Parenchyma-sparing Hepatectomy Research Articles

Vessel-Guided Mesohepatectomy for Liver Partition and Staged Major Parenchyma-Sparing Hepatectomies with Super-Selective Portal Vein Embolization or Enhanced ALPPS to Achieve R0 Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases at the Hepatocaval Confluence.

Background. R0 minor parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) is feasible for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) in contact with hepatic veins (HV) at hepatocaval confluence since HV can be reconstructed, but in the case of contact with the first-order glissonean pedicle (GP), major hepatectomy is mandatory. To pursue an R0 parenchyma-sparing policy, we proposed vessel-guided mesohepatectomy for liver partition (MLP) and eventually combination with liver augmentation techniques for staged major PSH. Methods. We analyzed 15 consecutive vessel-guided MLPs for CRLM at the hepatocaval confluence. Patients had a median of 11 (range: 0-67) lesions with a median diameter of 3.5 cm (range: 0.0-8.0), bilateral in 73% of cases. Results. Grade IIIb or more complications occurred in 13%, median hospital stay was 14 (range: 6-62) days, 90-day mortality was 0%. After a median follow-up of 17.5 months, 1-year OS and RFS were 92% and 62%. In nine (64%) patients, MLP was combined with portal vein embolization (PVE) or ALPPS to perform staged R0 major PSH. Future liver remnant (FLR) volume increased from a median of 15% (range: 7-20%) up to 41% (range: 37-69%). Super-selective PVE was performed in three (33%) patients and enhanced ALPPS (e-ALPPS) in six (66%). In two e-ALPPS an intermediate stage of deportalized liver PSH was necessary to achieve adequate FLR volume. Conclusions. Vessel-guided MLP may transform the liver in a paired organ. In selected cases of multiple bilobar CRLM, to guarantee oncological radicality (R0), major PSH is feasible combining advanced surgical parenchyma sparing with liver augmentation techniques when FLR volume is insufficient.

Parenchyma sparing or Anatomical Resections for Colorectal Liver Metastases?

Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of death in the Western world. Half of the patients develop colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), while only less than 30% of the patients have surgically resectable metastasis at the time of diagnosis. In case of resectability, classical anatomical (major) hepatectomy offers a high R0 resection rate, but with simultaneously increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. Over the past two decades, the potential benefits of parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) for overall oncological outcomes, survival, and re-resection in case of recurrence ("salvageability") have been demonstrated. This article summarizes the current evidence on PSH as a surgical treatment option, and discusses the current "state of the art" in different therapy scenarios.

Perioperative challenges in the management of a Jehovah’s Witness patient undergoing parenchyma sparing hepatectomy

Jehovah’s Witness patients presenting for liver surgery pose challenges to the anesthetists as well as the surgeons, due to their abstinence from receiving blood products. Despite this, surgery is the only curative option for operable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). We report a case of a Jehovah’s Witness with multiple comorbidities who had a parenchyma sparing hepatectomy (PSH) complicated by intraoperative bleeding. A 52-year-old ASA II patient with hypertension, diabetes and ischemic heart disease on dual antiplatelet therapy was scheduled for open PSH for multiple bilobar CRLMs. He was prehabilitated with an emphasis on enhancing erythropoiesis and improving his functional capacity. PSH was done using a Cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator (CUSA) with intermittent Pringle maneuver, a low central venous pressure and restricted intravenous fluids. His postoperative recovery was complicated by a minor upper gastrointestinal bleed that was managed conservatively.
 The authors certify that informed written consent has been obtained from patient for publication.
 Keywords: Jehovah’s Witness; Liver surgery; Anesthesia; Hepatectomy
 Citation: Dassanayake V, Sivaganesh S, Subasinghe D, Pitigala P. Perioperative challenges in the management of a Jehovah’s Witness patient undergoing parenchyma sparing hepatectomy. Anaesth. pain intensive care 2021;26(1):119–122 ;
 DOI: 10.35975/apic.v26i1.1787
 Received: October 16, 2021, Reviewed: October 28, 2021, Accepted: November 07, 2021

Upper transversal hepatectomy with double hepatic vein resection and reconstruction to treat colorectal cancer liver metastases at the hepatocaval confluence: a strategy to achieve R0 liver-sparing resection.

