Laparoscopic Transabdominal With Transdiaphragmatic Access Improves Resection of Difficult Posterosuperior Liver Lesions. Ann Surg. 2015;262:358-365. [PMID: 25848711 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000001015]

Advantages of laparoscopic segmentectomy of the liver using ICG fluorescent navigation by the negative staining method: A comparison with open procedure

Aim

Laparoscopic segmentectomy (LS) using indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence navigation with negative staining method has potential for performing accurate and safe anatomical excision. This study aimed to evaluate the significance of LS using ICG fluorescence navigation compared with open segmentectomy (OS).

Methods

Eighty-seven patients who underwent anatomical segmentectomies were evaluated for OS (n = 44) and LS (n = 43). The Glissonean pedicle approach was performed using either extra- or intrahepatic method, depending on the location of segment in LS. After clamping pedicle, negative staining method was performed. Liver transection was done along intersegmental plane visualizing by overlay mode of ICG camera. Surgical outcomes were compared between two groups. Correlation between predicted resecting liver volume (PRLV) calculated using volumetry and actual resected liver volume (ARLV) was assessed in two groups.

Results

Patients who underwent LS showed better outcomes in operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay. There were significantly fewer Grade II and Grade III or higher postoperative complications in LS group. Both values of AST (p < 0.001) and ALT (p < 0.001) on postoperative day 1 were significantly lower in LS group than in OS group. PRLV and ARLV were more strongly correlated in LS (r = 0.896) than in OS (r = 0.773). The difference between PRLV and ARLV was significantly lower in LS group than in OS group (p = 0.022), and this trend was particularly noticeable in posterosuperior segment (p = 0.008) than in anterolateral segment (p = 0.811).

Conclusion

LS using ICG navigation allows precise resection and may contribute to safer short-term outcomes than OS, particularly in posterosuperior segment.

Subsegmental approaches to S7: anatomic laparoscopic transdiaphragmatic and nonanatomic robotic transthoracic

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver surgery of postero-superior segments (S4a, S7, S8) remains a challenge. The caudal view, an increased distance between trocars and the operative field, and the liver fulcrum limiting the view, contribute to the difficulty [1, 2]. We and other groups have previously reported the use of intercostal trocars to access subdiaphragmatic tumors (transdiaphragmatic approach) [3-5], only few reports on a laparoscopic total transthoracic approach, none (to our knowledge) dynamic manuscripts of a total transthoracic robotic approach, and none (to our knowledge) that use preoperative port site and anatomic modelling exist. Further, we developed a total transthoracic (thoracoscopic) approach to avoid a hostile abdomen, while bringing viewing axis and instruments close to the target [6-10]. In this context, this report details the advantages of a laparoscopic vs. robotic transthoracic approach. According to institutional protocol, reports of individual cases in print or video format do not require institutional review board approval.

PATIENT

A 68-year-old male on peritoneal dialysis with left colon adenocarcinoma and a single synchronous liver metastasis in S6-7 close to the root of the right hepatic vein underwent a laparoscopic transdiaphragmatic metastasectomy. Two years later, the patient developed a recurrent 1.5 cm liver metastasis in S7, which lend itself to a robotic transthoracic approach.

TECHNIQUE

Following 3-D modelling and virtual port placement planning, the first metastasectomy was performed laparoscopically using a transdiaphragmatic approach. The recurrence was managed transthoracically due to more apical, subdiaphragmatic location. For this operation, a robotic approach was optimal as robotic wrist articulation facilitates manipulation via the limited intercostal space. This was particularly helpful during the diaphragmatic reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Total transthoracic liver surgery is certainly an advanced procedure requiring superior MIS liver skills. Recommendations for starting with a total transthoracic approach are not unlike from starting a standard, none-transthoracic liver surgery. Early on in the experience we recommend advanced liver MIS skills, and single, small, subdiaphragmatic tumors away from major vessels. Nonetheless, when these recommendations are followed a total transthoracic approach may be safer and result in less access trauma, than traversing a hostile abdomen to reach the posterior-superior liver. Both laparoscopic and robotic transthoracic approaches can facilitate the resection of subdiaphragmatic tumors, especially in patients with hostile abdomens. While the laparoscopic approach has advantages due to a broader spectrum of available surgical tools (flexible tip camera, parenchymal dissection, and energy devices), the robotic wrist articulation facilitates manipulation via the restricted intercostal space.

Safety and Feasibility of Laparoscopic Parenchymal-Sparing Hepatectomy for Lesions with Proximity to Major Vessels in Posterosuperior Liver Segments 7 and 8

Laparoscopic parenchymal-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) for lesions with proximity to major vessels (PMV) in posterosuperior segments (PSS) has not yet been sufficiently examined. The aim of this study is to examine the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic PSH for lesions with PMV in PSS 7 and 8. We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) for PSS lesions and focused on patients who underwent laparoscopic PSH for lesions with PMV in PSS. Blood loss was lower in the LLR group (n = 110) than the OLR group (n = 16) (p = 0.009), and no other short-term outcomes were significantly different. Compared to the pure LLR group (n = 93), there were no positive surgical margins or complications in hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) (n = 17), despite more tumors with PMV (p = 0.009). Regarding pure LLR for one tumor lesion, any short-term outcomes in addition to the operative time were not significantly different between the PMV (n = 23) and no-PMV (n = 48) groups. The present findings indicate that laparoscopic PSH for lesions with PMV in PSS is safe and feasible in a matured team, and the HALS technique still plays an important role.

Pure abdominal laparoscopic approach versus thoraco-abdominal laparoscopic approach: What is the best technique for liver resection in segment 7 and segment 8? An answer from the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris experience with short- and long-term outcome evaluation

BACKGROUND

Lesions in segments 7 and 8 are a challenge during standard laparoscopic liver resection. The addition of transthoracic trocars could be useful in the standard abdominal approach for laparoscopic liver resection. We report our experience with a thoraco-abdominal laparoscopic combined approach for liver resection with the aim of comparing short- and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed 1,003 laparoscopic liver resections in a prospectively maintained, single-institution database. We compared patient outcomes intraoperatively and postoperatively. We analyzed the long-term outcomes of the colorectal liver metastasis subgroup. Propensity score matching 1:1 was performed based on the following variables: age, American Society of Anesthesiologists, body mass index, previous abdominal surgery, multiple or single liver resection, lesion >50 mm or <50 mm, presence of solitary or multiple lesions, T stage, and N stage.

RESULTS

The standard abdominal approach was used in 110 laparoscopic liver resections, and the thoraco-abdominal laparoscopic combined approach was used in 62 laparoscopic liver resections. The thoraco-abdominal laparoscopic combined approach was associated with better intraoperative results (less blood loss and no need for conversion to open surgery). The R1s rate for segmentectomy 7 and 8 was lower in the thoraco-abdominal laparoscopic combined approach in the entire group and in the colorectal liver metastasis subgroup. In the colorectal liver metastasis subgroup, the 3- and 5-year overall survival was 90% and 80% in the thoraco-abdominal laparoscopic combined approach group and 76% and 52% in the standard abdominal approach group, respectively (P = .02). In univariate and multivariate analysis, the thoraco-abdominal laparoscopic combined approach was a significant factor that positively affected disease-free survival and overall survival.

CONCLUSION

The thoraco-abdominal laparoscopic combined approach in laparoscopic liver resection in segments 7 and 8 is safe and feasible, and it has demonstrated better oncologic outcomes than the pure abdominal approach, especially in segmentectomy.

