Robotic liver surgery: technical aspects and review of the literature

Anesthesia management for total robotic liver transplantation: Inaugural case series in Europe

Robotic liver transplantation represents a cutting-edge technique that may surpass traditional open surgery. Nonetheless, it introduces unique anesthetic challenges, including extended pneumoperitoneum, restricted patient access, and a risk of undetected blood loss. This article describes an anesthetic approach and patient outcomes for the first four total robotic liver transplants performed at a tertiary university hospital in Portugal, along with inaugural procedures of their kind in Europe. We retrospectively analyzed surgical and anesthetic data from four patients who underwent total robotic liver transplantation from February to April 2024. Data encompassed clinical profile, preoperative assessment, surgical and anesthesia details, postoperative course, and outcomes. Patients' age ranged from 51 to 69 years. Their cirrhosis was primarily due to alcohol use, hepatitis C virus infection, hepatocellular carcinoma, or nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. General anesthesia was administered. Hemodynamic monitoring and goal-directed fluid therapy were conducted using a PiCCO system. Blood loss varied from 1,000 to 5,000 mL. Blood products were transfused as needed. All donor livers underwent hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion before transplantation. After surgery, two patients were immediately extubated, while two required extended ventilation. Hospital stays ranged from 10 to 40 days. The 30-day survival rate was 100%. This initial case series affirmed the feasibility and safety of total robotic liver transplantation for carefully selected patients, yielding favorable short-term results. Anesthetic management can rely on proactive strategies, acute situational awareness, and effective multidisciplinary collaboration.

Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection for difficult posterosuperior segments: a systematic review with a meta-analysis of propensity-score matched studies

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of minimally invasive liver surgery for posterosuperior segments (PS) are still debated. Since the results of ongoing trials focusing on the results of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR) in this setting are still awaited, the best evidence currently comes from retrospective propensity-score matched (PSM) studies. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the outcomes of RLR for difficult located lesions and to provide evidence for its use in clinical practice.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LLR and RLR for PS segments. The Medline, Embase and Web of Science Library electronic databases were searched to identify available research published up to June 2024.

RESULTS

Five studies with a total of 2907 patients (RLR: n = 1084; LLR: n = 1823) were included in the meta-analysis. The RLR group had less estimated blood loss (EBL) (MD: - 88.3, 95% CI - 144.2-- 32.3; p = 0.012), fewer blood transfusions (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.39-0.80, p = 0.033), and a shorter operative time (MD - 27.3, 95% CI - 49.4-- 5.1; p = 0.027). No differences in postoperative morbidity, mortality and R1 resection rates were observed.

CONCLUSION

RLR for lesions in the PS segments are safe and effective, and may have superior surgical outcomes than LLR.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection: A Nationwide Propensity Score Matched Analysis

Objective

To compare nationwide outcomes of robotic liver resection (RLR) with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

Background

Minimally invasive liver resection is increasingly performed using the robotic approach as this could help overcome inherent technical limitations of laparoscopy. It is unknown if this translates to improved patient outcomes.

Methods

Data from the mandatory Dutch Hepatobiliary Audit were used to compare perioperative outcomes of RLR and LLR in 20 centers in the Netherlands (2014-2022). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to mitigate selection bias. Sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of the learning curve (≥50 procedures for LLR and ≥25 procedures for RLR), concurrent noncholecystectomy operations, high-volume centers, and conversion on outcomes.

Results

Overall, 792 RLR and 2738 LLR were included. After PSM (781 RLR vs 781 LLR), RLR was associated with less blood loss (median: 100 mL [interquartile range (IQR): 50-300] vs 200 mL [IQR: 50-500], P = 0.002), less major blood loss (≥500 mL,18.6% vs 25.2%, P = 0.011), less conversions (4.9% vs 12.8%, P < 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (median: 3 days [IQR: 2-5] vs 4 days [IQR: 2-6], P < 0.001), compared with LLR. There were no significant differences in overall and severe morbidity, readmissions, mortality, and R0 resection rate. Sensitivity analyses yielded similar results. When excluding conversions, RLR was only associated with a reduction in reoperations (1.1% vs 2.7%, P = 0.038).

Conclusion

In this nationwide analysis, RLR was associated with a reduction in conversion, blood loss and length of hospital stay without compromising patient safety, also when excluding a learning curve effect. The benefits of RLR seem to be mostly related to a reduction in conversions.

Outcomes of Adult Right Graft Living Donor Liver Transplantation Utilizing the Robotic Platform-integrated Real-time Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Cholangiography Compared to the Open Approach

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess short-term biliary outcomes in adult living donor liver transplants using right grafts, comparing robotic surgery with real-time indocyanine green fluorescence cholangiography for optimal hilar plate transection, against the conventional open approach.

BACKGROUND

Determining the optimal transection plane through the hilar plate is crucial in donor hepatectomies, impacting outcomes significantly.

METHODS

From 2011 to 2023, a total of 839 right graft living donor hepatectomies were performed, with 414 (49%) performed via the open approach and 425 (51%) utilizing the robotic platform.

RESULTS

The magnetic resonant cholangiopancreatography predictions correlated moderately with the actual count of graft ducts ( r =0.57, P <0.001). Out of all 839 right donor hepatectomies, 321 (44%) were single duct grafts, of which 193/425 (49%) were retrieved with the robotic while 128/414 (38%) were with the open approach (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.16-2.14), P =0.003). Overall, 50 (6%) of the donors developed a biliary complication during their hospital stay, of whom 38 (9%) were grafts retrieved with the open, while 13 (3%) with the robotic approach (OR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15-0.61, P <0.001). Similarly, 63 (15%) of the adult recipients developed a biliary complication of any severity when grafts were retrieved with the open approach compared to 35 (8%) with the robotic approach (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.31-0.79), P =0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic platform with integrated real-time indocyanine green fluorescence cholangiography during right donor hepatectomy offers improved safety for the donor by accurately addressing the right hilar corridor, resulting in fewer graft ducts and fewer complications for the donor and recipient when compared to the standard open approach.

Short-Term Surgical Outcomes After Robotic Liver Surgery: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis With Conventional Open Liver Surgery at a High-Volume Centre in Denmark

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the perioperative outcomes of robotic liver surgery (RLS) and Open liver surgery (OLS) in a centre with a high number of operations.

METHODS

A 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM) analysis of a retrospective database of RLS and OLS was performed. Cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was performed to identify learning curves.

RESULT

After PSM analysis, operative time was significantly longer in the RLS group (p < 0.001). Estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the RLS group (p < 0.001). Transfusion rates were significantly lower in the RLS group. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the RLS group (3.5vs6.3 days, p < 0.001). Readmission rates were significantly lower in the RLS group (p < 0.049). CUSUM analysis showed a learning curve for at least 8 low-intermediate RLS procedures and 27 advanced-Expert RLS procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

RLS has many advantages, including being safe to perform, less blood loss and faster postoperative recovery compared with OLS.

A Comprehensive Review on Comparative Analysis of Operative Efficiency and Postoperative Recovery in Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

Minimally invasive liver surgery, particularly hepatectomy, has evolved significantly with the advent of laparoscopic and robotic techniques. These approaches offer potential benefits over traditional open surgery, including reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stays, faster recovery, and improved cosmetic outcomes. This comprehensive review aims to compare the operative efficiency and postoperative recovery outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomy. It seeks to provide an in-depth analysis of the advantages and limitations of each technique, assess their cost-effectiveness, and explore emerging trends and future directions in minimally invasive liver surgery. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomy. The review includes an analysis of operative time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rates, postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, complication rates, oncological outcomes, and overall cost. Additionally, advancements in technology and future research directions were explored to provide a comprehensive overview of the current landscape and future potential of these surgical techniques. Both robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomy have demonstrated comparable outcomes in terms of oncological safety and effectiveness. However, robotic hepatectomy offers advantages in terms of precision and dexterity, particularly in complex cases, due to its advanced visualization and instrumentation. Laparoscopic hepatectomy, while associated with shorter operative times and lower costs, is limited by technical challenges, especially in major liver resections. The review also highlights the increasing adoption of robotic systems, despite their higher costs and the need for specialized training. Robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomy are both viable options for minimally invasive liver surgery, each with distinct advantages and limitations. The choice between the two should be based on patient-specific factors, the complexity of the procedure, and the surgeon's expertise. Ongoing advancements in technology, including the integration of artificial intelligence and augmented reality, are expected to further refine these techniques, enhancing their efficacy and accessibility. Future research should focus on large-scale, multicenter trials to provide more definitive comparisons and guide clinical decision-making.

