Is operation time over the benchmark value a risk factor for worse short-term outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection?

Introduction: Laparoscopic liver resection is a challenging surgical procedure that may require prolonged operation time, particularly during the learning curve. Operation time significantly decreases with increasing experience; however, prolonged operation time may significantly increase the risk of postoperative complications. Aim: To assess whether prolonged operation time over the benchmark value influences short-term postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection. Material and methods: A retrospective cohort study based on data from the National Polish Registry of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery was performed. A total of 197 cases consisting of left lateral sectionectomy (LLS), left hemihepatectomy (LH), and right hemihepatectomy (RH) with established benchmark values for operation time were included. Data about potential confounders for prolonged operation time and worse short-term outcomes were exported. Results: Most cases (129; 65.5%) were performed during the learning curve, while the largest rate was observed in LLS (57; 78.1%). Median operation time exceeded the benchmark value in LLS (Me = 210 min) and LH (Me = 350 min), while in RH the benchmark value was exceeded in 39 (44.3%) cases. Textbook outcomes were achieved in 138 (70.1%) cases. Univariate analysis (OR = 1.11; 95% CI: 0.61-2.06; p = 0.720) and multivariate analysis (OR = 1.16; 95% CI: 0.50-2.68; p = 0.734) did not reveal a significant impact of prolonged surgery on failing to achieve a textbook outcome. Conclusions: Prolonging the time of laparoscopic liver resection does not significantly impair postoperative results. There is no reason related to the patients' safety to avoid prolonging the time of laparoscopic liver resection over the benchmark value.

Advantages of laparoscopic segmentectomy of the liver using ICG fluorescent navigation by the negative staining method: A comparison with open procedure.

Aim: Laparoscopic segmentectomy (LS) using indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence navigation with negative staining method has potential for performing accurate and safe anatomical excision. This study aimed to evaluate the significance of LS using ICG fluorescence navigation compared with open segmentectomy (OS). Methods: Eighty-seven patients who underwent anatomical segmentectomies were evaluated for OS (n = 44) and LS (n = 43). The Glissonean pedicle approach was performed using either extra- or intrahepatic method, depending on the location of segment in LS. After clamping pedicle, negative staining method was performed. Liver transection was done along intersegmental plane visualizing by overlay mode of ICG camera. Surgical outcomes were compared between two groups. Correlation between predicted resecting liver volume (PRLV) calculated using volumetry and actual resected liver volume (ARLV) was assessed in two groups. Results: Patients who underwent LS showed better outcomes in operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay. There were significantly fewer Grade II and Grade III or higher postoperative complications in LS group. Both values of AST (p < 0.001) and ALT (p < 0.001) on postoperative day 1 were significantly lower in LS group than in OS group. PRLV and ARLV were more strongly correlated in LS (r = 0.896) than in OS (r = 0.773). The difference between PRLV and ARLV was significantly lower in LS group than in OS group (p = 0.022), and this trend was particularly noticeable in posterosuperior segment (p = 0.008) than in anterolateral segment (p = 0.811). Conclusion: LS using ICG navigation allows precise resection and may contribute to safer short-term outcomes than OS, particularly in posterosuperior segment.

Evolution of minimally invasive liver surgery in France over the last decade.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of benefits on postoperative outcomes, minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) had a very low diffusion up to 2014, and recent evolution is unknown. Our aim was to analyze the recent diffusion and adoption of MILS and compare the trends in indications, extent of resection, and institutional practice with open liver surgery (OLS). METHODS: We analyzed the French nationwide, exhaustive cohort of all patients undergoing a liver resection in France between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2022. Average annual percentage changes (AAPC) in the incidence of MILS and OLS were compared using mixed-effects log-linear regression models. Time trends were analyzed in terms of extent of resection, indication, and institutional practice. RESULTS: MILS represented 25.2% of 74,671 liver resections and year incidence doubled from 16.5% in 2013 to 35.4% in 2022. The highest AAPC were observed among major liver resections [+ 22.2% (19.5; 24.9) per year], primary [+ 10.2% (8.5; 12.0) per year], and secondary malignant tumors [+ 9.9% (8.2; 11.6) per year]. The highest increase in MILS was observed in university hospitals [+ 14.7% (7.7; 22.2) per year] performing 48.8% of MILS and in very high-volume (> 150 procedures/year) hospitals [+ 12.1% (9.0; 15.3) per year] performing 19.7% of MILS. OLS AAPC decreased for all indications and institutions and accelerated over time from - 1.8% (- 3.9; - 0.3) per year in 2013-2018 to - 5.9% (- 7.9; - 3.9) per year in 2018-2022 (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first reported trend reversal between MILS and OLS. MILS has considerably increased at a national scale, crossing the 20% tipping point of adoption rate as defined by the IDEAL framework.

