BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery has been one of the recent developments in liver surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was initially performed for benign lesions at easily accessible locations. As the surgical techniques, technology and experience improved over the past decades, LLR surgery had evolved to tackle malignant lesions, major resections and even in difficult locations without compromising safety and principles of oncology. It was also shown to be beneficial in cirrhotic patients. We describe our initial experience with LLR in a population with significant proportion having cirrhosis, emphasising our approach for lesions in the posterosuperior (PS) segments of the liver (segments 1, 4a, 7, and 8). METHODS: A review of patients undergoing LLR in single institution from 2006 to 2015 was performed from a prospective surgical database. Clinicopathological, operative and perioperative parameters were analyzed to compare outcomes in patients who underwent LLR for PS vs. anterolateral lesions (AL). RESULTS: LLR was performed in consecutive 197 patients, with a mean age of 60 years. The indications for resection were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (n=105; 53%), colorectal cancer liver metastasis (n=31; 16%), other malignancies (n=19; 10%) and benign lesions (n=42; 21%). A significant proportion had liver cirrhosis (25.9%). More females underwent surgery in the AL group and indications for surgery were similar between both groups. Major liver resection was performed more frequently for the PS group than for the AL group (P<0.001) and significantly more PS resections was performed in our latter experience (P=0.02). The mean operative time and the conversion rate were significantly greater in the PS group than in the AL group (P≤0.001 and 0.03, respectively). However, the estimated blood loss (EBL), rate of blood transfusion and mean postoperative stay were similar in the two groups (P=0.04, 0.88 and 0.92, respectively). The overall 90-day morbidity and mortality rate was 21.3% and 0.5% respectively, with no differences between the two groups. Surrogates of difficulty such as operative time, blood loss, conversion and outcomes e.g., morbidity and mortality, were similar in patients who underwent PS resections with or without cirrhosis. CONCLUSIONS: LLR in selected patients is technically feasible and safe including cirrhotic patients with lesions in the PS segments.
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery has been one of the recent developments in liver surgery, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was initially performed for benign lesions at easily accessible locations. As the surgical techniques, technology and experience improved over the past decades, LLR surgery had evolved to tackle malignant lesions, major resections and even in difficult locations without compromising safety and principles of oncology. It was also shown to be beneficial in cirrhotic patients. We describe our initial experience with LLR in a population with significant proportion having cirrhosis, emphasising our approach for lesions in the posterosuperior (PS) segments of the liver (segments 1, 4a, 7, and 8). METHODS: A review of patients undergoing LLR in single institution from 2006 to 2015 was performed from a prospective surgical database. Clinicopathological, operative and perioperative parameters were analyzed to compare outcomes in patients who underwent LLR for PS vs. anterolateral lesions (AL). RESULTS: LLR was performed in consecutive 197 patients, with a mean age of 60 years. The indications for resection were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (n=105; 53%), colorectal cancer liver metastasis (n=31; 16%), other malignancies (n=19; 10%) and benign lesions (n=42; 21%). A significant proportion had liver cirrhosis (25.9%). More females underwent surgery in the AL group and indications for surgery were similar between both groups. Major liver resection was performed more frequently for the PS group than for the AL group (P<0.001) and significantly more PS resections was performed in our latter experience (P=0.02). The mean operative time and the conversion rate were significantly greater in the PS group than in the AL group (P≤0.001 and 0.03, respectively). However, the estimated blood loss (EBL), rate of blood transfusion and mean postoperative stay were similar in the two groups (P=0.04, 0.88 and 0.92, respectively). The overall 90-day morbidity and mortality rate was 21.3% and 0.5% respectively, with no differences between the two groups. Surrogates of difficulty such as operative time, blood loss, conversion and outcomes e.g., morbidity and mortality, were similar in patients who underwent PS resections with or without cirrhosis. CONCLUSIONS: LLR in selected patients is technically feasible and safe including cirrhotic patients with lesions in the PS segments.
