Evaluation of a laparoscopic liver resection in the setting of cirrhosis

Impact of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease on the outcomes following laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The impact of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) on laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of LLR for MAFLD-HCC and Non-MAFLD-HCC.

METHODS

Patients with HCC who received LLR between October 2017 and July 2021 were enrolled. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to generate adjusted comparisons. Both short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated accordingly.

RESULTS

A total of 887 patients were enrolled, with 140 in MAFLD group and 747 in Non-MAFLD group. After IPTW adjustment, baseline factors were well matched. The MAFLD group was associated with more blood loss (210 vs 150 ml, p = 0.022), but with similar postoperative hospital stays and complication rates. The 1- and 3-year overall survival rates were 97.4% and 92.5% in MAFLD group, and 97.5% and 88.3% in Non-MAFLD group, respectively (p = 0.14). The 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 84.8% and 62.9% in MAFLD group, and 80.2% and 58.8% in Non-MAFLD group, respectively (p = 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR for MAFLD-HCC was associated with more blood loss but with comparable postoperative recovery and long-term survival compared with Non-MAFLD-HCC patients. LLR is feasible and safe for HCC patients with MAFLD background.

Efficacy of Laparoscopic Hepatectomy versus Open Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Cirrhosis: A Meta-analysis of Case-Matched Studies

Background

The role of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with cirrhosis remains controversial and needs to be further assessed. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of LH with those of open hepatectomy (OH) for HCC with cirrhosis.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing LH and OH until Mar 2021. Weighted mean differences (WMDs), odds ratios (ORs), and hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for continuous, dichotomous, and long-term variables, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analysis was performed according to different resection types: major resection and minor resection. The meta-analysis was performed using the STATA 12.0.

Results

A total of 16 case-matched studies (784 patients in the LH group and 1,191 patients in the OH group.) were included in this meta-analysis. In terms of primary outcomes, LH was associated with decreased overall complication rate (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.71; P <0.01), major complication rate (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.82; P < 0.01), postoperative mortality (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.66; P  <0.01), 1-y overall survival (OS) rate (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.73; P <0.01), 2-y OS (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.83; P < 0.01), and 5-y OS (0.67; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.85; P < 0.01). With respect to secondary outcomes, blood loss (WMD −69.16; 95% CI −101.72 to −36.61; P < 0.01), length of hospitalization (LOH) (WMD −2.65; 95% CI −3.41 to −1.89; P < 0.01), minor complication rate (OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.94; P = 0.02), postoperative liver failure (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.95; P = 0.03), and postoperative ascites (OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.72; P < 0.01) was lower in LH than in OH. No significant differences in operation time (P = 0.07), transfusion rate (P = 0.05), 1-, 2-, and 5-year DFS rate (1-year, P = 0.08; 2-year, P = 0.08; 5-year, P = 0.23) were noted between LH and OH. Subgroup analysis based on minor resection revealed that LH had similar favored outcomes in comparison with those in the overall pooled analysis. However, LH had a longer operation time than OH in the setting of major resection (P < 0.01).

Conclusion

LH is technically feasible and safe for selected HCC patients with cirrhosis. LH can achieve favored short-term and long-term oncological outcomes in minor liver resection. Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) seems to offer some advantages over the open approach; however concerns about surgical and oncological safety remain. More evidence on LMH is warranted before expanding its indication to patients with cirrhosis.

Laparoscopic Liver Resection: A South American Experience with 2887 Cases

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) have been increasingly performed in recent years. Most of the available evidence, however, comes from specialized centers in Asia, Europe and USA. Data from South America are limited and based on single-center experiences. To date, no multicenter studies evaluated the results of LLR in South America. The aim of this study was to evaluate the experience and results with LLR in South American centers.

METHODS

From February to November 2019, a survey about LLR was conducted in 61 hepatobiliary centers in South America, composed by 20 questions concerning demographic characteristics, surgical data, and perioperative results.

