Evolution of a laparoscopic liver resection program: an analysis of 203 cases (original) (raw)
Related papers
Laparoscopic Liver Resection: Lessons Learned After 132 Resections
Cirugía Española (English Edition), 2013
Benign liver tumours Hepatic metastases Hepatocarcinoma Laparoscopic liver surgery Palabras clave: Cirugía hepá tica a b s t r a c t Introduction: After 20 years of experience in laparoscopic liver surgery there is still no clear definition of the best approach (totally laparoscopic [TLS] or hand-assisted [HAS]), the indications for surgery, position, instrumentation, immediate and long-term postoperative results, etc. Aim: To report our experience in laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs). Patients and method: Over a period of 10 years we performed 132 LLRs in 129 patients: 112 malignant tumours (90 hepatic metastases; 22 primary malignant tumours) and 20 benign lesions (18 benign tumours; 2 hydatid cysts). Twenty-eight cases received TLS and 104 had HAS. Surgical technique: 6 right hepatectomies (2 as the second stage of a two-stage liver resection); 6 left hepatectomies; 9 resections of 3 segments; 42 resections of 2 segments; 64 resections of one segment; and 5 cases of local resections.
Laparoscopic Liver Resection—Understanding its Role in Current Practice
Annals of Surgery, 2009
To report our complete experience with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) to understand what role it may play in the broader context of liver surgery. Background: The goal of LLR is to extend the benefits of the laparoscopic approach without compromising the fundamental principles of open liver surgery. LLR, however, presents unique technical challenges and its evaluation is made difficult by the restricted indications for this approach, the few centers worldwide experienced in the technique, and the heterogeneity of procedures and pathologies involved. Methods: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of liver resections from a unit with a comprehensive liver program, including resection and transplantation. Results: There were 166 laparoscopic liver resections between May 23, 1996 and December 31, 2007, including 100 (60%) for malignant pathology (64 HCC, 3 cholangiocarcinoma, 33 hepatic metastases) and 66 for benign pathology (adenoma, 23; FNH, 19; cystic, 17; other, 7). Numbers of resections for benign indications remained stable over time whereas those for malignant indications increased. There were 31 major resections, 56 left lateral sectionectomies, 28 segmentectomies, and 51 tumorectomies. There was 0% mortality and 15.1% morbidity. Median blood loss was 200 mL, 9 patients (5.4%) required transfusion, and median operating time was 180 minutes. Left lateral sectionectomies demonstrated reduced bleeding (median, 175 vs. 300 mL, P ϭ 0.0015) and faster operating time (median, 170 vs. 180 minutes, P ϭ 0.0265). In the second half of the experience, there was reduced bleeding (median, 200 vs. 300 mL, P ϭ 0.0022) and a lower conversion rate (2.4% vs. 16.9%, P ϭ 0.0015). Conclusions: Good patient selection and refined surgical technique are the keys to successful LLR. The indications for resection of asymptomatic benign lesions should not be increased because the laparoscopic approach is available. Hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) are more likely to be suitable to a laparoscopic approach than colorectal liver metastases. Left lateral sectionectomy and limited resection of solitary peripheral lesions are particularly suitable while hemihepatectomies remain challenging procedures. LLR requires an ongoing robust audit to identify any emerging problems.
World journal of surgery, 2014
Robotic surgery was introduced as a means of overcoming the limitations of traditional laparoscopy. This report describes the results of a matched comparative study between traditional (TLLR) and robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection (RLLR) performed in two European centers. From January 2008-April 2013, 46 patients underwent RLLR at San Matteo degli Infermi Hospital. Each patient was matched to a patient who had undergone TLLR at Antoine Béclère Hospital. The variables evaluated were operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay. Twenty-eight patients were included in each group. Despite matching, more tumors were solitary in the TLLR group (P = 0.02) and more were localized in the superior and posterior segments in the RLLR group (P = 0.003). The median duration of surgery was 210 and 176 min in the RLLR and TLLR groups, respectively (P = 0.12). Conversion rate, blood loss, morbidity, and length of stay were similar in both gr...
Laparoscopic vs open hepatic resection: a comparative study
Surgical Endoscopy, 2003
Background: Although the feasibility of minor laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) has been demonstrated, data comparing the open vs the laparoscopic approach to liver resection are lacking. Methods: We compared 30 LLR with 30 open liver resections (OLR) in a pair-matched analysis. The indications for resection were malignant disease in 47% of the LLR and 83% of the OLR. The average size of the lesions was 42 mm for LLR and 41 mm for OLR. Five wedge resections, 12 segmentectomies, and 13 bisegmentectomies were performed in each group. Results: The conversion rate for LLR was nil. The mean operative time was 148 min for LLR and 142 min for OLR. Mean blood loss was minimal in the LLR group (320 vs 479 ml; p < 0.05). Postoperative complications occurred in 6.6% of the patients in each group; there were no deaths. The mean postoperative hospital stay was shorter for LLR patients (6.4 vs 8.7 days; p < 0.05). In tumors, the resection margin was <1 cm in 43% of the LLR patients and 40% of the OLR patients (p = NS). Conclusions: Minor LLR of the anterior segments has the same rates of mortality and morbidity as OLR. However, the laparoscopic approach reduces blood loss and postoperative hospital stay.