Right Kidney Position for Laparoscopic Liver Resection of Tumors Located in the Posterosuperior Region

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for tumors located in posterosuperior (PS) region of the liver (segment 7 or 8) is extremely challenging. Several techniques have been proposed; however, no standard procedure has yet been established. The aim of this study was to present and discuss the usefulness of the right kidney position as a unique idea of surgical position in LLR for tumors located in the PS region.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For the right kidney position, the patient lay on the operating table in the left lateral decubitus position with the body bent so that the kidney rest (approximately the level of the twelfth rib) was elevated to extend the surgical area. The surgeon was positioned on the right or left side of the patient according to the situation during operation. An intercostal port was not used in any of the cases. The operating table was liberally rotated as per the surgeon's preference. The liver was mobilized by dividing the right triangular and coronary ligaments. Full mobilization of the right liver was not routinely performed. Liver transection was performed under intermittent inflow occlusion in all cases.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients with tumors located in the PS region underwent LLR in the right kidney position at Shinshu University Hospital between June 2019 and May 2021. Of the 13 patients, 11 patients underwent limited liver resection and two underwent anatomic liver resection of segment 8. The right kidney position enables the surgeon to secure a wider surgical field under the dome and prevent the camera and forceps from hitting the ilium and interfering with the operation, and the surgical device can easily reach the lesion under the dome because of the migration to the caudal side of the liver. No patients required blood transfusion or conversion to open liver resection. The median surgical margin was 6 mm (range 0 to 9 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

The right kidney position is useful, especially for the resection of tumors located in the PS region of the liver.

Laparoscopic Minor Liver Resections for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Posterosuperior Segments Using the Rubber Band Technique

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic minor liver resections (LLR) of posterosuperior (PS) segments are technically challenging, several expert centers are increasingly performing this procedure. In the present study, we introduced novel techniques, including the rubber band traction method and positional changes, and compared surgical outcomes of LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in PS segments with open minor liver resection (OLR).

METHODS

From January 2008 to August 2019, 113 patients underwent laparoscopic (n = 55) or open (n = 58) minor liver resections for single small HCCs (<5 cm) located in PS segments. Propensity score matching in a 1:1 ratio was conducted to minimize preoperative selection bias, and surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There was no intraoperative mortality or reoperation in either group. One conversion to open surgery was necessary due to severe post-operative adhesions. The matched LLR group compared to OLR had significantly shorter operative time (215.16 vs. 251.41 min, P = 0.025), lesser blood loss (218.11 vs. 358.92 mL, P = 0.046), lower complication rate (8.1% vs. 29.7%, P = 0.018), and shorter hospital stay (7.03 vs. 11.78 days, P = 0.001). Intraoperative transfusion, R0 resection, resection margin, 5-year disease-free survival and 5-year overall survival were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Our standardized LLR provided improved short-term outcomes and similar long-term outcomes, when compared with OLR. With advanced techniques and accumulated surgical experience, LLR can be the first option for HCC in PS segments at expert centers.

Location of Hemangioma is an Individual Risk Factor for Massive Bleeding in Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

Background and Objectives:

The scope of laparoscopic surgery has expanded to encompass hepatic resections, specifically hepatic hemangioma. The most serious intraoperative complication is bleeding, often requiring laparotomy. Because risk factors associated with such massive blood loss have not been well evaluated, the intent of this retrospective study was to analyze these risk factors associated with laparoscopic resection of hepatic hemangiomas.

Methods:

From June 1, 2011 to January 31, 2021, 140 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic surgery for hepatic hemangioma in our hospital. According to quantity of intraoperative blood loss, they were divided into massive (≥ 800 ml) and minor blood loss (< 800 ml) groups. Perioperative data were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses with logistic regression to identify the risk factors for potential massive blood loss during laparoscopic resection.

Results:

There were 24 and 116 patients in the massive and minor blood loss groups, respectively. Of four risk factors significantly associated with massive blood loss by univariate logistic regression analysis (location of hemangioma in the liver, postcaval or hepatic venous compression, hilar compression, and body mass index exceeding 28) the multifactorial logistic model identified only location in the liver of the hemangioma as statistically (P = 0.012) associated with intraoperative massive blood loss.

Conclusions:

Location of the hepatic hemangioma was the single statistically significant risk factor for massive blood loss during laparoscopic surgery for hepatic hemangioma. Of particular importance, location in Couinaud liver segments I, IVa, VII, and VIII necessitates precautions to mitigate the risk of massive blood loss.

A Systematic Review of Minimally Invasive Trans-thoracic Liver Resection to Examine Intervention Description, Governance, and Outcome Reporting of an Innovative Technique

INTRODUCTION

The number of laparoscopic liver resections undertaken has increased. However, lesions located postero-superiorly are difficult to access. This may be overcome by the novel use of trans-thoracic port(s). Methods for the safe and transparent introduction of new and modified surgical procedures are limited and a summary of these issues, for minimally invasive trans-thoracic liver resections (MITTLR), is lacking. This study aims to understand and summarize technique description, governance procedures, and reporting of outcomes for MITTLR.

METHODS

A systematic literature search to identify primary studies of all designs describing MITTLR was undertaken. How patients were selected for the new technique was examined. The technical components of MITTLR were identified and summarized to understand technique development over time. Governance arrangements (eg, Institutional Review Board approval) and steps taken to mitigate harm were recorded. Finally, specific outcomes reported across studies were documented.

RESULTS

Of 2067 screened articles, 16 were included reporting data from 145 patients and 6 countries. Selection criteria for patients was explicitly stated in 2 papers. No studies fully described the technique. Five papers reported ethical approval and 3 gave details of patient consent. No study reported on steps taken to mitigate harm.Technical outcomes were commonly reported, for example, blood loss (15/16 studies), operative time (15/16), and margin status (11/16). Information on patient-reported outcomes and costs were lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Technical details and governance procedures were poorly described. Outcomes focussed on short term details alone. Transparency is needed for reporting the introduction of new surgical techniques to allow their safe dissemination.

Laparoscopic liver resection versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) play central roles to treat early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, ≤3 cm, 1-3 nodules, and no macrovascular involvement), although data are lacking regarding whether LLR or RFA is preferable. This study aimed to compare outcomes of both treatments for small HCCs.

METHODS

Treatment outcomes of small HCCs were compared between all the minor LLRs performed between 2005 and 2016 and RFAs performed between 2011 and 2016 at Kyoto University.

RESULTS

A total of 85 and 136 patients underwent LLR and RFA, respectively. Patients that underwent LLR had higher incidence of blood transfusions, complications, and longer hospital stay. Overall and disease-specific survival rates were similar between LLR and RFA; however, recurrence-free (49.2% vs. 22.1% at 3-year) and local recurrence-free survival rates (94.9% vs. 63.6% at 3-year) were higher after LLR. Multivariate analyses identified that multiple nodules and 65-year-old and above are predictors of disease-specific survival, and that RFA is a predictor of recurrence and local recurrence.

CONCLUSION

RFA is less invasive, although both LLR and RFA are safe and effective. LLR provides better local control with superior recurrence-free and local-recurrence free survival. These results help optimize treatment selection based on patient-specific factors.

Evaluation of accuracy of laparoscopic liver mono-segmentectomy using the Glissonian approach with indocyanine green fluorescence negative staining by comparing estimated and actual resection volumes: A single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver mono-segmentectomy (LLMS) may improve patient outcomes, but it is difficult and its accuracy and safety are unknown. We evaluated the accuracy of LLMS using Glissonian approach with indocyanine green fluorescence (ICG) negative staining.

METHODS

Seventy-four patients eligible for LLMS except for segment 1 were enrolled. Preoperative three-dimensional CT-based surgical simulation was used to determine estimated liver resection volume (ELRV), which was compared with modified actual liver resection volume (ALRV) obtained from actual liver resection mass. The LLMS accuracy was also evaluated based on operator's experience (attending surgeon [AS] or trainee surgeon [TS]).

