Feasibility and safety of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with a tumor size of 5-10 cm

A meta-analysis: laparoscopic versus open liver resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The indication of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for treating large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial. In this study, we compared the short-term and long-term outcomes of LLR and open liver resection (OLR) for large HCC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched eligible articles about LLR versus OLR for large HCC in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE and performed a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eight publications involving 1,338 patients were included. Among them, 495 underwent LLR and 843 underwent OLR. The operation time was longer in the LLR group (MD: 22.23, 95% CI: 4.14-40.33, p = 0.02). but the postoperative hospital stay time was significantly shorter (MD : -4.88, CI: -5.55 to -4.23, p < 0.00001), and the incidence of total postoperative complications and major complications were significantly fewer (OR: 0.49, 95% CI:0.37-0.66, p < 0.00001; OR: 0.54, 95% CI:0.36 - 0.82, p = 0.003, respectively). Patients in the laparoscopic group had no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative transfusion rate, resection margin size, R0 resection rate, three-year overall survival (OS) and three-year disease-free survival (DFS).

CONCLUSION

LLR for large HCC is safe and feasible. This surgical strategy will not affect the long-term outcomes of patients.

Sub-classification of laparoscopic left hepatectomy based on hierarchic interaction of tumor location and size with perioperative outcomes

BACKGROUND

The aim of this multicentric study was to investigate the impact of tumor location and size on the difficulty of Laparoscopic-Left Hepatectomy (L-LH).

METHODS

Patients who underwent L-LH performed across 46 centers from 2004 to 2020 were analyzed. Of 1236 L-LH, 770 patients met the study criteria. Baseline clinical and surgical characteristics with a potential impact on LLR were included in a multi-label conditional interference tree. Tumor size cut-off was algorithmically determined.

RESULTS

Patients were stratified into 3 groups based on tumor location and dimension: 457 in antero-lateral location (Group 1), 144 in postero-superior segment (4a) with tumor size ≤40 mm (Group 2), and 169 in postero-superior segment (4a) with tumor size >40 mm (Group 3). Patients in the Group 3 had higher conversion rate (7.0% vs. 7.6% vs. 13.0%, p-value .048), longer operating time (median, 240 min vs. 285 min vs. 286 min, p-value <.001), greater blood loss (median, 150 mL vs. 200 mL vs. 250 mL, p-value <.001) and higher intraoperative blood transfusion rate (5.7% vs. 5.6% vs. 11.3%, p-value .039). Pringle's maneuver was also utilized more frequently in Group 3 (66.7%), compared to Group 1 (53.2%) and Group 2 (51.8%) (p = .006). There were no significant differences in postoperative stay, major morbidity, and mortality between the three groups.

CONCLUSION

L-LH for tumors that are >40 mm in diameter and located in PS Segment 4a are associated with the highest degree of technical difficulty. However, post-operative outcomes were not different from L-LH of smaller tumors located in PS segments, or tumors located in the antero-lateral segments.

Perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for BCLC stage A large hepatocellular carcinoma patients in difficult segments: A two-centre, propensity score matching analysis

Background

The differences in short- and long-term outcome between laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) for BCLC stage A large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in difficult segments (I, IVa, VII, VIII) remain unclear. This PSM two-centre study aimed to compare perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of LLR with OLR for this HCC.

Methods

HCC patients with BCLC stage A who underwent OLR or LLR in two medical centres were enrolled in the study. PSM analysis was performed to match patients between the LLR cohort and OLR cohort. Survival was analysed based on the Kaplan–Meier method. Independent risk factors were identified by Cox regression.

Results

After PSM, 35 patients remained in the LLR cohort, and 84 remained in the OLR cohort. Patients in the LLR cohort had more intraoperative blood loss (p=0.036) and shorter hospital stays after surgery (p&lt;0.001). The LLR cohort and OLR cohort had no difference in intraoperative blood transfusion, surgical margin or postoperative short-term outcomes. The OS and RFS were not significantly different between the two cohorts. The OS and RFS of these two cohorts were not different in the subgroup analysis. Surgical margin was identified as an independent risk factor for tumour recurrence.

Conclusion

For BCLC stage A large HCC patients with lesions in difficult segments, LLR was feasible and had shorter hospital stay than OLR. In addition, a surgical margin ≥1 cm could significantly decrease the recurrence probability for large HCC located in different segments without compromising short-term outcomes.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score study

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial, especially for tumors larger than 5 cm. We compared the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection (OLR) for large HCC.

METHODS

Patients with large HCC after curative hepatectomy were enrolled. To compare the short-term outcomes, propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) were performed to reduce the effect of confounding factors, respectively. Subsequently, Cox-regression analyses were conducted to identify the independent risk factors associated with decreased recurrence-free survival (RFS) and poor overall survival (OS).

RESULT

There were 265 patients enrolled in the final analysis: 146 who underwent OLR and 119 who underwent LLR. There was no significant difference between the OLR and LLR groups according to PSM and IPTW analysis (all P > 0.05). Multivariable analysis revealed that LLR was not independently associated with poorer OS (HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.80-1.67, P = 0.448) or RFS (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.88-1.70, P = 0.238).

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences in perioperative complications or long-term prognosis between LLR and OLR for large HCC, which provides evidence for standard laparoscopic surgical practice with adequate surgeon experience and careful patient selection.

Challenging Scenarios and Debated Indications for Laparoscopic Liver Resections for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) have been increasingly adopted for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with safe short- and long-term outcomes reported worldwide. Despite this, lesions in the posterosuperior segments, large and recurrent tumors, portal hypertension, and advanced cirrhosis currently represent challenging scenarios in which the safety and efficacy of the laparoscopic approach are still controversial. In this systematic review, we pooled the available evidence on the short-term outcomes of LLRs for HCC in challenging clinical scenarios. All randomized and non-randomized studies reporting LLRs for HCC in the above-mentioned settings were included. The literature search was run in the Scopus, WoS, and Pubmed databases. Case reports, reviews, meta-analyses, studies including fewer than 10 patients, non-English language studies, and studies analyzing histology other than HCC were excluded. From 566 articles, 36 studies dated between 2006 and 2022 fulfilled the selection criteria and were included in the analysis. A total of 1859 patients were included, of whom 156 had advanced cirrhosis, 194 had portal hypertension, 436 had large HCCs, 477 had lesions located in the posterosuperior segments, and 596 had recurrent HCCs. Overall, the conversion rate ranged between 4.6% and 15.5%. Mortality and morbidity ranged between 0.0% and 5.1%, and 18.6% and 34.6%, respectively. Full results according to subgroups are described in the study. Advanced cirrhosis and portal hypertension, large and recurrent tumors, and lesions located in the posterosuperior segments are challenging clinical scenarios that should be carefully approached by laparoscopy. Safe short-term outcomes can be achieved provided experienced surgeons and high-volume centers.