Effect of IWATE laparoscopic difficulty score on postoperative outcomes and costs for robotic hepatectomy: Are complex resections more expensive?

BACKGROUND

The IWATE criteria, a four-level classification system for laparoscopic hepatectomy, measures technical complexity but lacks studies on its impact on outcomes and costs, especially in robotic surgeries. This study evaluated the effects of technical complexity on perioperative outcomes and costs in robotic hepatectomy.

METHODS

Since 2013, we prospectively followed 500 patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy. Patients were classified into four levels of IWATE scores; (low [0-3], intermediate [4-6], advanced [7-9], and expert [10-12]) determined by tumor characteristics, liver function and resection extent. Perioperative variables were analyzed with significance accepted at a p-value ≤.05.

RESULTS

Among 500 patients, 337 (67%) underwent advanced to expert-level operations. Median operative duration was 213 min (range: 16-817 min; mean ± SD: 240 ± 116.1 min; p < .001) and estimated blood loss (EBL) was 95 mL (range: 0-3500 mL; mean ± SD:142 ± 171.1 mL; p < .001). Both operative duration and EBL showed positive correlations with increasing IWATE scores. Median length of stay (LOS) of 3 days (range: 0-34; mean ± SD:4 ± 3.0 days; p < .001) significantly correlated with IWATE score. Total cost of $25 388 (range: $84-354 407; mean ± SD: 29752 ± 20106.8; p < .001) also significantly correlated with operative complexity, however hospital reimbursement did not. No correlation was found between IWATE score and postoperative complications or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical variables such as operative duration, EBL, and LOS correlate with IWATE difficulty scores in robotic hepatectomy. Financial metrics such as costs but not reimbursement received by the hospital correlate with IWATE scores.

Validation of the IWATE Criteria in Robotic-Assisted Liver Resections

Background/Objectives: The IWATE criteria are well-established as a helpful tool to preoperatively estimate the difficulty and perioperative outcome of laparoscopic liver resections. We evaluated the relationship between the IWATE criteria and the perioperative outcomes in robotic-assisted liver resections (RARLs). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 58 patients who underwent robotic-assisted liver surgery at our center between July 2019 and April 2023. The operative difficulty of every patient was graded according to the IWATE criteria and compared to the perioperative outcome. Results: The median operation time was 236.5 min (range 37-671 min), and the median length of stay was 6 days (range 3-37 min). The majority had no complications (65.5%; n = 38), 18 (31.0%) patients suffered from mild complications (CD ≤ 3A) and 2 patients (3.4%) suffered from relevant complications (CD ≥ 3B). We observed no deaths within 30 postoperative days. The surgery time, postoperative ICU stay and perioperative blood transfusions increased significantly with a higher difficulty level (p = < 0.001; p < 0.001; p = 0.016). The length of stay, conversion to open surgery (n = 2) and complication rate were not significantly linked to the resulting IWATE group. Conclusions: The IWATE criteria can be implemented in robotic-assisted liver surgery and can be helpful in preoperatively estimating the difficulty of robotic liver resections. Whether there is a "robotic effect" in minimally invasive liver resections has to be further clarified. The IWATE criteria can help to develop curricula for robotic training.

The death of laparoscopy

BACKGROUND

The introduction of laparoscopy in 1989 revolutionized surgical practices, reducing post-operative complications, and enhancing outcomes. Despite its benefits, limitations in laparoscopic tools have led to continued use of open surgery. Robotic-assisted surgery emerged to address these limitations, but its adoption trends and potential impact on open and laparoscopic surgery require analysis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) databases from 2012 to 2021. The study encompassed various abdominal procedures, employing Vector Autoregressive (VAR) models to analyze the dynamic relationships between surgical techniques. The models predicted future trends in open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery until Q2 of 2025.

RESULTS

The analysis included 360,171 patients across diverse procedures. In urology, robotic surgery dominated prostatectomies (83.1% in 2021) and nephrectomies (55.1% in 2021), while the open approach remained the predominant surgical technique for cystectomies (72.5% in 2021). In general surgery, robotic colectomies were forecasted to surpass laparoscopy, becoming the primary approach by 2024 (45.7% in 2025). Proctectomies also showed a shift towards robotic surgery, predicted to surpass laparoscopy and open surgery by 2025 (32.3%). Pancreatectomies witnessed a steady growth in robotic surgery, surpassing laparoscopy in 2021, with forecasts indicating further increase. While hepatectomies remained predominantly open (70.0% in 2025), esophagectomies saw a rise in robotic surgery, predicted to become the primary approach by 2025 (52.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

The study suggests a transformative shift towards robotic-assisted surgery, poised to dominate various minimally invasive procedures. The forecasts indicate that robotic surgery may surpass laparoscopy and open surgery in colectomies, proctectomies, pancreatectomies, and esophagectomies by 2025. This anticipated change emphasizes the need for proactive adjustments in surgical training programs to align with evolving surgical practices. The findings have substantial implications for future healthcare practices, necessitating a balance between traditional laparoscopy and the burgeoning role of robotic-assisted surgery.

Current Status of Robotic Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery

Laparoscopic surgery is performed worldwide and has clear economic and social benefits in terms of patient recovery time. It is used for most gastrointestinal surgical procedures, but laparoscopic surgery for more complex procedures in the esophageal, hepatobiliary, and pancreatic regions remains challenging. Minimally invasive surgery that results in accurate tumor dissection is vital in surgical oncology, and development of surgical systems and instruments plays a key role in assisting surgeons to achieve this. A notable advance in the latter half of the 1990s was the da Vinci Surgical System, which involves master-slave surgical support robots. Featuring high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) imaging with magnification capabilities and forceps with multi-joint function, anti-shake function, and motion scaling, the system compensates for the drawbacks of conventional laparoscopic surgery. It is expected to be particularly useful in the field of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, which requires delicate reconstruction involving complex liver anatomy with diverse vascular and biliary systems and anastomosis of the biliary tract, pancreas, and intestines. The learning curve is said to be short, and it is hoped that robotic surgery will be standardized in the near future. There is also a need for a standardized robotic surgery training system for young surgeons that can later be adapted to a wider range of surgeries. This systematic review describes trends and future prospects for robotic surgery in the hepatobiliary-pancreatic region.

A Practical Guide to Inflow Control, Retraction, and Exposure for Robotic Hepatectomy

Establishment of inflow control and gentle effective retraction of the liver for optimal exposure are critical to safe hepatectomy. Multiple methods have been previously reported for inflow control in minimally invasive (MIS) hepatectomy including Huang's Loop.1-3 We describe here the assembly and use of our modified version of Huang's loop that permits adjustable, atraumatic, and totally intracorporeal inflow control. We use a soft 16-French urinary catheter with a single premade opening near the blunt tip, across which a small slit is created. A beveled cut is made to the catheter 12-15 cm from the blunt tip and a suture sewn there that can be grasped to pull this beveled tail through the slit and window around the porta hepatis; this loop can be tightened or loosened with ease. For liver retraction, current techniques can be traumatic, especially when instruments apply traction directly onto the liver.4 Our preferred approach utilizes a liver sling made from a soft, rolled surgical sponge with 15-cm silk ties secured at each end; the length of the sling can be adjusted on the basis of thickness of the liver. The sling applies gentle, atraumatic "pulling" traction and is especially useful for exposure of the right posterior sector. We also use external band retraction to align the transection plane with the camera.5 Both also provide countertraction when advancing instruments into a firm or fibrotic liver. These techniques are commonly used in our MIS practice, and we have found them to be cost-efficient, easily reproducible, and effective.