RESULTS

Estimated liver resection volumes significantly correlated with ALRVs (r = .82) in all cases. Moreover, TS-conducted LLMS also showed acceptable difference between ELRV and ALRV compared with AS-conducted LLMS. There were no intergroup differences in estimated blood loss, operation time, time of Pringle maneuver, postoperative complications, and length of postoperative hospitalization (P < .05). Moreover, R0 resection was comparable between the AS and TS groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver mono-segmentectomy with Glissonian approach using ICG negative imaging ensured safe and accurate procedure owing to facilitated visualization of the resection line. Our approach was effective in avoiding postoperative liver dysfunction and securing radical resection. In addition, it might be helpful in TS education of LLMS.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection Using a Silicone Band Retraction Method (With Video)

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The success of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) depends on stable and full exposure of the parenchymal transection plane. We evaluated the efficacy of LLR using a silicone band retraction method for lesions in the anterolateral and posterosuperior segments.

Optimal indications for an intercostal port for the superior segments in laparoscopic partial liver resection

INTRODUCTION

Intercostal port is useful for the superior segments in laparoscopic liver resection, but optimal indications for its use remain unclear. This study analyzed the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic partial liver resection for superior segments to determine the optimal indications.

METHODS

A total of 30 cases of laparoscopic partial liver resection for superior segments were retrospectively reviewed. First, comparison of cases according to use of the intercostal port was performed. Second, cases were classified into two groups according to the branch of the hepatic vein in the superior segments: superior-ventral group (S4a/S8vent: Svent group, n = 18) and superior-dorsal group (S7/S8dor: Sdor group: n = 12). The surgical outcomes were then compared to assess the performance of intercostal ports.

RESULTS

No differences in surgical outcomes were observed between patients with or without intercostal port. In this series, no complication due to the intercostal port, and no major complication were observed. In the comparison between Svent and Sdor, similar values of the operation time (Svent: 275 minutes vs Sdor: 316 minutes, P = .161) and blood loss (Svent: 30 mL vs Sdor: 17 mL, P = .718) were observed in both groups. The tumor size tended to be smaller in Sdor (Svent: 20 mm vs Sdor: 17 mm, P = .018), but use of the intercostal port was significantly more frequent in Sdor (58%) compared to Svent (33%) (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The lesion located at Sdor or that close to this location was considered as optimal indication for placement of intercostal port in patients undergoing laparoscopic partial liver resection.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection of Segments 7 and 8: from the Initial Restrictions to the Current Indications

Since the beginning of laparoscopic liver surgery, resection of the posterosuperior segments has been considered one of the most challenging procedure due to its difficult access. The main drawbacks of the laparoscopic approach to dome lesions are poor visualization, the difficulty of instrumentation and the greater complexity in the control of bleeding. In the evolution of minimally invasive techniques from hybrid techniques to the current purely laparoscopic approaches, the different authors have established gradually the currents indications and surgical techniques to operate these segments with a similar feasibility and safety than open approach. The standardization in the patient position, the use of intercostal trocars, the learning curve in laparoscopic liver surgery, the management of the hepatic blood flow and the refinement of the technique in the extrahepatic and intrahepatic Glissonean pedicle approaches, has allowed to leave behind the initial contraindications about the laparoscopic approach in these segments. In the present review of the literature, the accumulated experience of the different groups in minimally invasive liver surgery together with the technological advances in the different laparoscopic devices have facilitated the resection of tumors in segments 7 and 8 with similar and even better results than open surgery.

Fully laparoscopic thermo-ablation of liver malignancies with or without liver resection: tumor location is an independent local recurrence risk factor

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to analyze risk factors of local recurrence (LR) after exclusive laparoscopic thermo-ablation (TA) with or without associated liver resection.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2017, among 385 patients who underwent 820 TA in our department, 65 (17%) patients (HCC = 11, LM = 54) had exclusive laparoscopic TA representing 112 lesions (HCC = 17, LM = 95). TA was associated with other procedures in 57% of cases (liver resection 81%). All TA were done without liver clamping. Median tumor size was 1.8 cm [ranges from 0.3 to 4.5], 18% of the lesions were larger than 3 cm in size and 11% close to major liver vessels. Tumors locations were 77.5% in right liver, 36% in S7&S8, and 46% in S7&S8&S4a.

RESULTS

Mortality was nil and morbidity rate 15.4% including Dindo-Clavien > II grade 3%. The median follow-up was 24 months [0.77-75]. Per lesion LR rate after TA was 18% (n = 19 patients) with a mean time of 7.6 months. Among patients with LR, 18 (95%) could have been re-treated successfully (new resection = 11, re-TA = 7). Multivariate analyses revealed that tumor location in S7 alone, S7&S8 and/or S7, S8, or S4a were independent risk factors of LR after TA.

CONCLUSIONS

Exclusive laparoscopic TA is a safe and an effective tool to treat liver malignancies with or without liver resection. Other than classical risk factors, tumor location in upper segments of the liver, are independent risk factors for LR.

Techniques for laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection

Laparoscopic liver surgery has gained wide acceptance resulting in a paradigm shift of liver surgery. Technical innovations and accumulation of surgeon's experience have allowed laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) to become an effective procedure with favorable peri- and post-operative outcomes. Through the overall process of LLR, liver parenchymal transection remains the most critical step with the aim of minimizing blood loss and secures the appropriate cutting line, i.e., securing major vessels and obtaining adequate surgical margin clearance for malignancies. Multiple preoperative imaging modalities and intraoperative ultrasonography findings may contribute to the best determination of the appropriate cutting line during the LLR; however, technical expertise in minimizing and controlling bleeding during liver parenchymal transection is still a challenge for safe LLR, and therefore represents a major concern for hepatobiliary surgeons. Along with the historical fact that the technique of liver parenchymal transection itself is chosen according to surgeon's preference and "savoir-faire", the best technical modality in laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection remains to be determined. However, better understanding the technical issue may serve a contribution to the standardization of LLR. This review article therefore focuses on the technical aspects of the laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection.

Laparoscopic Parenchymal-Sparing Hepatectomy for Multiple Colorectal Liver Metastases Improves Outcomes and Salvageability: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Parenchymal-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) is regarded as the standard of care for colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) in open surgery. However, the surgical and oncological benefits of laparoscopic PSH compared with laparoscopic major hepatectomy (MH) have not been fully documented.

METHODS

A total of 269 patients who underwent initial laparoscopic liver resections with curative intent for CRLMs between 2004 and 2017 were enrolled. Preoperative patient characteristics and tumor burden were adjusted with propensity score matching, and laparoscopic PSH was compared with laparoscopic MH after matching.

RESULTS

PSH was performed in 148 patients, while MH was performed in 121 patients. After propensity score matching, 82 PSH and 82 MH patients showed similar preoperative characteristics. PSH was associated with lower rates of major postoperative complications compared with MH (6.1 vs. 15.9%; p = 0.046). Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and liver-specific RFS rates were comparable between both groups (p = 0.595 and 0.683). Repeat hepatectomy for liver recurrence was more frequently performed in the PSH group (63.9 vs. 36.4%; p = 0.022), and the PSH group also showed a trend toward a higher overall survival (OS) rate (5-year OS 79.4 vs. 64.3%; p = 0.067). Multivariate analyses revealed that initial MH was one of the risk factors to preclude repeat hepatectomy after liver recurrence (hazard ratio 2.39, p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic PSH provided surgical and oncological benefits for CRLMs, with less complications, similar recurrence rates, and increased salvageability through repeat hepatectomy, compared with laparoscopic MH. PSH should be the standard approach, even in laparoscopic procedures.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for lesions located in posterosuperior segments: a meta-analysis of short-term and oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for lesions located in posterosuperior (PS) segments remains a matter of development to be further assessed. This systematic review aims to compare the short-term and oncological outcomes between laparoscopic and open liver resection (OLR) in PS lesions.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library were searched from date of inception to June 2019. This meta-analysis was performed using the STATA 12.0 statistical software. Standardized mean differences (SMDs), odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for continuous variables, dichotomous variables and long-term variables, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 788 patients from eight studies were identified for the final analysis, with 371 patients in the LLR group and 417 in the OLR group. Although the operation time (SMD 0.22; 95% CI 0.08-0.36; P = 0.003) was longer whereas overall complication rate (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.36-0.70; P < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (SMD - 0.45; 95% CI - 0.59 to - 0.30; P = 0.003) were lower in the LLR group than in the OLR group, no significant differences in blood loss (SMD - 0.14; 95% CI - 0.28 to 0.00; P = 0.054), transfusion rate (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.56-1.54; P = 0.764), major complication rate (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.38-1.05; P = 0.079), R0 resection rate (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.55-1.96; P = 0.902), and disease-free survival (DFS) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (HR 1.43; 95% CI 0.95-2.17), DFS for colorectal liver metastases (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.61-1.81), overall survival for HCC (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.43-2.30) were noted between the groups.

