|
1
|
Vancoillie S, Willems E, De Meyere C, Parmentier I, Verslype C, D'Hondt M. Robotic versus laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy: A comparative single-center study of perioperative outcomes. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2025; 51:109376. [PMID: 39549386 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2024] [Revised: 09/30/2024] [Accepted: 11/08/2024] [Indexed: 11/18/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE A repeat liver resection is considered a technically challenging procedure and therefor an open approach is frequently preferred. With the introduction of minimally invasive liver surgery, laparoscopic repeat liver resection demonstrates favorable results, however, limited data on robotic repeat liver resections exists. Our aim is to compare the robotic approach with the laparoscopic one for a repeat liver resection. METHODS In a single-center retrospective analysis, we report the data of all minimally invasive repeat liver resections performed between September 2011 and August 2023. Short-term outcomes - including procedure time, blood loss, conversion rate, morbidity and mortality - were compared for a laparoscopic and a robotic approach. RESULTS A total of 136 minimally invasive repeat liver resections were performed, of which 56 robotic procedures and 80 laparoscopic procedures. Both groups were similar in baseline demographics, diagnosis and surgical procedure. While the mean procedure time was slightly longer in the robotics group by 15 min (145min and 130min, p = 0.04), the median blood loss was significantly lower in the robotic group (30 ml and 80 ml, p < 0.001). Additionally, there was a trend towards less conversions in the robotic group (n = 0 and n = 6, p = 0.42). Post-operative morbidity and mortality were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION The robotic approach for minimally invasive repeat liver surgery is both safe and feasible, while also demonstrating favorable short-term outcomes. In our experience, the 'tunnel technique' - which avoids dissection of intra-abdominal adhesions - is a key advantage of this approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Vancoillie
- Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, President Kennedylaan 4, 8500, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - E Willems
- Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, President Kennedylaan 4, 8500, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - C De Meyere
- Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, President Kennedylaan 4, 8500, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - I Parmentier
- Oncology and Statistics, Groeninge Hospital, President Kennedylaan 4, 8500 Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - C Verslype
- Digestive Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - Mathieu D'Hondt
- Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, President Kennedylaan 4, 8500, Kortrijk, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Birgin E, Abdelhadi S, Seyfried S, Rasbach E, Rahbari M, Téoule P, Reißfelder C, Rahbari NN. Robotic or laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy after open hepatectomy: a cohort study. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:1296-1305. [PMID: 38102396 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10645-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2023] [Accepted: 12/04/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Repeat hepatectomies are technically complex procedures. The evidence of robotic or laparoscopic (= minimally invasive) repeat hepatectomies (MIRH) after previous open hepatectomy is poor. Therefore, we compared postoperative outcomes of MIRH vs open repeat hepatectomies (ORH) in patients with liver tumors after previous open liver resections. METHODS Consecutive patients who underwent repeat hepatectomies after open liver resections were identified from a prospective database between April 2018 and May 2023. Postoperative complications were graded in line with the Clavien-Dindo classification. We stratified patients by intention to treat into MIRH or ORH and compared outcomes. Logistic regression analysis was performed to define variables associated with the utilization of a minimally invasive approach. RESULTS Among 46 patients included, 20 (43%) underwent MIRH and 26 (57%) ORH. Twenty-seven patients had advanced or expert repeat hepatectomies (59%) according to the IWATE criteria. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the study groups. The use of a minimally invasive approach was not dependent on preoperative or intraoperative variables. All patients had negative resection margins on final histology. MIRH was associated with less blood loss (450 ml, IQR (interquartile range): 200-600 vs 600 ml, IQR: 400-1500 ml, P = 0.032), and shorter length of stay (5 days, IQR: 4-7 vs 7 days, IQR: 5-9 days, P = 0.041). Postoperative complications were similar between the groups (P = 0.298). CONCLUSIONS MIRH is feasible after previous open hepatectomy and a safe alternative approach to ORH. (German Clinical Trials Register ID: DRKS00032183).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emrullah Birgin
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Schaima Abdelhadi