Results of robotic liver surgery in association with IWATE criteria - the first 100 cases

BACKGROUND

Aim of the current study was to present the results of the implementation phase of a robotic liver surgery program and to assess the validity of the IWATE difficulty score in predicting difficulty and postoperative complications in robotic liver surgery.

METHODS

Based on the prospective database of the Interdisciplinary Robotic Center of Ulm University Hospital, the first 100 robotic liver surgeries were identified and analyzed. Perioperative parameters (duration of surgery and blood loss) and postoperative parameters including morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay were assessed and the results were compared between different IWATE difficulty categories.

RESULTS

From November 2020 until January 2023, 100 robotic liver surgeries were performed (41 female, 59 male; median age 60.6 years, median BMI 25.9 kg/m2). Median duration of surgery was 180 min (IQR: 128.7), and median blood loss was 300 ml (IQR: 550). Ninety-day mortality was 2%, and overall morbidity was 21%, with major complications occurring in 13% of patients (≥ grade 3 according to Clavien/Dindo). A clinically relevant postoperative biliary leakage was observed in 3 patients. Posthepatectomy liver failure occurred in 7% (4 Grade A, 3 Grade B). Duration of surgery (p < 0.001), blood loss (p < 0.001), CCI (p = 0.004), overall morbidity (p = 0.004), and length of hospital stay (p < 0.001) were significantly increased in the IWATE 'expert' category compared to lower categories.

DISCUSSION

Robotic surgery offers a minimally invasive approach for liver surgery with favorable clinical outcomes, even in the implementation phase. In the current study the IWATE difficulty score had the ability to predict both difficulty of surgery as well as postoperative outcomes when assessing the complexity of robotic liver surgery. Therefore, the role of the IWATE score in predicting these outcomes highlights its importance as a tool in surgical planning and decision-making.

Preoperative Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy for Definite Biliary Drainage in Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma Laparoscopic Resection: A Hybrid Minimal-Invasive Technique

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Laparoscopic approach of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) is still challenging. We report the original use of a endoscopic hepaticogastrostomy (EHG) for definite biliary drainage in order to avoid biliary reconstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A 70-year-old man presenting with jaundice was referred for resection of a Bismuth type IIIa PHC. Repeated endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography failed to drain the future liver remnant, enabling only right anterior liver section drainage. EHG was performed three weeks before surgery. A hepatogastric anastomosis was created, placing a half-coated self-expanding endoprosthesis between biliary duct of segment 2 and the lesser gastric curvature.

RESULTS

A laparoscopic right hepatectomy extended to segment 1, common bile duct, and hepatic pedicle lymphadenectomy was performed. The left hepatic duct was sectioned and ligated downstream to the biliary confluence of segment 2-3 and 4 allowing exclusive biliary flow through the EHG. The patient was disease free at 12 months, postoperative outcomes were uneventful except three readmissions for acute cholangitis due to prosthesis obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

EHG may be used as definite biliary drainage technique in laparoscopic PHC resection, at the expense of prosthesis obstruction and cholangitis.

10 years, 100 robotic major hepatectomies: a single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

Adoption of robotic liver resections has been gradually increasing throughout the HPB surgical community over the past decade. Currently there is limited literature which demonstrates a significant benefit of robotic surgery for major hepatectomies over open or laparoscopic. As one of the first centers to develop a robotic HPB program, we have experienced improved outcomes over time with increasing utilization of robotics. Herein, we present our 10-year experience and outcomes for major robotic liver resections.

METHODS

From 2012 to 2022, 361 robotic liver procedures were performed, including 100 major hepatectomies. A retrospective data review of the electronic medical record was performed evaluating outcomes after robotic major hepatectomy. Outcomes for the first 50 cases (Group A) and second 50 cases (Group B) were compared to identify any improvements in practice. Demographic and clinical outcome variables were analyzed. Data were assessed for normality, and Wilcoxon rank-sum, χ2 tests, and a logistic regression model were performed appropriate for the data. Stata v.17 was utilized, and significance was set as p < .05.

RESULTS

There was no difference in median operative time (258 vs 256 min), EBL (500 vs 500 mL), median LOS (5 vs 3.5 days), 90-day readmission (14% vs 24%), major complications (14% vs 20%), and 90-day mortality (6% vs 4%) between early and late cases, respectively. ICU admissions and conversion rates were significantly lower in group B (14.0% vs 48.0%), while expert level difficulty indices were higher (82% vs 58%).

CONCLUSION

Development of a robotic liver program with good outcomes is feasible over time. Our data suggest that our institutional learning curve for robotic major hepatectomy plateaued at approximately 50 cases.

Anatomical liver resection using the ultrasound-guided compression technique in minimal access surgery

BACKGROUND

Segmental or subsegmental anatomical resection (AR) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in minimal access liver surgery (MALS) has been technically proposed. The Glissonean approach or dye injection technique are generally adopted. The tumor-feeding portal pedicle compression technique (C-AR) is an established approach in open surgery, but its feasibility in the MALS environment has never been described.

METHODS

Eligible patients were prospectively enrolled to undergo laparoscopic or robotic ultrasound-guided C-AR based on HCC location and preoperative identification of a single tumor-feeding portal pedicle. Initial C-AR experience was gained with laparoscopic cases in the beginning of 2020. Following our progressive experience in laparoscopic C-AR, patients requiring AR for HCC were consecutively selected for robotic C-AR.

RESULTS

A total of 10 patients underwent minimal access C-AR. All patients had Child-Pugh A HCC. The surgical procedures included 6 laparoscopic and 4 robotic C-AR. Median tumor size was 3.1 cm (range 2-7 cm). All procedures had R0 margin. Postoperative complications were nil.

CONCLUSION

C-AR technique is a feasible and promising technique for patients eligible for laparoscopic and robotic AR for HCC. Further data are necessary to validate its applicability to more complex minimal access AR.

Minimally Invasive Robotic Techniques for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Resection: How I Do It

The adoption of minimally invasive techniques for hepatocellular resection has progressively increased in North America. Cumulative evidence has demonstrated improved surgical outcomes in patients who undergo minimally invasive hepatectomy. In this review, the authors' approach and methodology to minimally invasive robotic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma is discussed.

Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence in robotic hepatobiliary surgery: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Indocyanine green fluorescence (ICG-F) stains hepatic tumours and delineates vascular and biliary structures in real-time. We detail the efficacy of ICG-F in robotic hepatobiliary surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central were searched for original articles and meta-analyses detailing the outcomes of ICG-F in robotic hepatobiliary surgery.

RESULTS

214 abstracts were reviewed; 16 studies are presented. One single-institution study reported ICG-F in robotic right hepatectomy reduced postoperative bile leakage (0% vs. 12%, p = 0.023), R1 resection (0% vs. 16%, p = 0.019), and readmission (p = 0.023) without prolonging operative time (288 vs. 272 min, p = 0.778). Improved visualisation aided in attainment of R0 resection in partial hepatectomies and radical gallbladder adenocarcinoma resections. Fewer ICG-F-aided robotic cholecystectomies were converted to open procedure compared to laparoscopic cholecystectomies (2.1% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.03; 0.15% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

ICG-F improves clinical outcomes in robotic hepatobiliary surgery without prolonging operative time. There is an opportunity to standardise ICG administration protocols, especially for hepatectomies.

