Search

Background: There are no data to evaluate the difference in populations and impact of centers with liver transplant programs in performing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR)., Methods: This was a multicenter study including patients undergoing LLR for benign and malignant tumors at 27 French centers from 1996 to 2018. The main outcomes were postoperative severe morbidity and mortality., Results: A total of 3154 patients were included, and 14 centers were classified as transplant centers (N = 2167 patients, 68.7 %). The transplant centers performed more difficult LLRs and more resections for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients who more frequently had cirrhosis. A higher rate of performing the Pringle maneuver, a lower rate of blood loss and a higher rate of open conversion (all p < 0.05) were observed in the transplant centers. There was no association between the presence of a liver transplant program and either postoperative severe morbidity (<10 % in each group; p = 0.228) or mortality (1 % in each group; p = 0.915)., Conclusions: Most HCCs, difficult LLRs, and cirrhotic patients are treated in transplant centers. We show that all centers can achieve comparable safety and quality of care in LLR independent of the presence of a liver transplant program., (Copyright © 2024 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The recent development of 3D vision in laparoscopic and robotic surgical systems raises the question of whether these two procedures are equivalent. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical and long-term oncological outcomes of 3D laparoscopic (3D-LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)., Methods: The data for operative time, morbidity, margins, and survival were reviewed for 3D-LLR and compared with RLR., Results: From 2011 to 2017, 93 patients with HCC, including 58 (62%) with cirrhosis, underwent 3D-LLR [49 (53%)] or RLR [44 (47%)]. No difference was observed in operative time (269 vs. 252 min; p = 0.52), overall (27% vs. RLR: 16%; p = 0.49) and severe morbidity (4% vs. 2%; p = 0.77) or in the surgical margin width (9 vs. 11 mm; p = 0.30) between the 3D-LLR and RLR groups. The 3-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates after 3D-LLR and RLR were 82% and 24% and 91% (p = 0.16) and 48% (p = 0.18), respectively., Conclusions: The 3D-LLR and RLR systems provide comparable surgical margins with similar short- and long-term oncological outcomes.

Background: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) may improve outcomes for cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal hypertension (PHT). The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes after LLR for HCC in cirrhotic patients with and without PHT., Methods: This multicentric study included 96 HCC patients who underwent LLR. Clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) was defined by a hepatic venous pressure gradient ≥10 mmHg. Short-term outcomes and liver-specific complications including post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), ascites and encephalopathy were compared between patients with and without CSPH., Results: Thirty-one patients (32%) had CSPH. The CSPH group had higher post-operative morbidity (52% vs. 15%; p < 0.001), PHLF (10% vs. 0%; p = 0.03) and encephalopathy (10% vs. 0%; p = 0.03). There was no difference in terms of post-operative ascites between the two groups (CSPH: 16% vs. no CPSH: 8%, p = 0.28). The length of stay was longer in patients with CSPH than in those without CSPH (6 vs. 4 days; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The laparoscopic approach is feasible in selected HCC patients with CSPH, at the price of significant increases in liver-specific complications and length of stay.

Objectives: A laparoscopic approach improves short-term outcomes and maintains long-term outcomes compared to an open approach. In turn, the recent development of robotic surgery raises the question whether it performs as well as laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR) for malignancies., Method: From 2011 to 2017, the study population included 111 patients in the LLR group and 61 in the RLR group. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared before and after propensity score matching (PSM)., Results: Operative mortality rate was nil. The intraoperative blood transfusion rate was higher during RLR (15% vs. 2%, p = 0.0009). Major morbidity and hospital stay were not different between the two groups. The resection margin width (LLR 7 mm vs. RLR 10 mm, p = 0.13) and R1 resection rates (resection margin width < 1 mm; LLR 15% vs. RLR 11%, p = 0.49) were similar. After PSM (55 patients in each group), the blood transfusion, major morbidity, hospital stay and R1 resection were similar between the two groups. When considering the largest subset of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma including 114 patients (66%), the 3-year overall survival rate was 80% in the LLR group and 97% in the RLR group (p = 0.10) and remained similar after PSM (p = 0.27). The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate was 50% in the LLR group and 64% in the RLR group (p = 0.30) and remained similar after PSM (p = 0.26)., Conclusions: No differences were found in blood transfusion, incidence of positive resection margins and long-term outcomes between the two techniques. RLR does not compromise short-term and oncologic outcomes in patients with liver cancers.

