Minimizing the risk of small-for-size syndrome after liver surgery

Author(s):  
Michail Papamichail ◽  
Michail Pizanias ◽  
Nigel D Heaton ◽  
Papamichail M ◽  
Pizanias M ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
2009 ◽  
Vol 69 (05) ◽  
Author(s):  
EC Schest ◽  
H Cerwenka ◽  
A El-Shabrawi ◽  
H Bacher ◽  
HJ Mischinger

1990 ◽  
Vol 152 (10) ◽  
pp. 505-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J Hardy
Keyword(s):  

BJS Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Gonvers ◽  
J Jurt ◽  
G -R Joliat ◽  
N Halkic ◽  
E Melloul ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The clinical and economic impacts of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes have been demonstrated extensively. Whether ERAS protocols also have a biological effect remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the biological impact of an ERAS programme in patients undergoing liver surgery. Methods A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing liver surgery (2010–2018) was undertaken. Patients operated before and after ERAS implementation in 2013 were compared. Surrogate markers of surgical stress were monitored: white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, albumin concentration, and haematocrit. Their perioperative fluctuations were defined as Δvalues, calculated on postoperative day (POD) 0 for Δalbumin and Δhaematocrit and POD 2 for ΔWBC and ΔCRP. Results A total of 541 patients were included, with 223 and 318 patients in non-ERAS and ERAS groups respectively. Groups were comparable, except for higher rates of laparoscopy (24.8 versus 11.2 per cent; P < 0.001) and major resection (47.5 versus 38.1 per cent; P = 0.035) in the ERAS group. Patients in the ERAS group showed attenuated ΔWBC (2.00 versus 2.75 g/l; P = 0.013), ΔCRP (60 versus 101 mg/l; P <0.001) and Δalbumin (12 versus 16 g/l; P < 0.001) compared with those in the no-ERAS group. Subgroup analysis of open resection showed similar results. Multivariable analysis identified ERAS as the only independent factor associated with high ΔWBC (odds ratio (OR) 0.65, 95 per cent c.i. 0.43 to 0.98; P = 0.038), ΔCRP (OR 0.41, 0.23 to 0.73; P = 0.003) and Δalbumin (OR 0.40, 95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.72; P = 0.002). Conclusion Compared with conventional management, implementation of ERAS was associated with an attenuated stress response in patients undergoing liver surgery.


1990 ◽  
Vol 153 (7) ◽  
pp. 433-433
Author(s):  
Kenneth J Hardy
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirhasan Rahimli ◽  
Aristotelis Perrakis ◽  
Vera Schellerer ◽  
Andrew Gumbs ◽  
Eric Lorenz ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is increasing in incidence. The aim of this work was to present our experience by reporting short-term and long-term outcomes after MILS for CRLM with comparative analysis of laparoscopic (LLS) and robotic liver surgery (RLS). Methods Twenty-five patients with CRLM, who underwent MILS between May 2012 and March 2020, were selected from our retrospective registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS). Thirteen of these patients underwent LLS and 12 RLS. Short-term and long-term outcomes of both groups were analyzed. Results Operating time was significantly longer in the RLS vs. the LLS group (342.0 vs. 200.0 min; p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the laparoscopic vs. the robotic group regarding length of postoperative stay (8.8 days), measured blood loss (430.4 ml), intraoperative blood transfusion, overall morbidity (20.0%), and liver surgery related morbidity (4%). The mean BMI was 27.3 (range from 19.2 to 44.8) kg/m2. The 30-day mortality was 0%. R0 resection was achieved in all patients (100.0%) in RLS vs. 10 patients (76.9%) in LLS. Major resections were carried out in 32.0% of the cases, and 84.0% of the patients showed intra-abdominal adhesions due to previous abdominal surgery. In 24.0% of cases, the tumor was bilobar, the maximum number of tumors removed was 9, and the largest tumor was 8.5 cm in diameter. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 84, 56.9, and 48.7%, respectively. The 1- and 3-year overall recurrence-free survival rates were 49.6 and 36.2%, respectively, without significant differences between RLS vs. LLS. Conclusion Minimally invasive liver surgery for CRLM is safe and feasible. Minimally invasive resection of multiple lesions and large tumors is also possible. RLS may help to achieve higher rates of R0 resections. High BMI, previous abdominal surgery, and bilobar tumors are not a barrier for MILS. Laparoscopic and robotic liver resections for CRLM provide similar long-term results which are comparable to open techniques.


Author(s):  
Andrea Ruzzenente ◽  
◽  
Andrea Ciangherotti ◽  
Luca Aldrighetti ◽  
Giuseppe Maria Ettorre ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although isolated caudate lobe (CL) liver resection is not a contraindication for minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS), feasibility and safety of the procedure are still poorly investigated. To address this gap, we evaluate data on the Italian prospective maintained database on laparoscopic liver surgery (IgoMILS) and compare outcomes between MILS and open group. Methods Perioperative data of patients with malignancies, as colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), non-colorectal liver metastases (NCRLM) and benign liver disease, were retrospectively analyzed. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance the potential selection bias for MILS and open group. Results A total of 224 patients were included in the study, 47 and 177 patients underwent MILS and open isolated CL resection, respectively. The overall complication rate was comparable between the two groups; however, severe complication rate (Dindo–Clavien grade ≥ 3) was lower in the MILS group (0% versus 6.8%, P = ns). In-hospital mortality was 0% in both groups and mean hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MILS group (P = 0.01). After selection of 42 MILS and 43 open CL resections by PSM analysis, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes remained similar except for the hospital stay which was not significantly shorter in MILS group. Conclusions This multi-institutional cohort study shows that MILS CL resection is feasible and safe. The surgical procedure can be technically demanding compared to open resection, whereas good perioperative outcomes can be achieved in highly selected patients.


2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hidehiko Fukushima ◽  
Yohei Iwata ◽  
Shigeki Numata ◽  
Kenta Saito ◽  
Soichiro Watanabe ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document