Generic surgical process model for minimally invasive liver treatment methods

Surgical process modelling is an innovative approach that aims to simplify the challenges involved in improving surgeries through quantitative analysis of a well-established model of surgical activities. In this paper, surgical process model strategies are applied for the analysis of different Minimally Invasive Liver Treatments (MILTs), including ablation and surgical resection of the liver lesions. Moreover, a generic surgical process model for these differences in MILTs is introduced. The generic surgical process model was established at three different granularity levels. The generic process model, encompassing thirteen phases, was verified against videos of MILT procedures and interviews with surgeons. The established model covers all the surgical and interventional activities and the connections between them and provides a foundation for extensive quantitative analysis and simulations of MILT procedures for improving computer-assisted surgery systems, surgeon training and evaluation, surgeon guidance and planning systems and evaluation of new technologies.

A novel difficulty scoring system of laparoscopic liver resection for liver tumor

Objectives

To develop a novel difficulty scoring system (NDSS) to predict the surgical difficulty of laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Patients and methods

A total of 138 patients with liver tumors performed liver resection (LLR) between March 2017 to June 2022 were selected from Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan University and Wujin Hospital Affiliated with Jiangsu University.

Patient demographics, laboratory tests, intraoperative variables, pathological characteristics were assessed. We also assessed the Child Pugh score and the DSS-B score.

Results

Patients were divided into training and testing cohort according to their hospital. Patients in training cohort were divided into high and low difficult groups based on operation time, blood loss and conversion. Higher percentage of patients with malignant liver tumor (87.0% vs. 58.1%; P = 0.003) or history of hepatobiliary surgery (24.1% vs. 7.0%; P = 0.043) in high difficult group than in low difficult group. To improve the difficulty scoring system, we incorporated the history of hepatobiliary surgery and nature of the tumor. A novel difficulty scoring system was established. The results showed that the operation time (P < 0.001), blood loss (P < 0.001), ALT (P < 0.001) and AST (P = 0.001) were associated with the novel difficulty score significantly. Compared with DSS-B, the NDSS has a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) (0.838 vs. 0.814). The nomogram was established according to the NDSS. The AUROCs of the nomogram in training and testing cohort were 0.833 and 0.767. The calibration curves for the probability of adverse event showed optimal agreement between the probability as predicted by the nomogram and the actual probability.

Conclusions

We developed a nomogram with the NDSS that can predict the difficulty of LLR. This system could more accurately reflect the difficulty of surgery and help liver surgeons to make the surgical plan and ensure the safety of the operation.

Trends of the Extra-Hepatic Biliary Cancer and Its Surgical Management: A Cross-Sectional Study From the National Cancer Database

Introduction

Biliary cancers are rare cancers with poor prognoses. In this study, we aimed to evaluate trends in early detection and surgical treatment and approaches in extra-hepatic biliary tract cancers (EBCs) over 13 years in the US.

Methods

The most recent data on patients diagnosed with EBC between 2004 and 2016 were extracted from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The patients’ demographics (sex, age, race), primary tumor sites, tumor grades and stages, staging modalities, diagnostic confirmation, surgical treatment modalities and approaches, and 90-day mortality were analyzed to determine trends.

Results

Biopsy was the most common staging modality in 63.9% of total 60,291 patients. The bile duct was the primary tumor site (55.0%). Histologic examination was the most common confirmatory diagnostic modality (77.5%). The most common stage was stage II (23%). The most common surgical treatment modality was radical surgery (13.88%). The open surgical approach was used in 27.1% of patients, followed by a laparoscopic approach (4.3%).

Conclusion

EBC showed no significant change in the trends of the stage at diagnosis, treatment modality, and extent of surgical procedures despite advances in surgical diagnostic and therapeutic modalities; however, the total number of cases slightly increased between 2004 and 2016.

The Role of ICG in Robot-Assisted Liver Resections

Introduction: Robotic-assisted liver surgery (RALS) with its known limitations is gaining more importance. The fluorescent dye, indocyanine green (ICG), is a way to overcome some of these limitations. It accumulates in or around hepatic masses. The integrated near-infrared cameras help to visualize this accumulation. We aimed to compare the influence of ICG staining on the surgical and oncological outcomes in patients undergoing RALS. Material and Methods: Patients who underwent RALS between 2014 and 2021 at the Department of General Surgery at the University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, were included. In 2019, ICG-supported RALS was introduced. Results: Fifty-four patients were included, with twenty-eight patients (50.9%) receiving preoperative ICG. Hepatocellular carcinoma (32.1%) was the main entity resected, followed by the metastasis of colorectal cancers (17%) and focal nodular hyperplasia (15.1%). ICG staining worked for different tumor entities, but diffuse staining was noted in patients with liver cirrhosis. However, ICG-supported RALS lasted shorter (142.7 ± 61.8 min vs. 246.4 ± 98.6 min, p < 0.001), tumors resected in the ICG cohort were significantly smaller (27.1 ± 25.0 mm vs. 47.6 ± 35.2 mm, p = 0.021) and more R0 resections were achieved by ICG-supported RALS (96.3% vs. 80.8%, p = 0.075). Conclusions: ICG-supported RALS achieve surgically and oncologically safe results, while overcoming the limitations of RALS.

Review of the Standard and Advanced Screening, Staging Systems and Treatment Modalities for Cervical Cancer

Simple Summary

This review discusses the timeline and development of the recommended screening tests, diagnosis system, and therapeutics implemented in clinics for precancer and cancer of the uterine cervix. The incorporation of the latest automation, machine learning modules, and state-of-the-art technologies into these aspects are also discussed.

Abstract

Cancer arising from the uterine cervix is the fourth most common cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Almost 90% of cervical cancer mortality has occurred in low- and middle-income countries. One of the major aetiologies contributing to cervical cancer is the persistent infection by the cancer-causing types of the human papillomavirus. The disease is preventable if the premalignant lesion is detected early and managed effectively. In this review, we outlined the standard guidelines that have been introduced and implemented worldwide for decades, including the cytology, the HPV detection and genotyping, and the immunostaining of surrogate markers. In addition, the staging system used to classify the premalignancy and malignancy of the uterine cervix, as well as the safety and efficacy of the various treatment modalities in clinical trials for cervical cancers, are also discussed. In this millennial world, the advancements in computer-aided technology, including robotic modules and artificial intelligence (AI), are also incorporated into the screening, diagnostic, and treatment platforms. These innovations reduce the dependence on specialists and technologists, as well as the work burden and time incurred for sample processing. However, concerns over the practicality of these advancements remain, due to the high cost, lack of flexibility, and the judgment of a trained professional that is currently not replaceable by a machine.

Robot-assisted liver resection: the real benefit so far

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive liver resection is associated with lower perioperative morbidity and shorter hospital stay. However, the added benefit of the robotic platform over conventional laparoscopy is a matter of ongoing investigation.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an up-to-date and balanced evaluation of the benefits and shortcomings of robotic liver surgery for the modern hepatobiliary surgeon.

CONCLUSIONS

Advantages of a robotic approach to liver resection include a shortened learning curve, the ability to complete more extensive or complex minimally invasive operations, and integrated fluorescence guidance. However, the robotic platform remains limited by a paucity of parenchymal transection devices, complete lack of haptic feedback, and added operating time associated with docking and instrument exchange. Like laparoscopic hepatectomy, robotic hepatectomy may provide patients with more rapid recovery and a shorter hospital stay, which can help offset the substantial costs of robot acquisition and maintenance. The oncologic outcomes of robotic hepatectomy appear to be equivalent to laparoscopic and open hepatectomy for appropriately selected patients.

Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Primary Hepatobiliary Tumors-Possibilities and Limitations

Simple Summary

Primary liver malignancies are some of the most common and fatal tumors today. Robotic-assisted liver surgery is becoming increasingly interesting for both patients and surgeons alike. Up to date, prospective comparative studies around the topic are scarce. This leads us to an ever existing controversy about the efficacy, safety, and economic benefits of robotic surgery as an extension of traditional minimally invasive surgery over open liver surgery. However, there is evidence that robotic-assisted surgery is, after passing the learning curve, equivalent in terms of feasibility and safety, and in some cases superior to traditional laparoscopic hepatic resection. With this work, we want to provide an overview of the latest and most significant reviews and meta-analyses focusing on robotic hepatectomy in primary liver malignancies. We outline the technical aspects of robotic-assisted surgery and place them into the context of technical, surgical, and oncological outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open resection. When chosen per case individually, any hepatic resection can be performed robotically to overcome limitations of laparoscopic surgery by an experienced team. In this paper, we propose that prospective studies are needed to prove efficacy for robotic-assisted resection in liver malignancy.

Abstract

Hepatocellular and cholangiocellular carcinoma are fatal primary hepatic tumors demanding extensive liver resection. Liver surgery is technically challenging due to the complex liver anatomy, with an intensive and variant vascular and biliary system. Therefore, major hepatectomies in particular are often performed by open resection and minor hepatectomies are often performed minimally invasively. More centers have adopted robotic-assisted surgery, intending to improve the laparoscopic surgical limits, as it offers some technical benefits such as seven degrees of freedom and 3D visualization. The da Vinci^® Surgical System has dominated the surgical robot market since 2000 and has shown surgical feasibility, but there is still much controversy about its economic benefits and real benefits for the patient over the gold standard. The currently available retrospective case studies are difficult to compare, and larger, prospective studies and randomized trials are still urgently missing. Therefore, here we summarize the technical, surgical, and economic outcomes of robotic versus open and laparoscopic hepatectomies for primary liver tumors found in the latest literature reviews and meta-analyses. We conclude that complex robotic liver resections (RLR) are safe and feasible after the steep learning curve of the surgical team has plateaued. The financial burden is lower in high volume centers and is expected to decrease soon as new surgical systems will enter the market.

National Trends and Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic-assisted Hepatectomy in the USA: A Propensity-score Matched Analysis from the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

A paucity of data exists on the national use of robotic hepatectomy. We assessed national trends and perioperative outcomes of robotic hepatectomy in the USA. In addition, factors associated with use of the robotic approach were analyzed.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients undergoing hepatectomy from 2010 to 2016. Patients undergoing total hepatectomy for transplant were excluded. Factors associated with the use of the robotic approach were assessed using logistic regression multivariable analysis. Propensity-score analysis was performed (robotic vs. laparoscopic and robotic vs. open approaches), and perioperative outcomes were compared between the matched groups.

RESULTS

The robotic approach was used in 287 patients (110 hospitals). Utilization of the robotic approach increased significantly on the national level from 0.8% in 2010 to 4.1% in 2016 (P<0.001). The number of hospitals performing a minimum of one robotic hepatectomy per year increased from 8 in 2010 to 35 in 2016. The median hospital length of stay was 4 days (IQR 3-6), 30-day readmission rate was 5%, and 30-day/90-day mortality rates were 3%/4%. Factors associated with using robotic approach were African-American race (95% CI 1.02-2.11), recent year of surgery (95% CI 1.11-1.32), HCC histology (95% CI 1.01-52.03), tumor size (95% CI 0.87-0.96), and early-stage tumor (Stage I-II, 95% CI 1.27-3.99). On propensity-matched analysis, there were no differences between robotic and open approaches (n=184 each group) in 30-day readmission (5% vs. 7%, P=0.651), 30-day mortality (2% vs. 4%, P=0.106), 90-day mortality (3% vs. 7%, P=0.080), or 5-year overall survival (58% vs. 43%, P=0.211). However, the robotic approach was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay (median: 4 vs. 6 days, P<0.001). There were no differences between matched groups of patients undergoing robotic and laparoscopic approaches (n=182 in each group) in perioperative outcomes or length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

National use of robotic-assisted hepatectomy has increased by fivefold over the seven-year study period. It was associated with a shorter hospital length of stay compared to the open approach without compromising perioperative outcomes or survival.

Early Experience of Pure Robotic Right Hepatectomy for Liver Donors in a Small-Volume Center

Background and Objectives

Living donor right hepatectomy has become the most common method of liver transplantation. With minimally invasive surgery, laparoscopic donor hepatectomy became possible, but with some limitations. Advancements in robotic technology made it possible to overcome these shortcomings and maximize the advantages of minimally invasive surgery in transplantation. For this reason, some centers have started robotic donor hepatectomy. Our study aimed to introduce our early experience of robotic donor right hepatectomy and investigate the feasibility of this surgery.

Methods

This study included 10 (30%) living donors who underwent pure robotic donor right hepatectomy at Dong-A University Hospital from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021. The medical records were analyzed to determine the short-term outcomes of these patients.

Results

The total operation time and warm ischemic time were 396.6 min ± 62.7 min and 19.7 min± 5.6 min, respectively. Moreover, there was no transfusion during the operation and no other port use and open conversion. The average real graft volume was 590 mL ± 73.5 mL, and the mean hospital stay was 8.7 d ± 2.6 d. There have been no specific complications noted in the donor group.

Conclusions

Based on our positive experience with pure robotic right hepatectomy for a liver donor, the robotic technique may be a new option for achieving minimally invasive surgery for a liver donor.

Robotic donor hepatectomy: A major breakthrough in living donor liver transplantation

Living donation in many countries is the main resource of organs. Healthy, volunteering individuals deserve the highest safety standards possible in addition to the least invasive technique to procure the organs. Since the introduction of living donor liver transplantation, many efforts have been made to minimize the surgical trauma inherent to living donor surgery. The journey started with a large Mercedes incision and evolved to reverse L-shaped and small upper midline incisions before the introduction of minimally invasive laparoscopic techniques originated. The technical difficulties of the laparoscopic approach due to suboptimal instrumentation, challenging ergonomics, and the long learning curve limited the application of the fully laparoscopic approach to a few centers. The recent introduction of the robotic platform with its superb optical system and advanced instruments allows for the first time, a genuine emulation of open donor surgery in a closed abdomen, thus allowing all liver donors to benefit from minimally invasive surgery (better cosmesis, less pain and morbidity, and better quality of life) without compromising donor safety. This attribute in combination with the ubiquitous presence of the robot in major transplant centers may well lead to the desired endpoint of this technology, namely, the widespread dissemination of minimally invasive donor surgery.

Maturation of robotic liver resection during the last decade: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive hepatectomy techniques have developed rapidly since 2000. Pure laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has become the primary approach for managing liver tumors and procuring donor organs for liver transplantation. Robotic liver resection (RLR) has emerged during the last decade. The technical status of RLR seems to be improving.

AIM

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the short-term clinical outcomes of LLR and RLR over two 5-year periods.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Medline, including the Cochrane Library. The following inclusion criteria were set for the meta-analysis: (1) Studies comparing LLR vs RLR; and (2) Studies that described clinical outcomes, such as the operative time, intraoperative bleeding, intraoperative conversion rate, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 25 articles were included in this meta-analysis after 40 articles had been subjected to full-text evaluations. The studies were divided into early (n = 14) and recent (n = 11) groups. In the recent group, the operative time did not differ significantly between LLR and RLR (P = 0.70), whereas in the early group the operative time of LLR was significantly shorter than that of RLR (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The initial disadvantages of RLR, such as its long operation time, have been overcome during the last 5 years. The other clinical outcomes of RLR are comparable to those of LLR. The cost and quality-of-life outcomes of RLR should be evaluated in future studies to promote its routine clinical use.