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Steffen Seyfried
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Erik Rasbach
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Mohammad Rahbari
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Patrick Téoule
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Christoph Reißfelder
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Nuh N Rahbari
- Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Wang X, Lin J, Chen Y, Ye X. Surgical site wound infection and pain after laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma. Int Wound J 2023; 20:3262-3270. [PMID: 37086085 PMCID: PMC10502282 DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14206] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2023] [Revised: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 04/23/2023] Open
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the effects of laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) and open repeat liver resection (ORLR) on surgical site wound infection and pain in recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Data were systematically searched for studies comparing LRLR with ORLR for the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma, with a search timeframe from their inception to December 2022. Two investigators independently screened the literature, extracted information, and evaluated the quality of the studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. This study was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. A total of 20 publications with 4380 patients were included, with 1108 and 3289 patients in the LRLR and ORLR groups, respectively. The results showed that LRLR significantly reduced surgical site wound infection rate (1.71% vs. 5.16%, odds ratio [OR]:0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.18-0.56, P < .001), superficial wound infection rate (1.29% vs. 4.92%, OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.14-0.58, P < .001), bile leakage (3.34% vs. 6.05%, OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.39-0.90, P = .01), organ/space wound infection rate (0.4% vs. 5.11%, OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07-0.81, P = .02), and surgical site wound pain (mean difference: -2.00, 95% CI: -2.99 to -1.02, P < .001). Thus, the findings of this study showed that LRLR for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma significantly reduced wound infection rates and improved postoperative wound pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiao‐Bo Wang
- The Fourth School of Clinical MedicineZhejiang Chinese Medical UniversityHangzhouChina
| | - Jun‐Mei Lin
- Department of Traditional Chinese MedicineJinhua Municipal Central HospitalJinhuaChina
| | - Yan‐Ping Chen
- Department of GastroenterologyJinhua Municipal Central HospitalJinhuaChina
| | - Xu‐Xing Ye
- Department of Traditional Chinese MedicineJinhua Municipal Central HospitalJinhuaChina
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Onda S, Haruki K, Furukawa K, Yasuda J, Okui N, Shirai Y, Horiuchi T, Ikegami T. A feasible and safe approach for repeat laparoscopic liver resection and patient selection based on standardized preoperative prediction of surgical difficulty. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 408:138. [PMID: 37014467 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-02880-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2022] [Accepted: 03/31/2023] [Indexed: 04/05/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study was performed to propose a strategy for repeat laparoscopic liver resection (RLLR) and investigate the preoperative predictive factors for RLLR difficulty. METHODS Data from 43 patients who underwent RLLR using various techniques at 2 participating hospitals from April 2020 to March 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Surgical outcomes, short-term outcomes, and feasibility and safety of the proposed techniques were evaluated. The relationship between potential predictive factors for difficult RLLR and perioperative outcomes was evaluated. Difficulties associated with RLLR were analyzed separately in two surgical phases: the Pringle maneuver phase and the liver parenchymal transection phase. RESULTS The open conversion rate was 7%. The median surgical time and intraoperative blood loss were 235 min and 200 mL, respectively. The Pringle maneuver was successfully performed in 81% of patients using the laparoscopic Satinsky vascular clamp (LSVC). Clavien-Dindo class ≥III postoperative complications were observed in 12% of patients without mortality. An analysis of the risk factors for predicting difficult RLLR showed that a history of open liver resection was an independent risk factor for difficulty in the Pringle maneuver phase. CONCLUSION We present a feasible and safe approach to address RLLR difficulty, especially difficulty with the Pringle maneuver using an LSVC, which is extremely useful in RLLR. The Pringle maneuver is more challenging in patients with a history of open liver resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shinji Onda
- Department of Surgery, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8, Nishishimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan.