The robotic surgical system has been applied in liver surgery. However, controversies concerns exist regarding a variety of factors including the safety, feasibility, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery. To promote the development of robotic hepatectomy, this study aimed to evaluate the current status of robotic hepatectomy and provide sixty experts' consensus and recommendations to promote its development. Based on the World Health Organization Handbook for Guideline Development, a Consensus Steering Group and a Consensus Development Group were established to determine the topics, prepare evidence-based documents, and generate recommendations. The GRADE Grid method and Delphi vote were used to formulate the recommendations. A total of 22 topics were prepared analyzed and widely discussed during the 4 meetings. Based on the published articles and expert panel opinion, 7 recommendations were generated by the GRADE method using an evidence-based method, which focused on the safety, feasibility, indication, techniques and cost-effectiveness of hepatectomy. Given that the current evidences were low to very low as evaluated by the GRADE method, further randomized-controlled trials are needed in the future to validate these recommendations., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare no conflict of interest in the development of consensus.

Background: The laparoscopic approach might increase the number of cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) indicated for liver resection, otherwise contraindicated due to portal hypertension. The goal of this study was to confirm the safety of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in patients with portal hypertension., Methods: This prospective, single-center, open study (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02145013) included all consecutive cirrhotic patients who underwent LLR for HCC from 2014 to 2017. Short-term outcomes were compared between patients with and without clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH, defined by hepatic venous pressure gradient ≥ 10 mmHg)., Results: The study population included 45 patients, comprising 27 patients (60%) in the no CSPH group and 18 patients (40%) in the CSPH group. All planned procedures could be performed. The two groups did not differ in the extent of resection, transfusion, duration of clamping, and need for conversion. Overall, the 90-day mortality and severe morbidity rates were nil. Moderate morbidity was significantly higher in the CSPH group (39 vs. 4%, p = 0.01); however, the two groups did not differ in the rate of unresolved liver decompensation. Intensive care unit and hospital stays were significantly longer in the CSPH group. At 2 years, overall survival was 77% in the no CSPH group and 100% in the CSPH group (p = 0.17), and recurrence-free survival was 55% in the no CSPH group and 79% in the CSPH group (p = 0.10)., Conclusion: LLR is safe in BCLC 0-A patients with CSPH, with no mortality and good short-term outcomes. Re-evaluation of the BCLC guidelines is needed.

This study compared robotic (RR) and laparoscopic resection (LR) for primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of the stomach >5 cm. Twelve consecutive patients who underwent RR from 2012 to 2015 were matched for tumor size and location with 24 patients who underwent LR from 2000 to 2012. The median tumor size was 7.1 cm (range, 5.5 to 11.5). GISTs were resected by wedge resection (91.7%) or distal gastrectomy. The median RR operative time was longer than that of LR (162.5 vs. 130 min, respectively; P=0.004). Only 1 LR patient required conversion. The time to flatus and hospital stay were similar between groups. Overall, 3 patients developed minor postoperative complications that were medically treated. Mortality was nil. All resections were R0. No difference was observed in the incidence of recurrence. RR was significantly more expensive (+21.6%) than LR. RR appears to be safe and feasible for GISTs>5 cm, but is associated with longer operative times and greater costs.