Implementing a robotic liver resection program does not always require prior laparoscopic experience

Background

Preliminary experience in laparoscopic liver surgery is usually suggested prior to implementation of a robotic liver resection program.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort analysis of patients undergoing robotic (RLR) versus laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma at a center with concomitant initiation of robotic and laparoscopic programs

Results

A total of 92 consecutive patients operated on between May 2014 and February 2019 were included: 40 RLR versus 52 LLR. Median age (69 vs. 67; p = 0.74), male sex (62.5% vs. 59.6%; p = 0.96), incidence of chronic liver disease (97.5% vs.98.1%; p = 0.85), median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (8 vs. 9; p = 0.92), and median largest nodule size (22 vs. 24 mm) were similar between RLR and LLR. In the LLR group, there was a numerically higher incidence of nodules located in segment 4 (20.0% vs. 16.6%; p = 0.79); a numerically higher use of Pringle’s maneuver (32.7% vs. 20%; p = 0.23), and a shorter duration of surgery (median of 165.5 vs. 217.5 min; p = 0.04). Incidence of complications (25% vs.32.7%; p = 0.49), blood transfusions (2.5% vs.9.6%; p = 0.21), and median length of stay (6 vs. 5; p = 0.54) were similar between RLR and LLR. The overall (OS) and recurrence-free (RFS) survival rates at 1 and 5 years were 100 and 79 and 95 and 26% for RLR versus 96.2 and 76.9 and 84.6 and 26.9% for LLR (log-rank p = 0.65 for OS and 0.72 for RFS).

Conclusions

Based on our results, concurrent implementation of a robotic and laparoscopic liver resection program appears feasible and safe, and is associated with similar oncologic long-term outcomes.

Current trends in three-dimensional visualization and real-time navigation as well as robot-assisted technologies in hepatobiliary surgery

With the continuous development of digital medicine, minimally invasive precision and safety have become the primary development trends in hepatobiliary surgery. Due to the specificity and complexity of hepatobiliary surgery, traditional preoperative imaging techniques such as computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging cannot meet the need for identification of fine anatomical regions. Imaging-based three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction, virtual simulation of surgery and 3D printing optimize the surgical plan through preoperative assessment, improving the controllability and safety of intraoperative operations, and in difficult-to-reach areas of the posterior and superior liver, assistive robots reproduce the surgeon’s natural movements with stable cameras, reducing natural vibrations. Electromagnetic navigation in abdominal surgery solves the problem of conventional surgery still relying on direct visual observation or preoperative image assessment. We summarize and compare these recent trends in digital medical solutions for the future development and refinement of digital medicine in hepatobiliary surgery.

A narrative review of fluorescence imaging in robotic-assisted surgery

Objective

In this review, we provide examples of applications of fluorescence imaging in urologic, gynecologic, general, and endocrine surgeries.

Background

While robotic-assisted surgery has helped increase the availability of minimally invasive procedures across surgical specialties, there remains an opportunity to reduce adverse events associated with open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted methods. In 2011, fluorescence imaging was introduced as an option to the da Vinci Surgical System, and has been standard equipment since 2014. Without interfering with surgical workflow, this fluorescence technology named Firefly^® allows for acquisition and display of near-infrared fluorescent signals that are co-registered with white light endoscopic images. As a result, robotic surgeons of all specialties have been able to explore the clinical utility of fluorescence guided surgery.

Methods

Literature searches were performed using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases using the keywords "robotic-assisted fluorescence surgery", "ICG robotic surgery", and "fluorescence guided surgery" covering the years 2011-2020.

Conclusions

Real-time intraoperative fluorescence guidance has shown great potential in helping guide surgeons in both simple and complex surgical interventions. Indocyanine green is one of the most widely-used imaging agents in fluorescence guided surgery, and other targeted, near-infrared imaging agents are in various stages of development. Fluorescence is becoming a reliable tool that can help surgeons in their decision-making process in some specialties, while explorations continue in others.

National Trends and Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic-assisted Hepatectomy in the USA: A Propensity-score Matched Analysis from the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

A paucity of data exists on the national use of robotic hepatectomy. We assessed national trends and perioperative outcomes of robotic hepatectomy in the USA. In addition, factors associated with use of the robotic approach were analyzed.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients undergoing hepatectomy from 2010 to 2016. Patients undergoing total hepatectomy for transplant were excluded. Factors associated with the use of the robotic approach were assessed using logistic regression multivariable analysis. Propensity-score analysis was performed (robotic vs. laparoscopic and robotic vs. open approaches), and perioperative outcomes were compared between the matched groups.

RESULTS

The robotic approach was used in 287 patients (110 hospitals). Utilization of the robotic approach increased significantly on the national level from 0.8% in 2010 to 4.1% in 2016 (P<0.001). The number of hospitals performing a minimum of one robotic hepatectomy per year increased from 8 in 2010 to 35 in 2016. The median hospital length of stay was 4 days (IQR 3-6), 30-day readmission rate was 5%, and 30-day/90-day mortality rates were 3%/4%. Factors associated with using robotic approach were African-American race (95% CI 1.02-2.11), recent year of surgery (95% CI 1.11-1.32), HCC histology (95% CI 1.01-52.03), tumor size (95% CI 0.87-0.96), and early-stage tumor (Stage I-II, 95% CI 1.27-3.99). On propensity-matched analysis, there were no differences between robotic and open approaches (n=184 each group) in 30-day readmission (5% vs. 7%, P=0.651), 30-day mortality (2% vs. 4%, P=0.106), 90-day mortality (3% vs. 7%, P=0.080), or 5-year overall survival (58% vs. 43%, P=0.211). However, the robotic approach was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay (median: 4 vs. 6 days, P<0.001). There were no differences between matched groups of patients undergoing robotic and laparoscopic approaches (n=182 in each group) in perioperative outcomes or length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

National use of robotic-assisted hepatectomy has increased by fivefold over the seven-year study period. It was associated with a shorter hospital length of stay compared to the open approach without compromising perioperative outcomes or survival.

Applying IWATE criteria to robotic hepatectomy: is there a "robotic effect"?

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study is to apply this criteria to determine its applicability to robotic hepatectomy.

METHODS

We prospectively followed 105 patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy. Operations were categorized into Low (0-3), Intermediate (4-6), Advanced (7-9), and Expert (10-12).

RESULTS

Patients had a median age of 62 (61 ± 13.1) years, with a BMI of 28 (29 ± 6.1) kg/m²; 38% were women. ASA class was 3 (3 ± 0.6). Of the 105 operations, 2 were categorized as Low, 31 as Intermediate, 49 as Advanced, and 23 as Expert. EBL and operative duration were found to be significantly greater as the operative difficulty level increased (p < 0.03 and p < 0.01, respectively). Intraoperatively, when comparing Expert and Intermediate, EBL and operative duration were significantly greater (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0031, respectively). In the comparison of Expert with Advanced, operative duration was significantly longer (p = 0.0001). Postoperatively, comparisons between Expert and Intermediate, Expert and Advanced, and Advanced and Intermediate showed no differences.

CONCLUSION

EBL and operative duration increased with IWATE scores reflecting more difficult robotic hepatectomies. However, with the robotic approach, our postoperative outcomes were similar irrespective of IWATE difficulty scores. Perhaps, the robotic approach potentially has a mitigating effect on postoperative outcomes regardless of difficulty level.

Use of a Novel Fluorescent Catheter to Locate the Ureters during Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy

Ureteral injury can occur during total laparoscopic hysterectomy. This report documents our experience in using the near-infrared ray catheter (NIRC), a newly developed fluorescent ureteral catheter made of material that contains a fluorescent dye to improve visualization of the ureters. We have used the device in 3 patients between 40 and 50 years of age (mean, 46.3 ± 4.5 years) undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy and bilateral salpingectomy for uterine myomas. The time of catheter insertion ranged from 4 minutes and 9 seconds to 10 minutes and 57 seconds. A number of intraoperative procedures were performed near the ureters, namely, identification and ligation of the uterine arteries, dissection of the cardinal ligament, incision of the vaginal canal, and suturing of the vaginal stump. The abovementioned fluorescent ureteral catheter appears green on a monitor when illuminated by near-infrared light, and this facilitated real-time confirmation of the ureter positions, increasing surgical safety. The patients were followed up for 6 months postoperatively, and no urinary tract infection or injury was found. Prophylactic use of the fluorescent ureteral catheter may improve visualization of the ureters in patients considered to be at high risk of ureteral injury, such as those expected to exhibit ureteral deviation due to severe adhesions or an enlarged uterus and when the surgeon has little experience in laparoscopic surgery.