RESULTS

Fifty-one (83.6%) centers from seven different countries answered the survey. A total of 2887 LLR were performed, as follows: Argentina (928), Brazil (1326), Chile (322), Colombia (210), Paraguay (9), Peru (75), and Uruguay (8). The first program began in 1997; however, the majority (60.7%) started after 2010. The percentage of LLR over open resections was 28.4% (4.4-84%). Of the total, 76.5% were minor hepatectomies and 23.5% major, including 266 right hepatectomies and 343 left hepatectomies. The conversion rate was 9.7%, overall morbidity 13%, and mortality 0.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study assessing the dissemination and results of LLR in South America. It showed an increasing number of centers performing LLR with the promising perioperative results, aligned with other worldwide excellence centers.

A propensity-matched study of full laparoscopic versus hand-assisted minimal-invasive liver surgery

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The implications of multi-incision (MILS) and hand-assisted (HALS) laparoscopic techniques for minimally invasive liver surgery with regard to perioperative outcomes are not well defined. The purpose of this study was to compare MILS and HALS using propensity score matching.

METHODS

309 patients underwent laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) between January 2013 and June 2018. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed after a 1:1 propensity score match. Subgroup analyses of matched groups, i.e., radical lymphadenectomy (LAD) as well as resections of posterosuperior segments (VII and/or VIII), were performed.

RESULTS

MILS was used in 187 (65.2%) and HALS in 100 (34.8%) cases, with a significant decrease of HALS resections over time (p = 0.001). There were no significant differences with regard to age, sex, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Score, previous abdominal surgery and cirrhosis between both groups. Patients scheduled for HALS were characterized by a significantly higher rate of malignant tumors (p < 0.001) and major resections (p < 0.001). After propensity score matching (PMS), 70 cases remained in each group and all preoperative variables as well as resection extend were well balanced. A significantly higher rate of radical LAD (p = 0.039) and posterosuperior resections was found in the HALS group (p = 0.021). No significant differences between the matched groups were observed regarding operation time, conversion rate, frequency of major complications, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, overall hospital stay and R1 rate.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis suggests MILS and HALS to be equivalent regarding postoperative outcomes. HALS might be particularly helpful to accomplish complex surgical procedures during earlier stages of the learning curve.

Minimally Invasive Approach in the Setting of ALPPS Procedure: a Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Associating liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) represents a new surgical technique for the resection of advanced hepatic malignancies with predicted insufficient future liver remnant. In some patients, ALPPS can be associated with an increased risk of poor outcomes. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been proposed in combination with ALPPS with the intent to minimize this risk. We systematically evaluated the outcomes of MIS-ALPPS cases to compare the relative outcomes of open ALPPS versus MIS-ALPPS.

METHODS

A systematic review was done in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Search terms utilized included the following: ("ALPPS"[Title/Abstract] OR "associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy"[Title/Abstract] OR "in situ split"[Title/Abstract]) AND ("minimally invasive"[Title/Abstract] OR "laparoscopic"[Title/Abstract] OR "robotic"[Title/Abstract]).

RESULTS

Fifteen articles were identified, with a total of 27 patients reported. Colorectal metastatic disease was the most commonly observed indication for MIS-ALPPS (66.7%), followed by hepatocellular carcinoma (25.9%). Time passed from the first to the second stage ranged 7-30 days. MIS-ALPPS patients did not experience procedure failures between the first and second stages. Only four (15.4%) subjects had a grade IIIb complication. No perioperative mortality after the first or second stage was reported. Compared with open ALPPS, MIS-ALPPS demonstrated better results. Hospital stay duration ranged 8-33 days with a follow-up ranging 1-20 months.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS-ALPPS appears to be safe, with potentially lower morbidities and mortalities relative to open patients. The present results should be considered with caution. A limited number of articles exist on this topic. Furthermore, selection biases exist when comparing open versus MIS-ALPPS data. Registry studies are needed to better define the outcomes of patients undergoing MIS-ALPPS.

Perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with well-preserved liver function and cirrhotic background: a propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has advanced into a safe and effective alternative to conventional open liver resection (OLR), it has not been widely accepted by surgeons. This article aimed to investigate the perioperative and long-term benefits of LLR versus OLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in selected patients with well-preserved liver function and cirrhotic background.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 1085 patients with HCC who underwent liver resection at Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University from July 2010 to July 2015, and 346 patients with well-preserved liver function and cirrhotic background were selected. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), which is the best option to overcome selection bias, was conducted to compare the surgical outcomes and long-term prognosis between LLR and OLR. After PSM, a logistic regression analysis was used to identify the predictive risk factors of posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF).

