusions were required in only 4.9% of patients. There were only 2 (0.21%) postoperative deaths and overall morbidity was 9.9%. Tumor recurrence ranged from 6 to 25 months. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year disease free Survival (DFS) rates ranged from 71.9% to 99%, 50.3% to 91.2%, and 19% to 82% respectively. Overall survival rates ranged from 88% to 100%, 73.4% to 94.5%, and 52.6% to 94.5% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In our summery LH is lower risk and safer than conventional open liver surgery and is just as efficacious. Also, the LH approach decreased blood-loss, operation time, postoperative morbidity and had a lower conversion rate compared to other procedures whether open or robotic. Finally, LH may serve as a promising alternative to open procedures.

Perioperative steroid administration reduces overall complications in patients undergoing liver resection: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic resection (HR) results in an inflammatory response that can be modified by perioperative steroid administration. However, it remains to be determined if this response's attenuation translates to a reduction in complications.

AIM

To evaluate if perioperative administration of steroids reduces complications following HR.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to evaluate the effect of perioperative steroid (compared to placebo or no intervention) use in patients undergoing HR. Clinical outcomes were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

8 RCTs including 590 patients were included. Perioperative steroid administration was associated with significant reduction in postoperative complications [odds ratios: 0.58; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.35-0.97, P = 0.04]. There was also improvement in biochemical and inflammatory markers, including serum bilirubin on postoperative day 1 [MD: -0.27; 95%CI: (-0.47, -0.06), P = 0.01], C-reactive protein on postoperative day 3 [MD: -4.89; 95%CI: (-5.83, -3.95), P < 0.001], and interleukin-6 on postoperative day 1 [MD: -54.84; 95%CI: (-63.91, -45.76), P < 0.001].

CONCLUSION

Perioperative steroids administration in HR may reduce overall complications, postoperative bilirubin, and inflammation. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal dose and duration and patient selection.

Recent advances in the surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing, despite effective antiviral treatment for hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus infection and the application of preventive measures such as vaccination at birth against HBV infection. This is mainly due to the increase in metabolic syndrome and its hepatic components, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and steatohepatitis. Liver resection and transplantation are the main treatment options, offering long-term survival and potential cure. In this review, the recent advances in the surgical management of HCC are presented. More specifically, the role of liver resection in the intermediate and advanced stages, according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification, is analyzed. In addition, the roles of minimally invasive surgery and of living-related liver transplantation in the management of patients with HCC are discussed. Finally, recent data on the role of molecular markers in the early diagnosis and recurrence of HCC are presented. The management of HCC is complex, as there are several options for each stage of the disease. In order for, each patient to get the maximum benefit, an individualized approach is suggested, in specialized liver units, where cases are discussed in multidisciplinary tumor boards.

Laparoscopic versus open major liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: A case-matched analysis of short- and long-term outcomes

Background

The feasibility and safety of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) are still uncertain. The purpose of the present study is to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of LMH with those of open major hepatectomy (OMH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Method

Between January 2012 and December 2018, a total of 26 patients received laparoscopic major hepatectomy in our center. To minimize any confounding factors, a 1:3 case-matched analysis was conducted based on the demographics and extent of liver resection. Data of demographics, perioperative outcomes, and long-term oncologic outcomes were reviewed.

Results

Intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.007) was significantly lower in the LMH group. In addition, the LMH group exhibited a lower overall complication rate (P = 0.039) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.024). However, no statistically significant difference was found between LMH and OMH regarding operation time (P = 0.215) and operative cost (P = 0.860). Two laparoscopic cases were converted to open liver resection. In regard to long-term outcomes, there was no significant difference between LMH and OMH regarding disease-free survival (DFS) (P = 0.079) and overall survival (OS) (P = 0.172).

Conclusion

LMH can be an effective and safe alternative to OMH for selected patients with liver cancer in short- and long-term outcomes.

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: A Propensity-Matched Retrospective Cohort Study of American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database

BACKGROUND

Robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomies having increased utilization as minimally invasive techniques are explored for hepatobiliary malignancies. Although the data on outcomes from these 2 approaches are emerging, the cost-benefit analysis of these approaches remains sparse. This study compares the costs associated with robotic vs. laparoscopic liver resections, taking into account 30-day complications.

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, a propensity-matched cohort of patients with laparoscopic or robotic liver resections between 2014 and 2017 was identified. Costs were assigned to perioperative variables, including operating room (OR) time, length of stay, blood transfusions, and 30-day complications. Cost estimates were obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services billing data (2017), American Hospital Association data (2017), relevant literature, and local institutional cost data.