Background: After comparing with open approach, left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) has become standard in terms of short-term outcomes without jeopardizing long-term survival when performed for malignancy. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term and economic outcomes of laparoscopic (L-LLS) and robotic (R-LLS) LLS., Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent L-LLS or R-LLS from 1997 to 2014 were analyzed. Short-term and economic outcomes were compared between the two groups using a propensity score matching (PSM)., Results: Ninety-six consecutive cases of LLS were performed using the laparoscopic (80 cases; 83 %) or robotic (16 cases; 17 %) approach. The two groups were similar for operative and surgical outcomes. Operation time was similar in the R-LLS compared to the L-LLS group (190 vs. 162 min; p = 0.10). Perioperative costs were higher (1457 € vs. 576 €; p < 0.0001) in the R-LLS group than in the L-LLS group; however, postoperative costs were similar between the two groups (4065 € in the R-LLS group vs. 5459 € in the L-LLS group; p = 0.30). Total costs were similar between the two groups (5522 € in the R-LLS group vs. 6035€ in the L-LLS group; p = 0.70). The PSM included 14 patients for each group. Surgical and economic outcomes remained similar after PSM, except for total operating time which was significantly longer in the R-LLS group than in the L-LLS group., Conclusions: Even if feasible and safe, the robotic approach does not seem so far to offer additional benefit in terms of intra- and postoperative outcomes over the laparoscopic approach in patients requiring LLS. Total costs associated with the R-LLS group are not greater than that associated with the L-LLS group, which is the standard of care so far.

Purpose: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy have lower rates of recurrence compared to those who do not. However, the influences of the pathologic response on surgical complications and survival remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the influence of neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer on postoperative morbidity and long-term survival., Methods: This was a comparative study of consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in two European tertiary hospitals between 2004 and 2014. Patients with and without pathologic complete responses were compared in terms of postoperative morbidity, mortality, and survival., Results: Fifty patients with complete response (ypT0N0) were compared with 141 patients who exhibited non-complete response. No group differences were observed in the postoperative mortality or morbidity rates. The median follow-up time was 57 months (range 1-121). Over this period, 11 (5.8 %) patients, all of whom were in the non-complete response group, exhibited local recurrence. The 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival were significantly better in the complete response group, 92.5 vs. 75.3 % (p = 0.004) and 89 vs. 73.4 % (p = 0.002), respectively., Conclusions: Postoperative complication rate after laparoscopic total mesorectal excision is not associated with the pathologic response grade to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy.

Surgery using a robotic platform is expanding rapidly today, with a notable surge since its authorization on the international medical market by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2000. The first hepatectomy by a robotic approach was reported in 2002, 10 years after the first laparoscopic hepatectomy. Yet, in hepatic surgery, series are scarce and the lack of relevant data in the literature is an obstacle to the development of robot-assisted laparoscopic hepatectomy (RALH). Based on a review of the literature, this update focuses on current indications, short-term and oncologic outcomes following RALH., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Background: Robotic surgery was introduced to overcome laparoscopic drawbacks. This study aimed to compare the learning curve of robotic-assisted right colectomy (RRC) versus laparoscopic-assisted right colectomy (LRC) for colon cancer with respect to operative times and perioperative outcomes. In addition, the health-related costs associated with both procedures were analyzed and compared., Methods: Between 2012 and 2015, 30 consecutive patients underwent RRC and 50 patients LRC for colon cancer. All procedures were performed by a surgical fellow novice in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. The operative time and the cumulative sum method were used to evaluate the learning curve of RRC versus LRC., Results: The mean operative times were 200.5 minutes for RRC and 204.1 minutes for LRC (P = .408) and showed a significant decrease over consecutive procedures (P < .0001). The number of cases necessary to identify a drop in the operative time was 16 for RRC and 25 for LRC. RRC procedures were associated with significantly reduced blood loss (P = .012). Two patients (4%) in the LRC group were converted to laparotomy, whereas no conversion was required in the RRC group. Surgery-related costs were significantly more expensive for RRC, but when combined with the hospitalization-related costs, LRC and RRC did not differ (P = .632)., Conclusions: Both robotic and laparoscopic operative times decrease rapidly with practice. However, RRC is associated with a faster learning curve than LRC. The simultaneous development of these two minimally invasive approaches appears to be safe and feasible with acceptable health-related costs.