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Saku Central Hospital Advanced Care Center, Saku, Nagano, Japan.
| | - Koichiro Haruki
- Department of Surgery, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8, Nishishimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan
| | - Kenei Furukawa
- Department of Surgery, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8, Nishishimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan
| | - Jungo Yasuda
- Department of Surgery, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8, Nishishimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan
| | - Norimitsu Okui
- Department of Surgery, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8, Nishishimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Saku Central Hospital Advanced Care Center, Saku, Nagano, Japan
| | - Yoshihiro Shirai
- Department of Surgery, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8, Nishishimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Saku Central Hospital Advanced Care Center, Saku, Nagano, Japan
| | - Takashi Horiuchi
- Department of Surgery, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8, Nishishimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Saku Central Hospital Advanced Care Center, Saku, Nagano, Japan
| | - Toru Ikegami
- Department of Surgery, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8, Nishishimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Lv TR, Hu HJ, Ma WJ, Hu YF, Dai YS, Li FY. The role of laparoscopic surgery in the surgical management of recurrent liver malignancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Surg 2023; 9:1042458. [PMID: 36684258 PMCID: PMC9852625 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.1042458] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2022] [Accepted: 11/08/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the efficiency of laparoscopic surgery in treating recurrent liver tumors vs. conventional open surgery. Methods Database searching was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library and EMBASE. Rev Man 5.3 software and Stata 13.0 software were applied in statistical analyses. Results A total of fourteen studies were finally included with 1,284 patients receiving LRH and 2,254 with ORH. LRH was associated with less intraoperative hemorrhage, a higher R0 resection rate, a lower incidence of Pringle Maneuver, a lower incidence of postoperative morbidities, a better overall survival and an enhanced postoperative recovery vs. ORH. Patients receiving LRH shared similar operative time, tumor number and disease-free survival as those with ORH. However, tumor size was relatively larger in patients receiving ORH and major hepatectomy, anatomic hepatectomy were rarely performed in patients with LRH. Additional analyses between LRH and laparoscopic primary hepatectomy revealed less intraoperative blood loss in patients with LRH. Conclusion LRH is safe and feasible with more favorable peri-operative outcomes and faster postoperative recovery. However, it is only applicable for some highly-selected cases not requiring complex surgical procedures. Future larger well-designed studies are expected for further validation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Fu-Yu Li
- Correspondence: Fu-Yu Li lfy_74 @hotmail.com
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Cheng KC, Ho KM. Laparoscopic vs open liver re-resection for cirrhotic patients with post-hepatectomy hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence: A comparative study. World J Gastrointest Surg 2022; 14:409-418. [PMID: 35734623 PMCID: PMC9160681 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v14.i5.409] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2021] [Revised: 03/12/2022] [Accepted: 04/26/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Repeated liver resection is an effective treatment for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, few studies have compared the outcome of laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) and open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) for recurrent HCC, and few of those have included cirrhotic patients. AIM To compare short-term and long-term outcomes of cirrhotic patients with LRH and ORH for recurrent HCC. METHODS We retrospectively analysed the clinical records retrieved from a prospectively collected database of all patients who underwent hepatectomy for post-hepatectomy recurrent HCC at our institute between May 2006 and June 2021. Cases of recurrent HCCs larger than 7 cm were excluded. Patient demographics, operative details, perioperative outcomes, pathologic details, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) data of LRH and ORH were compared. RESULTS Data from 29 patients with LRH and 22 with ORH were compared. The LRH group showed significantly better outcomes for blood loss (median 300 mL vs 750 mL, P = 0.013) and length of hospital stay (median 5 d vs 7 d, P = 0.003). The 1-, 3- and 5-year OS rates in the LRH group were 100.0%, 60.0% and 30.0%, respectively; the corresponding rates in the ORH group were 81.8%, 36.4% and 18.2% (P = 0.336). The 1-, 3- and 5-year DFS rates in the LRH group were 68.2%, 27.3% and 4.5%, respectively; the corresponding rates in the ORH group were 31.3%, 6.3% and 6.3% (P = 0.055). There were no significant differences in overall and DFS between the two groups. CONCLUSION Laparoscopic re-resection should be considered for patients presenting with recurrent HCC less than or equal to 7 cm after previous hepatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kai-Chi Cheng
- Department of Surgery, Kwong Wah Hospital, Hong Kong 999077, China
| | - Kit-Man Ho
- Department of Surgery, Kwong Wah Hospital, Hong Kong 999077, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Jeong ES, Kim JM, Lim M, Yang J, Kwon JE, Choi GS, Joh JW. Laparoscopic versus open repeat liver resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma in hepatectomy patients: inverse probability of treatment weighting. Updates Surg 2022; 74:527-534. [PMID: 35218476 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01257-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2021] [Accepted: 02/14/2022] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
Repeat liver resection (RLR) is a good treatment option for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) is more technically demanding than open repeat liver resection (ORLR). The purpose of our study is to compare the surgical outcomes of ORLR and LRLR and to carefully present LRLR guidelines for HCC. We performed RLR at a single institution from January 2017 to November 2019. We divided the patients into an ORLR group and an LRLR group. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied in this study to compare the ORLR group and the LRLR group. There was no difference between the two groups in patient characteristics, preoperative blood tests and pathological characteristics. After stabilized IPTW, the LRLR group had a shorter hospital stay (5.52 vs. 9.27 days, p = 0.001) and superior disease-free survival (p = 0.020). LRLR yielded better short-term outcomes than ORLR. And if a regular radiologic examination is performed, most of the recurrent tumors could be detected less than 3 cm. In conclusion, LRLR might be feasible and useful for recurrent HCC located contralateral to the previous tumor at a size of less than 3 cm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eun Sung Jeong
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Jong Man Kim
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea.
| | - Manuel Lim
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Jaehun Yang
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Ji Eun Kwon
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Gyu-Seong Choi
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Jae-Won Joh
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Newly-revised Pringle maneuver using laparoscopic Satinsky vascular clamp for repeat laparoscopic hepatectomy. Surg Endosc 2021; 35:5375-5380. [PMID: 33913029 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08516-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2021] [Accepted: 04/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
It has been known that repeat laparoscopic hepatectomy (RLH) after open hepatectomy is technically challenging because of adhesions around the hilum. It is quite often that conventional tourniquet technique for the Pringle maneuver is difficult in RLH, and we introduced Laparoscopic Satinsky Vascular Clamp (LSVC) for inflow control in RLH. The Spiegel lobe is the anatomical landmark in LSVC technique. If a space behind the hepatoduodenal ligament and the Spiegel lobe was obtained, LSVC was applied laterally from the left side of the hepatoduodenal ligament, whereas LSVC was vertically applied for those with obstruction of a space behind the hepatoduodenal ligament. We performed 14 cases of RLH for those with histories of open hepatectomies by lateral (n = 6) and vertical (n = 8) LSVC technique with successful inflow control, confirmed by intraoperative Doppler ultrasound. Five patients underwent 2 or more previous histories of hepatectomies. The RLH included segmentectomy (n = 1), subsegmentectomy (n = 2) and partial hepatectomy (n = 11). The median time for the Pringle maneuver, operative time, and blood loss was 47 min, 237.5 min, and 160 mL. All the patients completed pure laparoscopic hepatectomy. In conclusion, LSVC technique is a safe and reliable technique for the Pringle maneuver in RLH.
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Chen JF, Fu XT, Gao Z, Shi YH, Tang Z, Liu WR, Zhang X, Gao Q, Ding GY, Song K, Wang XY, Zhou J, Fan J, Ding ZB. Laparoscopic vs. Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Recurrent Liver Tumors: A Propensity Score-Matched Study and Meta-Analysis. Front Oncol 2021; 11:646737. [PMID: 33968747 PMCID: PMC8100033 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.646737] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2020] [Accepted: 02/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: It remains unclear whether the short-term benefits of laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) accrue to patients with recurrent liver tumors. The present study aimed to report our own center's experience and perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LRH in comparison with open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) for treating recurrent liver tumors. Patients and Methods: A propensity score–matched study was performed including 426 patients receiving LRH or ORH for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma between January 2017 and December 2018. Surgical outcomes and perioperative inflammation-based markers, including monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and systemic immune–inflammation index were collected from medical records and analyzed. Additionally, a systematic literature review was performed to identify relevant studies in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases up to October 1, 2020. Information including patient demographics, pathologic characteristics, and short-term outcomes was extracted and analyzed using random- or fixed-effects models. Results: Of 68 LRHs, 57 were matched with an ORH finally. Our study demonstrated that LRH was significantly associated with less intraoperative blood loss (50 vs. 100 mL; P < 0.001), lower rate of hepatic inflow occlusion (10.52 vs. 33.3%; P = 0.003), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (5 vs. 6 days; P = 0.001) after 1:1 propensity score matching. The operation time, rate of blood transfusion, and postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. Moreover, all four inflammation-based markers were significantly lower in LRH group on postoperative day 1. In the meta-analysis, a total of 12 studies comprising 1,315 patients receiving repeat hepatectomy met the selection criteria. Similar to our own study, the meta-analysis showed shorter hospital stay [standard mean difference (SMD) = −0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.79 to −0.22, P < 0.001], less intraoperative blood loss (SMD = −0.79, 95% CI = −1.11 to −0.47, P < 0.001), and lower rate of major postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR) = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.19–0.66, P = 0.001] in the LRH group. There was no difference in the field of overall postoperative complication and operation time between LRH and ORH groups. Conclusion: Compared with ORH, LRH results in relatively better surgical outcomes and faster postoperative recovery. It could be considered a feasible and effective option for the treatment of recurrent liver tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jia-Feng Chen
