Laparoscopic Hemihepatectomy Research Articles

Laparoscopic central hepatectomy: Feasibility and safety.

Anatomical liver resection is the gold standard for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), enhancing survival and disease-free outcomes. For centrally located tumors, major resections are necessary but risky, especially for patients with liver disease. Central hepatectomy (CH) offers a parenchymal-sparing alternative to extended or hemihepatectomy (HH), reducing postoperative liver failure risk. However, its complexity and the large transection area make it challenging, especially with laparoscopic techniques. This study evaluates the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic CH for centrally located HCC, comparing surgical outcomes with those of the HH group. A total of 1592 laparoscopic hepatectomy cases from January 2011 to April 2023 were reviewed in a single institution. Patients undergoing laparoscopic CH were compared to those receiving HH during the same period. Exclusion criteria included non-HCC diagnosis, non-central tumors, and cases involving combined procedures. 70 cases of laparoscopic CH and 32 cases of laparoscopic HH were included. The CH and HH groups showed similar estimated blood loss (median 400ml vs. 290ml, p = 0.187) and intraoperative blood transfusion rates (10% vs. 15%, p = 0.413). Operation time did not significantly differ (median 330min vs. 360min, p = 0.862). Postoperative hospital stay was shorter in CH (median 6days vs. 9days, p = 0.018), with fewer ICU transfers (19% vs. 44%, p = 0.014) and lower 90-day mortality (1% vs. 9%, p = 0.055) compared to HH. Complication rates were similar overall (26% vs. 41%, p = 0.069), but HH had more Clavien-Dindo class I and II complications (13% vs. 19%, p = 0.040). Long-term survival did not significantly differ, but tended to favor the CH group. Despite the complexity, laparoscopic CH offers comparable perioperative outcomes and favorable long-term survival compared to HH. It can be considered a viable option for centrally located HCC, preserving liver function.

Robot-assisted hemihepatectomy is superior to laparoscopic hemihepatectomy through dorsal approach: A propensity score-matched study (with videos)

BackgroundDorsal approach is the potentially effective strategy for minimally invasive liver resection. This study aimed to compare the outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic hemihepatectomy through dorsal approach. MethodsWe compared the patients who underwent robot-assisted hemihepatectomy (Rob-HH) and who had laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (Lap-HH) through dorsal approach between January 2020 and December 2022. A 1:1 propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize bias and confounding factors. ResultsNinety-six patients were included, 41 with Rob-HH and 55 with Lap-HH. Among them, 58 underwent left hemihepatectomy (LHH) and 38 underwent right hemihepatectomy (RHH). Compared with Lap-HH group, patients with Rob-HH had less estimated blood loss (median: 100.0 vs. 300.0 mL, P = 0.016), lower blood transfusion rates (4.9% vs. 29.1%, P= 0.003) and postoperative complication rates (26.8% vs. 54.5%, P = 0.016). These significant differences consistently existed after PSM and in the LHH subgroups. Furthermore, robot-assisted LHH was associated with decreased Pringle duration (45 vs. 60 min, P = 0.047). RHH subgroup analysis showed that compared with Lap-RHH, Rob-RHH was associated with less estimated blood loss (200 vs. 400 mL, P = 0.013). No significant differences were found in other perioperative outcomes among pre- and post-PSM cohorts, such as Pringle duration, operative time, and hospital stay. ConclusionsThe dorsal approach was a safe and feasible strategy for hemi-hepatectomy with favorable outcomes under robot-assisted system in reducing intraoperative blood loss, transfusion, and postoperative complications.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Hemihepatectomy: The ORANGE II PLUS Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