Positioning of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From Laparoscopic to Robot-Assisted Liver Resection

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is widely accepted in the surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) through international consensus conferences and the development of difficulty classifications. LLR has been reported to result in earlier postoperative recovery and fewer postoperative complications than open liver resection (OLR) for HCC. However, the prevalence of liver cirrhosis, obesity, the elderly, HCC recurrence (repeat liver resection), and major resection must be considered for LLR for HCC. Some systematic reviews, meta-analysis studies, and large cohort studies indicated that LLR is technically feasible for selected patients with HCC with these factors that led to less intraoperative blood loss, fewer transfusions and postoperative complication incidences, and shorter hospital stays than OLR. Furthermore, some reported LLR prevents postoperative loss of independence. No difference was reported in long-term outcomes among patients with HCC who underwent LLR and OLR; however, some recent reports indicated better long-term outcomes with LLR. In recent years, robot-assisted liver resection (RALR) has gradually become popular, and its short- and long-term results for HCC are not different from those of LLR. Additionally, RALR is expected to become the mainstay of minimally invasive surgery in the future.

The pre- and postoperative nomograms to predict the textbook outcomes of patients who underwent hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma

Background and aims

An increasing number of studies have confirmed that non-textbook outcomes (non-TO) are a risk factor for the long-term outcome of malignant tumors. It is particularly important to identify the predictive factors of non-TO to improve the quality of surgical treatment. We attempted to construct two nomograms for preoperative and postoperative prediction of non-TO after laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

Patients who underwent curative-intent hepatectomy for HCC between 2014 and 2021 at two Chinese hospitals were analyzed. Using univariate and multivariate analyses, the independent predictors of non-TO were identified. The prediction accuracy is accurately measured by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calibration curve. ROC curves for the preoperative and postoperative models, Child-Pugh grade, BCLC staging, and 8th TNM staging were compared relative to predictive accuracy for non-TO.

Results

Among 515 patients, 286 patients (55.5%) did not achieve TO in the entire cohort. Seven and eight independent risk factors were included in the preoperative and postoperative predictive models by multivariate logistic regression analysis, respectively. The areas under the ROC curves for the postoperative and preoperative models, Child-Pugh grade, BCLC staging, and 8th TNM staging in predicting non-TO were 0.762, 0.698, 0.579, 0.569, and 0.567, respectively.

Conclusion

Our proposed preoperative and postoperative nomogram models were able to identify patients at high risk of non-TO following laparoscopic resection of HCC, which may guide clinicians to make individualized surgical decisions, improve postoperative survival, and plan adjuvant therapy against recurrence.

Laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a single center propensity-score-matching comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes and long-term survival

BACKGROUND

Although the benefits of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in most circumstances are evident, the benefits for large HCC are contentious. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes and survival after LH versus open hepatectomy (OH) in large HCC patients.

METHODS

An analysis of prospectively maintained database included 215 hepatectomies for large HCC (diameter ≥ 5 cm). The operative and survival outcomes were compared between the LH group (n = 109) and the OH group (n = 106). Propensity score matching (PSM) 1:1 included 70 patients in each group. The entire cohort multivariable analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with surgical complications and suboptimal recurrence-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

After PSM, baseline characteristics and the extent of liver resection were similar in both groups. The LH group had a shorter hospital stay than the OH group (7 vs 9.5 days, p = 0.001). The R0 resection rate, complication rate, overall survival, and RFS were similar between the groups. The multivariate analyses revealed two independent factors predicting surgical complication (major resection; p < 0.001 and large volume blood loss; p = 0.042), and 3 independent factors predicting suboptimal RFS including R1 resection (p = 0.011), multifocal HCC (p = 0.005), and microvascular invasion (p = 0.001). LH was not associated with surgical complication and suboptimal RFS.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the benefits of LH by improving the perioperative outcomes, without long-term survival inferiority in selected large HCC patients compared with conventional OH. LH can be an attractive option for large HCC treatment.

Is Laparoscopic Hepatectomy Safe for Giant Liver Tumors? Proposal from a Single Institution for Totally Laparoscopic Hemihepatectomy Using an Anterior Approach for Giant Liver Tumors Larger Than 10 cm in Diameter

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of laparoscopic liver resections for liver tumors that are larger than 10 cm remain unclear. We developed a safe laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy for giant liver tumors using an anterior approach.

METHODS

Eighty patients who underwent laparoscopic hemihepatectomy between January 2011 and December 2021 were divided into a nongiant tumor group (n = 65) and a giant tumor group (n = 15) for comparison.

RESULTS

The median operating time, amount of blood loss, and length of postoperative hospital stay did not differ significantly between the nongiant and giant tumor groups. The sizes of the tumors and weights of the resected liver were significantly larger in the giant tumor group. A comparison between a nongiant group (n = 23) and a giant group (n = 12) treated with laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy showed similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, especially that performed on the right side, for giant tumors larger than 10 cm can be performed safely. Surgical techniques for giant liver tumors have been standardized, and their application is expected to spread widely in the future.

Impact of tumor size on the difficulty of minimally invasive liver resection

INTRODUCTION

We performed this study in order to investigate the impact of tumour size on the difficulty of MILR, as well as to elucidate the optimal tumour size cut-off/s to distinguish between 'easy' and 'difficult' MILRs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is retrospective review of 603 consecutive patients who underwent MILR between 2006 and 2019 of which 461 met the study inclusion criteria. We first conducted an exploratory analysis to visualize the associations between tumor size and various surrogates of laparoscopic difficulty in order to determine to optimal tumor size cutoff for stratification. Visual inspection of flexible spline-based models as well as quantitative evidence determined that perioperative outcomes differed between patients with tumor size of 30-69 mm and tumours ≥70 mm. These cutoffs were used for further downstream analyses.

RESULTS

The cohort of 461 patients was divided into 3 groups based on tumour diameter size. Patients with larger tumours experienced longer operating times ((P_{Group 2 vs 1}<0.001, P_{Group 3 vs 1}<0.001, P_{Group 3 vs 2}<0.001), higher blood loss (P_{Group 2 vs 1}<0.001, P_{Group 3 vs 1}<0.001, P_{Group 3 vs 2}<0.001), as well as significantly longer hospital stay (P_{Group 2 vs 1}<0.001, P_{Group 3 vs 1}<0.001, P_{Group 3 vs 2}<0.001). There was a monotonic trend towards increasing blood transfusion rates (P = 0.006), overall morbidity (P = 0.029) and 90-day mortality rates (P = 0.047) with increasing tumour size.

