Laparoscopy-Assisted Major Liver Resections Employing A Hanging Technique: The Original Procedure

Significance of Prediction Models for Post-Hepatectomy Liver Failure Based on Type IV Collagen 7s Domain in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background: Previous studies have attempted to establish predictive models for post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing liver resection. However, a versatile and useful predictive model for PHLF remains to be developed. Therefore, we aimed to develop predictive models for PHLF based on type IV collagen 7s domain (7s collagen) in patients with HCC. Methods: We retrospectively collected data from 972 patients with HCC who had undergone initial curative liver resection between February 2000 and December 2020 at our hospital. Multivariate logistic regression analysis using a restricted cubic spline was performed to evaluate the effect of 7s collagen on the incidence of PHLF. A nomogram was developed based on 7s collagen. Results: PHLF grades B or C were identified in 104 patients (11%): 98 (10%) and 6 (1%) PHLF grades B and C, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the preoperative serum level of 7s collagen was significantly associated with a proportional increase in the risk of PHLF, which was confirmed in both laparoscopic and open liver resections. A nomogram was developed based on 7s collagen, with a concordance index of 0.768. The inclusion of 7s collagen values in the predictive model increased the predictive accuracy. Conclusion: The findings highlight the efficacy of the serum level of 7s collagen as a predictive factor for PHLF. Our novel nomogram using 7s collagen may be useful for predicting the risk of PHLF.

Impact of thoracic shape on the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted living donor hepatectomy

Background

Although laparoscopic-assisted donor hepatectomy (LADH) has become the definitive procedure for harvesting living donor livers, its surgical outcomes in association with donor body shape have not been elucidated.

Methods

The impact of donor factors, including thoracic shape, on LADH outcomes was retrospectively investigated. Thoracic anthropometric data were examined in all LADHs with a left/right graft between 2013 and 2022.

Results

The study included 210 LADHs, consisting of 106 left- and 104 right-lobe donors with similar blood loss and similar operation time. Males have greater thoracic depth and greater thoracic width compared with females, respectively. Thoracic depth was associated with graft weight (p < 0.001), blood loss (p < 0.001), and operation time (p < 0.001). On multivariate analyses, blood loss >500 mL and operation time >8 h were associated with graft weight in the left-lobe donors, and blood loss >500 mL was associated with thoracic depth in the right-lobe donors.

Conclusion

The greater thoracic depth is associated with massive blood loss in right-lobe donors. Anthropometric parameters might be helpful for estimating LADH outcomes.

Risk-Adjusted Assessment of the Learning Curve for Pure Laparoscopic Donor Hepatectomy for Adult Recipients

BACKGROUND

Studies on pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (PLDH) have been reported. However, only few studies have reported on the learning curve of PLDH. In this report, we aimed to determine the learning curve of PLDH in adult patients using cumulative sum (CUSUM) and risk-adjusted CUSUM (RA-CUSUM) analyses.

METHODS

The data of donors who underwent PLDH at a single center between December 2012 and May 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The learning curve was evaluated using the CUSUM and RA-CUSUM methods based on surgery duration.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients were finally included in the present study. The mean operation time was 393.6 ± 80.3 min. PLDH was converted to laparotomy in three cases (6.3%). According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, nine cases (18.8%) had higher-than-grade III postoperative complications and the most frequent complications were biliary complications. The CUSUM graph shows two peaks, at the 13th and 27th case. The multivariate analysis revealed that a body mass index ≥ 23 kg/m2 and intraoperative cholangiography were the only factors that were independently associated with longer operation time. Based on these results, an RA-CUSUM analysis was performed to assess the learning curve, which showed a decrease in the learning curve after 33 to 34 PLDH procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

A learning curve effect was demonstrated in this study after 33 to 34 PLDH procedures. There are relatively many biliary complications, and it is necessary to further examine the method of bile duct transection.

Textbook outcomes and benchmarks of minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomy across North America

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive approach represents the gold standard for the resection of the left lateral section of the liver. Recently, the American Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (AMILES) registry has become available to track outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic liver resection in the Americas. The aim of the present study is to determine the benchmark performance of MILLS throughout the AMILES database.

METHODS

The AMILES registry was interrogated for cases of minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomies (MILLS). Centers with best practices according to the achievement of textbook outcomes (TOs) were identified and were used to define benchmark performances.

RESULTS

Seven institutions from US and Canada entered 1665 minimally invasive liver resections, encompassing 203 MILLS. Overall, 49% of cases of MILLS satisfied contemporarily all textbook outcomes. While all centers obtained TOs with different rates of success, the outcomes of the top-ranking centers were used for benchmarking. Benchmark performance metrics of MILLS across North America are: conversion rate ≤ 3.7%, blood loss ≤ 200 ml, OR time ≤ 199 min, transfusion rate ≤ 4.5%, complication rate ≤ 7.9%, LOS ≤ 4 days.

CONCLUSION

Benchmark performances of MILLS have been defined on a large multi-institutional database in North America. As more institutions join the collaboration and more prospective cases accrue, benchmark for additional procedures and approaches will be defined.

Modified Two-Surgeon Technique for Laparoscopic Liver Resection

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

One-Stage Total Laparoscopic Treatment for Colorectal Cancer With Synchronous Metastasis. Is It Safe and Feasible?

Liver is the main target organ for colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases. It is estimated that ~25% of CRC patients have synchronous metastases at diagnosis, and about 60% of CRC patients will develop metastases during the follow up. Although several teams have performed simultaneous laparoscopic resections (SLR) of liver and colorectal lesions, the feasibility and safety of this approach is still widely debated and few studies on this topic are present in the literature. The purpose of this literature review is to understand the state of the art of SLR and to clarify the potential benefits and limitations of this approach. Several studies have shown that SLR can be performed safely and with short-term outcomes similarly to the separated procedures. Simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and hepatic resections combine the advantages of one stage surgery with those of laparoscopic surgery. Several reports compared the short-term outcomes of one stage laparoscopic resection with open resections and showed a similar or inferior amount of blood loss, a similar or lower complication rate, and a significant reduction of hospital stay for laparoscopic surgery respect to open surgery but much longer operating times for the laparoscopic technique. Few retrospective studies compared long term outcomes of laparoscopic one stage surgery with the outcomes of open one stage surgery and did not identify any differences about disease free survival and the overall survival. In conclusion, hepatic and colorectal SLR are a safe and effective approach characterized by less intraoperative blood loss, faster recovery of intestinal function, and shorter length of postoperative hospital stay. Moreover, laparoscopic approach is associated to lower rates of surgical complications without significant differences in the long-term outcomes compared to the open surgery.

Safety of liver resection in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Little is unknown about the effect of chronic antithrombotic therapy (ATT) on bleeding complication during or after hepatectomy. In addition, the safety and effectiveness of chemical prevention for venous thromboembolism (VTE) is still controversial.

