Microsurgical nerve graft repair of the ablated cavernosal nerves in the rat.

R. Ball,J. Richie,M. Vickers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4804(92)90048-5

IF: 2.417

1992-09-01

Journal of Surgical Research

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

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

Ke Chen,Yu Pan,Geng-Yuan Hu,Hendi Maher,Xue-Yong Zheng,Jia-Fei Yan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000000567

2018-01-01

Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques

Abstract:Background: Although large series of laparoscopic resections for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were published, reports of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) are still limited in expert centers because LMH for HCC remains a challenging procedure requiring extensive experience in both laparoscopic and hepatic surgery. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of LMH and open major hepatectomy (OMH) for HCC.Methods: A literature search was performed to identify studies comparing LMH with OMH for HCC. Postoperative morbidity, mortality, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, R0 rate, and long-term survival outcomes were analyzed.Results: Eight studies with a total of 780 HCC patients were included for meta-analysis. The pooled data showed that LMH was associated with longer operative time [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 81.04 min; 95% confidence interval (CI), 37.95 similar to 124.13; P < 0.01], less blood loss (WMD = -117.14 mL; 95% CI, -170.35 similar to-63.93; P < 0.01), and shorter hospital stay (WMD = -3.41 d; 95% CI, -4.90 similar to-1.92; P < 0.01). Overall morbidity was significantly lower in the LMH group (odds ratio = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.23 similar to 0.86; P = 0.02), as were major complications (odds ratio = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.18 similar to 0.73; P < 0.01). However, there was no difference in margin negativity and long-term survival outcomes.Conclusions: LMH can be performed as safely and efficiently as OMH for HCC regarding both surgical and oncological outcomes. LMH is associated with less intraoperative blood loss and postoperative morbidity and may serve as a promising alternative to OMH for HCC patients.
Perioperative Outcomes Comparing Laparoscopic with Open Repeat Liver Resection for Post-Hepatectomy Recurrent Liver Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Yuelong Liang,Chengping Lin,Bin Zhang,Jiasheng Cao,Mingyu Chen,Jieliang Shen,Feng Xu,Guang-Yuan Xiao,Ping Long,Ke Chen,Hendi Maher,Xiujun Cai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.03.052

2020-01-01

International Journal of Surgery

Abstract:Repeat laparoscopic hepatectomy (LRH) offers an option for recurrent tumors in liver remnants following an initial liver resection of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) and cholangiocellular carcinoma (CCC), showing advantages in some outcomes. The objective of the study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of LRH in comparison with repeat open hepatectomy (ORH) for recurrent liver cancer.A systematic review was performed in compliance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) and AMSTAR (Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews) guidelines. We performed a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to identify studies that compared LRH with ORH from inception to September 30, 2019. Outcomes of interest included operation time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, complication rate, transfusion and R0 resection rate. The protocol was registered with the PROSPERO register of systematic reviews.10 retrospective observational studies were suitable for this analysis, involving 767 patients with 334 undergoing LRH (43.5%) and 433 undergoing ORH (56.5%). Compared with ORH, LRH had less intraoperative blood loss (SMD = -1.03; 95% CI: 1.48~-0.59, P < 0.001), less overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.16-0.99, P = 0.048), less major complications (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15-0.62, P = 0.001), shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.98; 95% CI: 1.41~-0.54, P < 0.001) and higher R0 resection rate (OR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.39-3.81, P = 0.001). It was comparable in operation time (WMD = -7.66; 95% CI: 52.50-37.19, P = 0.738), transfusion rate (OR = 0.33; 95% CI:0.11-1.05, P = 0.060), and mortality (OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.27-2.18, P = 0.615) between LRH and ORH.Our results indicate that LRH is a safe and effective technique. Benefits, especially less intra-operative blood loss, less complications rate, shorter hospital stay and higher R0 resection, might be offered in the laparoscopic approach.
Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis of Outcomes Compared with Conventional Open Surgery.

