Juan Pekolj

Recommendations for laparoscopic liver resection: a report from the second international consensus conference held in Morioka.

OBJECTIVE This review aims to assess the impact of implementing dedicated emergency surgical services, in particular acute care surgery, on clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND The optimal model for delivering high-quality emergency surgical care remains unknown. Acute Care Surgery (ACS) is a health care model combining emergency general surgery, trauma, and critical care. It has been adopted across the United States in the management of surgical emergencies. METHOD A systematic review was performed after PRISMA recommendations using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Psych-Info databases. Studies assessing different care models and institutional factors affecting the delivery of emergency general surgery were included. RESULTS Twenty-seven studies comprising 744,238 patients were included in this review. In studies comparing ACS with traditional practice, mortality and morbidity were improved. Moreover, time to senior review, delays to operating theater, and financial expenditure were often reduced. The elements of ACS models varied but included senior clinicians present onsite during office hours and dedicated to emergency care while on-call. Referrals were made to specialist centers with primary surgical assessments taking place on surgical admissions units rather than in the emergency department. Twenty-four-hour access to dedicated emergency operating rooms was also described. CONCLUSIONS ACS models as well as centralized units and hospitals with dedicated emergency operating rooms, access to radiology and intensive care facilities (ITU) are all factors associated with improved clinical and financial outcomes in the delivery of emergency general surgery. There is, however, no consensus on the elements that constitute an ideal ACS model and how it can be implemented into current surgical practice.

Simultaneous colorectal and hepatic resections for colorectal cancer: postoperative and longterm outcomes

BACKGROUND Our goal was to analyze the results of resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases in one procedure. STUDY DESIGN Between June 1982 and July 1998, 522 patients underwent liver resection for colorectal metastases. Liver resection was performed simultaneously with colorectal resection in 71 cases, representing the population in this study. Morbidity, mortality, overall survival, and disease-free survival times were analyzed. Median followup time was 29 months (range 6 to 162 months). Prognostic factors and their influence on outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS The median hospital stay was 8 days (range 5 to 23 days). Morbidity was 21% and included nine pleural effusions, seven wound abscesses, four instances of hepatic failure, three systemic infections, three intraabdominal abscesses, and one colonic anastomosis leakage. Operative mortality was 0%. Recurrence rate was 57.7% (41 or 71), and progression of disease was detected in 33.8%. Overall and disease-free survivals at 1, 3, and 5 years were 88%, 45%, and 38% and 67%, 17%, and 9%, respectively. Prognostic factors with notable influence on patient outcomes were nodal stage as per TNM classification, number of liver metastases, diameter (smaller or larger than 5 cm), liver resection specimen weight (lighter or heavier than 90 g), and liver resection margin (smaller or larger than 1 cm). CONCLUSIONS Simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases can be performed with low morbidity and mortality rates, avoiding a second surgical procedure.

International experience for laparoscopic major liver resection

Although minor laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) appear as standardized procedures, major LLRs are still limited to few expert teams. The aim of this study was to report the combined data of 18 international centers performing major LLR. Variables evaluated were number and type of LLR, surgical indications, number of synchronous colorectal resections, details on technical points, conversion rates, operative time, blood loss and surgical margins. From 1996 to 2014, a total of 5388 LLR were carried out including 1184 major LLRs. The most frequent indication for laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) was colorectal liver metastases (37.0%). Seven centers used hand assistance or hybrid approach selectively for LRH mostly at the beginning of their experience. Seven centers apply Pringles maneuver routinely. The conversion rate for all major LLRs was 10% and mean operative time was 291 min. Mean estimated blood loss for all major LLR was 327 ml and negative surgical margin rate was 96.5%. Major LLRs still remain challenging procedures requiring important experience in both laparoscopy and liver surgery. Stimulating the younger generation to learn and accomplish these techniques is the better way to guarantee further development of this surgical field.

