Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Liver Resections: An International Multicenter Study

Validation of the Iwate scoring system for the stratification of laparoscopic liver resections: An international multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

The Iwate difficulty scoring system (DSS) is one of the most widely validated DSS for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). However, these studies only validated the 4 difficulty levels and did not validate the 12-point difficulty index of the system. To address current limitations in the studies validating the Iwate difficulty scoring system (DSS), we performed an international multicenter study to validate the Iwate DSS across both its four difficulty levels and 12-point difficulty index.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of 22,252 patients undergoing LLR across 64 centers worldwide between 2005 and 2021 was performed. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were analyzed across the four difficulty levels and 12-point difficulty index of the Iwate DSS.

RESULTS

A total of 14,759 patients met the inclusion criteria. The main indications for LLR were hepatocellular carcinoma/intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (52.8 %), and metastatic tumors liver (26.5 %). In terms of underlying liver pathology, 5127 patients (34.8 %) had liver cirrhosis, and 1214 patients (8.3 %) had portal hypertension. Intraoperative outcomes (operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion, use of Pringles maneuver and open conversion) and postoperative outcomes (length of stay, morbidity, major complications, and 90-day mortality) significantly increased with stepwise increases across the four difficulty levels (P < 0.001) and 12-point difficulty index (P < 0.001). These trends remained significant following adjustment for baseline characteristics (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The Iwate DSS 12-point difficulty index and four difficulty levels correlated well with LLR difficulty as determined by key surrogate perioperative measures.

Surgical protocol of robotic liver resection using a two-surgeon technique (TAKUMI-3): a technical note and initial outcomes

BACKGROUND

Internationally, evidence supporting robotic liver resection (RLR) has gradually increased in recent years. However, a standardized protocol for RLR remains lacking. This study describes a surgical protocol and the initial outcomes of RLR in a high-volume center for robotic hepatopancreatobiliary surgery in Japan.

METHODS

Patients were placed in the reverse Trendelenburg position, with a supine position for anterolateral tumors and left lateral position for posterosuperior tumors. Our standard RLR protocol involved a two-surgeon technique. Liver parenchymal transection was performed by an assistant using the clamp crush technique with a console, with or without a laparoscopic Cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator (CUSA). Surgical techniques, including the tips, tricks, and pitfalls of RLR, are also demonstrated.

RESULTS

We performed 113 RLR at our institution for common primary diseases, including hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 52, 46.0%) and metastatic tumors (n = 48, 42.5%) between July 2022 and December 2024. The median operative time and estimated blood loss were 156 min (interquartile range [IQR], 121-209 min) and 20 mL (IQR, 0-100 mL), respectively. During liver parenchymal transection, a laparoscopic CUSA was used in 59 patients (52.2%), and a water-jet scalpel was used in 12 patients (10.6%). The incidence of mortality, major complications, and bile leakage was 0%, 6.2%, and 2.7%, respectively. The median hospital stay was 7 days (IQR, 6-9 days).

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully introduced an RLR program using the two-surgeon technique. Safe implementation of RLR can be achieved upon completion of the training program and thorough understanding of the surgical protocols.

Analysis of a modified surgical desirability of outcome ranking (mDOOR) among patients undergoing surgery for Hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Composite measures represent a validated method for evaluating surgical care quality. We defined a modified Desirability Of Outcome Ranking (mDOOR) and compared it with textbook outcome (TO).

METHODS

In this cohort study, patients undergoing curative-intent surgery for HCC were identified from an international cohort. The performance and agreement of mDOOR, TO, and other measures of postoperative course with respect to overall survival (OS) were compared using Harrell's Concordance-index (C-index) and Cohen's kappa.

RESULTS

Among 2181 patients, 77.6 % (n = 1692) achieved the most desirable outcome (i.e., DOOR1), whereas roughly one-half of patients achieved TO (n = 1,171, 53.7 %). Patients with lower mDOOR had a better 5-year OS compared with patients with higher mDOOR (64.7 % vs. 51.9 %; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, higher mDOOR was associated with worse OS (HR 1.35, 95%CI 1.28-1.44; p < 0.001). The mDOOR demonstrated improved performance compared with the comprehensive complication index (C-index: 0.696 vs. 0.649; p < 0.001) and the Accordion score (C-index: 0.696 vs. 0.653; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Roughly 4 out of 5 patients achieved the most desirable outcome. Higher mDOOR was associated with worse long-term outcomes. A composite outcome ranking may provide more insight on surgical outcomes, complementing traditional metrics.