Ke Chen,Yu Pan,Yi-Fan Wang,Xue-Yong Zheng,Xiao Liang,Hong Yu,Xiu-Jun Cai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2018.0480

2019-01-01

Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques

Abstract:BACKGROUND The application of laparoscopic hepatectomy is gaining momentum. However, the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are yet to be adequately evaluated. We aimed to assess the surgical and oncological outcomes of LRH for HCC by comparing it with open right hepatectomy (ORH). MATERIALS AND METHODS Data of patients who underwent hepatectomy for HCC from May 2007 to January 2018 in our hospital were obtained. Baseline characteristics, postoperative recovery, and survival outcomes were compared. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize selection biases by balancing factors, including age, sex, preoperative therapy, tumor size, and pattern. RESULTS The original cohort included 109 patients (LRH, 41 patients; ORH, 68 patients). Of the 41 patients who underwent LRH, 8 patients (19.5%) required conversion to laparotomy. The overall morbidity was 19.5%, and no mortality in LRH was noted. After PSM, LRH was associated with a tendency of prolonged operative time (255.5 ± 93.4 minutes versus 225.9 ± 39.8 minutes, P = .08) and less intraoperative blood loss [300 (100-1200) versus 500 (200-2000) mL, P < .01]. LRH showed up a trend of less overall morbidity without statistical significance (18.4% versus 26.3%, P = .41). Moreover, the 3-year overall and disease-free survival did not differ significantly between the groups during a median follow-up of 19 (3-58) months for the LRH group and 23 (3-97) months for the ORH group. CONCLUSIONS LRH can be performed as safe and effective as ORH for HCC in regard to both surgical and oncological outcomes. LRH holds the benefit in less intraoperative blood loss and appears to achieve less postoperative morbidity, which could serve as a promising alternative to ORH in selected individuals.
Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of High-Quality Case-Matched Studies

Ke Chen,Yu Pan,Bin Zhang,Xiao-long Liu,Hendi Maher,Xue-yong Zheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1746895

2018-01-01

Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Abstract:Objective To present a meta-analysis of high-quality case-matched studies comparing laparoscopic (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods Studies published up to September 2017 comparing LH and OH for HCC were identified. Selection of high-quality, nonrandomized comparative studies (NRCTs) with case-matched design was based on a validated tool (Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies) since no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were published. Morbidity, mortality, operation time, blood loss, hospital stay, margin distance, recurrence, and survival outcomes were compared. Subgroup analyses were carried out according to the surgical extension (minor or major hepatectomy). Results Twenty studies with a total of 830 patients (388 in LH and 442 in OH) were identified. For short-term surgical outcomes, LH showed less morbidity (RR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.47~0.65; P < 0.01), less mortality (RR = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.18~1.00; P = 0.05), less blood loss (WMD = −93.21 ml, 95% CI, −157.33~−29.09 ml; P < 0.01), shorter hospital stay (WMD = −2.86, 95% CI, −3.63~−2.08; P < 0.01), and comparable operation time (WMD = 9.15 min; 95% CI: −7.61~25.90, P = 0.28). As to oncological outcomes, 5-year overall survival rate was slightly better in LH than OH (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.52~0.84, P < 0.01), whereas the 5-year disease-free survival rate was comparable between two groups (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.74~1.06, P = 0.18). Conclusion This meta-analysis has highlighted that LH can be safely performed in selective patients and improves surgical outcomes as compared to OH. Given the limitations of study design, especially the limited cases of major hepatectomy, methodologically high-quality comparative studies are needed for further evaluation.
Meta-analysis of efficacy of laparoscopic hepatectomy versus open hepatectomy for hepatocarcinoma.

Hongyu Liu,Dan Wang,Yang Yu,Hui Ren,Tao Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_533_17

2017-01-01

Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to summarize the current evidence to evaluate the effects of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH) in the treatment of hepatocarcinoma. METHODS:A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar to identify all relevant studies. After we screened further, 22 published studies were included in this meta-analysis. We pooled the odds ratios (ORs), standardized mean difference (SMD) and conducted heterogeneity, quality assessment. RESULTS:The outcomes of treatment effects included surgical blood loss, surgical time, postoperative complications, perioperative mortality, 3-year survival rate, and 5-year survival rate. Comparing OH for liver cancer patients, the pooled SMD of surgical blood loss was -0.65 (95% confidential index [confidence interval (CI)] = [-0.80, -0.50]), the pooled SMD of surgical time was -0.12 (95% CI = [-0.25, -0.00]), the pooled OR of postoperative complications was 0.48 (95% CI = [0.38, 0.62]), the pooled OR of perioperative mortality was 0.34 (95% CI = [0.14, 0.84]), the pooled OR of 3-year survival rate was 1.03 (95% CI = [0.76, 1.39]), and the pooled OR of 5-year survival rate was 0.99 (95% CI = [0.75, 1.30]). CONCLUSION:LH was found to significantly decrease patients' blood loss. LH slightly decreases surgical time. In addition, LH appears not to affect 3- and 5-year survival rate, but it offers less postoperative complications and perioperative mortality.
Total Laparoscopic Right Hemihepatectomy Through Anterior Approach for Larger Tumors in the Right Lobe of the Liver