To compare outcomes after laparoscopic versus open major liver resection (hemihepatectomy) mainly for primary or metastatic cancer. The primary outcome measure was time to functional recovery. Secondary outcomes included morbidity, quality of life (QoL), and for those with cancer, resection margin status and time to adjuvant systemic therapy. This was a multicenter, randomized controlled, patient-blinded, superiority trial on adult patients undergoing hemihepatectomy. Patients were recruited from 16 hospitals in Europe between November 2013 and December 2018. Of the 352 randomly assigned patients, 332 patients (94.3%) underwent surgery (laparoscopic, n = 166 and open, n = 166) and comprised the analysis population. The median time to functional recovery was 4 days (IQR, 3-5; range, 1-30) for laparoscopic hemihepatectomy versus 5 days (IQR, 4-6; range, 1-33) for open hemihepatectomy (difference, -17.5% [96% CI, -25.6 to -8.4]; P < .001). There was no difference in major complications (laparoscopic 24/166 [14.5%] v open 28/166 [16.9%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.84; P = .58). Regarding QoL, both global health status (difference, 3.2 points; P < .001) and body image (difference, 0.9 points; P < .001) scored significantly higher in the laparoscopic group. For the 281 (84.6%) patients with cancer, R0 resection margin status was similar (laparoscopic 106 [77.9%] v open 122 patients [84.1%], OR, 0.60; P = .14) with a shorter time to adjuvant systemic therapy in the laparoscopic group (46.5 days v 62.8 days, hazard ratio, 2.20; P = .009). Among patients undergoing hemihepatectomy, the laparoscopic approach resulted in a shorter time to functional recovery compared with open surgery. In addition, it was associated with a better QoL, and in patients with cancer, a shorter time to adjuvant systemic therapy with no adverse impact on cancer outcomes observed.

Laparoscopic hemihepatectomy is safe and effective.

Laparoscopic hemihepatectomy is safe and effective.

Intrahepatic Glisson Intrathecal Dissection via a Hepatic Parenchymal Transection-First Approach for Laparoscopic Anatomical Hemihepatectomy in Patients with Left/Right Glisson Pedicle Involvement.

Background: Because of lack of an appropriate surgical approach, laparoscopic surgery in patients with left/right Glisson pedicle involvement is still rarely conducted. This study aimed to discusses the methods of intrahepatic Glisson intrathecal dissection via a hepatic parenchymal transection-first approach for laparoscopic hemihepatectomy in patients with left/right Glisson pedicle involvement. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 21 patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy in the Second Affiliated Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University) from March 2021 to May 2022. Results: The mean age of the patients was 53.1 ± 11.6 years; mean operation time, 191.9 ± 22.3 minutes; median intraoperative blood loss, 205 mL (160-300 mL); and median length of hospital stay, 8 days (7-9 days). None of the patients underwent conversion to open procedure. Thirteen patients had pathologically confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal tumor thrombi (PVTT), and 8 was confirmed hepatolithiasis. Intraoperative frozen pathology and final pathology showed tumor free surgical margins in HCC with PVTT patients. After conservative treatment, all the complications such as postoperative liver section effusion, pleural effusion, pneumonia, intra-abdomen bleeding, and bile leak were cured. During outpatient follow-up examination, no other abnormality was detected. All HCC with PVTT patients were treated with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor after the operation and survived tumor-free. Conclusions: Proposed here is a more safe and feasible method of laparoscopic hemihepatectomy in patients with left/right Glisson pedicle involvement, but many problems still needs further exploration.

Assessing the Educational Value of YouTube Videos on Major Laparoscopic Liver Resection: A Cross-sectional Study of the Top 20 Most Viewed Laparoscopic Right and Left Hepatectomy Videos.

Surgical videos uploaded on social media platforms like YouTube augment the learning experience of advanced procedures like major laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). However, because of the heterogeneous quality, the educational value of such videos is unproven. This study assesses the educational value of YouTube's top 20 most viewed major LLR videos. The search terms "laparoscopic hemihepatectomy," "laparoscopic right hepatectomy," and "laparoscopic left hepatectomy" were searched on YouTube on October 7, 2020. Exclusion criteria were minor hepatectomy, open hepatectomy, live donor right and left hepatectomy, robotic hepatectomy videos, and nonstandard laparoscopic technique. Videos were graded based on adherence to key steps in LLR and compliance to the modified LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS); 29 of the original 37 consensus statements were used in our study. The videos have a median of 7647 views (range: 2675 to 67,449), a median of 34 likes (range: 3 to 67), and a median of 1 dislike (range: 0 to 22). The median duration of major LLR videos was 11.0 minutes (range: 6.38 to 223min). Majority of the videos had duration of <30 minutes (n=18/20, 90%). There were 14 videos (70%) demonstrating all defined surgical steps. The liver mobilization was shown in 17 videos (75%). Vascular inflow control of hepatic artery and portal vein and vascular outflow control were demonstrated in 18 videos (90%). Parenchymal transection and hemostasis were shown in all videos. The median LAP-VEGaS score across all 20 videos is 6 (range: 1 to 11) out of 29, translating to a median score of 20.6% (range: 3.4% to 37.9%). Thirteen out of 29 of the LAP-VEGaS criteria graded (44.8%) were not met by any of the 20 videos. The top 20 most viewed surgical videos on laparoscopic right and left hepatectomy may not be the ideal material for the educational value of surgical trainees. The LAP-VEGaS guidelines are too exhaustive for relevance to social media platforms as an educational tool.