CONCLUSION

Although tumour size of 30 mm serves as an optimal cut-off for predicting difficult resections as per the Iwate criteria, a trichotomy (<30 mm, 30-69 mm, ≥70 mm) may provide additional granularity. Further large-scale prospective studies are needed to corroborate these findings.

Comparison of clinical and economic outcomes between minimally invasive liver resection and open liver resection: a propensity-score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) has gained momentum in recent years. This study of contemporary data compares economic and clinical outcomes between MILR and open liver resection (OLR).

METHODS

We extracted data for patients undergoing liver resection between October 2015-September 2018 from the Premier Healthcare Database. We conducted a propensity score matched analysis to compare complications, in-hospital mortality, inpatient readmissions, discharge to institutional post-acute care, operating room time (ORT), length of stay (LOS), and total hospital cost between MILR and OLR patients.

RESULTS

From the eligible OLR (n = 3349) and MILR (n = 1367) patients, we propensity score matched 1261 from each cohort at a 1:1 ratio. After matching, MILR was associated with lower rates of complications (bleeding: 8.2% vs. 17.4%; respiratory failure: 5.5% vs. 10.9%; intestinal obstruction: 3.6% vs. 6.0%, and pleural effusion: 1.9% vs. 4.9%), in-hospital mortality (0.5% vs. 3.0%), 90-day inpatient readmissions (10.4% vs. 14.3%), discharge to institutional post-acute care (6.9% vs. 12.3%), shorter ORT (257 vs. 308 min) and LOS (4.3 vs. 7.2 days), and lower hospital costs ($19463 vs. $29119) (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

MILR was associated with lower risk of complications and reduced hospital resource utilizations as compared with OLR.

Comparison of surgical outcomes for laparoscopic liver resection of large hepatocellular carcinomas: A retrospective observation from single-center experience

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Although laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is a common surgical procedure for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), its suitability for large HCCs (≥5 cm) remains controversial. This study compared surgical outcomes of open hepatectomy with LLR for large HCCs.

METHODS

A total of 313 patients with HCC who underwent hepatectomy between January 2010 and June 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. Demographic data, short-term outcomes, and long-term survivals were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among patients with large HCCs (n = 122), the open group (n = 85) had larger tumor sizes (10.91 ± 4.72 vs. 7.45 ± 2.95 cm; p < 0.001) and more advanced stages (stages 3/4: 71.8% vs. 45.9%; p = 0.029) than the LLR group (n = 37), while LLR group achieved less blood loss (623.24 ± 841.75 mL vs. 1091.76 ± 1004.72 mL, p = 0.014) and shorter LOS (9.00 ± 5.13 d vs. 12.82 ± 8.51 d, p = 0.013). There were no significant differences in complication and mortality rates between groups. The 5-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates between the two groups were not significantly different (p = 0.408 and 0.644 respectively). The surgical outcomes showed equal benefit of the two operation types.

CONCLUSION

With sufficient surgeon experience and appropriate patient selection, LLR is a feasible treatment choice for large HCCs.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity case-matched analysis of the long-term survival

Backgrounds/Aims

Despite the widespread popularity of laparoscopic surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) remains in evolution. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤7 cm.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with HCC treated by hepatectomy from October 2000 to May 2019 were included. Excluding tumors larger than 7 cm, 1:2 propensity score matching was performed between laparoscopic and open hepatectomies. The perioperative outcomes, 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the two groups were compared.

Results

Forty-five patients who underwent LLR were matched to 90 open hepatectomy (OH) during the same period. LLR group had shorter median hospital stay (5 days vs. 9 days, p=0.00) but required longer operative time (326.0 minutes vs. 272.5 minutes, p=0.018) than the OH group. The 5-year overall survival was better in the LLR group (84.9% vs. 61.1%; p=0.036), though there was no significant difference in the 5-year disease free survival (20.0% vs. 22.2%, p=0.613). The rate of R0 resection was comparable between the 2 groups with a slightly better margin distance in the LLR (5 mm vs. 3 mm, p=0.043).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic liver resection is safe and feasible for cirrhotic patients with HCC size up to 7 cm. It has better short-term outcomes and comparable perioperative blood loss and complication rates. The resection margin is not jeopardized and the 5-year overall and disease-free survivals are comparable with the open group.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Left Lateral Segmentectomy for Large Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

With the advancement of endoscopic technology, laparoscopic liver resection has become the standard procedure for left lateral segmentectomy. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes between laparoscopic and open left lateral segmentectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) >5 cm.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 66 patients underwent left lateral segmentectomy for HCC (>5 cm) during the period spanning between 2013 and 2015. To overcome selection bias, 1:3 match using propensity score-matched analysis was performed between laparoscopic and open liver resection.

RESULTS

Relatively smaller tumor size (6.0 vs. 7.0 cm; P=0.030) and more frequent incidence of complete tumor capsule (93.3% vs. 58.8%; P=0.013) were observed in the laparoscopic group compared with the open group before matching. Although the longer operation time (195 vs. 150 min; P=0.022) was consumed in the laparoscopic procedure after matching, the laparoscopic group had shorter postoperative hospital stay (6 vs. 7 d; P=0.002) and less blood loss volume (50 vs. 100 mL; P=0.022). The Pringle maneuver for hepatic inflow occlusion was more likely to be applied in patients who underwent open surgery. The incidence of postoperative complication seemed to be lower in the laparoscopic group (6.7%) compared with that in the open group (11.8%) before matching. On the basis of propensity score-matched analysis, the complication rates were comparable between the 2 groups (7.1% vs. 6.7%, P=0.953). No difference in the 1-year and 3-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates was found between the laparoscopic and open groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic left lateral segmentectomy for large HCC patients showed better perioperative outcomes and equivalent oncologic outcomes as the open procedure, providing evidence for considering as a standard laparoscopic practice through careful selection.

Indications for laparoscopic liver resection of mass-forming intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

We investigated the indications for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of mass-forming intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (MF-ICC), including the need for lymph node dissection for improved postoperative prognosis.

METHODS

This study involved 36 patients who underwent surgery for solitary peripheral MF-ICC. Fifteen patients underwent LLR, and 21 underwent open liver resection (OLR). Surgical outcomes and prognostic factors were investigated to determine the indications for LLR.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed in perioperative outcomes between patients who underwent LLR and OLR. A significantly worse disease-free survival (DFS) rate was observed in patients who preoperatively had a tumor diameter ≥3 cm, vascular invasion on diagnostic imaging, and elevated serum carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels. A significantly worse overall survival (OS) rate was observed in patients with a tumor diameter ≥3 cm, vascular invasion on diagnostic imaging, and elevated serum CA19-9 levels. Therefore, a tumor diameter ≥3 cm, vascular invasion on diagnostic imaging, and elevated serum CA19-9 and CEA levels were determined to be preoperative prognostic factors. DFS and OS rates were significantly better in patients without these factors. Moreover, in six patients without these factors who underwent LLR, neither lymph node metastasis nor postoperative recurrence was observed.