Jie Liu,Cheng-Wu Zhang,Defei Hong,Zhiming Hu,Yuhua Zhang,Weiding Wu,Minjie Shang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-631x.2017.07.011

2017-01-01

Abstract:Objective To explore the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy (LRH) via anterior approach for larger tumors in the right lobe of the liver. Methods A retrospective study was conducted based on the clinical data of ten consecutive patients with large right liver cancer undergoing LRH through anterior approach and thirty-seven patients undergoing open hemihepatectomy by anterior approach in recent 6 years. Results Between the two groups there were no significant difference in gender, average age, the mean tumor size, preoperative liver reserve function, cut margin and intraoperative blood transfusion. The LRH group had less average intraoperative blood loss [(408±158)ml vs.(520±153)ml, t=2.047, P=0.046] and shorter postoperative hospital stay [(11.5±2.8)d vs.(16.2±4.6)d, t=3.091, P=0.003], longer operation time [(302±38)min vs.(251±55)min, t=2.732, P=0.009]. There was no perioperative death and no significant difference in complications (20.0% vs.35.1%, χ2=0.812, P=0.367) and similar median survival time (36 mon vs.29 mon, χ2=1.266, P=0.261). Conclusions LRH via anterior approach for larger tumors in the right lobe of the liver is safe and feasible. Key words: Liver neoplasms; Laparoscopes; Hepatectomy
Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: A single-center 10-year experience

Feng Tian,Songyao Leng,Jian Chen,Yong Cao,Li Cao,Xiaojun Wang,Xuesong Li,Juan Wang,Shuguo Zheng,Jianwei Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1112380

IF: 4.7

2023-01-25

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:Background Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has increased. However, the long-term outcomes of LLR for HCCs should be validated further. Besides, the validity of laparoscopic minor liver resection in difficult segments (1, 4a, 7, 8) (LMLR-DS) and laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) for HCCs need to be studied. Methods A total of 1773 HCC patients were collected: 683 received LLR and 1090 received OLR. Propensity score matching (PSM) with 1:1 ratio was used to eliminate the selection bias. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared. In subgroup analyses, the validity of LMLR-DS or LMH for HCCs was studied. Results After PSM, 567 patients were in LLR or OLR group. LLR had lower intraoperative blood-loss and shorter postoperative hospital-stays than OLR. The postoperative complications were lower in LLR group (23.8% vs. 32.8%, P=0.001). The Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) had no significant difference between LLR and OLR groups (P=0.973, P=0.812). The cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year OR rates were 87.9%, 68.9%, and 57.7% for LLR group, and 85.9%, 68.8%, 58.8% for OLR group. The cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS rates were 73.0%, 51.5%, 40.6% for LLR group, and 70.3%, 49.0%, 42.4% for OLR group. In subgroup analyses, 178 patients were in LMLR-DS or open surgery (OMLR-DS) group after PSM. LMLR-DS had lower intraoperative blood-loss and shorter postoperative hospital-stays than OMLR-DS. The postoperative complications were lower in LMLR-DS group. The OS and DFS had no difference between LMLR-DS and OMLR-DS groups. The cumulative 5-year OR and DFS rates were 61.6%, 43.9% for LMLR-DS group, and 66.5%, 47.7% for OMLR-DS group. In another subgroup analyses, 115 patients were in LMH or open major hepatectomy (OMH) group. LMH had lower blood-loss and shorter postoperative hospital-stays than OMH. The complications, OS and DFS had no significantly differences between two groups. The cumulative 5-year OR and DFS rates were 44.3%, 29.9% for LMH group, and 44.7%, 33.2% for OMH group. Conclusions LLR for HCCs showed better short-term outcomes and comparable long-term outcomes with OLR, even for patients who received LMLR-DS or LMH. LLR could be reliable and recommended for HCC treatment.