Background: Weight loss failure and proton pomp inhibitor (PPI)-resistant gastroesophageal reflux diseases (GERD) after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) are frequently encountered., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and risks of SG conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in the case of weight loss failure or severe GERD., Setting: University hospitals., Methods: Between March 2007 and December 2014, 34 patients with history of SG underwent RYGP. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database was undertaken., Results: Among 34 patients, 31 underwent revisional surgery for weight loss failure and 3 for PPI-resistant GERD. Six patients in the weight loss failure group had symptomatic GERD that was effectively treated with PPIs. The average body mass index (BMI) was 53±11 kg/m2 before SG. A laparoscopic approach was performed in 94% of patients. There was no postoperative mortality. Major adverse events (<90 days) occurred in 4 patients (11.7%). The mean length of stay was 6.7±2.8 days. At the time of revisional surgery, the mean BMI, percentage excess weight loss, and percentage weight loss were 44.7±9.8 kg/m2, 33.6±27.1%, and 16±9.7%, respectively, compared with 40.9±8.5 kg/m2, 63.1±36.2%, and 23.8±14% at 3 years. The GERD was resolved in all patients, allowing the cessation of PPI medication., Conclusion: Laparoscopic conversion of SG to RYGB is feasible and it allows improvement in secondary weight loss and GERD, but at the cost of high morbidity., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy is considered hazardous for the majority of authors and minimally distal pancreatectomy is still a debated topic. The aim of this study was to compare robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) using meta-analysis., Method: EMBASE, Medline and PubMed were searched systematically to identify full-text articles comparing robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies. The meta-analysis was performed by using Review Manager 5.3., Results: Nine studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and included 637 patients (246 robotic and 391 laparoscopic). RDP had a shorter hospital length of stay by 1 day (P = 0.01). On the other hand, LDP had shorter operative time by 30 min, although this was statistically nonsignificant (P = 0.12). RDP showed a significantly increased readmission rate (P = 0.04). There was no difference in the conversion rate, incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula, International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula grade B-C rate, major morbidity, spleen preservation rate and perioperative mortality. All surgical specimens of RDP reported R0 negative margins, whereas 7 specimens in the LDP group had affected margins., Conclusions: In terms of feasibility, safety and oncological adequacy, there is no essential difference between the two techniques so far. The 30 min longer operative time of the RDP is due to the docking and undocking of the robot. The shorter length of stay by 1 day should be judged in combination with the increased 90-day readmission rate., (Copyright © 2016 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Adjustable gastric banding (AGB) has been a very common bariatric procedure, but long-term AGB related complications have led to an increased number of second procedures. Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is one option and can be done as a 1- or 2-step procedure., Objectives: To compare the 1-step and 2-step approachs of conversion of AGB to SG with respect to postoperative mortality and morbidity., Setting: Nationwide study, France., Methods: All morbidly obese patients who underwent AGB followed by SG in France between 2007 and 2012 were included. Multivariate analyses were conducted using the French National Health Service Database data to ascertain predictive factors for 90-day postoperative mortality and morbidity., Results: There were 2061 and 1296 patients in the 1-step and 2-step conversion groups, respectively. The readmission rate was 22.8% and 16.5% in the 1- and 2-step groups, respectively (P<.001). More patients required an intensive care unit stay in the 1-step group (11.7 % versus 6.7%; P<.001). The 90-day mortality was .1%, with no difference between the 2 groups (1% versus .08%). The complication rate was 14.7% (1-step 15.9% versus 2-step 12.7%; P = .009). The timing of AGB removal (P = .02), patient age 50-60 years (P = .004), hypertension (P = .01), surgical approach (P = .002), and hospital status (P = .015) were significantly associated with the complication rate., Conclusion: This study indicates that the 2-step conversion of failed AGB to SG results in a significantly reduced rate of postoperative staple line leaks, gastric tube stricture, respiratory complication, and need for intensive care unit stay., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic extended right colectomy (ER) versus laparoscopic left colectomy (LC) for splenic flexure carcinomas., Methods: Patients with stage 0-III adenocarcinoma of the splenic flexure who underwent laparoscopy between 2000 and 2013 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Twenty-seven patients who underwent ER were matched by age, gender, BMI, ASA score, and tumor stage with 27 patients who underwent LC., Results: The ER procedures were significantly longer than LC (235 ± 49.2 min vs. 192 ± 43.4 min, p = 0.001, respectively). Post-operatively, time to flatus and return to regular diet were observed to average 2.4 ± 0.8 days (1-4 days) and 4.6 ± 1.05 days (3-8 days), respectively, without differences between the groups. Overall, 14 complications were observed in 12 patients and 90-day mortality was nil. The length of hospitality stay was not different between ER and LC, with an overall mean of 8.3 ± 2.7 days. All procedures were classified as R0 resections, but ER was associated with a higher number of lymph nodes retrieved (21.4 ± 4.9) compared with LC (16.6 ± 5.5, p = 0.001). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative survival rates were 92.6, 85.8, and 72.8% for the ER group and 96.3, 91.9, and 75.1% for the LC group (p = 0.851). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 85.2, 76.7, and 67.1% for the ER group and 96.2, 75.5, and 66.7% for the LC group (p = 0.636)., Conclusions: Laparoscopic ER and LC procedures performed for splenic flexure carcinomas appear to have similar short- and long-term oncologic outcomes.

