1
|
Nakada S, Otsuka Y, Ishii J, Maeda T, Kubota Y, Matsumoto Y, Ito Y, Funahashi K, Ohtsuka M, Kaneko H. Predictors of a difficult Pringle maneuver in laparoscopic liver resection and evaluation of alternative procedures to assist bleeding control. Surg Today 2022; 52:1688-1697. [PMID: 35767070 DOI: 10.1007/s00595-022-02538-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2021] [Accepted: 03/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the predictors of a difficult Pringle maneuver (PM) in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and to assess alternative procedures to PM. METHODS Data from patients undergoing LLR between 2013 and 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed and the outcomes of patients who underwent PM or alternative procedures were compared. RESULTS Among 106 patients who underwent LLR, PM could not be performed in 18 (17.0%) because of abdominal adhesions in 14 (77.8%) and/or collateral flow around the hepatoduodenal ligament in 5 (27.8%). Multivariate analysis revealed that Child-Pugh classification B (p = 0.034) and previous liver resection (p < 0.001) were independently associated with difficulty in performing PM in LLR. We evaluated pre-coagulation of liver tissue using microwave tissue coagulators, saline irrigation monopolar, clamping of the hepatoduodenal ligament using an intestinal clip, and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery as alternatives procedures to PM. There were no significant differences in blood loss (p = 0.391) or transfusion (p = 0.518) between the PM and alternative procedures. CONCLUSIONS Child-Pugh classification B and previous liver resection were identified as predictors of a difficult PM in LLR. The alternative procedures were found to be effective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shinichiro Nakada
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,, 6-11-1, Omorinishi, Otaku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan.,Department of General Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.,, 1-8-1, Inohana, Chu-o-ku, Chiba city, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan
| | - Yuichiro Otsuka
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. .,, 6-11-1, Omorinishi, Otaku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan.
| | - Jun Ishii
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,, 6-11-1, Omorinishi, Otaku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan
| | - Tetsuya Maeda
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,, 6-11-1, Omorinishi, Otaku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan
| | - Yoshihisa Kubota
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,, 6-11-1, Omorinishi, Otaku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan
| | - Yu Matsumoto
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,, 6-11-1, Omorinishi, Otaku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan
| | - Yuko Ito
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,, 6-11-1, Omorinishi, Otaku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan
| | - Kimihiko Funahashi
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,, 6-11-1, Omorinishi, Otaku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan
| | - Masayuki Ohtsuka
- Department of General Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.,, 1-8-1, Inohana, Chu-o-ku, Chiba city, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan
| | - Hironori Kaneko
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,, 6-11-1, Omorinishi, Otaku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Taillieu E, De Meyere C, Nuytens F, Verslype C, D'Hondt M. Laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases - short- and long-term outcomes: A systematic review. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2021; 13:732-757. [PMID: 34322201 PMCID: PMC8299931 DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v13.i7.732] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2021] [Revised: 05/16/2021] [Accepted: 06/25/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND For well-selected patients and procedures, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become the gold standard for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) when performed in specialized centers. However, little is currently known concerning patient-related and peri-operative factors that could play a role in survival outcomes associated with LLR for CRLM. AIM To provide an extensive summary of reported outcomes and prognostic factors associated with LLR for CRLM. METHODS A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library