BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic hepatectomy (Lap-Hx) has been increasingly performed for patients with liver tumors as surgical techniques and devices have progressed. However, the long-term outcomes of Lap-Hx for malignant liver tumors are not oncologically guaranteed. This study compared the short- and long-term outcomes between Lap-Hx and open hepatectomy (Open-Hx) for malignant liver tumors by matched-pair analysis. METHODS: The indications for Lap-Hx at our department are a tumor size of <5 cm and fewer than two lesions without macroscopic vascular invasion or the need for biliary reconstruction. In total, 135 patients underwent Lap-Hx for malignant liver tumors through December 2013. We compared the short- and long-term outcomes between Lap-Hx and Open-Hx in patients who met the above-mentioned indications. RESULTS: With respect to short-term outcomes, the operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, white blood cell count, and C-reactive protein level after Lap-Hx were significantly better than those after Open-Hx in both the patients who underwent partial resection and those who underwent lateral sectionectomy. In patients who underwent partial resection, the incidence of postoperative complications after Lap-Hx was significantly lower than that after Open-Hx; in particular, wound infection and respiratory complications were significantly lower. Furthermore, when the tumor was located in the posterosuperior segments, the operation time for Lap-Hx was not shorter than that for Open-Hx. With respect to long-term outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma, neither overall nor disease-free survival differed between the two groups. With respect to long-term outcomes of colorectal liver metastases, the disease-free survival rate was similar between Lap-Hx and Open-Hx; however, the overall survival rate was significantly better for Lap-Hx than for Open-Hx. CONCLUSIONS: Lap-Hx is a good option for selected patients with malignant liver tumors. The short- and long-term outcomes of Lap-Hx also are considered to be acceptable.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic hepatectomy (Lap-Hx) has been increasingly performed for patients with liver tumors as surgical techniques and devices have progressed. However, the long-term outcomes of Lap-Hx for malignant liver tumors are not oncologically guaranteed. This study compared the short- and long-term outcomes between Lap-Hx and open hepatectomy (Open-Hx) for malignant liver tumors by matched-pair analysis. METHODS: The indications for Lap-Hx at our department are a tumor size of <5 cm and fewer than two lesions without macroscopic vascular invasion or the need for biliary reconstruction. In total, 135 patients underwent Lap-Hx for malignant liver tumors through December 2013. We compared the short- and long-term outcomes between Lap-Hx and Open-Hx in patients who met the above-mentioned indications. RESULTS: With respect to short-term outcomes, the operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, white blood cell count, and C-reactive protein level after Lap-Hx were significantly better than those after Open-Hx in both the patients who underwent partial resection and those who underwent lateral sectionectomy. In patients who underwent partial resection, the incidence of postoperative complications after Lap-Hx was significantly lower than that after Open-Hx; in particular, wound infection and respiratory complications were significantly lower. Furthermore, when the tumor was located in the posterosuperior segments, the operation time for Lap-Hx was not shorter than that for Open-Hx. With respect to long-term outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma, neither overall nor disease-free survival differed between the two groups. With respect to long-term outcomes of colorectal liver metastases, the disease-free survival rate was similar between Lap-Hx and Open-Hx; however, the overall survival rate was significantly better for Lap-Hx than for Open-Hx. CONCLUSIONS:Lap-Hx is a good option for selected patients with malignant liver tumors. The short- and long-term outcomes of Lap-Hx also are considered to be acceptable.
Authors: Alfredo D Guerron; Shamil Aliyev; Orhan Agcaoglu; Erol Aksoy; Halit Eren Taskin; Federico Aucejo; Charles Miller; John Fung; Eren Berber Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-10-10 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Peter R Smith; Muhammad A Baig; Veronica Brito; Fayez Bader; Michael I Bergman; Antonio Alfonso Journal: Respiration Date: 2009-10-28 Impact factor: 3.580
Authors: Michael Tsinberg; Gurkan Tellioglu; Conrad H Simpfendorfer; R M Walsh; Matthew R Walsh; David Vogt; John Fung; Eren Berber Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-12-31 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ahmad Ozair; Amelia Collings; Alexandra M Adams; Rebecca Dirks; Bradley S Kushner; Iswanto Sucandy; David Morrell; Ahmed M Abou-Setta; Timothy Vreeland; Jake Whiteside; Jordan M Cloyd; Mohammed T Ansari; Sean P Cleary; Eugene Ceppa; William Richardson; Adnan Alseidi; Ziad Awad; Subhashini Ayloo; Joseph F Buell; Georgios Orthopoulos; Samer Sbayi; Go Wakabayashi; Bethany J Slater; Aurora Pryor; D Rohan Jeyarajah Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-09-22 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: Jennifer Straatman; Miguel A Cuesta; Jurriaan B Tuynman; Alexander A F A Veenhof; Willem A Bemelman; Donald L van der Peet Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-12-27 Impact factor: 4.584