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

Qian Lü,Nannan Zhang,Feiran Wang,Xiaojian Chen,Zhong Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr.2020.04.01

2020-01-01

Translational Cancer Research

Abstract:The short- and long-term prognoses are unclear following laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We performed a meta-analysis to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of LMH vs. open major hepatectomy (OMH) in patients with HCC.All studies comparing LMH with OMH for HCC published until April 2019 were identified independently by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We analyzed data for surgical and oncological outcomes, namely, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major complications, mortality, hospital stay, margin distance, negative margin rate, long-term overall survival, and corresponding disease-free survival (DFS).We included 13 studies involving 1,225 patients with HCC (LMH: 534 patients; OMH: 691 patients) in the meta-analysis. Regarding short-term outcomes, the pooled data showed that LMH was associated with longer operative time [weighted mean difference (WMD): 72.14 min; 95% confidence interval (CI): 43.07-101.21; P<0.00001], less blood loss (WMD: -102.32 mL; 95% CI: -150.99 to -53.64; P<0.0001), shorter hospital stay (WMD: -3.77 d; 95% CI: -4.95 to -2.60; P<0.00001), lower morbidity [risk difference (RD): -0.01; 95% CI: -0.16 to -0.06; P<0.00001], and lower major complication rates (RD: -0.08; 95% CI: -0.11 to -0.05; P<0.00001). However, the need for blood transfusion (RD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.05; P=0.78), mortality (RD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.01; P=0.57), margin distance (WMD: 0.05 mm; 95% CI: -0.1 to 0.19; P=0.52), and negative margin rate (RD: 0.01; 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.05; P=0.65) were significantly comparable between the two groups. Regarding long-term outcomes, there was no difference in 3-year DFS [hazard ratio (HR): 0.99; 95% CI: 0.72-1.37; P=0.95], 3-year overall survival (HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.70-2.21; P=0.45), 5-year DFS (HR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.64-1.38; P=0.76), and 5-year overall survival (HR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.45-1.99; P=0.88).LMH can be performed as safely as OMH in select patients and provides improved short-term surgical outcomes without affecting long-term survival. However, confirming our results requires more evidence from high-quality and prospective randomized controlled trials.
[Disease and death frequent themes in the works of Edvard Munch].

O. Thulesius

2005-09-05

Abstract:
Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted major hepatectomies: an Italian multi-institutional comparative study

Marcello Giuseppe Spampinato,Andrea Coratti,Luigi Bianco,Fabio Caniglia,Andrea Laurenzi,Francesco Puleo,Giuseppe Maria Ettorre,Ugo Boggi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3560-4

2014-05-23

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:BackgroundLaparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH), although safely feasible in experienced hands and in selected patients, is a formidable challenge because of the technical demands of controlling hemorrhage, sealing bile ducts, avoiding gas embolism, and maintaining oncologic surgical principles. The enhanced surgical dexterity offered by robotic assistance could improve feasibility and/or safety of minimally invasive major hepatectomy. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes of LMH and robotic-assisted major hepatectomy (RMH).MethodsPooled data from four Italian hepatobiliary centers were analyzed retrospectively. Demographic data, operative, and postoperative outcomes were collected from prospectively maintained databases and compared.ResultsBetween January 2009 and December 2012, 25 patients underwent LMH and 25 RMH. The two groups were comparable for all baseline characteristics including type of resection and underlying pathology. Conversion to open surgery was required in one patient in each group (4 %). No difference was noted in operative time, estimated blood, and need for allogenic blood transfusions. Intermittent pedicle occlusion was required only in LMH (32 % vs. 0; p = 0.004). Length of hospital stay, including time spent in intensive care unit, was similar between the two groups, but patients undergoing LMH showed quicker recovery of bowel activity, with shorter time to first flatus (1 vs. 3 days; p = 0.023) and earlier tolerance to oral liquid diet (1 vs. 2 days; p = 0.001). No difference was noted in complication rate, 90-day mortality, and readmission rate.ConclusionsThis retrospective multi-institution study confirms that selected patients can safely undergo minimally invasive major hepatectomy, either LMH or RMH. The fact that intermittent pedicle occlusion could be avoided in RMH suggests improved surgical ability to deal with bleeding during liver transection, but further studies are needed before any final conclusion can be drawn.
Use of multi-primer / multi-gene PCR method for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis among female genital tuberculosis patients in India

