Usefulness of laparoscopic hepatectomy

Safely Modified Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Segment VI and/or VII Hepatic Lesions Using the Left Lateral Decubitus Position

Purpose

To explore the feasibility and safety of using the left lateral decubitus position (LLDP) to perform laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for the treatment of hepatic lesions in segment VI and/or VII.

Patients and Methods

Clinical data concerning 50 patients underwent LLR including 25 patients in the LLDP and the other 25 patients in the routine operative position (ROP) at Shulan (Hangzhou) Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Shuren University Shulan International Medical College (Hangzhou, China) and Shulan (Quzhou) Hospital between March 2019 and May 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. All of the patients underwent LLR while in the LLDP or the ROP for the treatment of hepatic lesions located in segment VI and/or VII.

Results

The preoperative clinical and laboratory parameters were comparable between the two groups (P > 0.05). All patients completed the surgery successfully. There were two patients required conversion to open resection in the ROP comparing with zero in the LLDP. The mean operative time was 256.9 ± 132.7 minutes in LLDP and 255.7 ± 92.1 minutes in ROP, while the median perioperative blood loss was 100 mL (range: 50–300 mL) in LLDP and 200 mL (range: 50–425 mL), respectively. The postoperative pathological examination showed that margin-negative resection was achieved all of the cases. The important postoperative parameters all returned to normal within five days after the LLR. The mean postoperative hospital stay (15.6 vs 19.3 days; p < 0.05) and the extraction of the drainage tube time (7.8 vs 10.4 days; p < 0.05) were shorter for patients in LLDP.

Conclusion

The LLDP represents a safe and feasible position for performing LLR in selected patients with lesions in segment VI and/or VII. LLR in the LLDP is helpful in terms of the exposure of the surgical field and the recovery of the patient.

Robot-assisted liver surgery in a general surgery unit with a "Referral Centre Hub&Spoke Learning Program". Early outcomes after our first 70 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate safety, feasibility and short-term outcomes of our first 70 consecutive patients treated by robotic-assisted liver resection after a reversal proctoring between a high HPB volume centre and our well-trained center in minimally invasive General Surgery. Six surgeons were involved in this Hub&Spoke learning program.

METHODS

From September 2012 to December 2016, 70 patients underwent robotic-assisted liver resections (RALR). We treated 18 patients affected by colorectal and gastric cancer with synchronous liver lesions suspected for metastases in a one-stage robotic-assisted procedure. For the first 20 procedures we had a tutor in the operatory room, who was present also in the next most difficult procedures.

RESULTS

The 30- and 90-day mortality rate was zero with an overall morbidity rate of 10.1%. Associated surgical procedures were performed in about 65,7% of patients. The observed conversion rate was 10%. The results of the first 20 cases were similar to the next 50 showing a shortned learning curve.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive robot-assisted liver resection is a safe technique; it allows overcoming many limits of conventional laparoscopy. This innovative, time-enduring Hub&Spoke may allow patients to undergo a proper standard of care also for complex surgical procedures, without the need of reaching referral centres.

Meta-analysis of laparoscopic vs open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) are widely accepted as safe and effective procedures for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the hands of experienced surgeons. The efficacy and extent of benefits of pure as well as hand-assisted laparoscopic and laparoscopy-assisted liver resection over open liver resection (OLR) have been investigated by numerous studies during the last 10 years. The aim of our meta-analysis is to investigate the effect of LLR in short- and long-term outcomes compared to OLR in patients operated for HCC. A total of 5203 patients from forty-four studies were included in our meta-analysis reporting for short- and long-term results for both LLR and OLR for HCC. Among them, 1830 underwent pure laparoscopic hepatectomy, 282 underwent pure laparoscopic or hand-assisted laparoscopic or laparoscopy-assisted hepatectomy, and 3091 were operated through open approach. LLRs were found to be significantly associated with lower blood loss, need for blood transfusion, successful achievement of R0 resection as well as wider resection margin, shorter hospital stay, lower morbidity and 30-day mortality rates. Operative time, tumor recurrence, 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival as well as 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival were not found different between the groups. This meta-analysis clearly demonstrates the superiority of laparoscopic resection over the open approach for patients with small HCC.