AIM

To clarify the effect of ATT on thromboembolism and bleeding after liver resection.

METHODS

Articles published between 2011 and 2020 were searched from Google Scholar and PubMed, and after careful reviewing of all studies, studies concerning ATT and liver resection were included. Data such as study design, type of surgery, type of antithrombotic agents, and surgical outcome were extracted from the studies.

RESULTS

Sixteen published articles, including a total of 8300 patients who underwent hepatectomy, were eligible for inclusion in the current review. All studies regarding patients undergoing chronic ATT showed that hepatectomy can be performed safely, and three studies have also shown the safety and efficacy of preoperative continuation of aspirin. Regarding chemical prevention for VTE, some studies have shown a potentially high risk of bleeding complications in patients undergoing chemical thromboprophylaxis; however, its efficacy against VTE has not been shown statistically, especially among Asian patients.

CONCLUSION

Hepatectomy in patients with chronic ATT can be performed safely without increasing the incidence of bleeding complications, but the safety and effectiveness of chemical thromboprophylaxis against VTE during liver resection is still controversial, especially in the Asian population. Establishing a clear protocol or guideline requires further research using reliable studies with good design.

Rationality and necessity of vascular stapler application during liver resection (Review)

Liver resection (LR) is the primary treatment method for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Improving surgical safety and reducing surgical morbidity and mortality is important for patients receiving LR. Various devices have been developed to facilitate vascular transection to reduce intraoperative blood loss, which is considered to be a predictor of poor surgical outcomes in patients undergoing LR. Vascular staplers have been widely applied for the division of major vascular and biliary structures in the process of LR; however, when and how to use these tools remains controversial. This review aims to report the rationality and necessity of using vascular staplers in vessel transection during liver surgery. Due to the risk of intraoperative and postoperative hemorrhage and biliary fistula, the process of transection of the portal pedicle and hepatic vein is a crucial step during LR. Stapling represents a vascular dissection technique that is widely used in laparoscopic LR and has then been popularized in open LR. Advocates argue that stapler transection methods provide several advantages, including diminished blood loss, fewer transfusion requirements and shorter operative times. However, other studies have failed to demonstrate those benefits when using these tools compared with the simple clamp-crushing technique. Using the stapler vascular transection method resulted in smaller surgical margins and similar surgical outcomes compared with those of the clamp-crushing vascular transection method. However, the intraoperative use of vascular staplers may significantly increase the financial burden of liver resection for patients with HCC, while not improving short- and long-term outcomes. Therefore, it has been suggested that vascular staplers should not be routinely used in LR. The current review discussed the above points and recommended that the stapling transection of the portal pedicle and hepatic vein should be applied during laparoscopic LR in a rational manner. However, the suturing ligation method should be routinely used in open LR.

Feasibility and efficacy of repeat laparoscopic liver resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Repeat hepatectomy is an acceptable treatment for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, repeat laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has not been widely adopted due to its technical difficulty. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of repeat LLR compared with repeat open liver resection (OLR) for recurrent HCC.

METHODS

We performed 42 repeat OLR and 30 repeat LLR for cases of recurrent HCC between January 2007 and March 2018. This study retrospectively compared the patients' clinicopathological characteristics and operative and short-term outcomes including surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and postoperative complications between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the two groups except in terms of Child-Pugh grade. The repeat LLR group had lower median intraoperative blood loss (100 mL vs. 435 mL; P = 0.001) and shorter median postoperative hospital stay (10 days vs. 14.5 days; P = 0.002). The other results including postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups. Further, comparison of two subpopulations of the repeat LLR group stratified by previous hepatectomy type (open or laparoscopic) or tumor location (segments 7 and 8 or other) revealed no significant differences in the postoperative clinical characteristics between them, although the morbidity rate tended to be higher in patients who underwent open hepatectomy for primary HCC than in patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat LLR for recurrent HCC is feasible and useful with good short-term outcomes although an appropriate patient selection seems to be necessary.

Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Liver Resections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Theoretical advantages of robotic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery include improved instrument dexterity, 3D visualization, and better ergonomics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine advantages of robotic surgery over laparoscopic surgery in patients undergoing liver resections.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was conducted for studies comparing robotic assisted or totally laparoscopic liver resection. Meta-analysis of intraoperative (operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, conversion rate), oncological (R0 resection rates), and postoperative (bile leak, surgical site infection, pulmonary complications, 30-day and 90-day mortality, length of stay, 90-day readmission and reoperation rates) outcomes was performed using a random effects model.

RESULT

Twenty-six non-randomized studies including 2630 patients (950 robotic and 1680 laparoscopic) were included, of which 20% had major robotic liver resection and 14% had major laparoscopic liver resection. Intraoperatively, robotic liver resection was associated with significantly less blood loss (mean: 286 vs 301 mL, p < 0.001) but longer operating time (mean: 281 vs 221 min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in conversion rates or transfusion rates between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. Postoperatively, there were no significant differences in overall complications, bile leaks, and length of hospital stay between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. However, robotic liver resection was associated with significantly lower readmission rates than laparoscopic liver resection (odds ratio: 0.43, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Robotic liver resection appears to offer some advantages compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, although both techniques appear equivalent. Importantly, the quality of evidence is generally limited to cohort studies and a high-quality randomized trial comparing both techniques is needed.

Up-to-down open and laparoscopic liver hanging maneuver: an overview

BACKGROUND

The liver hanging maneuver (LHM) was described by Belghiti et al. to facilitate liver resection and is done classically by creating a space between the caudate lobe and the inferior vena cava starting on the edge of caudate lobe and extending cranially, in a para-caval fashion, towards the space between the right and middle hepatic veins. LHM facilitates liver transection, guides anatomical resections, decreases blood loss, facilitates harvesting of the liver graft in live donors, and also has oncological advantages.

STUDY DESIGN

We describe a new approach named "up-to-down" to perform LHM in open and laparoscopic liver resections. This approach was mainly used in obese patients, in laparoscopic liver resections and in cases of failure of the classic approach. The advantages/disadvantages, complications, and different modalities of LHM are also summarized.

RESULTS

The peritoneal layer between the liver capsule and the infrahepatic vena cava is opened, and a short blind dissection is initiated on the right anterolateral aspect of the inferior vena cava to the left of the hepatic vein of segment VI. The suprahepatic vena cava is exposed, and the space between the right and middle hepatic veins and the vena cava is created by gentle dissection. A 16-Fr nasogastric tube is positioned in the space between the right and middle hepatic vein, pointing inferiorly, and pushed downwards, in a para-caval manner caudally until it is seen inferiorly. The results of this approach are given.