Bile duct injuries: management of late complications

BackgroundLaparoscopic cholecystectomy is the treatment of choice for gallbladder stones. In the current study, this approach was associated with a higher incidence of biliary injuries. The authors evaluate their experience treating complex biliary injuries and analyze the literature.MethodsIn a 15-year period, 169 patients with bile duct injuries (BDIs) resulting from open and laparoscopic cholecystectomies were treated. The patients were retrospectively evaluated through their records. Biliary injury and associated lesions were evaluated with imaging studies. Surgical management included therapeutic endoscopy, percutaneous interventions, hepaticojejunostomy, liver resection, and liver transplantation. Postoperative outcome was recorded. Survival analysis was performed with G-Stat and NCSS programs using the Kaplan–Meier method.ResultsOf the 169 patients treated for BDIs, 148 were referred from other centers. The injuries included 115 lesions resulting from open cholecystectomy and 54 lesions resulting from laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A total of 110 patients (65%) fulfilled the criteria for complex injuries, 11 of whom met more than one criteria. Injuries resulting from laparoscopic and open cholecystectomies were complex in 87.5% and 72% of the patients, respectively. The procedures used were percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for 30 patients, hepaticojejunostomy for 96 patients, rehepaticojejunostomy for 16 patients, hepatic resection for 9 patients, and liver transplantation projected for 18 patients. Hepaticojejunostomy was effective for 85% of the patients. The mean follow-up period was 77.8 months (range, 4–168 months). The mortality rate for noncomplex BDI was 0%, as compared with the mortality rate of 7.2% (8/110) for complex BDI. Mortality after hepatic resection was nil, and morbidity was 33.3%. The actuarial survival rate for liver transplantation at 1 year was 91.7%.ConclusionsComplex BDIs after laparoscopic cholecystectomy are potentially life-threatening complications. In this study, late complications of complex BDIs appeared when there was a delay in referral or the patient received multiple procedures. On occasion, hepatic resections and liver transplantation proved to be the only definitive treatments with good long-term outcomes and quality of life.

Management of Nonparasitic Hepatic Cysts

BACKGROUND The optimal management of nonparasitic hepatic cysts (NPHC) is a topic of debate. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our 17-year experience with NPHC. STUDY DESIGN From January 1990 to August 2007, 131 consecutive patients with NPHC were evaluated and treated at our institution. Seventy-eight patients (60%) had simple hepatic cysts (SHC). The remaining 53 (40%) had polycystic liver disease (PLD). Morbidity, mortality, and recurrence rates for each of the two groups were evaluated. RESULTS Thirty-seven patients underwent open deroofing (SHC, 24; PLD,13), 66 had laparoscopic deroofing (SHC, 46; PLD, 20), 19 had percutaneous drainage (SHC, 4; PLD, 15), 3 had major hepatic resections (PLD, 3), 4 had cystojejunostomy (SHC, 4), and 2 had combined hepatorenal transplantation (PLD, 2). Corresponding morbidity, mortality, and recurrence rates were, respectively: conventional deroofing: SHC, 29%, 0%, 8%; PLD, 8%, 0%, 0%; laparoscopic deroofing: SHC, 2%, 0%, 2%; PLD, 25%, 0%, 5%; percutaneous drainage: SHC, 0%, 0%, 75%; PLD, 0%, 0%, 20%; cystojejunostomy: SHC, 75%, 0%, 25%; major hepatic resections: PLD, 66%, 0%, 0%; and hepatorenal transplantation: PLD, 50%, 50%, 0%. CONCLUSIONS Laparoscopic deroofing provided complete relief of symptoms for both SHC and PLD. Percutaneous drainage was our procedure of choice for infected liver cysts and potentially for patients who cannot tolerate general anesthesia. Liver and liver-kidney transplantations were reserved for patients with end-stage PLD alone and in association with end-stage renal disease, respectively.

Endoscopic management of biliary complications after adult living-donor versus deceased-donor liver transplantation.

Background. Although data about the incidence and management of biliary complications after deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) are well defined, those pertaining to adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) are conflicting. Methods. We retrospectively compared endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) findings in 30 LDLT vs. 357 DDLT consecutive adult recipients with duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction. LDLT and DDLT recipients were followed up for median durations of 30.5 and 36.0 months after the last ERCP, respectively. Results. Postoperative biliary complications were more frequently identified at ERCP after LDLT versus DDLT (10/30 [33.3%] vs. 34/357 [9.5%]; P<0.001). Complications mainly consisted of anastomotic biliary strictures (10/30 [33.3%] vs. 27/357 [7.6%]; LDLT vs. DDLT recipients, respectively; P<0.001) and biliary leaks (4/30 [13.3%] vs. 6/357 [1.7%]; LDLT vs. DDLT recipients, respectively; P=0.005; some patients had both complications). Stricture dilation was successful in 4/10 (40%) LDLT vs. 27/27 (100%) DDLT recipients (P<0.001), and bile ducts remained patent up to the end of follow-up without further intervention in 2/10 (20.0%) vs. 21/27 (77.8%) patients, respectively (P=0.002). Endoscopic treatment of bile leaks was successful in 3/4 (75.0%) vs. 5/6 (83.3%) LDLT versus DDLT recipients, respectively (NS). Conclusions. Biliary complications were more frequent after LDLT compared with DDLT. Endoscopic treatment of anastomotic biliary strictures was successful in a minority of patients after LDLT, in contrast with DDLT. Most biliary leaks were successfully treated at endoscopy after LDLT or DDLT.

