Search

Background: Major liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ideally involves preoperative portal venous embolization (PVE) coupled with preoperative transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) to improve postoperative course and oncological results. Laparoscopic right hepatectomy (RH) following sequential TACE-PVE for HCC, although challenging, may help improve both immediate and long-term patient outcomes. This study is the first to describe and compare laparoscopic to open RH following sequential TACE-PVE for HCC in terms of feasibility, safety, and patient outcomes.Study Design: All patients who underwent laparoscopic RH following successful TACE-PVE sequence (video provided) were retrospectively reviewed from a prospective database maintained at our center. Preoperative characteristics, operative data, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed and compared with those of patients who underwent open RH after TACE-PVE sequence during the same period.Results: The laparoscopic and open RH groups each included 16 patients. F3 or F4 fibrosis was present in 81 % of patients. The conversion rate was 25 %. The 90-day postoperative complication rate was 25 % in the laparoscopic group versus 50 % in the open group (p = 0.27). The incidence of postoperative liver failure grade B was higher in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (5 vs. 0 patients, p = 0.043). Severe complications, Clavien grade ≥ IIIb, only occurred in the open group and included one postoperative death. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (7 vs. 12 days, p = 0.001). R0 resection was accomplished in 93.8 % of laparoscopic patients.Conclusion: Laparoscopic approach seems technically feasible and safe. This modern approach may optimize the surgical strategy in the future of HCC management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study was to assess the clinical impact of laparoscopic hepatectomy from technical and oncological viewpoints through the consecutive 5-year experience of an expert team. The subjects consisted of 491 consecutive hepatectomies performed over the course of 5 years. A total of 190 hepatectomies (38.6 %) were performed laparoscopically, and the remaining 301 (61.4 %) were open hepatectomies. Chronological trends of operative procedures and their indications were evaluated, and patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were analyzed from an oncological viewpoint. The proportion of laparoscopic hepatectomies performed increased significantly during the study period (from 17.6 to 49.5 %). According to chronological trends, right hepatectomy was standardized using consecutive steps after minor hepatectomy, left lateral sectionectomy, and left hepatectomy were standardized. The proportion of laparoscopic hepatectomies performed for HCC increased from 21.4 to 71.0 %. No significant difference was observed in the proportion of major hepatectomies performed for HCC between the open and laparoscopy groups (50.6 vs. 48.6 %, p = 0.8053), whereas that of anatomical segmentectomy for HCC was significantly lower in the laparoscopy group (28.7 vs. 11.1 %, p = 0.0064). All laparoscopic anatomical segmentectomies were of segments 5 and 6, and there was no segmentectomy of posterosuperior lesions. The present study shows the consecutive technical developmental processes for minor hepatectomy, left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy without compromising oncological principles. Laparoscopic anatomical segmentectomy for posterosuperior lesions may be the most technically demanding procedure, requiring individualized standardization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is currently perceived a complex and challenging laparoscopic procedure and is limited to a few expert teams. This study analyzed the short- and long-term outcomes of LMH for HCC compared with open hepatectomy.Methods: From January 2006 to May 2014, 38 patients underwent LMH for HCC (10 left and 28 right hepatectomy). They were matched and compared to 38 patients (10 left and 28 right hepatectomy) who underwent a conventional open approach. Short-term operative and postoperative outcomes as well as long-term outcomes, including disease-free survival and overall survival rates, were evaluated.Results: Patients were well matched for several preoperative factors. Overall complication rates were significantly higher for the open group. No significant difference was seen in 3-year overall survival between the open and laparoscopic groups (69.2 vs. 73.4 %; p = 0.951). A trend toward better 3-year disease-free survival after laparoscopy was observed (29.7 vs. 50.3 %; p = 0.219), even though the difference did not reach statistical significance. The same trend was seen in subgroup analyses of right and