Purpose: The present study aimed to compare the operative and oncologic results of transanal total mesorectum excision (Ta-TME) ("down-to-up") vs. laparoscopic TME (L-TME, "up-to-down") for low rectal cancer. Additionally, a systematic review of the literature was performed to assess the quality of the current body of evidence on Ta-TME., Methods: The study population included 32 consecutive patients who underwent Ta-TME between January 2011 and December 2014 that were compared with a matched group of patients undergoing L-TME between January 2008 and December 2010. The literature search was performed following the PRISMA guidelines for a systematic review., Results: Ta-TME was associated with significantly shorter operative time (195 vs. 225 min; p = 0.017) and hospital stay (7.8 vs. 9.7 days; p = 0.018) compared to L-TME. No group differences were observed for intra-/postoperative complications and oncologic outcomes. One patient in the Ta-TME and two patients in the L-TME group developed local recurrence. The estimated survival rate at 2 years was 95.5 % for the Ta-TME and 96.6 % for the L-TME group (p = 0.646). The literature search identified 22 relevant retrospective studies on 423 patients operated on Ta-TME or robotic-assisted transanal TME for rectal cancer. The only two comparative studies found similar short-term oncologic outcomes between Ta-TME and L-TME. A complete mesorectum was observed in 85 % of Ta-TME cases. The conversion rate was estimated at 4.3 % and the postoperative complication rate at 30.4 %., Conclusions: Ta-TME appears to be safe and feasible. It may find special application in patients with anatomic constraints that could make L-TME highly challenging.

Objective: To compare early and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing resection for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) by either a laparoscopic (LA) or an open (OA) approach., Background: The LA is still a matter of debate regarding the surgical management of CLM., Methods: Data of all patients from 32 French surgical centers who underwent liver resection for CLM from January 2006 to December 2013 were collected. Aiming to obtain 2 well-balanced cohorts for available variables influencing early outcome and survival, the LA group was matched 1:1 with the OA group by using a propensity score (PS)-based method., Results: The unmatched initial cohort consisted of 2620 patients (LA: 176, OA: 2444). In the matched cohort for operative risk factors (LA: 153, OA: 153), the LA group had shorter hospitalization stays [11.1 (±9) days vs 13.9 (±10) days; P = 0.01] and was associated with lower rates of grade III to V complications [odds ratio (OR): 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14-0.51; P = 0.0002] and inhospital transfusions (OR: 0.33 95% CI 0.18-0.59; P < 0.0001). On a prognostic factors well-balanced population (LA: 73, OA: 73), the LA group and the OA group experienced similar overall (OS) and disease-free (DFS) survival rates [OS rates of 88% and 78% vs 84% and 75% at 3 and 5 years, respectively (P = 0.72) and DFS rates of 40% and 32% vs 52% and 36% at 3 and 5 years, respectively (P = 0.60)]., Conclusions: In the patients who are suitable for LA, laparoscopy yields better operative outcomes without impairing long-term survival.