CONCLUSION

LHM facilitates liver resection, and many variations have been described worldwide in open and laparoscopic liver surgery. The up-to-down approach should be part of the surgical armamentarium in order to offer a safer way to achieve LHM in some patients.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection: Experience of 436 Cases in One Center

BACKGROUND

To report experience of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in one center.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 436 consecutive LLRs in 411 patients between December 2010 and December 2016. On the basis of the 2008 Louisville Statement, we divided the 436 cases into two groups: Simple Group (n = 203) and Difficult Group (n = 233).

RESULTS

The indications were HCC (n = 194), colorectal cancer liver metastasis (n = 156), benign tumors (n = 62), hepatolithiasis (n = 2), and other malignant lesions (n = 22). The median tumor size was 24 mm (range 3 to 130). Procedures of LLR included wedge resection (n = 230), one segmentectomy (n = 8), two segmentectomies (n = 12), left lateral sectionectomy (n = 75), right hepatectomy (n = 52), left hepatectomy (n = 31), extended right hepatectomy (n = 2), extended left hepatectomy (n = 5), central bisectionectomy (n = 3), right posterior sectionectomy (n = 12), and right anterior sectionectomy (n = 6). The median operative time was 228 min (range 9-843) and median blood loss was 150 ml (range 2-3500). Twenty-five cases required blood transfusion (5.7%). Conversion to open surgery was required in six cases (1.4%). The mean length of stay was 6.4 ± 2.9 days. Overall complication rate was 9.4% and major complication rate was 5%. One patient died of liver failure on the thirtieth postoperative day after a right hepatectomy. We had higher median blood loss (200 vs. 100 ml; p < 0.001), higher transfusion rate (8.2 vs. 2.9%; p = 0.020), longer median operative time (297 vs. 164 min; p < 0.001), higher conversion rate (2.6 vs. 0%; p = 0.021), higher complication rate (14.2 vs. 3.9%; p < 0.001), and longer mean postoperative hospital stay (6.8 ± 2.9 vs. 5.9 ± 3.0 days; p < 0.001) in the Difficult Group.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection is safe for selected patients in the Difficult Group. On the basis of the 2008 Louisville Statement, selection criteria of LLR are helpful to predict the difficulty of the operation and the postoperative outcomes of LLR.

Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Pure Laparoscopic Versus Hand-Assisted/Hybrid Major Hepatectomy at Two Western Centers

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is expanding, but little data exist comparing surgical approaches. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that pure laparoscopic liver resection (PLAP) has advantages over hand-assisted (HALS) or hybrid (HYB) resection for major hemi-hepatectomy at two western centers.

METHODS

Using propensity score matching, 65 cases of HALS + HYB (18 hand-assisted and 47 hybrid) were matched to 65 cases of PLAP. Baseline characteristics were well matched for gender, age, ASA score, Childs A cirrhosis, right/left hepatectomy, malignancy, tumor size, and type between the groups.

RESULTS

The HALS + HYB group had 27 right and 38 left major hepatectomies (n = 65) versus 29 right and 36 left (n = 65) in the PLAP group (p = NS). The median number of lesions resected was 1 in each group, with median size 5.6 cm (HALS + HYB) versus 6.0 cm (PLAP), (p = NS). The HALS + HYB group had shorter OR time (240 versus 330 min, p < 0.01), and less blood loss (EBL 150 ml vs. 300 ml, p < 0.01) versus the PLAP group, respectively. Median length of stay (LOS) was 4 days with HALS + HYB versus 5 days in the PLAP group (p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in use of the Pringle maneuver, transfusion rate, ICU stay, post-op morbidity, liver-specific complications, or R0 resection. Pain regimen/usage in each group is provided. There were no 30/90-day deaths in either group.

CONCLUSION

This is the first reported series of propensity score matching of HALS + HYB versus PLAP for major hepatectomy. The HALS + HYB group had non-inferior OR time, blood loss, and LOS versus the PLAP group, while the other perioperative parameters were comparable. We conclude that minimally invasive liver resection with either PLAP or HALS + HYB technique yields excellent results.

Current Status of Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

Before the first laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) was described in 1991, open hepatectomy (OH) was the only choice for surgical treatment of liver tumors. LH indications were initially based solely on tumor location, size, and type. Use of LH has spread rapidly worldwide because it reduces incision size. This review systematically assesses the current status of LH. As compared with OH, LH is significantly less complicated, requires shorter hospital stays, and results in less blood loss. The long-term survival rates of LH and OH are comparable. Development of new techniques and instruments will improve the conversion rate and reduce complications. Furthermore, development of surgical navigation will improve LH safety and efficacy. Laparoscopic major hepatectomy for HCC remains a challenging procedure and should only be performed by experienced surgeons. In the near future, a training system for young surgeons will become mandatory for standardization of LH, and LH will likely become better standardized and have broader applications.

Laparoscopic caudate lobe resection for the treatment of hepatolithiasis

Background

To explore the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic caudate lobe (CL) resection for the treatment of hepatolithiasis.

Methods

A retrospective study of nine patients who received laparoscopic CL resection for treatment of hepatolithiasis in our hospital from January 2013 to April 2017. Of these cases, we studied the patients' demographic data, the operation time, blood loss, post-operative hospital stay, post-operative complications and prognosis.

Results

All the nine cases are performed successfully; the post-operative recovery was symptom free except for one case of post-operative bile leakage. Among them, there were six cases of CL resection in combination with other lobe, three cases of separate CL resection, and three cases of whole CL resection. The average operative time was 310 min (Range: 180-450 min), the average intraoperative blood loss was 530 ml (Range: 100-1000 ml), average post-operative hospital stay was 9 days (Range: 6-13 days), average total hospital stay was 10 days (Range: 9-19 days). Intraoperative calculi exhaustion rate was 66.7% (6/9), which at the end of treatment was 88.9% (8/9). No cases had calculi recurrence.

Conclusion

The application of laparoscopic CL resection is feasible and safe.

Pure laparoscopic right hepatectomy of living donor is feasible and safe: a preliminary comparative study in China

BACKGROUND

The adoption of laparoscopic techniques for living donor major hepatectomy has been controversial issue. The aim of this study is to present the preliminary experience of laparoscopic right hepatectomy in China.

METHODS

All the donors receiving right hepatectomy for adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) were divided into three groups: pure laparoscopic right hepatectomy (PLRH) group, hand-assisted right hepatectomy (HARH) group and open right hepatectomy (ORH) group. We compared the perioperative data and surgical outcomes of donors and recipients among three groups.