RESULTS

In our matched cohort of 454 patients (227 per group), total costs associated with laparoscopic liver resections were estimated at $5.5 M ($24 K per patient) vs. $6.8 M ($29.8 K per patient) for robotic liver resections (21.3% difference, P < .001). The higher cost associated with robotic hepatectomies was related to blood transfusions ($22.0 K vs. $12.1 K, P = .02), length of stay ($2.05 M vs. $1.76 M, P = .046), and OR time ($4.01 M vs. $3.24 M, P < .0001).

DISCUSSION

Robotic hepatectomies were associated with higher costs compared to laparoscopic hepatectomies. The 2 major contributors to the cost disparity were increased OR time and increased length of stay. Future studies are warranted to analyze high-volume Minimally Invasive Surgery surgeons' impact in specialty centers on potentially mitigating this current cost disparity.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection Should Be a Standard Procedure for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Low or Intermediate Difficulty

BACKGROUND

To investigate the feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), we compared the outcome between LLR and conventional open liver resection (OLR) in patient groups with different IWATE criteria difficulty scores (DS).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 607 primary HCC patients (LLR: 81, OLR: 526) who underwent liver resection in Linkou Chang Gung Memorial hospital from 2012 to 2019. By using 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis, their baseline characteristics and the DS stratified by the IWATE criteria were matched between the LLR and OLR. Their perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

After 1:1 PSM, 146 patients (73 in LLR, 73 in OLR) were analyzed. Among them, 13, 41, 13 and 6 patients were classified as low, intermediate, advanced and expert DS group, respectively. Compared to OLR, the LLR had shorter hospital stay (9.4 vs. 11.5 days, p = 0.071), less occurrence of surgical complications (16.4% vs. 30.1%, p = 0.049), lower rate of hepatic inflow control (42.5% vs. 65.8%, p = 0.005), and longer time of inflow control (70 vs. 51 min, p = 0.022). The disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survivals were comparable between the two groups. While stratified by the DS groups, the LLR tended to have lower complication rate and shorter hospital stay than OLR. The DFS of LLR in the intermediate DS group was superior to that of the OLR (p = 0.020). In the advanced and expert DS groups, there were no significant differences regarding outcomes between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

We have demonstrated that with sufficient experience and technique, LLR for HCC is feasible and the perioperative outcome is favorable. Based on the current study, we suggest LLR should be a standard procedure for HCC with low or intermediate difficulty. It can provide satisfactory postoperative recovery and comparable oncological outcomes. Further larger scale prospective studies are warranted to validate our findings.

Economic analysis of open versus laparoscopic versus robotic hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Following the publication of reports from landmark international consensuses (Louisville 2008 and Morioka 2014), minimally invasive hepatectomy became widely accepted as a legitimate alternative to open surgery. We aimed to compare the operative, hospitalization, and total economic costs of open (OLR) vs. laparoscopic (LLR) vs. robotic liver resection (RLR).

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review (end-of-search date: July 3, 2020) according to the PRISMA statement. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. Quality assessment was performed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-randomized studies.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies reporting on 3847 patients (1783 OLR; 1674 LLR; 390 RLR) were included. The operative costs of LLR were significantly higher than those of OLR, while subgroup analysis also showed higher operative costs in the LLR group for major hepatectomy, but no statistically significant difference for minor hepatectomy. Hospitalization costs were significantly lower in the LLR group, with subgroup analyses indicating lower costs for LLR in both major and minor hepatectomy series. No statistically significant difference was observed regarding total costs between LLR and OLR both overall and on subgroup analyses in either major or minor hepatectomy series. Meta-analyses showed higher operative, hospitalization, and total costs for RLR vs. LLR, but no statistically significant difference regarding total costs for RLR vs. OLR.

CONCLUSION

LLR's higher operative costs are offset by lower hospitalization costs compared to OLR leading to no statistically significant difference in total costs, while RLR appears to be a more expensive alternative approach.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatic angiomyolipoma with preoperative diagnosis of other malignancy: a report of 2 cases

Background

Hepatic angiomyolipoma (HAML) is a rare liver tumor, and hepatectomy is the only effective treatment. Due to the difficulty of correct diagnosis of HAML before surgery by image studies, more than 36.6% of reported HAMLs are misdiagnosed as other malignant liver tumors before surgery. As there are only few reported cases in which HAMLs were removed using laparoscopic hepatectomy, the effectiveness of laparoscopic hepatectomy for such HAMLs in which are diagnosed as other malignant liver tumor before surgery has not been reported.