Repeated hepatectomies in the therapeutic route of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) may improve their long term survival. Hepatic vein (HV) resection and reconstruction allows parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) and R0 resections for CRLM in contact with one HV. We aimed at verifying the feasibility of PSH with double HV resection and direct reconstruction for CRLM in contact with two HVs at the hepatocaval confluence. Out of 106 consecutive PSH performed for CRLM deep-located in segments I-IVa-VII-VIII, four (3.7%) PSH were performed with resection of CRLM en bloc with two adjacent HVs which were both reconstructed with double direct HV anastomosis: 3 cases between right-HV and middle-HV and 1 case between middle-HV and left-HV. Two patients had previously undergone liver resection. Three patients had one single lesion and one had 5 CRLMs. Median size of CRLMs in contact with HVs was 25mm (range 22-30mm). At histological examination, all resections were R0 except one R1-vascular (detachment from glissonean pedicle): in all cases at least one HV and in 1 case both HVs were infiltrated by the tumor cells. After median follow-up of 18 (range 3.5-41.2) months, all HVs were patent. All patients were alive and in good general conditions, and 3 patients were disease free (one of them following a liver re-resection). One patient experienced a grade IIIa complication. Median hospital-stay was 11 (range 9-13) days. In patients with CRLMs involving two adjacent HVs at the hepatocaval confluence, liver resection with double HV resection and direct reconstruction is feasible and may be considered to guarantee oncological radicality (R0) and spare health parenchyma.

Determination of surgical margins in laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy of neuroendocrine tumors liver metastases using indocyanine green fluorescence imaging.

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a group of heterogenous tumors originating from neuroendocrine system. Approximately, 40 percent will go through liver metastases, and liver-directed therapy was proved to improve the survival outcome. Parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy is advocated for the resection of NETs liver metastases while the possible relatively low negative margin rate is concerned. Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging provides a real-time navigation on determination of surgical margins in colorectal cancer liver metastases. However, there was no previous study that reported the applications of ICG fluorescence imaging in NETs liver metastases. The present study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and security of using ICG fluorescence imaging to determine surgical margins of NETs liver metastases during operation. A retrospective two-arm cohort study was performed on 25 consecutive patients with NETs liver metastases who underwent laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (LPSH). Patients were divided into two groups according to whether or not the ICG fluorescence imaging was used. Data on sociodemographic characteristics, laboratory parameters, pathology results, and surgical outcomes were collected. A total of 145 tumors pathologically diagnosed with NETs liver metastases were resected from 25 patients. The pathological results indicated negative margins in all tumors (102/102) in LPSH with ICG fluorescence imaging group. The negative margin rate was significantly higher in LPSH using the ICG fluorescence imaging (100% v.s 88.4%, p = 0.002). Surgical outcomes, including operation time, estimated blood loss, intraoperative transfusion rate, and postoperative morbidity, were comparable between LPSH with and without ICG fluorescence imaging groups. ICG fluorescence imaging showed the potential to identify tumor boundaries and determine surgical margins. This technique may serve as a valuable intraoperative navigation in patients with NETs liver metastases.

Technique of vessel-skeletonized parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy for the oncological treatment of bilobar colorectal liver metastases

BackgroundTo aid in the oncological management of multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs), we describe a new surgical procedure, VEssel-Skeletonized PArenchyma-sparing Hepatectomy (VESPAH).Study designOf 152 patients with CRLMs treated with hepatectomy, 33 patients had multiple bilobar liver metastases (≥8 liver metastases); their surgical procedures and clinical outcomes were retrospectively summarized and compared between those who underwent VESPAH and those who underwent major hepatectomy (Major Hx).ResultsOf the 33 patients, 20 patients were resected by VESPAH (the VESPAH group) and 13 patients by major hepatectomy (Major Hx group). The median number of CRLMs was 13 (range, 8–53) in the VESPAH group and 10 (range, 8–41) in the Major Hx group (P=0.511). No operative mortality nor severe morbidity was observed in either group. The VESPAH group showed earlier recovery of remnant liver function after surgery than the Major Hx group; the incidence of grade B/C post hepatectomy liver failure was 5% in the VESPAH group and 38% in the Major Hx group, P=0.048). Intrahepatic tumor recurrence was confirmed in 14 (70%) and 7 (54%) patients in the VESPAH and Major Hx groups, respectively (P=0.416). There was no significant difference in median overall survival (OS) after hepatectomy between the two groups; the median OS was 47 months in the VESPAH group and 33 months in the Major Hx group (P=0.481). The VESPAH group showed the higher induction rate of adjuvant chemotherapy within 2 months after surgery (P=0.002) and total number of repeat hepatectomy for intrahepatic recurrence (P=0.060) than the Major Hx group.ConclusionsVESPAH enables us to clear surgical navigation by hepatic vessel skeletonization and may enhance patient tolerability of not only adjuvant chemotherapy but also repeat hepatectomies during the patients’ lifetimes.

