Search

Background: Previous meta-analyses have yielded conflicting results on the optimal surgical treatment strategy in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (sCRLM). This network meta-analysis aims to provide an overview on colorectal-, liver first and simultaneous resections to treat sCRLM., Methods: A search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL (inception-July 11,2023). Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted to compare the three strategies, using colorectal-first resections as reference group., Results: Overall, 46 studies with a total of 20,991 patients were included, a significant portion at a high risk of bias. Simultaneous resections were associated with less blood loss (MD -145.44 ml, 95%CI -239.40 to -51.48) and shorter hospital stays (MD -6.39 days, 95%CI -7.78 to -4.99). Liver-first resections were associated with more transfusions (OR 1.89, 95%CI 1.04 to 3.42) and shorter hospital stays (MD -4.53 days, 95%CI -7.99 to -1.06). Simultaneous resections were associated with less incomplete macroscopic disease clearances (OR 0.33, 95%CI 0.12 to 0.92), while liver-first resections were associated with more incomplete macroscopic disease clearances (OR 2.80, 95%CI 1.16 to 6.73) and less microscopically radical (R0) resections (OR 0.64, 95%CI 0.45 to 0.90). There were no significant differences in morbidity, mortality, disease-free or overall survival., Conclusion: Based on meta-analysis of mainly observational studies, simultaneous resections were associated with less blood loss, shorter length of stay and more complete macroscopic disease clearances., (Copyright © 2024 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a lack of consensus on the definition of upfront resectability and use of perioperative systemic therapy for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This survey aimed to summarize the current treatment strategies for upfront resectable CRLM throughout Europe., Methods: A survey was sent to all members of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association to gain insight into the current views on resectability and the use of systemic therapy for upfront resectable CRLM., Results: The survey was completed by 87 surgeons from 24 countries. The resectability of CRLM is mostly based on the volume of the future liver remnant, while considering tumor biology. Thermal ablation was considered as an acceptable adjunct to resection in parenchymal-sparing CRLM surgery by 77 % of the respondents. A total of 40.2 % of the respondents preferred standard perioperative systemic therapy and 24.1 % preferred standard upfront local treatment., Conclusion: Among the participating European hepato-pancreato-biliary surgeons, there is a high degree of consensus on the definition of CRLM resectability. However, there is much variety in the use of adjunctive thermal ablation. Major variations persist in the use of perioperative systemic therapy in cases of upfront resectable CRLM, stressing the need for further evidence and a consensus., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: In daily clinical practice, different future liver remnant (FLR) modulation techniques are increasingly used to allow a liver resection in patients with insufficient FLR volume. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and perioperative safety of portal vein ligation (PVL), portal vein embolization (PVE), liver venous deprivation (LVD) and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS)., Methods: A literature search for studies comparing liver resections following different FLR modulation techniques was performed in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central, and pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted., Results: Overall, 23 studies comprising 1557 patients were included. LVD achieved the greatest increase in FLR (17.32 %, 95% CI 2.49-32.15), while ALPPS was most effective in preventing dropout before the completion hepatectomy (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.15-0.55). PVL tended to be associated with a longer time to completion hepatectomy (MD 5.78 days, 95% CI -0.67-12.23). Liver failure occurred less frequently after LVD, compared to PVE (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14-0.87) and ALPPS (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.85)., Discussion: ALPPS and LVD seem superior to PVE and PVL in terms of achieved FLR increase and subsequent treatment completion. LVD was associated with lower rates of post hepatectomy liver failure, compared to both PVE and ALPPS. A summary of the protocol has been prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022321474)., (Copyright © 2024 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Solid benign liver lesions (BLL) are increasingly discovered, but clear indications for surgical treatment are often lacking. Concomitantly, laparoscopic liver surgery is increasingly performed. The aim of this study was to assess if the availability of laparoscopic surgery has had an