Laparoscopic Surgery for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Focus on Oncological Outcomes

A meta-analysis between robotic hepatectomy and conventional open hepatectomy

Current meta-analysis was performed to compare robotic hepatectomy (RH) with conventional open hepatectomy (OH) in terms of peri-operative and postoperative outcomes. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were all searched up for comparative studies between RH and OH. RevMan5.3 software and Stata 13.0 software were used for statistical analysis. Nineteen studies with 1747 patients who received RH and 23,633 patients who received OH were included. Pooled results indicated that patients who received RH were generally younger than those received OH (P < 0.00001). Moreover, RH was associated with longer operative time (P = 0.0002), less intraoperative hemorrhage (P < 0.0001), lower incidence of intraoperative transfusion (P = 0.003), lower incidence of postoperative any morbidity (P < 0.00001), postoperative major morbidity (P = 0.0001), mortalities with 90 days after surgery (P < 0.0001), and shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.00001). Comparable total hospital costs were acquired between RH and OH groups (P = 0.46). However, even at the premise of comparable R0 rate (P = 0.86), RH was associated with smaller resected tumor size (P < 0.00001). Major hepatectomy (P = 0.02) and right posterior hepatectomy (P = 0.0003) were less frequently performed in RH group. Finally, we concluded that RH was superior to OH in terms of peri-operative and postoperative outcomes. RH could lead to less intraoperative hemorrhage, less postoperative complications and an enhanced postoperative recovery. However, major hepatectomy and right posterior hepatectomy were still less frequently performed via robotic approach. Future more powerful well-designed studies are required for further exploration.

Minimally Invasive Approach Provides Oncological Benefit in Patients with High Risk of Very Early Recurrence (VER) After Surgery for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA)

BACKGROUND

Surgery for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is jeopardized by significant risk of early recurrence (≤ 6 months). The aim of the present study is to analyze the oncological benefit provided by laparoscopic over open approach for iCCA in patients with high risk of very early recurrence (VER).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 532 liver resections (LR) were performed for iCCA [265 by minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and 267 with open approach, matched through a 1:1 propensity score] and stratified using the postoperative prediction model of VER. Outcomes were compared between open and laparoscopic approaches, specifically evaluating oncological benefit.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients with high risk of VER was similar (32.7% in the laparoscopic group and 35.3% in the open group, pNS). The number of retrieved nodes as well as the rate and depth of negative resection margins were comparable between laparoscopic and open. The surgery-adjuvant treatment interval was shorter in laparoscopic patients in the overall series, as well in the subgroup of high risk of VER. The rate of patients starting adjuvant treatments within 2 months from surgery was higher in laparoscopic group compared with open group. In VER high-risk group both disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly improved in MIS compared with open group (p = 0.032 and p = 0.026, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with high risk of VER, laparoscopy translates into an advantage in terms of recurrence-free survival, likely related to lower biological impact of surgery, together with a shorter interval between surgery and start of adjuvant treatments, even allowing for a higher number of patients to start adjuvant therapies within 2 months from resection.

Risk factor analysis of conversion in laparoscopic liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The risk factors of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) requiring conversion to open surgery have not been adequately studied. This study aimed to determine the risk factors and postoperative outcomes of conversion in patients with ICC.

METHODS

From May 2014 to September 2022, Unplanned conversions were compared with successful LLRs.

RESULTS

153 patients with ICC initially underwent LLR, of which 41 (26.8%) required conversion to open surgery. Multivariate analysis for those factors that were statistically significant or confirmed by clinical studies, tumor proximity to the major vessels (OR 6.643, P < 0.001), and previous upper abdominal surgery (OR 3.140, P = 0.040) were independent predictors of unplanned conversions. Compared to successful LLRs, unplanned conversions showed longer operative times (300.0 vs. 225.0 min, P < 0.001), more blood loss (500.0 vs. 200.0 mL, P < 0.001), higher transfusion rates (46.3% vs. 11.6%, P < 0.001), longer length of stays (13.0 vs. 8.0 days, P < 0.001), and higher rates of major morbidity (39.0% vs. 11.6%, P < 0.001). However, there was no statistically significant difference in 30-day or 90-day mortality between the conversion group and the laparoscopic group.

CONCLUSION

Conversion during LLR should be anticipated in ICC patients with prior upper abdominal surgery or tumor proximity to major vessels as features.

Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection for liver malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies

OBJECTIVE

How different surgical procedures, including the robotic-assisted liver resection (RLR) and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), can affect the prognosis of patients with liver malignancies is unclear. Thus, in this study, we compared the effects of RLR and LLR on the surgical and oncological outcomes in patients with liver malignancies through propensity score-matched cohort studies.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched using Medical Subject Headings terms and keywords from inception until May 31, 2023. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. The mean difference with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used for analysis of continuous variables; the risk ratio with 95% CI was used for dichotomous variables; and the hazard ratio with 95% CI was used for survival-related variables. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Five high-quality cohort studies with 986 patients were included (370 and 616 cases for RLR and LLR, respectively). In terms of surgical outcomes, there were no significant differences in the operation time, conversion rate to open surgery, overall complication rate, major complication rate, and length of hospital stay between the RLR and LLR groups. In terms of oncological outcomes, there were no significant differences in the 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Surgical and oncological outcomes are comparable between RLR and LLR on patients with liver malignancies. Therefore, the benefits of applying RLR in patients with liver malignancies need to be further explored.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review of propensity score-matched studies

Outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) versus open LR (OLR) for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICCA) are heterogeneous. We aimed to compare LLR and OLR for ICCA based on propensity-score-matched (PSM) studies. Two reviewers independently searched the online databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) for PSM studies that compared LLR and OLR for ICCA. The Ottawa-Newcastle Quality Assessment Scale with a cutoff of ≥ 7 was used to define higher-quality literature. Only 'high-quality' PSM analyses of the English language that met all our inclusion criteria were considered. A total of ten PSM trials were included in the analyses. Compared with OLR, although the lymph node dissection (LND) (RR = 0.67) and major hepatectomy rates were lower in the LLR group (RR = 0.87), higher R0 resections (RR = 1.05) and lower major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III) (RR = 0.72) were also observed in the LLR group. In addition, patients in the LLR group showed less estimated blood loss (MD = - 185.52 ml) and shorter hospital stays as well (MD = - 2.75 days). Further analysis found the overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.91), disease-free survival (DFS) (HR = 0.95), and recurrence-free survival (HR = 0.80) for patients with ICCA after LLR were all comparable to those of OLR. LLR for selected ICCA patients may be technically safe and feasible, providing short-term benefits and achieving oncological efficacy without compromising the long-term survival of the patients.

Robotic Approach for Lymphadenectomy in Biliary Tumors: The Missing Ring Between the Benefits of Laparoscopic and Reproducibility of Open Approach?

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the oncological adequacy of lymphadenectomy (LND) for biliary tumors and surgical outcomes of resections performed using robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches and to compare the techniques within a weighted propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND

The need to perform formal LND is considered a limit for the applicability of minimally invasive liver surgery.

METHODS

Overall, 25 robotic resections with LND (2021-2022) from a single-center constituted the study group (Rob group), matched by inverse probability treatment weighting with 97 laparoscopic (Lap group) and 113 open (Open group) procedures to address the primary endpoint. A "per-period" analysis was performed comparing the characteristics and outcomes of the Rob group with the first 25 consecutive laparoscopic liver resections with associated LND (LapInit group).

RESULTS

Minimally invasive techniques performed equally well regarding the number of harvested nodes, blood transfusions, functional recovery, length of stay, and major morbidity and provided a short-term benefit to patients when compared with the open technique. A better performance of the robotic approach over laparoscopic approach (and both approaches over the open technique) was recorded for patients achieving LND with retrieval of >6 nodes. The open approach reduced both the operative time and time for LND, and robotic surgery performed better than laparoscopic surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive techniques are excellent tools for the management of LND in patients with biliary tumors, showing feasibility, and oncological adequacy. Robotics could contribute to the large-scale diffusion of these procedures with a high profile of complexity.

Association of Laparoscopic Surgery with Improved Perioperative and Survival Outcomes in Patients with Resectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis from Propensity-Score Matched Studies

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have associated laparoscopic surgery with better overall survival (OS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). The potential benefits of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) over open liver resection (OLR) have not been demonstrated in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC).

METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases was performed to search studies comparing OS and perioperative outcome for patients with resectable iCC. Propensity-score matched (PSM) studies published from database inception to May 1, 2022 were eligible. A frequentist, patient-level, one-stage meta-analysis was performed to analyze the differences in OS between LLR and OLR. Second, intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes were compared between the two approaches by using a random-effects DerSimonian-Laird model.

RESULTS

Six PSM studies involving data from 1.042 patients (530 OLR vs. 512 LLR) were included. LLR in patients with resectable iCC was found to significantly decrease the hazard of death (stratified hazard ratio [HR]: 0.795 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.638-0.992]) compared with OLR. Moreover, LLR appears to be significantly associated with a decrease in intraoperative bleeding (- 161.47 ml [95% CI - 237.26 to - 85.69 ml]) and transfusion (OR = 0.41 [95% CI 0.26-0.69]), as well as with a shorter hospital stay (- 3.16 days [95% CI - 4.98 to - 1.34]) and a lower rate of major (Clavien-Dindo ≥III) complications (OR = 0.60 [95% CI 0.39-0.93]).

CONCLUSIONS

This large meta-analysis of PSM studies shows that LLR in patients with resectable iCC is associated with improved perioperative outcomes and, being conservative, yields similar OS outcomes compared with OLR.