Case presentation

Case 1: a 58-year-old female with a history of treatment for autoimmune hepatitis was preoperatively diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (size: 20 mm) in segment 7 (S7) of the liver. The tumor was removed by laparoscopic partial resection and was diagnosed as a HAML through a pathological examination. The patient’s postoperative course was good, and she was recurrence-free at 37 months after the hepatectomy. Case 2: a 29-year-old female with a history of surgery for a right mature cystic teratoma was referred to our department to receive treatment for a growing 20-mm liver tumor with some calcification, which arose in S3 of the liver. A metastatic liver tumor derived from the mature cystic teratoma was suspected, and laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy was performed. The liver tumor was diagnosed as a HAML after a pathological examination. The patient’s postoperative course was unremarkable, and more than 54 months have passed since the hepatectomy without any recurrence.

Conclusions

Two cases in which HAMLs were preoperatively diagnosed as other malignant liver tumor were successfully removed by laparoscopic hepatectomy with a correct postoperative diagnosis. Laparoscopic hepatectomy for the present 2 cases of HAML seemed to be effective for providing a correct diagnosis after the curative removement of liver tumor with a smaller invasion compared to open hepatectomy, and for denying risk of dissemination of the malignant tumor by needle biopsy that had to be considered before ruling out malignant tumor.

Intra-operative anaesthetic management of older patients undergoing liver surgery

Older patients represent a growing proportion of the general surgical caseload. This includes those undergoing liver resection, with figures rising faster than the rate of population ageing. The physiology of ageing leads to changes in all body systems which may render the provision of safe anaesthesia more challenging than in younger patients. Anaesthesia for liver surgery has specific principles, largely aimed at reducing venous bleeding from the liver, and those related to complex major surgery. This review explores the principles of anaesthesia for liver resection and describes how they may require modification in the older patient. The traditional approach of low central venous pressure anaesthesia in order to reduce bleeding may need to be altered in the presence of a cardiovascular system less able to tolerate hypotension and hypoperfusion. These changes in physiology should also lower the threshold for invasive monitoring. The provision of effective analgesia perioperatively should be tailored to minimise the surgical stress response and opiate use. Careful consideration of general principles of intra-operative care for older patients, such as positioning, drug dosing, avoidance of excessively deep anaesthesia, and maintenance of normothermia are also important given the prolonged, complex nature of liver surgery. This individualised approach, with careful attention to changes in physiology allows liver resections to be undertaken in older patients without increases in mortality.

Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation is superior to hepatic resection in patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

It is not known whether percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA) has the same treatment efficacy and fewer complications than laparoscopic resection in patients with small centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of PRFA with classical laparoscopic resection in patients with small HCC and document the safety parameters.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 85 patients treated with hepatic resection (HR) and 90 PRFA-treated patients were enrolled in our hospital from July 2016 to July 2019. Treatment outcomes, including major complications and survival data, were evaluated.

RESULTS

The results showed that minor differences existed in the baseline characteristics between the patients in the two groups. PRFA significantly increased cumulative recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio 1.048, 95%CI: 0.265–3.268) and overall survival (hazard ratio 0.126, 95%CI: 0.025–0.973); PRFA had a lower rate of major complications than HR (7.78% vs 20.0%, P < 0.05), and hospital stay was shorter in the PRFA group than in the HR group (7.8 ± 0.2 d vs 9.5 ± 0.3 d, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Based on the data obtained, we conclude that PRFA was superior to HR and may reduce complications and hospital stay in patients with small HCC.

The usefulness of the totally intra-corporeal pringle maneuver with Penrose drain tube during laparoscopic left side liver resection

Backgrounds/Aims

The Pringle maneuver is generally performed to reduce the amount of blood loss during hepatic resection. During laparoscopic liver resection, the Pringle maneuver can be used in several ways. We have developed a new Pringle maneuver (PM) with Penrose drain tube to sufficiently control blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection. This study was performed to determine the safety and outcome during laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomy performed using this new method.

Methods

We describe the technique and results of the left-sided liver resection with totally intracorporeal PM with Penrose drain tube. We performed 37 laparoscopic left-sided hepatic resections with (PM group) or without the Penrose PM (No PM group). We retrospectively compared the short-term operative outcome between the No PM group (n=12) and the PM group (n=25) during laparoscopic left-sided liver resection.

Results

Median PM duration was 34.3 min. The median duration of the surgery using the totally intracorporeal PM with Penrose drain tube was 174 min, while the surgical duration required for resection without the PM was 156 min. The median volume of operative blood loss was lower in the PM group than in the No PM group (No PM group (341 ml) vs. PM group (165 ml)). There was no postoperative mortality and no open conversion.