The proximity of the middle hepatic vein to the hepatic hilus: a retrospective radiological study.

The middle hepatic vein (MHV) is an important landmark in anatomical hemihepatectomy. The proximity between the MHV and the hilar plate was suspected to be associated with tumor exposure during left hemihepatectomy for advanced perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and is reported to facilitate a dorsal approach to the MHV during laparoscopic hemihepatectomy. However, the precise distance between these locations is unknown. To investigate the "accurate and normal" distance between the MHV and the hilar plate, the present study focused on patients who presented without perihilar tumor. One hundred and sixty-eight consecutive patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy were included. Retrospective radiological measurement was performed using preoperative multi-detector row CT. The optimized CT slices perpendicular to the MHV were made using the multiplanar reconstruction technique. The shortest distance between the MHV and the hilar plate was measured on the left and right sides on the perpendicular slices. The diameters of the left and right hepatic ducts were also measured. The distance was 9.0mm (1.9-20.0mm) on the left side and 11.3mm (2.3-21.8) on the right side (p < 0.001). The distance on the left side was < 10mm in 60% of patients (n = 100). Only one-third of patients (n = 55) had a distance of ≥ 10mm on both sides. As the hepatic ducts became more dilated, the distance from the MHV to the hilar plate became shorter. The MHV was located in close proximity to the hepatic hilus, especially on the left side.

Optimization of a laparoscopic procedure for advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma based on the concept of “waiting time”: a preliminary report

IntroductionClinicians increasingly perform laparoscopic surgery for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). However, this surgery can be difficult in patients with advanced-stage ICC because of the complicated procedures and difficulty in achieving high-quality results. We compared the effects of a three-step optimized procedure with a traditional procedure for patients with advanced-stage ICC.MethodsForty-two patients with advanced-stage ICC who received optimized laparoscopic hemihepatectomy with lymph node dissection (LND, optimized group) and 84 propensity score-matched patients who received traditional laparoscopic hemihepatectomy plus LND (traditional group) were analyzed. Surgical quality, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared.ResultsThe optimized group had a lower surgical bleeding score (P = 0.038) and a higher surgeon satisfaction score (P = 0.001). Blood loss during hepatectomy was less in the optimized group (190 vs. 295 mL, P < 0.001). The optimized group had more harvested LNs (12.0 vs. 8.0, P < 0.001) and more positive LNs (8.0 vs. 5.0, P < 0.001), and a similar rate of adequate LND (88.1% vs. 77.4%, P = 0.149). The optimized group had longer median DFS (9.0 vs. 7.0 months, P = 0.018) and median OS (15.0 vs. 13.0 months, P = 0.046). In addition, the optimized group also had a shorter total operation time (P = 0.001), shorter liver resection time (P = 0.001), shorter LND time (P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001), and lower incidence of total morbidities (14.3% vs. 36.9%, P = 0.009).ConclusionsOur optimization of a three-step laparoscopic procedure for advanced ICC was feasible, improved the quality of liver resection and LND, prolonged survival, and led to better intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

Is Laparoscopic Hepatectomy Safe for Giant Liver Tumors? Proposal from a Single Institution for Totally Laparoscopic Hemihepatectomy Using an Anterior Approach for Giant Liver Tumors Larger Than 10 cm in Diameter.

The efficacy and safety of laparoscopic liver resections for liver tumors that are larger than 10 cm remain unclear. We developed a safe laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy for giant liver tumors using an anterior approach. Eighty patients who underwent laparoscopic hemihepatectomy between January 2011 and December 2021 were divided into a nongiant tumor group (n = 65) and a giant tumor group (n = 15) for comparison. The median operating time, amount of blood loss, and length of postoperative hospital stay did not differ significantly between the nongiant and giant tumor groups. The sizes of the tumors and weights of the resected liver were significantly larger in the giant tumor group. A comparison between a nongiant group (n = 23) and a giant group (n = 12) treated with laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy showed similar results. Laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, especially that performed on the right side, for giant tumors larger than 10 cm can be performed safely. Surgical techniques for giant liver tumors have been standardized, and their application is expected to spread widely in the future.