Background: Robotic surgery for transverse colon cancer has rarely been described. This study reports our initial experience in robotic resection for transverse colon cancer, by comparing robotic transverse colectomy (RC) to laparoscopic transverse colectomy (LC) in terms of safety, feasibility, short-term outcomes, and the surgeon's psychological stress and physical pain., Methods: The study population included the first 22 consecutive patients who underwent RC between March 2013 and December 2014 for histologically confirmed transverse colon adenocarcinoma. These patients were compared with 22 matched patients undergoing LC between December 2010 and February 2013. Patients were matched based on age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor stage, and tumor location (ratio 1:1). Mortality, morbidity, operative, and short-term oncologic outcomes were compared between groups. The operating surgeon's stress and pain were assessed before and after surgery on a 0-100-mm visual analog scale., Results: The demographic and preoperative characteristics were comparable between RC and LC patients. No group difference was observed for intraoperative complications, blood loss, postoperative pain, time to flatus, time to regular diet, and hospital stay. RC was associated with longer operative time than LC (260 min vs. 225 min; p = 0.014), but the overall operative and robotic time in the RC group decreased over time reflecting the increasing experience in performing this procedure. No conversion to laparotomy was observed in the RC group, while two LC patients were converted due to uncontrolled bleeding and technically difficult middle colic pedicle dissection. Postoperative complications (Dindo-Clavien grade I or II) occurred in 11.3 % of patients with no group difference. Mortality was nil. All resections were R0, with >12 lymph nodes harvested in 90.9 % of RC and 95.5 % of LC patients. The surgeon's stress was not different between RC and LC, whereas the surgeon's hand and neck/shoulder pain were significantly lower after RC., Conclusions: RC for transverse colon cancer appears to be safe and feasible with short-term outcomes comparable to LC.

The study aimed to compare laparoscopic wedge resection (LWR) versus open-wedge resections (OWR) for primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of the stomach. Twenty-five patients who underwent LWR were matched by tumor size and location with 25 patients who underwent OWR. GISTs close to the pylorus or the esophagogastric junction, incidental, and metastatic GISTs were excluded. Demographic, clinical, and histologic variables did not differ between groups. Estimated blood loss, time to flatus, and duration of hospitalization were significantly lower in the LWR group. Overall, 6 patients developed minor postoperative complications that were medically treated. Mortality was nil. No group difference was observed for the incidence of diseases during the follow-up (average, 46.8 mo). The OWR procedure had significantly higher costs (+34%) than the LWR. Both techniques appear safe and oncologically feasible. However, laparoscopy is associated with faster recovery and shorter hospital stay, which reflect advantages in terms of contracted costs for the health care system.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the long-term oncologic results of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) versus open liver resection (OLR) for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) using a propensity score analysis., Subjects and Methods: This propensity score matching (PSM) study was based on a prospective database of a single tertiary-care center. Patients with primarily resectable CRLM were selected for a 1:1 PSM between LLR and OLR. Covariates for PSM estimation were age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, primary tumor location, CRLM presentation, location, size, and number. Moreover, the year of surgery was included in the PSM model. Operative, postoperative, and survival rates were compared between groups., Results: From 2000 to 2013, in total, 339 liver resections for CRLM met the selection criteria. Among these, 52 LLR patients were matched with 52 OLR patients. The two surgical approaches showed similar postoperative morbidity and mortality rates. LLR was associated with significantly less blood loss, less frequent need for and shorter duration of pedicle clamping, faster recovery, and shorter hospital stay. Moreover, the overall 3- and 5-year survival rates were, respectively, 83% and 76% for LLR and 87% and 62% for OLR (P=.51). The 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates were, respectively, 28% and 21% for LLR and 31% and 21% for OLR (P=.71)., Conclusions: The LLR achieves similar oncological results to those of the standard open surgery for CRLM, with the additional benefit of significantly faster recovery.