Conclusions

The totally intracorporeal PM with Penrose drain tube for laparoscopic hepatectomy is safe, reproducible, and can facilitate liver dissection during left-sided liver resection.

Anatomic Laparoscopic Liver Resection in the Scenario of the Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aim: To assess the impact of the laparoscopic anatomic resections (LARs) on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, analyzing the pooled short- and long-term outcomes of this technique and comparing it with the standard open approach [open anatomic resections (OAR)]. Material and Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for studies published between 2010 and 2020 concerning LAR for HCC. Results: After screening 311 articles, 10 studies with a total of 398 patients who underwent LAR for HCC were included. The pooled cohort included mostly male (76.6%), Child A (98.2%), with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related disease (60.5%). The pooled conversion rate was 7.3%. The pooled overall complication rate was 10.2 with a mortality rate of 1.0%. In the pooled analyses of only comparative studies, LAR group included 378 versus 455 in OAR. Operative time was longer in the LAR group (329 minutes versus 248; P = .001). Blood loss (179 versus 331 mL; P = .018) was lower in the LAR group. The pooled mean length of hospital stay was 8.4 days in LARs and 11.3 in OARs (P = .002). The pooled rate of postoperative complications was higher in the OAR group (25.3 versus 13.8; P = .009), while mortality rates were similar. The LAR group had a pooled 3- and 5-year overall survival of 90.1 and 81.9 versus 83.5 and 80.7 of the OARs (P > .05), respectively. Conclusions: In conclusion, the LAR for HCC is safe and associated with decreased blood loss and length of hospital stay. Survival rates are comparable with those of the conventional open approach.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma in elderly patients: a multicentric propensity score‑based analysis

BACKGROUND

Considering the increase in overall life expectancy and the rising incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), more elderly patients are considered for hepatic resection. Traditionally, major hepatectomy has not been proposed to the elderly due to severe comorbidities. Indeed, only a few case series are reported in the literature. The present study aimed to compare short-term and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) and open major hepatectomy (OMH) in elderly patients with HCC using propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

We performed a multicentric retrospective study including 184 consecutive cases of HCC major liver resection in patients aged ≥ 70 years in _8 European Hospital Centers. Patients were divided into LMH and OMH groups, and perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 122 patients were enrolled, 38 in the LMH group and 84 in the OMH group. Postoperative overall complications were lower in the LMH than in the OMH group (18 vs. 46%, p < 0.001). Hospital stay was shorter in the LMH group than in the OMH group (5 vs. 7 days, p = 0.01). Mortality at 90 days was comparable between the two groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 1, 3, and 5 years.

CONCLUSION

LMH for HCC is associated with appropriate short-term outcomes in patients aged ≥ 70 years as compared to OMH. LMH is safe and feasible in elderly patients with HCC.

Intraoperative Imaging Techniques to Visualize Hepatic (Micro)Perfusion: An Overview

The microcirculation plays a crucial role in the distribution of perfusion to organs. Studies have shown that microcirculatory dysfunction is an independent predictor of morbidity and mortality. Hence, assessment of liver perfusion offers valuable information on the (patho)physiological state of the liver. The current review explores techniques in perfusion imaging that can be used intraoperatively. Available modalities include dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound, handheld vital microscopes, indocyanine green fluorescence angiography, and laser contrast speckle imaging. Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound relays information on deep tissue perfusion and is a commonly used technique to assess tumor perfusion. Handheld vital microscopes provide direct visualization of the sinusoidal architectural structure of the liver, which is a unique feature of this technique. Intraoperative fluorescence imaging uses indocyanine green, a dye that is administered intravenously to visualize microvascular perfusion when excited using near-infrared light. Laser speckle contrast imaging produces non-contact large surface-based tissue perfusion imaging free from movement- or pressure-related artefacts. In this review, we discuss the intrinsic advantages and disadvantages of these techniques and their clinical and/or scientific applications.

Surgical and oncological outcomes after laparoscopic vs. open major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The short- and long-term prognoses are unclear following laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We performed a meta-analysis to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of LMH vs. open major hepatectomy (OMH) in patients with HCC.

