Laparoscopic hepatectomy is a safe procedure for cancer patients

Comparison of IWATE, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, and Southampton Laparoscopic Liver Resection Difficulty Scoring Systems for Predicting Intra and Postoperative Outcomes in Robotic Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

IWATE, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris (IMM), and Southampton are established difficulty scoring systems (DSS) for laparoscopic hepatectomy, yet none specifically address robotic hepatectomy. Our study evaluates these 3 DSS for predicting perioperative outcomes in robotic hepatectomy.

METHODS

With IRB approval, we prospectively followed 359 consecutive patients undergoing robotic hepatectomies, assessing categorical metrics like conversions to open, intra/postoperative issues, Clavien-Dindo Score (≥III), 30 and 90-day mortality, and 30-day readmissions using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and Area Under the Curve (AUC) to determine efficacy in predicting their occurrence for each DSS. Continuous metrics such as operative duration, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay, and total cost were analyzed using Spearman's correlation and regression. Predictive strength was significant with an AUC or correlation ≥.700 and P-value ≤.05.

RESULTS

IMM had highest predictive accuracy for conversions to open (AUC = .705) and postoperative complications (AUC = .481). Southampton was most accurate in predicting Clavien Dindo ≥ III complications (AUC = .506). IWATE excelled in predicting 30-day mortality (AUC = .552), intraoperative issues (AUC = .798), In-hospital mortality (AUC = .450), 90-day mortality (AUC = .596), and readmissions (AUC = .572). Regression showed significant relationships between operative duration, EBL, and hospital cost with increasing scores for all DSS (P ≤ .05).

DISCUSSION

Statistical analysis of the 3 DSS indicates that each has specific strengths that can best predict intra- and/or postoperative outcomes. However, all showed inaccuracies and conflicting relationships with the variables, indicating lack of substantial hierarchy between DSS. Given these inconsistencies, a dedicated comprehensive DSS should be created for robotic hepatectomy.

Using the win ratio to compare laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal cancer liver metastases

Background

We sought to assess the overall benefit of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) using the win ratio, a novel methodological approach.

Methods

CRLM patients undergoing curative-intent resection in 2001-2018 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. Patients were paired and matched based on age, number and size of lesions, lymph node status and receipt of preoperative chemotherapy. The win ratio was calculated based on margin status, severity of postoperative complications, 90-day mortality, time to recurrence, and time to death.

Results

Among 962 patients, the majority underwent open hepatectomy (n=832, 86.5%), while a minority underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy (n=130, 13.5%). Among matched patient-to-patient pairs, the odds of the patient undergoing laparoscopic resection "winning" were 1.77 [WR: 1.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.42-2.34]. The win ratio favored laparoscopic hepatectomy independent of low (WR: 2.94, 95% CI: 1.20-6.39), medium (WR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.16-2.10) or high (WR: 7.25, 95% CI: 1.13-32.0) tumor burden, as well as unilobar (WR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.25-2.31) or bilobar (WR: 4.57, 95% CI: 2.36-8.64) disease. The odds of "winning" were particularly pronounced relative to short-term outcomes (i.e., 90-day mortality and severity of postoperative complications) (WR: 4.06, 95% CI: 2.33-7.78).

Conclusions

Patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy had 77% increased odds of "winning". Laparoscopic liver resection should be strongly considered as a preferred approach to resection in CRLM patients.