RESULTS

By using PSM, the two groups were well balanced with 86 patients in each group. In the LLR group, only the median operation time was significantly longer than the OLR group, but the hospital stay, overall morbidity, and the incidence of PHLF were significantly decreased compared to OLR. There were no significant differences in the overall survival and disease-free survival rates between the two groups. On multivariate analysis, OLR was identified to be the only independent risk factor for PHLF.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected HCC patients with well-preserved liver function and cirrhotic background, LLR could be a better option compared to OLR.

Surgical outcomes between patients with and without a cirrhotic liver undergoing laparoscopic liver resection: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery in patients with liver cirrhosis (CL) is considered to be challenging. Recent studies have shown that laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is more beneficial of reduced operative stress and postoperative complications in patients with CL.

AIM

A meta-analysis was done to review the currently available published data comparing LLR for patients with CL versus those non-cirrhosis of the liver (NCL).

METHODS

The electronic databases of PubMed, Wiley, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from date of inception to January 29, 2018. Studies reporting a comparison of outcomes and methods of LLR in CL and NCL groups were included. The studies were evaluated using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 1573 patients from six cohort studies were included in final analysis. The CL group had a slightly shorter operative time compared with the NCL group (weighted mean difference [WMD], 18.78min shorter; 95% confidence interval [CI], -43.54-5.98; P=0.14) and delayed hospital stay (WMD, 1.26 days longer; 95% CI, -0.05-2.56; P=0.06). Blood loss, blood transfusion rate, mortality, and conversion rate did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR is safe and feasible in the CL compared with the NCL groups. Our present review indicates that LLR should be considered when selecting surgery for patients with CL.

Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in early and advanced cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma is well described in early cirrhosis. Less is known regarding outcomes with more advanced cirrhosis, and this study aimed to compare these groups.

METHODS

A retrospective review of resections at a high-volume hepatobiliary center over a 15-year period was performed. Primary end-points were 30 and 90-day mortality. Secondary end-points included complications and survival.

RESULTS

80 early (Child's A) were compared to 26 advanced (20 Child's B and 6 Child's C) patients. Baseline patient and tumor characteristics were similar except for parameters indicating degree of cirrhosis. Only early cirrhotic patients underwent anatomic hepatectomies (six cases) and median operative times were longer (151 vs 99 min, p = 0.03). Intraoperative blood loss, conversion, R0 resection, length-of-stay and perioperative complications were comparable. 30 and 90-day mortality were statistically similar (2.5 vs 0%, OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.08-36.19 and 2.5 vs 7.7%, OR 0.31 95% CI 0.04-2.30). There was a trend toward longer survival in the early cirrhotic group but this did not reach significance (50 vs 21 months, p = 0.077).

CONCLUSIONS

In carefully selected advanced cirrhotic patients, laparoscopic liver resection may be performed with acceptable outcomes. Though this is not yet well established, further trials may be warranted.

Advances and challenges in laparoscopic surgery in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the fifth most common malignancy and the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. From the wide variety of treatment options, surgical resection and liver transplantation are the only therapeutic ones. However, due to shortage of liver grafts, surgical resection is the most common therapeutic modality implemented. Owing to rapid technological development, minimally invasive approaches have been incorporated in liver surgery. Liver laparoscopic resection has been evaluated in comparison to the open technique and has been shown to be superior because of the reported decrease in surgical incision length and trauma, blood loss, operating theatre time, postsurgical pain and complications, R0 resection, length of stay, time to recovery and oral intake. It has been reported that laparoscopic excision is a safe and feasible approach with near zero mortality and oncologic outcomes similar to open resection. Nevertheless, current indications include solid tumors in the periphery < 5 cm, especially in segments II through VI, while according to the consensus laparoscopic major hepatectomy should only be performed by surgeons with high expertise in laparoscopic and hepatobiliary surgery in tertiary centers. It is necessary for a surgeon to surpass the 60-cases learning curve observed in order to accomplish the desirable outcomes and preserve patient safety. In this review, our aim is to thoroughly describe the general principles and current status of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, as well as future prospects.