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Xiu-Tao Fu
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Zheng Gao
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Ying-Hong Shi
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Zheng Tang
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Wei-Ren Liu
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Xin Zhang
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Qiang Gao
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Guang-Yu Ding
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Kang Song
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Xiao-Ying Wang
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Jian Zhou
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.,Key Laboratory for Carcinogenesis and Cancer Invasion, Chinese Ministry of Education, Shanghai, China
| | - Jia Fan
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.,Key Laboratory for Carcinogenesis and Cancer Invasion, Chinese Ministry of Education, Shanghai, China
| | - Zhen-Bin Ding
- Department of Liver Surgery & Transplantation, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Hepatectomy and liver regeneration in the results of treatment of colorectal liver metastasis. Contemp Oncol (Pozn) 2020; 24:172-176. [PMID: 33235543 PMCID: PMC7670187 DOI: 10.5114/wo.2020.100272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2020] [Accepted: 08/22/2020] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Hepatectomy is currently the most reliable treatment modality for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This paper describes and discusses the outcomes of initial versus repeat hepatic resection for CRLM. Material and methods Between January 2008 and December 2018, we retrospectively analyzed the data of 385 patients who underwent initial and repeat hepatic resection for CRLM at a single institution with respect to surgical outcomes and remnant liver regeneration. The remnant liver volume was postoperatively measured via computed tomography on postoperative day 7 and at 1, 2, 5, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results The liver regeneration rate peaked at 1 week postoperatively, and gradually decreased thereafter. Remnant liver volume plateaued around 1–2 months postoperatively, when regeneration was almost complete. There was no difference in the rate of liver volume regeneration during the entire postoperative period between initial and repeat hepatic resection (p = 0.708, 0.511, 0.055, 0.053, 0.102, and 0.110, respectively). After 2 months postoperatively, the laboratory data showed recovery toward near normal levels, and none of the data exhibited significant differences. There were also no significant differences in morbidity rate, mortality rate, overall survival, and recurrence-free survival after hepatic resection (p = 0.488, 0.124, 0.071 and 0.387, respectively). Conclusions Initial and repeat hepatectomy showed similar outcomes of remnant liver regeneration and short- and long-term prognoses.
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Liang Y, Lin C, Zhang B, Cao J, Chen M, Shen J, Feng X, Xiao G, Pan L, Chen K, Maher H, Cai X. Perioperative outcomes comparing laparoscopic with open repeat liver resection for post-hepatectomy recurrent liver cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg 2020; 79:17-28. [PMID: 32240816 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.03.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2019] [Revised: 03/13/2020] [Accepted: 03/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND 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. METHODS 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. RESULTS 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. CONCLUSION 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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuelong Liang
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Chengping Lin
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Bin Zhang
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Jiasheng Cao
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Mingyu Chen
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Jiliang Shen
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Xu Feng
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Guangyuan Xiao
- Department of General Surgery, Jiaxing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jiaxing, China
| | - Long Pan
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Ke Chen
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Hendi Maher
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Xiujun Cai
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
| |
Collapse
|