CONCLUSION

A tumor diameter ≥3 cm, vascular invasion on diagnostic imaging, and elevated serum CA19-9 and CEA levels are preoperative prognostic factors for peripheral MF-ICC. LLR is indicated for patients without these factors.

Techniques for laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection

Laparoscopic liver surgery has gained wide acceptance resulting in a paradigm shift of liver surgery. Technical innovations and accumulation of surgeon's experience have allowed laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) to become an effective procedure with favorable peri- and post-operative outcomes. Through the overall process of LLR, liver parenchymal transection remains the most critical step with the aim of minimizing blood loss and secures the appropriate cutting line, i.e., securing major vessels and obtaining adequate surgical margin clearance for malignancies. Multiple preoperative imaging modalities and intraoperative ultrasonography findings may contribute to the best determination of the appropriate cutting line during the LLR; however, technical expertise in minimizing and controlling bleeding during liver parenchymal transection is still a challenge for safe LLR, and therefore represents a major concern for hepatobiliary surgeons. Along with the historical fact that the technique of liver parenchymal transection itself is chosen according to surgeon's preference and "savoir-faire", the best technical modality in laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection remains to be determined. However, better understanding the technical issue may serve a contribution to the standardization of LLR. This review article therefore focuses on the technical aspects of the laparoscopic liver parenchymal transection.

Modified liver hanging maneuver in laparoscopic major hepatectomy: the learning curve and evolution of indications

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy is a technically challenging procedure requiring a steep learning curve. The liver hanging maneuver is a useful technique in liver resection, especially for large or invasive tumors, a relative contraindication of the laparoscopic approach. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the learning curve for laparoscopic major hepatectomy using the liver hanging maneuver and extended indications.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic major hepatectomy using the liver hanging maneuver by a single surgeon from January 2013 and September 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Our hanging technique involves placing the hanging tape along the inferior vena cava for right-sided hepatectomy or the ligamentum venosum for left-sided hepatectomy. The upper end of the tape was placed at the lateral side of the major hepatic veins. The learning curve for operating time and blood loss was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method.

RESULTS

Among 53 patients, 18 underwent right hepatectomy, 26 underwent left hepatectomy, and 9 underwent right posterior sectionectomy. CUSUM analysis showed that operative time and blood loss improved after the 30th laparoscopic major hepatectomy. The 53 consecutive patients were divided into two groups (early, patients 1-30; late, patients 31-53). The median operative time was lower in the late group, but the difference was not statistically significant (270 vs. 245 min, p = 0.261). The median blood loss was also significantly lower in the late group (350 vs. 150 ml, p < 0.001). Large tumors (measuring > 10 cm) and tumors in proximity to major vessels were significantly higher in the late group (0 vs. 17.4%, p = 0.018; 3.3 vs. 21.7%, p = 0.036; respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that laparoscopic major hepatectomy using the modified liver hanging maneuver has a learning curve of 30 cases. After procedure standardization, the indications have gradually been extended to large or invasive tumors.

Minimally Invasive Management of Secondary Liver Cancer

Laparoscopic liver surgery for secondary liver cancer is increasing. The most common indications are colorectal cancer liver metastases followed by adenocarcinoma metastases from other solid organs, such as breast, pancreatic neuroendocrine, and other gastrointestinal tract cancers. This article provides a comprehensive review of crucial concepts when managing secondary liver cancer minimally invasively, a summary of the up-to-date literature, and a discussion of the development of the application of this technique over time.

Surgical outcomes and quality of life between laparoscopic and open approach for hepatic hemangioma: A propensity score matching analysis

The main objective of the study was to compare the surgical outcomes and quality of life (QOL) of patients with hepatic hemangioma either by laparoscopic or open surgery using a propensity score analysis.We retrospectively reviewed patients with hepatic hemangioma undergoing laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) or open liver surgery (OLS) between January 2016 and December 2017. Intraoperative and postoperative characteristics, and quality of life, according to Short Form-36 Healthy Survey (SF-36) questionnaire, were compared between groups. We performed 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) between the LLS and OLS groups.A total of 205 patients who involved in the analysis (80 LLS vs 125 OLS) were matched (1:1) by age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, previous upper abdominal surgery, comorbidities, operation method, type of resection, tumor localization, size, and number. After PSM, 73 well-matched patients in each group were obtained. LLS was associated with significantly less blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay and fewer complications. The QOL scores weren't significantly different between the 2 groups, though the LLS group tended to be superior to the OLS group in terms of bodily pain (BP) and mental health (MH) at 3 months after surgery.In comparison with the conventional open approach, laparoscopic liver surgery for hepatic hemangioma appears to have improved short-term surgical outcomes and comparable QOL in selected patients.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing the Short- and Long-Term Outcomes for Laparoscopic and Open Liver Resections for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Updated Results from the European Guidelines Meeting on Laparoscopic Liver Surgery, Southampton, UK, 2017

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic approach to liver resection has experienced exponential growth in recent years; however, its application is still under debate and objective, evidence-based guidelines for its safe future progression are needed.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

To identify all the comparative manuscripts reporting on laparoscopic and open liver resection for HCC, all published English-language studies with more than 10 cases were screened. In addition to the primary meta-analysis, four specific subgroup analyses were performed on patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, resections for solitary tumors, and those undergoing minor and major resections. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

From the initial 361 manuscripts, 28 were included in the meta-analysis. Five of these 28 manuscripts were specific to patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis (321 cases), 11 focused on solitary tumors (1003 cases), 16 focused on minor resections (1286 cases), and 3 focused on major resections (164 cases). Three manuscripts compared 1079 cases but could not be assigned to any of the above subanalyses. In general terms, short-term outcomes were favorable when using a laparoscopic approach, especially in minor resections. The only advantage seen with an open approach was reduced operative time during major liver resections. No differences in long-term outcomes were observed between the approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection for HCC is feasible and offers improved short-term outcomes, with comparable long-term outcomes as the open approach.

Meta-analysis of short- and long-term outcomes after pure laparoscopic versus open liver surgery in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

Background

The advantages of laparoscopy are widely known. Nevertheless, its legitimacy in liver surgery is often questioned because of the uncertain value associated with minimally invasive methods. Our main goal was to compare the outcomes of pure laparoscopic (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Methods

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases to find eligible studies. The most recent search was performed on December 1, 2017. Studies were regarded as suitable if they reported morbidity in patients undergoing LLR versus OLR. Extracted data were pooled and subsequently used in a meta-analysis with a random-effects model. Clinical applicability of results was evaluated using predictive intervals. Review was reported following the PRISMA guidelines.