Initial Experience With Robotic Liver Resection in the United States.

BACKGROUND: This study's aim was to show the feasibility and safety of robotic liver resection (RLR) even without extensive experience in major laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). METHODS: A single center, retrospective analysis was performed for consecutive liver resections for solid liver tumors from 2014 to 2022. RESULTS: The analysis included 226 liver resections, comprising 127 (56.2%) open surgeries, 28 (12.4%) LLR, and 71 (31.4%) RLR. The rate of RLR increased and that of LLR decreased over time. In a comparison between propensity score matching-selected open liver resection and RLR (41:41), RLR had significantly less blood loss (384 ± 413 vs 649 ± 646 mL, P = .030) and shorter hospital stay (4.4 ± 3.0 vs 6.4 ± 3.7 days, P = .010), as well as comparable operative time (289 ± 123 vs 290 ± 132 mins, P = .954). A comparison between LLR and RLR showed comparable perioperative outcomes, even with more surgeries with higher difficulty score included in RLR (5.2 ± 2.7 vs 4.3 ± 2.5, P = .147). The analysis of the learning curve in RLR demonstrated that blood loss, conversion rate, and complication rate consistently improved over time, with the case number required to achieve the learning curve appearing to be 60 cases. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that RLR is a feasible, safe, and acceptable platform for liver resection, and that the safe implementation and dissemination of RLR can be achieved without solid experience of LLR.

Impact of tumor proximity to vessel on conversion in laparoscopic liver resection: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although various difficulty scoring systems have been proposed for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), details remain uncertain regarding distance between the tumor and vessels as a factor of difficulty. We aimed to examine the risk factors for conversion to open hepatectomy in LLR, including distance between tumor and vessels. METHODS: Between January 2012 and December 2022, 118 patients who underwent LLR were retrospectively enrolled and their perioperative characteristics were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 10 cases (8.5%) were converted to open hepatectomy during LLR. The conversion group had lower platelet count, shorter distance between the tumor and a medium vessel (defined as diameter of 5-10 mm), and greater tumor depth compared with the pure LLR group. Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis identified 10 mm as the optimal cutoff value of tumor proximity to a medium vessel (sensitivity, 80.0%, specificity, 78.7%, AUC 0.817) for predicting conversion. In multivariate analysis, lower platelet count (p = .028) and tumor proximity within 10 mm to a medium vessel (p = .001) were independent risk factors for conversion in LLR. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests tumor proximity within 10 mm to a medium vessel and lower platelet count as predictors of unfavorable intraoperative conversion in LLR.

Outcomes after laparoscopic or open liver resection for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-associated hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score-matching study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is rapidly gaining popularity; however, its efficacy for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)-associated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (NAFLD-HCC) has been not evaluated. The purpose of this study was to compare short- and long-term outcomes between LLR and open liver resection (OLR) among patients with NAFLD-HCC. METHODS: We used a single-institution database to analyze data for patients who underwent LLR or OLR for NAFLD-HCC from January 2007 to December 2022. We performed propensity score-matching analyses to compare overall postoperative complications, major morbidities, duration of surgery, blood loss, transfusion, length of stay, recurrence, and survival between the two groups. RESULTS: Among 210 eligible patients, 46 pairs were created by propensity score matching. Complication rates were 28% for OLR and 11% for LLR (p = 0.036). There were no significant differences in major morbidities (15% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.522) or duration of surgery (199 min vs. 189 min, p = 0.785). LLR was associated with a lower incidence of blood transfusion (22% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.013), less blood loss (415 vs. 54 mL, p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (9 vs. 6 days, p < 0.001). Differences in recurrence-free survival and overall survival between the two groups were not statistically significant (p = 0.222 and 0.301, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: LLR was superior to OLR for NAFLD-HCC in terms of overall postoperative complications, blood loss, blood transfusion, and postoperative length of stay. Moreover, recurrence-free survival and overall survival were comparable between LLR and OLR. Although there is a need for careful LLR candidate selection according to tumor size and location, LLR can be regarded as a preferred treatment for NAFLD-HCC over OLR.