Laparoscopic versus Robotic Hepatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This study aimed to assess the surgical outcomes of robotic compared to laparoscopic hepatectomy, with a special focus on the meta-analysis method. Original studies were collected from three Chinese databases, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Our systematic review was conducted on 682 patients with robotic liver resection, and 1101 patients were operated by laparoscopic platform. Robotic surgery has a long surgical duration (MD = 43.99, 95% CI: 23.45-64.53, p = 0.0001), while there is no significant difference in length of hospital stay (MD = 0.10, 95% CI: -0.38-0.58, p = 0.69), blood loss (MD = -20, 95% CI: -64.90-23.34, p = 0.36), the incidence of conversion (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.41-1.69, p = 0.62), and tumor size (MD = 0.30, 95% CI: -0-0.60, p = 0.05); the subgroup analysis of major and minor hepatectomy on operation time is (MD = -7.08, 95% CI: -15.22-0.07, p = 0.09) and (MD = 39.87, 95% CI: -1.70-81.44, p = 0.06), respectively. However, despite the deficiencies of robotic hepatectomy in terms of extended operation time compared to laparoscopic hepatectomy, robotic hepatectomy is still effective and equivalent to laparoscopic hepatectomy in outcomes. Scientific evaluation and research on one portion of the liver may produce more efficacity and more precise results. Therefore, more clinical trials are needed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of robotic compared to laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for malignant liver tumours in the elderly: systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for malignant liver tumours in elderly patients. A systematic online search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane database, The Virtual Health Library, Clinical trials.gov, and Science Direct. Comparative studies comparing laparoscopic (LH) versus open hepatectomy (OH) for both primary and metastatic malignant liver tumours in the elderly were included. Total operative time (minutes), need to perform Pringle's manoeuvre, blood loss (ml), the requirement for blood transfusion intra-operatively/post-operatively, post-operative complications, r0 resection rate, specimen resection margin (mm), re-operation rate, length of hospital stay (LOS), and 90-day mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters. Twelve studies reporting a total number of 1762 patients who underwent laparoscopic (n = 831) or open (n = 931) hepatectomy were included. OH group was associated with a significantly higher overall number of post-operative complications compared to LH (P = 0.00001). Complications such as post-operative liver failure (P = 0.02), ascites formation (P = 0.002), surgical site infection (P = 0.02), blood loss (P = 0.03), blood transfusion rate (P = 0.05), and LOS (P = 0.00001) were significantly higher in the OH group when compared to LH. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of total operative time (P = 0.53), bile leak (P = 0.12), r0 resection rate (P = 0.36), re-operation (P = 0.70), and 90-day mortality (P = 0.11). Laparoscopic liver resections are safe with at least equal or superior peri-operative outcomes in the elderly population, although available data regards mainly the results of minor resections. Laparoscopic major resections in the elderly population should be carefully evaluated and preferably performed in expert centres.

Minimally invasive liver resection in the era of robotics: analysis of 214 cases

BACKGROUND

Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (MILR) techniques range from a hybrid-technique to full robotic approaches. When compared with open techniques, MILR has been shown to be advantageous by reducing pain, complications, length of stay and blood loss. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and hospital resource utilization between full laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and robotic liver resections among major (≥ 3 segments) and minor (≤ 2 segments) resections.

METHODS

A single-center comparative retrospective review was completed on 214 patients undergoing full laparoscopic, hand-assisted, or robotic liver resection procedures between 2005 and 2018.

RESULTS

Among minor resections: 85 full laparoscopic, 40 hand-assisted, and 35 robotic liver resection cases were analyzed; and among major resections: 13, 33, and 8 cases were analyzed, respectively. In the adjusted subgroup analysis of minor resections, OR time was significantly longer for the minor hand-assisted group ([Formula: see text] = 181 min; p < 0.05), and the average lesion size was smaller for the minor full laparoscopic group ([Formula: see text] = 4.2 cm; p < 0.05). Overall, direct hospital charges were lowest in the group of patients who underwent a minor resection using the full laparoscopic technique ([Formula: see text] = $39,054.90; p < 0.05), compared to the robotic technique. Due to the smaller sample size (n = 54) in the major resection subgroup, only two significant observations were made - the full laparoscopic group had the least amount of blood loss ([Formula: see text] = 227 cc; p < 0.05) and incurred the least amount of room and board charges compared to the other two techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic approach appears favorable for minor resections as evidenced by shorter length of stay but more costly than full laparoscopy. Clinical outcomes appear to be more dependent upon the magnitude of the resection (i.e. major vs. minor) than the MILR technique chosen. Randomized trials may be indicated to discern the best indications and advantages of each technique.

