The Impact of Laparoscopic Approaches on Short-term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Liver Surgery for Metastatic Tumors

Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive liver resection for colorectal metastases: A case-control study of 130 patients

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of open liver resection and minimally invasive liver resection in the management of colorectal liver metastases.

METHODS

Patients who underwent minimally invasive liver resection for colorectal liver metastases between January 2006 and June 2015 at a single center were identified and matched by extent of resection to consecutive open liver resection patients from the same period. Clinicopathologic characteristics, perioperative data, recurrence, and survival outcomes were collected and analyzed based on intention-to-treat.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients underwent minimally invasive liver resection during this period and were matched to 65 consecutive open liver resection patients, with similar baseline demographic, tumor, and chemotherapy parameters. Conversion to open occurred in 5 (7.7%) minimally invasive liver resection patients. R0 resection rates and operative times were comparable, but the estimated blood loss was less in the minimally invasive liver resection group (median 200 mL vs 400 mL, P < .001), as were perioperative transfusion rates (4.6% vs 15.4%, P = .04). The duration of stay was shorter after minimally invasive liver resection (median 4 days vs 6 days, P < .001), while major and minor complication rates were similar and no perioperative mortality was recorded. At a median follow-up of 28 months, there was no difference regarding disease-free (P = .90) or overall survival (P = .37).

CONCLUSION

In selected patients with colorectal liver metastases, minimally invasive liver resection resulted in similar oncologic outcomes, with decreased blood loss and shorter duration of stay compared to patients who underwent open liver resection.

A comparison of perioperative outcomes in elderly patients with malignant liver tumors undergoing laparoscopic liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is the treatment option with the best chance for cure in patients with malignant liver tumors. However, there are concerns regarding postoperative recovery in elderly patients, which may lead to a preference of non-resectional therapies over hepatectomy in this patient population. Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is associated with a faster recovery compared to open hepatectomy, there are scant data on how elderly patients tolerate LLR. The aim of this study was to analyze the perioperative outcomes of LLR in elderly patients with hepatic malignancies, with a comparison to laparoscopic RFA (LRFA).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospective database for liver tumors identified a total of 82 patients older than 65 years who underwent laparoscopic treatment of their liver tumors in a single tertiary care center between 2000 and 2014. These patients were equally distributed into LLR and LRFA treatment arms.

RESULTS

Mean age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and tumor type (predominantly metastatic colorectal cancer) were similar in both groups. Patients in the LRFA group had more tumors (2.1 ± 1.8 vs. 1.2 ± 0.6, p < 0.01), whereas tumors were larger in the LLR group (3.8 ± 1.6 vs. 2.8 ± 1.1 cm, p < 0.01). Although the operative time (116 vs. 214 min, p < 0.01) and hospital stay (2.1 vs. 3.4 days, p = 0.010) were shorter for the LRFA versus LLR group, respectively, morbidity (4.8 vs. 7.3 %) and mortality (0 vs. 0 %) were similar. Local recurrence was significantly higher in the LRFA versus LLR group (29 vs. 2.4 %, respectively, p = 0.002). However, there was no statistical difference in disease-free and overall survival between two groups (28 vs. 30 and 51 vs. 54 months, p = 0.443 and 0.768, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that LLR was tolerated as well as LRFA in elderly patients with similar comorbidities. We suggest LLR to be considered as an option in selected elderly patients who are deemed poor candidates for open hepatectomy.