V. Bhanothu,J. Theophilus,R. Rozati,A. Aiman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-S3-E12

IF: 3.7

2014-05-27

BMC Infectious Diseases

Abstract:
Laparoscopic versus open right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases after portal vein embolization: international multicentre study

Emre Bozkurt,Jasper P Sijberden,Serena Langella,Federica Cipriani,Francesc Collado-Roura,Victoria Morrison-Jones,Burak Görgec,Gabriel Zozaya,Jacopo Lanari,Davit Aghayan,Celine De Meyere,David Fuks,Giuseppe Zimmiti,Benedetto Ielpo,Mikhail Efanov,Robert P Sutcliffe,Nadia Russolillo,Miquel Gomez-Artacho,Francesca Ratti,Mathieu D'Hondt,Bjørn Edwin,Umberto Cillo,Fernando Rotellar,Marc G Besselink,John N Primrose,Santi Lopez-Ben,Luca A Aldrighetti,Alessandro Ferrero,Mohammad Abu Hilal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae181

2024-08-02

Abstract:Background: Laparoscopic liver surgery is increasingly used for more challenging procedures. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and oncological safety of laparoscopic right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases after portal vein embolization. Methods: This was an international retrospective multicentre study of patients with colorectal liver metastases who underwent open or laparoscopic right and extended right hepatectomy after portal vein embolization between 2004 and 2020. The perioperative and oncological outcomes for patients who underwent laparoscopic and open approaches were compared using propensity score matching. Results: Of 338 patients, 84 patients underwent a laparoscopic procedure and 254 patients underwent an open procedure. Patients in the laparoscopic group less often underwent extended right hepatectomy (18% versus 34.6% (P = 0.004)), procedures in the setting of a two-stage hepatectomy (42% versus 65% (P < 0.001)), and major concurrent procedures (4% versus 16.1% (P = 0.003)). After propensity score matching, 78 patients remained in each group. The laparoscopic approach was associated with longer operating and Pringle times (330 versus 258.5 min (P < 0.001) and 65 versus 30 min (P = 0.001) respectively) and a shorter length of stay (7 versus 8 days (P = 0.011)). The R0 resection rate was not different (71% for the laparoscopic approach versus 60% for the open approach (P = 0.230)). The median disease-free survival was 12 (95% c.i. 10 to 20) months for the laparoscopic approach versus 20 (95% c.i. 13 to 31) months for the open approach (P = 0.145). The median overall survival was 28 (95% c.i. 22 to 48) months for the laparoscopic approach versus 42 (95% c.i. 35 to 52) months for the open approach (P = 0.614). Conclusion: The advantages of a laparoscopic over an open approach for (extended) right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases after portal vein embolization are limited.
Risk factors and consequences of conversion in laparoscopic major liver resection

F. Cauchy,D. Fuks,T. Nomi,L. Schwarz,L. Barbier,S. Dokmak,O. Scatton,J. Belghiti,O. Soubrane,B. Gayet,F Cauchy,D Fuks,T Nomi,L Schwarz,L Barbier,S Dokmak,O Scatton,J Belghiti,O Soubrane,B Gayet

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9806

2015-04-02

Abstract:Abstract Background Although recent reports have suggested potential benefits of the laparoscopic approach in patients requiring major hepatectomy, it remains unclear whether conversion to open surgery could offset these advantages. This study aimed to determine the risk factors for and postoperative consequences of conversion in patients undergoing laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH). Methods Data for all patients undergoing LMH between 2000 and 2013 at two tertiary referral centres were reviewed retrospectively. Risk factors for conversion were determined using multivariable analysis. After propensity score matching, the outcomes of patients who underwent conversion were compared with those of matched patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy who did not have conversion, operated on at the same centres, and also with matched patients operated on at another tertiary centre during the same period by an open laparotomy approach. Results Conversion was needed in 30 (13·5 per cent) of the 223 patients undergoing LMH. The most frequent reasons for conversion were bleeding and failure to progress, in 14 (47 per cent) and nine (30 per cent) patients respectively. On multivariable analysis, risk factors for conversion were patient age above 75 years (hazard ratio (HR) 7·72, 95 per cent c.i. 1·67 to 35·70; P = 0·009), diabetes (HR 4·51, 1·16 to 17·57; P = 0·030), body mass index (BMI) above 28 kg/m2 (HR 6·41, 1·56 to 26·37; P = 0·010), tumour diameter greater than 10 cm (HR 8·91, 1·57 to 50·79; P = 0·014) and biliary reconstruction (HR 13·99, 1·82 to 238·13; P = 0·048). After propensity score matching, the complication rate in patients who had conversion was higher than in patients who did not (75 versus 47·3 per cent respectively; P = 0·038), but was not significantly different from the rate in patients treated by planned laparotomy (79 versus 67·9 per cent respectively; P = 0·438). Conclusion Conversion during LMH should be anticipated in patients with raised BMI, large lesions and biliary reconstruction. Conversion does not lead to increased morbidity compared with planned laparotomy.