Laparoscopic Liver Resection—Current Update
Surgical Clinics of North America, 2010
• Laparoscopic liver resection • Laparoscopic hepatic resection • Liver cancer • HCC • Colorectal cancer metastases Laparoscopic hepatic resection is an emerging option in the field of hepatic surgery. With almost 3000 laparoscopic hepatic resections reported in the literature for benign and malignant tumors, with a combined mortality of 0.3% and morbidity of 10.5%, there will be an increasing demand for minimally invasive liver surgery. 1 Multiple series have been published on laparoscopic liver resections; however, no randomized controlled trial has been reported that compares laparoscopic with open liver resection. Large series, meta-analyses, and reviews have thus far attested to the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive hepatic surgery for benign and malignant lesions. 2-17 The largest single-center experience was published by Koffron and colleagues 3 and describes various minimally invasive approaches to liver resection, including pure laparoscopic, hand-assisted laparoscopic, and laparoscopic-assisted open (hybrid) techniques. The choice of the minimally invasive approach should depend on surgeon experience, tumor size, location, and the extent of liver resection.
Laparoscopic liver resection: benefits and controversies
Surgical Clinics of North America, 2004
In 1992, Gagner et al reported the first complex laparoscopic liver resection for a 6 cm, focal nodular hyperplasia, using an ultrasonic dissector, monopolar cautery, and clip appliers [1]. In 1995, Ferzli et al reported excision of 8 Â 9 cm segment IV hepatic adenoma, using ultrasonic dissector and endoscopic vascular staplers [2]. The first successful laparoscopic anatomical hepatectomy was reported in 1996 by Azagra et al, who performed a left lateral segmentectomy (segments II and III) in a patient with a benign adenoma of segments II and III .
Open versus laparoscopic liver resection: looking beyond the immediate postoperative period
Surgical Endoscopy, 2012
Background Laparoscopic liver resection for malignant disease has shown short-term benefit. This study aimed to compare in-house, 30-day, and 1-year morbidity between laparoscopic and open liver resections. Methods The charts for all patients who underwent liver resection for malignant disease between April 2006 and October 2009 were reviewed. Patient, operative, and outcomes data at 30 days and 1 year were collected. Results For 76 patients, 49 open and 27 laparoscopic resections were performed. The two groups were similar in terms of age, gender, body mass index (BMI), extent of liver resection, use of ablation therapy, and tumor pathology (P [ 0.05). The laparoscopic group had less blood loss (P = 0.004) and shorter hospital stays (P = 0.002). During their hospital stay, patients treated laparoscopically had fewer complications, but the difference was not significant. Home disposition was similar in the laparoscopic (96%) and open (90%) groups. More patients were readmitted at 30 days (2 vs. 9; P = 0.31) and 1 year (4 vs. 19; P = 0.04) in the open group. The all-cause 1-year mortality rates were similar between the laparoscopic and open groups (14.8% vs. 10.2%).
International Journal of Surgery, 2011
Introduction: Laparoscopic liver resection can either be total laparoscopic or hand-assisted laparoscopic approach. The recent introduction of robotic surgical systems has revolutionized the field of minimally invasive surgery. It was developed to overcome the disadvantages of conventional laparoscopic surgery. The role of robotic system in laparoscopic surgery was not well evaluated yet. The aim of this cohort study was to evaluate the outcome of multimodality approach of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatic malignancy Methods: From January 1998 to August 2010, all patients with hepatic malignancy underwent laparoscopic liver resection were included. A prospectively collected data was analyzed retrospectively. Results: During the study period, a total of 56 patients with hepatic malignancies (hepatocellular carcinoma, HCC, n ¼ 42; colorectal liver metastases, CLM, n ¼ 14) underwent laparoscopic liver resection in our surgical unit. The majority of cases were performed by hand-assisted laparoscopic approach, n ¼ 31 (55.3%) and the remainder were with total laparoscopic approach, n ¼ 10 (17.9%) and robot-assisted laparoscopic approach, n ¼ 15 (26.8%). The median operation time was 150 min (range, 75e307 min). The median blood loss during surgery was 175 ml (range, 5e2000 ml). Two patients (3.6%) needed open conversion and one patient (1.8%) needed to be converted to hand-assisted laparoscopic approach. The morbidity rate was 14.3%. There was no procedure-related death. 89.3% of patients had R0 resection and 10.7% of patients had R1 resection. The median hospital stay was 6.5 days (range, 2e13 days). The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year disease-free survival rates for HCC were 85%, 47%, and 38%, respectively. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year overall survival rates for HCC were 96%, 67%, and 52%, respectively. The 1-year, and 3-year disease-free survival rates for CLM were 92% and 72%. The 1-year, and 3-year overall survival rates for CLM were 100% and 88%, respectively. Conclusions: Multimodality approach of laparoscopic liver resection of hepatic malignancy was feasible, and safe in selected patients. It was associated with a low complications rate. The mid-term and longterm survival outcome was favorable also.