RESULTS

From November 2001 to May 2017, 295 donors have received right hepatectomy for LDLT in our center. Among them, 7 donors received PLRH, 26 donors received HARH and 262 donors received ORH. The operation time of PLRH group (509.3 ± 98.9 min) was longer than that of the HARH group (451.6 ± 89.7 min) and the ORH group (418.4 ± 81.1 min, p = 0.003). The blood loss was the least in the PLRH group (378.6 ± 177.1 mL), compared with that in the HARH group (617.3 ± 240.4 mL) and that in the ORH group (798.6 ± 483.7 mL, p = 0.0013). The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the PLRH group (7, 7-10 days) than that in the HATH group (8.5, 7.5-12 days) and ORH group (11, 9-14 days; p = 0.001). Only one donor had pleural effusion (Grade I) and another one experienced pulmonary infection (Grade II). One recipient (14.3%) in the PLRH group occurred hepatic venous stenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic approaches for right hepatectomy contribute to less blood loss, better cosmetic satisfaction, less severe complications, and faster rehabilitation. PLRH is a safe and feasible procedure, which must be performed in highly specialized centers with expertise of both LDLT and laparoscopic hepatectomy, and requires a hybrid-to-pure stepwise development.

Laparoscopy-assisted versus open and pure laparoscopic approach for liver resection and living donor hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted (hybrid) liver surgery is considered a minimally invasive technique, however there are doubts regarding loss of the benefits of laparoscopy due to the use of an auxiliary incision. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative results of hybrid vs. open and hybrid vs. pure laparoscopic approach to liver resection for focal lesions and living donation.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Central and LILACS databases. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

21 studies were included. Hybrid vs. open: operative time was lower in open group (mean difference [MD] = 34 min; 95%CI: 22-47; P < 0.001; N = 669). Hybrid technique was associated with a reduction in operative blood loss [MD = -43 ml; 95%CI: -74-(-13); P = 0.005, N = 1738]; shorter hospital stay [MD = -1.9 days; 95%CI: -3.2-(-0.5); P = 0.008; N = 833] and lower morbidity [risk difference (RD) = -0.05; 95%CI: -0.10-(-0.01); P = 0.010; N = 1359]. Hybrid vs. pure laparoscopic: There was no difference regarding blood loss, transfusion rate, hospital stay and morbimortality.

DISCUSSION

Hybrid technique had perioperative outcomes that were more in keeping with pure laparoscopic outcomes than open surgery. Hybrid liver surgery should be considered a minimally invasive approach.

Standardized hybrid living donor hemihepatectomy in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation

The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of the most updated version and largest group of our standardized hybrid (laparoscopic mobilization and hepatectomy through midline incision) living donor (LD) hemihepatectomy compared with those from a conventional laparotomy in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Of 237 adult-to-adult LDLTs from August 1997 to March 2017, 110 LDs underwent the hybrid procedure. Preoperative and operative factors were analyzed and compared with conventional laparotomy (n = 126). The median duration of laparoscopic usage was 26 minutes in the hybrid group. Although there was improvement in applying this procedure over time from the beginning of the series of cases studied, blood loss and operative duration were still smaller and shorter in the hybrid group. There was no significant difference between the groups in the incidence of postoperative complications greater than or equal to Clavien-Dindo class III. There was no difference in recipient outcome between the groups. Our standardized procedure of hybrid LD hepatectomy is applicable and safe for all types of LD hepatectomies, and it enables the benefit of both the laparoscopic and the open approach in a transplant center without a laparoscopic expert. Liver Transplantation 24 363-368 2018 AASLD.

Comprehensive evaluation of liver resection procedures: surgical mind development through cognitive task analysis

Background

Liver resection is a complex procedure for trainee surgeons. Cognitive task analysis (CTA) facilitates understanding and decomposing tasks that require a great proportion of mental activity from experts.

Methods

Using CTA and video-based coaching to compare liver resection by open and laparoscopic approaches, we decomposed the task of liver resection into exposure (visual field building), adequate tension made at the working plane (which may change three-dimensionally during the resection process), and target processing (intervention strategy) that can bridge the gap from the basic surgical principle.

Results

The key steps of highly-specialized techniques, including hanging maneuvers and looping of extra-hepatic hepatic veins, were shown on video by open and laparoscopic approaches.

Conclusions

Familiarization with laparoscopic anatomical orientation may help surgeons already skilled at open liver resection transit to perform laparoscopic liver resection smoothly. Facilities at hand (such as patient tolerability, advanced instruments, and trained teams of personnel) can influence surgical decision making. Application of the rationale and realizing the interplay between the surgical principles and the other paramedical factors may help surgeons in training to understand the mental abstractions of experienced surgeons, to choose the most appropriate surgical strategy effectively at will, and to minimize the gap.

Anterior approach for right hepatectomy with hanging maneuver for hepatocellular carcinoma: a multi-institutional propensity score-matching study

BACKGROUND

This multi-institutional study aimed to assess the benefits of anterior approach for right hepatectomy with hanging maneuver (ARH-HM) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared with conventional right hepatectomy (CRH).

METHODS

From January 2000 to December 2012, 306 patients with HCC ≥5 cm were divided into two groups: ARH-HM (n = 104) and CRH (n = 202).

RESULTS

After one-to-one propensity score-matched analysis, 72 ARH-HM and 72 CRH patients presented comparable background factors. Patients in the ARH-HM group demonstrated significantly less intraoperative blood loss (480 vs. 1,242 g, P < 0.001) and a lower frequency of red cell concentrate transfusion (21.1% vs. 50.7%, P < 0.001) compared with patients in the CRH group. The 5-year overall survival rate was significantly better in the ARH-HM group compared with the CRH group (50.2% vs. 31.4%, P = 0.021). Limited to patients with HCC ≥10 cm, recurrence-free and overall survival of the ARH-HM group was significantly greater than those of the CRH group.

CONCLUSION

In comparison with CRH, ARH-HM for large HCC can provide better overall survival rates with a decrease in intraoperative blood loss and transfusion rates. Survival impact was evident especially in patients with HCC ≥10 cm.

The First Comparative Study of the Perioperative Outcomes Between Pure Laparoscopic Donor Hepatectomy and Laparoscopy-Assisted Donor Hepatectomy in a Single Institution

BACKGROUND

In a statement from the second International Consensus Conference for Laparoscopic Liver Resection, adult-to-adult laparoscopic donor surgery was the earliest phase of development. It was recommended that the procedure be performed under institutional ethical approval and a reporting registry.

METHOD

At our institute, we started laparoscopy-assisted donor hepatectomy (LADH) in 2007 and changed to pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (PLDH) in 2012. This study included 40 living donors who underwent LADH and 14 live donors who underwent PLDH. We describe the technical aspects and outcomes of our donor hepatectomy from assist to pure and examine the liver allograft outcomes of the recipients after LADH and PLDH.

RESULTS

There was significantly less blood loss in the PLDH group (81.07 ± 52.78 g) than that in the LADH group (238.50 ± 177.05 g), although the operative time was significantly longer in the PLDH group (454.93 ± 85.60 minutes) than in the LADH group (380.40 ± 44.08 minutes). And there were no significant differences in postoperative complication rate in the 2 groups. The liver allograft outcomes were acceptable and comparable with open living donor hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

By changing our routine approach from assist to pure, PLDH can be performed safely, with better exposure due to magnification, and with less blood loss under pneumoperitoneal pressure. PLDH, which has become our promising donor procedure, results in less blood loss, better cosmesis, and the donor's complete rehabilitation without deterioration in donor safety.