METHODS

All studies comparing LMH with OMH for HCC published until April 2019 were identified independently by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We analyzed data for surgical and oncological outcomes, namely, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major complications, mortality, hospital stay, margin distance, negative margin rate, long-term overall survival, and corresponding disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

We included 13 studies involving 1,225 patients with HCC (LMH: 534 patients; OMH: 691 patients) in the meta-analysis. Regarding short-term outcomes, the pooled data showed that LMH was associated with longer operative time [weighted mean difference (WMD): 72.14 min; 95% confidence interval (CI): 43.07-101.21; P<0.00001], less blood loss (WMD: -102.32 mL; 95% CI: -150.99 to -53.64; P<0.0001), shorter hospital stay (WMD: -3.77 d; 95% CI: -4.95 to -2.60; P<0.00001), lower morbidity [risk difference (RD): -0.01; 95% CI: -0.16 to -0.06; P<0.00001], and lower major complication rates (RD: -0.08; 95% CI: -0.11 to -0.05; P<0.00001). However, the need for blood transfusion (RD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.05; P=0.78), mortality (RD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.01; P=0.57), margin distance (WMD: 0.05 mm; 95% CI: -0.1 to 0.19; P=0.52), and negative margin rate (RD: 0.01; 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.05; P=0.65) were significantly comparable between the two groups. Regarding long-term outcomes, there was no difference in 3-year DFS [hazard ratio (HR): 0.99; 95% CI: 0.72-1.37; P=0.95], 3-year overall survival (HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.70-2.21; P=0.45), 5-year DFS (HR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.64-1.38; P=0.76), and 5-year overall survival (HR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.45-1.99; P=0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

LMH can be performed as safely as OMH in select patients and provides improved short-term surgical outcomes without affecting long-term survival. However, confirming our results requires more evidence from high-quality and prospective randomized controlled trials.

A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open hepatectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The evidence of pairwise meta-analysis of Robotic Hepatectomy (RH) vs Laparoscopic Hepatectomy (LH) and RH vs Open Hepatectomy (OH) is inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this study, was to compare the outcomes of RH, LH and OH by performing a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in the following databases: Pubmed, Google scholar, EMBASE and Cochrane library. Cost-effectiveness and survival benefits were selected as primary outcomes.

RESULTS

The cost was less in OH compared to both minimally invasive procedures, LH demonstrated lower cost compared to RH, but the differences were not statistically significant. Both the RH and LH cohorts demonstrated significantly lower estimated blood loss, reduced major morbidity rate and shorter length of stay compared to OH cohort. The LH and OH cohorts demonstrated significantly shorter operative time and duration of clamping compared to the RH cohort. The LH cohort included significantly smaller tumours compared to the OH cohort.

CONCLUSION

The present network meta-analysis, demonstrated that both RH and LH in malignant and benign conditions were associated with lower morbidity rates, shorter hospital stay and the procedure related costs were statistically nonsignificant between RH, LH and OH.

The early evaluation of ultrasound-guided iodine-125 interstitial implants for high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of ultrasound-guided iodine-125 interstitial implants for high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

From October, 2016, to August, 2018, 49 patients suffering from a total of 66 hepatocellular carcinoma lesions were treated with ultrasound-guided iodine-125 interstitial implantation. Treatment planning system was applied to make preoperative plan. The response evaluation criteria in solid tumors were used to evaluate the curative effect. The evaluated outcomes included postoperative complications and complete disease control rate, 6-month disease-free survival, and 6-month overall survival.

RESULTS

All 49 patients underwent iodine-125 seed implantation successfully. Patients were followed up for 5 to 27.5 months. No patients developed serious complications and only 2 (4.1%) patients had slight pain. The complete response was seen in 21 lesions (31.8%), partial response in 26 lesions (39.4%), stable disease in eight lesions (12.1%), and progressive disease in 11 lesions (16.7%). The overall disease control rate was reached to 83.3%. The 6-month disease-free survival rate was 46.4% with a median disease-free survival time of 5.0 months. The 6-month overall survival rate was 83.6% with a median overall survival time of 15.0 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Iodine-125 interstitial implantation is a kind of safe and feasible treatment for high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma.

Laparoscopic versus open major liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative cohort studies

Background

The application of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has expanded rapidly in recent decades. Although multiple authors have reported LLR shows improved safety and efficacy in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared with open liver resection (OLR), laparoscopic (LMLR) and open (OMLR) major liver resections for HCC treatment remain inadequately evaluated. This work aimed to test the hypothesis that LMLR is safer and more effective than OMLR for HCC.

Methods

Comparative cohort and registry studies on LMLR and OMLR, searched in PubMed, the Science Citation Index, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, and published before March 31, 2018, were collected systematically and meta-analyzed. Fixed- and random-effects models were employed for generating pooled estimates. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Q-statistic.