using the keywords "colorectal liver metastases", "laparoscopy", "liver resection", "prognostic factors", "outcomes" and "survival". Only publications written in English and published until December 2019 were included. Furthermore, abstracts of which no accompanying full text was published, reviews, case reports, letters, protocols, comments, surveys and animal studies were excluded. All search results were saved to Endnote Online and imported in Rayyan for systematic selection. Data of interest were extracted from the included publications and tabulated for qualitative analysis. RESULTS Out of 1064 articles retrieved by means of a systematic and grey literature search, 77 were included for qualitative analysis. Seventy-two research papers provided data concerning outcomes of LLR for CRLM. Fourteen papers were eligible for extraction of data concerning prognostic factors affecting survival outcomes. Qualitative analysis of the collected data showed that LLR for CRLM is safe, feasible and provides oncological efficiency. Multiple research groups have reported on the short-term advantages of LLR compared to open procedures. The obtained results accounted for minor LLR, as well as major LLR, simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and liver resection, LLR of posterosuperior segments, two-stage hepatectomy and repeat LLR for CRLM. Few research groups so far have studied prognostic factors affecting long-term outcomes of LLR for CRLM. CONCLUSION In experienced hands, LLR for CRLM provides good short- and long-term outcomes, independent of the complexity of the procedure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily Taillieu
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, AZ Groeninge, Kortrijk 8500, Belgium
| | - Celine De Meyere
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, AZ Groeninge, Kortrijk 8500, Belgium
| | - Frederiek Nuytens
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, AZ Groeninge, Kortrijk 8500, Belgium
| | - Chris Verslype
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, KU Leuven, Leuven 3000, Belgium
| | - Mathieu D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, AZ Groeninge, Kortrijk 8500, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Taillieu E, De Meyere C, Nuytens F, Verslype C, D'Hondt M. Laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases — short- and long-term outcomes: A systematic review. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v13.i7.557] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
|
4
|
Pérez-Santiago L, Dorcaratto D, Garcés-Albir M, Muñoz-Forner E, Huerta Álvaro M, Roselló Keranën S, Sabater L. The actual management of colorectal liver metastases. MINERVA CHIR 2020; 75:328-344. [PMID: 32773753 DOI: 10.23736/s0026-4733.20.08436-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent cancers in the world and between 50% and 60% of patients will develop colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) during the disease. There have been great improvements in the management of CRLM during the last decades. The combination of modern chemotherapeutic and biological systemic treatments with aggressive surgical resection strategies is currently the base for the treatment of patients considered unresectable until few years ago. Furthermore, several new treatments for the local control of CRLM have been developed and are now part of the arsenal of multidisciplinary teams for the treatment of these complex patients. The aim of this review was to summarize and update the management of CRLM, its controversies and relevant evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leticia Pérez-Santiago
- Unit of Liver, Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital, INCLIVA Biomedical Research Institute, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Dimitri Dorcaratto
- Unit of Liver, Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital, INCLIVA Biomedical Research Institute, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain -
| | - Marina Garcés-Albir
- Unit of Liver, Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital, INCLIVA Biomedical Research Institute, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Elena Muñoz-Forner
- Unit of Liver, Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital, INCLIVA Biomedical Research Institute, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Marisol Huerta Álvaro
- Department of Medical Oncology, Clinic Hospital, INCLIVA Biomedical Research Institute, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Susana Roselló Keranën