Impact of laparoscopic liver resection on bleeding complications in patients receiving antithrombotics

AIM

To assess the impact of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) on surgical blood loss (SBL), especially in patients with antithrombotics for thromboembolic risks.

METHODS

Consecutive 258 patients receiving liver resection at our institution between 2010 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative antithrombotic therapy (ATT; antiplatelets and/or anticoagulation) was regularly used in 100 patients (ATT group, 38.8%) whereas not used in 158 (non-ATT group, 61.2%). Our perioperative management of high thromboembolic risk patients included maintenance of preoperative aspirin monotherapy for patients with antiplatelet therapy and bridging heparin for patients with anticoagulation. In both ATT and non-ATT groups, outcome variables of patients undergoing LLR were compared with those of patients receiving open liver resection (OLR), and the independent risk factors for increased SBL were determined by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

This series included 77 LLR and 181 OLR. There were 3 thromboembolic events (1.2%) in a whole cohort, whereas increased SBL (≥ 500 mL) and postoperative bleeding complications (BCs) occurred in 66 patients (25.6%) and 8 (3.1%), respectively. Both in the ATT and non-ATT groups, LLR was significantly related to reduced SBL and low incidence of BCs, although LLR was less performed as anatomical resection. Multivariate analysis showed that anatomical liver resection was the most significant risk factor for increased SBL [risk ratio (RR) = 6.54, P < 0.001] in the whole cohort, and LLR also had the significant negative impact (RR = 1/10.0, P < 0.001). The same effects of anatomical resection (RR = 15.77, P < 0.001) and LLR (RR = 1/5.88, P = 0.019) were observed when analyzing the patients in the ATT group.

CONCLUSION

LLR using the two-surgeon technique is feasible and safely performed even in the ATT-burdened patients with thromboembolic risks. Independent from the extent of liver resection, LLR is significantly associated with reduced SBL, both in the ATT and non-ATT groups.

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.

Are Hybrid Liver Resections Truly Minimally Invasive? A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

Hybrid liver resection is considered a modality of minimally invasive surgery; however, there are doubts regarding loss of benefits of laparoscopy due to the use of an auxiliary incision. We compared perioperative results of patients undergoing hybrid × open and hybrid × pure laparoscopic resections.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing liver resection between June 2008 and January 2016 were studied. Study groups were compared after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Six hundred forty-four resections were included in the comparative analysis: 470 open, 120 pure laparoscopic, and 54 hybrids. After PSM, 54 patients were included in each group. Hybrid × open: hybrid technique had shorter operative time (319.5 ± 108.6 × 376.2 ± 155.8 minutes, P = .033), shorter hospital stay (6.0 ± 2.7 × 8.1 ± 5.6 days, P = .001), and lower morbidity (18.5% × 40.7%, P = .003). Hybrid × pure laparoscopic: hybrid group had lower conversion rate (0% × 13%, P = .013). There was no difference regarding estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, hospital stay, complications, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid resection has better perioperative results than the open approach and is similar to pure laparoscopy. The hybrid technique should be considered a minimally invasive approach.

Early experience with totally laparoscopic major hepatectomies: single institution experience with 31 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Totally laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) is a technically challenging procedure with limited studies mainly from high-volume expert centers reported. In this study, we report our initial experience with totally LMH.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospective database of 340 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection at a single institution was conducted. Thirty-one consecutive patients who underwent attempted totally LMH between March 2011 to December 2016 were identified. Major hepatectomies were defined as resection of ≥3 contiguous segments which included only right/left hepatectomies, extended hepatectomies or central hepatectomies.

RESULTS

The procedures included 11 right hepatectomies, one extended right hepatectomy, nine left hepatectomies (two including middle hepatic vein), two extended left hepatectomies, two left hepatectomies with caudate lobe and six central hepatectomies. The median tumor size was 40 (range, 12-100) mm and the median operation time was 435 (range, 245-585) min. Median blood loss was 500 (range, 100-1900) mls and 10 (32.3%) patients required blood transfusion. There were three (9.7%) open conversions of which two occurred during the first five cases. There was one (3.2%) major (>grade 2) morbidity and there were no 30-day/in-hospital mortalities or reoperations. The median postoperative stay was 5 (range, 3-14) days.

CONCLUSION

Our initial experience confirms the feasibility and safety of LMH. There was an increase in the number and proportion of LMH performed at our institution over time.

Evolution and revolution of laparoscopic liver resection in Japan

Due to important technological developments and improved endoscopic techniques, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now considered the approach of choice and is increasingly performed worldwide. Recent systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of observational data reported that LLR was associated with less bleeding, fewer complications, and no oncological disadvantage; however, no prospective randomized trials have been conducted. LLR will continue to evolve as a surgical approach that improves patient's quality of life. LLR will not totally supplant open liver surgery, and major LLR remains to be technically challenging procedure. The success of LLR depends on individual learning curves and adherence to surgical indications. A recent study proposed a scoring system for stepwise application of LLR, which was based on experience at high‐volume Japanese centers. A cluster of deaths after major LLR was sensationally reported by the Japanese media in 2014. In response, the Japanese Society of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Surgery conducted emergency data collection on operative mortality. The results demonstrated that mortality was not higher than that for open procedures except for hemi‐hepatectomy with biliary reconstruction. An online prospective registry system for LLR was established in 2015 to be transparent for patients who might potentially undergo treatment with this newly developed, technically demanding surgical procedure.

Validation of a Difficulty Scoring System for Laparoscopic Liver Resection: A Multicenter Analysis by the Endoscopic Liver Surgery Study Group in Japan

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is widely used for hepatic disease treatment. Preoperative prediction of operative difficulty can be beneficial as a roadmap for surgeons advancing from simple to highly technical LLR. We performed a multicenter analysis to investigate a "difficulty scoring system" for predicting the difficulty of LLR.

STUDY DESIGN

The proposed "difficulty scoring system" includes 3 difficulty levels based on 5 factors. The system was validated in a cohort of 2,199 patients who underwent LLR at 74 Japanese centers between 2010 and 2014; the difficulty level was rated as low (n = 965), intermediate (n = 891), and high (n = 343). Operative parameters, postoperative complications, and outcomes were compared according to the difficulty levels.

RESULTS

The median operation time and blood loss were 258 minutes (range 30 to 1,275 minutes) and 75 mL (range 0 to 7,798 mL), respectively. The overall conversion rate was 5.0% (n = 110). The incidences of postoperative complications, liver failure, and in-hospital death were 5.3% (n = 116), 1.5% (n = 32), and 0.5% (n = 12), respectively. Median hospital stay was 9 days (range 1 to 189 days). Conversion rate, operation time, and blood loss showed a direct correlation with the difficulty level. A strong correlation was observed among the difficulty level, incidence of postoperative complications, and hospital stay. Incidence of postoperative liver failure and in-hospital death in the high difficulty group was higher than that in the low difficulty group.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative evaluation with the "difficulty scoring system" predicted the difficulty of the operation and the postoperative outcomes of LLR. In the beginning of LLR training, surgeons should start with low difficulty-level operations.

