Giammauro Berardi

Outcomes of robotic vs laparoscopic hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic liver resections. METHODS A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library Central. Participants of any age and sex, who underwent robotic or laparoscopic liver resection were considered following these criteria: (1) studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic liver resection; (2) studies reporting at least one perioperative outcome; and (3) if more than one study was reported by the same institute, only the most recent was included. The primary outcome measures were set for estimated blood loss, operative time, conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and mortality rates, hospital stay and major hepatectomy rates. RESULTS A total of 7 articles, published between 2010 and 2014, fulfilled the selection criteria. The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significant reduction in blood loss and lower operative time (MD = 83.96, 95%CI: 10.51-157.41, P = 0.03; MD = 68.43, 95%CI: 39.22-97.65, P < 0.00001, respectively). No differences were found with respect to conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and hospital stay. CONCLUSION Laparoscopic liver resection resulted in reduced blood loss and shorter surgical times compared to robotic liver resections. There was no difference in conversion rate, R1 resection rate, morbidity and length of postoperative stay.

Comparison between minimally invasive and open living donor hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Living donor liver transplantation is a valid alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation, and its safety and feasibility have been well determined. Minimally invasive living donor hepatectomy (MILDH) has taken some time to be accepted because of inherent technical difficulties and the highly demanding surgical skills needed to perform the procedure, and its role is still being debated. Because of the lack of data, a systematic review and meta‐analysis comparing MILDH and open living donor hepatectomy (OLDH) was performed. A systematic literature search was performed with PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library Central. Treatment outcomes, including blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, analgesia use, donor‐recipient morbidity and mortality, and donor procedure costs, were analyzed. There were 573 articles, and a total of 11, dated between 2006 and 2014, fulfilled the selection criteria and were, therefore, included. These 11 studies included a total of 608 adult patients. Blood loss [mean difference (MD) = –46.35; 95% confidence interval (CI) = –94.04‐1.34; P = 0.06] and operative times [MD = 19.65; 95% CI = –4.28‐43.57; P = 0.11] were comparable between the groups, whereas hospital stays (MD = –1.56; 95% CI = –2.63 to −0.49; P = 0.004), analgesia use (MD = –0.54; 95% CI = –1.04 to −0.03; P = 0.04), donor morbidity rates [odds ratio (OR) = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.40‐0.98; P = 0.04], and wound‐related complications (OR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.17‐0.97; P = 0.04) were significantly reduced in MILDH. MILDH for right liver procurement was associated with a significantly reduced hospital stay (OR = –0.92; 95% CI = 0.17‐0.97; P = 0.04). In conclusion, MILDH is associated with intraoperative results that are comparable to results for OLDH and with surgical outcomes that are no worse than those for the open procedure. Liver Transpl 21:738‐752, 2015.

Evolution of Laparoscopic Liver Surgery from Innovation to Implementation to Mastery: Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes of 2,238 Patients from 4 European Specialized Centers

BACKGROUND First seen as an innovation for select patients, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has evolved since its introduction, resulting in worldwide use. Despite this, it is still limited mainly to referral centers. The aim of this study was to evaluate a large cohort undergoing LLR from 2000 to 2015, focusing on the technical approaches, perioperative and oncologic outcomes, and evolution of practice over time. STUDY DESIGN The demographics and indications, intraoperative, perioperative, and oncologic outcomes of 2,238 patients were evaluated. Trends in practice and outcomes over time were assessed. RESULTS The percentage of LLR performed yearly has increased from 5% in 2000 to 43% in 2015. Pure laparoscopy was used in 98.3% of cases. Wedge resections were the most common operation; they were predominant at the beginning of LLR and then decreased and remained steady at approximately 53%. Major hepatectomies were initially uncommon, then increased and reached a stable level at approximately 16%. Overall, 410 patients underwent resection in the posterosuperior segments; these were more frequent with time, and the highest percentage was in 2015 (26%). Blood loss, operative time, and conversion rate improved significantly with time. The 5-year overall survival rates were 73% and 54% for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), respectively. The 5-year, recurrence-free survival rates were 50% and 37% for HCC and CRLM, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Since laparoscopy was introduced, a long implementation process has been necessary to allow for standardization and improvement in surgical care, mastery of the technique, and the ability to obtain good perioperative results with safe oncologic outcomes.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma comparing the Milan, UCSF, and Asan criteria: long‐term follow‐up of a Western single institutional experience

In patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the outcome after liver transplantation (LT) is excellent if tumor characteristics are within the Milan criteria (MC). Expanded Asan criteria (AC) have not yet been validated in Western countries.

Conversion for Unfavorable Intraoperative Events Results in Significantly Worst Outcomes During Laparoscopic Liver Resection: Lessons Learned From a Multicenter Review of 2861 Cases

Objective: To investigate the risk factors for conversion during laparoscopic liver resection and its effect on patient outcome in a large cohort of patients. Additional analysis of outcomes in patients who required conversion for unfavorable intraoperative findings and conversion for unfavorable intraoperative events will be performed to establish if the cause of conversion effects outcome. Summary Background Data: Multiple previous studies demonstrate that laparoscopic liver surgery reduces intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, and morbidity while maintaining comparable oncological and survival outcomes when compared with open liver resections. However, limited information is available regarding the possible sequelae of conversion to open surgery, especially with regards to cause of conversion. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 2861 cases from prospectively maintained databases of 7 tertiary liver centers across Europe was performed. Results: Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, previous liver resection(s), resections for malignant lesions, postero-superior location, and the extent of the resection are associated with an increased risk of conversion. Patients who require conversion have longer operations with higher blood loss; a longer HDU and total hospital stay, increased frequency and severity of complications and higher 30- and 90-day mortality. Patients who had an elective conversion for an unfavorable intraoperative finding had better outcomes than patients who had an emergency conversion secondary to an unfavorable intraoperative event in terms of HDU and total hospital stay, severity of complication, and 90-day mortality. Conclusions: Our study highlights the risk factors for conversion and suggests that conversion for unfavorable intraoperative events is associated with worse outcomes.