Robotic hepatectomy and biliary reconstruction for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a pioneer western case series

Open surgery is the standard of care for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA). With the aim of oncologic radicality, it requires a complex major hepatectomy with biliary reconstruction. The postoperative course is consequently often complicated, with severe morbidity and mortality rates of up to 27.5–54% and 18%, respectively. Robotic liver surgery is emerging as a safe, minimally-invasive technique with huge potential for pCCA management. After the first case described by Giulianotti in 2010, here we present the first western series of robot-assisted liver resections with biliary reconstruction for pCCA with the aim to preliminarily assess the feasibility and repeatability of the procedure. At our high-volume teaching hospital center dedicated to HPB surgery, 128 pCCA patients have been surgically treated in the last 15 years whereas more than 800 laparoscopic liver resections have been performed. Since the Da Vinci Xi Robotic platform was introduced in late 2018, 6 major robotic liver resections with biliary reconstruction have been performed, 4 of which were for pCCA. All 4 cases involved a left hepatectomy with caudate lobectomy. The median operating time was 840 min, with a median blood loss of 700 ml. One case was converted to open surgery during the reconstruction due to a short mesentery preventing the hepatico-jejunostomy. None of the patients experienced major complications, while minor complications occurred in 3 out of 4 cases. One biliary leak was managed conservatively. The median postoperative stay was 9 days. Negative biliary margins were achieved in 3 of the 4 cases. An included video clip shows the most relevant technical details. This preliminary series demonstrates that robot-assisted liver resection for pCCA is feasible. We speculate that the da Vinci platform has a relevant potential in pCCA surgery with particular reference to the multi-duct biliary reconstruction. Further studies are needed to better clarify the role of this high-cost technology in the minimally-invasive treatment of pCCA.

Robotic liver surgery: literature review and future perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) have been gaining popularity over the last decades. MILR provides superior peri-operative outcome. Despite these advantages, the penetrance of MILR in the clinical setting has been limited, and it was slowed down, among other factors, also by the laparoscopic technological limitations.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature review has been carried out (Pubmed, Embase and Scopus platforms) focusing on the role of robotic surgery in MILR.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The literature review results are presented and our additional remarks on the topic are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic MILR has been helping to expand the penetrance of MIS in liver surgery by making possible increasingly more challenging procedures. Minor resections still represent most of the robotic liver surgery data currently available. Robotic liver surgery is safe and effective, and it shows perioperative outcomes comparable with laparoscopic and open surgery. The oncological efficacy, within the limitations of the current level of evidence (mostly retrospective studies and literature heterogeneity), seems to show promising result. High quality prospective randomized studies, the use of prospective registry data, and multi-institutional efforts are needed.

Robotic ICG guided anatomical liver resection in a multi-centre cohort: an evolution from "positive staining" into "negative staining" method

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic major anatomical liver resection is challenging. The robotic liver resection (RLR) approach, with Firefly indocyanine green (ICG) imaging, was proposed to overcome the limitations of laparoscopy. The aim of this multi-centre international study was to evaluate the use of Firefly ICG imaging in anatomical RLR.

METHODS

A retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing RLR anatomical resection with intra-operative ICG administration from January 2015 to July 2018 were enrolled. Patients who underwent simultaneous or en-bloc resections of other organs were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 52 patients were recruited of which 32 patients were healthy donors, 17 with malignancy and 3 for benign conditions. 12 patients had cirrhosis. 28 patients underwent a right hepatectomy (53.8%) with left hepatectomy performed with 18 patients. 40 patients underwent negative staining and 12 patients via direct portal vein injection for positive staining. ICG demarcation line was visualized in 43 patients and was clearer than the ischaemic demarcation line in 29 patients. All resections for malignancy had clear margins. There were no 30-day/inpatient mortalities.

CONCLUSION

Robotic ICG guided hepatectomy technique for anatomical liver resection is safe, feasible and has the benefit for improved visualization in healthy donors and cirrhotic patients.

IWATE criteria are associated with perioperative outcomes in robotic hepatectomy: a retrospective review of 225 resections

Background

Robotic hepatectomy (RH) is increasingly utilized for minor and major liver resections. The IWATE criteria were developed to classify minimally invasive liver resections by difficulty. The objective of this study was to apply the IWATE criteria in RH and to describe perioperative and oncologic outcomes of RH over the last decade at our institution.

Methods

Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of patients who underwent RH between 2011 and 2019 were retrospectively collected. The difficulty level of each operation was assessed using the IWATE criteria, and outcomes were compared at each level. Univariate linear regression was performed to characterize the relationship between IWATE criteria and perioperative outcomes (OR time, EBL, and LOS), and a multivariable model was also developed to address potential confounding by patient characteristics (age, sex, BMI, prior abdominal surgery, ASA class, and simultaneous non-hepatectomy operation).

Results

Two hundred and twenty-five RH were performed. Median IWATE criteria for RH were 6 (IQR 5–9), with low, intermediate, advanced, and expert resections accounting for 23% (n = 51), 34% (n = 77), 32% (n = 72), and 11% (n = 25) of resections, respectively. The majority of resections were parenchymal-sparing approaches, including anatomic segmentectomies and non-anatomic partial resections. 30-day complication rate was 14%, conversion to open surgery occurred in 9 patients (4%), and there were no deaths within 30 days postoperatively. In the univariate linear regression analysis, IWATE criteria were positively associated with OR time, EBL, and LOS. In the multivariable model, IWATE criteria were independently associated with greater OR time, EBL, and LOS. Two-year overall survival for hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma was 94% and 50%, respectively.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the IWATE criteria are associated with surgical outcomes after RH. This series highlights the utility of RH for difficult hepatic resections, particularly parenchymal-sparing resections in the posterosuperior sector, extending the indication of minimally invasive hepatectomy in experienced hands and potentially offering select patients an alternative to open hepatectomy or other less definitive liver-directed treatment options.

Usability of Indocyanine Green in Robot-Assisted Hepatic Surgery

Recent developments in robotic surgery have led to an increasing number of robot-assisted hepatobiliary procedures. However, a limitation of robotic surgery is the missing haptic feedback. The fluorescent dye indocyanine green (ICG) may help in this context, which accumulates in hepatocellular cancers and around hepatic metastasis. ICG accumulation may be visualized by a near-infrared camera integrated into some robotic systems, helping to perform surgery more accurately. We aimed to test the feasibility of preoperative ICG application and its intraoperative use in patients suffering from hepatocellular carcinoma and metastasis of colorectal cancer, but also of other origins. In a single-arm, single-center feasibility study, we tested preoperative ICG application and its intraoperative use in patients undergoing robot-assisted hepatic resections. Twenty patients were included in the final analysis. ICG staining helped in most cases by detecting a clear lesion or additional metastases or when performing an R0 resection. However, it has limitations if applied too late before surgery and in patients suffering from severe liver cirrhosis. ICG staining may serve as a beneficial intraoperative aid in patients undergoing robot-assisted hepatic surgery. Dose and time of application and standardized fluorescence intensity need to be further determined.

Robotic liver resection: Hurdles and beyond

Laparoscopy is currently considered the standard of care for certain procedures such as left-lateral sectionectomies and wedge resections of anterior segments. The role of robotic liver surgery is still under debate, especially with regards to oncological outcomes. The purpose of this review is to describe how the field of robotic liver surgery has expanded, and to identify current limitations and future perspectives of the technology. Available evidences suggest that oncologic results after robotic liver resection are comparable to open and laparoscopic approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases, with identifiable advantages for cirrhotic patients and patients undergoing repeat resections. Excellent outcomes and optimal patient safety can be only achieved with specific hepato-biliary and general minimally invasive training to overcome the learning curve.