impact on the characteristics and perioperative outcomes of patients with BLL., Methods: This is a retrospective international multicenter cohort study, including patients undergoing a laparoscopic or open liver resection for BLL from 19 centers in eight countries. Patients were divided according to the time period in which they underwent surgery (2008-2013, 2014-2016, and 2017-2019). Unadjusted and risk-adjusted (using logistic regression) time-trend analyses were performed. The primary outcome was textbook outcome (TOLS), defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥ grade 2, bile leak ≥ grade B, severe complications, readmission and 90-day or in-hospital mortality, with the absence of a prolonged length of stay added to define TOLS+., Results: In the complete dataset comprised of patients that underwent liver surgery for all indications, the proportion of patients undergoing liver surgery for benign disease remained stable (12.6% in the first time period, 11.9% in the second time period and 12.1% in the last time period, p = 0.454). Overall, 845 patients undergoing a liver resection for BLL in the first (n = 374), second (n = 258) or third time period (n = 213) were included. The rates of ASA-scores≥3 (9.9%-16%,p < 0.001), laparoscopic surgery (57.8%-77%,p < 0.001), and Pringle maneuver use (33.2%-47.2%,p = 0.001) increased, whereas the length of stay decreased (5 to 4 days,p < 0.001). There were no significant changes in the TOLS rate (86.6%-81.3%,p = 0.151), while the TOLS + rate increased from 41.7% to 58.7% (p < 0.001). The latter result was confirmed in the risk-adjusted analyses (aOR 1.849,p = 0.004)., Conclusion: The surgical treatment of BLL has evolved with an increased implementation of the laparoscopic approach and a decreased length of stay. This evolution was paralleled by stable TOLS rates above 80% and an increase in the TOLS + rate., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Evidence on the value of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) has been increasing but it is unclear how this has influenced the view of pancreatic surgeons on MIPS., Methods: An anonymous survey was sent to members of eight international Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Associations. Outcomes were compared with the 2016 international survey., Results: Overall, 315 surgeons from 47 countries participated. The median volume of pancreatic resections per center was 70 (IQR 40-120). Most surgeons considered minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) superior to open (ODP) (94.6%) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) superior to minimally invasive (MIPD) (67.9%). Since 2016, there has been an increase in the number of surgeons performing both MIDP (79%-85.7%, p = 0.024) and MIPD (29%-45.7%, p < 0.001), and an increase in the use of the robot-assisted approach for both MIDP (16%-45.6%, p < 0.001) and MIPD (23%-47.9%, p < 0.001). The use of laparoscopy remained stable for MIDP (91% vs. 88.1%, p = 0.245) and decreased for MIPD (51%-36.8%, p = 0.024)., Conclusion: This survey showed considerable changes of MIPS since 2016 with most surgeons considering MIDP superior to ODP and an increased use of robot-assisted MIPS. Surgeons prefer OPD and therefore the value of MIPD remains to be determined in randomized trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Postoperative complications following distal pancreatectomy (DP) are common, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). In order to design adequate prophylactic strategies, it is of relevance to determine the costs of these complications. An overview of the literature on the costs of complications following DP is lacking., Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (inception until 1 August 2022). The primary outcome was the costs (i.e. cost differential) of major morbidity, individual complications and prolonged hospital stay. Quality of non-RCTs were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Costs were compared with the use of Purchasing Power parity. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021223019)., Results: Overall, seven studies were included with 854 patients after DP. The rate POPF grade B/C varied between 13% and 27% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 18,389 (based on two studies). The rate of severe morbidity varied between 13% and 38% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 19,281 (based on five studies)., Conclusion: This systematic review reported considerable costs for POPF grade B/C and severe morbidity after DP. Prospective databases and studies should report on all complications in a uniform matter to better display the economic burden of complications of DP., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Anastomotic suturing is the Achilles heel of pancreatic surgery. Especially in laparoscopic and robotically assisted surgery, the pancreatic anastomosis should first be trained outside the operating room. Realistic training models are therefore needed., Methods: Models of the pancreas, small bowel, stomach, bile duct, and a realistic training torso were developed for training of anastomoses in pancreatic surgery. Pancreas models with soft and hard textures, small and large ducts were incrementally developed and evaluated. Experienced pancreatic surgeons (n = 44) evaluated haptic realism, rigidity, fragility of tissues, and realism of suturing and knot tying., Results: In the iterative development process the pancreas models showed high haptic realism and highest realism in suturing (4.6 ± 0.7 and 4.9 ± 0.5 on 1-5 Likert scale, soft pancreas). The small bowel model showed highest haptic realism (4.8 ± 0.4) and optimal wall thickness (0.1 ± 0.4 on -2 to +2 Likert scale) and suturing behavior (0.1 ± 0.4). The bile duct models showed optimal wall thickness (0.3 ± 0.8 and 0.4 ± 0.8 on -2 to +2 Likert scale) and optimal tissue fragility (0 ± 0.9 and 0.3 ± 0.7)., Conclusion: The biotissue training models showed high haptic realism and realistic suturing behavior. They are suitable for realistic training of anastomoses in pancreatic surgery which may improve patient outcomes., (Copyright © 2023 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The European registry for minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (E-MIPS) collects data on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS in low- and high-volume centers across Europe., Methods: Analysis of the first year (2019) of the E-MIPS registry, including minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) and minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). Primary outcome was 90-day mortality., Results: Overall, 959 patients from 54 centers in 15 countries were included, 558 patients underwent MIDP and 401 patients MIPD. Median volume of MIDP was 10 (7-20) and 9 (2-20) for MIPD. Median use of MIDP was 56.0% (IQR 39.0-77.3%) and median use of MIPD 27.7% (IQR 9.7-45.3%). MIDP was mostly performed laparoscopic (401/558, 71.9%) and MIPD mostly robotic (234/401, 58.3%). MIPD was performed in 50/54 (89.3%) centers, of which 15/50 (30.0%) performed ≥20 MIPD annually. This was 30/54 (55.6%) centers and 13/30 (43%) centers for MIPD respectively. Conversion rate was 10.9% for MIDP and 8.4% for MIPD. Overall 90 day mortality was 1.1% (n = 6) for MIDP and 3.7% (n = 15) for MIPD., Conclusion: Within the E-MIPS registry, MIDP is performed in about half of all patients, mostly using laparoscopy. MIPD is performed in about a quarter of patients, slightly more often using the robotic approach. A minority of centers met the Miami guideline volume criteria for MIPD., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The 8th edition of AJCC TNM staging of Gallbladder cancer subdivided T2 stage into T2a and T2b based on tumour location. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the long-term outcomes in T2a and T2b gallbladder cancers., Methods: Literature search of Medline, Web of science, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed. Study characteristics, survival and recurrence data were extracted for meta-analysis of effect estimates and of individual patient data., Results: Fifteen retrospective studies (2531 patients, T2a = 1332, T2b = 199) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall survival (OS) was significantly worse in patients with T2b compared to T2a tumours (HR 2.18, 95% CI 1.67-2.86, p < 0.0001). Meta-analysis of individual patient data (n = 629) showed similar results (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.43-2.58, p < 0.00001). Patients with T2b tumours had higher risk of recurrence compared to T2a (OR 3.19, 95% CI 1.40-7.28, p = 0.006) and were more likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.12-2.84, p = 0.014). Liver resection improved OS in T2b tumours (HR 2.99, CI 1.73-5.16, p < 0.0001)., Conclusion: T2b gallbladder tumours have worse overall survival and increase risk of recurrence compared to T2a. Liver resection appears to improve OS in patients with T2b tumours. However, high quality multicenter data is required to confirm these results., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest This work did not require any funding. All authors declare to conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Laparoscopic and robotic minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is gaining popularity. Recent data and views on the implementation of laparoscopic and robotic MILS throughout Europe are lacking., Methods: An anonymous survey consisting of 46 questions was sent to all members of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association., Results: The survey was completed by 120 surgeons from 103 centers in 24 countries. Median annual center volume of liver resection was 100 [IQR 50-140]. The median annual volume of MILS per center was 30 [IQR 16-40]. For minor resections, laparoscopic MILS was used by 80 (67%) surgeons and robotic MILS by 35 (29%) surgeons. For major resections, laparoscopic MILS was used by 74 (62%) surgeons and robotic MILS by 33 (28%) surgeons. The