surgery
Laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: short-and long-term outcomes with blood loss

Xiaocui Lv,Lina Zhang,Hong Yu,Xin Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-21-463

2021-01-01

Translational Cancer Research

Abstract:Background: Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a complex procedure. Compared to open hepatectomy (OH), LH offers certain advantages such as faster recovery, smaller incisions, and shorter hospital stay, but bleeding during LH remains a significant concern. Currently, the impacts of blood loss on the short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing LH are poorly understood. This retrospective study analyzes the impacts of blood loss on the prognosis of LH in HCC patients. Methods: Between 2001 and 2019, 192 patients underwent LH for HCC at a single high-volume center. These patients were divided into two groups according to intraoperative blood loss (IBL) (Group A: <= 250 mL; Group B: >250 mL). The patient characteristics assessed included age, gender, cirrhosis, hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, Child-Pugh class, number of tumors, tumor size, vascular invasion, and diabetes mellitus. The perioperative and postoperative factors compared included operative time, blood loss, type of resection, blood transfusion, general complications, surgical complications, hospital mortality, and postoperative hospital stay. Results: Factors associated with IBL in our multivariate analysis included the type of resection (P<0.01) and operative time (P<0.01). IBL, tumor size and number of tumors were independent predictors of a patient's overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Through our subgroup multivariate analysis, we found that IBL was the only significant factor associated with RFS (P<0.02). There was also a noted IBL "dose effect", as patients with IBL >1,000 mL had a worse median OS (24 months) and median RFS (6 months), while patients with IBL 250-1,000 mL had a median OS of 36 months and RFS of 12 months, and patients with IBL <= 250 mL had a median OS of 36 months and RFS of 24 months. Conclusions: We found that the extent of IBL during LH was related to tumor size, operative time, and surgery type. Increased IBL, during LH was also an independent prognostic factor for tumor recurrence. Furthermore, a dose-response relationship between increased IBL and decreased RFS and OS was evident.
Laparoscopic Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes with Blood Loss

Xiaocui Lv,Lina Zhang,Hong Yu,Xin Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-21-463

2021-01-01

Translational Cancer Research

Abstract:Background: Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a complex procedure. Compared to open hepatectomy (OH), LH offers certain advantages such as faster recovery, smaller incisions, and shorter hospital stay, but bleeding during LH remains a significant concern. Currently, the impacts of blood loss on the short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing LH are poorly understood. This retrospective study analyzes the impacts of blood loss on the prognosis of LH in HCC patients. Methods: Between 2001 and 2019, 192 patients underwent LH for HCC at a single high-volume center. These patients were divided into two groups according to intraoperative blood loss (IBL) (Group A: ≤250 mL; Group B: >250 mL). The patient characteristics assessed included age, gender, cirrhosis, hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, Child-Pugh class, number of tumors, tumor size, vascular invasion, and diabetes mellitus. The perioperative and postoperative factors compared included operative time, blood loss, type of resection, blood transfusion, general complications, surgical complications, hospital mortality, and postoperative hospital stay. Results: Factors associated with IBL in our multivariate analysis included the type of resection (P<0.01) and operative time (P<0.01). IBL, tumor size and number of tumors were independent predictors of a patient’s overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Through our subgroup multivariate analysis, we found that IBL was the only significant factor associated with RFS (P<0.02). There was also a noted IBL “dose effect”, as patients with IBL >1,000 mL had a worse median OS (24 months) and median RFS (6 months), while patients with IBL 250–1,000 mL had a median OS of 36 months and RFS of 12 months, and patients with IBL ≤250 mL had a median OS of 36 months and RFS of 24 months. Conclusions: We found that the extent of IBL during LH was related to tumor size, operative time, and surgery type. Increased IBL during LH was also an independent prognostic factor for tumor recurrence. Furthermore, a dose-response relationship between increased IBL and decreased RFS and OS was evident.
Long-term and short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: might laparoscopic approach be better in early HCC?