Efficacy and safety of robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence concerning long-term outcome of robotic liver resection (RLR) and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients is scarce. METHODS: This study enrolled all patients who underwent RLR and LLR for resectable HCC between July 2016 and July 2021. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to create a 1:3 match between the RLR and LLR groups. A comprehensive collection and analysis of patient data regarding efficacy and safety have been conducted, along with the evaluation of the learning curve for RLR. RESULTS: Following PSM, a total of 341 patients were included, with 97 in the RLR group and 244 in the LLR group. RLR group demonstrated a significantly longer operative time (median [IQR], 210 [152.0-298.0] min vs. 183.5 [132.3-263.5] min; p = 0.04), with no significant differences in other perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes. Overall survival (OS) was similar between the two groups (p = 0.43), but RLR group exhibited improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) (median of 65 months vs. 56 months, p = 0.006). The estimated 5-year OS for RLR and LLR were 74.8% (95% CI: 65.4-85.6%) and 80.7% (95% CI: 74.0-88.1%), respectively. The estimated 5-year RFS for RLR and LLR were 58.6% (95% CI: 48.6-70.6%) and 38.3% (95% CI: 26.4-55.9%), respectively. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, RLR (HR: 0.586, 95% CI (0.393-0.874), p = 0.008) emerged as an independent predictor of reducing recurrence rates and enhanced RFS. The operative learning curve indicates that approximately after the 11th case, the learning curve of RLR stabilized and entered a proficient phase. CONCLUSIONS: OS was comparable between RLR and LLR, and while RFS was improved in the RLR group. RLR demonstrates oncological effectiveness and safety for resectable HCC.

Caudo-dorsal approach combined with the occlusion of right hepatic vein and Pringle maneuver in laparoscopic anatomical resection of segment 7.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic anatomical resection of segment 7 (LARS7) remains a technically challenging procedure due to the deep anatomical location and the potential risk of injury to the right hepatic vein (RHV). Herein, we initiated an innovative technique of caudo-dorsal approach combined with the occlusion of the RHV and Pringle maneuver for LARS7 and presented the outcomes of our initial series. METHOD: Since January 2021, the patients who underwent LARS7 by using this novel technique were enrolled in this study. The critical aspect of this technique was the interruption of communication between the RHV and the inferior vena cava. Meanwhile, the Pringle maneuver was adopted to control the hepatic inflow. RESULT: A total of 11 patients underwent LARS7 by using this novel technique, which included 8 hepatocellular carcinoma, 2 bile duct adenocarcinoma and one focal nodular hyperplasia. The median operative time was 199 min (range of 151-318 min) and the median blood loss was 150 ml (range of 50-200 ml). The main trunk of the RHV was fully exposed on the cutting surface in all cases and no patient received perioperative blood transfusion. No procedure was converted to open surgery. Of note, no indications of CO2 gas embolism were observed in these cases after the introduction of double occlusion. Only one patient suffered from postoperative complications and healed after treatment. The median postoperative stay was 5 days (range of 4-7 days). The 90-day mortality was nil. At a median follow-up period of 19 months, all of the patients were alive without any evidence of tumor recurrence. CONCLUSION: The caudo-dorsal approach combined with the occlusion of RHV and the Pringle maneuver may be a feasible and expected technique for safe exposure of RHV in LARS7. Further validation of the feasibility and efficacy of this technique is needed.