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF LONG-TERM RESULTS OF MALIGNANT HEPATIC TUMORS TREATED BY MEANS CURATIVE LAPAROSCOPIC HEPATECTOMY

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic hepatectomy has presented great importance for treating malignant hepatic lesions.

AIM

To evaluate its impact in relation to overall survival or disease free of the patients operated due different hepatic malignant tumors.

METHODS

Thirty-four laparoscopic hepatectomies were performed in 31 patients with malignant neoplasm. Patients were distributed as: Group 1 - colorectal metastases (n=14); Group 2 - hepatocellular carcinoma (n=8); and Group 3 - non-colorectal metastases and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n=9). The conversion rate, morbidity, mortality and tumor recurrence were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Conversion to open surgery was 6%; morbidity 22%; postoperative mortality 3%. There was tumor recurrence in 11 cases. Medians of overall survival and disease free survival were respectively 60 and 46 m; however, there was no difference among studied groups (p>0,05).

CONCLUSION

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic hepatectomy for treating hepatic malignant tumors are satisfactory. There is no statistical difference in relation of both overall and disease free survival among different groups of hepatic neoplasms.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The effects of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) on oncological outcomes for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CCLM) remain inconclusive. Major databases were searched from January 1992 to October 2016. Effects of LLR vs OLR were determined. The primary endpoints were oncological outcomes. In total, 32 eligible non-randomized studies with 4697 patients (LLR: 1809, OLR: 2888) were analyzed. There were higher rates of clear surgical margins (OR: 1.64, 95%CI: 1.32 to 2.05, p < 0.00001) in the LLR group, without significant differences in disease recurrence, 3- or 5-year overall survival(OS) and disease free survival(DFS) between the two approaches. LLR was associated with less intraoperative blood loss (WMD: −147.46 [−195.78 to −99.15] mL, P < 0.00001) and fewer blood transfusions (OR: 0.41 [0.30–0.58], P < 0.00001), but with longer operation time (WMD:14.44 [1.01 to 27.88] min, P < 0.00001) compared to OLR. Less overall morbidity (OR: 0.64 [0.55 to 0.75], p < 0.00001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD: −2.36 [−3.06 to −1.66] d, p < 0.00001) were observed for patients undergoing LLR, while there was no statistical difference in mortality. LLR appears to be a safe and feasible alternative to OLR in the treatment of CCLM in selected patients.

Long-sleeve-working-port assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy-A new technique in laparoscopic surgery

•

The new technique of using a long-sleeve-working-port in laparoscopic surgery can facilitate complicated operations like laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

•

This technique offers both advantages of minimally invasive surgery and the use of ordinary instruments for open surgery through the working port.

•

This working port is cheap and easy to use.

Introduction

Advances in technology and instruments have made laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) feasible. Unfortunately, this operation is technically very challenging and it is not widely accepted by laparoscopic surgeons.

Presentation of case

A 59-year-old woman underwent LPD using a newly invented long-sleeve-working-port (LSWP) for a mucinous cystadenoma of the head of pancreas. This case report describes this port and its use on this patient.

Discussion

LSWP is a new invention to facilitate difficult laparoscopic operations. Through this LSWP, ordinary instruments used in open surgery can be used to overcome the limitation encountered in conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Conculsion

LSWP made complex laparoscopic surgery less complex.

The safety and efficacy of approaches to liver resection: a meta-analysis

Background:

The aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of conventional laparotomy with those of robotic and laparoscopic approaches to hepatectomy.

Database:

Independent reviewers conducted a systematic review of publications in PubMed and Embase, with searches limited to comparative articles of laparoscopic hepatectomy with either conventional or robotic liver approaches. Outcomes included total operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, resection margins, postoperative complications, perioperative mortality rates, and cost measures. Outcome comparisons were calculated using random-effects models to pool estimates of mean net differences or of the relative risk between group outcomes. Forty-nine articles, representing 3702 patients, comprise this analysis: 1901 (51.35%) underwent a laparoscopic approach, 1741 (47.03%) underwent an open approach, and 60 (1.62%) underwent a robotic approach. There was no difference in total operative times, surgical margins, or perioperative mortality rates among groups. Across all outcome measures, laparoscopic and robotic approaches showed no difference. As compared with the minimally invasive groups, patients undergoing laparotomy had a greater estimated blood loss (pooled mean net change, 152.0 mL; 95% confidence interval, 103.3–200.8 mL), a longer length of hospital stay (pooled mean difference, 2.22 days; 95% confidence interval, 1.78–2.66 days), and a higher total complication rate (odds ratio, 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.42–0.57).