Development Process and Technical Aspects of Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: Learning Curve Based on 15 Years of Experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy continues to be a challenging operation associated with a steep learning curve. This study aimed to evaluate the learning process during 15 years of experience with laparoscopic hepatectomy and to identify approaches to standardization of this procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospectively collected data of 317 consecutive laparoscopic hepatectomies performed from January 2000 to December 2014 were reviewed retrospectively. The operative procedures were classified into 4 categories (minor hepatectomy, left lateral sectionectomy [LLS], left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy), and indications were classified into 5 categories (benign-borderline tumor, living donor, metastatic liver tumor, biliary malignancy, and hepatocellular carcinoma).

RESULTS

During the first 10 years, the procedures were limited mainly to minor hepatectomy and LLS, and the indications were limited to benign-borderline tumor and living donor. Implementation of major hepatectomy rapidly increased the proportion of malignant tumors, especially hepatocellular carcinoma, starting from 2011. Conversion rates decreased with experience for LLS (13.3% vs 3.4%; p = 0.054) and left hepatectomy (50.0% vs 15.0%; p = 0.012), but not for right hepatectomy (41.4% vs 35.7%; p = 0.661).

CONCLUSIONS

Our 15-year experience clearly demonstrates the stepwise procedural evolution from LLS through left hepatectomy to right hepatectomy, as well as the trend in indications from benign-borderline tumor/living donor to malignant tumors. In contrast to LLS and left hepatectomy, a learning curve was not observed for right hepatectomy. The ongoing development process can contribute to faster standardization necessary for future advances in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Technical feasibility and safety of laparoscopic right hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma following sequential TACE-PVE: a comparative study

BACKGROUND

Major liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ideally involves preoperative portal venous embolization (PVE) coupled with preoperative transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) to improve postoperative course and oncological results. Laparoscopic right hepatectomy (RH) following sequential TACE-PVE for HCC, although challenging, may help improve both immediate and long-term patient outcomes. This study is the first to describe and compare laparoscopic to open RH following sequential TACE-PVE for HCC in terms of feasibility, safety, and patient outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

All patients who underwent laparoscopic RH following successful TACE-PVE sequence (video provided) were retrospectively reviewed from a prospective database maintained at our center. Preoperative characteristics, operative data, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed and compared with those of patients who underwent open RH after TACE-PVE sequence during the same period.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic and open RH groups each included 16 patients. F3 or F4 fibrosis was present in 81 % of patients. The conversion rate was 25 %. The 90-day postoperative complication rate was 25 % in the laparoscopic group versus 50 % in the open group (p = 0.27). The incidence of postoperative liver failure grade B was higher in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (5 vs. 0 patients, p = 0.043). Severe complications, Clavien grade ≥ IIIb, only occurred in the open group and included one postoperative death. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (7 vs. 12 days, p = 0.001). R0 resection was accomplished in 93.8 % of laparoscopic patients.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic approach seems technically feasible and safe. This modern approach may optimize the surgical strategy in the future of HCC management.

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.

Liver surgery in cirrhosis and portal hypertension

The prevalence of hepatic cirrhosis in Europe and the United States, currently 250 patients per 100000 inhabitants, is steadily increasing. Thus, we observe a significant increase in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension needing liver resections for primary or metastatic lesions. However, extended liver resections in patients with underlying hepatic cirrhosis and portal hypertension still represent a medical challenge in regard to perioperative morbidity, surgical management and postoperative outcome. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification recommends to restrict curative liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients to early tumor stages in patients with Child A cirrhosis not showing portal hypertension. However, during the last two decades, relevant improvements in preoperative diagnostic, perioperative hepatologic and intensive care management as well as in surgical techniques during hepatic resections have rendered even extended liver resections in higher-degree cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension possible. However, there are few standard indications for hepatic resections in cirrhotic patients and risk stratifications have to be performed in an interdisciplinary setting for each individual patient. We here review the indications, the preoperative risk-stratifications, the morbidity and the mortality of extended resections for primary and metastatic lesions in cirrhotic livers. Furthermore, we provide a review of literature on perioperative management in cirrhotic patients needing extrahepatic abdominal surgery and an overview of surgical options in the treatment of hepatic cirrhosis.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy in cirrhotics: safe if you adjust technique