Predicting the complexity of minimally invasive liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma using machine learning

BACKGROUND

Despite technical advancements, minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains challenging. Nonetheless, effective tools to assess MILS complexity are still lacking. Machine learning (ML) models could improve the accuracy of such tools.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative-intent MILS for HCC were identified using an international database. An XGBoost ML model was developed to predict surgical complexity using clinical and radiological characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 845 patients, 186 (22.0 %) were classified as high-risk patients. In this subgroup, median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (5.0, IQR 3.0-7.0 vs. 2.0, IQR 2.0-5.0, p < 0.001) and tumor burden score (TBS) (median 4.12, IQR 3.0-5.1 vs. 4.22, IQR 3.2-7.1, p < 0.001) were higher. The model was able to effectively predict complexity of surgery in both the training and testing cohorts with high discriminating power (ROC-AUC: 0.86, 95%CI 0.82-0.89 vs. 0.73, 95%CI 0.65-0.81). The most influential variables were CCI, TBS, BMI, extent of resection, and sex. Patients predicted to have a complex surgery were more likely to develop severe complications (OR 4.77, 95%CI 1.82-13.9, p = 0.002). An easy-to-use calculator was developed.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative ML-prediction of complex MILS for HCC may improve preoperative planning, resource allocation, and patient outcomes.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic central hepatectomy: a comparison with open surgery

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resection has advantages over open liver resection, including reduced blood loss and shorter hospital stays. Laparoscopic central hepatectomy (CH) is a highly challenging procedure, and such outcomes can only be achieved with a high level of expertise in laparoscopic liver surgery. Laparoscopic CH remains challenging, with safety and efficacy unclear. This study retrospectively evaluated the intra- and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open CH and assessed safety and efficacy of laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

CH included anterior sectionectomy (AS) and central bisectionectomy (CBS) (excluding cases with biliary reconstruction). The study comprised 38 patients receiving CH in our department from January 2010 to November 2023.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic group included 14 cases and the open group 24. AS/CBS was performed in 14/10 open group cases and 6/8 laparoscopic group cases. Short-term surgical outcomes showed no significant between-group difference in operative time, but the laparoscopic group lost significantly less blood (250 vs. 985 mL; p = 0.001) and the transfusion rate was lower (14% vs. 46%; p = 0.004). Among postoperative outcomes, incidence of bile leakage was not significantly different (33% vs. 42%; p = 0.42), but the laparoscopic group had significantly less postoperative ascites (0% vs. 17%; p = 0.047), fewer surgical site infections (SSI) (0% vs. 21%; p = 0.02), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (14 vs. 30 days; p = 0.005). The risk factor for bile leakage in CH by univariate and multivariate analysis was tumor proximity to the right anterior Glissonean pedicle (OR = 6.84; 95% CI = 1.67-32.7; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic CH could be performed safely. Compared to open surgery, laparoscopic CH was effective in reducing blood loss, postoperative ascites, SSIs, and shortening postoperative hospital stay. However, tumors close to the root of the right anterior Glissonean pedicle were considered a risk factor for postoperative bile leakage and require caution.

Recommendations on Robotic Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery. The Paris Jury-Based Consensus Conference

OBJECTIVE

To establish the first consensus guidelines on the safety and indications of robotics in Hepato-Pancreatic-Biliary (HPB) surgery. The secondary aim was to identify priorities for future research.

BACKGROUND

HPB robotic surgery is reaching the IDEAL 2b exploration phase for innovative technology. An objective assessment endorsed by the HPB community is timely and needed.

METHODS

The ROBOT4HPB conference developed consensus guidelines using the Zurich-Danish model. An impartial and multidisciplinary jury produced unbiased guidelines based on the work of 10 expert panels answering predefined key questions and considering the best-quality evidence retrieved after a systematic review. The recommendations conformed with the GRADE and SIGN50 methodologies.

RESULTS

Sixty-four experts from 20 countries considered 285 studies, and the conference included an audience of 220 attendees. The jury (n=10) produced recommendations or statements covering 5 sections of robotic HPB surgery: technology, training and expertise, outcome assessment, and liver and pancreatic procedures. The recommendations supported the feasibility of robotics for most HPB procedures and its potential value in extending minimally invasive indications, emphasizing, however, the importance of expertise to ensure safety. The concept of expertise was defined broadly, encompassing requirements for credentialing HPB robotics at a given center. The jury prioritized relevant questions for future trials and emphasized the need for prospective registries, including validated outcome metrics for the forthcoming assessment of HPB robotics.