Conclusion:

Minimally invasive approaches to liver resection are as safe as conventional laparotomy, affording less estimated blood loss, shorter lengths of hospitalization, lower perioperative complication rates, and equitable oncologic integrity and postoperative mortality rates. There was no proven advantage of robotic approaches compared with laparoscopic approaches.

Long-term survival in laparoscopic vs open resection for colorectal liver metastases: inverse probability of treatment weighting using propensity scores

BACKGROUND

This study compares long-term outcomes between intention-to-treat laparoscopic and open approaches to colorectal liver metastases (CLM), using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on propensity scores to control for selection bias.

METHOD

Patients undergoing liver resection for CLM by 5 surgeons at 3 institutions from 2000 to early 2014 were analysed. IPTW based on propensity scores were generated and used to assess the marginal treatment effect of the laparoscopic approach via a weighted Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

A total of 298 operations were performed in 256 patients. 7 patients with planned two-stage resections were excluded leaving 284 operations in 249 patients for analysis. After IPTW, the population was well balanced. With a median follow up of 36 months, 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for the cohort were 59% and 38%. 146 laparoscopic procedures were performed in 140 patients, with weighted 5-year OS and RFS of 54% and 36% respectively. In the open group, 138 procedures were performed in 122 patients, with a weighted 5-year OS and RFS of 63% and 38% respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of OS or RFS.

CONCLUSION

In the Brisbane experience, after accounting for bias in treatment assignment, long term survival after LLR for CLM is equivalent to outcomes in open surgery.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy: indications and results from 18 resectable cases

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the early and late results from laparoscopic hepatectomy procedures at a tertiary hospital in Brasília (DF), Brazil.

METHODS

The authors report on a series of 18 patients (11 women) who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy performed by a single surgical team at Santa Lúcia Hospital, in Brasília, between June 2007 and December 2010. Age ranged from 21 to 71 years (median = 43 years). There were eleven women and seven men. Nine patients had benign diseases and nine had malignant lesions. The lesion diameter ranged from 1.8 to 12 cm (mean: 4.96 cm).

RESULTS

Six major hepatectomy procedures and 12 minor hepatectomy procedures were performed. The mean duration of the operation was 205 minutes (range: 90 to 360 minutes). The mean intraoperative blood loss was 300 mL (range: 100 to 1,500 mL). Two patients received a transfusion (11%). There was one conversion to open surgery. There was no death and no patient underwent reoperation. The postoperative morbidity rate was 11% (n = 2). One patient presented with a minor complication (lobar pneumonia) while other presented with two major complications (intraoperative bleeding and incisional hernia). The median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range: 2 to 11 days). The median time to return to normal activities was 13 days (range: 7 to 40 days).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic hepatectomy is a safe surgical approach for treating both benign and malignant hepatic lesions. This small series showed no mortality, low morbidity and good cosmetic results.

Modified hepatic vascular occlusion facilitates hepatectomy for malignant hepatic tumor in laparoscopy

PURPOSE

The parenchymal transection and bleeding are important problems in laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH). The study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LH for a malignant hepatic tumor (MHT) with hepatic vascular occlusion (HVO) only using a monopolar electrocautery.

METHODS

A total of 31 patients' profiles, operative data, clinical outcomes, pathologic findings, and follow-up information were collected who underwent LH with HVO.