Spontaneous ruptured hepatocellular carcinoma

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is rising worldwide. Spontaneous rupture of HCC occasionally occurs, and ruptured HCC with intraperitoneal hemorrhage is potentially life-threatening. The most common symptom of ruptured HCC is acute abdominal pain. The tumor size in ruptured HCC is significantly greater than that in non-ruptured HCC, and HCC protrudes beyond the original liver margin. In the acute phase, hemostasis is the primary concern and tumor treatment is secondary. Transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) can effectively induce hemostasis. The hemostatic success rate of TAE ranges 53-100%. A one-stage surgical operation is a treatment modality for selected patients. Conservative treatment is usually given to patients in a moribund state with inoperable tumors and thus has poor outcomes. Patients with severe ruptures of advanced HCC and poor liver function have high mortality rates. Liver failure occurs in 12-42% of patients during the acute phase. In the stable phase, tumor treatment, such as transarterial chemoembolization or hepatic resection should be concerned. The combination of acute hemorrhage and cancer in patients with ruptured HCC requires a two-step therapeutic approach. TAE followed by elective hepatectomy is considered an effective strategy for patients with ruptured HCC.

Colorectal cancer liver metastases: laparoscopic and open radiofrequency-assisted surgery

INTRODUCTION

The liver is the most common site of colorectal metastases (colorectal liver metastases - CLM). Surgical treatment in combination with oncological therapy is the only potentially curative method. Unfortunately, only 10-25% of patients are suitable for surgery. Traditionally, open liver resection (OLR) is usually performed. However, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become popular worldwide in the last two decades.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness and benefits of radiofrequency minor LLR of CLM in comparison with OLR.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The indication for surgery was CLM and the possibility to perform minor laparoscopic or OLR not exceeding two hepatic segments according to Couinaud's classification.

RESULTS

Sixty-six minor liver resections for CLM were performed. Twenty-five (37.9%) patients underwent a laparoscopic approach and 41 (62.1%) patients underwent OLR. The mean operative time was 166.4 min for LLR and 166.8 min for OLR. Average blood loss was 132.3 ±218.0 ml during LLR and 149.5 ±277.5 ml during OLR. Length of hospital stay was 8.4 ±2.0 days for LLR and 10.5 ±5.8 days for OLR. All resections were R0. There was no case of mortality. Postoperative complications were recognized in 9 (13.6%) patients: 8 in the group of OLR patients and 1 in the LLR group. The median survival time for LLR was 70.5 months and for OLR 61.9 months. The 5-year overall survival rate was higher for LLR vs. OLR - 82.1% vs. 69.8%. The average length of disease-free interval after LLR was greater (52.2 months) in comparison with OLR (49.4%). The 5-year disease-free interval was 63.2% for LLR and 58% for OLR.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes and oncological radicality of minor laparoscopic liver resections of CLM are comparable to outcomes of OLR.

Laparoscopic liver surgery: An overview of the literature and experiences of a single centre

In the past two decades there has been an enormous increase in laparoscopic liver surgery. There is a trend from limited to laparoscopic major resections and more centres are adopting laparoscopic liver surgery as a standard of care. Although no randomized clinical trials are published, different reports on minor and major hepatectomies and meta-analyses suggest (at least) equal outcomes and cost-effectiveness compared to open procedures.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for benign and malignant hepatic lesions in adults

BACKGROUND

Liver (hepatic) resection refers to removal of the whole liver, or one or more of its vascular segments. Elective liver resection is mainly performed for benign and malignant liver tumours. The operation can be performed as an open procedure or with a laparoscopic approach. With the advancement of laparoscopic skills and equipment, liver resection is selectively being carried out with this approach. A laparoscopic procedure is intended to be less severe, allowing for quicker healing, fewer complications, and a shorter hospital stay as the insult to the body is minimised. However, evidence about the efficacy of this approach when compared to an open procedure is still scattered. Current practice at different hepato-pancreato-biliary centres is based on the clinical judgement of experts in their field, which is highly insufficient in terms of evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for benign or malignant lesions on the liver in adult patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until February 2013. We also conducted searches of reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings, and ongoing trial databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised clinical trials of participants undergoing liver resection for benign or malignant lesions which reported on benefits and harms. We searched for quasi-randomised or observational studies for reports of harm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

