Search

Background: For open minor hepatectomy, morbidity and recovery are dominated by the incision. The robotic approach may transform this "incision dominant procedure" into a safe outpatient procedure., Study Design: We audited outpatient (less than 2 midnights) robotic hepatectomy at 6 hepatobiliary centers in 2 nations to test the hypothesis that the robotic approach can be a safe and effective short-stay procedure. Establishing early recovery after surgery programs were active at all sites, and home digital monitoring was available at 1 of the institutions., Results: A total of 307 outpatient (26 same-day and 281 next-day discharge) robotic hepatectomies were identified (2013 to 2023). Most were minor hepatectomies (194 single segments, 90 bi-segmentectomies, 14 three segments, and 8 four segments). Thirty-nine (13%) were for benign histology, whereas 268 were for cancer (33 hepatocellular carcinoma, 27 biliary, and 208 metastatic disease). Patient characteristics were a median age of 60 years (18 to 93 years), 55% male, and a median BMI of 26 kg/m 2 (14 to 63 kg/m 2 ). Thirty (10%) patients had cirrhosis. One hundred eighty-seven (61%) had previous abdominal operation. Median operative time was 163 minutes (30 to 433 minutes), with a median blood loss of 50 mL (10 to 900 mL). There were no deaths and 6 complications (2%): 2 wound infections, 1 failure to thrive, and 3 perihepatic abscesses. Readmission was required in 5 (1.6%) patients. Of the 268 malignancy cases, 25 (9%) were R1 resections. Of the 128 with superior segment resections (segments 7, 8, 4A, 2, and 1), there were 12 positive margins (9%) and 2 readmissions for abscess., Conclusions: Outpatient robotic hepatectomy in well-selected cases is safe (0 mortality, 2% complication, and 1.6% readmission), including resection in the superior or posterior portions of the liver that is challenging with nonarticulating laparoscopic instruments., (Copyright © 2024 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In an attempt to preserve hepatic volume in cases of severe cirrhosis, isolated resection of segment 3 (Sg3) may be beneficial [1-3]. We describe a laparoscopic anatomical Sg3 segmentectomy via an extrahepatic Glissonian approach., Video: First, the falciform and coronary ligament were dissected. The Glissonian pedicle to Sg3 was isolated via meticulous dissection with the laparoscopic CUSA and suction catheter. After temporary occlusion, the ischemic margin of Sg3 was confirmed and the transection was performed from the medial and lateral aspects of Sg3. After the transection planes meet, hepatic venous and portal pedicle branches are controlled, and ultimately the main s3 Glissonian pedicle is ligated., Results: Operative time was 175 minutes and the estimated intraoperative blood loss was 30 mL. On postoperative day 3, the patient was discharged without any complications. Pathologic findings demonstrated a 2.1 × 1.5 × 1.0 cm hepatocellular carcinoma (pT2) with a 0.3 cm tumor-free resection margin., Conclusions: The laparoscopic anatomic Sg3 segmentectomy is a feasible and safe procedure for hepatocellular carcinoma. This approach may be beneficial in cases where hepatic parenchymal preservation is desired., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Laparoscopic anatomical liver resection for posterosuperior lesions is challenging [1,2] A technique of anatomical liver resection with intrahepatic Glissonian approach in open surgery has been published [3]. However, few articles report this technique via the laparoscopic approach [4]. We report a case of laparoscopic anatomical S7 segmentectomy using the Glissonian pedicle approach., Video: A 76-year-old male was admitted for an incidentally detected hepatic mass in segment 7 (S7). Abdominal computed tomography (CT) showed a 5.5 cm solitary tumor. First, the major Glissonian pedicle of the right posterior section was dissected, followed by hepatic parenchymal dissection peripherally until the branches of the Glissonian pedicles of segment 6 and 7 were reached. The S7 Glissonian pedicle was temporarily clamped to confirm demarcation. Dissection was then performed until the right hepatic vein (RHV) was exposed. Further dissection was then continued along the RHV, up to its root., Results: Operative time was 330 minutes. The estimated intraoperative blood loss was 300 mL without a requirement for intraoperative transfusion. On postoperative day 4, the abdominal CT was performed, which revealed no abnormal findings. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 5 without any complications. Pathologic findings demonstrated a 5.2 × 3.8 × 3.1 cm hepatocellular carcinoma (pT1b) with a 2.8-cm tumor-free resection margin., Conclusion: Laparoscopic anatomical S7 segmentectomy via the intrahepatic Glissonian approach is a technically demanding procedure and should be adopted for selected patients. However, this technique is feasible with careful dissection and control of the intrahepatic Glissonian pedicle., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Liver resection in patients with neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NELM) provides a survival benefit, yet the optimal extent of resection remains unknown. We sought to examine outcomes of patients undergoing non-anatomic (NAR) versus anatomic liver resection (AR) for NELM using a large international cohort of patients., Methods: Two hundred and fifty-eight patients who underwent curative intent liver resection from January 1990 to December 2016 were identified from eight institutions. Patients were excluded if they underwent concurrent ablation, had extrahepatic disease, underwent a debulking operation, or had mixed anatomic and non-anatomic resections. Overall (OS) and recurrence-free (RFS) survival were compared among patients based on the extent of liver resection (AR vs. NAR)., Results: Most primary tumors were located in the pancreas (n = 117, 45.4%) or the small intestine (n = 65, 25.2%). Liver resection consisted of NAR (n = 126, 48.8%) or AR (n = 132, 51.2%) resection. The overwhelming majority of patients who underwent NAR had an estimated liver involvement of < 50% (NAR 109, 97.3% vs. AR n = 82, 65.6%; P < 0.001). Patients who underwent NAR also had higher rates of primary tumor lymph node metastasis (NAR n = 79, 71.2% vs. AR n = 37, 33.6%; P < 0.001) and microscopically positive margins (R1) (NAR n = 29, 25.7% vs. AR n = 16, 12.5%; P = 0.009). After a median follow-up of 47.7 months, 48 (18.6%) patients died and 37.0% (n = 95) had evidence of disease recurrence. Patients who underwent AR had both longer median OS (not reached) and RFS (not reached) versus patients who underwent NAR (median OS 138.3 months; median RFS 31.3 months) (both P < 0.01). After controlling for patient and disease-related factors, extent of liver resection was independently associated with an increased risk of recurrence (HR 2.39, 95% CI 1.04-5.48; P = 0.04) but not death (HR 1.92, 95% CI 0.40-9.28; P = 0.42)., Conclusion: NAR was independently associated with a higher incidence of recurrence versus patients who undergo a formal anatomic hepatectomy among patients with NELM.

Robotic technology is being utilized in multiple hepatobiliary procedures, including hepatic resections. The benefits of minimally invasive surgical approaches have been well documented; however, there is some concern that robotic liver surgery may be prohibitively costly and therefore should be limited on this basis. A single-institution, retrospective cohort study was performed of robotic and open liver resections performed for benign and malignant pathologies. Clinical and cost outcomes were analyzed using adjusted generalized linear regression models. Clinical and cost data for 71 robotic (RH) and 88 open (OH) hepatectomies were analyzed. Operative time was significantly longer in the RH group (303 vs. 253 min; p = 0.004). Length of stay was more than 2 days shorter in the RH group (4.2 vs. 6.5 days; p < 0.001). RH perioperative costs were higher ($6026 vs. $5479; p = 0.047); however, postoperative costs were significantly lower, resulting in lower total hospital direct costs compared with OH controls ($14,754 vs. $18,998; p = 0.001). Robotic assistance is safe and effective while performing major and minor liver resections. Despite increased perioperative costs, overall RH direct costs are not greater than OH, the current standard of care.