Multicentre evaluation of case volume in minimally invasive hepatectomy.

Center case volume and minimally invasive liver surgery: a study based on the Italian Group of minimally invasive liver surgery registry

Operative indications and type of resection represent a crucial issue of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS), and they should not be modified by the increased experience of laparoscopic liver surgeons. The aim of this study was to define the indications for MILS and the learning curve in a high-volume hepatobiliary surgery Unit. Between 2009 and 2014, 993 liver resections were performed in our unit, and MILS was performed in 81 of these (8.2%). The proportion of MILS significantly increased over the study period of time and was significantly higher during the last 2 years than during the first 2 years (10.8 vs. 6.4%; p = 0.042). Rate of liver resections for benign disease between the first 2 years and the last 2 years of the study period was not significantly different (14.7 vs. 10.5%; p = 0.098). Rate of MILS for malignant disease significantly increased from the first 2 years to the last 2 years: 3.2 vs. 7.5% (p < 0.001). Indication for left lateral sectionectomy in the whole series was rare. It was performed in 37 cases as the only liver surgical procedure, on 993 liver resections (3.7%). In 25 (67.6%) of these, a minimally invasive approach was used. Rate of left lateral sectionectomies between the first 2 years and the last 2 years of the study period was not significantly different: 4.5 vs. 3.8% (p = 0.645). This study shows that the proportion of MILS significantly increased over the study period of time in our high-volume hepatobiliary surgery Unit without changing surgical indications for benign disease and type of resections.

To elucidate minor hepatectomy (MiH) outcomes. Liver surgery has moved toward a parenchyma-sparing approach, favoring MiHs over major resections. MiHs encompass a wide range of procedures. We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients who underwent open liver resections in 17 high-volume centers. cirrhosis and associated digestive/biliary resections. Resections were classified as (Brisbane nomenclature): limited resections (LR); (mono)segmentectomies/bisegmentectomies (Segm/Bisegm); right anterior and right posterior sectionectomies (RightAnteriorSect/RightPosteriorSect). Additionally, we defined: complex LRs (ComplexLR = LRs with exposed vessels); postero-superior segmentectomies (PosteroSuperiorSegm = segment (Sg)7, Sg8, and Sg7+Sg8 segmentectomies); and complex core hepatectomies (ComplexCoreHeps = Sg1 segmentectomies and combined resections of Sg4s+Sg8+Sg1). Left lateral sectionectomies (LLSs, n = 442) and right hepatectomies (RHs, n = 1042) were reference standards. Outcomes were adjusted for potential confounders. Four thousand four hundred seventy-one MiHs were analyzed. Compared with RHs, MiHs had lower 90-day mortality (0.5%/2.2%), severe morbidity (8.6%/14.4%), and liver failure rates (2.4%/11.6%, P < 0.001), but similar bile leak rates. LR and LLS had similar outcomes. ComplexLR and Segm/Bisegm of anterolateral segments had higher bile leak rates than LLS rates (OR = 2.35 and OR = 3.24), but similar severe morbidity rates. ComplexCoreHeps had higher bile leak rates than RH rates (OR = 1.94); the severe morbidity rate approached that of RH. PosteroSuperiorSegm, RightAnteriorSect, and RightPosteriorSect had severe morbidity and bile leak rates similar to RH rates. MiHs had low liver failure rates, except RightAnteriorSect (vs LLS OR = 4.02). MiHs had heterogeneous outcomes. Mortality was low, but MiHs could be stratified according to severe morbidity, bile leak, and liver failure rates. Some MiHs had postoperative outcomes similar to RH.