RESULTS

The median operative time was 176 minutes and the median postoperative hospital stay was 9 days. The median estimated blood loss was 310 mL. The median tumor size was 4.6 cm and the median surgical margin was 12 mm.The ischemia injury to the liver in patients subjected to selective HVO was less than that in patients subjected to the Pringle maneuver.

CONCLUSIONS

HVO facilitates LH in transecting liver parenchyma and reduces bleeding, making LH safe and feasible only using monopolar electrocautery in selected patients with malignancies. Moreover, the selective HVO have more advantages over the Pringle maneuver in decreasing ischemic injury.

A systematic review of robotic-assisted liver resection and meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatic neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted liver resection (RALR) was introduced as procedures of overcoming the limitations of traditional laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). The aim of this review was to evaluate the surgical results of RALR from all published studies and the results of comparative studies of RALR versus LLR for hepatic neoplasm.

METHODS

Eligible studies involved RALR that published between January 2001 and December 2014 were reviewed systematically. Comparisons between RALS and LLR were pooled and analyzed by meta-analytical techniques using random- or fixed-effects models, as appropriate.

RESULTS

In total, 29 studies, involving 537 patients undergoing RALR, were identified. The most common RALR procedure was a wedge resection and segmentectomy (28.67%), followed by right hepatectomy (17.88%), left lateral sectionectomy (13.22%), and bisegmentectomy (9.12%). The conversion and complication rates were 5.59 and 11.36%, respectively. The most common reasons for conversion were bleeding (46.67%) and unclear tumor margin (33.33%). Intracavitary fluid collections and bile leaks (40.98%) were the most frequently occurring morbidities. Nine studies, involving 774 patients, were included in meta-analysis. RALR had a longer operative time compared with LLR [mean difference (MD) 48.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 22.49-74.49 min; p = 0.0003]. There were no significant differences between the two groups in blood loss [MD 31.53; 95% CI -14.74 to 77.79 mL; p = 0.18], hospital stay [MD 0.13; 95% CI -0.54 to 0.80 days; p = 0.18], postoperative overall morbidity [odds ratio (OR) 0.76; 95% CI 0.49-1.19; p = 0.23], and surgical margin status (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.33-1.12; p = 0.11); cost was greater than robotic surgery (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

RALR and LLR display similar safety, feasibility, and effectiveness for hepatectomies, but further studies are needed before any final conclusion can be drawn, especially in terms of oncologic and cost-effectiveness outcomes.

Oncological and surgical results of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for HCC less than 5 cm: case-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is the evaluation of the surgical and oncological results of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by comparing laparoscopic and open liver resection (OLR) in the treatment of this disease. Retrospective analysis of laparoscopic and OLR for HCC (<5 cm) performed over a 4-year period was conducted. The LLR was done by a single surgeon.

METHODS

The study was performed on patients who received liver resection for HCC between July 2007 and August 2011 in our institution. Propensity-based matched analyses were used to account for operative method selection biases. During the 4 years, 1,050 patients with HCC received an operation. Among them patients who never received TACE or RFA before surgery and had HCC (<5 cm) were selected for this study.

RESULTS

174 patients had OLR, and 58 patients underwent LLR. Patients who received LLR had lower operative time, transfusion rate, complication rate, and shorter hospital days. There were significant differences in hospital mortality and morbidity between the two groups. Dietary recovery was relatively fast in the group of LLR. Overall and disease-free survival rates during the 4 years were also not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LLR is a developing and safe technique in a select group of patients including those with malignancies, and use of this procedure is associated with short hospital stays, a rapid return to a normal diet, full mobility, and minimal morbidity, with acceptable oncological parameters. It may be an optimal method of hepatectomy in HCC (<5 cm). Further, long-term follow-up should be acquired for adequate evaluation for survival.