Results

Nine studies (1173 patients) were included. Although the pooled data showed operation time was markedly increased for LMLR in comparison with OMLR (weighted mean difference [WMD] 74.1, 95% CI 35.1 to 113.1, P = 0.0002), blood loss was reduced (WMD = − 107.4, 95% CI − 179.0 to − 35.7, P = 0.003), postoperative morbidity was lower (odds ratio [OR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.63, P <  0.0001), and hospital stay was shorter (WMD = − 3.27, 95% CI − 4.72 to − 1.81, P <  0.0001) in the LMLR group. Although 1-year disease-free survival (DFS) was increased in patients administered LMLR (OR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.31, P = 0.03), other 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival outcomes (overall survival [OS] and/or DFS) were comparable in both groups.

Conclusions

Compared with OMLR, LMLR has short-term clinical advantages, including reduced blood loss, lower postsurgical morbidity, and shorter hospital stay in HCC, despite its longer operative time. Long-term oncological outcomes were comparable in both groups.

Is the treatment outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma inferior in elderly patients?

In view of the increasing life expectancy in different parts of the world, a larger proportion of elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) requiring oncological treatment is expected. The clinicopathological characteristics of HCC in elderly patients and in younger patients are different. Elderly patients, in general, also have more comorbidities. Evaluation of the efficacy of different HCC treatment options in elderly patients is necessary to optimize treatment outcomes for them. Treatment modalities for HCC include hepatectomy, liver transplantation, radiofrequency ablation, transarterial chemoembolization, and molecular-targeted therapy with sorafenib. In this review, current evidence on the risks and outcomes of the different HCC treatments for elderly patients are discussed. According to data in the literature, elderly patients and younger patients benefited similarly from HCC treatments. More clinical data are needed for the determination of selecting criteria on elderly HCC patients to maximize their chance of getting the most appropriate and effective treatments. As such, further studies evaluating the outcomes of different HCC treatment modalities in elderly patients are warranted.

Early Morbidity and Mortality after Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Propensity-Score Matched Comparison with Open Resection

BACKGROUND

The impact of minimally invasive surgery on the short-term outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing liver resection remains poorly defined.

METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP-targeted hepatectomy database was used to identify patients who underwent liver resection for HCC during 2014-2016. A 1:1 propensity score matching was created between patients who underwent open (OLR) vs. minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) based on age, ASA score, liver resection type, liver texture, and stage of disease. The short-term outcomes of patients undergoing OLR vs. MILR were compared.

RESULTS

Among a total cohort of 1816 patients, propensity score matching resulted in 728 liver resections: 364 (50%) OLR and 364 (50%) MILR. Overall morbidity (29% vs. 23%, P = 0.04) was greater among patients undergoing OLR compared with MILR, whereas mortality did not differ between the two approaches (2% vs 1%, P = 0.57). MILR was associated with significant reductions in hospital LOS (6 vs. 4 days, P < 0.0001) but no difference in operative time (188 vs. 171 min, P = 0.13). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, age ≥ 65 (OR:1.6, 95%CI: 1.1-2.3, P = 0.0065), ASA class ≥ 3 (OR:2.7, 95%CI: 1.5-4.7, P = 0.0003), preoperative blood transfusion (OR:9.7, 95%CI: 1.06-90.3, P = 0.04), T ≥ 3 (OR:1.9, 95%CI: 1.09-3.4, P = 0.02), operative time > 200 min (OR:1.8, 95%CI: 1.2-2.5, P = 0.0011), and OLR (OR:1.4, 95%CI: 1.002-2.03, P = 0.04) were associated with increased odds of overall morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

MILR for HCC is associated with a shorter hospital LOS and reduced postoperative complication rates, even after controlling for important patient and clinicopathologic confounders, compared to OLR. Efforts to expand the use of MILR for hepatobiliary surgery are warranted.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Advantages of laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) has been widely accepted as a minimally invasive alternative to open liver surgery. We assessed the benefits and drawbacks of LLH compared with open left hemihepatectomy (OLH) using meta-analysis.