CONCLUSION

LLR is technically feasible and safe without compromising long-term oncological outcomes for selected patients with lesions in the PS segments of the liver.

Laparoscopic liver resection for segment VII lesion using a combination of rubber band retraction method and flexible laparoscope

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for tumors involving segment VII has been considered a contraindication. Herein, our proposed laparoscopic technique for segment VII lesions using a rubber band retraction method and flexible laparoscope is introduced.

METHODS

A combination of elastic rubber band retraction method and flexible laparoscope was applied to access segment VII lesion. The perioperative outcomes and pathologic results were compared between patients with segment VII lesions (group 1) and patients with tumors in other segments (group 2) to evaluate feasibility and safety of the proposed laparoscopic approach for segment VII lesions.

RESULTS

Among 167 patients who underwent LLR from May 2014 to October 2017, the study population included 17 patients with tumors in segment VII (group 1) and 66 patients with tumors in other segments (group 2). The demographics of the two groups were comparable. One open conversion occurred in group 2 due to bleeding. The mean tumor size was 2.6 ± 1.0 and 2.5 ± 1.5 cm (p = 0.392) and surgical margin was 1.2 ± 0.7 and 1.3 ± 1.2 cm (p = 0.344) in group 1 and group 2, respectively. The mean operation time was 151 ± 63 and 131 ± 57 min (p = 0.596) and estimated mean blood loss was 294 ± 281 and 306 ± 405 mL (p = 0.610), in group 1 and group 2, respectively. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 6.1 ± 1.5 and 6.4 ± 2.7 days (p = 0.064) in group 1 and group 2. Two postoperative complications in both groups and no postoperative mortality occurred.

CONCLUSION

The combination technique of rubber band retraction and flexible laparoscopic camera allowed feasible and safe LLR for segment VII lesions that showed postoperative outcomes comparable to other segment lesions.

Highlights, limitations and future challenges of laparoscopic resection for colorectal liver metastases

The liver is the most common site for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRLM). Despite advances in oncologic treatment, resection of metastases is still the only curative option. Although laparoscopic surgery for primary colorectal cancer is well documented and widely used, laparoscopic surgery for liver metastases has developed more slowly. However, in spite of some difficulties, laparoscopic approach demonstrated strong advantages including minimal parietal damage, decreased morbidity (reduced blood loss and need for transfusion, fewer pulmonary complications), and simplification of subsequent iterative hepatectomy. Up to now, more than 9 000 laparoscopic procedures have been reported worldwide and long-term results in colorectal liver metastases seem comparable to the open approach. Only one recent randomized controlled trial has compared the laparoscopic and the open approach. The purpose of the present update was to identify the barriers limiting widespread acceptance of laparoscopic approach, the benefits and the limits of laparoscopic hepatectomies in CRLM.

Minimally invasive resection of posterosuperior liver tumors in the supine position using intra-abdominal trocars

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of posterosuperior (PS) segment liver tumors is technically challenging with confusion about optimal patient positioning and trocar placement (i.e., transabdominal vs. transcostal). The aim of this study is to describe our technique and outcomes with LLR of these tumors.

METHODS

This is an IRB-approved retrospective review of a prospective database. Between 2005 and 2017, patients with benign and malignant lesions underwent LLR. Perioperative outcomes of PS (segments 4A, 7, and 8) and anterolateral (AL) resections were compared. All patients were operated through intra-abdominal trocars in the supine position.

RESULTS

304 patients underwent LLR for AL (n = 217) and PS (n = 87) segmental lesions. Minor liver resections were performed in 274 patients and major resections in 30. Groups were comparable for age, sex, pathology, and tumor size (mean 4.2 and 3.7 cm for AL and PS). Inflow occlusion was more frequently performed for PS resections, but precoagulation rates were similar. PS resections more frequently required hand assistance (50% vs. 20%, p < 0.001) and conversion to open (18% vs. 7%, p = 0.04). For PS versus AL resections, operative time (253 vs. 205 min, p ≤ 0.001) was longer and associated with more blood loss (307 vs. 211 mL, p < 0.001) and more frequent need for blood transfusion (15% vs. 7%, p = 0.04). However, the rate of negative resection margin, 90-day complication rates, and length of stay were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that LLR of PS located liver tumors is more challenging compared to AL lesions. Nevertheless, it can be performed successfully in the majority of patients with supine positioning and intra-abdominal trocar placement, without compromising oncologic principles. Liberal uses of hand assistance and inflow occlusion were the technical tips helping us to successfully resect these tumors laparoscopically.

Laparoscopic Parenchymal-Sparing Hepatectomy: the New Maximally Minimal Invasive Surgery of the Liver-a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies (PSH) are liver resections with preservation of as much liver parenchyma as possible. PSH can be performed laparoscopically (LPSH), but access to the posterosuperior segments is difficult and they are challenging when there are multiple bilobar lesions; the procedure may require repositioning and may be long and cumbersome. The objective of this systematic review is to analyze the feasibility and limitations of laparoscopic PSH in the literature.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Resections were categorized by segment(s), and data regarding operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, and R0 resection were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 351 studies screened for relevance, 48 studies were reviewed. Ten publications fulfilled inclusion criteria, reporting data from 579 patients undergoing LPSH. The most common indication was CRLM (58%) followed by hepatocellular carcinoma (16%). Only 92 patients were reported to have resections of more than one tumor; the maximum number of lesions resected was seven. Of resected lesions, 21.5% were located in the cranial segments. Mean operating time was 335.2 min, estimated blood loss was 462 cc, and hospital stay was 7.6 days. Conversion rate was 9.7%, and complications occurred in 19.4% of cases. No perioperative mortality was reported. R0 resections were achieved in 87.7% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic PSH is performed and reported, but the data quality is low so far. The main limitation of LPSH is the low number of lesions resected, especially for bilobar, metastatic disease. Prospective reports with tumor-specific oncological data are desirable.

Developments and perspectives of laparoscopic liver resection in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was introduced in the early 1990s, initially for partial resection of the anterolateral segments, from where it has expanded in a stepwise fashion. Movement restriction makes bleeding control demanding. Managing pneumoperitoneum pressure with inflow control can inhibit venous bleeding and create a dry surgical field for easier hemostasis. Since the lack of overview leads to disorientation, simulation and navigation with imaging studies have become important. Improved direct access to the liver inside the rib cage can be obtained in LLR, reducing destruction of the associated structures and decreasing the risk of refractory ascites and liver failure, especially in patients with a cirrhotic liver. Although LLR can be performed as bridging therapy to transplantation for severe cirrhosis, its impact on expanding the indications of liver resection (LR) and the consequent survival benefits must be evaluated. For repeat LR, LLR is advantageous by producing fewer adhesions and reducing the need for adhesiolysis. The laparoscopic approach facilitates better access in a small operative field between adhesions. Further evaluations are needed for repeat anatomical resection, since alterations of the anatomy and surrounding scars and adhesions of major vessels have a larger impact.

Laparoscopic liver surgery in cirrhosis - Addressing lesions in posterosuperior segments

BACKGROUND

Minimal-invasive liver resection has gained considerable attention in recent years, assuming a weighty position in the field of HPB surgery. Even lesions in posterosuperior segments, the technically most challenging localization, have been resected while achieving comparable outcomes to laparotomy. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether the similar beneficial results can be conveyed through minimal-invasive techniques for patients with liver cirrhosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection with at least one lesion in the posterosuperior liver segments (IVa, VII, VIII) at our center between January 2012 and July 2018. Patients were separated in two groups based on the presence (n = 43) or absence (n = 115) of liver cirrhosis.