Comparison of the learning curves for robotic left and right hemihepatectomy: A prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Robotic hepatectomy has been continuously improving and shown to be safe and reliable. The learning curve of robotic hemihepatectomy is required which enable beginners to benefit from previous experience. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curve of robotic left (RLH) and right hemihepatectomy (RRH) in terms of operative time (OT) to determine which procedure has an easier learning curve for beginners.

METHODS

Data records for each 100 consecutive patients who underwent RLH and RRH between July 2012 and May 2019 were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. The data included demographics, OT, estimated blood loss (EBL), postoperative hospital stay (PHS), and rates of morbidity and mortality. The cumulative sum method was used to evaluate the learning curve of OT.

RESULTS

All patients underwent the RRH and RLH procedure performed by the same surgical team. RRH and RLH learning curve consisted of two phases: the first and second phase. The first phase of RRH included 45 patients, while RLH outcomes were optimized after 35 cases were completed. Compared with the first phase, the mean OT and the median blood loss were decreased significantly in the second phase in both learning curves. No significant decrease in the rates of morbidity and conversion to laparotomy or PHS was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the safety and feasibility of RLH and RRH. The surgeons who previously lacked robotic experience are able to overcome the learning curve for RLH faster than RRH.

The application of indocyanine green-fluorescence imaging during robotic-assisted liver resection for malignant tumors: a single-arm feasibility cohort study

BACKGROUND

The fluorescence properties of Indocyanine Green (ICG) make it a useful technique in the armamentarium of liver surgeons in order to enhance the visualization of anatomical structures by providing a real-time liver mapping.

METHODS

We have analyzed the impact of ICG-fluorescence staining technique in 40 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted liver resection for malignancies from June 2014 to November 2017.

RESULTS

For the 55% of patients the surgical indication was colorectal liver metastasis followed by hepatocarcinoma in 35% of cases. The R0 resection rate was 100%, and the mean resection margin was 12 mm. Twenty percent of patients experienced tumor recurrence. The 1-year and 2-year overall survival rates were 91% and 84%, respectively. The 1-year and 2-year disease free survival were 77.2% and 65%, respectively. The previously marked transaction line was changed after the staining method in 12 out of 40 patients. Through intra-operative ultrasonography and white-light exploration of the liver surface 43 lesions were detected, whereas with the ICG-F 52 lesion of the liver surface were identified, including two superficial colorectal metastases missed at the intra-operative ultrasonography.

CONCLUSION

The ICG-F is a promising navigational tool, that can potentially overcome the limitations of the minimally invasive liver surgery.

Does preoperative MELD score affect outcomes following robotic hepatectomy for liver tumors?

The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score is objective, reproducible, and it has shown to predict mortality related to cirrhosis. This study was undertaken to investigate safety of robotic hepatectomy in patients with elevated preoperative MELD score and to examine correlation between preoperative MELD scores and postoperative outcomes after robotic hepatectomy for liver tumors. Demographic data, MELD score, and clinical outcomes were prospectively collected. Regression analysis was used. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD). 75 patients underwent robotic hepatectomy. Age was 64 (62.5 ± 14.2) years and BMI 28 (29 ± 7.0) kg/m²; 56% women. 60 (81%) of the hepatectomies were undertaken for malignancy (25% hepatocellular carcinoma, 20% colorectal metastasis, 15% cholangiocarcinoma). On regression analysis, MELD score did not correlate with operative time (p = 0.518) or blood loss (p = 0.583). MELD score, however, correlated with length of stay (p = 0.002). 8 (11%) patients experienced postoperative complications; their MELD score was 7 (8 ± 2.5). 68 (91%) patients did not experience postoperative complications; their MELD score was 7 (8 ± 2.8) (p = 0.803). One patient died in this series. In patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy to treat liver tumors, preoperative MELD score only correlates with length of stay. Preoperative MELD score does not correlate with operative time and amount of blood loss. An elevated MELD score should not deter surgeons from offering robotic hepatectomy.

Robotic approach to the liver: Open surgery in a closed abdomen or laparoscopic surgery with technical constraints?

The application of the minimally invasive approach has shown to be safe and effective for liver surgery and is in constant growth. The indications for laparoscopic surgery are steadily increasing across the field. In the early 2000s, robotic surgery led to some additional improvements, such as tremor filtration, instrument stability, 3D view and more comfort for the surgeon. These techniques bring in some advantages compared to the traditional OLR: less blood loss, shorter admissions, fewer adhesions, and a faster postoperative recovery and better outcomes in case of further hepatectomy for tumor recurrence has been shown. Concerning which is the best minimally invasive approach between laparoscopic and robotic surgery, the evidence is still conflicting. The latter shows good potential, since the endo-wristed instruments work similarly to the surgeon's hands, even with an intact abdominal wall. However, the technique is still under development, burdened by important costs, and limited by the lack of some instruments available for the laparoscopic approach. The paucity of universally accepted and proven data, especially concerning long-term outcomes, hampers drawing univocal acceptance at present. Furthermore, the number of variables related both to the patient and the disease further complicates the decision leading to a treatment tailored to each patient with strict selection. This review aims to explore the main differences between laparoscopic and robotic surgery, focusing on indications, operative technique and current debated clinical issues in recent literature.

The Application of Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging During Robotic Liver Resection: A Case-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

The ICG fluorescence properties are progressively gaining momentum in the HPB surgery. However, the exact impact of ICG application on surgical outcomes is yet to be established.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients who underwent ICG fluorescence-guided robotic liver resection were case-matched in a 1:1 ratio to a cohort who underwent standard robotic liver resection.

RESULTS

In the ICG group, six additional lesions not diagnosed by preoperative workup and intraoperative ultrasound were identified and resected. Four of the lesions were proved to be malignant. Despite the similar operative time (288 vs. 272 min, p = 0.778), the risk of postoperative bile leakage (0% vs. 12%, p = 0.023), R1 resection (0% vs. 16%, p = 0.019) and readmission (p = 0.023) was reduced in the ICG group compared with the no-ICG group.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICG fluorescence is a real-time navigation tool which enables surgeons to enhance visualization of anatomical structures and overcome the disadvantages of minimally invasive liver resection. The procedure is not time-consuming, and its applications can reduce the postoperative complication rate in robotic liver surgery.

Multivisceral robotic liver surgery: feasible and safe

The application of robotic technology allows for the performance of multi-organ liver resections by multidisciplinary teams in a minimally invasive manner. Their technique and outcomes are not established. Herein we describe our technique with robotic liver surgery combined with colon, pancreas and urologic resections. Our patients are an 84-year-old (yo) female (Body Mass Index, BMI: 25) with a recently diagnosed right colon adenocarcinoma and two synchronous liver metastases at segments 5 and 6, a 75-year-old female (BMI: 50.4) with a history of right renal cell cancer status post (s/p) right robotic radical nephrectomy now with tumor recurrence with multiple intra-abdominal masses including a segment 7 liver lesion and a 71-year-old female (BMI: 24) with history of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the tail and a segment 3 liver lesion s/p neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The Xi robotic system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) was utilized in all cases. Port placement in all cases was decided within the multidisciplinary teams to accommodate both the hepatic and the extra-hepatic portion of the operation. Parenchymal transections were performed with the use of the Vessel Sealer and the robotic stapler as appropriate. Indocyanine green (ICG) was used to assess the anastomotic perfusion in the first patient. Blood loss was 50 ml for the first two cases and 300 ml for the third. Surgical margins were negative in all cases. Patients were discharged at POD 8, 3 and 5 with one patient experiencing postoperative ileus. Robotic multivisceral liver resections are feasible and safe within multidisciplinary surgical teams with expertise in robotic surgery. The robotic platform can offer a minimally invasive approach in liver surgery synchronous with colonic, pancreatic and urologic surgery.