Minimally Invasive Hepatectomy for Liver Tumors: Where Are We Now?

With advancements in minimally invasive (MIS) technology and techniques, MIS hepatectomy has evolved as an effective treatment for both benign and malignant liver tumors [...].

Laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) versus open hepatectomy (OH) on the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) through a meta-analysis of studies using propensity score-matched cohorts.

METHODS

The literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases until August 31, 2022. Meta-analysis of surgical (major morbidity, the length of hospital stay, 90-day postoperative mortality), oncological (R0 resection rate, lymph node dissection rate) and survival outcomes (1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival) was performed using a random effects model. Data were summarized as relative risks (RR), mean difference (MD) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

Six case-matched studies with 1054 patients were included (LH 518; OH 536). Major morbidity was significantly lower (RR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.37-0.88, P = 0.01) and the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter (MD = -2.44, 95% CI = -4.19 to -0.69, P = 0.006) in the LH group than in the OH group, but there was no significant difference in 90-day postoperative mortality between the 2 groups. There were no significant differences in R0 resection rate, lymph node dissection rate, 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival or disease-free survival between the LH and OH groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LH has better surgical outcomes and comparable oncological outcomes and survival outcomes than does OH on ICC. Therefore, laparoscopy is at least not inferior to open surgery for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a multicenter propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopy in the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) remains unclear. This multicenter study examined the outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for ICC.

METHODS

Patients with ICC who had undergone laparoscopic or open liver resection between 2012 and 2019 at four European expert centers were included in the study. Laparoscopic and open approaches were compared in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. Propensity score matching was used for minimizing treatment selection bias and adjusting for confounders (age, ASA grade, tumor size, location, number of tumors and underlying liver disease).

RESULTS

Of 136 patients, 50 (36.7%) underwent laparoscopic resection, whereas 86 (63.3%) had open surgery. Median tumor size was larger (73.6 vs 55.1 mm, p = 0.01) and the incidence of bi-lobar tumors was higher (36.6 vs 6%, p < 0.01) in patients undergoing open surgery. After propensity score matching baseline characteristics were comparable although open surgery was associated with a larger fraction of major liver resections (74 vs 38%, p < 0.01), lymphadenectomy (60 vs 20%, p < 0.01) and longer operative time (294 vs 209 min, p < 0.01). Tumor characteristics were similar. Laparoscopic resection resulted in less complications (30 vs 52%, p = 0.025), fewer reoperations (4 vs 16%, p = 0.046) and shorter hospital stay (5 vs 8 days, p < 0.01). No differences were found in terms of recurrence, recurrence-free and overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resection seems to be associated with improved short-term and with similar long-term outcomes compared with open surgery in patients with ICC. However, possible selection criteria for laparoscopic surgery are yet to be defined.

Short- and long-term outcomes following robotic and open resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A national cohort study

BACKGROUND

Curative-intent liver resection with porta hepatis lymphadenectomy provides the best chance for long-term survival for patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). While the robotic approach has been increasingly utilized, its impact on perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients with ICC are largely unknown.

METHODS

Patients with stages I-III ICC who underwent surgical resection between 2004 and 2017 were identified from the National Cancer Database. Descriptive statistics and multivariate models were constructed to examine the association between surgical approach and surgical and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 1876 patients with ICC who underwent open (n = 1804, 96.2%) and robotic-assisted (n = 72, 3.8%) resection were identified. Following surgery, patients who underwent a robotic-assisted resection had a shorter length of hospital stay yet there was no difference in 30-day readmission or 90-day mortality. Older age, disease stage, and higher comorbidity were associated with worse OS. Patients undergoing robotic-assisted surgery had no difference in long-term risk of death compared with patients who underwent an open procedure.

CONCLUSION

This national cohort study demonstrated that the robotic approach for patients undergoing resection for ICC resulted in a shorter hospitalization while not compromising oncological outcomes such as negative margins, postoperative mortality, and long-term survival.

Recurrent Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma - Review

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is the second-most common primary liver malignancy after hepatocellular carcinoma. While surgical resection with negative margin is the only curative treatment, ICC has very high rate of recurrence, up to 60-70% after curative resection. We reviewed the current data available on risk factors for ICC recurrence, recurrence pattern (location and timing), treatment options, and future directions. The risk factors for recurrence include elevated preoperative CA19-9, presence of liver cirrhosis, nodal metastasis, positive margins, and vascular invasion. Understanding different recurrence patterns, timing course, and risk factors for early recurrence is important to tailor postoperative surveillance and select treatment strategies including systemic or locoregional therapy. Re-resection can be considered for a selected patient population at experienced centers, and can yield long-term survival. ICC remains a dismal disease given the high likelihood of recurrence. Advances in our understanding of the genomic landscape of ICC are beginning to identify targetable alterations in ICC in subsets of patients that allow for personalized treatment.