Hepatic vein resection and reconstruction for liver malignancies: expanding indication and enhancing parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy.

The short-term outcomes after hepatic vein reconstruction (HVR) were evaluated in 41 patients. HVR can be performed safely using autologous vein graft. HVR can increase the functional remnant liver volume, facilitating parenchyma-sparing one-step hepatectomy as well as expanding resectability even in patients with all major hepatic veins involved.

Prediction of remnant liver volume using 3D simulation software in patients undergoing R1vasc parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy for multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases: reliability, clinical impact, and learning curve

BackgroundAssessment of the future liver remnant (FLR) is routinely performed before major hepatectomy. In R1-vascular one-stage hepatectomy (R1vasc-OSH), given the multiplanar dissection paths, the FLR is not easily predictable. Preoperative 3D-virtual casts may help. We evaluated the predictability of the FLR using the 3D-virtual cast in the R1vasc-OSH for multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CLM). MethodsThirty consecutive patients with multiple bilobar CLMs scheduled for R1vasc-OSH were included. Predicted and real-FLRs were compared. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to determine the impact of 3D-virtual cast on postoperative complications. ResultsMedian number of CLM and resection areas were 12 (4–33) and 3 (1–8). Median predicted-FLR was 899 ml (558–1157) and 60% (42–85), while for the real-FLR 915 ml (566–1777) and 63% (43–87). Median discrepancy between predicted and real-FLR was −0.6% (p = 0.504), indicating a slight tendency to underestimate the FLR. The difference was more evident in more than 12 CLMs (p = 0.013). A discrepancy was not evident according to the number of resection areas (p = 0.316). No mortality occurred. Patients in virtual-group had lower major complications compared to nonvirtual-group (0% vs 18%, p-value 0.014). ConclusionFLR estimation based on 3D-analysis is feasible, provides a safe surgery and represents a promising method in planning R1vasc-OSH for patients with multiple bilobar CLMs.

Parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy improves salvageability and survival for solitary small intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

BackgroundThis study aimed to investigate the prognostic impact of parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) on solitary small intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). MethodsA total of 184 patients with solitary small ICC (≤ 5 cm) from 2009 to 2017 were included. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between PSH and Non-PSH approach. Results95 (51.6%) patients underwent PSH and 89 (48.4%) patients underwent Non-PSH for solitary small ICC. PSH was associated with less intraoperative blood loss (212.9 mL versus 363.5 mL, P=0.038), lower transfusion rate (7.4% versus 16.9%, P=0.048), without increasing the frequency of tumor recurrence (60.0% versus 58.4%). No significant differences were observed in overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and liver RFS (P = 0.627, 0.769 and 0.538, respectively). 109 (59.2%) patients experienced recurrence, of these, 67 (36.4%) were intrahepatic recurrence. Subgroup analysis of patients with liver-only recurrence demonstrated an increased likelihood of repeat hepatectomy for PSH compared to Non-PSH (21.2% versus 2.9%, P = 0.031), thus resulting in improved liver OS (P = 0.016). ConclusionPSH was associated with improved perioperative outcomes but it did not increase liver recurrence rates. PSH offered an increased rate of salvage hepatectomy for recurrent tumor, thus improving long-term survival in cases in which liver recurrence occurred.

THU221 - Parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy improves salvageability and survival for solitary small intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

THU221 - Parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy improves salvageability and survival for solitary small intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Impact of the learning-curve with parenchyma sparing hepatectomy for deep tumors: time vs complexity?