The liver hanging maneuver in laparoscopic liver resection: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic surgery has gained the acceptance of the hepatobiliary surgical community and expert teams are now advocating major laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs). In this setting, the liver hanging maneuver (LHM) has been described in numerous series. We conducted a systematic review to investigate the effectiveness of the LHM in LLR.

METHODS

We performed an electronic literature search using PubMed, EMBASE, and COCHRANE databases. The final search was carried out in December, 2015.

RESULTS

We found 11 articles describing a collective total of 104 surgical procedures that were eligible for this study. Laparoscopic LHM was used in LLR for both benign and malignant conditions, and also in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). The LHM was used mainly in right hepatectomy and only two authors reproduced the original LHM. We investigated the intraoperative parameters, preservation of postoperative liver function, and oncological outcomes. The clear benefit of using the LHM in LLR is for better identification of the parenchymal transection plane with less blood loss. The other benefits of LHM could not be corroborated by solid data on its positive value.

CONCLUSIONS

In view of the data published in the literature, our findings are not strong enough to support the systematic use of LHM in LLR.

Current status of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and pancreatectomy

This review describes the recent advances in, and current status of, minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS). Typical MIPS procedures are laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD), laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP), and laparoscopic total pancreatectomy (LTP). Some retrospective studies comparing LPD or LDP and open procedures have demonstrated the safety and feasibility as well as the intraoperative outcomes and postoperative recovery of these procedures. In contrast, LCP and LTP have not been widely accepted as common laparoscopic procedures owing to their complicated reconstruction and limited indications. Nevertheless, our concise review reveals that LCP and LTP performed by expert laparoscopic surgeons can result in good short-term and long-term outcomes. Moreover, as surgeons' experience with laparoscopic techniques continues to grow around the world, new innovations and breakthroughs in MIPS will evolve. Well-designed and suitably powered randomized controlled trials of LPD, LDP, LCP, and LTP are now warranted to demonstrate the superiority of these procedures.

Comprehensive guide to laparoscope-assisted graft harvesting in live donors for living-donor liver transplantation: perspective of laparoscopic vision

Background

A living donor (LD) for liver transplantation (LT) is the best target for minimally invasive surgery. Laparoscope-assisted surgery (LAS) for LDs has gradually evolved. A donor safety rate of 100% should be guaranteed.

Methods

We began performing LAS for LDs in June 2012. The aim of this report is to describe the surgical procedures of LAS in detail, discuss various tips and pitfalls, and address the potential for a smooth transition to more advanced LAS.

Results

Preoperative planning based on three-dimensional image analysis is a powerful tool for successful surgery. The combination of liver retraction/countertraction and the pressure produced by pneumoperitoneum widens the dissectible/cuttable layer, increasing the safety of LAS. A flexible laparoscope provides excellent magnified vision in both the horizontal view along the inferior vena cava, under adequate liver retraction, and in the lateral view, to harvest left-sided grafts in critical procedures. Intentional omission of painful incisions is beneficial for LDs. Hepatectomy using a smaller midline incision is safe if a hanging maneuver is used. Safe transition from LAS to a hybrid technique involving a combination of pure laparoscopic surgery and subsequent open surgery seems possible.

Conclusion

LDLT surgeons have a very broad intellectual and technical frontier.

Comparative Short-term Benefits of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: 9000 Cases and Climbing

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of worldwide literature on laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and compare short-term outcomes against open liver resections (OLR) by meta-analyses.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

There are no updated pooled data since 2009 about the current status and short-term outcomes of LLR worldwide.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All English language publications on LLR were screened. Descriptive worldwide data and short-term outcomes were obtained. Separate analyses were performed for minor-only and major-only resection series, and series in which minor/major resections were not differentiated. Apparent case duplications were excluded.

RESULTS

A set of 463 published manuscripts were reviewed. One hundred seventy-nine single-center series were identified that accounted for 9527 LLR cases worldwide. Minor-only, major-only, and combined major-minor series were 61, 18, and 100, respectively, including 32, 8, and 43 comparative series, respectively. Of the total 9527 LLR cases reported, 6190 (65%) were for malignancy and 3337 (35%) were for benign indications. There were 37 deaths reported (mortality rate = 0.4%). From the meta-analysis comparing case-matched LLR to OLR (N = 2900 cases), there was no increased mortality and significantly less complications, transfusions, blood loss, and hospital stay observed in LLR vs OLR.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest review of LLR available to date with over 9000 cases published. It confirms growing safety when performed in selected patients and by trained surgeons, and suggests that LLR may offer improved patient short-term outcomes compared with OLR. Improved levels of evidence, standardized reporting of outcomes, and assuring proper training are the next challenges of laparoscopic liver surgery.

Surgical Indications and Procedures for Resection of Hepatic Malignancies Confined to Segment VII

OBJECTIVE

To establish a strategy for surgical resection of hepatic malignancies confined to segment VII.

BACKGROUND

Various surgical procedures can be used to resect hepatic malignancies in segment VII, the deepest region of the liver, by open and/or laparoscopic approaches: nonanatomic wedge resection (WR), segmentectomy VII, right lateral sectionectomy (RLS), and right hepatectomy.

METHODS

WR and segmentectomy VII were applied as first-line surgical procedures for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), respectively. RLS and right hepatectomy were indicated only when tumor infiltration to the proximal Glissonian sheath was suspected. Operative outcomes were evaluated in 200 consecutive patients who underwent hepatic resection for HCC (n = 120) or CRLM (n = 80).

RESULTS

WR, segmentectomy VII, RLS, and right hepatectomy were performed in 104 (52.0%), 57 (28.5%), 22 (11.0%), and 17 (8.5%) patients, respectively. Local hepatectomy (WR and segmentectomy VII) led to shorter operation times and lower blood loss volumes than did extensive hepatectomy (RLS and right hepatectomy). Thoracotomy was performed in half of the WR and two-thirds of the segmentectomy VII procedures. The availability of a laparoscopic approach was 40% (8 patients) after its application in October 2012.

CONCLUSIONS

Even for hepatic malignancies located in segment VII, WR and segmentectomy should be prioritized over extensive hepatectomy to preserve the postoperative functional hepatic volume. Full mobilization of the right liver and a good surgical field provided by a large thoracoabdominal or abdominal incision or a laparoscopic approach are key factors for safe performance of deep hepatic transection.