No data from randomised clinical trials could be collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Two authors performed study selection independently. We were not able to identify any randomised clinical trials that met the inclusion criteria of our review protocol. We identified two ongoing randomised clinical trials performed in Europe with data yet to be published. We retrieved a few observational studies (prospective and retrospective) with the searches for randomised clinical trials. They included a limited number of participants in whom laparoscopic and open liver resection was compared. Since these studies were non-randomised observational studies, the results for any adverse events are not included in the review as the risk of bias in such studies is high.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No conclusions can be made at this time as no randomised clinical trials are available. In addition to the two ongoing randomised clinical trials for which results are expected to be published in the near future, well-designed, prospective, randomised clinical trials are needed in order to evaluate the benefits and harms of the laparoscopic procedure versus open liver resection.

Laparoscopic partial hepatectomy of focal nodular hyperplasia

Focal nodular hyperplasia is a benign liver lesion incidentally discovered with increasing frequency because of the proliferation of imaging studies. Radiographic characterization can diagnose this pathologic lesion and nonoperative therapy is the standard of care. However, surgical resection may be required for diagnostic reasons or symptomatic patients. Depending on the anatomic location of the lesion, biopsy and/or resection can be performed laparoscopically. We herein report the case of a 26-year-old Japanese woman with a hepatic tumor who required a medical examination. Her medical history was negative for alcohol abuse, oral contraceptive administration and trauma. Clinical examination showed no significant symptoms. Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging showed a mass located in the left lateral segment of the liver with a diameter of about 40 mm. It was difficult to diagnose the tumor definitively from these imaging studies, so we performed laparoscopic partial hepatectomy with successive firing of endoscopic staplers. The histopathological diagnosis was focal nodular hyperplasia. Surgical procedures and postoperative course were uneventful and the patient was discharged from the hospital on postoperative day 5.

Laparoscopic or open liver resection? Let systematic review decide it

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly being used for the excision of benign and malignant hepatic lesions. The aim of this study was to perform meta-analysis on the compiled data from available observational studies.

METHODS

All the studies comparing laparoscopic versus open liver resections were searched on the available databases. Data were analyzed using Review Manager software version 5.0 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Software Update, Oxford, UK).

RESULTS

There was a total of 2,466 patients: 1,161 (47.1%) in the laparoscopic group and 1,305 (52.9%) in the open group. The laparoscopic group was associated with a reduced overall complication rate (odds ratio = .35; 95% confidence interval [CI], .28-.45; P < .001; heterogeneity (HG): P = .51), fewer positive resection margins for malignant tumor resections (odds ratio = .38; CI, .20-.76; P = .006; HG: P = .52) and a decrease in the number of patients requiring blood transfusion (odds ratio = .36; CI, .23-.74; P < .001; HG: P = .30).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection showed a reduced overall morbidity rate and favorable and comparable outcomes when compared with the open group. However, there is still a need for randomized controlled trials to compare laparoscopic versus open hepatic resection in benign and malignant lesions.