Results

From 2085 articles, forty-three studies (N = 5100 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Our findings showed that LLR had lower overall morbidity than OLR (15.59% vs. 29.88%, p < 0.001). Moreover, major morbidity was reduced in the LLR group (3.78% vs. 8.69%, p < 0.001). There were no differences between groups in terms of mortality (1.58% vs. 2.96%, p = 0.05) and both 3- and 5-year overall survival (68.97% vs. 68.12%, p = 0.41) and disease-free survival (46.57% vs. 44.84%, p = 0.46).

Conclusions

The meta-analysis showed that LLR is beneficial in terms of overall morbidity and non-procedure-specific complications. That being said, these results are based on non-randomized trials. For these reasons, we are calling for randomization in upcoming studies. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD42018084576.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-018-6431-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Laparoscopic liver resection: a review of current indications and surgical techniques

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been the most impressive development in the field of liver surgery in recent two decades. Technical innovations and experience accumulation have made LLR a safe and effective procedure with faster postoperative recovery. Despite the fast spreading of the procedure, details regarding the indications, oncological outcomes and technical essentials were still disputable. To address these issues, two international consensus conferences were hold to update the knowledge in this field. The statements of the both conferences were not conclusive and more high-quality researches are required. In this article, we reviewed the development and the current state of LLR. Indications, outcomes, surgical techniques and devices used in LLR were also discussed.

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

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) in short- and long-term outcomes compared to open hepatectomy (OH) in patients treated for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

An electronic search of reports published before August 2017 was carried out to identify comparative studies evaluating LH versus OH for HCC.

RESULTS

A total of 5889 patients (2421 underwent LH; 3468 underwent OH) were included in our meta-analysis from 47 studies. Laparoscopic hepatectomies were associated with favorable outcomes in terms of operative blood loss (mean difference [MD], -147.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], -217.00, -77.55), blood transfusion requirement (odds ratio [OR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.40, 0.65), pathologic resection margins (MD, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.02, 0.12; P = 0.01), R0 resection rate (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.98, 1.84; P = 0.07), and length of hospital stay (MD, -5.13; 95% confidence interval, -6.23, -4.03). There were no differences between the groups in overall survival (OS) at 1 year (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.00, 1.98), 3 years (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.93, 1.36), or 5 years (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.94, 1.46), in disease-free survival (DFS) at 1 (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94, 1.51), 3 years (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.86, 1.33), or 5 years (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.92, 1.40), or in recurrence (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74, 1.08).

CONCLUSION

Compared to OH, LH is superior in terms of lower intraoperative blood loss and the requirement for blood transfusion, larger pathologic resection margins, increased R0 resection rates, and shorter length of hospital stay. Laparoscopic hepatectomy and OH have similar OS, DFS, and recurrence.

Minimally Invasive Approaches for Surgical Management of Primary Liver Cancers

The benefits of minimally invasive approaches in oncologic surgery are increasingly recognized, and laparoscopic liver surgery has become increasingly widespread. In light of the complexity and technical challenges of hepatobiliary procedures, robotic approaches are also employed. The utility, safety, and oncologic integrity of these methods in the management of primary liver cancers are reported. PubMed was used to search the medical literature for studies and articles pertaining to laparoscopic and robotic liver surgery. Studies that particularly addressed hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma were identified and reviewed. Laparoscopic liver surgery, including for major resections, has been shown to be safe in experienced hands without any compromise of oncologic outcomes for either hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Some studies show improved clinical outcomes including shorter hospital stays and lower complication rates when compared to open surgery, particularly for patients with cirrhosis. Robotic liver surgeries seem to have equally acceptable clinical outcomes; however, there is limited data regarding oncologic integrity and considerable additional expense. Laparoscopic and robotic liver resections are both feasible and safe for the management of primary liver tumors. Future studies should aim to clarify specific indications and optimize applications of these approaches.

Laparoscopic liver resection for large HCC: short- and long-term outcomes in relation to tumor size

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aim to assess the impact of tumor size on clinical and oncological outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

BACKGROUND

LLR has been shown to be feasible, safe, and oncologically efficient. However, it has been slow to develop in patients with HCC who often suffer from chronic liver disease which represents an additional challenge for the surgeon. The experience with large HCCs is even more limited.

METHODS

Between 2003 and 2016, 172 patients from two high-volume liver surgery centers underwent LLR for HCC. Prospectively collected data were analyzed after stratification in 3 groups according to tumor major diameter (group 1: < 3 cm; group 2: between 3 and 5 cm; group 3: ≥ 5 cm). Perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between the three groups and sub-analyses were carried out on the extent and location of the resections.

RESULTS

Groups 1, 2, and 3 consisted of 82, 52, and 38 patients, respectively. Minor and major resections were performed in 98.8% and 1.2% in group 1, in 90.4% and 9.6% in group 2, and in 68.4% and 31.6% in group 3, respectively. Postero-superior "technically major" resections were performed in 15.8% patients in group 1, in 19.2% in group 2, and in 15.8% in group 3, respectively. Group 3 had higher conversion rates (p < 0.001), more frequent (p = 0.056) and more prolonged (p = 0,075) pedicle clamping and longer operative time (p < 0.001), higher blood losses (p = 0.025), and longer total hospital and intensive care unit stays. These differences ceased after removing the major resections from the study population, except for the postoperative length of stay. There were no differences in morbidity, mortality, completeness of resection rates, and long-term outcomes between the three groups.

CONCLUSION

LLR for HCC appears to be safe and oncologically efficient when performed in high-volume HPB and laparoscopic centers. Tumor size does not appear to impact negatively on the outcomes except for postoperative hospital stay.

The Asia Pacific Consensus Statement on Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Report from the 7th Asia-Pacific Primary Liver Cancer Expert Meeting Held in Hong Kong

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has been gaining momentum, and it has become an accepted practice after the two international consensus conferences where experts worked up guidelines to standardize this approach and improve its safety. However, most laparoscopic hepatectomies were performed in patients with liver metastases. The concurrent presence of liver cirrhosis with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) poses a great challenge to clinicians trying to establish a routine use of laparoscopic liver resection for HCC.

SUMMARY

The first Asia Pacific consensus meeting on laparoscopic liver resection for HCC was held in July 2016 in Hong Kong. A group of expert liver surgeons with experience in both open and laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC convened to formulate recommendations on the role and perspective of laparoscopic liver resection for primary liver cancer. The recommendations consolidate the most recent evidence pertaining to laparoscopic hepatectomy together with the latest thinking of practicing clinicians involved in laparoscopic hepatectomy, and give detailed guidance on how to deploy the treatment effectively for patients in need.