What is the Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomy?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is rapidly expanding with more than 9500 cases performed worldwide. While initial series reported non-anatomic resection of benign peripheral hepatic lesions, approximately 50-65 % of laparoscopic liver resections are now being done for malignant tumors, primarily hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or colorectal cancer liver metastases (mCRC).

METHODS

We performed a literature review of published studies evaluating outcomes of major laparoscopic liver resection, defined as three or more Couinaud segments.

RESULTS

Initial fears of adverse oncologic outcomes or tumor seeding have not been demonstrated, and dozens of studies have reported comparable 5-year disease-free and overall survival between laparoscopic and open resection of HCC or mCRC in case-cohort and propensity score-matched analyses. Increased experience has led to laparoscopic anatomic liver resections including laparoscopic major hepatectomy. A steep learning curve of 45-60 cases is evident for laparoscopic hepatic resection.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is safe and effective in the treatment of benign and malignant liver tumors when performed in specialized centers with dedicated teams. Comparable to other complex laparoscopic surgeries, laparoscopic major hepatectomy has a learning curve of 45-60 cases.

Outcomes of laparoscopic hepatic resection versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma located at the liver surface: A case-control study with propensity score matching

AIM

Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (P-RFA) therapy is a widely applied treatment for small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, local recurrence is a major issue of HCC located at the surface of the liver (surface HCC). The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of laparoscopic hepatic resection (LH) and P-RFA for surface HCC in case-control patient groups using the propensity score.

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2013, 40 and 52 patients underwent LH and P-RFA for surface HCC (≤3 cm, 1-3 nodules). To correct the difference in clinicopathological factors between the two groups, propensity score matching was used at a 1:1 ratio, which resulted in a comparison of 27 patients/group. We compared outcomes between the two groups, with special reference to local recurrence.

RESULTS

Clinicopathological variables were well balanced between the two groups. One patient in the LH group was converted to open surgery due to adhesion. The incidence of complications was 0% in the P-RFA group and 15% (four patients) in the LH group (P = 0.11); however, none of these four patients in the LH group sustained severe complications. The duration of hospitalization following treatment was longer in the LH group than in the P-RFA group (12.6 vs 7.6 days, P < 0.01). The incidence of local recurrence was lower in the LH group (0%) than in the P-RFA group (eight patients [30%], P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

LH is an effective treatment for surface HCC with regard to control of local recurrence.

A Conceptual Technique for Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy Based on Facts and Oncologic Principles: The Caudal Approach

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a new conceptual technique of laparoscopic right hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND

Despite significant improvements in surgical care in the last decades, morbidity is still high after major hepatectomy. Blood loss and transfusions are known to significantly increase the risk of postoperative complications and cancer recurrence after liver resection. A laparoscopic approach may improve perioperative outcomes in these cases, but data in literature are limited and the surgical technique is not yet standardized.

METHODS

A new conceptual technique of right hepatectomy was designed using evidence-based facts and oncologic rules: laparoscopy with pneumoperitoneum, low central venous pressure, intermittent pedicle clamping, anterior approach without mobilization, and parenchymal section with ultrasonic dissector. Thirty patients were prospectively enrolled between October 2011 and September 2013. Primary endpoint was intraoperative blood loss.

RESULTS

Eighty percent of patients underwent surgery for malignant disease and cirrhosis was present in 11 patients. Benign lesions accounted for 13% of indications, whereas living liver donation was performed in 2 cases. Median blood loss was 100 mL (50-700) and transfusion rate was 7%. Five patients (16.6%) required conversion to laparotomy, including 2 using hybrid technique. The median operative time was 360 minutes (210-510). R0 resection rate was 87% (21/24). Postoperative morbidity rate was 23% (7/30) with 8 complications including 6 Clavien III-IV. No respiratory complication occurred. The median hospital stay was 8 days. No patient died.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that several evidence-based facts could be combined to define a new conceptual technique of laparoscopic right hepatectomy allowing for low blood loss and morbidity.

Evidence supporting laparoscopic major hepatectomy

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been increasing in frequency with over 9,000 cases done worldwide. Benefits of laparoscopic resection include less blood loss, smaller incisions, decreased postoperative morbidity, and shorter length of stay compared to open liver resection. With increased experience, several centers have reported series of laparoscopic major hepatectomy, although this represents only about 25% of total LLR performed. Evidence is accumulating to support laparoscopic major hepatectomy with the understanding that there is a steep learning curve, and surgeons should begin with minor LLR before moving on to laparoscopic major hepatectomy. Controversy still remains concerning indications, techniques, learning curve, risks, and long-term cancer outcomes with laparoscopic major hepatectomy.

Minimally Invasive Hepatic Surgery

This review provides an overview of the background and progress that has been made in minimally invasive liver surgery. The essential steps of minimally invasive right and left lobectomy as well as left lateral sectionectomy are reviewed. In addition, existing data regarding the feasibility and oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive hepatic resection for malignancy are discussed.

Laparoscopic parenchymal preserving hepatic resections in semiprone position for tumors located in the posterosuperior segments

INTRODUCTION

All patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resections in the posterosuperior segments (LPSS) at our center were positioned in semiprone since August 2011. The aims of this study were to assess differences in perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomies (LLLS) performed in supine position and LPSS in semiprone position.

METHODS

We reviewed our prospectively collected database of all liver resections performed between January 2012 and January 2015. LLLS and LPSS were compared with respect to demographics and perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients underwent LLLS (n = 20) or LPSS (n = 25). There were no differences in patient demographics or tumor diameter (p = 0.946). There were no conversions. Pringle maneuver was not used in both groups. There was no difference in peroperative central venous pressure (p = 0.511). The median operative time in the LLLS group was 100 min (60-260) and 160 min (95-270) in the LPSS group (p = 0.002) with median intraoperative blood loss in the LLLS group of 50 ml (0-550) versus a larger 150 ml (50-700) (p = 0.010) for patients receiving LPSS. No patients required transfusion. Intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were similar in both groups. Median hospital stay was 6 days in both groups (p = 0.554).

CONCLUSION

LPSS in semiprone can be performed with similar clinical outcomes as a minor laparoscopic liver resection except for longer operative time and larger intraoperative blood loss without the need for transfusion.

Less cost by using hanging maneuver and Pringle maneuver in left lateral hepatectomy through small laparotomy wound--experience of Southern Taiwan

Background

Laparoscopic segmentectomy for liver tumor located in the left lateral segment (LLS) is thought to be a standard protocol nowadays with several advantages, such as small wound, few blood loss, and short hospital stay. However, there are still many disadvantages during executing laparoscopic LLS segmentectomy. This manuscript aims to present the technique to execute LLS segmentectomy with small incision, hanging maneuver without Pringle maneuver in patients with tumor at LLS of the liver.

Material and methods

Between November 2010 and July 2011, hepatectomies through small incision for nine patients with benign and malignant tumors were performed at Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan. Perioperative and postoperative results, such as operation time, blood loss, incisional width, and postoperative stay were used to determine consequents for this technique.