Laparoscopic versus Open Liver Resection: Differences in Intraoperative and Early Postoperative Outcome among Cirrhotic Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma-A Retrospective Observational Study

Introduction. Laparoscopic liver resection is considered risky in cirrhotic patients, even if minor surgical trauma of laparoscopy could be useful to prevent deterioration of a compromised liver function. This study aimed to identify the differences in terms of perioperative complications and early outcome in cirrhotic patients undergoing minor hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with open or laparoscopic technique. Methods. In this retrospective study, 156 cirrhotic patients undergoing liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma were divided into two groups according to type of surgical approach: laparoscopy (LS group: 23 patients) or laparotomy (LT group: 133 patients). Perioperative data, mortality, and length of hospital stay were recorded. Results. Groups were matched for type of resection, median number of nodules, and median diameter of largest lesions. Groups were also homogeneous for preoperative liver and renal function tests. Intraoperative haemoglobin decrease and transfusions of red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma were significantly lower in LS group. MELD score lasted stable after laparoscopic resection, while it increased in laparotomic group. Postoperative liver and renal failure and mortality were all lower in LS group. Conclusions. Lower morbidity and mortality, maintenance of liver function, and shorter hospital stay suggest the safety and benefit of laparoscopic approach.

Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection: a comparative study from a single center

PURPOSE

The significant advantages of robotic surgery have expanded the scope of surgical procedures that can be performed through minimally invasive techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic liver surgeries at a single center.

METHODS

From July 2007 to October 2011, a total of 206 patients underwent laparoscopic or robotic liver surgery at the Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. We compared the surgical outcomes between robotic liver surgery and laparoscopic liver surgery during the same period. Only patients who underwent left hemihepatectomy or left lateral sectionectomy were included in this study.

RESULTS

The robotic group consisted of 13 patients who underwent robotic liver resection including 10 left lateral sectionectomies and three left hemihepatectomies. The laparoscopic group consisted of 17 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection during the same period including six left lateral sectionectomies and 11 left hemihepatectomies. The groups were similar with regard to age, gender, tumor type, and tumor size. There were no significant differences in perioperative outcome such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative liver function tests, complication rate, and hospital stay between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. However, the medical cost was higher in the robotic group.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic liver resection is a safe and feasible option for liver resection in experienced hands. The authors suggest that since the robotic surgical system provides sophisticated advantages, the retrenchment of medical cost for the robotic system in addition to refining its liver transection tool may substantially increase its application in clinical practice in the near future.

Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for treating benign liver lesions: assessing quality of life in the first year after surgery

Laparoscopic liver surgery has not yet gained widespread acceptance among liver surgeons. Some questions remain regarding indications to surgery and health related quality of life (HRQOL) after surgery, especially for the treatment of benign lesions, has so far not yet been investigated. The aim of this study is to evaluate HRQOL at 1 month, 6 months and 1 year after surgery in two groups of patients undergoing liver resections for benign liver lesions either by laparoscopic or open surgery. From January 2004 to September 2010 75 patients underwent surgery (29 laparoscopic, 46 open) for benign liver lesions.We retrospectively compared surgical results of the two groups and evaluated HRQOL with the SF-36 test. A personal or telephonic interview was administrated for the assessment of HRQOL before surgical treatment and at1 month, 6 months and 1 year after surgery. Sixty six patients (88%) were available for the study. The length of stay (4.7 vs. 8.2 days, p = 0.0002), the reprisal of oral intake (II post-op vs. III post-op, p = 0.02) the number of transfused patients (2 vs. 8, p = 0.1) and the overall rate of morbidity (p = 0.06) were lower in the laparoscopic group.HRQOL was significantly better in the laparoscopic group in the first year after surgery. Surgical treatment for benign liver lesions, when indicated, should be laparoscopic. This approach shows a lower rate of surgical complications with a better quality of life after surgery and a faster reprisal of social and job activities.

Single-port laparoscopic approach of the left liver: initial experience

INTRODUCTION

New technological advances have enabled the development of single-port laparoscopic surgery. This approach began with cholecystectomy and subsequently with other abdominal surgeries. However, few publications on laparoscopic liver surgery have described the use of complete single-port access. We present our initial experience of a single-port laparoscopic hepatectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between May 2012 and December 2013, 5 single-port laparoscopic hepatectomies were performed: one for benign disease and four for colorectal liver metastases. The lesions were approached through a 3-5 cm right supraumbilical incision using a single-port access device. All the lesions were located in hepatic segments II or III. Four left lateral sectorectomies and one left hepatectomy were performed.