Kuei-Yen Tsai,Hsin-An Chen,Wan-Yu Wang,Ming-Te Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6372-0

2018-07-24

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:BackgroundThis retrospective study compared the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) and identified patients who might gain more benefits from LLR.MethodsThe demographic and perioperative data, short-term surgical outcomes, and long-term oncological results of all 313 patients who received elective liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) between January 2010 and June 2017 were analyzed. The patients were then divided into stage-specific subgroups according to the TNM staging system for comparison.ResultsLLR was performed in 153 patients and OLR in 160 patients. LLR is associated with less blood loss (p < 0.001), shorter surgical time (p = 0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (p < 0.001), and lower morbidity rate (p = 0.034). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rates in the LLR group were higher than those in the OLR group (78.1 vs. 57.6%; p = 0.002). Stage-specific subgroup analysis revealed similar 5-year OS in the two groups (stage I: 82.8 vs. 82.6%, p = 0.845; stage II: 80.3 vs. 69.2%, p = 0.638; stage III: 55.6 vs. 34.8%, p = 0.681), as did the 5-year recurrence-free survival. Moreover, the short-term outcomes were better in the LLR group in terms of surgical time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay, and these benefits attenuated with advancing tumor stage.ConclusionsLLR for HCC is a safe and feasible procedure that does not compromise long-term oncological outcomes. In early tumor stages, LLR might be better in terms of short-term surgical outcomes.
Laparoscopic Versus Open Hepatectomy in Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of the Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients with Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Song Jiang,Zhaoying Wang,Mingrui Ou,Qing Pang,Dongwei Fan,Peng Cui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2018.0588

2019-01-01

Abstract:Background: Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has been reported as a safe and efficacious treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. However, in cirrhosis patients, LH may be more complex and challenging. So, the short- and long-term outcomes should be well evaluated between LH and open hepatectomy (OH) in HCC patients with cirrhosis. Objectives: To compare the short- and long-term outcomes of LH with OH in HCC patients with cirrhosis. Materials and Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were systematically searched to identify the clinical trials published until July 2018 on the comparison of LH and OH in HCC patients with cirrhosis. The statistical analysis was conducted by the Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom). Short-term outcomes included blood loss, operation time, blood transfusion, postoperative complications, mortality, postoperative hospital stay, tumor size, and surgical margin. Long-term outcomes included 1-, 3-, 5-year overall survival (OS) and 1-, 3-, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS). Results: Seventeen studies with 2004 patients were included in this meta-analysis. For short-term outcomes, LH suggested less blood loss, lower blood transfusion rates, reduced occurrence of postoperative complications, wider surgical margin, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and declined rate of mortality (all P < .05). However, there was no significant difference in operation time (P = .67) between the two groups, whereas tumor size was larger in OH (P = .004). As to long-term outcomes, 1-, 3-, 5-year OS and 1-year DFS were higher in LH group (all P < .05). Nevertheless, there were no significant differences in 3- and 5-year DFS (P = .23 and .83, respectively). Conclusions: For the HCC patients with cirrhosis, current evidence suggests that LH shows not only better outcomes in short term, but also a comparable and even improved long-term prognosis.
Outcomes of robotic vs laparoscopic hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Roberto Montalti,Giammauro Berardi,Alberto Patriti,Marco Vivarelli,Roberto Ivan Troisi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i27.8441

IF: 5.374

2015-01-01

World Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract:AIM: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic liver resections.METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library Central. Participants of any age and sex, who underwent robotic or laparoscopic liver resection were considered following these criteria: (1) studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic liver resection; (2) studies reporting at least one perioperative outcome; and (3) if more than one study was reported by the same institute, only the most recent was included. The primary outcome measures were set for estimated blood loss, operative time, conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and mortality rates, hospital stay and major hepatectomy rates.RESULTS: A total of 7 articles, published between 2010 and 2014, fulfilled the selection criteria. The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significant reduction in blood loss and lower operative time (MD = 83.96, 95%CI: 10.51-157.41, P = 0.03; MD = 68.43, 95%CI: 39.22-97.65, P < 0.00001, respectively). No differences were found with respect to conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and hospital stay.CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic liver resection resulted in reduced blood loss and shorter surgical times compared to robotic liver resections. There was no difference in conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and length of postoperative stay.