ImportanceSurgery represents the mainstay treatment of colorectal liver metastases. Indications for the laparoscopic approach in this setting have been widened and there is a need to confirm the benefits of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) in patients with complex disease states.ObjectiveTo compare outcomes of laparoscopic surgery with those of open surgery for liver metastases from colorectal cancer, focusing on the characteristics of modern MILS and therefore overcoming possible selection bias related to different policies for patients’ eligibility for MILS over time.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA cohort study of 885 resections performed for liver metastases from colorectal cancer between January 1, 2004, and June 30, 2017, at the Hepatobiliary Surgery Unit of San Raffaele Hospital, Milano, Italy, comprising 187 laparoscopic and 698 open resections. Procedures performed using the MILS approach with a ratio of MILS to total resections per year of more than 30% were considered and were matched by propensity scores (ratio of 1:4) to procedures performed using the open approach with a ratio of MILS to total resections per year of less than 30%.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end point was short-term outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, functional recovery, and interval between surgery and adjuvant treatments; the secondary end point was long-term outcomes.ResultsAmong this cohort (104 patients in the MILS group; 46 women and 58 men; median age, 62 years [range, 35-81 years]; and 412 patients in the open group; 181 women and 231 men; median age, 60 years [range, 37-80 years]), primary end-point data showed a significantly higher incidence of postoperative morbidity in patients who underwent open resections compared with those who underwent MILS (94 [22.8%] vs 21 [20.2%]; P = .04). Patients in the MILS group had fewer major complications (Dindo-Clavien grades III-V) compared with patients in the open group (Dindo-Clavien grades III-V; 7 [6.7%] vs 35 [8.5%]; P = .03) as well as shorter lengths of stay (median [range] duration, 3 [2-35] vs 5 [4-37] days; P = .02). Oncologic results were not compromised by the laparoscopic approach.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, the results of the propensity score matching analysis between modern laparoscopic surgery and previous open surgery appear to confer more comparable cohorts for complexity, further supporting the advantages of laparoscopy in the surgical treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer. The increase in use that laparoscopy has experienced appears to be based on increased feasibility, widening of eligibility criteria for patients, enhanced clinical effectiveness, and oncologic outcomes. All these elements together suggest that up to 70% of patients appear to be candidates for this minimally invasive surgical approach in high-volume centers.

Laparoscopic and robotic minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is gaining popularity. Recent data and views on the implementation of laparoscopic and robotic MILS throughout Europe are lacking. An anonymous survey consisting of 46 questions was sent to all members of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association. The survey was completed by 120 surgeons from 103 centers in 24 countries. Median annual center volume of liver resection was 100 [IQR 50-140]. The median annual volume of MILS per center was 30 [IQR 16-40]. For minor resections, laparoscopic MILS was used by 80 (67%) surgeons and robotic MILS by 35 (29%) surgeons. For major resections, laparoscopic MILS was used by 74 (62%) surgeons and robotic MILS by 33 (28%) surgeons. The majority of the surgeons stated that minimum annual volume of MILS per center should be around 21-30 procedures/year. Of the surgeons performing robotic surgery, 28 (70%) felt they missed specific equipment, such as a robotic-CUSA. Seventy (66%) surgeons provided a formal MILS training to residents and fellows. In 5 years' time, 106 (88%) surgeons felt that MILS would have superior value as compared to open liver surgery. In the participating European liver centers, MILS comprised about one third of all liver resections and is expected to increase further. Laparoscopic MILS is still twice as common as robotic MILS. Development of specific instruments for robotic liver parenchymal transection might further increase its adoption.

The Italian Group of MILS (I Go MILS) prospective registry was established in 2014 with the goals to create a hub for data and projects on a national basis and to promote the diffusion and implementation of MILS programs on a national scale. The primary endpoint of the present study is to give a snapshot of the real diffusion and outcomes of MILS in Italy, while analyzing the role of the registry in the implementation of MILS programs nationwide. The I Go MILS Registry is a prospective and intention-to-treat registry opened to any Italian center performing MILS, without restriction criteria based on number of procedures. The Registry is developed through the eClinical, an electronic platform for the management of clinical trials and is based on 34 clinical variables, regarding indication, intra- and postoperative course. Clinical outcomes and data regarding implementation of MILS activity have been analyzed for the aim of the study. Between November 2014 and June 2017, data from 1678 MILS performed in 48 centers have been collected (mean number of procedures per center 35, range 1-302). 22% of procedures were performed for benign and 78% for malignant disease (HCC constituted the 49.1% and CRLM the 31.2% of malignant tumors). Major liver resections (>3 liver segments), including right and left hepatectomies, trisectionectomies and ALPPS procedures were 10% of the series. Mean blood loss was 200±230mL Morbidity rate was 20.5% and mortality was 0.3%. 10.4% of cases were converted to open approach. Median length of stay was 5days. MILS/total resections ratio in 13 experienced centers increased from 14 to 30% after Registry establishment. MILS programs are well established in Italy, with progressive increase both in the number of cases and in the numerosity of centers. The I Go MILS Registry is playing a crucial role in monitoring the development of MILS in the real world on a national basis while giving a significant contribution to the implementation of MILS programs.