METHODS

Relevant literature was retrieved using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Ovid Medline databases. Multiple parameters of efficacy and safety were compared between the treatment groups. Results are expressed as odds ratio (OD) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for fixed- and random-effects models.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 13 trials involving 1163 patients. Compared with OLH, LLH significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss (MD, -91.01; 95% CI, -139.12 to -42.89; P = .0002), transfusion requirement (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.11-0.54; P = .0004), time to oral intake (MD, -0.80; 95% CI, -1.27 to -0.33; P = .0008), and hospital stay (MD, -3.94; 95% CI, -4.85 to -3.03; P < .0001). However, operative time; complications rate; and postoperative alanine transferase, albumin, and total bilirubin levels did not differ significantly between the 2 surgical groups (P > .05). For hepatolithiasis treatment, there were no significant differences in operative time, residual stones, stone recurrence, and complications rate between the groups (P > .05), but LLH resulted in lower incisional infection rate (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22-0.89; P = .02) than OLH. The LLH group demonstrated higher bile leakage rate (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.14-2.81; P = .01) and incurred greater hospital costs (MD, 618.56; 95% CI, 154.47-1082.64; P = .009).

CONCLUSIONS

LLH has multiple advantages over OLH and should thus be considered as the first choice for left hemihepatectomy.

Stapleless laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: reappraisal of the Louisville statement by a young liver surgeon

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has been regarded as the standard treatment for liver tumors located at the left lateral liver sector. However, few studies have reported the results of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) for HCC, not to mention the feasibility of this emerging technique for the less experienced liver surgeons. The current study would reappraise the Louisville statement by examining the outcome of LLS performed by a young liver surgeon.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed two separate groups of patients who underwent open or laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomies at Chung Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou. All laparoscopic hepatectomies were performed by the index young surgeon following a stepwise stapleless LLS. The surgical results and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic vs. open hepatectomies (LH and OH, respectively) with the surgical indication of HCC at left lateral liver sector were further compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

18 of 29 patients in the laparoscopic group and 75 patients in the conventional open group had primary HCC. The demographic data was essentially the same for the two groups. Statistical analysis revealed that the LH group had smaller tumor size, higher blood transfusion requirement, longer duration of inflow control and parenchymal transection, and longer operation time. However, no significant difference was observed in terms of complication rate, mortality rate, and hospital stay between the two groups. After adjusting for tumor size, LH and OH showed no statistical difference in the amount of blood transfusion, operation time and patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that stapleless LLS is a safe and feasible procedure for less experienced liver surgeons to resect HCC located at the left lateral liver sector. This stepwise stapleless LSS can not only achieve surgical results comparable to OH but also can provide a platform for liver surgeons to apply laparoscopic technique before conducting more complicated liver resections.

Meta-analysis of short- and long-term outcomes after pure laparoscopic versus open liver surgery in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

Background

The advantages of laparoscopy are widely known. Nevertheless, its legitimacy in liver surgery is often questioned because of the uncertain value associated with minimally invasive methods. Our main goal was to compare the outcomes of pure laparoscopic (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Methods

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases to find eligible studies. The most recent search was performed on December 1, 2017. Studies were regarded as suitable if they reported morbidity in patients undergoing LLR versus OLR. Extracted data were pooled and subsequently used in a meta-analysis with a random-effects model. Clinical applicability of results was evaluated using predictive intervals. Review was reported following the PRISMA guidelines.

Results

From 2085 articles, forty-three studies (N = 5100 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Our findings showed that LLR had lower overall morbidity than OLR (15.59% vs. 29.88%, p < 0.001). Moreover, major morbidity was reduced in the LLR group (3.78% vs. 8.69%, p < 0.001). There were no differences between groups in terms of mortality (1.58% vs. 2.96%, p = 0.05) and both 3- and 5-year overall survival (68.97% vs. 68.12%, p = 0.41) and disease-free survival (46.57% vs. 44.84%, p = 0.46).

Conclusions

The meta-analysis showed that LLR is beneficial in terms of overall morbidity and non-procedure-specific complications. That being said, these results are based on non-randomized trials. For these reasons, we are calling for randomization in upcoming studies. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD42018084576.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-018-6431-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy for elderly patients: Major findings based on a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As the general population continues to age, there is an increase need for surgical management of elderly patients. Compared to open hepatectomy (OH), laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) offers earlier mobilization, less blood loss, and shorter postoperative hospital stay. However, whether these advantages of LH over OH are retained in elderly patients remains to be clarified. Therefore, in this study, we sought to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of LH for elderly patients.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was performed to identify studies that compared LH and OH. Studies comparing LH in elderly and LH in nonelderly patients were also identified. Outcomes of interest included conversion rate, operative time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, rate and type of morbidity, mortality rate, margin status (R0), and long-term oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