left hepatectomy.Conclusions: This study shows the feasibility of LMH for HCC compared to open hepatectomy in regard to both short- and long-term outcomes. LMH offers many advantages commonly attributed to laparoscopy and is well suited for HCC with cirrhosis when performed by experienced surgeons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Drainage fluid amylase (DFA) is useful for predicting clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) after distal pancreatectomy (DP). However, difference in optimal cutoff value of DFA for predicting CR-POPF between open DP (ODP) and laparoscopic DP (LDP) has not been investigated. This study aimed to identify the optimal cutoff values of DFA for predicting CR-POPF after ODP and LDP. Methods: Data for 294 patients (ODP, n = 127; LDP, n = 167) undergoing DP at Kobe University Hospital between 2010 and 2021 were reviewed. Propensity score matching was performed to minimize treatment selection bias. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to determine the optimal cutoff values of DFA for predicting CR-POPF for ODP and LDP. Logistic regression analysis for CR-POPF was performed to investigate the diagnostic value of DFA on postoperative day (POD) three with identified cutoff value. Results: In the matched cohort, CR-POPF rates were 24.7% and 7.9% after ODP and LDP, respectively. DFA on POD one was significantly lower after ODP than after LDP (2263 U/L vs 4243 U/L, p < 0.001), while the difference was not significant on POD three (543 U/L vs 1221 U/L, p = 0.171). ROC analysis revealed that the optimal cutoff value of DFA on POD one and three for predicting CR-POPF were different between ODP and LDP (ODP, 3697 U/L on POD one, 1114 U/L on POD three; LDP, 10564 U/L on POD one, 6020 U/L on POD three). Multivariate analysis showed that DFA on POD three with identified cutoff value was the independent predictor for CR-POPF both for ODP and LDP. Conclusions: DFA on POD three is an independent predictor for CR-POPF after both ODP and LDP. However, the optimal cutoff value for it is significantly higher after LDP than after ODP. Optimal threshold of DFA for drain removal may be different between ODP and LDP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) have been reported worldwide. However, those of LLR for tumors located in Couinaud's segment 8 are not sufficiently investigated. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 108 patients who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in segment 8 at Kobe University Hospital and Hyogo Cancer Center between January 2010 and December 2021. The patients were categorized in LLR and open liver resection (OLR) groups, and 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to compare surgical outcomes between the groups. Results: Forty-seven and 61 patients underwent LLR and OLR, respectively. After PSM, each group contained 34 patients. There was no significant difference in operation time between the groups (331 min vs. 330 min, P = 0.844). Patients in the LLR group had significantly less blood loss (30 mL vs. 468 mL, P < 0.001) and shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (10 days vs. 12 days, P = 0.015) than those in the OLR group. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of postoperative complications between the groups (12% vs. 9%, P = 0.690). Further, the 1-year cumulative incidence of recurrence was not significantly different between the groups (16% vs. 19%, P = 0.734). Conclusions: The surgical outcomes and short-term prognosis of LLR were similar or better than those of OLR. LLR could be an effective and safe procedure, even for lesions located in segment 8, which is considered a difficult anatomical location for LLR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anatomic liver resection (ALR) has been established to eliminate the tumor-bearing hepatic region with preservation of the remnant liver volume for liver malignancies. Recently, laparoscopic ALR has been widely applied; however, there are few reports on laparoscopic segmentectomy 2. This study aimed to present the standardization of laparoscopic segmentectomy 2 with surgical outcomes. Methods: This study included seven patients who underwent pure laparoscopic segmentectomy 2 by the Glissonean approach from January 2020 to December 2021. Four of them had hepatocellular carcinoma, two had colorectal liver metastasis, and one had hepatic angiomyolipoma, which was preoperatively diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma. In all patients, preoperative three-dimensional (3D) simulation images from dynamic CT were reconstructed using a 3D workstation. The layer between the hepatic parenchyma and the Glissonean pedicle of segment 2 (G2) was dissected to encircle the root of G2. After clamping or ligation of the G2, 2.5 mg of