Background: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single-incision laparoscopy are emerging, minimally invasive techniques. Total mesorectal excision (TME), the gold standard treatment for patients with resectable distal rectal tumors, is usually performed in an "up-to-down" approach, either laparoscopically or via open techniques. A transanal, "down-to-up" TME has already been reported. Our NOTES variant of TME (NOTESTME) is based on a transperineal approach without any form of abdominal assistance. The aim was to reduce further the invasiveness of the procedure while optimizing the anatomical definition of the distal mesorectum. This approach may lead to reduced postoperative pain, decreased hernia formation and improved cosmesis when compared to standard laparoscopy., Methods: NOTESTME was attempted in 16 patients with distal rectal neoplasia (i.e., distal edge of the tumor lower than the pouch of Douglas, between 0 and 12 cm from the dentate line). Additional inclusion criteria consisted of an ASA status ≤III and the absence of previous abdominal surgery., Results: NOTESTME was completed in all patients. Additional abdominal, single-incision laparoscopic assistance was required in 6 (38 %) patients. Mean operative time was 265 min (range 155-440 min). The morbidity rate was 18.8 % (two small bowel obstructions and one pelvic abscess), requiring re-operation in each case. No leaks occurred, and the mortality rate at 30 and 90 days was 0 %. Resection margins were negative in all patients. A median of 17 nodes (range 12-81) was retrieved per specimen. Mean length of hospital stay was 10 days (range 4-29 days). Patients were followed for an average of 7 months (range 3-23 months)., Conclusion: NOTESTME was feasible and safe in this series of patients with mid- or low rectal tumors. The short-term mortality and morbidity rates are acceptable, with no apparent compromise in the oncological quality of the resection. Larger, randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are warranted.

Background: Laparoscopic liver resection is considered a safe and feasible alternative to open surgery for malignant liver lesions. However, laparoscopic surgery in cirrhotic patients remains challenging. The aim of this retrospective case-control study was to compare morbidity, mortality, and long-term patient survival between laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and open liver resections (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with histologically proven cirrhosis., Methods: A total of 45 patients treated with LLR were matched by cause of cirrhosis, Child-Pugh score, type of surgical resection (subsegmentectomy, segmentectomy, and bisegmentectomy), tumor number, tumor size, and alpha-fetoprotein value with 45 patients treated with OLR. Pre-, intra-, and post-operative variables were compared between groups., Results: Compared with OLR, the LLR group displayed a significantly shorter operative time (140 vs. 180 min; p = 0.02), shorter hospital stay (7 vs. 12 days; p < 0.0001), and lower morbidity rate (20 vs. 45 % of patients; p = 0.01). A higher rate of R0 resection was observed in the LLR group than in the OLR group (95 vs. 85 %; p = 0.03). Postoperative ascites was more frequently observed in the OLR group (18 vs. 2 %; p = 0.01). Mortality, patient, and disease-free survival rates were similar between groups. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates were 88, 59, and 12 %, respectively, in the LLR group and 63, 44, and 22 % in the OLR group (p = 0.27)., Conclusions: Significantly shorter operative times, better resection margins, lower postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stay were observed in the LLR group compared with the OLR group. LLR and OLR have similar overall and disease-free survival rates in cirrhotic HCC patients.

Background: Hepatocellular adenoma (HCA) is a rare benign liver epithelial tumour that can require surgery. This retrospective study reports a 23-year experience of open and laparoscopic resections for HCA., Methods: Patients with a histological diagnosis of HCA were included in this analysis. Surgical resection was performed in all symptomatic patients and in those with lesions measuring >5 cm., Results: Between 1989 and 2012, 62 patients, 59 of whom were female, underwent surgery for HCA (26 by open surgery and 36 by laparoscopic surgery). Overall, 96.6% of female patients had a history of contraceptive use; 54.8% of patients presented with abdominal pain and 11.2% with haemorrhage; the remaining patients were asymptomatic. Patients who underwent laparoscopy had smaller lesions (mean ± standard deviation diameter: 68.3 ± 35.2 mm versus 91.9 ± 42.5 mm; P = 0.022). Operatively, laparoscopic and open liver resection did not differ except in the number of pedicle clamps, which was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (27.8% versus 57.7% of patients; P = 0.008). Postoperative variables did not differ between the groups. Mortality was nil. Two surgical specimens were classified as HCA/borderline hepatocellular carcinoma. At the 3-year follow-up, all patients were alive with no recurrence of HCA., Conclusions: Open and laparoscopic liver resections are both safe and feasible approaches for the surgical management of HCA. However, laparoscopic liver resections may be limited by lesion size and location and require advanced surgical skills., (© 2014 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.)