Nine studies met our inclusion criteria for this analysis. Of these, 5 compared LH and OH in elderly patients, 3 compared LH in elderly and nonelderly patients, and 1 included both outcomes. Compared to those with OH, elderly patients who underwent LH had similar operative times [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.15 minutes; 95% confidence interval (CI): -28.28-30.59, P = .94], less intraoperative blood loss (WMD = -0.71 mL; 95% CI: -1.29 to -0.16, P = .01), a lower rate of transfusion [risk ratio (RR) = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.40-0.94, P = .02], comparable R0 rates (RR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.96-1.07, P = .70), less postoperative complications (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.76, P < .01), and shorter hospital stay (WMD = -3.22 days; 95% CI: -4.21 to -2.23, P < .01). The limited long-term outcomes indicated that survival status was comparable between LH and OH for elderly patients. The pooled outcomes for elderly versus nonelderly patients indicated that the safety and effectiveness of LH over OH in elderly patients was not inferior to those in nonelderly patients.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that LH is a feasible and safe alternative to OH in elderly patients, providing a lower rate of morbidity and favorable postoperative recovery and outcomes.

Outcomes following laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The role of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) remains uncertain in current liver surgery. This meta-analysis aimed to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of LMH versus open major hepatectomy (OMH).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database to identify all relevant publications. The statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3. Continuous variables were calculated by standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas dichotomous variables were calculated by odds ratio (OR) with 95%CI.

RESULTS

A total of 10 eligible studies with 1130 patients were identified, of which 455 (40.3%) patients in the LMH group and 675 (59.7%) patients in the OMH group. LMH was associated with less blood loss (SMD = -0.30, 95%CI: -0.43 to -0.18, p < .00001), less transfusion requirement (OR = 0.49, 95%CI: 0.29-0.82, p = .007), decreased postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.56, 95%CI: 0.42-0.76, p = .0001), and shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.46, 95%CI: -0.69 to -0.24, p < .0001) when compared with the OMH group. But the operative time was significantly longer in LMH group (SMD = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.79-1.86, p = .01). Both the two groups achieved similar surgical margin and R0 resection rate for malignant lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis demonstrated that LMH appeared to be feasible and safe in current liver surgery. LMH is associated with less blood loss, decreased postoperative morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and comparable oncological outcomes compared with OMH.

A Propensity Score-Based Analysis of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Liver Malignancies in Elderly Patients

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resection is safe, feasible and associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stays and fewer postoperative complications in the working age patients with malignant liver tumors. However, it is still unclear if the elderly patients with malignant liver tumors would also benefit from that approach as the younger patients. So, the aim of the study was to compare the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for malignant liver tumors in elderly patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between March 2009 and July 2016, all elderly patients (≥70 years old) who underwent laparoscopic (n = 40) and open (n = 202) liver resection for malignant liver tumors were included. A one to one propensity score matching analysis was performed, based on 6 covariates, to decrease the selection bias.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the laparoscopic and open liver resection groups regarding the patient characteristics and tumor features. The operative time was comparable between both groups (Laparoscopic group 259 min vs Open group 308 min, p = .86), while patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection had lower intraoperative blood loss (30 ml vs 517 ml, p < .0001), shorter hospital stays (10 days vs 23 days, p < .0001), and less overall morbidity (15% vs 38%, p = .04). The one-, three-, and five-year survival for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma was comparable between both groups (Laparoscopic group 96%, 74%, 47%, vs Open group 94%, 71%, 48%, p = .82), whereas The one-, three-, and five-year recurrence-free survival for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma was significantly higher in the laparoscopic group (88%, 60%, 60% vs 54%, 25%, 19%, p = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic approach for minor liver resection in elderly patients is safe and feasible with less blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, less postoperative complications and a better oncological outcome.

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

BACKGROUND

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

STUDY DESIGN

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Hepatocellular carcinoma: early-stage management challenges

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major cause of cancer death and is increasing in incidence. This review focuses on HCC surveillance and treatment of early-stage disease, which are essential to improving outcomes. Multiple societies have published HCC surveillance guidelines, but screening efforts have been limited by noncompliance and overall lack of testing for patients with undiagnosed chronic liver disease. Treatment of early-stage HCC has become increasingly complex due to expanding therapeutic options and better outcomes with established treatments. Surgical indications for HCC have broadened with improved preoperative liver testing, neoadjuvant therapy, portal vein embolization, and perioperative care. Advances in post-procedural monitoring have improved efficacies of transarterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation, and novel therapies involving delivery of radiochemicals are being studied in small trials. Finally, advances in liver transplantation have allowed for expanded indications beyond Milan criteria with non-inferior outcomes. More clinical trials evaluating new therapies and multimodal regimens are necessary to help clinicians design better treatment algorithms and improve outcomes.