Abstract:BackgroundWith the rapid development of minimally invasive techniques and instruments, more and more patients begin to accept minimally invasive surgery. Minimally invasive hepatectomy (MIH) has obvious advantages in terms of surgical incision, but there is still no strong evidence of its long-term survival effect.PurposeThe primary objective of this study was to compare long-term survival outcomes between MIH and Open hepatectomy (OH) in hepatocellular carcinoma based on high-quality case-control studies.MethodsThe study on the comparison of MIH (including RH or LH) and OH in the treatment of HCC from the date of establishment to June 1, 2022 was searched through PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. The main results were long-term overall and disease-free survival and short-term postoperative effect; All studies were conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, and meta-analysis of random effect models was adopted.Results43 articles included 6673 patients. In these studies, the data from 44 studies need to be extracted and pooled in the meta-analysis. Our results showed that compared with OH group, OS (HR 1.17; 95%CI 1.02, 1.35; P=0.02) and DFS (HR 1.15; 95%CI 1.05, 1.26; P=0.002) in MIH group were slightly lower than those in OH group. The operation time (Z=2.14, P=0.03, MD8.01, 95% CI: 2.60–13.42) was longer than OH group. In terms of length of hospital stay (Z=10.76, p<0.00001, MD -4.0, 95% CI: -4.72 to -3.27), intraoperative blood loss (Z=5.33, P<0.00001, MD -108.33, 95% CI: -148.15 to -68.50), blood transfusion rate (Z=5.06, p<0.00001, OR=0.64, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.76, I2 = 0%), postoperative complications (Z=9.24, p<0.00001, OR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.55, I2 = 21%), major morbidity (Z=6.11, p<0.00001, OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.59,I2 = 0%), R0 resection (Z=2.34, P=0.02, OR=1.46, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.0, I2 = 0%) and mortality(Z=2.71,P=0.007, OR=0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.85), the MIH group was significantly better than the OH group. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference in terms of major hepatectomy Z=0.47, P=0.64, OR=1.04, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.22, I2 = 0%), anatomical resection (Z=0.48, P=0.63, OR=0.92, 95%CI 0.67 to 1.27), satellite nodules (Z=0.54, P=0.59, OR=0.92, 95%CI 0.69 to 1.23, I2 = 0%), microvascular invasion (Z=1.15, P=0.25, OR=1.11, 95%CI 0.93 to 1.34, I2 = 0%) and recurrence (Z=0.71, p=0.48, OR=0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.12, I2 = 19%).ConclusionThis study is the first to compare the clinical efficacy of MIH and OH in the treatment of HCC based on a high-quality propensity score matching study. The results show that in terms of long-term survival outcomes (OS and DFS), although the gap between MIH and OH is not obvious, OH was better than MIH on the whole. However, in terms of short-term postoperative outcomes (post-operation outcomes), MIH was slightly better than OH.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022332556.

Comparing Outcomes of Minimally Invasive and Open Hepatectomy for Primary Liver Malignancies in Patients with Low-MELD Cirrhosis

Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis of Outcomes Compared with Conventional Open Surgery.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of High-Quality Case-Matched Studies

Perioperative Outcomes Comparing Laparoscopic with Open Repeat Liver Resection for Post-Hepatectomy Recurrent Liver Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Laparoscopic Versus Open Major Hepatectomy For Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

Meta-analysis of efficacy of laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for hepatocarcinoma.

Comparison of Survival and Post-Operation Outcomes for Minimally Invasive Versus Open Hepatectomy in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Case-Matched Studies

Outcomes following laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: a propensity score-matched analysis

Does the Surgical Approach Affect the Incidence of Post-Hepatectomy Liver Failure in Cirrhotic Patients? An Analysis of the NSQIP Database

Efficacy of Laparoscopic Hepatectomy versus Open Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Cirrhosis: A Meta-analysis of Case-Matched Studies

Safety and Perioperative Outcomes of Laparoscopic vs. Open Hepatectomy of Central-Located Liver Lesions: A Multicenter, Propensity Score-Matched, Retrospective Cohort Study

Laparoscopic Versus Open Hepatectomy in Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of the Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients with Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Laparoscopic Hepatectomy (with or without Robotic Assistance) versus Radiofrequency Ablation as a Minimally Invasive Treatment for Very Early-Stage or Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma

The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic and open hepatectomy in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with liver cirrhosis: a systematic review

A Prospective Study Using Propensity Score Matching to Compare Long-term Survival Outcomes After Robotic-assisted, Laparoscopic or Open Liver Resection for Patients with BCLC Stage 0-A Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Surgical and Oncological Outcomes after Laparoscopic Vs. Open Major Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Outcomes following laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy: a meta-analysis

Minor hepatectomy combined with cholangioplasty and cholangiojejunostomy for Bismuth II hilar cholangiocarcinoma: A propensity score matching analysis

Short- and Long-term Outcomes after Laparoscopic and Open Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Global Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Minimally invasive versus open radical resection surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: Comparable outcomes associated with advantages of minimal invasiveness

Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma: a Propensity Score Matching Analysis.