KEY MESSAGE

The panel of experts gathered evidence and produced recommendations providing guidance on the safe practice of laparoscopic hepatectomy for patients with HCC and cirrhosis. The inherent advantage of the laparoscopic approach may result in less blood loss if the procedure is performed in experienced centers. The laparoscopic approach to minor hepatectomy, particularly left lateral sectionectomy, is a preferred practice for HCC at experienced centers. Laparoscopic major liver resection for HCC remains a technically challenging operation, and it should be carried out in centers of excellence. There is emerging evidence that laparoscopic liver resection produces a better oncological outcome for HCC when compared with radiofrequency ablation, particularly when the lesions are peripherally located. Augmented features in laparoscopic liver resection, including indocyanine green fluorescence, 3D laparoscopy, and robot, will become important tools of surgical treatment in the near future. A combination of all of these features will enhance the experience of the surgeons, which may translate into better surgical outcomes. This is the first consensus workforce on laparoscopic liver resection for HCC, which is a unique condition that occurs in the Asia Pacific region.

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.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Patients with Large Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Case-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the expansion of laparoscopic approach in the treatment of liver tumors, limited data have been reported regarding large colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). This study aimed at assessing the short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for large (≥5 cm) CRLMs.

METHODS

This was a case-matched study (1:2) comparing patients with large (group L; ≥5 cm) and small (group S; <5 cm) CRLMs using demographic, tumor, and surgical characteristics as matching variables. Postoperative outcomes and survival data were compared in the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Forty patients who underwent LLR for large CRLMs were matched with 80 patients with tumors <5 cm. Major hepatectomy was performed with 75.0 % of patients in Group L and 66.3 % in group S (p = 0.403). Operative time was 300 min in group L and 240 min in group S (p = 0.059). The postoperative mortality and overall morbidity rates were comparable in the 2 groups (p = 1.000 and 0.170, respectively). Postoperative major complication (Dindo-Clavien ≥3) was similar between the two groups (p = 0.072). R0 resection was achieved in 92.5 % in the group L and in 95.0 % in the group S (p = 1.000). The 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival were better for group S than for group L (47.3 vs. 35.4 %, p = 0.044 and 27.3 vs. 14.9 %, p = 0.042, respectively). Multivariate analysis identified positive surgical margins and synchronous presentation as prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

Since LLR was performed safely with favorable oncological adequacy in selected patients with large CRLMs, tumor size should not modify the surgical approach.

Can laparoscopic liver resection provide a favorable option for patients with large or multiple intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas?

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for large or multiple intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (ICCs) remains equivocal. The main concerns are potential risks of inadequate resection margin, tumor rupture, uncontrollable bleeding, tumor seeding, and inadequate lymph node sampling. In this study, we aimed to determine the safety, feasibility, and oncological efficacy of LLR for large (≥5 cm) or multiple (≥2) ICCs.

METHODS

Among 50 patients receiving liver resection for ICC between May 2004 and January 2016, 12 patients who had undergone LLR for large or multiple ICCs (Group A, n = 12) were compared with 18 patients who had undergone LLR for small solitary ICCs (Group B, n = 18), as well were compared with 20 patients who had undergone open liver resection for large or multiple ICCs (Group C, n = 20). Perioperative and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Compared with Group B, Group A had fewer patients with T1 tumors (58.3 vs. 100%; P = 0.006) and a longer hospital stay (14 vs. 9 days; P = 0.039); operating time, blood loss, surgical margin, cases receiving lymph node dissection, conversion rates, and morbidity were comparable. There were no life-threatening complications and no mortality. No tumor rupture or dissemination occurred, nor did port-site recurrence follow surgery. After a median follow-up of 22 months, no difference was noted in 3-year overall survival (56.3 vs. 59.5%; P > 0.05) and recurrence-free survival (43.8 vs. 50%; P > 0.05) between the two groups. Similarly, perioperative and long-term outcomes were comparable between Group A and Group C.

CONCLUSION

LLR for large or multiple ICCs is technically safe, feasible, and oncologically effective in select patients. It provides a favorable option for patients seeking curative treatment. The minimally invasive nature will benefit these patients without compromising the oncological efficacy. Future larger-scale studies and well-designed randomized trials are warranted to evaluate this issue.

Laparoscopic and robotic approach for hepatocellular carcinoma-state of the art

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common malignant tumor worldwide and the most common primary liver cancer, in over 80% of cases HCC grown on a cirrhotic liver. Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now worldwide accepted considering the excellent results shown. Minimally invasive surgical approach for HCC is increasing continuously and in specialized centers seems to become the first-line approach for those patients. The aim of this review presents and discusses state of the art in the laparoscopic and robotic surgical treatment of HCC. An electronic search was performed to identify all studies dealing with HCC resected with laparoscopy or robotic approach. Indications for laparoscopic resection, robotic assisted and totally robotic resection of HCC will be doubtless increased in future years. LLR and robotic approach for HCC is safe and feasible.

Comparative Short-term Benefits of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: 9000 Cases and Climbing

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of worldwide literature on laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and compare short-term outcomes against open liver resections (OLR) by meta-analyses.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

There are no updated pooled data since 2009 about the current status and short-term outcomes of LLR worldwide.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All English language publications on LLR were screened. Descriptive worldwide data and short-term outcomes were obtained. Separate analyses were performed for minor-only and major-only resection series, and series in which minor/major resections were not differentiated. Apparent case duplications were excluded.

RESULTS

A set of 463 published manuscripts were reviewed. One hundred seventy-nine single-center series were identified that accounted for 9527 LLR cases worldwide. Minor-only, major-only, and combined major-minor series were 61, 18, and 100, respectively, including 32, 8, and 43 comparative series, respectively. Of the total 9527 LLR cases reported, 6190 (65%) were for malignancy and 3337 (35%) were for benign indications. There were 37 deaths reported (mortality rate = 0.4%). From the meta-analysis comparing case-matched LLR to OLR (N = 2900 cases), there was no increased mortality and significantly less complications, transfusions, blood loss, and hospital stay observed in LLR vs OLR.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest review of LLR available to date with over 9000 cases published. It confirms growing safety when performed in selected patients and by trained surgeons, and suggests that LLR may offer improved patient short-term outcomes compared with OLR. Improved levels of evidence, standardized reporting of outcomes, and assuring proper training are the next challenges of laparoscopic liver surgery.

Systematic Review of Single Large and/or Multinodular Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Surgical Resection Improves Survival

BACKGROUND

The role of surgical resection for patients with single large (≥5 cm) and/or multinodular (≥2) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is still controversial. This systematic review was performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of resection for patients with single large and/or multinodular HCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Databases (the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases) were systematically searched to identify relevant studies exploring the safety and efficacy of resection for single large and/or multinodular HCC, published between January 2000 and December 2014. Perioperative morbidity and mortality, overall survival, and disease-free survival of the resection group were calculated. In addition, these outcome variables were also calculated for the control group in the included studies.