indocyanine green was injected intravenously to identify the boundaries between segments 2 and 3 with a negative staining method under near-infrared light. Parenchymal transection was performed from the caudal side to the cranial side according to the demarcation on the liver surface, and the left hepatic vein was exposed on the cut surface if possible. Results: The mean operative time for all patients was 281 min. The mean blood loss was 37 mL, and no transfusion was necessary. Estimated liver resection volumes significantly correlated with actual liver resection volumes (r = 0.61, P = 0.035). After the operation, one patient presented with asymptomatic deep venous and pulmonary thrombosis, which was treated with anticoagulant therapy. The mean length of hospital stay was 8.9 days. Conclusion: Laparoscopic segmentectomy 2 by the Glissonean approach is a feasible and safe procedure with the preservation of the nontumor-bearing segment 3 for liver tumors in segment 2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We compared surgical outcomes, with a focus on tumor characteristics, of laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) and open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) to identify recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases where the LRH procedure would be more favorable than ORH.Methods: Eighty-one HCC patients who underwent repeat hepatectomy in our hospital from 2008 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed in this study. Of these patients, 30 and 51 patients underwent LRH and ORH, respectively. We analyzed surgical outcomes of LRH and ORH, focusing on tumor characteristics such as tumor size, location, distance from major vessels, and contralateral or ipsilateral tumor recurrence to determine what factors could affect surgical outcomes. Subsequently, using a propensity-matched cohort, we compared the impact of those factors on LRH and ORH outcomes.Results: In the entire cohort, the LRH operation time was significantly shorter in contralateral recurrent HCC cases than in ipsilateral recurrent HCC cases (252 vs. 398 min, P = 0.008); however, such a difference was not observed in the ORH operation time. We subsequently compared the surgical outcomes, in terms of the location of tumor recurrence, between the LRH and ORH groups in a propensity-matched cohort. In total, 23 patients were included in each of these groups. We found that the LRH procedure had significantly shorter operative time than the ORH procedure in the contralateral recurrent HCC cases (253 vs. 391 min, P = 0.018); however, we did not observe such a difference in the ipsilateral recurrent HCC cases (372 vs. 333 min, P = 0.669). LRH had lower blood loss, similar postoperative complications and shorter hospital stay than ORH in both contralateral and ipsilateral recurrent HCC cases.Conclusions: LRH is likely considered a more favorable approach than ORH in treating patients with contralateral recurrent HCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although laparoscopic liver resection is widely performed, many technical difficulties remain, such as accurate isolation/division of hepatic vessels in laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH). Innovative surgical devices, such as three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy and optimized carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation system, may help to overcome technical difficulties in LRH. The purpose of this study was to analyze the efficacy of 3D vision associated with active pneumoperitoneum maintenance in LRH.Methods: In our prospectively maintained database from 2006, 75 consecutive LRH from May 2011 to June 2017 were included in this study. All LRH were performed with 2D vision and standard CO2 insufflator (2D-LRH group, 45 cases) or 3D vision with optimized CO2 insufflator (3D-LRH group, 30 cases). Preoperative clinical characteristics, surgical data including operation time of separate steps within the procedure, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.Results: Clinical and pathological factors were comparable between two groups. Total operative time was significantly shorter in 3D-LRH group than in 2D-LRH (360 vs 390 min, P = 0.029). Right hepatic pedicle dissection time was significantly shorter in 3D-LRH group (101 vs 123 min, P = 0.003). Liver parenchyma transection time was also shorter in 3D-LRH group (138 vs 151 min, P = 0.089), although not significant. There was no significant difference in liver mobilization time, intraoperative bleeding/transfusion, and postoperative complications.Conclusions: 3D vision with maintenance of pneumoperitoneum facilitates hepatic vascular isolation/division, and may contribute to the development of LRH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]