CONCLUSIONS

The ROBOT4HPB consensus represents a collaborative and multidisciplinary initiative, defining state-of-the-art expertise in HPB robotics procedures. It produced the first guidelines to encourage their safe use and promotion.

Risk Factors for Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction After Liver Cancer Surgery

Background/Aim

Although the frequency of small bowel obstructions after liver surgery is generally considered low, previous studies have followed-up patients for less than a year, thus the incidence of small bowel obstructions several years after surgery is unknown. Furthermore, the rise in laparoscopic surgeries and the use of adhesion prevention materials may influence the occurrence of small bowel obstructions. This  study aimed to assess the incidence of small bowel obstructions within a five-year period following liver surgery and identify the associated risk factors.

Patients and Methods

This case series analysis analyzed patients who underwent liver surgery between April 2012 and March 2014 from 32 participating hospitals. Multivariate analysis was conducted to examine risk factors for small bowel obstructions.

Results

A total of 953 patients were included in the analysis, and the incidence of small bowel obstructions was 1.6%. The incidence was significantly higher at 3.4% for surgeries related to metastatic liver cancer compared to other types of surgeries. Laparoscopic surgery had no significant effect on the incidence of SBO (p=0.72). There was no significant difference in the incidence of small bowel obstructions between surgeries that employed adhesion prevention materials and those that did not. Multivariable analysis revealed that longer surgical time and re-operation were independent risk factors for small bowel obstructions.

Conclusion

The incidence of small bowel obstructions following surgery for metastatic liver cancer is significantly higher compared to other liver surgeries. Neither laparoscopic surgery nor adhesion prevention materials reduce its occurrence. Longer surgical time and re-operation are independent risk factors for small bowel obstructions.

Augmented reality improving intraoperative navigation in minimally invasive liver surgery: an interplay between 3D reconstruction and indocyanine green

Technology have helped surgeons to increase MILS feasibility, so that currently liver surgery evolution is strongly based on technological advances and the same trend is expected even further soon. Aim of the present technical report is to provide insights regarding the possible interplay between 3D reconstructions based on augmented reality and intraoperative navigation by indocyanine green fluorescence. Augmented reality methods based on reconstructions created through artificial intelligence interact synergistically. The better the understanding of the anatomy and characteristics of the lesion, the more accurate the preoperative planning may be scheduled. On the other hand, the better the intraoperative navigation, the more reproducible the preoperative planning becomes.

Global Outcomes Benchmarks in Laparoscopic Liver Surgery for Segments 7 and 8: International Multicenter Analysis

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been growing interest in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and the audit of the results of surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to define reference values for LLR in segments 7 and 8.

STUDY DESIGN

Data on LLR in segments 7 and 8 between January 2000 and December 2020 were collected from 19 expert centers. Reference cases were defined as no previous hepatectomy, American Society of Anesthesiologists score less than 3, BMI less than 35 kg/m 2 , no chronic kidney disease, no cirrhosis and portal hypertension, no COPD (forced expiratory volume 1 <80%), and no cardiac disease. Reference values were obtained from the 75th percentile of the medians of all reference centers.

RESULTS

Of 585 patients, 461 (78.8%) met the reference criteria. The overall complication rate was 27.5% (6% were Clavien-Dindo 3a or more) with a mean Comprehensive Complication Index of 7.5 ± 16.5. At 90-day follow-up, the reference values for overall complication were 31%, Clavien-Dindo 3a or more was 7.4%, conversion was 4.4%, hospital stay was less than 6 days, and readmission rate was <8.33%. Patients from Eastern centers categorized as low risk had a lower rate of overall complication (20.9% vs 31.2%, p = 0.01) with similar Clavien-Dindo 3a or more (5.5% and 4.8%, p = 0.83) compared with patients from Western centers, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows the need to establish standards for the postoperative outcomes in LLR based on the complexity of the resection and the location of the lesions.

A critical analysis of surgical outcomes indicators in hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: From crude mortality to composite outcomes

BACKGROUND

Indicators of surgical outcomes are designed to objectively evaluate surgical performance, enabling comparisons among surgeons and institutions. In recent years, there has been a surge in complex indicators of perioperative short-term and long-term outcomes. The aim of this narrative review is to provide an overview and a critical analysis of surgical outcomes indicators, with a special emphasis on hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery.