Robotic versus Laparoscopic Resection of Liver Tumors. HPB 2010;12:583-6
2010
Background: There are scant data in the literature regarding the role of robotic liver surgery. The aim of the present study was to develop techniques for robotic liver tumour resection and to draw a comparison with laparoscopic resection. Methods: Over a 1-year period, nine patients underwent robotic resection of peripherally located malignant lesions measuring <5 cm. These patients were compared prospectively with 23 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of similar tumours at the same institution. Statistical analyses were performed using Student's t-test, c 2-test and Kaplan-Meier survival. All data are expressed as mean Ϯ SEM. Results: The groups were similar with regards to age, gender and tumour type (P = NS). Tumour size was similar in both groups (robotic-3.2 Ϯ 1.3 cm vs. laparoscopic-2.9 Ϯ 1.3 cm, P = 0.6). Skin-to-skin operative time was 259 Ϯ 28 min in the robotic vs. 234 Ϯ 17 min in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.4). There was no difference between the two groups regarding estimated blood loss (EBL) and resection margin status. Conversion to an open operation was only necessary in one patient in the robotic group. Complications were observed in one patient in the robotic and four patients in the laparoscopic groups. The patients were followed up for a mean of 14 months and disease-free survival (DFS) was equivalent in both groups (P = 0.6). Conclusion: The results of this initial study suggest that, for selected liver lesions, a robotic approach provides similar peri-operative outcomes compared with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).
Laparoscopic liver resection: 5-year experience at a single center
Surgical Endoscopy, 2014
Background Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common cancer, especially in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region, where the prevalence of hepatitis virus infection is high. Liver resection is a potentially curative and popular therapy for HCC. Laparoscopic surgery using minimally invasive techniques potentially brings benefits to patients who need liver resection for HCC. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and benefits of laparoscopic liver resection for HCC with long-term follow-up evaluation. Methods This cohort study with 5-year results of total laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC was conducted in one center. Patients with HCC were selected for laparoscopic liver resection by the same team. The operation also was performed by one team of surgeons. The follow-up protocol was similar to that for open surgery. The patients were scheduled to return for examination every 2 months after the operation. The data for the patients were collected and analyzed using SPSS software. Results From January 2008 to December 2012, 173 enrolled patients with HCC underwent laparoscopic liver resection. The male-to-female ratio was 3:1. The mean age of the patients was 56 years (range 16-83 years). The follow-up period for 130 patients was 21.6 ± 16.0 months (range 0-60 months). The mean tumor size was 3.73 cm (range 2-10 cm). The stages of HCC according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) categorization were as follows: 0 (6 %), A1 (59.5 %), A2 (6.9 %), A4 (2.9 %), and B (27.2 %). Four patients required conversion to other techniques (2.3 %) because of the potential for major bleeding and tumor perforation. The types of resection were resection of one segment (segments 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8; 43.8 %), resection of two segments (posterior sector, anterior sector, segments 5 and 6, and left lateral sector; 47.9 %), resection of three segments (left and central liver; 4.7 %), and four segments (right liver; 3.6 %). The mean operation time was 112 ± 56 min (range 30-345 min), and the median blood loss was 100 ml (range 20-1,200 ml). The mean hospital stay was 6.5 ± 2.0 days (range, 3-19 days). No perioperative mortality occurred. The overall survival rates were 94.2 % at 1 year, 87 % at 2 years, 72.9 % at 3 years, 72.9 % at 4 years, and 72.9 % at 5 years. The mean overall survival time was 49.7 ± 2.1 months (range 45.5-53.9 months). The disease-free survival rates were 79.1 % at 1 year, 60 % at 2 years, 57 % at 3 years, 52 % at 4 years, and 26.3 % at 5 years. The mean disease-free survival time was 38.9 ± 2.6 months (range 33.9-44.0 months). Conclusion Laparoscopic liver resection for HCC is feasible, safe, and effective, with good oncologic results. Major and anatomic hepatectomy are possible with improved skill and experience. Laparoscopic liver resection is a promising treatment option with minimally invasive benefits for HCC patients.