Laparoscopic liver resection

More than 3,000 laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) are performed worldwide for benign disease, malignancy, and living donor hepatectomy. Minimally invasive hepatic resection approaches include pure laparoscopic, hand-assisted laparoscopic, and a laparoscopic-assisted open "hybrid" approach, where the operation is started laparoscopically to mobilize the liver and begin the dissection, followed by a small laparotomy for completion of the parenchymal transection. Surgeons should have an advanced understanding of hepatic anatomy, extensive experience in open liver surgery, and technical skill to control major vascular and biliary structures laparoscopically before embarking on LLR. Although there is no absolute size criterion, smaller, peripheral lesions (<5 cm) that lie far from major vessels and anticipated transection planes are most amenable to LLR. Although the majority of reported LLR are non-anatomic resections or segmentectomies, several surgical groups are now performing laparoscopic major hepatic resections with excellent safety profiles. Patient benefits from LLR include less operative blood loss, less postoperative pain and narcotic requirement, and a shorter length of hospital stay, with comparable postoperative morbidity and mortality to open liver resection. Comparison studies between LLR and open resection have revealed no differences in width of resection margins for malignant lesions or overall survival after resection for hepatocellular cancer or colorectal cancer liver metastases. Advantages of LLR for HCC in particular include avoidance of collateral vessel ligation, decreased postoperative hepatic insufficiency, and fewer postoperative adhesions, all of which are features that enhance subsequent liver transplantation.

Meta-analysis of trials comparing minimally-invasive and open liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Recent literature suggests that minimally-invasive hepatectomy (MIH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is associated with better perioperative results and similar oncologic outcomes compared to open hepatectomy (OH). However, previous reports have been limited by small sample size and single-institution design.

METHODS

To overcome these limitations, we performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing MIH and OH in patients with HCC using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Nine eligible studies were identified that included 227 patients undergoing MIH and 363 undergoing OH. Patients were similar respect to age, gender, rates of cirrhosis, hepatitis C infection, tumour size, and American Society of Anesthesiology classification. The MIH group had lower rates of hepatitis B infection. There were no differences in type of resection (anatomic or non-anatomic), use of Pringle's maneuver, and operative time. Patients undergoing MIH had less blood loss [difference -217 mL; 95% confidence interval (CI), -314 to -121], lower rates of transfusion [odds ratio (OR), 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.59], shorter postoperative stay (difference -5 days; 95% CI, -7.84 to -2.25), lower rates of positive margins (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.69) and perioperative complications (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.66). Survival outcomes were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although patient selection might have influenced some of the observed outcomes, MIH was associated with decreased blood loss, transfusions, rates of positive resection margins, overall and specific morbidity, and hospital stay. Survival outcomes did not differ between MIH and OH, although further studies are needed to evaluate the impact of MIH on long-term results.

Outcomes of laparoscopic hepatic resection for colorectal cancer metastases

The role of laparoscopic liver resection for cancer remains controversial. This review summarizes the expanding literature on outcomes of minimally invasive hepatic resection for colorectal cancer liver metastases. Four recent studies (in more than 300 patients) show 5-year overall-survival rates of 46-64%, which are comparable to results in modern open hepatic resection series. The advantages of laparoscopic liver resection include smaller incisions, less pain, less narcotic requirements, and shorter length of stay.

Laparoscopic liver resection--current update

An increasing number of studies are reporting the outcomes and benefits of laparoscopic liver resection. This article reviews the literature with emphasis on a recent consensus conference on laparoscopic liver resection in 2008, the learning curve for laparoscopic liver surgery, laparoscopic major hepatectomies, oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal cancer liver metastases, and the comparative benefits of laparoscopic versus open liver resection. Current evidence suggests that minimally invasive hepatic resection is safe and feasible with short-term benefits, no economic disadvantage, and no compromise to oncologic principles.

World review of laparoscopic liver resection-2,804 patients

OBJECTIVE

To provide a review of the world literature on laparoscopic liver resection.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Initially described for peripheral, benign tumors resected by nonanatomic wedge resections, minimally invasive liver resections are now being performed more frequently, even for larger, malignant tumors located in challenging locations. Although a few small review articles have been reported, a comprehensive review on laparoscopic liver resection has not been published.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search using Pubmed, screening all English publications on laparoscopic liver resections. All data were analyzed and apparent case duplications in updated series were excluded from the total number of patients. Tumor type, operative characteristics, perioperative morbidity, and oncologic outcomes were tabulated.