Introduction: Parenchyma sparing hepatectomy (PSH) assures adequate future liver remnant (FLR) for deep located tumors, however, PSH requires complex surgical procedures with a learning curve that has never been analysed. Methods: Data from 127 consecutive patients treated with a PSH during the first 9 years of practice were registered in a prospective database. Two patients with preoperative total bilirubin >5 mg/dl were excluded. The initial period (4y) of low (< 14/y) and the later period (5y) of high (>14/y) case volume were compared. Results: Low (n=24) and high (n=101) case volume groups were comparable (P>0.05) for patient's baseline characteristics, PSH requiring HV exposure/resection (92% vs 78%), PSH with vascular reconstruction (25% vs 25%), extrahepatic surgical procedures (25% vs 28%), median blood loss (150 vs 150 ml), blood transfusion (37% vs 27%), overall (50% vs 38%) and severe (8% vs 8%) postoperative complications, and median length of stay (8.5 vs 9 days). Overall 90-day mortality was 1.6%. In high volume case period there was an increasing attitude in first/second order glissonian pedicles exposure (33% vs 68%; P=0.001) and the mean largest lesion size was greater (41±24 cm vs 55±37 cm, P=0.034). Furthermore the operative time was shorter (714±316 min vs 595±242 min, P=0.048) and the resected liver surface per minute was larger (0.93±0.35 cm2/min vs 1.44±0.69 cm2/min, P=0.001). Conclusions: The learning curve had significant impact on operative time and on liver-cut surface area per minute, in spite of an increased attitude in first/second order glissonian pedicles exposure and increased lesion size.

The liver tunnel: is there a place for vascular and biliary reconstruction for this new parenchyma sparing hepatectomy?

The liver tunnel: is there a place for vascular and biliary reconstruction for this new parenchyma sparing hepatectomy?

Short- and Long-Term Results of Laparoscopic Parenchyma-Sparing Hepatectomy for Small-Sized Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Comparative Study Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis

The aim of this study was to evaluate the degree of invasiveness and the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (LPSH) for a maximum hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) size ≤5 cm. Sixty-one LPSHs and 175 open parenchyma-sparing hepatectomies (OPSHs) for small-sized HCC were analyzed using a propensity score matching analysis. The median operative time was significantly shorter in the LPSH group (194 min) than in the OPSH group (275 minutes) (P < 0.0001). The estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the LPSH group (100 mL) than in the OPSH group (380 mL) (P < 0.0001). The incidences of superficial incisional surgical site infections and respiratory complications were significantly lower in the LPSH group than in the OPSH group (P = 0.0161 and 0.0285, respectively). During the postoperative course, the white blood cell counts and C-reactive protein levels were significantly lower in the LPSH group. There were no differences in overall survival and disease-free survival (P = 0.1293 and 0.4039, respectively), and no significant differences in terms of type of recurrence and site of intrahepatic recurrence (P = 0.1410). The data from the present series suggest the lesser invasiveness and safety of LPSH even for small-sized HCC patients.

Twelve-year experience of “radical but conservative” liver surgery for colorectal metastases: impact on surgical practice and oncologic efficacy

BackgroundLiver surgery for colorectal metastases (CLM) is moving toward parenchyma-sparing approaches. The authors reported the technical feasibility of parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy for deeply located tumors, but its impact on daily practice and long-term outcomes remain unclear. MethodsThe patients undergoing liver resection (LR) for CLM with vascular contact (first-/second-order pedicle or hepatic vein (HV) trunk) were considered. Those undergoing major hepatectomy were excluded. The authors' technique included tumor–vessel detachment, partial resection of marginally infiltrated HVs, and detection of communicating vessels (CVs) among HVs to preserve outflow after HV resection. ResultsAmong 169 patients with major vascular contact, parenchyma-sparing LR was feasible in 146 (86%). Twenty-eight SERPS, 13 transversal hepatectomies, 6 mini-mesohepatectomies, and 4 liver tunnels were performed. Sixty-six (45%) patients underwent CLM–vessel detachment, 25 (17%) underwent partial HV resection, and 30 (21%) achieved outflow preservation by CV identification. The mortality and severe morbidity rates were 1.4% and 8.2%, respectively. The 5-year survival rate was 30.7%. The parenchyma-sparing strategy failed in 14 (7%) patients because of recurrence in the spared parenchyma or cut edge; 13 were radically retreated. ConclusionUltrasound-guided parenchyma-sparing surgery is feasible in most patients with ill-located CLMs. This procedure is safe and achieves adequate oncologic outcomes.

