BACKGROUND: Techniques for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) have been developed over the past two decades. The aim of this study is to analyze the outcomes and trends of LLR. METHODS: 203 patients underwent LLR between 2006 and 2015. Trends in techniques and outcomes were assessed dividing the experience into 2 periods (before and after 2011). RESULTS: Tumor type was malignant in 62%, and R0 resection was achieved in 87.7%. Procedures included segmentectomy/wedge resection in 64.5%. Techniques included a purely laparoscopic approach in 59.1% and robotic 12.3%. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 6.4% cases. Mean hospital stay was 3.7 ± 0.2 days. 90-day mortality was 0% and morbidity 20.2%. Pre-coagulation and the robot were used less often, while the performance of resections for posteriorly located tumors increased in the second versus the first period. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the safety and efficacy of LLR, while describing the evolution of a program regarding patient and technical selection. With building experience, the number of resections performed for posteriorly located tumors have increased, with less reliance on pre-coagulation and the robot.
BACKGROUND: Techniques for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) have been developed over the past two decades. The aim of this study is to analyze the outcomes and trends of LLR. METHODS: 203 patients underwent LLR between 2006 and 2015. Trends in techniques and outcomes were assessed dividing the experience into 2 periods (before and after 2011). RESULTS: Tumor type was malignant in 62%, and R0 resection was achieved in 87.7%. Procedures included segmentectomy/wedge resection in 64.5%. Techniques included a purely laparoscopic approach in 59.1% and robotic 12.3%. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 6.4% cases. Mean hospital stay was 3.7 ± 0.2 days. 90-day mortality was 0% and morbidity 20.2%. Pre-coagulation and the robot were used less often, while the performance of resections for posteriorly located tumors increased in the second versus the first period. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the safety and efficacy of LLR, while describing the evolution of a program regarding patient and technical selection. With building experience, the number of resections performed for posteriorly located tumors have increased, with less reliance on pre-coagulation and the robot.
Authors: Pier Cristoforo Giulianotti; Andrea Coratti; Fabio Sbrana; Pietro Addeo; Francesco Maria Bianco; Nicolas Christian Buchs; Mario Annechiarico; Enrico Benedetti Journal: Surgery Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Reza Mirnezami; Alexander H Mirnezami; Kandiah Chandrakumaran; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Neil W Pearce; John N Primrose; Robert P Sutcliffe Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2011-03-02 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Jin Yao Teo; Juinn Huar Kam; Chung Yip Chan; Brian K P Goh; Jen-San Wong; Victor T W Lee; Peng Chung Cheow; Pierce K H Chow; London L P J Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung; Ser Yee Lee Journal: Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 7.293
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: Kevin Ryan Parks; Yen-Hong Kuo; John Mihran Davis; Brittany O' Brien; Ellen J Hagopian Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2013-05-15 Impact factor: 3.647