RESULTS

A total of 127 published articles of original series on laparoscopic liver resection were identified, and accounted for 2,804 reported minimally invasive liver resections. Fifty percent were for malignant tumors, 45% were for benign lesions, 1.7% were for live donor hepatectomies, and the rest were indeterminate. Of the resections, 75% were performed totally laparoscopically, 17% were hand-assisted, and 2% were laparoscopic-assisted open hepatic resection (hybrid) technique, with the remainder being other techniques or conversions to open hepatectomies. The most common laparoscopic liver resection was a wedge resection or segmentectomy (45%) followed by anatomic left lateral sectionectomy (20%), right hepatectomy (9%), and left hepatectomy (7%). Conversion from laparoscopy to open laparotomy and from laparoscopy to hand-assisted approach occurred in 4.1% and 0.7% of reported cases, respectively. Overall mortality was 9 of 2,804 patients (0.3%), and morbidity was 10.5%, with no intraoperative deaths reported. The most common cause of postoperative death was liver failure. Postoperative bile leak was observed in 1.5% of cases. For cancer resections, negative surgical margins were achieved in 82% to 100% of reported series. The 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates after laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma were 50% to 75% and 31% to 38.2%, respectively. The 3-year overall and disease-free survival rates after laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal metastasis to the liver were 80% to 87% and 51%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, laparoscopic liver resections are safe with acceptable morbidity and mortality for both minor and major hepatic resections. Oncologically, 3- and 5-year survival rates reported for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal cancer metastases are comparable to open hepatic resection, albeit in a selected group of patients.

Laparoscopic versus open left lateral segmentectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver surgery is becoming increasingly common. This cohort study was designed to directly compare perioperative outcomes of the left lateral segmentectomy via laparoscopic and open approach.

METHODS

Between 2002 and 2006 43 left lateral segmentectomies were performed at King's College Hospital. Those excluded from analysis included previous liver resections, polycystic liver disease, liver cirrhosis and synchronous operations. Of 20 patients analysed, laparoscopic (n = 10) were compared with open left lateral segmentectomy (n = 10). Both groups had similar patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Morbidity rates were similar with no wound or chest infection in either group. The conversion rate was 10% (1/10). There was no difference in operating time between the groups (median time 220 minutes versus 179 minutes, p = 0.315). Surgical margins for all lesions were clear. Less postoperative opiate analgesics were required in the laparoscopic group (median 2 days versus 5 days, p = 0.005). The median postoperative in-hospital stay was less in the laparoscopic group (6 days vs 9 days, p = 0.005). There was no mortality.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic left lateral segmentectomy is safe and feasible. Laparoscopic patients may benefit from requiring less postoperative opiate analgesia and a shorter post-operative in-hospital stay.

Clinical study of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for malignant liver tumors

BACKGROUND

The number of reported laparoscopic hepatectomies for liver malignancy is increasing, but comparative data on the survival outcomes between the patients who have undergone laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open surgery are still lacking.

METHODS

We compared 31 laparoscopic liver resections with 31 open liver resections in a pair-matched retrospective analysis with the aim of evaluating the intraoperative hazards, recovery, and survival outcomes of these procedures for liver cancer. The laparoscopic group and the open group were matched for age, sex, the size and location of the tumor, and the presence or absence of cirrhosis.

RESULTS

Thirty cases in the laparoscopic group were performed successfully while one case was converted to open surgery due to intraoperative hemorrhage. The length of hospital stay was 7.5 (5-15) days, which was significantly shorter than those in open group (p < 0.01). The mean operative time and blood loss in the laparoscopic group were 140.1 (60-380) min and 502.9 (50-2000) ml, respectively, which were lower than those in open group but without significant difference. There were no operative complications and no deaths in the laparoscopic group. The mean and median survival times of laparoscopic group were 59.3 and 70 months, compared with 49.4 and 60 months in the open group, respectively. The 1-, 3-, 5-year survival rates in the laparoscopic group were, respectively, 96.55%, 60.47%, and 50.40%, and 96.77%, 68.36%, and 50.64% in the open group. By log-rank test, these two survival curves were not significantly different (p = 0.8535).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that laparoscopic hepatectomy for liver malignancy in selected patients is a safe, effective, and oncologically efficient procedure with better short-term results and similar survival outcomes to open hepatectomy for liver malignancy after midterm follow-up.