Impact of sarcopenia on the surgical outcomes in patients with hepatolithiasis: A multicenter 10-year experience

BackgroundThe impact of sarcopenia on the surgical outcomes of hepatectomy for hepatolithiasis has not been investigated. The present study elucidated the effect of sarcopenia on short-term outcomes after hemihepatectomy for hepatolithiasis and investigated the benefit of different surgical approaches to hepatectomy in patients with sarcopenia. MethodsPatients who underwent hemihepatectomy for hepatolithiasis at Fujian Provincial Hospital and 5 other medical centers from 2010 to 2020 were enrolled. The sarcopenic obesity subgroup had sarcopenia coexisting with obesity, and the sarcopenic nonobesity subgroup had sarcopenia without obesity. We analyzed the postoperative outcomes of the sarcopenia group, sarcopenic obesity subgroup and sarcopenic nonobesity subgroup and the corresponding benefits of different surgical approaches. ResultsPatients with sarcopenia (n = 481) had worse surgical outcomes than nonsarcopenia, such as longer postoperative hospital duration of stay, longer time to oral intake, longer time to bowel movement, and longer time to off-bed activities. In postoperative short-term outcomes, we also found that sarcopenia had higher rates of major complications, bile leakage, and intensive care unit occupancy than the nonsarcopenic group. Subgroup analysis showed that sarcopenic obesity subgroup (n = 182) had the worst results in intraoperative outcomes and postoperative short-term outcomes. Multivariate analysis identified sarcopenic obesity as a significant risk factor for postoperative hospital duration of stay (hazard ratio = 2.994, P < .001). Furthermore, the sarcopenic obesity and sarcopenic nonobesity (n = 299) subgroups benefited from laparoscopic surgery compared with open surgery, including postoperative recovery and major complications (all P < .05). However, sarcopenic nonobesity subgroup had more significant benefits of laparoscopy than the sarcopenic obesity subgroup. The learning curve for laparoscopic hemihepatectomy for the sarcopenic obesity subgroup had a plateau, and the surgical outcomes of the sarcopenic obesity subgroup were closer to the sarcopenic nonobesity subgroup after the plateau. ConclusionSarcopenia is associated with more adverse events after hepatectomy and patients with sarcopenic obesity have a higher incidence of adverse events. Patients with sarcopenia could benefit from laparoscopy. Compared with the sarcopenic obesity patients, the sarcopenic nonobesity patients benefited more from laparoscopy. Although the sarcopenic obesity patients had more complications and slower postoperative recovery than the sarcopenic nonobesity patients, laparoscopic also could improve their short-term outcomes, but a longer learning curve was required.

Laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy following a novel optimized portal vein embolization: a video case report

BackgroundThis article is the first report of laparoscopic major hepatectomy of Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following optimized portal vein embolization (oPVE).Case presentationThe patient was diagnosed with a single 3 × 3.5 cm HCC located in segment 5 and 8 detected by enhanced computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. The lesion was adjacent to the right anterior and posterior portal veins, making it difficult to confirm the adequate liver functional remnant volume, surgical margin and R0 resection. In addition, the liver cirrhosis induced by a long history of chronic hepatitis B virus increased the potential risk of postoperative liver failure and refractory ascites. Therefore, we conducted a laparoscopic surgery following oPVE, by which the safe tumor margin was ensured and the outcome of the surgery was improved. The patient was discharged on the seventh day after the surgery. The AFP gradually decreased to a normal level during the 90-day follow-up.ConclusionThis case report demonstrates that, in experienced hands for selected patients, laparoscopic hepatectomy after portal vein embolization is feasible and may be an alternative to open liver resection.

Laparoscopic Glissonian pedicle versus hilar dissection approach hemihepatectomy: A prospective, randomized controlled trial.

