Brian K P Goh1,2, Ser-Yee Lee1,2, Ye-Xin Koh1,2, Juinn-Huar Kam1, Chung-Yip Chan1,2. 1. Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore. 2. Office of Clinical Sciences, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of minimally invasive major hepatectomy (MIMH) remains controversial and questions remain about its safety and reproducibility outside expert centres. This study examines the changing trends, safety and outcomes associated with the adoption of MIMH based on a contemporary single institution experience. METHODS: This study is a review of 120 consecutive patients who underwent MIMH between 2011 and 2018. To determine the evolution of MIMH, the study population was stratified into four equal groups of patients. Both conventional major hepatectomies (CMHs) (≥3 segments) and technical major hepatectomies (right anterior and posterior sectionectomies) were included. RESULTS: There were 70 CMHs and 50 technical major hepatectomies. Seven MIMHs were laparoscopic-assisted and 113 (94.2%) were totally laparoscopic/robotic. There were 10 (8.3%) open conversions. Comparison across the four groups demonstrated that with increasing experience, there was a significant trend in a higher proportion of higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score patients, increasing frequency of CMH performed, increasing frequency of multifocal tumours resected, decreasing use of laparoscopic-assisted approach and decrease in blood loss. CONCLUSION: MIMH can be adopted safely today with a low open conversion rate. Over time with increasing experience, we performed MIMH with increasing frequency in higher risk patients and in patients with multifocal tumours but with a decrease in median estimated blood loss.
BACKGROUND: The role of minimally invasive major hepatectomy (MIMH) remains controversial and questions remain about its safety and reproducibility outside expert centres. This study examines the changing trends, safety and outcomes associated with the adoption of MIMH based on a contemporary single institution experience. METHODS: This study is a review of 120 consecutive patients who underwent MIMH between 2011 and 2018. To determine the evolution of MIMH, the study population was stratified into four equal groups of patients. Both conventional major hepatectomies (CMHs) (≥3 segments) and technical major hepatectomies (right anterior and posterior sectionectomies) were included. RESULTS: There were 70 CMHs and 50 technical major hepatectomies. Seven MIMHs were laparoscopic-assisted and 113 (94.2%) were totally laparoscopic/robotic. There were 10 (8.3%) open conversions. Comparison across the four groups demonstrated that with increasing experience, there was a significant trend in a higher proportion of higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score patients, increasing frequency of CMH performed, increasing frequency of multifocal tumours resected, decreasing use of laparoscopic-assisted approach and decrease in blood loss. CONCLUSION: MIMH can be adopted safely today with a low open conversion rate. Over time with increasing experience, we performed MIMH with increasing frequency in higher risk patients and in patients with multifocal tumours but with a decrease in median estimated blood loss.
Authors: Hye Yeon Yang; Gi Hong Choi; Ken-Min Chin; Sung Hoon Choi; Nicholas L Syn; Tan-To Cheung; Adrian K H Chiow; Iswanto Sucandy; Marco V Marino; Mikel Prieto; Charing C Chong; Jae Hoon Lee; Mikhail Efanov; T Peter Kingham; Robert P Sutcliffe; Roberto I Troisi; Johann Pratschke; Xiaoying Wang; Mathieu D'Hondt; Chung Ngai Tang; Rong Liu; James O Park; Fernando Rotellar; Olivier Scatton; Atsushi Sugioka; Tran Cong Duy Long; Chung-Yip Chan; David Fuks; Ho-Seong Han; Brian K P Goh Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Adrian K H Chiow; David Fuks; Gi-Hong Choi; Nicholas Syn; Iswanto Sucandy; Marco V Marino; Mikel Prieto; Charing C Chong; Jae Hoon Lee; Mikhail Efanov; T Peter Kingham; Sung Hoon Choi; Robert P Sutcliffe; Roberto I Troisi; Johann Pratschke; Tan-To Cheung; Xiaoying Wang; Rong Liu; Mathieu D'Hondt; Chung-Yip Chan; Chung Ngai Tang; Ho-Seong Han; Brian K P Goh Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Tan-To Cheung; Xiaoying Wang; Mikhail Efanov; Rong Liu; David Fuks; Gi-Hong Choi; Nicholas L Syn; Charing C Chong; Iswanto Sucandy; Adrian K H Chiow; Marco V Marino; Mikel Gastaca; Jae Hoon Lee; T Peter Kingham; Mathieu D'Hondt; Sung Hoon Choi; Robert P Sutcliffe; Ho-Seong Han; Chung Ngai Tang; Johann Pratschke; Roberto I Troisi; Brian K P Goh Journal: Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr Date: 2021-10 Impact factor: 7.293
Authors: Darren W Chua; Nicholas Syn; Ye-Xin Koh; Jin-Yao Teo; Peng-Chung Cheow; Alexander Y F Chung; Chung-Yip Chan; Brian K P Goh Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-08-23 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: Ken Min Chin; Yun-Le Linn; Chin Kai Cheong; Ye-Xin Koh; Jin-Yao Teo; Alexander Y F Chung; Chung Yip Chan; Brian K P Goh Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Ken Min Chin; Darren W Q Chua; Ser Yee Lee; Chung Yip Chan; Brian K P Goh Journal: J Minim Access Surg Date: 2021 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 1.407