RESULTS

One randomized controlled trial and 42 non- randomized studies involving 9,580 patients were eligible for analysis. Eight (1,594 patients) of the 43 studies also reported the outcomes of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Although 51.4% of patients featured cirrhosis, 90.7% of them demonstrated Child-Pugh A liver function in the resection group. The median rates of morbidity (24.5%) and mortality (2.5%) after resection were significantly higher than that of TACE (11.0%, P<0.001; 1.9%, P<0.001). However, patients who underwent resection had significantly higher median one-, three-, and five-year overall survival (76.1%, 51.7%, and 37.4%) than those who underwent TACE (68.3%, 31.5%, and 17.5%, all P<0.001). The median 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS rates after resection were 58.3%, 34.6%, and 24.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although tumor recurrence after resection for patients with single large and/ or multinodular HCC continues to be a major problem, resection should be considered as a strategy to achieve long-term survival.

Liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with portal hypertension: the role of laparoscopy

Liver resection (LR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) is a major issue since patients are at risk of serious intraoperative and postoperative complications. The current EASL/AASLD guidelines recommend LR only in case of patients with stage A HCC with well-preserved liver function and consider the presence of portal hypertension (PHT) as a contraindication to surgery. Nevertheless, the literature on this topic is conflicting. Recently several studies reported that favorable outcomes can be achieved with a careful patients' selection in high volume centers. Laparoscopic LR, when performed by well-trained surgeons and with appropriate indications, proved to be a valid option for the surgical treatment of HCC on cirrhosis offering similar oncologic outcomes but a reduction in surgical related morbidities. Laparoscopic LR thanks to a reduction in the incidence of post-operative liver failure and ascites development in comparison to standard open LR could, in selected cases challenge alternative treatments in the treatment of HCC patients with preserved liver function and clinical signs of mild PHT.

Laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with cirrhosis in a single institution

BACKGROUND

In a statement by the second International Consensus Conference for Laparoscopic Liver Resection (LLR), minor LLR was confirmed to be a standard surgical practice, as it has become adopted by an increasing proportion of surgeons. However, it is unclear whether this applies to the more complex group of patients suffering from cirrhosis. Therefore, the aim of this retrospective study was to compare the feasibility and safety of LLR for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) between non-liver cirrhosis (NLC) patients and liver cirrhosis (LC) patients at a single high-volume laparoscopy center.

METHODS

From the beginning of 2000 to the end of 2013, open liver resection (OLR) was performed in 99 HCC patients, and LLR was in 118. The HCC patients who underwent LLR were divided into NLC-LLR (n=60) and LC-LLR (n=58) groups, and we compare the short-term outcomes between them.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the incidence of blood loss and transfusion requirements between the NLC-LLR group and the LC-LLR group, although wedge resection was mainly performed in the LC-LLR group. There was no significant difference in the complication rate between the two groups, and the remarkable finding was that there was a significantly lower incidence of postoperative ascites in the LC-LLR group than in the NLC-LLR group.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our experience, it appears that LLR for selected HCC patients with cirrhosis is a feasible and promising procedure that is associated with less blood loss and fewer postoperative complications, especially the incidence of postoperative ascites. Further investigations are clearly warranted.

Perspective of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver resection (LR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) is associated with high risks of developing significant postoperative complications and multicentric metachronous lesions, which can result in the need for repeated treatments. Studies comparing laparoscopic procedures to open LR consistently report reduced blood loss and transfusions requirements, lower postoperative morbidity, and shorter hospital stays, with no differences in oncologic outcomes. In addition, laparoscopic LR is associated with reduced postoperative ascites and a lower incidence of liver failure for HCC patients with CLD, due to the reduced surgery-induced parenchymal injury to the residual liver and limited destruction of the collateral blood/lymphatic flow around the liver. Finally, this procedure facilitates subsequent repeat LR due to minimal adhesion formation and improved vision/manipulation between adhesions. These characteristics of laparoscopic LR may lead to an expansion of the indications for LR. This editorial is based on the review and meta-analysis presented at the 2^nd International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Iwate, Japan, in October 2014 (Chairperson of the congress is Professor Go Wakabayashi from the Department of Surgery, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine), which is published in the Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences.

The difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection

Grading of difficulty is needed for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). Indications for LLR are expanding worldwide from minor to major resections, particularly in institutions having surgeons with advanced skills. If the degrees of surgical difficulty were defined, it would serve as a useful guide when introducing LLR and stepping up to the more advanced LLR. As no previous study has addressed the degrees of difficulty of various LLR procedures, we devised a practical scoring system for this purpose. We extracted the following five factors from preoperative information to score difficulty levels: (1) tumor location, (2) extent of liver resection, (3) tumor size, (4) proximity to major vessels, and (5) liver function. This difficulty index is comprised of the cumulative score for the five individual factors. There has not yet been a standard definition of difficulty. Our proposed scoring system might be a practical means of assessing the difficulty of LLR procedures. However, this system must be prospectively validated.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in posterosuperior segments

BACKGROUND

Traditional open liver resection remains the classic procedure for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located in the posterosuperior segments of the liver (segments I, IVa, VII, and VIII). This study compared the perioperative and oncologic results for laparoscopic versus open liver resection of HCC located in the posterosuperior segments, especially in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

This study included 41 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and 86 who underwent open liver resection (OLR) for HCC in the posterosuperior segments between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2012. There perioperative course and oncologic outcomes were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the LLR and OLR groups in length of operation (242.41 ± 73.69 vs. 235.38 ± 65.80 min), transfusion rate (7.3 vs. 14.0 %), R0 resection rate (100 vs. 97.7 %), or tumor size (4.22 ± 2.05 vs. 4.30 ± 1.49 cm). In contrast, postoperative hospital stay (9.44 ± 2.72 vs. 14.53 ± 6.03 days) was significantly shorter, and postoperative complication rates (17.1 vs. 37.2 %) and intraoperative blood loss (272.20 ± 170.86 vs. 450.12 ± 344.70 mL) significantly lower in the LLR than in the OLR group. In addition, there was no significant difference between the two groups (LLR vs. OLR) regarding 1-year overall survival rate (95.1 vs. 89.5 %), 3-year overall survival rate (78 vs. 76.7 %,), 1-year disease-free survival rate (87.8 vs. 82.6 %,), and 3-year disease-free survival rate (70.7 vs. 68.6 %).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR for selected patients with HCC in the posterosuperior segments may offer the same oncologic outcomes as conventional procedures, while being associated with such advantages as lower blood loss, fewer postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stay.