This over 7-year case study is the first to compare the results of laparoscopic Glissonian pedicle approach hemihepatectomy (LGAH) and laparoscopic hilar dissection approach hemihepatectomy (LHAH) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Patients who had undergone laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, either LGAH or LHAH, between March 2012 and December 2019 at our center were prospectively enrolled and assigned to the LGAH or LHAH group. Both groups were stratified and compared, and the preoperative and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. The primary endpoint was total operative time. The groups were equally matched for age, sex, HBsAg, Child-Pugh class, benign disease, malignancy, liver cirrhosis, tumor diameter and type of resection. Ninety-six patients had undergone LGAH and 94 had undergone LHAH. No preoperative death occurred in the two groups. LGAH did not enhance the postoperative overall complication rates (P=.465) or intraoperative blood loss (P=.535) compared with LHAH. However, the overall operative time (P=.014) and hilar dissection time (P=.000) were significantly shorter in the LGAH group than in the LHAH group. No significant differences were found between the groups regarding the 1-year (P=.384), 3-year (P=.332), and 5-year overall survival rates (P=.662) or 1-year (P=.856), 3-year (P=.348), and 5-year disease-free survival rates (P=.573). LGAH and LHAH are both effective procedures for treating the hilar structures in selected patients. LGAH has advantages over LHAH in reducing total operation time under the condition where both procedures can be used. LGAH for selected patients is worthy of promotion owing to its simplicity and convenience. NCT01567631 (http://www. gov).

Migration of non-absorbable polymer clips in hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery: a report of four cases

BackgroundLigation clips are used for vessel or tissue ligation in surgery. Although previous reports have described the migration of metallic clips after hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, very few reports have described the migration of non-absorbable polymer clips (NAPCs: Hem-o-Lok).Case presentationWe present 4 cases of NAPC migration that occurred after laparoscopic surgery. Case 1 was an 81-year-old woman that had undergone a laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy for an intrahepatic bile duct cyst adenocarcinoma at the age of 79 years. Two years after the operation, she underwent an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy to investigate epigastric pain. The endoscopy showed NAPCs lodged at the anterior side of the duodenal bulb. Case 2 was an 80-year-old man that had undergone a laparoscopic cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis at the age of 77 years. Three years after the operation, follow-up computed tomography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) imaging indicated a mass in the upper bile duct. After a laparoscopic bile duct resection and reconstruction, an NAPC was found inside the inflammatory pseudotumor. Case 3 was a 63-year-old man that had undergone laparoscopic liver S4b and S5 resections and lymph node dissection for gallbladder cancer. Three months after the operation, follow-up MRCP imaging suggested a bile duct stenosis. An endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was performed, and an NAPC was found inside the bile duct. Case 4 was a 74-year-old man that had undergone a laparoscopic S5 segmentectomy, S7 partial liver resection, and cholecystectomy for liver metastasis of lung cancer and cholelithiasis. A trans-cystic drainage tube was inserted, and it was ligated and fixed with NAPCs. Three months after the operation, follow-up MRCP imaging showed common bile duct stones (CBDS). An ERCP was performed, and two NAPCs were found with the CBDS.ConclusionsFew previous reports have described complications due to NAPC migration after hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery. However, with the widespread use of NAPC, postoperative complications due to NAPC migration are expected to increase in the near future. The differential diagnosis of complications should include potential NAPC migration in patients that have undergone laparoscopic surgery.

Safety and effectiveness evaluation of a two-handed technique combining harmonic scalpel and laparoscopic Peng\u2019s multifunction operative dissector in laparoscopic hemihepatectomy

ObjectivesThis study was designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a two-hand technique combining harmonic scalpel (HS) and laparoscopic Peng’s multifunction operative dissector (LPMOD) in patients who underwent laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LHH).MethodsWe designed and conducted a case-control study nested in a prospectively collected laparoscopic liver surgery database. Patients who underwent LHH for liver parenchyma transection using HS + LPMOD were defined as cases (n = 98) and LPMOD only as controls (n = 47) from January 2016 to May 2018. Propensity score matching (1:1) between the case and control groups was used in the analyses.ResultsThe case group had significantly less intraoperative blood loss in milliliters (169.4 ± 133.5 vs. 221.5 ± 176.3, P = 0.03) and shorter operative time in minutes (210.5 ± 56.1 vs. 265.7 ± 67.1, P = 0.02) comparing to the control group. The conversion to laparotomy, postoperative hospital stay, resection margin, the mean peak level of postoperative liver function parameters, bile leakage rate, and others were comparable between the two groups. There was no perioperative mortality.ConclusionsWe demonstrated that the two-handed technique combing HS and LPMOD in LHH is safe and effective which is associated with shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss compared with LPMOD alone. The technique facilitates laparoscopic liver resection and is recommended for use.