- Department of Medical Oncology, Clinic Hospital, INCLIVA Biomedical Research Institute, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Luis Sabater
- Unit of Liver, Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital, INCLIVA Biomedical Research Institute, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pekolj J, Clariá Sánchez R, Salceda J, Maurette RJ, Schelotto PB, Pierini L, Cánepa E, Moro M, Stork G, Resio N, Neffa J, Mc Cormack L, Quiñonez E, Raffin G, Obeide L, Fernández D, Pfaffen G, Salas C, Linzey M, Schmidt G, Ruiz S, Alvarez F, Buffaliza J, Maroni R, Campi O, Bertona C, de Santibañes M, Mazza O, Belotto de Oliveira M, Diniz AL, Enne de Oliveira M, Machado MA, Kalil AN, Pinto RD, Rezende AP, Ramos EJB, Talvane T Oliveira A, Torres OJM, Jarufe Cassis N, Buckel E, Quevedo Torres R, Chapochnick J, Sanhueza Garcia M, Muñoz C, Castro G, Losada H, Vergara Suárez F, Guevara O, Dávila D, Palacios O, Jimenez A, Poggi L, Torres V, Fonseca GM, Kruger JAP, Coelho FF, Russo L, Herman P. Laparoscopic Liver Resection: A South American Experience with 2887 Cases. World J Surg 2020; 44:3868-3874. [PMID: 32591841 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-020-05646-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Pekolj
- HPB Surgery Section, General Surgery Service, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - R Clariá Sánchez
- HPB Surgery Section, General Surgery Service, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - J Salceda
- Hospital Ramón Santamarina, Tandil, Argentina
| | | | | | - L Pierini
- Clínica Nefrología, Clínica Uruguay, Hospital Iturraspe, Santa Fe, Argentina
| | - E Cánepa
- Hospital Privado de Comunidad, Mar del Plata, Argentina
| | - M Moro
- Hospital Italiano - Regional Sur, Bahía Blanca, Argentina
| | - G Stork
- Hospital Italiano - Regional Sur, Bahía Blanca, Argentina
| | - N Resio
- Unidad HPB Sur, General Roca, Argentina
| | - J Neffa
- Hospital Italiano de Mendoza, Mendoza, Argentina
| | | | - E Quiñonez
- Hospital El Cruce, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - G Raffin
- Hospital Argerich, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - L Obeide
- Hospital Universitario Privado, Córdoba, Argentina
| | - D Fernández
- Clínica Pueyrredón, Mar del Plata, Argentina
| | - G Pfaffen
- Sanatorio Güemes, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - C Salas
- Sanatorio 9 de Julio, Santiago del Estero, Argentina, Hospital Centro de Salud, San Miguel de Tucumán, Argentina
| | - M Linzey
- Hospital Angel C. Padilla, San Miguel de Tucumán, Argentina
| | - G Schmidt
- Hospital Escuela Gral, Corrientes, Argentina
| | - S Ruiz
- Clínica Colón, Mar del Plata, Argentina
| | - F Alvarez
- Clínica Reina Fabiola, Hospital Italiano, Córdoba, Argentina
| | | | - R Maroni
- Hospital Papa Francisco, Salta, Argentina
| | - O Campi
- Clínica Regional General Pico, Santa Rosa, Argentina
| | - C Bertona
- Hospital Español, Mendoza, Argentina
| | - M de Santibañes
- HPB Surgery Section, General Surgery Service, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - O Mazza
- HPB Surgery Section, General Surgery Service, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | - A L Diniz
- A.C. Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil
| | | | | | - A N Kalil
- Santa Casa de Porto Alegre, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde, Porto Alegre, Brazil
| | - R D Pinto
- Hospital Santa Catarina de Blumenau, Blumenau, Brazil
| | | | - E J B Ramos
- Hospital Nossa Senhora das Graças, Curitiba, Brazil
| | | | - O J M Torres
- Hospital Universitario HUUFMA, Hospital São Domingos, UDI Hospital, Fortaleza, Brazil
| | | | - E Buckel
- Clínica Las Condes, Santiago, Chile
| | | | | | | | - C Muñoz
- Hospital de Talca, Talca, Chile
| | | | - H Losada
- Hospital de Temuco, Temuco, Chile
| | - F Vergara Suárez
- Clínica Vida - Fundación Colombiana de Cancerología, Medellin, Colombia
| | - O Guevara
- Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia, Bogotá, Colombia
| | | | | | - A Jimenez
- Hospital Clínicas, Asunción, Paraguay
| | - L Poggi
- Clínica Anglo Americana, Lima, Peru
| | - V Torres
- Hospital Guillermo Almenara ESSALUD, Lima, Peru
| | - G M Fonseca
- Hospital das Clínicas - University of São Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - J A P Kruger
- Hospital das Clínicas - University of São Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - F F Coelho
- Hospital das Clínicas - University of São Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - L Russo
- Hospital Maciel, Casmu, Montevideo, Uruguay
| | - P Herman