majority of the surgeons stated that minimum annual volume of MILS per center should be around 21-30 procedures/year. Of the surgeons performing robotic surgery, 28 (70%) felt they missed specific equipment, such as a robotic-CUSA. Seventy (66%) surgeons provided a formal MILS training to residents and fellows. In 5 years' time, 106 (88%) surgeons felt that MILS would have superior value as compared to open liver surgery., Conclusion: In the participating European liver centers, MILS comprised about one third of all liver resections and is expected to increase further. Laparoscopic MILS is still twice as common as robotic MILS. Development of specific instruments for robotic liver parenchymal transection might further increase its adoption., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The recent Miami international evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) advise all centers that perform MIPS to participate in multicenter registries to safeguard optimal outcomes and patient safety. During the design phase of a pan-European registry on MIPS, the European consortium of Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (E-MIPS) sought input from European HPB surgeons., Methods: An anonymous online questionnaire with 23 questions on MIPS practice was sent to all member centers of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA) and E-MIPS., Results: Completed questionnaires were obtained from 98 centers in 23 countries, of which 75 (76.5%) were academic centers. Centers had a median annual pancreatoduodenectomy volume of 45. The most-performed MIPS procedure was laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (93.9% of centers). Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy was performed in 49% of all centers. Some 25 centers already participated in an ongoing national registry, and were willing to share their data with the European registry on MIPS. The most mentioned (45.4%) maximum time for processing one patient's data into the registry was 10-15 min., Conclusion: This European survey showed considerable support for the European registry on MIPS., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) has been suggested to reduce postoperative outcomes as compared to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Recently, the first randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MIDP to ODP were published. This individual patient data meta-analysis compared outcomes after MIDP versus ODP combining data from both RCTs., Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify RCTs on MIDP vs. ODP, and individual patient data were harmonized. Primary endpoint was the rate of major (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) complications. Sensitivity analyses were performed in high-risk subgroups., Results: A total of 166 patients from the LEOPARD and LAPOP RCTs were included. The rate of major complications was 21% after MIDP vs. 35% after ODP (adjusted odds ratio 0.54; p = 0.148). MIDP significantly reduced length of hospital stay (6 vs. 8 days, p = 0.036), and delayed gastric emptying (4% vs. 16%, p = 0.049), as compared to ODP. A trend towards higher rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula was observed after MIDP (36% vs. 28%, p = 0.067). Outcomes were comparable in high-risk subgroups., Conclusion: This individual patient data meta-analysis showed that MIDP, when performed by trained surgeons, may be regarded as the preferred approach for distal pancreatectomy. Outcomes are improved after MIDP as compared to ODP, without obvious downsides in high-risk subgroups., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) has been expanding in the past decade. Excellent outcomes have been reported, however, safety concerns exist. The aim of this study was to define prerequisites for performing MIPR with the objective to guide safe implementation of MIPR into clinical practice., Methods: This systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR). PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for literature concerning the implementation of MIPR between 1946 and November 2018. Quality assessment was according to The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN)., Results: Overall, 1150 studies were screened, of which 32 studies with 8519 patients were included in this systematic review. Training programs for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy have been described with acceptable outcomes during the learning curve and improved outcomes after training. Learning curve studies have revealed an association between growing experience and improving perioperative outcomes. In addition, the association between higher center volume and lower mortality and morbidity has been reported by several studies., Conclusion: When embarking on MIPR, it is recommended to participate in a dedicated training program, to assure a sufficient volume, especially when implementing minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, (20 procedures recommended annually), and prospectively collect and closely monitor outcomes for continuous quality assessment, this can be achieved through institutional databases and participation in national or international registries., (Copyright © 2019 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: While most of the evidence on minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is derived from expert centers, nationwide outcomes remain underreported. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation and outcome of MILS on a nationwide scale., Methods: Electronic patient files were reviewed in all Dutch liver surgery centers and all patients undergoing MILS between 2011 and 2016 were selected. Operative outcomes were stratified based on extent of the resection and annual MILS volume., Results: Overall, 6951 liver resections were included, with a median annual volume of 50 resections per center. The overall use of MILS was 13% (n = 916), which varied from 3% to 36% (P < 0.001) between centers. The nationwide use of MILS increased from 6% in 2011 to 23% in 2016 (P < 0.001). Outcomes of minor MILS were comparable with international studies (conversion 0-13%, mortality <1%). In centers which performed ≥20 MILS annually, major MILS was associated with less conversions (14 (11%) versus 41 (30%), P < 0.001), shorter operating time (184 (117-239) versus 200 (139-308) minutes, P = 0.010), and less overall complications (37 (30%) versus 58 (42%), P = 0.040)., Conclusion: The nationwide use of MILS is increasing, although large variation remains between centers. Outcomes of major MILS are better in centers with higher volumes., (Copyright © 2019 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The value of open and minimally invasive liver resection for symptomatic solid benign liver tumours (BLT) such as hepatocellular adenoma, focal nodular hyperplasia and haemangioma is being debated. A systematic review on symptom relief, quality of life (QoL) and surgical outcome after both open and minimally invasive surgery for solid BLT is currently lacking., Methods: A systematic search in PubMed and EMBASE was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines (January 1985-April 2018). Articles reporting pre-and postoperative symptoms or QoL in patients undergoing open or minimally surgery for BLT were evaluated. Methodological quality was assessed using the MINORS tool., Results: Forty-two studies were included with 4061 patients undergoing surgery for BLT, 3536 (87%) open and 525 (13%) laparoscopic resections. Randomized and propensity-matched studies were lacking. Symptoms were the indication for resection in 56% of the patients. After a weighted mean of 28.5 months follow-up after surgery, symptoms were relieved in 82% of symptomatic patients. Validated QoL tools were used in eight studies, of which two found significant better QoL scores following laparoscopic compared to open surgery., Discussion: Resection of symptomatic BLT seems safe and relieves symptoms in the vast majority of selected patients. Comparative studies are needed before more firm conclusions can be drawn., (Copyright © 2019 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: It is currently unclear what the added value is of 3D-laparoscopy during pancreatic and biliary surgery. 3D-laparoscopy could improve procedure time and/or surgical performance, for instance in demanding anastomoses such as pancreatico- and hepaticojejunostomy. The impact of 3D-laparoscopy could be negligible in more experienced surgeons., Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled cross-over trial including 20 expert laparoscopic surgeons and 20 surgical residents from 9 countries (Argentina, Estonia, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, South Africa, Spain, UK, USA). All participants performed a pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) and a hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) using 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy on biotissue organ models according to the Pittsburgh method. Primary endpoint was the time required to complete both anastomoses. Secondary endpoint was the objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS; range 12-60) rating. Observers were blinded for 3D/2D and expertise., Results: A total of 40 participants completed 144 PJs and HJs. 3D-laparoscopy reduced the operative time with 15.5 min (95%CI 10.2-24.5 min), from 81.0 to 64.4 min, p = 0.001. This reduction was observed for both experts and residents (13.0 vs 22.2 min, intergroup significance p = 0.354). The OSATS improved with 5.1 points, SD ± 6.3, with 3D-laparoscopy, p = 0.001. This improvement was observed for both experts and residents (4.6 vs 5.6 points, p = 0.519). Of all participants, 37/39 participants stated to prefer 3D laparoscopy whereas 14/39 reported side effects. Minor side effects were reported by 10/39 participants whereas 2/39 participants reported severe side effects (both severe eye strain)., Conclusion: 3D-laparoscopy, as compared to 2D-laparoscopy, reduced the operative time and improved surgical performance for PJ and HJ anastomoses in both experts and residents with mostly minor side effects., (Copyright © 2019 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the most common complication after distal pancreatectomy. The International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery definition of POPF is used worldwide. Recently, an update of the definition was published. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical impact of the update., Methods: An international retrospective validation study, including patients who underwent DP (2005 -2016) in 5 centers was performed. Distribution of complications amongst POPF grades were compared for the old and updated definition., Results: In total, 1089 patients were included. The incidence of POPF decreased with the updated definition from 47% to 24% (P < 0.01), largely because a downgrade of grade A and grade B into biochemical leak. Comparable morbidity was seen in the old and updated 'no POPF group' (Clavien -Dindo 3 5% vs. 6% P = 0.320 and hospital stay (7 vs. 7 days P = 0.301). The change in definition of POPF grade B resulted in more Clavien -Dindo 3 (38% vs. 51%) P < 0.01) and longer hospital stay (9 [9 -13] vs. 9 days [7 -15] P < 0.01) in the updated `grade B group'., Conclusion: Applying the updated POPF definition showed improved discrimination between grades and should therefore be used to report POPF after DP., (Copyright © 2018 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recent studies have suggested that the difficulty of laparoscopic liver resections are related to both patient and tumour factors, however the available difficulty scoring systems only incorporate tumour factors. The aim of this study was to assess the opinion of laparoscopic liver surgeons regarding the factors that affect the perceived difficulty of laparoscopic liver resections., Method: Using a Visual Analogue Scale an international survey of laparoscopic liver surgeons was undertaken to assess the perceived difficulty of 26 factors previously demonstrated to affect the difficulty of a laparoscopic liver resection., Results: 80 surgeons with a combined experience of over 7000 laparoscopic liver resections responded to the survey. The difficulty of laparoscopic liver surgery was suggested to be increased by a BMI > 35 by 89% of respondents; neo-adjuvant chemotherapy by 79%; repeated liver resection by 99% and concurrent procedures by 59% however these factors have not been included in the previous difficulty scoring systems., Conclusion: The results suggests that the difficulty of laparoscopic liver surgery is not fully assessed by the available difficulty scoring systems and prompts the development of a new difficulty score that incorporates all factors believed to increase difficulty., (Copyright © 2017 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Uncontrolled introduction of laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) could compromise postoperative outcomes. A stepwise introduction of LLS combined with structured training is advised. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of such a stepwise introduction., Methods: A retrospective, single-center case series assessing short term outcomes of all consecutive LLS in the period November 2006-January 2017. The technique was implemented in a stepwise fashion. To evaluate the impact of this stepwise approach combined with structured training, outcomes of LLS before and after a laparoscopic HPB fellowship were compared., Results: A total of 135 laparoscopic resections were performed. Overall conversion rate was 4% (n = 5), clinically relevant complication rate 13% (n = 18) and mortality 0.7% (n = 1). A significant increase in patients with major LLS, multiple liver resections, previous abdominal surgery, malignancies and lesions located in posterior segments was observed after the fellowship as well as a decrease in the use of hand-assistance. Increasing complexity in the post fellowship period was reflected by an increase in operating times, but without comprising other surgical outcomes., Conclusion: A stepwise introduction of LLS combined with structured training reduced the clinical impact of the learning curve, thereby confirming guideline recommendations., (Copyright © 2017 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The introduction of minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR) into surgical practice has been slow. The worldwide utilization of MIPR and attitude towards future perspectives of MIPR remains unknown., Methods: An anonymous survey on MIPR was sent to the members of six international associations of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary (HPB) surgery., Results: The survey was completed by 435 surgeons from 50 countries, with each surgeon performing a median of 22 (IQR 12-40) pancreatic resections annually. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) was performed by 345 (79%) surgeons and minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) by 124 (29%). The median total personal experience was 20 (IQR 10-50) MIDPs and 12 (IQR 4-40) MIPDs. Current superiority for MIDP was claimed by 304 (70%) and for MIPD by 44 (10%) surgeons. The most frequently mentioned reason for not performing MIDP (54/90 (60%)) and MIPD (193/311 (62%)) was lack of specific training. Most surgeons (394/435 (90%)) would consider participating in an international registry on MIPR., Discussion: This worldwide survey showed that most participating HPB surgeons value MIPR as a useful development, especially for MIDP, but the role and implementation of MIPD requires further assessment. Most HPB surgeons would welcome specific training in MIPR and the establishment of an international registry., (Copyright © 2017 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Minimally invasive (MI) pancreatic surgery appears to be gaining popularity, but its implementation throughout Europe and the opinions regarding its use in pancreatic cancer patients are unknown., Methods: A 30-question survey was sent between June and December 2014 to pancreatic surgeons of the European Pancreatic Club, European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association and 5 European national pancreatic societies. Incomplete responses were excluded., Results: In total, 237 pancreatic surgeons responded. After excluding 34 incomplete responses, 203 responses from 27 European countries were included. 164 (81%) surgeons were employed at a university hospital, 184 (91%) performed advanced MI surgery and 148 (73%) performed MI distal pancreatectomy. MI pancreatoduodenectomy was performed by 42 (21%) surgeons, whereas 9 (4.4%) surgeons had performed more than 10 procedures. Robot-assisted MI pancreatic surgery was performed by 28 (14%) surgeons. 63 (31%) surgeons expected MI distal pancreatectomy for cancer to be inferior to open distal pancreatectomy concerning oncological outcomes. 151 (74%) surgeons expected to benefit from training in MI distal pancreatectomy and 149 (73%) were willing to participate in a randomized trial on this topic., Conclusions: MI distal pancreatectomy is a common procedure, although its use for cancer is still disputed. MI pancreatoduodenectomy is still an uncommon procedure. Specific training and a randomized trial regarding MI pancreatic cancer surgery are welcomed., (Copyright © 2015 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now considered a feasible alternative to open liver resection (OLR) in selected patients. Nevertheless studies comparing LLR and OLR are few and concerns remain about long-term oncological equivalence. The present study compares outcomes with LLR vs. OLR using meta-analytical methods., Methods: Electronic literature searches were conducted to identify studies comparing LLR and OLR. Short-term outcomes evaluated included operating time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, peri-operative morbidity and resection margin status. Longer-term outcomes included local and distant recurrence, and overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Meta-analyses were performed using the Mantel-Haenszel method and Cohen's d method, with results expressed as odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean difference (SMD), respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CI)., Results: Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria with a population of 1678 patients. LLR resulted in longer operating time, but reduced blood loss, portal clamp time, overall and liver-specific complications, ileus and length of stay. No difference was found between LLR and OLR for oncological outcomes., Discussion: LLR has short-term advantages and seemingly equivalent long-term outcomes and can be considered a feasible alternative to open surgery in experienced hands., (© 2011 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.)

Background: Pancreatic anastomotic leak is one of the most serious complications following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Various factors have been implicated as contributors to pancreatic anastomotic leaks, the incidence of which has been as high as 28% in some series., Objectives: We describe technical modifications to Cattell's technique for pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ), with buttressing of 'soft' pancreases and use of an isolated biliopancreatic loop for reconstruction following a PD., Methods: We report our early experience using this technique in 50 patients who underwent PD between May 2002 and June 2006., Results: There was no mortality in our series. The postoperative morbidity rate was 32% (16/50), with major complications occurring in seven (14%) patients. Pancreatic leak occurred in one patient (2%) and bile leak in one patient (2%). Both patients were managed conservatively., Conclusions: Reconstruction after PD using an isolated biliopancreatic loop and modifications to Cattell's technique for PJ, with buttressing of the soft pancreas, can be performed with a low risk of pancreatic anastomotic leakage.