Laparoscopic versus open hemihepatectomy: comprehensive comparison of complications and costs at 90\xa0days using a propensity method

Laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LHH) may offer advantages over open hemihepatectomy (OHH) in blood loss, recovery, and hospital stay. The aim of this study is to evaluate our recent experience performing hemihepatectomy and compare complications and costs up to 90 days following laparoscopic versus open procedures. Retrospective evaluation of patients undergoing hemihepatectomy at our center 01/2010–12/2018 was performed. Patient, tumor, and surgical characteristics; 90-day complications; and costs were analyzed. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance covariates. A total of 141 hemihepatectomies were included: 96 OHH and 45 LHH. While operative times were longer for LHH, blood loss and transfusions were less. At 90 days, there were similar rates of liver-specific and surgical complications but fewer medical complications following LHH. Medical complications that arose with greater frequency following OHH were primarily pulmonary complications and urinary and central venous catheter infections. Complications at 90 days were lower following LHH (Clavien–Dindo grade ≥ III OHH 23%, LHH 11%, p = 0.130; Comprehensive Complication Index OHH 20.0 ± 16.1, LHH 10.9 ± 14.2, p = 0.001). While operating costs were higher, costs for hospital stay and readmissions were lower with LHH. Patients undergoing LHH experience a significant reduction in postoperative medical complications and costs, resulting in 90-day cost equity compared with OHH.

Robotic, laparoscopic or open hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas over 10\u2009cm in diameter

BackgroundTo evaluate the clinical efficacy of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas.MethodsFrom April 2011 to April 2017, consecutive patients who underwent hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas were included in this study. According to the type of operation, these patients were divided into the robotic hemihepatectomy (RH) group, the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) group, and the open hemihepatectomy (OH) group. The perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared among the three groups. The study was reported following the STROCSS criteria.ResultsThere were no significant differences in age, sex, tumour location, body surface area (BSA), future liver remnant volume (FLR), standard liver volume (SLV), liver haemangioma volume, FLR/SLV, resected normal liver volume/resected volume, hepatic disease, rates of blood transfusion, liver function after 24 h of surgery, operative morbidity and mortality among the three groups. Compared with patients in the RH group (n = 19) and the LH group (n = 13), patients in the OH group (n = 25) had a significantly longer postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.05), time to oral intake (P < 0.05), and time to get-out-of-bed (P < 0.05); a higher VAS score after 24 h of surgery (P < 0.05); and a shorter operative time (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in these postoperative outcomes (P>0.05) between the RH group and the LH group. When the setup time in the RH group was excluded, the operative time in the RH group was significantly shorter than that in the LH group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the operative time between the RH group and the OH group (P>0.05). The amount of intraoperative blood loss in the RH group was the lowest among the three groups (P<0.05), and the amount of intraoperative blood loss in the LH group was less than that in the OH group (P<0.05).ConclusionRobotic and laparoscopic hemihepatectomies were associated with less intraoperative blood loss,better postoperative recovery and lower pain score. Compared with laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, robotic hemihepatectomy was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter operative time.

Laparoscopic versus open hemihepatectomy: a 1:1 matched analysis.

BackgroundLaparoscopic liver resection has increased rapidly and procedure has almost extended to all the types of liver resection. Major liver resections, such as hemihepatectomies, were still innovative procedures in the exploration phase and continued cautious introduction of major laparoscopic liver resections was recommended by experts. The study aims to evaluate the safety of laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) by the comparing with open hemihepatectomy (OH).MethodsPatients who underwent hemihepatectomy in Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital from January 2012 to December 2017 were reviewed. A 1:1 matched study was performed between LH group and OH group. Patients who fail to be matched were excluded. Perioperative outcomes, complications and cost were compared between LH group and OH group.ResultsOne hundred and thirty-eight exact matches for all matching variables were found between LH patients and OH patients. The length of postoperative hospital stay of LH group was significant shorter than the OH group (P=0.031). Intraoperative blood loss (P=0.005) and transfusion rate (P=0.001) in the LH group were significantly lower than the OH group. There was no mortality in either group. Twenty-six patients in LH group and 31 patients in OH group had complications and all of them recovered uneventfully after immediate treatments. The hospital expense of LH group was significantly higher than OH group (P<0.001).ConclusionsThese results lead us to believe that LH is a safe procedure and it could be performed routinely in experienced laparoscopic centers.