BackgroundDespite the worldwide increase of both obesity and the use of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS), evidence regarding the safety and eventual benefits of MILS in obese patients is scarce. The aim of this study was therefore to compare the outcomes of non-obese and obese patients (BMI 18.5–29.9 and BMI≥30, respectively) undergoing MILS and OLS, and to assess trends in MILS use among obese patients. MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, patients operated at 20 hospitals in eight countries (2009–2019) were included and the characteristics and outcomes of non-obese and obese patients were compared. Thereafter, the outcomes of MILS and OLS were compared in both groups after propensity-score matching (PSM). Changes in the adoption of MILS during the study period were investigated. ResultsOverall, 9963 patients were included (MILS: n = 4687; OLS: n = 5276). Compared to non-obese patients (n = 7986), obese patients(n = 1977) were more often comorbid, less often received preoperative chemotherapy or had a history of previous hepatectomy, had longer operation durations and more intraoperative blood loss (IOBL), paralleling significantly higher rates of wound- and respiratory-related complications. After PSM, MILS, compared to OLS, was associated, among both non-obese and obese patients, with less IOBL (200 ml vs 320 ml, 200 ml vs 400 ml, respectively), lower rates of transfusions (6.6% vs 12.8%, 4.7% vs 14.7%), complications (26.1% vs 35%, 24.9% vs 34%), bile leaks(4% vs 7%, 1.8% vs 4.9%), liver failure (0.7% vs 2.3%, 0.2% vs 2.1%), and a shorter length of stay(5 vs 7 and 4 vs 7 days). A cautious implementation of MILS over time in obese patients (42.1%–53%, p < .001) was paralleled by stable severe morbidity (p = .433) and mortality (p = .423) rates, despite an accompanying gradual increase in surgical complexity. ConclusionsMILS is increasingly adopted and associated with perioperative benefits in both non-obese and obese patients.

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a safe procedure. Repeat surgery is more often required, and the role of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is not yet clearly defined. The present study analyzes data compiled by the Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery (IGoMILS) on LLR. To compare repeated LLR with the first LLR for HCC is the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the outcome of repeat LLR in the case of primary open versus primary MILS surgery. The data cohort is divided into two groups. Group 1: first liver resection and Group 2: Repeat LLR. To compare the two groups a 3:1 Propensity Score Matching is performed to analyze open versus MILS primary resection. Fifty-two centers were involved in the present study, and 1054 patients were enrolled. 80 patients underwent to a repeat LLR. The type of resection was different, with more major resections in the group 1 before matching the two groups. After propensity score matching 3:1, each group consisted of 222 and 74 patients. No difference between the two groups was observed. In the subgroup analysis, in 44 patients the first resection was performed by an open approach. The other 36 patients were resected with a MILS approach. We found no difference between these two subgroups of patients. The present study in repeat MILS for HCC using the IGoMILS Registry has observed the feasibility and safety of the MILS procedure.

To compare the outcome of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) to open liver surgery (OLS) for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) on a nationwide level. Colorectal cancer is the third most common malignancy worldwide. Up to 50% of all patients with colorectal cancer develop CRLM. MILS represents an attractive alternative to OLS for treatment of CRLM. Retrospective cohort study using the prospectively recorded German Quality management registry for liver surgery. Propensity-score matching was performed to account for variance in the extent of resection and patient demographics. In total, 1037 patients underwent liver resection for CRLM from 2019 to 2021. MILS was performed in 31%. Operative time was significantly longer in MILS (234 vs 222 minutes, P = 0.02) compared with OLS. After MILS, median length of hospital stay (LOS) was significantly shorter (7 vs 10 days; P < 0.001). Despite 76% of major resections being OLS, postoperative complications and 90-day morbidity and mortality did not differ. The Pringle maneuver was more frequently used in MILS (48% vs 40%, P = 0.048). After propensity-score matching for age, body mass index, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, and extent of resection, LOS remained shorter in the MILS cohort (6 vs 10 days, P < 0.001) and operative time did not differ significantly (P = 0.2). MILS is not the standard for resection of CRLM in Germany. Drawbacks, such as a longer operative time remain. However, if technically possible, MILS is a reasonable alternative to OLS for resection of CRLM, with comparable postoperative complications, reduced LOS, and equal oncological radicality.

Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery (MILS), encompassing laparoscopic (L-MILS) and robotic (R-MILS) approaches, has revolutionized liver surgery, offering reduced morbidity, shorter hospital stays, and improved outcomes while maintaining oncological efficacy. Despite the widespread use of L-MILS, parenchyma liver transection techniques and devices remain debated. This study investigates the adoption of transection devices (TDs) in MILS among 86 hospitals, focusing on surgical practices, device utilization, and outcomes. The Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery (SICE) endorsed a cross-sectional internet-based survey targeting general and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary surgeons. Responses from 86 centers revealed that 77% of institutions is available a robotic platform, with an adoption rate of 87.50% in high-volume centers. L-MILS remains the predominant technique for liver resections, also in case of major hepatectomies, although R-MILS is increasingly utilized. For minor L-MILS, more than 50% of respondents use ultrasonic shears and electrosurgical pencil and advanced bipolar devices, while about 40% of surgeons adopt Cavitronic Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator (CUSA) in major resections. R-MILS procedures predominantly used Maryland bipolar forceps and vessel sealers, with hybrid techniques (30%) integrating laparoscopic devices (e.g., CUSA) to address robotic device limitations. The minimally invasive approach to liver parenchymal transection is a key component of this surgical procedure. For major hepatectomies, the CUSA device remains the most effective tool, whereas ultrasonic shears, electrosurgical pencil, and advanced bipolar devices are more suited for minor resections. Despite limited access to specialized instruments, R-MILS achieves favorable outcomes in liver transection by employing the crash-clamp technique or hybrid strategies.

Influence of the I Go MILS (italian group of minimally invasive liver surgery) registry on the implementation of MILS programs in a single center

The influence of the I Go MILS (italian group of minimally invasive liver surgery) registry on the implementation of MILS programs in a single center

Minor hepatectomies: focusing a blurred picture. Analysis of the outcome of 4471 open resections in non-cirrhotic patients

After an initial skepticism, minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) gained popularity and is nowadays a consolidated option in specialized centers for the surgical treatment of selected patients affected by both benign and malignant liver diseases. Nevertheless, the role of MILS in the surgical treatment of hepato-cellular carcinoma (HCC) developed on the background of chronic liver disease is still a matter of debate. The indications and the current evidences on MILS for HCC are discussed in this paper. MILS being less invasive and harmful for the patients proved to offer a reduction in post-operative morbidity and specific benefits have been highlighted in case of patients affected by HCC and chronic liver disease. In fact, by minimizing liver manipulation and mobilization and by preserving the collateral blood and lymphatic flow, MILS seems to reduce the incidence of post-operative ascites and post-operative liver failure without compromising the oncologic outcomes. This has been confirmed by an analysis of 21 comparative studies and 5 metanalyses comparing MILS and open surgery for HCC. With an adequate surgical training, MILS for HCC can be undertaken safely even in case of major hepatectomies and technically demanding operations such as resections of posteriorly located tumors proved to be feasible in specialized centers. Therefore, with an appropriate patients' selection, MILS for HCC is becoming the preferred option for the surgical treatment of HCC in cirrhotic patients.

Biliary cysts (BC) are rare congenital dilatations of intra- and extrahepatic parts of the biliary tract and bear a significant risk of carcinogenesis. Surgery is the cornerstone treatment for patients with BC. While total BC excision and Roux-Y hepaticojejunostomy is the treatment method of the choice in patients with extrahepatic BC (i.e., Todani I-IV), patients with intrahepatic BC (i.e., Todani V) benefit the most from a surgical liver resection. In recent years, minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) including robotic MILS has gained more acceptance as a feasible, safe, and effective procedure for the treatment of both benign and malignant indications. Robotic major MILS is still considered technically demanding and a detailed description of the technical approach during robotic major MILS has only been limitedly discussed in the literature. The current article describes the main steps for a robotic left hepatectomy in a patient with a large BC Todani Type V. The patient is in French position with 5 trocars placed (4 robotic, 1 laparoscopic assistant). After mobilizing the left hemiliver, the left and right hepatic artery are dissected carefully followed by a cholecystectomy. Intraoperative ultrasound is performed to confirm localization and margins of the BC. The Left hepatic artery and left portal vein are isolated, clipped, and divided. Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging is used regularly during the entire procedure to visualize and confirm biliary tract anatomy and the BC. Parenchymal transection is performed with robotic cautery hook for the superficial part and robotic cautery spatula, bipolar cautery, and vessel sealer for the deeper parenchyma. The postoperative course was uncomplicated. A robotic left hepatectomy is technically demanding, yet a feasible and safe procedure. ICG-fluorescence imaging aids in delineating the BC and bile duct anatomy. Further, comparative studies are needed to confirm clinical benefits of robotic MILS for benign and malignant indications.