gastroenterology & hepatology
Global Outcomes Benchmarks in Laparoscopic Liver Surgery for Segments 7 and 8: International Multicenter Analysis

Lopez-Lopez Victor,Zeniche Morise,Concepción Gomez Gavara,Daniel Gero,Mohammed Abu Hilal,Brian KP Goh,Paulo Herman,Pierre-Alain Clavien,Ricardo Robles-Campos,Go Wakabayashi,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/xcs.0000000000001100

2024-04-25

Journal of the American College of Surgeons

Abstract:Background: In recent years, there has been growing interest in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and the audit of the results of surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to define reference values for LLR in segments 7 and 8. Methods: Data on LLR in segments 7 and 8 between January 2000 and December 2020 were collected from 19 expert centers. Reference cases were defined as no prior hepatectomy, ASA <3, body mass index <35 kg/m2, no chronic kidney disease, no cirrhosis and portal hypertension, no chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (FEV1<80%), and no cardiac disease. Reference values were obtained from the 75th percentile of the medians of all reference centers. Results: Of 585 patients, 461 (78.8%) met the reference criteria. The overall complication rate was 27.5% (6% were Clavien-Dindo≥3a) with a mean CCI of 7.5 ± 16.5. At 90-day follow-up, the references values for overall complications were 31%, Clavien≥3a 7.4%, conversion 4.4%, hospital stay < 6 days, and readmission rate < 8.33%, respectively. Eastern centers patients categorized as low risk had a lower rate of overall complications (20.9% vs 31.2%, p=0.01) with similar Clavien-Dindo≥3a (5.5% and 4.8%, p=0.83) compared to Western centers, respectively. Conclusion: This study shows the need to establish standards for the postoperative outcomes in LLR based on the complexity of the resection and the location of the lesions.

surgery
Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic minor hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Ji-Ming Wang,Jiang-Fa Li,Guan-Dou Yuan,Song-Qing He

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000025648

2021-04-30

Abstract:Background: Robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery are the most minimally invasive surgical approaches for the removal of liver lesions. Minor hepatectomy is a common surgical procedure. In this study, we evaluated the advantages and disadvantages of robot-assisted vs laparoscopic minor hepatectomy (LMH). Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify comparative studies on robot-assisted vs. laparoscopicminor hepatectomy up to February, 2020. The odds ratios (OR) and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the fixed-effects model or random-effects model. Results: A total of 12 studies involving 751 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Among them, 297 patients were in the robot-assisted minor hepatectomy (RMH) group and 454 patients were in the LMH group. There were no significant differences in intraoperative blood loss (P = .43), transfusion rates (P = .14), length of hospital stay (P > .64), conversion rate (P = .62), R0 resection rate (P = .56), complications (P = .92), or mortaliy (P = .37) between the 2 groups. However, the RMH group was associated with a longer operative time (P = .0003), and higher cost (P < .00001) compared to the LMH group. No significant differences in overall survival or disease free survival between the 2 groups were observed. In the subgroup analysis of left lateral sectionectomies, RMH was still associated with a longer operative time, but no other differences in clinical outcomes were observed. Conclusions: Although RMH is associated with longer operation times and higher costs, it exhibits the same safety and effectiveness as LMH. Prospective randomized controlled clinical trials should now be considered to obtain better evidence for clinical consensus.

Microsurgical nerve graft repair of the ablated cavernosal nerves in the rat.

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

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

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

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

Total Laparoscopic Right Hemihepatectomy Through Anterior Approach for Larger Tumors in the Right Lobe of the Liver

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: A single-center 10-year experience

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

[Disease and death frequent themes in the works of Edvard Munch].

Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted major hepatectomies: an Italian multi-institutional comparative study

Use of multi-primer / multi-gene PCR method for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis among female genital tuberculosis patients in India

Laparoscopic versus open right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases after portal vein embolization: international multicentre study

Risk factors and consequences of conversion in laparoscopic major liver resection

Laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: short-and long-term outcomes with blood loss

Laparoscopic Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes with Blood Loss

Long-term and short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: might laparoscopic approach be better in early HCC?

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

Outcomes of robotic vs laparoscopic hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Global Outcomes Benchmarks in Laparoscopic Liver Surgery for Segments 7 and 8: International Multicenter Analysis

Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic minor hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis