Gas embolism under standard versus low pneumoperitoneum pressure during laparoscopic liver resection (GASES): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Low Pneumoperitoneum Pressure Reduces Gas Embolism During Laparoscopic Liver Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of low and standard pneumoperitoneal pressure (PP) on the occurrence of gas embolism during laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

BACKGROUND

LLR has an increased risk of gas embolism. Although animal studies have shown that low PP reduces the occurrence of gas embolism, clinical evidence is lacking.

METHODS

This parallel, dual-arm, double-blind, randomized controlled trial included 141 patients undergoing elective LLR. Patients were randomized into standard ("S," 15 mm Hg; n = 70) or low ("L," 10 mm Hg; n = 71) PP groups. Severe gas embolism (≥ grade 3, based on the Schmandra microbubble method) was detected using transesophageal echocardiography and recorded as the primary outcome. Intraoperative vital signs and postoperative recovery profiles were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Fewer severe gas embolism cases (n = 29, 40.8% vs n = 47, 67.1%, P = 0.003), fewer abrupt decreases in end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure, shorter severe gas embolism duration, less peripheral oxygen saturation reduction, and fewer increases in heart rate and lactate during gas embolization episodes was found in group L than in group S. Moreover, a higher arterial partial pressure of oxygen and peripheral oxygen saturation were observed, and fewer fluids and vasoactive drugs were administered in group L than in group S. In both groups, the distensibility index of the inferior vena cava negatively correlated with central venous pressure throughout LLR, and a comparable quality of recovery was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Low PP reduced the incidence and duration of severe gas embolism and achieved steadier hemodynamics and vital signs during LLR. Therefore, a low PP strategy can be considered a valuable choice for the future LLR.

Comparing the efficacy and safety of three surgical approaches for total hysterectomy (TSATH): protocol for a multicentre, single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Hysterectomy is the most common surgical procedure in the field of gynaecology. The traditional multiport laparoscopy, transumbilical laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (TU-LESS) and transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) hysterectomy approaches have been implemented to varying degrees in clinical practice. At present, although their feasibility has been proven, there are no large randomised controlled studies on postoperative rehabilitation. This study aims to evaluate postoperative recovery and assess the safety and effectiveness of these three surgical approaches for total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre, randomised, single-blind, three-arm, parallel-group, interventional clinical trial. Recruitment will be carried out in five tertiary hospitals in China. Patients diagnosed with benign uterine disease or precancerous lesions will be assigned to the vNOTES group, TU-LESS group and conventional laparoscopy group at a 1:1:1 ratio. The achievement rate of comprehensive indices of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) within 24 hours postoperatively will be considered the primary outcome (the comprehensive indicators of ERAS include fluid intake, passing flatus, urination after catheter removal, ambulation and a Visual Analogue Scale score ≤3.) This study will use a non-inferiority test, with a power (1-ß) of 80% and a margin of -0.15, at a one-sided α of 0.0125. The sample size will be 480 patients (including an assumed 15% dropout rate), calculated according to the primary outcome.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved on 25 April 2022 by the Medical Ethics Committee of West China Second University Hospital (2022(057)), Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. All participants will be required to provide informed consent before their participation in the study. The results of the trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at international conferences.

PROTOCOL VERSION

V.3.0, 31 August 2023.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2200057405.

Classification of left-side hepatolithiasis for laparoscopic middle hepatic vein-guided anatomical hemihepatectomy combined with transhepatic duct lithotomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic middle hepatic vein-guided anatomical hemihepatectomy combined with transhepatic duct lithotomy (MATL) is an approach that can substantially improve stone clearance rates while reducing the rate of postoperative biliary fistula formation, residual stone rates, and rates of recurrence. In this study, we classified left-side hepatolithiasis cases into four subtypes based upon the diseased stone-containing bile duct, the middle hepatic vein, and the right hepatic duct. We then investigated the risk associated with different subtypes and evaluated the safety and efficacy of the MATL procedure.

METHODS

In total, 372 patients who underwent left hemihepatectomy for left intrahepatic bile duct stones were enrolled. Based on the distribution of the stones, the cases could be divided into four types. The risk of surgical treatment was compared for the four types and the safety, short-term efficacy, and long-term efficacy of the MATL procedure in the four types of left intrahepatic bile duct stones were studied.

RESULTS

Type II was found to be the most likely to cause intraoperative bleeding while type III was likely to cause biliary tract damage and type IV was associated with the highest stone recurrence rate. The MATL procedure did not increase the risk of surgery and was found to reduce the rate of bile leakage, residual stones, and stone recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Left-side hepatolithiasis-associated risk classification is feasible and may represent a viable means of improving the safety and feasibility of the MATL procedure.

Minimally invasive mesohepatectomy for centrally located liver lesions-a case series

BACKGROUND

Resection of centrally located liver lesions remains a technically demanding procedure. To date, there are limited data on the effectiveness and safety of minimally invasive mesohepatectomy for benign and malignant lesions. It was therefore the objective of this study to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive mesohepatectomy for liver tumors at a tertiary care hospital.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent a minimally invasive anatomic mesohepatectomy using a Glissonean pedicle approach from April 2018 to November 2021 were identified from a prospective database. Demographics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics for continuous and categorical variables.

RESULTS

A total of ten patients were included, of whom five patients had hepatocellular carcinoma, one patient had cholangiocarcinoma, three patients had colorectal liver metastases, and one patient had a hydatid cyst. Two and eight patients underwent robotic-assisted and laparoscopic resections, respectively. The median operative time was 393 min (interquartile range (IQR) 298-573 min). Conversion to laparotomy was required in one case. The median lesion size was 60 mm and all cases had negative resection margins on final histopathological analysis. The median total blood loss was 550 ml (IQR 413-850 ml). One patient had a grade III complication. The median length of stay was 7 days (IQR 5-12 days). Time-to-functional recovery was achieved after a median of 2 days (IQR 1-4 days). There were no readmissions within 90 days after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive mesohepatectomy is a feasible and safe approach in selected patients with benign and malignant liver lesions.