Graft inflow modulation in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) has an incidence between 0 and 43% in small-for-size graft (SFSG) adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Portal hypertension following reperfusion and the hyperdynamic splanchnic state are reported as the major triggering factors of SFSS. Intra- and postoperative strategies to prevent or to reduce its onset are still under debate. We analyzed graft inflow modulation (GIM) during adult LDLT considering the indications, efficacy of the available techniques, changes in hemodynamics and outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and the Cochrane Library Central. Treatment outcomes including in-hospital mortality and morbidity, re-transplantation rate, 1-, 3-, and 5-year patient overall survival and 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rates, hepatic artery and portal vein flows and pressures before and after inflow modulation were analyzed. RESULTS From 563 articles, 12 studies dated between 2003 and 2014 fulfilled the selection criteria and were therefore included in the study. These comprised a total of 449 adult patients who underwent inflow modulation during adult-to-adult LDLT. Types of GIM described were splenic artery ligation, splenectomy, meso-caval shunt, spleno-renal shunt, portocaval shunt, and splenic artery embolization. Mortality and morbidity ranged between 0 and 33% and 17% and 70%, respectively. Re-transplantation rates ranged between 0% and 25%. GIM was associated with good survival for both graft and recipients, reaching an 84% actuarial rate at 5 years. Through the use of GIM, irrespective of the technique, a statistically significant reduction of PVF and PVP was obtained. CONCLUSIONS GIM is a safe and efficient technique to avoid or limit portal hyperperfusion, especially in cases of SFSG, decreasing overall morbidity and improving outcomes.

Resection of Single Metachronous Liver Metastases from Breast Cancer Stage I-II Yield Excellent Overall and Disease-Free Survival. Single Center Experience and Review of the Literature

Purpose: Improved survival after liver resection for breast cancer liver metastases (BCLM) has been proven; however, there is still controversy on predictive factors influencing outcomes. The analysis of factors related to primary and metastatic cancer eventually influencing long-term outcomes and a review of the literature are presented in this report. Methods: Twenty-seven patients diagnosed with metachronous BCLM between 1996 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who had a minimum disease-free interval between primary tumor and liver metastasis of 12 months, no more than 3 liver lesions, no macroscopic extra-hepatic disease and in which systemic therapy showed a good response were included. Results: Twenty-two patients (82%) were initially diagnosed with a stage I-II disease. Twelve patients presented with multiple liver metastases. The 5 years overall survival (OS) rate was 78%, while the 5 years disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 36%. Initial tumor stage III-IV at first diagnosis and number of metastases >1 was significantly associated with a shorter DFS at multivariate analysis (p = 0.03 and p = 0.04 respectively). Patients with multiple lesions had a median DFS of 15 months compared to 47 months in patients with a single lesion (p = 0.03). Conclusions: Resection of single BCLM from primary stage I-II cancer offers very good long-term survival rates and a low morbidity.

Oncologic value of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: The oncologic validity of laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains controversial. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available evidence. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search was performed between 2008 and 2014 to identify comparative studies evaluating morbidity/mortality, oncologic surgery-related outcomes, recurrence and survival rates. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.2 software. Results: Eight studies with a total of 1456 patients were included in this analysis. The complication rate was lower in LADG [odds ratio (OR) 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.42-0.83; P < 0.002]. The in-hospital mortality rate was comparable (OR 1.22; 95% CI = 0.28-5-29, P = 0.79). There was no significant difference in the number of harvested lymph nodes, resection margins, cancer recurrence rate, cancer-related mortality or overall and disease-free survival (OS and DFS, respectively) rates between the laparoscopic and the open groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The current study supports the view that LADG for AGC is a feasible, safe and effective procedure in selected patients. Adequate lymphadenectomy, resection margins, recurrence, cancer-related mortality and long-term outcomes appear equivalent to open distal gastrectomy (ODG).

Development and validation of a difficulty score to predict intraoperative complications during laparoscopic liver resection: Difficulty score to predict complications during laparoscopic liver resection

Previous studies have demonstrated that patient, surgical, tumour and operative variables affect the complexity of laparoscopic liver resections. However, current difficulty scoring systems address only tumour factors. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a predictive model for the risk of intraoperative complications during laparoscopic liver resections.

The practice of laparoscopic liver surgery in Belgium: a national survey

Abstract Background: Laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) gained popularity bringing several advantages including decreased morbidity and reduction of length of hospital stay compared to open. Methods: To understand practice and evolution of LLS in Belgium, a 20-questions survey was sent to all members of the Royal Belgian Society for Surgery, the Belgian Section of Hepato-Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery and the Belgian Group for Endoscopic Surgery. Results: Thirty-seven surgical units representing 61 surgeons performing LLS in Belgium responded: 50% from regional hospitals, 28% from university and 22% from peripheral hospitals. Replies from high volume centers (>50 liver-surgery/year) were 19%. More than 25% of liver procedures were performed laparoscopically in 35% of centers. LLS is adopted since more than 15-years in 14.5% of centers with an increasing rate reported in 59%. Low relevance of LLS in the hospital organization (26.5%) and lack of time in surgical schedules (12%) or of specific training (9%) are the main barriers for further diffusion. More than 80% of the responders agreed to participate to a national prospective registry. Conclusion: LLS is mainly performed in experienced HPB units with an increasing interest in peripheral centers. A prospective national registry will be useful by providing real data in terms of indications, morbidity and overall evolution.