Result

Results demonstrated that modified LLS segmentectomy by the author’s team was performed successfully in patient with liver tumor with fewer blood loss, smaller incisional width, and lower hospital cost than traditional open surgery. In addition, the instrument cost and blood loss in our series were less than that in laparoscopic LLS segmentectomy in published literature.

Conclusion

Authors concluded that minimally incisional segmentectomy, with less cost and technical demanding, could be an alternative choice in patient with liver tumor at LLS.

Video assisted resections. Increasing access to minimally invasive liver surgery?

Objective: To evaluate perioperative outcomes, safety and feasibility of video-assisted resection for primary and secondary liver lesions. Methods : From a prospective database, we analyzed the perioperative results (up to 90 days) of 25 consecutive patients undergoing video-assisted resections in the period between June 2007 and June 2013. Results : The mean age was 53.4 years (23-73) and 16 (64%) patients were female. Of the total, 84% were suffering from malignant diseases. We performed 33 resections (1 to 4 nodules per patient). The procedures performed were non-anatomical resections (n = 26), segmentectomy (n = 1), 2/3 bisegmentectomy (n = 1), 6/7 bisegmentectomy (n = 1), left hepatectomy (n = 2) and right hepatectomy (n = 2). The procedures contemplated postero-superior segments in 66.7%, requiring multiple or larger resections. The average operating time was 226 minutes (80-420), and anesthesia time, 360 minutes (200-630). The average size of resected nodes was 3.2 cm (0.8 to 10) and the surgical margins were free in all the analyzed specimens. Eight percent of patients needed blood transfusion and no case was converted to open surgery. The length of stay was 6.5 days (3-16). Postoperative complications occurred in 20% of patients, with no perioperative mortality. Conclusion : The video-assisted liver resection is feasible and safe and should be part of the liver surgeon armamentarium for resection of primary and secondary liver lesions.

Laparoscopic Transabdominal With Transdiaphragmatic Access Improves Resection of Difficult Posterosuperior Liver Lesions

OBJECTIVE

We describe the technical details and evaluate the safety, feasibility, and usefulness of a combined lateral and abdominal (CLA) approach for laparoscopic resection of liver segments 7 and 8.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection of lesions in the posterosuperior area of segments 7 and 8 is technically challenging, and currently there is no standardized laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

Through review of a prospectively maintained database, we identified 44 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of lesions in segment 7 or 8. Twenty-five patients required the CLA approach because their lesions were more posterosuperior and intraparenchymal; 19 patients underwent resection with a regular abdominal-only approach of more accessible anteroinferior lesions. We reviewed operative details and video footage of these operations and compared the outcomes of the 2 groups.

RESULTS

In the group treated with the CLA approach, deep location was more frequent (88% vs 42%; P = 0.035), median tumor diameter was larger (24.5 mm vs 15 mm; P = 0.114), and the median weight of the excised parenchyma was greater (56.5 g vs 23 g; P = 0.093). Median operative time was longer in the CLA approach group (217.5 minutes vs 165 minutes; P = 0.046), but blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, surgical margin status, morbidity, and mortality were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CLA approach permits safe laparoscopic resection of lesions in the posterosuperior area of segments 7 and 8, allowing surgeons to overcome the difficulties of limited visualization and access to the target lesions.

Outcomes of Pure Laparoscopic versus Open Hepatic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Cirrhotic Patients: A Case-Control Study with Propensity Score Matching

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Laparoscopic hepatic resection (LH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has gradually gained ground as a safe and minimally invasive treatment, although LH for cirrhotic patients remains challenging.

METHODS

Between January 2007 and August 2014, 28 and 57 patients with histologically proven cirrhosis (histological activity index, fibrosis score 4) underwent pure LH and open hepatic resection (OH; less than segmentectomy), respectively, for peripheral HCC ≤5 cm. To correct the difference in clinicopathological factors, including difficulty scores, between the two groups, propensity score matching was used at a 1:1 ratio, which resulted in a comparison of 20 patients per group. We compared the short- and long-term outcomes of LH and OH to investigate the efficacy of LH.

RESULTS

Clinicopathological variables, including difficulty scores, were well balanced between the two groups. The incidence of complications and mean intraoperative blood loss were lower in the LH group than the OH group (0 vs. 45% and 180 vs. 440 ml, p = 0.001 and 0.04, respectively). The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 42% in the LH group and 30% in the OH group (p = 0.533), whereas the 5-year overall survival rates were 46 and 60%, respectively (p = 0.606).

CONCLUSIONS

LH is a safe and effective treatment option for cirrhotic patients with HCC in terms of intraoperative blood loss and morbidity.

Laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases

Background

Despite the gradual diffusion of laparoscopic liver resection, the feasibility and results of laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) for bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have not been described frequently. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic TSH for bilobar CRLM.

Methods

All patients eligible for laparoscopic TSH among those treated for bilobar CRLM from 2000 to 2013 were included. Demographics, tumour characteristics, surgical procedures, and short- and long-term outcomes were analysed.

Results

Laparoscopic TSH was planned in 34 patients with bilobar CRLM, representing 17·2 per cent of all 198 patients treated for bilobar CRLM. Thirty patients received preoperative chemotherapy, and 20 had portal vein occlusion to increase the volume of the remnant liver. Laparoscopic resection of the primary colorectal tumour was integrated within the first-stage hepatectomy in 11 patients. After a median interval of 3·1 months, 26 patients subsequently had a successful laparoscopic second-stage hepatectomy, including 18 laparoscopic right or extended right hepatectomies. The mortality rate for both stages was 3 per cent (1 of 34), and the overall morbidity rate for the first and second stages was 50 per cent (17 of 34) and 54 per cent (14 of 26) respectively. Mean length of hospital stay was 6·1 and 9·0 days respectively. With a median follow-up of 37·8 (range 6–129) months, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates in patients who completed TSH were 78 and 41 per cent respectively. The 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 26 and 13 per cent respectively.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic TSH for bilobar CRLM is safe and does not jeopardize long-term outcomes in selected patients.

Laparoscopic Hepatectomy for Liver Cancer

This chapter covers a range of important topics of laparoscopic hepatectomy as a novel approach toward treatment of liver cancer. Although laparoscopic hepatectomy was performed in a limited number of centers in the 1990s, technological innovations, improvements in surgical techniques and accumulation of experience by surgeons have led to more rapid progress in laparoscopic hepatectomy in the late 2000s for minimally invasive hepatic surgery. Currently, laparoscopic hepatectomy can be performed for all tumor locations and several diseases via several approaches. The laparoscopic approach can be applied to several types of resection, not only for tumors but also for liver transplantation, with equivalent or better results compared with those obtained with open surgery. Therefore, laparoscopic hepatectomy will become a standard procedure for treatment of liver cancer in the near future.