METHODS

A narrative review of outcome measures was conducted using a combined text and MeSH search strategy to identify relevant articles focused on perioperative outcomes, specifically within HPB surgery.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 624 records, and 94 studies were included in the analysis. Included papers were classified depending on whether they assessed intraoperative or postoperative specific or composite outcomes, and whether they assessed purely clinical or combined clinical and socio-economic indicators. Specific indicators included in composite outcomes were categorized into three main domains: intraoperative metrics, postoperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes. While postoperative mortality, complications, hospital stay and readmission were the indicators most frequently included in composite outcomes, oncological outcomes were rarely considered.

CONCLUSIONS

The evolution of surgical outcomes has shifted from the simplistic assessment of crude mortality rates to complex composite outcomes. Whether the recent explosion of publications on these topics has a clinical impact in real life is questionable. Outcomes from the patient perspective, integrating social and financial indicators, are not yet integrated into most of these composite analytical tools but should not be underestimated.

6,126 hepatectomies in 2022: current trend of outcome in Italy

PURPOSE

Whether hospital volume affects outcome of patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery, and whether the centralization of such procedures is justified remains to be investigated. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome of liver surgery in Italy in relationship of hospital volume.

METHODS

This is a nationwide retrospective observational study conducted on data collected by the National Italian Registry "Piano Nazionale Esiti" (PNE) 2023 that included all liver procedures performed in 2022. Outcome measure were case volume and 30-day mortality. Hospitals were classified as very high-volume (H-Vol), intermediate-volume (I-Vol), low-volume (L-Vol) and very low-volume (VL-VoL). A review on centralization process and outcome measures was added.

RESULTS

6,126 liver resections for liver tumors were performed in 327 hospitals in 2022. The 30-day mortality was 2.2%. There were 14 H-Vol, 19 I-Vol, 31 L-Vol and 263 VL-Vol hospitals with 30-day mortality of 1.7%, 2.2%, 2.6% and 3.6% respectively (P < 0.001); 220 centers (83%) performed less than 10 resections, and 78 (29%) centers only 1 resection in 2022. By considering the geographical macro-areas, the median count of liver resection performed in northern Italy exceeded those in central and southern Italy (57% vs. 23% vs. 20%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

High-volume has been confirmed to be associated to better outcome after hepatobiliary surgical procedures. Further studies are required to detail the factors associated with mortality. The centralization process should be redesigned and oversight.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were conducted. Surface under cumulative ranking area values, mean difference, odds ratio, and 95% credible intervals were calculated for all outcomes. Cluster analysis was performed to determine the most cost-effective clustering approach. Costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, and costs-efficacy were the primary outcomes assessed, with postoperative overall morbidity, mortality, and length of stay associated with total costs for open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic liver resection incurred the lowest total costs (laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection: mean difference -2,529.84, 95% credible intervals -4,192.69 to -884.83; laparoscopic liver resection versus robotic liver resection: mean difference -3,363.37, 95% credible intervals -5,629.24 to -1,119.38). Open liver resection had the lowest procedural costs but incurred the highest hospitalization costs compared to laparoscopic liver resection and robotic liver resection. Conversely, robotic liver resection had the highest total and procedural costs but the lowest hospitalization costs. Robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection had a significantly reduced length of stay than open liver resection and showed less postoperative morbidity. Laparoscopic liver resection resulted in the lowest readmission and liver-specific complication rates. Laparoscopic liver resection and robotic liver resection demonstrated advantages in costs-morbidity efficiency. While robotic liver resection offered notable benefits in mortality and length of stay, these were balanced against its highest total costs, presenting a nuanced trade-off in the costs-mortality and costs-efficacy analyses.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resection represents a more cost-effective option for hepatectomy with superior postoperative outcomes and shorter length of stay than open liver resection. Robotic liver resection, though costlier than laparoscopic liver resection, along with laparoscopic liver resection, consistently exceeds open liver resection in surgical performance.

Towards a Standardization of Learning Curve Assessment in Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to analyze the learning curves of minimal invasive liver surgery(MILS) and propose a standardized reporting.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

MILS offers benefits compared to open resections. For a safe introduction along the learning curve, formal training is recommended. However, definitions of learning curves and methods to assess it lack standardization.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases identified studies on learning curves in MILS. The primary outcome was the number needed to overcome the learning curve. Secondary outcomes included endpoints defining learning curves, and characterization of different learning phases(competency, proficiency and mastery).

RESULTS

60 articles with 12'241 patients and 102 learning curve analyses were included. The laparoscopic and robotic approach was evaluated in 71 and 18 analyses and both approaches combined in 13 analyses. Sixty-one analyses (60%) based the learning curve on statistical calculations. The most often used parameters to define learning curves were operative time (n=64), blood loss (n=54), conversion (n=42) and postoperative complications (n=38). Overall competency, proficiency and mastery were reached after 34 (IQR 19-56), 50 (IQR 24-74), 58 (IQR 24-100) procedures respectively. Intraoperative parameters improved earlier (operative time: competency to proficiency to mastery: -13%, 2%; blood loss: competency to proficiency to mastery: -33%, 0%; conversion rate (competency to proficiency to mastery; -21%, -29%), whereas postoperative complications improved later (competency to proficiency to mastery: -25%, -41%).

CONCLUSIONS

This review summarizes the highest evidence on learning curves in MILS taking into account different definitions and confounding factors. A standardized three-phase reporting of learning phases (competency, proficiency, mastery) is proposed and should be followed.

Benchmarks in Liver Resection for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Benchmarking in surgery has been proposed as a means to compare results across institutions to establish best practices. We sought to define benchmark values for hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) across an international population.

METHODS

Patients who underwent liver resection for ICC between 1990 and 2020 were identified from an international database, including 14 Eastern and Western institutions. Patients operated on at high-volume centers who had no preoperative jaundice, ASA class <3, body mass index <35 km/m2, without need for bile duct or vascular resection were chosen as the benchmark group.

RESULTS

Among 1193 patients who underwent curative-intent hepatectomy for ICC, 600 (50.3%) were included in the benchmark group. Among benchmark patients, median age was 58.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 49.0-67.0), only 28 (4.7%) patients received neoadjuvant therapy, and most patients had a minor resection (n = 499, 83.2%). Benchmark values included ≥3 lymph nodes retrieved when lymphadenectomy was performed, blood loss ≤600 mL, perioperative blood transfusion rate ≤42.9%, and operative time ≤339 min. The postoperative benchmark values included TOO achievement ≥59.3%, positive resection margin ≤27.5%, 30-day readmission ≤3.6%, Clavien-Dindo III or more complications ≤14.3%, and 90-day mortality ≤4.8%, as well as hospital stay ≤14 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmark cutoffs targeting short-term perioperative outcomes can help to facilitate comparisons across hospitals performing liver resection for ICC, assess inter-institutional variation, and identify the highest-performing centers to improve surgical and oncologic outcomes.

Explainable artificial intelligence prediction-based model in laparoscopic liver surgery for segments 7 and 8: an international multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming more useful as a decision-making and outcomes predictor tool. We have developed AI models to predict surgical complexity and the postoperative course in laparoscopic liver surgery for segments 7 and 8.

METHODS

We included patients with lesions located in segments 7 and 8 operated by minimally invasive liver surgery from an international multi-institutional database. We have employed AI models to predict surgical complexity and postoperative outcomes. Furthermore, we have applied SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to make the AI models interpretable. Finally, we analyzed the surgeries not converted to open versus those converted to open.

RESULTS

Overall, 585 patients and 22 variables were included. Multi-layer Perceptron (MLP) showed the highest performance for predicting surgery complexity and Random Forest (RF) for predicting postoperative outcomes. SHAP detected that MLP and RF gave the highest relevance to the variables "resection type" and "largest tumor size" for predicting surgery complexity and postoperative outcomes. In addition, we explored between surgeries converted to open and non-converted, finding statistically significant differences in the variables "tumor location," "blood loss," "complications," and "operation time."

CONCLUSION

We have observed how the application of SHAP allows us to understand the predictions of AI models in surgical complexity and the postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic liver surgery in segments 7 and 8.

Comparing indications, complexity and outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection between centers with and without a liver transplant program: a French nationwide study

BACKGROUND

There are no data to evaluate the difference in populations and impact of centers with liver transplant programs in performing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

METHODS

This was a multicenter study including patients undergoing LLR for benign and malignant tumors at 27 French centers from 1996 to 2018. The main outcomes were postoperative severe morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 3154 patients were included, and 14 centers were classified as transplant centers (N = 2167 patients, 68.7 %). The transplant centers performed more difficult LLRs and more resections for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients who more frequently had cirrhosis. A higher rate of performing the Pringle maneuver, a lower rate of blood loss and a higher rate of open conversion (all p < 0.05) were observed in the transplant centers. There was no association between the presence of a liver transplant program and either postoperative severe morbidity (<10 % in each group; p = 0.228) or mortality (1 % in each group; p = 0.915).

CONCLUSIONS

Most HCCs, difficult LLRs, and cirrhotic patients are treated in transplant centers. We show that all centers can achieve comparable safety and quality of care in LLR independent of the presence of a liver transplant program.

Early experience with pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy: comparison with open donor hepatectomy and non-donor laparoscopic hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (L-DH) has seen a rise in uptake in recent years following the popularization of minimally invasive modality for major hepatobiliary surgery. Our study aimed to determine the safety and compare the perioperative outcomes of L-DH with open donor hepatectomy (O-DH) and laparoscopic non donor hepatectomy (L-NDH) based on our single institution experience.

METHODS

Eighty of 113 laparoscopic hemi-hepatectomies performed between 2015 and 2022 met study inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 were L-DH. PSM in a 1:2 ratio of L-DH versus L-NDH and 1:1 ratio of L-DH versus O-DH were performed, identifying patients with similar baseline clinicopathological characteristics.

RESULTS

After 2:1 matching, the L-DH cohort were significantly younger (P < 0.001) and had lower ASA scores (P < 0.001) than the L-NDH cohort. L-DH was associated with a longer median operating time (P < 0.001) and shorter median postoperative stay (P < 0.001) than L-NDH. After 1:1 matching, there were no significant differences in baseline demographic between the L-DH and O-DH cohorts. L-DH was associated with lower median blood loss (P = 0.040) and shorter length of stay compared to O-DH (P = 0.004). There were no significant differences in recipient outcomes for both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

L-DH can be adopted safely by surgeons experienced in L-NDH and ODH. It is associated with decreased blood loss and shorter length of stay compared to O-DH.

Management of potential portal vein thrombus during laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy following portal vein embolization

BACKGROUND

Portal vein embolization (PVE) is often performed prior to right hemihepatectomy (RH) to increase the future liver remnants. However, intraoperative removal of portal vein thrombus (PVT) is occasionally required. An algorithm for treating the right branch of the PV using laparoscopic RH (LRH) after PVE is lacking and requires further investigation.

METHODS

In our department, after the confirmation of a lack of extension of PVT to the main portal trunk or left branch on preoperative examination (ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography), a final evaluation was performed using intraoperative ultrasonography (IOUS). Here we present the cases of eight patients who underwent LRH after PVE and examine the safety of our treatment strategies.

RESULTS

IOUS revealed PVT extension into the main portal trunk in two cases. For the other six patients without PVT extension, we continued the laparoscopic procedure. In contrast, in the two cases with PVT extension, we converted to laparotomy after hepatic transection and removed the PVT. The median operation time for hepatectomy was 562 min (421-659 min), the median blood loss was 293 mL (85-1010 mL), no liver-related postoperative complications were observed, and the median length of stay was 10 days (6-34 days).

CONCLUSIONS

PVT evaluation and removal are important in cases of LRH after PVE. Our strategy is safe and IOUS is particularly useful for laparoscopically evaluating PVT extension.

Navigator nurse implementation within a fast track program of liver resections: How to improve the healthcare service and perioperative results

BACKGROUND

The introduction into the clinical practice of the navigator nurse (NaNu) to address the task of counseling and short term follow-up help the effective implementation of the fast track protocol. The aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of the standardization of the NaNu's role in patients undergoing liver surgery.

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective liver surgery for all diagnosis and approach, from 2015, received counseling and postoperative follow-up by NaNu and constituted the study group (n = 890). This group was compared with the control group (n = 712) including patients treated in the era before the implementation of the NaNu role (2011-2014). Outcome was evaluated in terms of discrepancy between functional recovery and discharge, number of ER accesses, number of readmissions.

RESULTS

Preoperative characteristics of patients and disease, as well as type of resection and postoperative outcomes were similar between the two groups. The proportion of laparoscopic cases was higher in the study group (51.2% vs. 32% in the control). Time for discharge, interval between functional recovery and discharge, number of ER accesses and number of readmissions were reduced in the study group. Benign diagnosis, absence of complications, laparoscopic approach and presence of NaNu were independent predictors of shorter length of stay. The positive effect of NaNu's activation was recorded in patients with complications and undergoing open surgery.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of NaNu's role has allowed to us optimize the level of healthcare service offered to patients. The wider benefit was offered in the setting of complex patients.

Early adoption of laparoscopic liver surgery in Poland: a national retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The need for safe and efficient dissemination of minimally invasive approach in liver surgery is among the current challenges for hepatobiliary surgeons. After the stage of innovators and pioneers, the following countries should adopt a laparoscopic approach. The aim of this study was to assess the national experience and trend in implementing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in Poland.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A national registry of LLR performed in Poland was established in June 2020. All LLR cases performed before were included retrospectively, followed by prospectively collected new cases. Baseline characteristics, preoperative and intraoperative data, short-term results and long-term follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

Since 2010 up to the end of 2022 there were 718 LLRs performed in Poland. The national rate of laparoscopic approach has gradually increased since 2017 ( P <0.001), reaching the rate of 11.7% in 2022. There were 443 (61.7%), 107 (14.9%), and 168 (23.4%) LLRs performed in accordance to increasing grades of difficulty. The move towards more demanding cases had an increasing trend over the years ( P <0.001). Total intraoperative adverse event and postoperative severe complications rates were estimated for 13.5% ( n =97) and 6.7% ( n =48), respectively. 30-day reoperation, readmission and postoperative mortality rates were 3.6% ( n =26), 2.8% ( n =20), and 0.8% ( n =6), respectively. While the R0 resection margin was assessed in 643 (89.6%) cases, the total textbook outcomes (TO) were achieved in 525 (74.5%) cases. Overcoming the learning curve of 60 LLRs, resulted in an increasing TO rate from 72.3 to 80.6% ( P =0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

It is the first national analysis of a laparoscopic approach in liver surgery in Poland. An increasing trend of minimizing invasiveness in liver resection has been observed. Responsible selection of cases in accordance with difficulty may provide results within global benchmark values and textbook outcomes already during the learning curve.

An attempt to establish and apply global benchmarks for liver resection of malignant hepatic tumors

BACKGROUND

Benchmarking is a process of continuous self-evaluation and comparison with best-in-class hospitals to guide quality improvement initiatives. We sought to define global benchmarks relative to liver resection for malignancy and to assess their achievement in hospitals in the United States.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative-intent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, or colorectal or neuroendocrine liver metastases between 2000 and 2019 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. Propensity score matching was conducted to balance baseline characteristics between open and minimally invasive approaches. Best-in-class hospitals were defined relative to the achievement rate of textbook oncologic outcomes and case volume. Benchmark values were established relative to best-in-class institutions. The achievement of benchmark values among hospitals in the National Cancer Database was then assessed.

RESULTS

Among 2,624 patients treated at 20 centers, a majority underwent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 1,609, 61.3%), followed by colorectal liver metastases (n = 650, 24.8%), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 299, 11.4%), and neuroendocrine liver metastases (n = 66, 2.5%). Notably, 1,947 (74.2%) patients achieved a textbook oncologic outcome. After propensity score matching, 6 best-in-class hospitals with the highest textbook oncologic outcome rates (≥75.0%) were identified. Benchmark values were calculated for margin positivity (≤11.7%), 30-day readmission (≤4.1%), 30-day mortality (≤1.6%), minor postoperative complications (≤24.7%), severe complications (≤12.4%), and failure to achieve the textbook oncologic outcome (≤22.8%). Among the National Cancer Database hospitals, global benchmarks for margin positivity, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, severe complications, and textbook oncologic outcome failure were achieved in 62.9%, 27.1%, 12.1%, 7.1%, and 29.3% of centers, respectively.

CONCLUSION

These global benchmarks may help identify hospitals that may benefit from quality improvement initiatives, aiming to improve patient safety and surgical oncologic outcomes.

Performance evaluation of a North American center using the established global benchmark for laparoscopic liver resections: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The global benchmark cut-offs were set for laparoscopic liver resection procedures: left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy. We aimed to compare the performance of our North American center with the established global benchmarks.

METHODS

This is a single-center study of adults who underwent laparoscopic liver resection between 2010 to 2022 at the Toronto General Hospital. Fourteen benchmarking outcomes were assessed: operation time, intraoperative blood transfusion, estimated blood loss, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood loss ≥1000mL, open-conversion, postoperative length of stay, return to operation, postoperative morbidity, postoperative major-morbidity, 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, R1 resection, and failure to rescue. Low-risk benchmark cases were defined as follows: patients aged 18 to 70 years, American Society of Anesthesiologist score ≤ 2, tumor size <10 cm, and Child-Pugh score ≤A. Cases involving bilio-enteric anastomosis, hilar dissection, or concomitant major procedures were excluded from the low-risk category. Cases that did not meet the criteria for low-risk selection were considered high-risk cases.

RESULTS

A total of 178 laparoscopic liver resection cases were analyzed (109 left lateral sectionectomies, 45 left hepatectomies, 24 right hepatectomies). Forty-four (25%) cases qualified as low-risk cases (23 left lateral sectionectomies, 16 left hepatectomies, 5 right hepatectomies). The postoperative major morbidity and 90-day mortality after left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy for the low-risk cases were 0%, 0%, and 0%, and 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. For the high-risk cases post-2017, the outcomes in the same order were 0%, 0%, and 12%; 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. For the high-risk cases operated pre2017, the outcomes in the same order were 9%∗, 16%∗, and 18%; 2%∗, 0%, and 9%∗ (asterisks indicate not meeting the global cut-off), respectively.

CONCLUSION

A North American center was able to achieve outcomes comparable to the established global benchmark for laparoscopic liver resection.

An update on liver surgery - a new terminology and modern techniques

Liver surgery is the cornerstone of the curative treatment of malignant liver tumors. However, the liver anatomy is very complex, and liver surgery is still associated with relevant morbidity despite many technical advances. The Brisbane nomenclature is used worldwide to classify liver resection. However, this nomenclature has several limitations as multiple terms are used for the same type of resection. Non-anatomical resections, multiple resections, and combined bilio-vascular resections were not mentioned. Therefore, new terminologies have been proposed for the precise and simple classification of liver resection. Furthermore, in recent years, many technical innovations have been introduced in liver surgery, such as 3D imaging systems and indocyanine green fluorescence, for better preoperative and intraoperative identification of tumor localization and critical vascular structures. Minimally invasive techniques are used more frequently in liver surgery. Potential benefits include less intraoperative blood loss, less pain, and a shorter hospital stay. The implementation of robotic systems also has an impact on liver surgery, and the number of cases reported in the literature is constantly increasing. The potential benefits of robotic liver resection over laparoscopic liver resection will be the subject of future studies.

Circumstances and implications of conversion from minimally invasive to open liver resection: a multi-center analysis from the AMILES registry

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive approaches to liver resection (MILR) are associated with favorable outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine the implications of conversion to an open procedure on perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent MILR at 10 North American institutions were identified from the Americas Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (AMILES) database. Outcomes of patients who required conversion were compared to those who did not. Additionally, outcomes after conversion due to unfavorable findings (poor visualization/access, lack of progress, disease extent) versus intraoperative events (bleeding, injury, cardiopulmonary instability) were compared.

RESULTS

Of 1675 patients who underwent MILR, 102 (6.1%) required conversion. Conversion rate ranged from 4.4% for left lateral sectionectomy to 10% for right hepatectomy. The primary reason for conversion was unfavorable findings in 67 patients (66%) and intraoperative adverse events in 35 patients (34%). By multivariable analysis, major resection, cirrhosis, prior liver surgery, and tumor proximity to major vessels were identified as risk factors for conversion (p < 0.05). Patients who required conversion had higher blood loss, transfusion requirements, operative time, and length of stay, (p < 0.05). They also had higher major complication rates (23% vs. 5.2%, p < 0.001) and 30-day mortality (8.8% vs. 1.3%, p < 0.001). When compared to those who required conversion due to unfavorable findings, patients who required conversion due to intraoperative adverse events had significantly higher major complication rates (43% vs. 14%, p = 0.012) and 30-day mortality (20% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion from MILR to open surgery is associated with increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. Conversion due to intraoperative adverse events is rare but associated with significantly higher complication and mortality rates, while conversion due to unfavorable findings is associated with similar outcomes as planned open resection. High-risk patients may benefit from early conversion in a controlled fashion if difficulties are encountered or anticipated.

Benchmarking: a novel measuring tool for outcome comparisons in surgery

INTRODUCTION

Benchmarking, a novel measuring tool for outcome comparisons, is a recent concept in surgery. The objectives of this review are to examine the concept, definition, and evolution of benchmarking and its application in surgery.

METHODS

The literature about benchmarking was reviewed through an ever-narrowing search strategy, commencing from the concept, definition, and evolution of benchmarking to the application of benchmarking and experiences of benchmarking in surgery. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Science Direct databases were searched until 20 September 2022, in the English language according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

In the first phase of the literature search, the development of benchmarking was identified. The definitions of benchmarking evolved from a surveying term to a novel quality-improvement tool to assess the best achievable results in surgery. In the second phase, a total of 23 studies were identified about benchmarking in surgery, including esophagectomy, hepatic surgery, pancreatic surgery, rectum resection, and bariatric surgery. All studies were multicenter analyses from national, international, or global expert centers. Most studies (87.0%) adopted the definition that benchmark was the 75th percentile of the median values of centers. Performance metrics to define benchmarks were clinically relevant intraoperative and postoperative outcome indicators.

CONCLUSION

Benchmarking in surgery is a novel quality-improvement tool to define and measure the best achievable results, establishing a meaningful reference to evaluate surgical performance.