Entities:
Keywords:
Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR); colorectal cancer liver metastasis; hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); posterosuperior (PS) and anterolateral lesions (AL)
Authors: Ibrahim Dagher; Brice Gayet; Dimitrios Tzanis; Hadrien Tranchart; David Fuks; Olivier Soubrane; Ho-Seong Han; Ki-Hun Kim; Daniel Cherqui; Nicholas O'Rourke; Roberto I Troisi; Luca Aldrighetti; Edwin Bjorn; Mohammed Abu Hilal; Giulio Belli; Hironori Kaneko; William R Jarnagin; Charles Lin; Juan Pekolj; Joseph F Buell; Go Wakabayashi Journal: J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci Date: 2014-08-06 Impact factor: 7.027
Authors: Ser Yee Lee; Ioannis T Konstantinidis; Anne A Eaton; Mithat Gönen; T Peter Kingham; Michael I D'Angelica; Peter J Allen; Yuman Fong; Ronald P DeMatteo; William R Jarnagin Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2014-07-16 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Brian K P Goh; Chung-Yip Chan; Jen-San Wong; Ser-Yee Lee; Victor T W Lee; Peng-Chung Cheow; Pierce K H Chow; London L P J Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-11-27 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Joseph F Buell; Daniel Cherqui; David A Geller; Nicholas O'Rourke; David Iannitti; Ibrahim Dagher; Alan J Koffron; Mark Thomas; Brice Gayet; Ho Seong Han; Go Wakabayashi; Giulio Belli; Hironori Kaneko; Chen-Guo Ker; Olivier Scatton; Alexis Laurent; Eddie K Abdalla; Prosanto Chaudhury; Erik Dutson; Clark Gamblin; Michael D'Angelica; David Nagorney; Giuliano Testa; Daniel Labow; Derrik Manas; Ronnie T Poon; Heidi Nelson; Robert Martin; Bryan Clary; Wright C Pinson; John Martinie; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Robert Goldstein; Sasan Roayaie; David Barlet; Joseph Espat; Michael Abecassis; Myrddin Rees; Yuman Fong; Kelly M McMasters; Christoph Broelsch; Ron Busuttil; Jacques Belghiti; Steven Strasberg; Ravi S Chari Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Brian K P Goh; Jin-Yao Teo; Ser-Yee Lee; Juinn-Huar Kam; Peng-Chung Cheow; Premaraj Jeyaraj; Pierce K H Chow; London L P J Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung; Chung-Yip Chan Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-09-15 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Najaf N Siddiqi; Mahmoud Abuawwad; Mark Halls; Arab Rawashdeh; Francesco Giovinazzo; Anas Aljaiuossi; Dennis Wicherts; Mathieu D'Hondt; Mohammed Abu Hilal Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ser Yee Lee; Brian K P Goh; Gholami Sepideh; John C Allen; Ryan P Merkow; Jin Yao Teo; Deepa Chandra; Ye Xin Koh; Ek Khoon Tan; Juinn Haur Kam; Peng Chung Cheow; Pierce K H Chow; London L P J Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung; Michael I D'Angelica; William R Jarnagin; T Peter Kingham; Chung Yip Chan Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Ye-Xin Koh; Pallavi Basu; Yi-Xin Liew; Jin-Yao Teo; Juinn-Huar Kam; Ser-Yee Lee; Peng-Chung Cheow; Premaraj Jeyaraj; Pierce K H Chow; Alexander Y F Chung; London L P J Ooi; Chung-Yip Chan; Brian K P Goh Journal: World J Surg Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Brian K P Goh; Ser-Yee Lee; Jin-Yao Teo; Juinn-Huar Kam; Prema-Raj Jeyaraj; Peng-Chung Cheow; Pierce K H Chow; London L P J Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung; Chung-Yip Chan Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-07-02 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Hui Jun Lim; Adrian Kah Heng Chiow; Lip Seng Lee; Siong San Tan; Brian Kp Goh; Ye Xin Koh; Chung Yip Chan; Ser Yee Lee Journal: Singapore Med J Date: 2019-11-04 Impact factor: 1.858