David Geller,R. Swijnenburg,Tom K. Gallagher,E. Sparrelid,R. Memeo,S. Lopez Ben,Pablo E Serrano,J. Martinie,D. Fuks,B. Goh,A. Benedetti Cacciaguerra,Y. Koh,U. Cillo,V. Morrison-Jones,D. Aghayan,F. Cipriani,B. Edwin,G. Zimmitti,A. Ruzzenente,Daniel Osei Bordom,Shafiq Rehman,Rong Liu,S. Conci,Kongyuan Wei,F. Ratti,D. Vrochides,E. Jovine,G. Zozaya,Roland S Croner,Robert P. Sutcliffe,S. Tzedakis,A. Alseidi,J. Primrose,Å. Fretland,K. Crespo,Fabrizio Di Benedetto,M. Efanov,C. Caula,M. Schmelzle,L. Aldrighetti,S. White,M. Besselink,T. Hoogteijling,R. Robles Campos,F. Giuliante,F. Rotellar,Jacopo Lanari,P. Magistri,M. D'Hondt,I. Dagher,I. Sucandy,Louis Haentjens,Jawad Ahmad,Jasper P. Sijberden,M. Abu Hilal,N. Russolillo,B. Görgec,D. D’Souza,M. Vivarelli,E. Tan,A. Ferrero

Abstract:Objective: To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic liver surgery (RLS) and laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) in various settings. Background: Clear advantages of RLS over LLS have rarely been demonstrated, and the associated costs of robotic surgery are generally higher than those of laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, the exact role of the robotic approach in minimally invasive liver surgery remains to be defined. Methods: In this international retrospective cohort study, the outcomes of patients who underwent RLS and LLS for all indications between 2009 and 2021 in 34 hepatobiliary referral centers were compared. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare both approaches across several types of procedures: (1) minor resections in the anterolateral (2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6) or (2) posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8), and (3) major resections (≥3 contiguous segments). Propensity score matching was used to mitigate the influence of selection bias. The primary outcome was textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS), previously defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥grade 2, postoperative bile leak ≥grade B, severe morbidity, readmission, and 90-day or in-hospital mortality with the presence of an R0 resection margin in case of malignancy. The absence of a prolonged length of stay was added to define TOLS+. Results: Among the 10.075 included patients, 1.507 underwent RLS and 8.568 LLS. After propensity score matching, both groups constituted 1.505 patients. RLS was associated with higher rates of TOLS (78.3% vs 71.8%, P < 0.001) and TOLS+ (55% vs 50.4%, P = 0.026), less Pringle usage (39.1% vs 47.1%, P < 0.001), blood loss (100 vs 200 milliliters, P < 0.001), transfusions (4.9% vs 7.9%, P = 0.003), conversions (2.7% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), overall morbidity (19.3% vs 25.7%, P < 0.001), and microscopically irradical resection margins (10.1% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.015), and shorter operative times (190 vs 210 minutes, P = 0.015). In the subgroups, RLS tended to have higher TOLS rates, compared with LLS, for minor resections in the posterosuperior segments (n = 431 per group, 75.9% vs 71.2%, P = 0.184) and major resections (n = 321 per group, 72.9% vs 67.5%, P = 0.086), although these differences did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: While both produce excellent outcomes, RLS might facilitate slightly higher TOLS rates than LLS.

Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy/H67: An International Multicenter Study

Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy/H67

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

Propensity Score-matched Analysis Comparing Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Minor Liver Resections of the Anterolateral Segments: an International Multi-center Study of 10,517 Cases

Impact of liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension on minimally invasive limited liver resection for primary liver malignancies in the posterosuperior segments: An international multicenter study

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

Performance evaluation of a North American center using the established global benchmark for laparoscopic liver resections: A retrospective study

Novel Benchmark Values for Open Major Anatomic Liver Resection in Non-cirrhotic Patients

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Various Settings

Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Comparing Robotic and Laparoscopic Right and Extended Right Hepatectomy

Factors Associated with and Impact of Open Conversion in Laparoscopic and Robotic Minor Liver Resections: An International Multicenter Study of 10,541 Patients

Impact of body mass index on the difficulty and outcomes of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Various Settings: An International Multicenter Propensity Score Matched Study of 10.075 Patients

Improving Outcomes Defending Patient Safety: The Learning Journey in Robotic Liver Resections

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

Robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery for gastric cancer compared on surgical, clinical and oncological outcomes: a multi-institutional chart review. A study protocol of the International study group on Minimally Invasive surgery for GASTRIc Cancer-IMIGASTRIC.

Evaluation of the economic impact of the robotic approach in major and postero-superior segment liver resections: a multicenter retrospective analysis

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the difficulty and outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic major liver resections for colorectal liver metastases: A propensity-score and coarsened exact-matched controlled study

Impact of Tumor Size on the Difficulty of Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study

International consensus guidelines on robotic pancreatic surgery in 2023