RESULTS

Median operative time was 135 min. No cases were converted to conventional laparoscopic or open surgery. The oral intake began at 18 h. There were no postoperative complications and no patients required blood transfusion. The median hospital stay was 3 days. The degree of satisfaction was very good in 4 cases and good in one. Patients resumed their normal daily activities at 8 days.

DISCUSSION

Single-port laparoscopic hepatectomy is safe and feasible in selected cases and may reduce surgical aggression and offer better cosmetic results. Comparative studies are needed to determine the real advantages of this approach.

Laparoscopic approach to gastrointestinal malignancies: Toward the future with caution

After the rapid acceptance of laparoscopy to manage multiple benign diseases arising from gastrointestinal districts, some surgeons started to treat malignancies by the same way. However, if the limits of laparoscopy for benign diseases are mainly represented by technical issues, oncologic outcomes remain the foundation of any procedures to cure malignancies. Cancerous patients represent an important group with peculiar aspects including reduced survival expectancy, worsened quality of life due to surgery itself and adjuvant therapies, and challenging psychological impact. All these issues could, potentially, receive a better management with a laparoscopic surgical approach. In order to confirm such aspects, similarly to testing the newest weapons (surgical or pharmacologic) against cancer, long-term follow-up is always recommendable to assess the real benefits in terms of overall survival, cancer-free survival and quality of life. Furthermore, it seems of crucial importance that surgeons will be correctly trained in specific oncologic principles of surgical oncology as well as in modern miniinvasive technologies. Therefore, laparoscopic treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies requires more caution and deep analysis of published evidences, as compared to those achieved for inflammatory bowel diseases, gastroesophageal reflux disease or diverticular disease. This review tries to examine the evidence available to date for the use of laparoscopy and robotics in malignancies arising from the gastrointestinal district.

Laparoscopic Hepatectomy is a Safe and Effective Approach for Resecting Large Colorectal Liver Metastases

Hepatectomy is an accepted treatment modality for large (greater than 5 cm) colorectal liver metastases (CLM). Recently, laparoscopic hepatectomy has emerged as a viable option; however, its use for patients with large CLM is undefined. A retrospective analysis of a single institution's prospective database was performed for patients with large CLM resected between 1995 and 2010. Patients were stratified by operative approach. Patient characteristics, tumor burden, operative factors, hospital course, and long-term outcomes were compared using nonparametric, Fisher's exact, and Kaplan-Meier testing. Eighty-four patients were identified. Eight patients (9.5%) underwent laparoscopic resection. Age (59.5 vs 60 years), body mass index (26.8 vs 27.5 kg/m2), size of largest tumor (6.8 vs 7.5 cm), R0 resection (100 vs 89.5%), hepatic recurrence (25 vs 43.4%), and transfusion rate (14.3 vs 30.9%) of laparoscopic compared with open resection were similar. However, complication rate (12.5 vs 60.5%; P = 0.0192), blood loss (225 vs 400 mL; P = 0.0427), and length of stay (3.5 vs 7.0 days; P = 0.0005) were significantly higher in the open resection cohort. Median disease-free survival was 14.4 and 13.2 months for laparoscopic and open patients, respectively. Laparoscopic resection appears to be a safe approach for resecting large CLM. Tumor size does not preclude laparoscopic hepatectomy.

[Results after laparoscopic liver resection: an appropriate option in malignant disease]

INTRODUCTION

The laparoscopic approach is not yet widely used in liver surgery, but has proven to be safe and feasible in selected patients even in malignant disease. The experience and results of a hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery unit in the treatment of malignant liver disease by laparoscopic approach is presented.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between February 2002 and May 2011, 71 laparoscopic liver resections were performed, 43 for malignant disease (only patients with more than one year of follow-up were included). Mean age was 63 years old and 58% of the patients were male. Forty-nine per cent of the lesions were located in segments ii-iii. Thirty segmentectomies were performed, 7 limited resections and 6 major hepatectomies.