Techniques of parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy for the treatment of tumors involving the hepatocaval confluence: A reliable way to assure an adequate future liver remnant volume

Parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy techniques allow a lesser volume resection (<3 adjacent segments) for tumors involving the hepatic veins at the hepatocaval confluence, assuring adequate volume of the future liver remnant. We report the ability to perform parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy as planned from the preoperative imaging and the type of vascular intervention used to preserve hepatic outflow. We analyzed 60 consecutive parenchyma-sparing hepatectomies in 54 patients for 7 primary and 53 metastatic tumors (48 colorectal), located in segments I, VII, VIII, or IVa and involving the hepatocaval confluence. Patients had a median of 2 (range: 1-18) lesions with median diameter of 4cm (range: 1.2-16.5), which were bilateral in 43%. A parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy was performed in all of the 60 cases, only one case required the resection of 3 adjacent segments. In 16 (27%) hepatic veins-resections, the outflow was assured by preservation of the inferior-right-hepatic veins in 3 (5%), of the communicating-veins in 4 (7%), of the middle-hepatic veins in 3 (4%; middle-hepatic veins patch-reconstruction in 2 cases), by polytetrafluoroethylene-grafts in 4 (7%), and by hepatic veins-anastomosis in 2 (3%). In 15 (25%) cases, the hepatic veins were resected tangentially and reconstructed by direct suture venorraphy. In 29 (48%) cases, the hepatic veins were skeletonized from the tumor. Grade IIIb to IV complications occurred in 7%, median hospital-stay was 9days, and 90-day mortality occurred in one cirrhotic patient. Median overall and disease-free survivals were 72 and 16months (median follow-up: 34months). A lesser volume parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy rather than a formal major hepatectomy for tumors involving the hepatocaval confluence can be performed with a low rate of major complications (7%). Parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy should be considered in highly selected patients when evaluating liver resection for tumors involving the hepatocaval confluence based on appropriate and accurate preoperative imaging.

Case-controlled study comparing peri-operative and cancer-related outcomes after major hepatectomy and parenchymal sparing hepatectomy for metastatic colorectal cancer

IntroductionLiver resection is potentially curative in selected patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM). There has been a trend towards parenchyma sparing hepatectomy (PSH) rather than major hepatectomy (MH) due to lower perioperative morbidity. Although data from retrospective series suggest that long-term survival after PSM are similar to MH, these reports may be subject to selection bias. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of PSH and MH in a case-controlled study. Patients and methods917 consecutive patients who underwent liver resection for CLM during 2000–2010 were identified from a prospective database. 238 patients who underwent PSH were case-matched with 238 patients who had MH, for age, gender, tumour number, maximum tumour diameter, primary Dukes' stage, synchronicity and chemotherapy status using a propensity scoring system. Peri-operative outcomes, recurrence and long-term survival were compared. ResultsFewer PSH patients received peri-operative blood transfusions (p < 0.0001). MH patients had greater incidence of complications (p = 0.04), grade III/IV complications (p = 0.01) and 90-day mortality (p = 0.03). Hospital stay was greater in the MH group (p = 0.04). There was no difference in overall/disease-free survival. ConclusionPatients with resectable CLM should be offered PSH if technically feasible. PSH is safer than MH without compromising long-term survival.

Parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) versus non-PSH for bilobar liver metastases of colorectal cancer.

Background:Preoperative interventions have increased the resectability of colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases. This retrospective study compares outcomes after liver resection for bilobar CRC metastases between patients who underwent parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH), i.e., segmentectomies and smaller resections on both lobes, and those treated with non-PSH, i.e., hemihepatectomy plus any resection on the other lobe.Methods:A cohort of 119 patients who underwent liver resection for bilobar CRC metastases were included. Perioperative course and long-term survival were compared between 59 patients who underwent PSH and 60 patients who underwent non-PSH. Statistical analyses were done using Pearson’s chi-square test, Fisher’s exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test. Overall survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox regression analysis.Results:The median number of liver metastases was 2 in patients treated with PSH and 3 in those treated with non-PSH (P<0.01). Postoperative mortality, severe complications and radicality did not differ significantly between groups. Median intraoperative bleeding was 250 mL for PSH and 600 mL for non-PSH (P<0.001). Median operation time and hospital stay were significantly shorter for PSH. Overall survival was comparable between groups, also after adjustment for covariates.Conclusions:There were no significant differences in outcome, except for differences in bleeding, operation time and postoperative stay, favoring PSH. Furthermore, minimizing resection did not influence radicality. Hence, this study supports the use of PSH for bilobar CRC liver metastases when possible.