- Hospital das Clínicas - University of São Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Gavriilidis P, Roberts KJ, Aldrighetti L, Sutcliffe RP. A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open hepatectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2020; 46:1214-1224. [PMID: 32312592 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.03.227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2020] [Revised: 03/18/2020] [Accepted: 03/31/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The evidence of pairwise meta-analysis of Robotic Hepatectomy (RH) vs Laparoscopic Hepatectomy (LH) and RH vs Open Hepatectomy (OH) is inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this study, was to compare the outcomes of RH, LH and OH by performing a network meta-analysis. METHODS A systematic literature search was performed in the following databases: Pubmed, Google scholar, EMBASE and Cochrane library. Cost-effectiveness and survival benefits were selected as primary outcomes. RESULTS The cost was less in OH compared to both minimally invasive procedures, LH demonstrated lower cost compared to RH, but the differences were not statistically significant. Both the RH and LH cohorts demonstrated significantly lower estimated blood loss, reduced major morbidity rate and shorter length of stay compared to OH cohort. The LH and OH cohorts demonstrated significantly shorter operative time and duration of clamping compared to the RH cohort. The LH cohort included significantly smaller tumours compared to the OH cohort. CONCLUSION The present network meta-analysis, demonstrated that both RH and LH in malignant and benign conditions were associated with lower morbidity rates, shorter hospital stay and the procedure related costs were statistically nonsignificant between RH, LH and OH.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paschalis Gavriilidis
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Liver Transplant Surgery, Queen Elizabeth University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, B15 2TH, UK.
| | - Keith J Roberts
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Liver Transplant Surgery, Queen Elizabeth University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, B15 2TH, UK
| | - Luca Aldrighetti
- Division of Hepatobiliary Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Robert P Sutcliffe
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Liver Transplant Surgery, Queen Elizabeth University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, B15 2TH, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Robles-Campos R, Lopez-Lopez V, Brusadin R, Lopez-Conesa A, Gil-Vazquez PJ, Navarro-Barrios Á, Parrilla P. Open versus minimally invasive liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases (LapOpHuva): a prospective randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 2019. [PMID: 30701365 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06679-0/tables/3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To present surgical and oncological outcomes using a prospective and randomized trial (LapOpHuva, NCT02727179) comparing minimally invasive liver resection (LLR) versus open liver resection (OLR) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS Between February 2005 and March 2016, 204 selected patients with CRLM were randomized and 193 were included: LLR (n = 96) and OLR (n = 97). The primary endpoint was to compare postoperative morbidity. Other secondary endpoints were oncological outcomes, use of the Pringle maneuver, surgical time, blood losses, transfusions, hospital stay, mortality and OS, and disease-free survival (DFS) at 3, 5, and 7 years. RESULTS LLR presented with lower global morbidity (11.5% vs. 23.7%, p = 0.025) but with similar severe complications. Long-term survival outcomes were similar in both groups. The cumulative 1-, 3-, 5-, 7-year OS for LLR and OLR were 92.5%, 71.5%, 49.3%, 35.6% versus 93.6%, 69.7%, 47.4%, 35.5%, respectively (log-rank = 0.047, p = 0.82). DFS for LLR and OLR was 72.7%, 33.5%, 22.7%, and 20.8% versus 61.6%, 27.2%, 23.9%, and 17.9%, respectively (log-rank = 1.427, p = 0.23). LLR involved more use of the Pringle maneuver (15.5% vs. 30.2%, p = 0.025) and a shorter hospital stay (4 vs. 6 days, p < 0.001). There were no differences regarding surgical time, blood losses, transfusion, and mortality. CONCLUSIONS In selected patients with CRLM, LLR presents similar oncological outcomes with the advantages of the short-term results associated with LLR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ricardo Robles-Campos
- Department of Liver Surgery and Transplantation, Virgen de la Arrixaca Clinic and University Hospital, IMIB, El Palmar, Murcia, Spain.