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are mesenchymal tumors that originate from interstitial cells of Cajal or their stem cell-like precursors. Generally, GISTs have specific c-KIT gene mutations. The incidence of GISTs is estimated to be 10 to 20 cases/one million individuals, and GISTs typically affect people over 50 years of age. The majority of GISTs are solitary. However, multifocal GISTs have been observed, especially in children. We report on two unusual adult cases of double GISTs that were treated by laparoscopic surgery. The first patient presented a polypoid mass of the fundus and a second isolated smaller tumor in the posterior wall of the lesser curvature of the stomach. A histopathological examination confirmed that both tumors were GISTs and were c-KIT-positive. A total laparoscopic gastrectomy was performed. In the second patient, GISTs were identified at the level of the fundus and the greater curvature of the stomach. A laparoscopic partial sleeve gastrectomy was performed. Both surgeries were successful with no complications or relapses at three to five years following surgery.

Objective: Compare oncologic results of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for resection of colorectal metastases to the liver., Summary and Background Data: Open hepatectomy (OH) is the current standard of care for the management of colorectal liver metastases. Although the feasibility of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has been established, only select centers have used this technique as their primary modality. At present there is no study comparing the oncologic outcomes for colorectal liver metastases patients undergoing LH versus OH., Methods: Two groups composed of 60 patients each were obtained from 2 specialized liver units performing either OH or LH as their primary modality. Cohorts of 215 LH cases and 1783 OH were used to establish the study population. Patients were compared on an intention to treat basis using 9 preoperative prognostic criteria obtained from LiverMetSurvey. These included sex, age, primary tumor localization, number of tumors, diameter of tumor, distribution of metastases, presence of extrahepatic disease, initial respectability, and the use of prehepatectomy chemotherapy. Overall survival and disease-free survival were compared between OH and LH for a follow-up of 36 months., Results: The median follow-up for the LH group is 30 months and 33 months for the OH group (P = 0.75). One-, 3-, and 5-year patient survival for LH was 97%, 82%, and 64% and 97%, 70%, and 56% in the OH group, respectively (P = 0.32). One-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival was 70%, 47%, and 35% and 70%, 40%, and 27% (P = 0.32), respectively for the 2 groups., Conclusion: In a highly specialized center, first line application of laparoscopic liver resection in selected patients can provide comparable oncologic results to treatment with open liver resection for patients with colorectal liver metastases.

Abstract: Background and aims: The aim was to externally validate the capability of a simplified Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (s-BCLC) staging system in allocating patients to hepatic resection (HR) and the effect on survival: S-BCLC was defined by only 2 groups: AA included BCLC A1 + A2 classes with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≤ 20 ng/ml and AB included A1 + A2 with AFP > 20 ng/ml plus A3 + A4 subgroups. Methods: This study compared a training group (TG) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) submitted to hepatic resection (HR) in Milan with another group of patients, the validation group (VG) in Creteil. All patients underwent ultrasound-guided anatomical resection (<3 segments). Results: Overall survival got worse from A1 to A4 (p = 0.0271) in TG (n = 132), as well as in VG (n = 100) (p = 0.0044) with a more important overlapping of each curves. According s-BCLC classification, the survival curves of TG (p = 0.0001) and VG (p = 0.0250) showed a definitive separation in two different staging groups. The s-BCLC provided the best predictive accuracy and it also presented the highest separability index and C-statistics in both TG and VG. On the other hand, in the evaluation of discriminatory ability for death, measured by ROC curve areas, the s-BCLC system gave better results than the others. Conclusion: This experience stressed the high value of BCLC system in staging of HCC, but the s-BCLC system seems to be more useful for therapeutic decision making. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]