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver surgery is a growing field, and a small number of recent reports have suggested that laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is feasible even in patients with cirrhosis. However, parenchymal transection of the cirrhotic liver is challenging due to fibrosis and portal hypertension. There is a paucity of data regarding the technical modifications necessary to safely transect the diseased parenchyma.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LLR by a single surgeon between 2008 and 2015 were reviewed. Patients with cirrhosis were compared to those without cirrhosis to examine differences in surgical technique, intraoperative characteristics, and outcomes (including liver-related morbidity and general postoperative complication rates).

RESULTS

A total of 167 patients underwent LLR during the study period. Forty-eight (29 %) had cirrhosis, of which 43 (90 %) had hepatitis C. Most had Child-Pugh class A disease (85 %). Compared to noncirrhotics, patients with cirrhosis were older, had more comorbidities, and were more likely to have hepatocellular carcinoma. Precoagulation before parenchymal transection was used more frequently in cirrhotics (65 vs. 15 %, P < 0.001), and mean portal triad clamping time was longer (32 vs. 22 min, P = 0.002). There were few conversions to open surgery, though hand-assisted laparoscopy was used as an alternative to converting to open in three patients with cirrhosis. Blood loss was relatively low for both groups. Although there were more postoperative complications among cirrhotics (38 vs. 13 %, P = 0.001), this was almost entirely due to a higher rate of minor (Clavien-Dindo I or II) complications. Liver-related morbidity, major complications, and mortality rates were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR is safe for selected patients with cirrhosis. The added complexity associated with the division of diseased liver parenchyma may be overcome with some form of technique modification, including more liberal use of precoagulation, portal triad clamping, or a hand-assist port.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Experience based guidelines

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

Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatitis B and C virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with Child B or C cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and oncological outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in patients with hepatitis B and C virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with Child B or C cirrhosis.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and December 2013, LLR was performed in 232 patients with HCC. Of these, 141 patients also had pathologically proven cirrhosis. Sixteen patients with hepatitis B and C virus-related HCC with Child B or C cirrhosis were included in the study. Thirteen (81.3%) patients had Child B disease and three (18.8%) patients had Child C disease.

RESULTS

The median operation time was 215 min, the median estimated blood loss was 350 mL, and the median hospital stay was eight days. Three patients (18.8%) experienced complications after surgery. There was no postoperative mortality or reoperation. The mean follow-up period was 51.6 months. HCC recurred in eight (50%) patients: seven intrahepatic recurrences and one extrahepatic recurrence. The treatments for recurrence were laparoscopic reoperation in one (6.3%) patient, trans-catheter arterial chemo-embolization (TACE) in one (6.3%) patient, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in one (6.3%) patient, and combined TACE and RFA in four (25%) patients. The five-year postoperative overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 84.4% and 41.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that LLR can be safely used in patients with hepatitis B and C virus-related HCC and Child B or C cirrhosis, with acceptable survival outcomes.

Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Liver

Operations on the liver have been undertaken for centuries for numerous indications including trauma, infections, and even for malignancy, but it was not until the past few decades that rates dramatically increased. This expanse in liver operations is due to a multitude of factors, including broader indications as well as improved safety. Our understanding of metastatic disease to the liver, especially colorectal cancer metastases, has vastly amplified the number of patients who would be candidates for hepatic resections and liver-directed therapies. We will focus our discussion here on planned minimally invasive operations for benign and malignant tumors as the majority of the literature relates to this setting.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy: Recent advances and current thought

The development of laparoscopic hepatectomy is rapid in recent years. Preliminary clinical studies have shown that the postoperative morbidity of laparoscopic hepatectomy has no significant difference compared with open hepatectomy. Laparoscopic hepatectomy has many advantages such as minimal invasiveness, faster recovery and less impairment to immune function. Both the short- and long-term effects of laparoscopic hepatectomy for liver cancer patients are similar to those of open hepatectomy. There are still many issues worthy of discussion about laparoscopic hepatectomy due to the clinical and pathological features of liver cancer such as how to evaluate patients' condition preoperatively, how to follow the principle of intraoperative non-tumor touch, how to locate the tumor within the liver parenchyma, how to optimize the surgical approach, and how to control bleeding. It is anticipated that laparoscopic hepatectomy will be more widely used once these issues are resolved.

