Systematic review and meta-analysis of difficulty scoring systems for laparoscopic and robotic liver resections

INTRODUCTION

The ability to stratify the difficulty of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) allows surgeons at different phases of the learning curve to tackle cases of appropriate difficulty safely. Several difficulty scoring systems (DSS) have been formulated which attempt to accurately stratify this difficulty. The present study aims to review the literature pertaining to the existing DSS for MILR.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and metanalysis of the literature reporting on the formulation, supporting data, and comparison of DSS for MILR.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies were identified which reported on the formulation of unique DSS for MILR. Five of these (Ban, Iwate, Hasegawa, Institut Mutaliste Montsouris [IMM], and Southampton DSS) were externally validated and shown to predict difficulty of MILR via a range of outcome measures. The Ban DSS was supported by pooled data from 10 studies (9 LLR, 1 RLR), Iwate by 10 studies (8 LLR, 2 RLR), Hasegawa by four studies (all LLR), IMM by eight studies (all LLR), and Southampton by five studies (all LLR). There was no clear superior DSS.

CONCLUSION

The existing DSS were all effective in predicting difficulty of MILR. Present studies comparing between DSS have not established a clear superior system, and the five main DSS have been found to be predictive of difficulty in LLR and two of these in RLR.

Laparoscopic versus open caudate lobe liver resections: a 1:2 propensity score-matched controlled study based on a single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Despite the wide use of laparoscopy for liver resection, laparoscopic caudate lobe resections(L-CLR) remain technically challenging, only attempted by experts in the field. The primary objective of this study was to determine the safety and compare the perioperative outcomes of L-CLR with O-CLR based on our single institution experience in a 1:2 propensity score-matched controlled study based on our single institution experience.

METHODS

Between 2004 and 2020, 67 consecutive patients who underwent CLR at Singapore General Hospital were identified. Propensity score matching (PSM) of laparoscopic versus open caudate lobe resections(O-CLR) was performed in a 1:2 ratio with no replacements using nearest neighbour matching method.

RESULTS

L-CLR was associated with a significantly decreased median blood loss (150 mL versus 500 mL, P = 0.001) and a decreased median post-operative stay (3 days versus 7.5 days, P = <0.01) in the unmatched cohorts. After 1:2 propensity score matching, these results were again demonstrated with a significantly lower blood loss (150 mL versus 400 mL, P = 0.016) and a shorter postoperative stay (3 days versus 7 days, P = <0.01) in favour of L-CLR. 30-day readmission and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade > 2) rates were all in favour of L-CLR as well but could not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

L-CLR can be safely performed by experienced surgeons. It is associated with decreased blood loss and shorter perioperative stay compared to O-CLR.

Registry to investigate the efficacy and safety of the VenaBlock© VeIn SEaling system for VaRicose veins in SingApore - Six months results of the RIVIERA trial

BACKGROUND

The Venablock^© Venous Closure System (Invamed, Ankara, Turkey) is a novel cyanoacrylate-based non-thermal non-tumescent embolization device to block refluxing truncal veins for chronic venous insufficiency and varicose veins. The aim was to prospectively evaluate the safety and 6 months efficacy of Venablock^© for the treatment of primary great saphenous vein (GSV) and small saphenous vein (SSV) incompetency in a multi-ethnic cohort from Singapore.

METHODS

This was a single arm, single investigator prospective study of 29 patients (39 limbs, 39 truncal veins) recruited over a 5-month period (August 2019 to February 2020), who were treated with the Venablock^© device at a tertiary vascular unit in Singapore. Patients with symptomatic varicose veins (C2-6) and had truncal reflux > 0.5 second on venous Duplex ultrasound were included. Follow-up occurred at 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months with dedicated quality of life questionnaires and a targeted Duplex ultrasound performed to check for continued venous occlusion.

RESULT

Mean age was 61.4 (±11.0) years and mean BMI was 26.2 (±5.7) kg/m². 11/29 (37.9%) were males. Most common CEAP class treated was 2 (12/29, 41.3%). Mean diameter of treated GSV was 5.7 (±2.0) mm, 4.8 (±1.7) mm and 4.2 (±1.3) mm for the proximal, mid and distal above knee segments respectively. Mean time from access puncture to sheath removal was 23.4 (±10.0) mins. Vein occlusion at 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months was 39/39 (100%), 39/39 (100%) and 36/37 (97.2%) respectively. 5/29 (17.2%) developed puncture site infections, of which 3/29 (7.7%) required formal surgical drainage. 3/29 (7.7%) developed phlebitis. At 6 months, revised Venous Clinical Severity Score improved from 5.2 (±3.5) to 2.1 (±2.9; p < .001); EuroQol-5 Dimension score, from 7.4 (±2.1) to 5.7 (±1.4; p < .001); Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score, from 18.1 (±15.5) to 7.9 (±8.9; p = .007); and Chronic Venous Insufficiency Questionnaire, from 18.6 (±16.2) to 4.5 (±6.3; p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Venablock^© is a safe and efficacious option of treating truncal venous insufficiency in a multi-ethnic Asian cohort from Singapore in the short term. There is a significant improvement in QoL. Longer follow-up is required to assess the durability of this technique, in particular the higher puncture site infection rates observed compared to other glue-based therapies.

Minimally invasive versus open right anterior sectionectomy and central hepatectomy for central liver malignancies: a propensity-score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The utility of minimally-invasive liver resection (MILR) for deep centrally located tumours (CLT) remains controversial. We aimed to review our institution's experience and outcomes with minimally invasive central hepatectomy (CH) and right anterior sectionectomy (RAS) for CLT in a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis.

METHODS

Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained surgical database revealed 23 patients who underwent MILR (6 CH, 17 RAS) and 53 patients who underwent open liver resection (OLR; 24 CH, 29 RAS) for CLT. PSM in a 1:1 ratio identified two groups of patients with similar baseline clinicopathological characteristics. Peri-operative outcomes were then compared.

RESULTS

There was one laparoscopic-assisted, one robot-assisted and two laparoscopic-converted-open procedures in the MILR cohort. Across the unmatched cohort, there was only one mortality (MILR) and five patients with major morbidity (all OLR). MILR was associated with a longer operating time (P < 0.001), but shorter post-operative hospital stay (P = 0.002) and decreased morbidity (P = 0.018) in the unmatched cohort. Examination of peri-operative outcomes after PSM revealed that MILR was similarly associated with a longer operating time (P = 0.001) and shortened post-operative hospital stay (P = 0.043). OLR was associated with a significantly reduced application of Pringle manoeuvre (P = 0.004). There were no significant differences between MILR and OLR with regards to blood loss, blood transfusions, morbidity and margin status in the PSM analysis.

CONCLUSION

MILR for CLT is safe and feasible when performed by experienced surgeons. It is associated with shorter hospital stays but at the expense of longer operation times and more frequent application of Pringle manoeuver.