BACKGROUND: Liver regeneration after liver resection plays an important role in preventing posthepatectomy liver failure. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the impact of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) on liver regeneration. METHODS: Patients who underwent curative anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocellular carcinoma, and colorectal liver metastases at our institution between January 2010 and December 2018 were included in this study. The patients were divided into the OLR and LLR groups. Preoperative liver volume (PLV), future remnant liver volume, resected liver volume (RLV), liver volume at 1 month after the surgery, and liver volume at 6 months after the surgery were calculated. The liver regeneration rate was defined as the increase in the rate of RLV, and the liver recovery rate was defined as the rate of return to the PLV. RESULTS: The study included 72 patients. Among them, 43 were included in the OLR group and 29 were included in the LLR group. No differences were observed in the baseline characteristics and surgical procedures between the two groups. Moreover, no significant difference was observed in the liver regeneration rate at 1 month after the surgery (OLR vs. LLR: 68.9% vs. 69.0%, p = 0.875) and at 6 months after the surgery (91.8% vs. 93.2%, p = 0.995). Furthermore, the liver recovery rates were not significantly different between the two groups at 1 month after the surgery (90.3% vs. 90.6%, p = 0.893) and at 6 months after the surgery (96.9% vs. 98.8%, p = 0.986). CONCLUSION: Liver regeneration after liver resection is not affected by the type of surgical procedure and both laparoscopic and open procedures yield similar regeneration and recovery rates.
BACKGROUND: Liver regeneration after liver resection plays an important role in preventing posthepatectomy liver failure. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the impact of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) on liver regeneration. METHODS: Patients who underwent curative anatomical liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocellular carcinoma, and colorectal liver metastases at our institution between January 2010 and December 2018 were included in this study. The patients were divided into the OLR and LLR groups. Preoperative liver volume (PLV), future remnant liver volume, resected liver volume (RLV), liver volume at 1 month after the surgery, and liver volume at 6 months after the surgery were calculated. The liver regeneration rate was defined as the increase in the rate of RLV, and the liver recovery rate was defined as the rate of return to the PLV. RESULTS: The study included 72 patients. Among them, 43 were included in the OLR group and 29 were included in the LLR group. No differences were observed in the baseline characteristics and surgical procedures between the two groups. Moreover, no significant difference was observed in the liver regeneration rate at 1 month after the surgery (OLR vs. LLR: 68.9% vs. 69.0%, p = 0.875) and at 6 months after the surgery (91.8% vs. 93.2%, p = 0.995). Furthermore, the liver recovery rates were not significantly different between the two groups at 1 month after the surgery (90.3% vs. 90.6%, p = 0.893) and at 6 months after the surgery (96.9% vs. 98.8%, p = 0.986). CONCLUSION: Liver regeneration after liver resection is not affected by the type of surgical procedure and both laparoscopic and open procedures yield similar regeneration and recovery rates.
Authors: Miguel Nicolás; Matías Czerwonko; Victoria Ardiles; Rodrigo Sánchez Claria; Oscar Mazza; Eduardo de Santibañes; Juan Pekolj; Martín de Santibañes Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 3.445