Liver resection for non-colorectal, non-neuroendocrine metastases: analysis of a multicenter study from Argentina

BACKGROUND AND AIM Resection of colorectal liver metastases has become a standard of care, although the value of this procedure in non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine (NCRNNE) metastases remains controversial and is still a matter of debate. The aim of the study was to determine the utility of liver resection in the long-term outcome of patients with NCRNNE metastases. MATERIAL AND METHODS The records of 106 patients who underwent liver resection for NCRNNE metastases in the period 1989 to 2006 at 5 HPB Centers in Argentina were analyzed. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, type of resection, long-term outcome and prognostic factors were analyzed. Depending on primary tumor sites, a comparative analysis of survival was performed. RESULTS Mean age was 54 (17-76). Hepatic metastases were solitary in 62.3% and unilateral in 85.6%. Primary tumor sites: Urogenital (37.7%), sarcomas (21.7%), breast (17.9%), gastrointestinal (6.6%), melanoma (5.7%), and others (10.4%). Fifty-one major hepatectomies and 55 minor resections were performed. Twenty patients underwent synchronous resections. An R0 resection could be achieved in 89.6%. Perioperative mortality was 1.8%. Overall, 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates were 67%, 34%, and 19%, respectively. Survival was significantly longer for metastases of urogenital (p=0.0001) and breast (p=0.003) origin. Curative resections (p=0.04) and metachronous disease (p=0.0001) were predictors of better survival. CONCLUSIONS Liver resection is an effective treatment for NCRNNE liver metastases; it gives satisfactory long-term survival especially in metachronous disease, in patients with metastases from urogenital and breast tumors and when R0 procedures can be performed.

Complex bile duct injuries: management

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the present treatment of choice for patients with gallbladder stones, despite its being associated with a higher incidence of biliary injuries compared with the open procedure. Injuries occurring during the laparoscopic approach seem to be more complex. A complex biliary injury is a disease that is difficult to diagnose and treat. We considered complex injuries: 1) injuries that involve the confluence; 2) injuries in which repair attempts have failed; 3) any bile duct injury associated with a vascular injury; 4) or any biliary injury in association with portal hypertension or secondary biliary cirrhosis. The present review is an evaluation of our experience in the treatment of these complex biliary injuries and an analysis of the international literature on the management of patients.

What kind of energy devices should be used for laparoscopic liver resection? Recommendations from a systematic review

Transection methods and hemostasis achievement have an impact on blood loss, and consequently on outcome and survival. However, no consensus exists on parenchymal transection or hemostasis techniques in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). The aim of this review is to clarify the role of energy devices (ED) in LLR. ED is a generator of mechanic or electric energy transfer to an operating tool, used for transection, sealing or both. Searches were performed in PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane, Embase, Google Scholar in human or animal experimental models. Each study quality was graded following the GRADE system. From 1996 to 2014, 30 studies were found: five comparative, one prospective, two case‐control, and 16 case series and some case reports, with level of evidence ranging from Moderate to Very Low. Since 2012, the Research and Development of new tools raised quicker than clinical studies could follow. The two main techniques emerged are blind transection versus sharp dissection: due to the low quality and heterogeneity of the studies, no firm conclusion can be drawn, but meticulous dissection of vessels usually never leads to vascular damage. As a matter of fact, ED, though efficient and reliable, cannot replace the basic skills of hepatic surgery: sharp dissection, vascular control and elective sealing.

Liver transplantation for the sequelae of intra-operative bile duct injury.

BACKGROUND Intra-operative bile duct injuries (IBDI) are potentially severe complications of the treatment of benign conditions, with unpredictable long-term results. Multiple procedures are frequently needed to correct these complications. In spite of the application of these procedures, patients with severe injuries can develop irreversible liver disease. Liver transplantation (LT) is currently the only treatment available for such patients, but little information has been published concerning the results of LT. METHODS Eight patients with LT for end-stage liver disease for IBDI were studied retrospectively. They had failure of multiple previous treatments and experienced recurrent episodes of cholangitis, oesophageal variceal bleeding, severe pruritus, refractory ascites and spontaneous peritonitis. RESULTS Mean recipient hepatectomy time was of 243 minutes (range 140-295 min), the complete procedure averages 545 minutes (260-720) and intraoperative red-blood-cells consumption was 6.5 units (1-7). One patient required reoperation due to perforation of a Roux-en-Y loop, and three developed minor complications (2 wound infections, I inguinal lymphocele). One patient died due to nosocomial pneumonia (mortality rate 12.5%). One patient required retransplantation due to delayed hepatic artery thrombosis. At follow-up 75% of patients are alive with normal graft function and an excellent quality of life. CONCLUSIONS LT represents a safe curative treatment for end-stage liver disease after IBDI, albeit a major undertaking in the context of a surgical complication in the treatment of benign disease. The complications of the surgical procedure and the long-standing immunosuppression impart a high cost for resolutions of these sequelae but LT represents the only long-term effective treatment for these selected patients.