Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Is Superior to Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases in the Posterosuperior Segments

Introduction: Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) of colorectal metastasis located in posterosuperior segments (1, 4A, 7 and 8) are challenging and highly demanding. The aim of our study is to determine the safety and feasibility of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) in the resections of the posterosuperior lesions and to compare the peri-operative, short-term and long-term outcomes with the open liver resection (OLR) approach.Methods and Results: A retrospective study of patients who underwent either HALS or OLR for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) located in the posterosuperior segments of the liver between 2008 and 2018 in two university affiliated medical centers.Results: A total of 187 patients were identified, of whom 78 underwent HALS and 109 underwent OLR. There was no difference between the HALS and OLR with regard to preoperative factors (age, primary CRC tumor location, number and anatomical distribution of liver metastasis, pre-operative neo-adjuvant treatment, operative time, blood transfusion rate, and resection margins positivity). On the other hand, HALS compared to OLR had a significantly shorter mean hospital stay (4 vs. 6 days; P = 0.003), and a lower total complications rate (25 vs. 47% P = 0.006). Both groups had no 30-day mortality. Also, patients who underwent HALS vs. OLR had similar liver metastases recurrence (55 vs. 51%. P = 0.65) and 5-year survival (47 vs. 45%. P = 0.72).Conclusions: HALS for mCRC located in posterosuperior liver segments is safe and feasible and it is a preferable approach due to its lower complication rate and shorter hospital stay while not compromising survival and disease recurrence.

Assessment of Safety and Applicability of Laparoscopic vs Open Non Anatomical Resection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Cirrhotic Patients

Background Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been progressively developed along the past two decades. Liver surgery was one of the last frontiers reached by minimally invasive surgery. Surgical technique and equipment evolved to overcome technical limitations, making laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) safe and feasible. Surgeons developed skills in a stepwise approach, beginning with low complexity operations for benign diseases and reaching high-complexity surgeries for malignant cases and living donor organ harvesting. Objective s: The aim of the study is to compare short term results of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy regarding to intra operative details and post-operative management and complications for achieving a safe hepatic resection for treatment of HCC in cirrhotic patients. Patients and Methods In this prospective study, a comparison between laparoscopic resection and open resection was done to compare short-term results between laparoscopic and open liver resection. This study was conducted on 30 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. 15 patients (50%) were treated by laparoscopic liver resection (Group A) while the other 15 patients (50%) were treated by open liver resection (Group B). Results Regarding the demographic data, the presence of past history of medical condition and the preoperative laboratory results, no statistical significance was found. The mean operative time has statistically significant difference between the 2 groups, with decreased operative time in the laparoscopic group (P < 0.001). The mean blood loss has no statistically significant difference relations between the 2 groups, (P = 0.866) with conversion rate of (13.3%) happened in two cases. Conclusion Laparoscopic liver resection is a safe and feasible treatment option for HCC in cirrhotic patient needing minor resection at laparoscopic segments (II, III, IVa,V,VI). Laparoscopic liver resection for HCC has superior short- term and comparable oncological outcomes to open liver resection. LLR should be performed for carefully selected patients and by an expert surgical team.

Minimally Invasive versus Open Liver Resection for Stage I/II Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) is increasingly used as a surgical treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, there is no large scale data to compare the effectiveness of MILR in comparison to open liver resection (OLR). We identified patients with stage I or II HCC from the National Cancer Database using propensity score matching techniques. Overall, 1931 (66%) and 995 (34%) patients underwent OLR or MILR between 2010 and 2015. After propensity matching, 5-year OS was similar in the MILR and OLR group (51.7% vs. 52.8%, p = 0.766). MILR was associated with lower 90-day mortality (5% vs. 7%, p = 0.041) and shorter length of stay (4 days vs. 5 days, p < 0.001), but higher rates of positive margins (6% vs. 4%, p = 0.001). An operation at an academic institution was identified as an independent preventive factor for a positive resection margin (OR 0.64: 95% CI 0.43–0.97) and 90-day mortality (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.41–0.91). MILR for HCC is associated with similar overall survival to OLR, with the benefit of improved short term postoperative outcomes. The increased rate of positive margins after MILR requires further investigation, as do the differences in perioperative outcomes between academic and nonacademic institutions.