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopy technology in right hemihepatectomy

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has been accepted widely owing to its advantages as a minimally invasive surgery; however, laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy (LRH) has rarely been reported. We aimed to compare the benefits and drawbacks of LRH and open approaches. Between January 2014 and October 2017, 85 patients with tumor and hepatolithiasis who underwent LRH (n = 30) and open right hemihepatectomy (ORH) (n = 55) were enrolled in this study. For tumors, LRH showed significantly better results with respect to blood loss (P = 0.024) and duration of hospital stay (P = 0.008) than ORH, while hospital expenses (P = 0.031) and bile leakage rate (P = 0.012) were higher with LRH. However, the operative time and rate of other complications were not significantly different between the two groups. However, for hepatolithiasis, there was less blood loss (P = 0.015) and longer operative time (P = 0.036) with LRH than with ORH. There were no significant difference between LRH and ORH in terms of hospital stay, hospital expenses, and complication rate (P > 0.05). Moreover, the postoperative white blood cell count, alanine aminotransferase level, aspartate aminotransferase level, and total bilirubin were not significantly different in both types of patients (P > 0.05). Our results suggest the safety and feasibility of laparoscopy technology for right hemihepatectomy in both tumor and hepatolithiasis patients.

Adipose-Derived Stem Cell Transplantation Attenuates Inflammation and Promotes Liver Regeneration after Ischemia-Reperfusion and Hemihepatectomy in Swine.

Aim To study the anti-inflammatory and liver regenerative effects of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs) on a porcine model of ischemia-reperfusion (IR) and hemihepatectomy. Methods Eighteen healthy Bama miniature pigs were randomly divided into the sham-operated (sham), untreated IR injury (IRI), and ADSC-transplanted (ADSC) groups. Hepatic IR was established by laparoscopic hemihepatectomy. ADSCs were transplanted directly into the liver parenchyma after the surgery. Hepatic inflammation and liver regeneration were evaluated by histopathological examination and assessment of relevant cytokines and other factors. Results ADSC transplantation successfully ameliorated the IRI-induced histopathological damage and the high levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines like IL-1β, IL-6, and TNF-α. In addition, the ADSCs enhanced the expression of the anti-inflammatory IL-10, regenerative factors including HGF, Cyclin D1, and proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), and angiogenic factors like VEGF, ANG-1, and ANG-2. Conclusions ADSCs attenuated the hepatic IRI-induced inflammatory response and promoted liver regeneration.

Introduction of laparoscopic hemihepatectomy and evaluation of the short-term outcomes

Background: Ever since laparoscopic hemihepatectomy began to be covered by the national health insurance system in Japan in April 2016, we have performed it regularly at our department. On the basis of the short-term outcomes, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of this procedure. Methods: A total of 17 patients who underwent laparoscopic hemihepatectomy at our department between April 2016 and September 2018 (L Group) were included in the study, and the perioperative outcomes of these subjects were compared with those of 25 patients who underwent hemihepatectomy by open surgery between April 2011 and March 2016 (O Group). Results: The background characteristics of the patients were as follows (L Group vs. O Group): age (70 vs. 67 years), gender (male/female ratio, 11/6 vs. 16/9), BMI (22.7 vs. 23.41), ASA-PS (1,2/3 ratio, 13/4 vs. 18/7), ICGR15 (10.3 vs. 7.7%), and diagnosis (HCC/others, 7/10 vs. 11/14), with no significant differences between the two groups. Among the perioperative factors, there was no significant difference in the type of surgery performed between the two groups (right/left 11/6 vs. 13/12); however, the operative duration was shorter in the O group than in the L Group (436 vs. 346 minutes, P = 0.021), and the blood loss was lower in the L Group than in the O group (310 vs. 610 g, P = 0.007). There was also no significant difference in the postoperative complication rate (C-D Grade 1/Grade 2 or higher, 15/2 vs. 18/7) or duration of hospitalization (9 vs. 11 days) between the two groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic hemihepatectomy tends to take a longer time as compared to open surgery, but is associated with significantly less bleeding. On the other hand, the rate of complications and other factors were similar between the open surgery and laparoscopic surgery groups, indicating that laparoscopic surgery can be performed safely.