Current management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an Eastern perspective

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer death, especially in Eastern areas. With advancements in diagnosis and treatment modalities for HCC, the survival and prognosis of HCC patients are improving. However, treatment patterns are not uniform between areas despite efforts to promote a common protocol. Although many hepatologists in Asian countries may adopt the principles of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system, they are also independently making an effort to expand the indications of each treatment and to combine therapies for better outcomes. Several expanded criteria for liver transplantation in HCC have been developed in Asian countries. Living donor liver transplantation is much more commonly performed in these countries than deceased donor liver transplantation, and it may be preceded by other treatments such as the down-staging of tumors. Local ablation therapies are often combined with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and the outcome is comparable to that of surgical resection. The indications of TACE are expanding, and there are new types of transarterial therapies. Although data on drug-eluting beads, TACE, and radioembolization in Asian countries are still relatively sparse compared with Western countries, these methods are gradually gaining popularity because of better tolerability and the possibility of improved response rates. Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and radiotherapy are not included in Western guidelines, but are currently being used actively in several Asian countries. For more advanced HCCs, appropriate combinations of TACE, radiotherapy, and sorafenib can be considered, and emerging data indicate improved outcomes of combination therapies compared with single therapies. To include these paradigm shifts into newer treatment guidelines, more studies may be needed, but they are certainly in progress.

Pure laparoscopic liver resection for large malignant tumors: does size matter?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for large malignant tumors can be technically challenging. Data on this topic are scarce, and many question its feasibility, safety, and oncologic efficiency. This study aimed to assess outcomes of LLR for large (≥ 5 cm) and giant (≥ 10 cm) malignant liver tumors.

METHODS

A prospectively collected database of 422 LLRs was reviewed from August 2003 to August 2013. The data for 52 patients undergoing LLR for large malignant tumors were analyzed. A subgroup analysis of giant tumors also is reported.

RESULTS

During the period studied, 52 LLRs were performed (males, 53.8 %; mean age, 64.6 years) for large malignant tumors. Colorectal liver metastasis was the most common indication (42.3 %). The 52 LLRs included 32 major (61.5 %) and 20 minor (38.5 %) LLRs for tumors with a mean diameter of 83 mm. The median operative time was 240 min [interquartile range (IQR), 150-330 min], and the blood loss was 500 ml (IQR, 200-1,373 ml). Eight conversions (15.4 %) were performed. Six patients experienced complications (11.5 %). Among the 44 patients with successful LLRs, two patients (4.5 %) had an R1 resection. The median hospital stay was 5 days (range, 1-21 days), and no mortality occurred during a 90-day period. A subgroup analysis of patients with giant tumors showed greater blood loss (p = 0.002) and a longer operative time (p = 0.052) but no difference in terms of conversions (p = 0.64) or complications (p = 0.32).

CONCLUSION

The findings showed that LLR is feasible and safe for large malignant tumors and can be performed with acceptable morbidity and oncologic efficiency. When used for giant malignant tumors, LLR is associated with greater blood loss and a longer operative time but no increase in complications.

Laparoscopic liver resection for lesions adjacent to major vasculature: feasibility, safety and oncological efficiency

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Laparoscopic liver resection for lesions adjacent to major vasculature can be challenging, and many would consider it a contraindication. Recently, however, laparoscopic liver surgeons have been pushing boundaries and approached some of these lesions laparoscopically. We assessed feasibility, safety and oncological efficiency of this laparoscopic approach for these lesions.

METHODS

This is a monocenter study (2003-2013) describing technique and outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for lesions adjacent to major vasculature: <2 cm from the portal vein (main trunk and first division), hepatic arteries or inferior vena cava.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients underwent laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for a lesion adjacent to major vasculature. Twenty-four (65%) resections were for malignant disease and 92% R0 resections. Conversion occurred in three patients (8%). Mean operative time was 313 min (standard deviation (SD) ± 101) and intraoperative blood loss 400 ml (IQR 213-700). Clavien-Dindo complications > II occurred in two cases (5%), with no mortality. Lesions at <1 cm were larger (7.2 cm (2.7-14) vs. 3 cm (2.5-5), p = 0.03) and operation time was longer (344 ± 94 vs. 262 ± 92 min, p = 0.01) than lesions at 1-2 cm from major vasculature.

CONCLUSIONS

Lesions <2 cm from major hepatic vasculature do not represent an absolute contraindication for LLR when performed by experienced laparoscopic liver surgeons in selected patients.

Can we expand the indications for laparoscopic liver resection? A systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic liver resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and chronic liver disease

Liver resection (LR) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and chronic liver disease (CLD) poses a high risk of serious postoperative complications and multicentric metachronous lesions requiring repeated treatment. The efficacy of laparoscopic LR (LLR) for such patients has yet to be established. The objective of this study is to test the outcomes of LLR for HCC with the aim of considering potential expansion of the indications for LLR. We performed a systematic review of the pertinent English-language literature. Our search yielded four meta-analyses and 23 comparative studies of LLR for HCC. On the basis of the findings from these studies and our newly conducted meta-analysis, the possibility for expanding the indications for LLR to HCC was examined. The studies show that LLR (vs open) for HCC generally yields better short-term outcomes without compromising long-term outcomes, and that incidences of postoperative ascites and liver failure are decreased with LLR. Several studies show the benefits of LLR for patients with severe CLD and for repeat surgery. Reductions of postoperative ascites and liver failure are among the advantages of LLR. These characteristics of LLR may allow us to expand the indications of LLR to HCC with CLD.

Long-term favorable surgical results of laparoscopic hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: a single-center experience over a 10-year period

BACKGROUND

We first performed laparoscopic hepatic resection (Lap-Hx) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 1994. Here we review the long-term surgical results of Lap-Hx for HCC in patients with cirrhosis over a 10-year period at a single institution.

STUDY DESIGN

Between January 2000 and December 2013, 99 patients with cirrhosis underwent open hepatic resection (Open-Hx) and 63 underwent Lap-Hx for primary HCC within the Milan criteria. We compared the operative outcomes and patient survival between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences regarding patient background characteristics or tumor-related factors between the 2 groups. The morbidity rate of the Lap-Hx group was significantly lower than that of the Open-Hx group (26% vs 10%; p = 0.0459), and the complication rate of ascites was significantly lower (7% vs 0%; p = 0.0077). The mean duration of hospital stay of the Lap-Hx group was significantly shorter than that of the Open-Hx group (16 vs 10 days; p = 0.0008). There were no significant between-group differences regarding overall or disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic-Hx for HCC in patients with cirrhosis is associated with less morbidity and shorter hospital stays, with no compromise in patient survival. It may be time to consider changing the standard operation for primary HCC within the Milan criteria to Lap-Hx in patients with cirrhosis.