RESULTS

The median operative time was 163 min. There were 3 conversions. Five cases (11%) required blood transfusion. The oral intake began at 32 h and the median hospital stay was 6.7 days. There were no reoperations and there was one case of mortality. Nine patients (21%) had postoperative complications. The mean number of resected lesions was 1.2, with an average size of 3.5 cm. All resections were R0. The median survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) was 69% and 43.5% at 36 and 60 months, respectively, and 89% and 68% at 36 and 60 months, respectively, in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic liver resection in malignant disease is feasible and safe in selected patients. The same oncological rules as for open surgery should be followed. In selected patients it offers similar long-term oncological results as open surgery.

Setorectomia posterior direita laparoscópica no tratamento dos tumores hepáticos

INTRODUÇÃO: A ressecção de neoplasias no setor posterior direito costuma ser um desafio técnico pela dificuldade de sua abordagem. Adicionalmente, as hepatectomias laparoscópicas tem se tornado alternativa interessante em virtude de muitas vantagens (baixa morbidade, curto tempo de internação, retorno precoce as atividades laborais e bons resultados cosméticos). OBJETIVO: Relatar experiência em doentes submetidos à setorectomia posterior direita laparoscópica por uma única equipe. MÉTODOS: Cinco doentes foram operados entre novembro de 2008 a agosto de 2010. A idade variou de 21 a 63 anos com mediana de 43 anos. Foram quatro mulheres e um homem. A causa das neoplasias foi: adenoma (n=2), hepatocarcinoma (n=1) e metástases (n=2). A lesão foi solitária em três casos (60 %). A média do tamanho das lesões foi 3,3 cm (1,8-5). Foram analisados: tempo cirúrgico, sangramento operatório, morbimortalidade, tempo de internação e tempo de retorno à atividade habitual. RESULTADOS: A média de tempo cirúrgico foi de 160 minutos (90-260). A de sangramento intra-operatório foi de 200 ml (0-500). Nenhum doente foi transfundido. Não houve mortalidade e a morbidade foi nula. A mediana de internação foi de três dias (2-5). A mediana de retorno às atividades cotidianas foi de 12 dias (7-20). A mediana de seguimento foi de 13 meses (1-20). Não houve recidiva de lesão. CONCLUSÃO: A setorectomia posterior direita laparoscópica representa boa opção tática para o tratamento dos tumores hepáticos situados no setor posterior do lobo direito. É opção segura que evita grandes incisões com morbimortalidade. Também apresenta bom resultado cosmético e retorno precoce ao trabalho.

Robotic versus laparoscopic resection of liver tumours

BACKGROUND

There are scant data in the literature regarding the role of robotic liver surgery. The aim of the present study was to develop techniques for robotic liver tumour resection and to draw a comparison with laparoscopic resection.

METHODS

Over a 1-year period, nine patients underwent robotic resection of peripherally located malignant lesions measuring <5 cm. These patients were compared prospectively with 23 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of similar tumours at the same institution. Statistical analyses were performed using Student's t-test, χ(2) -test and Kaplan-Meier survival. All data are expressed as mean ± SEM.

RESULTS

The groups were similar with regards to age, gender and tumour type (P= NS). Tumour size was similar in both groups (robotic -3.2 ± 1.3 cm vs. laparoscopic -2.9 ± 1.3 cm, P= 0.6). Skin-to-skin operative time was 259 ± 28 min in the robotic vs. 234 ± 17 min in the laparoscopic group (P= 0.4). There was no difference between the two groups regarding estimated blood loss (EBL) and resection margin status. Conversion to an open operation was only necessary in one patient in the robotic group. Complications were observed in one patient in the robotic and four patients in the laparoscopic groups. The patients were followed up for a mean of 14 months and disease-free survival (DFS) was equivalent in both groups (P= 0.6).

CONCLUSION

The results of this initial study suggest that, for selected liver lesions, a robotic approach provides similar peri-operative outcomes compared with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).