RESULTS

Preoperative patient characteristics showed that patients with cirrhosis were older (p < 0.001), had more frequently diabetes (p < 0.005) and a history of alcohol consumption (p < 0.0005). Preoperative liver function, as assessed by LiMAx score was markedly decreased in patients with liver cirrhosis (p < 0.005). While a similar percentage in both groups had anatomical resection, significantly more major resections were performed in patients without cirrhosis (cirrhosis: 23.3% vs. no cirrhosis 55.7%; p < 0.0005). Consequently, surgeries were markedly longer in the no cirrhosis group (p < 0.0005). There was no difference with regard to the need for perioperative transfusion or conversion to laparotomy. There was no differences found between both groups with regard to the postoperative course showing similar ICU- and hospital stays. Complication rate, both with regard to minor and major complications, as well as rate of clear resection margins were similar between the two groups as well.

CONCLUSION

Patients with liver cirrhosis and a lesion in the posterosuperior liver segments are amenable to the minimal-invasive approaches as no significant differences can be observed with regard to safety and oncologic sufficiency. As these procedures are from a technical perspective challenging, they should be performed in specialized centers.

Intercostal and Glissonian Pedicle Approach in Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Bilobar Tumors

BACKGROUND

Bilobar liver metastasis is challenging for laparoscopic liver resection. Especially, subphrenic liver tumors in S7 or S8 are technically difficult to be resected out because the space is limited and the angle of instruments to lesions cannot be perpendicular.^1,2 Major liver lobectomy is also challenging for laparoscopic liver resection. Glissonian pedicle approach has benefit that any variation of vascular and bile duct elements does not need to be considered in the hepatoduodenal ligament under the hilar plate. Glissonian pedicle approach is simpler and faster than individual dissection of hepatoduodenal ligament.

METHODS

This video illustrates a hand-assisted laparoscopic left lobectomy and partial liver resection of S8 in a 48-year-old male with metastatic colorectal carcinoma to the liver. He received 6 cycle of FOLFOX as neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The patient was positioned in semi left lateral decubitus so that a lesion in S8 was easily approached. A tumor in S8 was approached after right lobe mobilization. The liver resection was performed by a harmonic scalpel. A 5-mm balloon port was placed in 6th intercostal space to approach the lesion perpendicular. For left hepatectomy, glissonian pedicle approach was applied to control vascular inflow. Dissections was performed at bifurcation on the right glissonian and left glissonian pedicles. Dissection direction to the left side was above hepatogastric ligament. The tunnel was created including all left glissonian sheath, and a vessel loop was taped. An endovascular stapler was inserted and fired with dividing the left glissonian pedicle as en bloc. Hepatic parenchymal dissection was performed by the harmonic scalpel. Left hepatic vein was divided using an endoscopic vascular stapler. The specimens were removed from a hand-port.

RESULTS

The operative time was 290 min. Blood loss was 250 ml, and no blood transfusion was required. He resumed a regular diet the next day and was discharged on postoperative day 4.

CONCLUSIONS

Intercostal approach is useful for subphrenic liver tumors, and glissonian pedicle approach is also useful for major lobectomy for laparoscopic liver resection.

Robotic Versus Open Minor Liver Resections of the Posterosuperior Segments: A Multinational, Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

Minor liver resections of posterosuperior segments (1, 4A, 7, 8) are challenging to perform laparoscopically and are mainly performed using an open approach. We determined the feasibility of robotic resections of posterosuperior segments and compared short-term outcomes with the open approach.

METHODS

Data on open and robotic minor (≤ 3 segments) liver resections including the posterosuperior segments, performed between 2009 and 2016, were collected retrospectively from four hospitals. Robotic and open liver resections were compared, before and after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

In total, 51 robotic and 145 open resections were included. After matching, 31 robotic resections were compared with 31 open resections. Median hospital stay was 4 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3-7) for the robotic group, versus 8 days (IQR 6-10) for the open group (p < 0.001). Median operative time was 222 min (IQR 164-505) for robotic cases versus 231 min (IQR 190-301) for open cases (p = 0.668). Median estimated blood loss was 200 mL (IQR 100-400) versus 300 mL (IQR 125-750), respectively (p = 0.212). In the robotic group, one patient (3%) had a major complication, versus three patients (10%) in the open group (p = 0.612). Readmissions were similar-10% in the robotic group versus 6% in the open group (p > 0.99). There was no mortality in either group.

CONCLUSION

Minor robotic liver resections of the posterosuperior segments are safe and feasible and display a shorter length of stay than open resections in selected patients at expert centers.

Segment 7 Laparoscopic Liver Resection: Is It Possible to Resect When Metastatic Lesions Border Suprahepatic Veins?

INTRODUCTION

After nearly 25 years of experience, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now recognized as being feasible and safe.1 However, laparoscopic resections of the posterosuperior segments are more technically demanding. They are associated with higher conversions rates, more intraoperative bleeding, and increased operating time.2 Appropriate training is required to approach these resections safely.3 This video demonstrates the technical maneuvers to laparoscopically approach a segment 7 tumor in contact with the right supra hepatic vein.

METHOD

The pertinent aspect to perform a segment 7 metastasis resection using minimally invasive techniques is shown. The main steps of this operation include (1) complete release of the right liver from the coronary and triangular ligament, (2) dissection of the retrohepatic vena cava and transection of the hepatocaval ligament, (3) the use of intercostal trocars for direct vision of the inferior vena cava and the right suprahepatic vein,4,5 (4) the use of intraoperative ultrasound to evaluate the position and limits of vascular structures compared to the lesion, (5) careful transection of the hepatic parenchyma, and (6) dissection of the right hepatic vein to separate it from the lesion.

RESULTS

The surgery was performed in a 68-year-old male patient. The patient developed synchronous metastases to the liver from a sigmoid colon tumor. Two lesions were identified; a 15 mm subcapsular lesion located in segment 5 and a 45 mm lesion located in segment 7 in contact with the right hepatic vein and inferior vena cava confluence. Previously, laparoscopic sigmoidectomy was performed without complications (TNM classification of the specimen: T3N0, with 31 resected lymph nodes, KRAS gene mutated). Following chemotherapy with FOLFOX + bevacizumab, a good response to the liver lesion was noted on imaging. Subsequently, a laparoscopic resection of the metastases in segment 7 and 5 was performed. The surgery lasted 210 min, intraoperative blood loss was 200 cm³, no Pringle maneuver was required, and the postoperative period was uneventful with the patient being discharged on postoperative day number four. Pathology of the liver specimens confirmed metastases from colon adenocarcinoma with free surgical margins.

DISCUSSION

Some important points achieving easier and safer approach of the posterior segments of the liver by laparoscopic route should be discussed. First, the patient's semi-lateral position showed in the video allows placing the ports and the optic in a more comfortable position since the lateral portion of the abdominal and thoracic wall becomes anterior. Another important point is the complete liberation of the hepatorenal, falciform, triangular, and right coronary ligaments in order to fully mobilize the liver and convert a segment that is posterior in the anatomical position to an anterior segment for the surgeon. And finally, the use of intercostal trocars that allows a direct and perpendicular view of the right hepatic vein and vena cava represents the most important point. Interestingly, these specific trocars should be inserted through the pleural cavity, during a forced expiration or apnea to avoid lung injury. In this context, the trocar balloon helps the surgeon to avoid displacement or that pneumoperitoneum enters the pleural cavity. At the end of the procedure, we strongly recommend to stitch laparoscopically these diaphragmatic openings after removing the trocars in order to avoid migration of abdominal fluid or bowel incarceration into the pleural cavity during the postoperative period and also to avoid future diaphragmatic hernia. In the present case, the parenchymal transection was performed with Thunderbeat (Olympus®, Japan), a device integrating both ultrasound dissection and advanced bipolar energy. We use this device because it saves time by sealing vessels up to 7 mm in diameter avoiding the need to use clips in the majority of intrahepatic veins and portal branches. However, currently, several techniques and devices are equivalent for parenchymal transection in laparoscopic liver resection and should be left to the surgeon's preference, as in open liver procedures.