Total abdominal approach for postero-superior segments (7, 8) in laparoscopic liver surgery: a multicentric experience

Laparoscopic liver resections are frequently performed for peripheral lesions located in the antero-inferior segments. Resection of postero-superior segments is more demanding and dangerous than other segmentectomies, resulting in a longer operation time and increased blood loss. To reduce technical challenges, some authors advocated a modified surgical approach for these segments with the patient placed in the left lateral decubitus with the right arm suspended and suggested technical variations like the use of an additional intercostal trocar, the placement of one or two additional trans-thoracic trocars, a hand-assisted approach or a hybrid method with a median laparotomy. In the present series of 88 patients from four hepatobiliary centers with high volume of activity in Italy, a standard lithotomic position has been routinely used without the need for left lateral decubitus or semi-prone position and through abdominal wall without use of trans-thoracic trocars. This approach allows a more comfortable use of the Pringle maneuver that we used routinely in hepatic resection for PS segments; and, a very short time is needed for conversion, whenever it is required. In our series, laparoscopic resection of liver tumors located in the postero-superior segments of the liver with a total abdominal approach is technically feasible and safe with short-term results similar to other laparoscopic liver resections.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Wedge resections to living donor hepatectomy, are we heading in the right direction?

Despite inception over 15 years ago and over 3000 completed procedures, laparoscopic liver resection has remained mainly in the domain of selected centers and enthusiasts. Requirement of extensive open liver resection (OLR) experience, in-depth understanding of anatomy and considerable laparoscopic technical expertise may have delayed wide application. However healthy scepticism of its actual benefits and presence of a potential publication bias; concern about its safety and technical learning curve, are probably equally responsible. Given that a large proportion of our work, at least in transplantation is still OLR, we have attempted to provide an entirely unbiased, mature opinion of its pros and cons in the current invited review. We have divided this review into two sections as we believe they merit separate attention on technical and ethical grounds. The first part deals with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in patients who present with benign or malignant liver pathology, wherein we have discussed its overall outcomes; its feasibility based on type of pathology and type of resection and included a small section on application of LLR in special scenarios like cirrhosis. The second part deals with the laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy (LDH) experience to date, including its potential impact on transplantation in general. Donor safety, graft outcomes after LDH and criterion to select ideal donors for LLR are discussed. Within each section we have provided practical points to improve safety in LLR and attempted to reach reasonable recommendations on the utilization of LLR for units that wish to develop such a service.

Laparoscopic liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma: Current role and limitations

Liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is currently known to be a safer procedure than it was before because of technical advances and improvement in postoperative patient management and remains the first-line treatment for HCC in compensated cirrhosis. The aim of this review is to assess current indications, advantages and limits of laparoscopic surgery for HCC resections. We also discussed the possible evolution of this surgical approach in parallel with new technologies.

Laparoscopic surgery of liver tumors

INTRODUCTION

Despite initial concerns regarding safety and oncological adequacy, the use of laparoscopic liver resections for benign and malignant diseases has spread worldwide. As in open liver surgery, anatomical orientation and the ability to control intraoperative challenges as bleeding have to be combined with expertise in advanced laparoscopic techniques.

METHODS

In this review, we provide an overview regarding the literature on laparoscopic liver resection for benign and malignant liver tumors with the aim to discuss the current standards and define remaining challenges. Although numerous case series and meta-analyses have addressed the evolving field of laparoscopic liver surgery recently, data from randomized controlled trials are still not available.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection is feasible and safe in selected patients and experienced hands. Even major liver resections can be performed laparoscopically. The minimal invasive approach offers benefits in perioperative short-term outcome without compromising oncological outcomes compared to open liver resections. Further randomized trials are needed to formally prove these statements and to define the optimal indication and techniques for the individual patient.