| | - Víctor Lopez-Lopez
- Department of Liver Surgery and Transplantation, Virgen de la Arrixaca Clinic and University Hospital, IMIB, El Palmar, Murcia, Spain
| | - Roberto Brusadin
- Department of Liver Surgery and Transplantation, Virgen de la Arrixaca Clinic and University Hospital, IMIB, El Palmar, Murcia, Spain
| | - Asunción Lopez-Conesa
- Department of Liver Surgery and Transplantation, Virgen de la Arrixaca Clinic and University Hospital, IMIB, El Palmar, Murcia, Spain
| | - Pedro José Gil-Vazquez
- Department of Liver Surgery and Transplantation, Virgen de la Arrixaca Clinic and University Hospital, IMIB, El Palmar, Murcia, Spain
| | - Álvaro Navarro-Barrios
- Department of Liver Surgery and Transplantation, Virgen de la Arrixaca Clinic and University Hospital, IMIB, El Palmar, Murcia, Spain
| | - Pascual Parrilla
- Department of Liver Surgery and Transplantation, Virgen de la Arrixaca Clinic and University Hospital, IMIB, El Palmar, Murcia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Guilbaud T, Marchese U, Gayet B, Fuks D. Highlights, limitations and future challenges of laparoscopic resection for colorectal liver metastases. J Visc Surg 2019; 156:329-337. [PMID: 31101548 DOI: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2019.04.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
The liver is the most common site for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRLM). Despite advances in oncologic treatment, resection of metastases is still the only curative option. Although laparoscopic surgery for primary colorectal cancer is well documented and widely used, laparoscopic surgery for liver metastases has developed more slowly. However, in spite of some difficulties, laparoscopic approach demonstrated strong advantages including minimal parietal damage, decreased morbidity (reduced blood loss and need for transfusion, fewer pulmonary complications), and simplification of subsequent iterative hepatectomy. Up to now, more than 9 000 laparoscopic procedures have been reported worldwide and long-term results in colorectal liver metastases seem comparable to the open approach. Only one recent randomized controlled trial has compared the laparoscopic and the open approach. The purpose of the present update was to identify the barriers limiting widespread acceptance of laparoscopic approach, the benefits and the limits of laparoscopic hepatectomies in CRLM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T Guilbaud
- Department of Digestive, Oncological and Metabolic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 42, boulevard Jourdan, 75014 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, 15, rue de l'école de médecine, 75005 Paris, France.
| | - U Marchese
- Department of Digestive, Oncological and Metabolic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 42, boulevard Jourdan, 75014 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, 15, rue de l'école de médecine, 75005 Paris, France
| | - B Gayet
- Department of Digestive, Oncological and Metabolic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 42, boulevard Jourdan, 75014 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, 15, rue de l'école de médecine, 75005 Paris, France
| | - D Fuks
- Department of Digestive, Oncological and Metabolic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 42, boulevard Jourdan, 75014 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, 15, rue de l'école de médecine, 75005 Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Ciria R, Ocaña S, Gomez-Luque I, Cipriani F, Halls M, Fretland ÅA, Okuda Y, Aroori S, Briceño J, Aldrighetti L, Edwin B, Hilal MA. A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the short- and long-term outcomes for laparoscopic and open liver resections for liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc 2019; 34:349-360. [PMID: 30989374 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06774-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2019] [Accepted: 03/28/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The laparoscopic approach to liver resection has experienced exponential growth in recent years. However, evidence-based guidelines are needed for its safe future progression. The main aim of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resections for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS To identify all the comparative manuscripts between laparoscopic and open liver resections for CRLM, all published English language studies with more than ten cases were screened. In addition to the primary meta-analysis, 3 specific subgroup analyses were performed on patients undergoing minor-only, major-only and synchronous resections. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology and Newcastle-Ottawa Score. RESULTS From the initial 194 manuscripts identified, 21 were meta-analysed, including results from the first randomized trial comparing open and laparoscopic resections of CRLM. Five of these were specific to patients undergoing a synchronous resection (399 cases), while six focused on minor (3 series including 226 cases) and major (3 series including 135 cases) resections, respectively. Thirteen manuscripts compared 2543 cases but could not be assigned to any of the above sub-analyses, so were analysed independently. The majority of short-term outcomes were favourable to the laparoscopic approach with equivalent rates of negative resection margins. No differences were observed between the approaches in overall or disease-free survival at 1, 3 or 5 years. CONCLUSION Laparoscopic liver resection for CRLM offers improved short-term outcomes with comparable long-term outcomes when compared to open approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruben Ciria
- Unit of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Hospital Reina Sofía, IMIBIC, University of Cordoba, CIBER-ehd, 14004, Cordoba, Spain.