CONCLUSION

Using laparoscopy to remove lesions in the posterior segments of the liver is safe and feasible. Vision from transthoracic port has the added benefit of making the dissection of right hepatic vein and inferior vena cava safer. Mastery of the anatomy is paramount before attempting this approach with minimally invasive techniques. Surgeons who attempt this operation should have expertise with both laparoscopy and liver surgery.

The Southampton Consensus Guidelines for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery: From Indication to Implementation

OBJECTIVE

The European Guidelines Meeting on Laparoscopic Liver Surgery was held in Southampton on February 10 and 11, 2017 with the aim of presenting and validating clinical practice guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery.

BACKGROUND

The exponential growth of laparoscopic liver surgery in recent years mandates the development of clinical practice guidelines to direct the speciality's continued safe progression and dissemination.

METHODS

A unique approach to the development of clinical guidelines was adopted. Three well-validated methods were integrated: the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology for the assessment of evidence and development of guideline statements; the Delphi method of establishing expert consensus, and the AGREE II-GRS Instrument for the assessment of the methodological quality and external validation of the final statements.

RESULTS

Along with the committee chairman, 22 European experts; 7 junior experts and an independent validation committee of 11 international surgeons produced 67 guideline statements for the safe progression and dissemination of laparoscopic liver surgery. Each of the statements reached at least a 95% consensus among the experts and were endorsed by the independent validation committee.

CONCLUSION

The European Guidelines Meeting for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery has produced a set of clinical practice guidelines that have been independently validated for the safe development and progression of laparoscopic liver surgery. The Southampton Guidelines have amalgamated the available evidence and a wealth of experts' knowledge taking in consideration the relevant stakeholders' opinions and complying with the international methodology standards.

The clinical and biological impacts of the implementation of fast-track perioperative programs in complex liver resections: A propensity score-based analysis between the open and laparoscopic approaches

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the fast-track approach in patients undergoing complex liver procedures and to analyse factors that influence morbidity and functional recovery.

METHODS

Hepatic resections (2014-2016) were stratified according to difficulty score, obtaining a group of 215 complex resections (102 laparoscopic, 163 open). The laparoscopic group was matched by propensity score with open patients to obtain the minimally invasive liver surgery group (n = 102) and the open group (n = 102).

RESULTS

Groups were similar in terms of patient and disease characteristics. The postoperative morbidity was 31.4% in the minimally invasive liver surgery and 38.2% in the open group (P = .05), and functional recovery was shorter in the minimally invasive liver surgery (respectively 4 versus 6 days, P = .041). The adherence to fast-track was high in both groups, with several items with higher penetrance in the minimally invasive liver surgery group. Among factors associated with morbidity and functional recovery, a laparoscopic approach and strict adherence to a fast-track protocol resulted in protective factors.

CONCLUSION

The combination of minimally invasive approaches and fast-track protocols allows a reduced rate of postoperative morbidity and satisfactory functional recovery even in the setting of complex liver resections. When the laparoscopic approach is not feasible, strict adherence to a fast-track program is associated with the achievement of adequate results and should be implemented.

Initial experience with purely laparoscopic living-donor right hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

There may be concerns about purely laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (PLDRH) compared with open donor right hepatectomy, especially when performed by surgeons accustomed to open surgery. This study aimed to describe technical tips and pitfalls in PLDRH.

METHODS

Data from donors who underwent PLDRH at Seoul National University Hospital between December 2015 and July 2017 were analysed retrospectively. Endpoints analysed included intraoperative events and postoperative complications. All operations were performed by a single surgeon with considerable experience in open living donor hepatectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 26 donors underwent purely laparoscopic right hepatectomy in the study interval. No donor required transfusion during surgery, whereas two underwent reoperation. In two donors, the dissection plane at the right upper deep portion of the midplane was not correct. One donor experienced portal vein injury during caudate lobe transection, and one developed remnant left hepatic duct stenosis. One donor experienced remnant portal vein angulation owing to a different approach angle, and one experienced arterial damage associated with the use of a laparoscopic energy device. One donor had postoperative bleeding due to masking of potential bleeding foci owing to intra-abdominal pressure during laparoscopy. Two donors experienced right liver surface damage caused by a xiphoid trocar.

CONCLUSION

Purely laparoscopic donor hepatectomy differs from open donor hepatectomy in terms of angle and caudal view. Therefore, surgeons experienced in open donor hepatectomy must gain adequate experience in laparoscopic liver surgery and make adjustments when performing PLDRH.

Systematic review of the feasibility and future of laparoscopic liver resection for difficult lesions

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now performed widely, but is difficult to accomplish in some anatomical locations, such as the posterosuperior segments (S7 and S8) and caudate lobe (S1). An international survey revealed that lesions in these locations are less frequently indicated for LLR than those in other segments. Recent reports from experienced centers document several case series and present technical tips for treating such lesions. The lateral approach using intercostal (transdiaphragmatic) trocars was reported to be useful for lesions in the posterosuperior segments with a semi- to full-decubitus position. The thoracoscopic approach was also reported to be useful for lesions just under the diaphragm dome, but the tumor location and patient selection should be considered carefully because pneumoperitoneum pressure and Pringle's maneuver cannot be applied. Several case series have described the feasibility of LLR for caudate lobe lesions, with similar operative outcomes to lesions in the posterosuperior segments, but this demands technical expertise. The caudal view of laparoscopy is advantageous for approaching the caudate lobe. We conducted a systematic review to clarify the feasibility of LLR for difficult lesions and discuss its current and future status.

Laparoscopic parenchymal sparing resections in segment 8: techniques for a demanding and infrequent procedure

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resections for lesions in the postero-superior segments are technically demanding due their deep location and relation with the vena cava. However, previous reports have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of these resections in centres with advanced experience in laparoscopic liver surgery. In this case series, we present our results and experience of laparoscopic parenchymal sparing liver resections of lesions in segment 8.

METHODS

All patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resections of segment 8 lesions, alone or combined with other liver resections, between August 2003 and July 2016 were included. Analysis of baseline characteristics and perioperative results was performed for the whole cohort. A separate subgroup analysis was performed for isolated segment 8 resections. Long-term results were analyzed in patients with colorectal liver metastases. A video is attached for thorough explanation of surgical technique.

RESULTS

A total of 30 patients were included. Among them, 13 patients had isolated segment 8 resections. Operative time for the whole cohort and isolated segment 8 resections were 210 min (range 180-247 min) and 200 min (range 90-300 min), respectively. The conversion rate was 3.4% for the entire cohort and 0 for isolated segment 8 resections. Major morbidity was 7 and 0%, respectively. R0 rates were 96% for the entire cohort and 92% for isolated segment 8 resections. Recurrence free survival in the colorectal liver metastasis subgroup was 82, 71 and 54% at 1, 3 and 5 years. Overall survival was 94, 82 and 65% at 1, 3 and 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic resection of lesions in segment 8 is feasible and offers the benefits of minimally invasive surgery with parenchyma sparing resections. However, advanced experience in LLR is essential to ensure safety and oncological results.

Operative and short-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases located in the posterosuperior liver: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection (LLR) of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) located in the posterosuperior liver (segments 4a, 7, and 8) is challenging but has become more practical recently due to progress in operative techniques. We aimed to compare tumor-specific, perioperative, and short-term oncological outcomes after LLR and open liver resection (OLR) for CRLM.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative resection of CRLM with at least 1 tumor in the posterosuperior liver during 2012-2015 were analyzed. Tumor-specific factors associated with the adoption of LLR were analyzed by logistic regression model. One-to-one propensity score matching was used to match baseline characteristics between patients with LLR and OLR.