Parenchyma‐preserving hepatectomy based on portal ramification and perfusion of the right anterior section: preserving the ventral or dorsal area

Anatomical hepatectomy aims to eliminate the spread of malignant tumor cells via portal vein systemically. An anatomical concept of the right anterior section (RAS) and preservation of the liver parenchyma within the RAS has been proposed. We focused on the anatomical concept of the RAS based on portal perfusion and described surgical procedures to preserve the ventral or dorsal RAS using preoperative simulation. In 370 patients undergoing a preoperative simulation, the ramification of the tertiary portal branches of the RAS could be divided into three types including the cranio-caudal type; Couinaud's classification in 50% of patients, ventro-dorsal type in 26% of patients, and multiple type in 24% of patients. Then in 32 patients of the ventro-dorsal type, curative parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy of the RAS was performed, preserving the ventral and dorsal RAS in 14 and 18 patients, respectively. There were no differences in the postoperative complications and long-term survival compared with the results obtained after segment 5 or 8 resection (n = 33). Three-dimensional simulation revealed three types of portal vein ramification of the RAS. Parenchyma-preserving hepatectomy based on the precise portal ramification may contribute to safe and curative hepatectomy in selected cases with liver neoplasm involving the RAS.

Laparoscopic liver resection: Toward a truly minimally invasive approach.

In the surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastasis, it is important to preserve sufficient liver volume after resection in order to avoid post-hepatectomy liver sufficiency and to increase the feasibility of repeated hepatectomy in case of intrahepatic recurrence. Parenchyma-sparing approach, which minimizes the extent of resection while obtaining sufficient surgical margins, has been developed in open hepatectomy. Although this approach can possibly have positive impacts on morbidity and mortality, it is not popular in laparoscopic approach because parenchyma-sparing resection is technically demanding especially by laparoscopy due to its intricate curved transection planes. "Small incision, big resection" is the words to caution laparoscopic surgeons against an easygoing trend to seek for a superficial minimal-invasiveness rather than substantial patient-benefits. Minimal parenchyma excision is often more important than minimal incision. Recently, several reports have shown that technical evolution and accumulation of experience allow surgeons to overcome the hurdle in laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing resection of difficult-to-access liver lesions in posterosuperior segments, paracaval portion, and central liver. Laparoscopic surgeons should now seek for the possibility of laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy as open approach can, which we believe is beneficial for patients rather than just a small incision and lead laparoscopic hepatectomy toward a truly minimally-invasive approach.

Intraoperative ultrasonographic detection of communicating veins between adjacent hepatic veins during hepatectomy for tumours at the hepatocaval confluence

The presence of communicating veins between adjacent hepatic veins may allow parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy. Taking advantage of improvements in ultrasound technology, such as e-flow modality, a study of the presence of communicating veins was conducted in patients with hepatic tumours at the caval confluence. Consecutive patients undergoing surgery between October 2007 and December 2009 for hepatic tumours in contact with or invading a hepatic vein at its caval confluence were included. Communicating vein mapping by means of e-flow intraoperative ultrasonography (EF-IOUS) was carried out. A total of 20 patients were enrolled. Communicating veins between adjacent hepatic veins or with the inferior vena cava were detected in 16 patients. The median number of communicating veins was 1 (range 0-5). The total number of lesions removed was 126 (range 1-46). In 11 of 12 patients requiring resection of a hepatic vein, communicating veins enabled a parenchyma-sparing procedure to be performed. No patient had a formal major hepatectomy. There was no postoperative mortality or major morbidity. EF-IOUS estimation of the frequency of communicating veins between adjacent hepatic veins suggests that such veins are common. This may facilitate parenchyma-sparing procedures in patients with hepatic tumours encroaching on major hepatic veins.