Search

Background: This study's aim was to show the feasibility and safety of robotic liver resection (RLR) even without extensive experience in major laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). Methods: A single center, retrospective analysis was performed for consecutive liver resections for solid liver tumors from 2014 to 2022. Results: The analysis included 226 liver resections, comprising 127 (56.2%) open surgeries, 28 (12.4%) LLR, and 71 (31.4%) RLR. The rate of RLR increased and that of LLR decreased over time. In a comparison between propensity score matching-selected open liver resection and RLR (41:41), RLR had significantly less blood loss (384 ± 413 vs 649 ± 646 mL, P = .030) and shorter hospital stay (4.4 ± 3.0 vs 6.4 ± 3.7 days, P = .010), as well as comparable operative time (289 ± 123 vs 290 ± 132 mins, P = .954). A comparison between LLR and RLR showed comparable perioperative outcomes, even with more surgeries with higher difficulty score included in RLR (5.2 ± 2.7 vs 4.3 ± 2.5, P = .147). The analysis of the learning curve in RLR demonstrated that blood loss, conversion rate, and complication rate consistently improved over time, with the case number required to achieve the learning curve appearing to be 60 cases. Conclusions: The findings suggest that RLR is a feasible, safe, and acceptable platform for liver resection, and that the safe implementation and dissemination of RLR can be achieved without solid experience of LLR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Posttransplant malignancy has become a significant cause of mortality. Data on the long-term outcomes of patients with pretransplant nonhepatic malignancy (PTM) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) are scarce, although the recipients of other organs with PTM have been reported to have a poor survival. Fifteen patients with PTM (4.4%) among the 342 adult recipients were identified in our LDLT programs. The outcomes of the patients with PTM after LDLT were compared to those of patients without PTM in terms of the all-cause mortality and cancerspecific mortality (defined as mortality related to malignancy expect for hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma, or neuroendocrine tumor). The sites of PTM included the breast in six, stomach in two, and colon, lung, kidney, uterine, thyroid, larynx, and acute myelogenous leukemia in one each. The median interval from the PTM treatment to LDLT was 57 months (range, 2-298). The patients who received the curative treatment for PTM were selected as the recipients. No patients with PTM had recurrence during the follow-up period. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival rates were 100%, 92.9%, and 92.9% in the PTM group and 86.2%, 76.7%, and 68.5% in the non-PTM group, respectively (p = 0.142). Likewise, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the cancer-specific mortality. In conclusion, the patients with PTM had comparable outcomes with regard to mortality and cancer-specific mortality compared with those without PTM. This study showed that the patients with PTM can obtain an acceptable outcome after LDLT when carefully selected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]