RESULTS

The original cohort included 30 patients with LLR and 239 with OLR. Median follow-up time was 23.8 months. Logistic regression analysis showed that multiple, diameter ≥30 mm, deep location, and closeness to major vessels were associated with OLR. None of the 24 patients with none or one of these factors were converted from LLR to OLR. After matching, 29 patients with LLR and 29 with OLR were analyzed. The 2 groups had similar preoperative factors. The LLR and OLR groups did not differ with respect to operative time, intraoperative bleeding, incidence of blood transfusion, surgical margin positivity, incidence of postoperative complications, and unplanned readmission within 45 days. Median length of postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter for LLR versus OLR (4 days [1-12] vs. 5 days [4-18]; p = 0.0003). Median recurrence-free survival was similar for patients who underwent LLR versus OLR (10.6 months for LLR vs. 13.4 months for OLR; p = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to OLR, LLR of posterosuperior CRLM is associated with significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay but otherwise similar perioperative and short-term oncological outcomes. Tumor-specific factors associated with safe and routine LLR approach despite challenging location are superficial, solitary, and small (<30 mm) CRLM not associated with major vessels.

First quarter century of laparoscopic liver resection

The beginnings of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) were at the start of the 1990s, with the initial reports being published in 1991 and 1992. These were followed by reports of left lateral sectionectomy in 1996. In the years following, the procedures of LLR were expanded to hemi-hepatectomy, sectionectomy, segmentectomy and partial resection of posterosuperior segments, as well as the parenchymal preserving limited anatomical resection and modified anatomical (extended and/or combining limited) resection procedures. This expanded range of LLR procedures, mimicking the expansion of open liver resection in the past, was related to advances in both technology (instrumentation) and technical skill with conceptual changes. During this period of remarkable development, two international consensus conferences were held (2008 in Louisville, KY, United States, and 2014 in Morioka, Japan), providing up-to-date summarizations of the status and perspective of LLR. The advantages of LLR have become clear, and include reduced intraoperative bleeding, shorter hospital stay, and - especially for cirrhotic patients-lower incidence of complications (e.g., postoperative ascites and liver failure). In this paper, we review and discuss the developments of LLR in operative procedures (extent and style of liver resections) during the first quarter century since its inception, from the aspect of relationships with technological/technical developments with conceptual changes.

[Laparoscopic liver resection]

Laparoscopic liver surgery has become an established procedure in the treatment of liver tumors. Due to its short-term and long-term advantages, the number of centers with experience in laparoscopic liver surgery has greatly increased in the last few years. The complexity of the interventions performed has nearly reached the level of open surgery. This article describes the importance of laparoscopic hepatic surgery and discusses the evidence for the procedure. In addition, the indications for the most frequently resected tumors, metastases of colorectal cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma are explained together with important aspects of certain tumor localizations. In addition, the authors explain the technical aspects of the surgical technique and give an overview on new developments. To illustrate the possibilities of laparoscopic liver surgery, a video of a complete laparoscopically performed associating liver partition and portal vein ligation (ALPPS) procedure is available as supplementary material.

Laparoscopic liver resection for posterosuperior tumors using caudal approach and postural changes: A new technical approach

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for tumors in the posterosuperior liver [segment (S) 7 and deep S6] is a challenging clinical procedure. This area is located in the bottom of the small subphrenic space (rib cage), with the large and heavy right liver on it when the patient is in the supine position. Thus, LLR of this area is technically demanding because of the handling of the right liver which is necessary to obtain a fine surgical view, secure hemostasis and conduct the resection so as to achieve an appropriate surgical margin in the cage. Handling of the right liver may be performed by the hand-assisted approach, robotic liver resection or by using spacers, such as a sterile glove pouch. In addition, the operative field of posterosuperior resection is in the deep bottom area of the subphrenic cage, with the liver S6 obstructing the laparoscopic caudal view of lesions. The use of intercostal ports facilitates the direct lateral approach into the cage and to the target area, with the combination of mobilization of the liver. Postural changes during the LLR procedure have also been reported to facilitate the LLR for this area, such as left lateral positioning for posterior sectionectomy and semi-prone positioning for tumors in the posterosuperior segments. In our hospital, LLR procedures for posterosuperior tumors are performed via the caudal approach with postural changes. The left lateral position is used for posterior sectionectomy and the semi-prone position is used for S7 segmentectomy and partial resections of S7 and deep S6 without combined intercostal ports insertion. Although the movement of instruments is restricted in the caudal approach, compared to the lateral approach, port placement in the para-vertebra area makes the manipulation feasible and stable, with minimum damage to the environment around the liver.

Laparoscopic Total Caudate Lobectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Caudate lobe is located in the deep dorsal area of the liver between the portal triad and the inferior vena cava (IVC). Torrential bleeding can occur from the IVC and short hepatic veins during dissection. Isolated total caudate lobe resection is still rare and technically demanding. We herein present a video on the technical aspect of laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy.

METHOD

A 61-year-old woman was admitted for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma detected on imaging. She had history of multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma in July 2015 and underwent open cholecystectomy, segment 6 and segment 8 tumorectomy. Ten months later, the computed tomography scan and magnetic resonance imaging showed a 1 cm arterial enhancing lesion in segment I (S1) with no other foci of recurrence. Laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy was contemplated.

RESULTS

The operative time was 270 minutes. The intraoperative blood loss was 200 mL and blood transfusion was not necessary. The patient was discharged on the fourth postoperative day without any complications.

CONCLUSION

This report showed the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy. Nonetheless, it is a technically demanding procedure. It should be performed in carefully selected patients and by experienced hepatobiliary surgeons proficient in laparoscopic liver resection.

Short-term and middle-term evaluation of laparoscopic hepatectomies compared with open hepatectomies: A propensity score matching analysis

AIM

To compare short-term results between laparoscopic hepatectomy and open hepatectomy using a propensity score matching.

METHODS

A patient in the laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) group was randomly matched with another patient in the open liver resection (OLR) group using a 1:1 allocated ratio with the nearest estimated propensity score. Patients of the LLR group without matches were excluded. Matching criteria included age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, potential co-morbidities, hepatopathies, size and number of nodules, preoperative chemotherapy, minor or major liver resections. Intraoperative and postoperative data were compared in both groups.

RESULTS

From January 2012 to January 2015, a total of 241 hepatectomies were consecutively performed, of which 169 in the OLR group (70.1%) and 72 in the LLR group (29.9%). The conversion rate was 9.7% (n = 7). The mortality rate was 4.2% in the OLR group and 0% in the LLR group. Prior to and after propensity score matching, there was a statistically significant difference favorable to the LLR group regarding shorter operative times (185 min vs 247.5 min; P = 0.002), less blood loss (100 mL vs 300 mL; P = 0.002), a shorter hospital stay (7 d vs 9 d; P = 0.004), and a significantly lower rate of medical complications (4.3% vs 26.4%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resections seem to yield better short-term and mid-term results as compared to open hepatectomies and could well be considered a privileged approach and become the gold standard in carefully selected patients.

Anesthetic and operative considerations for laparoscopic liver resection

We enumerate the broad range of anesthetic considerations that affect the outcome of patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. Key elements for excellent outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection are careful patient selection and risk stratification, appropriate monitoring, techniques to reduce blood loss and transfusion, and active recovery management. Although some of these key elements are the same for open liver operation, there are specific anesthetic considerations of which both the surgical and anesthesia teams must be aware to achieve optimal patient outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection. While unique advantages of laparoscopic liver resection typically include decreased intraoperative bleeding, transfusion requirements, and a lower incidence of postoperative ascites, specific challenges include management of the complicated interplay between low-volume anesthesia and increased intraabdominal pressure due to pneumoperitoneum, with additional considerations regarding circulatory support to treat acute blood loss with need for emergent conversion in some cases. This article will address in detail the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative anesthetic considerations for patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection that both the surgical and anesthesia team should be aware of to optimize outcomes.