| | - Sira Ocaña
- Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, University Clinic, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - Irene Gomez-Luque
- Unit of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Hospital Reina Sofía, IMIBIC, University of Cordoba, CIBER-ehd, 14004, Cordoba, Spain
| | - Federica Cipriani
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.,Department of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Mark Halls
- Department of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Åsmund Avdem Fretland
- Department of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.,Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Yukihiro Okuda
- Unit of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Hospital Reina Sofía, IMIBIC, University of Cordoba, CIBER-ehd, 14004, Cordoba, Spain.,Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Somaiah Aroori
- Unit of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK
| | - Javier Briceño
- Unit of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Hospital Reina Sofía, IMIBIC, University of Cordoba, CIBER-ehd, 14004, Cordoba, Spain
| | - Luca Aldrighetti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Bjorn Edwin
- Department of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.,Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Open versus minimally invasive liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases (LapOpHuva): a prospective randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 2019; 33:3926-3936. [DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06679-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2018] [Accepted: 01/17/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
|
11
|
Tian ZQ, Su XF, Lin ZY, Wu MC, Wei LX, He J. Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. Oncotarget 2018; 7:84544-84555. [PMID: 27811369 PMCID: PMC5356680 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.13026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2016] [Accepted: 10/24/2016] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To compare surgical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. Results A total of 14 retrospective studies with 1679 colorectal liver metastases patients were analyzed: 683 patients treated with laparoscopic liver resection and 996 patients with open liver resection. With respect to surgical outcomes, laparoscopic compared with open liver resection was associated with lower blood loss (MD, -216.7, 95% CI, -309.4 to -124.1; P < 0.00001), less requiring blood transfusion (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.55; P < 0.00001), lower postoperative complication morbidity (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P = 0.003), and shorter hospitalization time (MD, -3.85, 95% CI, -5.00 to -2.71; P < 0.00001). However, operation time and postoperative mortality were no significant difference between the two approaches. With respect to oncological outcomes, laparoscopic liver resection group was prone to lower recurrence rate (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61−0.99; P = 0.04), but surgical margins R0, overall survival and disease-free survival were no significant difference. Materials and Methods We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for all relevant studies. All statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR) and continuous data were calculated by mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Conclusions Laparoscopic and open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases have the same effect on oncological outcomes, but laparoscopic liver resection achieves better surgical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhi-Qiang Tian
- Tumor Immunology and Gene Therapy Center, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, The Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200438, China.,Department of General Surgery, Wuxi People's Hospital Affiliated Nanjing Medical University, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214023, China
| | - Xiao-Fang Su
- Department of Rehabilitation and Physiotherapy Medicine, Wuxi Taihu Hospital (101 Hospital of Chinese People's Liberation Army), Wuxi, Jiangsu 214044, China
| | - Zhi-Yong Lin
- Department of Health Statistics, The Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200433, China
| | - Meng-Chao Wu
- Tumor Immunology and Gene Therapy Center, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, The Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200438, China
| | - Li-Xin Wei
- Tumor Immunology and Gene Therapy Center, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, The Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200438, China
| | - Jia He
- Department of Health Statistics, The Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200433, China
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Cheng Y, Zhang L, Li H, Wang L, Huang Y, Wu L, Zhang Y. Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review. J Surg Res 2017; 220:234-246. [PMID: 29180186 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.05.110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2017] [Revised: 05/18/2017] [Accepted: 05/25/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been proposed as a safe and feasible treatment option for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). However, the short-term and oncologic outcomes of LLR versus open liver resection (OLR) for CRLM have not been adequately assessed. Thus, we herein provide an updated systematic review comparing short-term and oncologic outcomes of CRLM patients undergoing LLR versus OLR. METHODS A systematic literature search was performed in the Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases (until November 2, 2016) with a limitation to the publications in English. Quality assessment was performed based on the modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR), and continuous data were calculated by weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS A total of 28 studies enrolling 4591 patients with CRLM were included. With respect to short-term outcomes, patients in LLR group showed significantly reduced blood loss (WMD: -143.64; 95% CI: -180.56 to -106.73; I2 = 86%; P < 0.001), lower operative transfusion requirement (OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.30-0.53; I2 = 0%; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (WMD: -2.47; 95% CI: -2.99 to -1.94; I2 = 82%; P < 0.001), reduced overall postoperative morbidity (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.42-0.66; I2 = 38%; P < 0.001) and reduced severe morbidity (OR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.32-0.60; I2 = 35%; P < 0.001). Regarding oncologic outcomes, there were no significant differences between the two surgical procedures in recurrence and 1-, 3-, and 5-overall survival and disease-free survival except for slightly higher R0 resection rate in LLR group was slightly higher than that of OLR group (OR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.03-1.97; I2 = 37%; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS LLR should be the standard approach for selected patients with CRLM, and further research should focus on determining which patients would benefit most from LLR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yusheng Cheng
- Department of Liver Transplantation, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Lei Zhang
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and Gene Regulation, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Huizi Li
- Department of Orthopaedics, The Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong, China
| | - Li Wang
- Department of Liver Transplantation, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yiming Huang
- Department of Liver Transplantation, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Lihao Wu
- School of Computer Engineering, Gungzhou College of South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yingcai Zhang
- Department of Liver Transplantation, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Kaneko H, Otsuka Y, Kubota Y, Wakabayashi G. Evolution and revolution of laparoscopic liver resection in Japan. Ann Gastroenterol Surg 2017; 1:33-43. [PMID: 29863134 PMCID: PMC5881311 DOI: 10.1002/ags3.12000] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2017] [Accepted: 02/15/2017] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hironori Kaneko
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery Department of Surgery Toho University Faculty of Medicine Tokyo Japan
| | - Yuichiro Otsuka
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery Department of Surgery Toho University Faculty of Medicine Tokyo Japan
| | - Yoshihisa Kubota
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery Department of Surgery Toho University Faculty of Medicine Tokyo Japan
| | - Go Wakabayashi
- Division of General and Gastroenterological Surgery Department of Surgery Toho University Faculty of Medicine Tokyo Japan.,Department of Surgery Ageo Central General Hospital Saitama Japan
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Xie SM, Xiong JJ, Liu XT, Chen HY, Iglesia-García D, Altaf K, Bharucha S, Huang W, Nunes QM, Szatmary P, Liu XB. Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2017; 7:1012. [PMID: 28432295 PMCID: PMC5430829 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-00978-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2016] [Accepted: 03/20/2017] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Si-Ming Xie
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Cheng du, China.,People's Hospital of Deyang, Deyang, China
| | - Jun-Jie Xiong
- Departments of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Xue-Ting Liu
- Department of gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Hong-Yu Chen
- Departments of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Daniel Iglesia-García
- Clinical Directorate of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Kiran Altaf
- Clinical Directorate of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Shameena Bharucha
- Clinical Directorate of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Wei Huang
- Clinical Directorate of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Quentin M Nunes
- Clinical Directorate of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Peter Szatmary
- Clinical Directorate of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK.
| | - Xu-Bao Liu
- Departments of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
| |
Collapse
|