Use of intercostal trocars for laparoscopic resection of subphrenic hepatic tumors

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the detailed surgical techniques of laparoscopic hepatectomy using intercostal transthoracic trocars for subcapsular tumors located in segment VII or VIII.

METHODS

Intercostal transthoracic trocars were used in patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy for tumors located in segment VII or VIII. Following establishment of pneumoperitoneum and placement of abdominal trocars, balloon-tipped trocars were inserted into the abdominal cavity from the intercostal space and through the pleural space and diaphragm. Upon placement of the intercostal trocars, the lung edge was confirmed by ultrasonography and laparoscopic examination. Following minimal mobilization of the right liver, hemispherical wedge resection of segment VII or VIII was performed using the intercostal trocars as a camera port or for the forceps of the surgeon's left hand. After the hepatectomy, the holes in the diaphragm were sutured closed.

RESULTS

Among the 79 patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy, intercostal trocars were used in 14 patients for resection of tumors located in segment VII (4 nodules) or VIII (10 nodules). The median (range) operation time and amount of blood loss for hepatectomy were 225 (109-477) min and 60 (20-310) mL, respectively. No postoperative complications associated with hepatectomy or the use of intercostal trocars occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of intercostal transthoracic trocars is safe and effective not only for complicated laparoscopic hepatectomy but also for hemispherical wedge resections of subcapsular hepatic tumors located in segment VII or VIII.

Comparison of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma located in the posterosuperior segments or anterolateral segments: A case-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is an attractive option for treating liver tumors. Laparoscopic liver resection is more difficult for hepatocellular carcinomas located in the posterosuperior segments than for hepatocellular carcinomas in the anterolateral segments. We compared perioperative and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinomas located in the posterosuperior and anterolateral segments.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data for 230 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinomas between September 2003 and July 2014. Of these, 116 patients were selected by case-matched analysis using age, sex, tumor number and size, Child-Pugh class, and extent of liver resection. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to tumor location: the anterolateral group (n = 58) and the posterosuperior group (n = 58).

RESULTS

Operation time (355 minutes vs 212 minutes, P < .005), intraoperative blood loss (600 mL vs 410 mL, P < .001), and hospital stay (8.5 days vs 7 days, P = .040) were significantly greater in the posterosuperior group than in the anterolateral group. The open conversion (13.8% vs 10.3%, P = .777), postoperative complication (17.2% vs 10.3%, P = .420), 5-year overall survival (88.5% vs 85.7%, P = .370), and 5-year, recurrence-free survival (47.6% vs 40.9%, P = .678) rates were not significantly different between the posterosuperior and anterolateral groups.

CONCLUSION

Although laparoscopic liver resection is more difficult for hepatocellular carcinomas located in the posterosuperior segment, there were no differences in the short- and long-term outcomes between the posterosuperior and anterolateral groups. The perceived impact of tumor location on patient outcomes could be overcome by experience and technical improvements.

Feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection for caudate lobe: technical strategy and comparative analysis with anteroinferior and posterosuperior segments

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now considered a standard procedure in peripheral segments, there are few reports on laparoscopic segment 1 (Sg1) resection. The aim of this study was to assess both safety and feasibility of Sg1 LLR.

METHODS

From 2000 to 2014, all patients who underwent LLR were identified from a prospective database. Patients with resection of Sg1 (Sg1 group) were compared with those with resection of anteroinferior segments (AI group: segments 3, 4b, 5, 6) or posterosuperior segments (PS group: segments 4a, 7, 8), in terms of tumor characteristics, surgical treatment, and short-term outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 15, 151, and 67 patients in Sg1, AI, and PS groups. Tumor size and tumor number were similar between the three groups (p = 0.139, p = 0.102). Operative time was significantly shorter in Sg1 (150 min) and AI group (135 min) compared with PS group (180 min) (p = 0.021). Median blood loss was notably higher in PS group (140 ml) compared with Sg1 group (75 ml) and AI group (10 ml) (p = 0.001). No mortality was observed in all groups. Postoperative complication rate was 20.0 % with Sg1 group, 14.6 % with AI group, and 20.9 % with PS group (p = 0.060). The rate of major complication was significantly higher in Sg1 group (13.3 %) and PS group (11.9 %) compared with AI group (4.0 %) (p = 0.042). Resection margins were clear in all Sg1 and PS group patients, whereas two (1.3 %) patients in AI group had R1 margins (p = 0.586).

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach of isolated resection located in the caudate lobe is a feasible and curative surgical option in selected patients.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Experience based guidelines

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been progressively developed along the past two decades. Despite initial skepticism, improved operative results made laparoscopic approach incorporated to surgical practice and operations increased in frequency and complexity. Evidence supporting LLR comes from case-series, comparative studies and meta-analysis. Despite lack of level 1 evidence, the body of literature is stronger and existing data confirms the safety, feasibility and benefits of laparoscopic approach when compared to open resection. Indications for LLR do not differ from those for open surgery. They include benign and malignant (both primary and metastatic) tumors and living donor liver harvesting. Currently, resection of lesions located on anterolateral segments and left lateral sectionectomy are performed systematically by laparoscopy in hepatobiliary specialized centers. Resection of lesions located on posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8) and major liver resections were shown to be feasible but remain technically demanding procedures, which should be reserved to experienced surgeons. Hand-assisted and laparoscopy-assisted procedures appeared to increase the indications of minimally invasive liver surgery and are useful strategies applied to difficult and major resections. LLR proved to be safe for malignant lesions and offers some short-term advantages over open resection. Oncological results including resection margin status and long-term survival were not inferior to open resection. At present, surgical community expects high quality studies to base the already perceived better outcomes achieved by laparoscopy in major centers’ practice. Continuous surgical training, as well as new technologies should augment the application of laparoscopic liver surgery. Future applicability of new technologies such as robot assistance and image-guided surgery is still under investigation.

Incidence, risk factors and consequences of bile leakage following laparoscopic major hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Bile leakage (BL) remains a common cause of major morbidity after open major liver resection but has only been poorly described in patients undergoing laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH). The present study aimed to determine the incidence, risk factors and consequences of BL following LMH.

METHODS

All 223 patients undergoing LMH between 2000 and 2013 at two tertiary referral centres were retrospectively analysed. BL was defined according to the International Study Group of Liver Surgery, and its incidence and consequences were assessed. Risk factors for BL were determined on multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

BL occurred in 30 (13.5 %) patients, and its incidence remained stable over time (p = 0.200). BL was diagnosed following the presence of bile into the abdominal drain in 14 (46.7 %) patients and after drainage of symptomatic abdominal collections in 16 (53.3 %) patients without intra-operative drain placement. Grade A, B and C BL occurred in 3 (10.0 %), 23 (76.6 %) and 4 (13.4 %) cases, respectively. Interventional procedures for BL included endoscopic retrograde cholangiography, percutaneous and surgical drainage in 10 (33.3 %), 23 (76.7 %) and 4 (13.3 %) patients, respectively. BL was associated with significantly increased rates of symptomatic pleural effusion (30.0 vs. 11.4 %, p = 0.006), multiorgan failure (13.3 vs. 3.6 %, p = 0.022), postoperative death (10.0 vs. 1.6 %, p = 0.008) and prolonged hospital stay (18 vs. 8 days, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, BMI > 28 kg/m(2) (OR 2.439, 95 % CI 1.878-2.771, p = 0.036), history of hepatectomy (OR 1.675, 95 % CI 1.256-2.035, p = 0.044) and biliary reconstruction (OR 1.975, 95 % CI 1.452-2.371, p = 0.039) were significantly associated with increased risk of BL.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

After LMH, BL occurred in 13.5 % of the patients and was associated with significant morbidity. Patients with one or several risk factors for BL should benefit intra-operative drain placement.