Laparoscopic liver resection or enucleation for giant hepatic hemangioma: how to choose?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic treatment has been increasingly adopted for giant hepatic hemangioma (HH), but the role of liver resection or enucleation remains uncertain. The aim of this study is to compare the laparoscopic resection (LR) with laparoscopic enucleation (LE) for HH, and to provide evidence on how to choose the most suitable approach for HH. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of HH patients underwent laparoscopic treatment between March 2015 and August 2022 was performed. Perioperative outcomes were compared based on the surgical approaches, and risk factors for increased blood loss was calculated by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients in LR group and 287 patients in LE group were enrolled in this study. The median blood loss (300 vs. 200 mL, P < 0.001) was higher in LE group than that in LR group. Independent risk factors for blood loss higher than 400 mL were tumor size ≥ 10 cm, tumor adjacent to major vessels, tumor occupying right liver or caudate lobe, and the portal phase enhancement ratio (PER) ≥ 38.9%, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that LR was associated with less blood loss (155 vs. 400 mL, P < 0.001) than LE procedure in patients with high PER value. Both LR and LE approaches exhibited similar perioperative outcomes in patients with low PER value. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic treatment for HH could be feasibly and safely performed by both LE and LR. For patients with PER higher than 38.9%, the LR approach is recommended.

Successful Multidisciplinary Treatment, Including Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab Biological Therapy, for Multiple Hepatocellular Carcinomas Adjacent to Major Vessels: A Case Report.

Multiple hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) are currently being treated with multimodal therapy that includes liver resection and local therapy. Although the necessity of multimodal therapy for multiple HCCs is evident, treating them is extremely difficult due to the complex nature of multiple HCCs and the frequent occurrence of underlying liver damage. We encountered a case in which long-term tumor control was achieved through multidisciplinary treatment, including atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination biological therapy. As in the current case, less-invasive surgical resection combined with radiofrequency ablation after a combination of biological therapy may be one of the preferred options for the treatment of initially unresectable multiple HCCs.

Achieving Textbook Outcomes after Laparoscopic Resection in Posterosuperior Segments of the Liver: The Impact of the Learning Curve.

Achieving textbook outcomes (TOs) improves the short-term and long-term performance of a hospital. Our objective was to assess TOs in the laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of tumors in the PS (posterosuperior) section of the liver and identify the impact of the learning curve. We conducted a retrospective cohort study analyzing patients who underwent LLR for lesions located in the PS segments. Patients were divided into a TO and no-TO group. TOs were defined as negative margins, no transfusion, no readmission, no major complications, no 30-day mortality, and a length of stay ≤ 50th percentile. Patients' outcomes were assessed in two study periods before and after 2015. TOs were achieved in 47.6% (n = 117). In multivariable analysis, obesity (p = 0.001), shorter operation time (p < 0.001), less blood loss (p < 0.001), normal albumin (p = 0.003), and minor resection (p = 0.046) were significantly associated with achieving TOs. Although the 5-year recurrence-free survival rate (p = 0.096) was not significantly different, the 5-year overall survival rate was significantly greater in the TO group (p = 0.001). Body mass index > 25 kg/m2 (p = 0.020), age > 65 years (p = 0.049), and achievement of TOs (p = 0.024) were independently associated with survival. The proportion of patients who achieved a TO was higher after 2015 than before 2015 (52.3% vs. 36.1%; p = 0.022). TOs are important markers not only for assessing hospital and surgeon performance but also as predictors of overall survival. As the number of surgeons who achieve the learning curve increases, the number of patients with TOs will gradually increase with a subsequent improvement in overall survival.

Laparoscopic liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation for caudate lobe solitary hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity score matching study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in treating solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) of the hepatic caudate lobe. METHODS: Patients with hepatic caudate lobe HCC who underwent LLR or RFA at three hospitals in China between February 2015 and February 2021 were included. In total, 112 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 52 underwent RFA and 60 underwent LLR. The outcomes of the two groups were compared and analyzed using propensity score matching (PSM) method. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of sex, HBV/HCV positivity, AFP positivity (>100 ng/mL), tumor position, Child-Pugh score, or preoperative liver function tests (ALT, AST, TBIL, ALB, and PT) (p > 0.05). Compared to the LLR group, the RFA group had a shorter operation time, less intraoperative bleeding, and shorter postoperative hospital stay (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in overall postoperative complications between the two groups (p > 0.05). Despite the larger tumor size, the LLR group had better postoperative recurrence-free survival (RFS) (p = 0.00027) and overall survival (OS) (p = 0.0023) than the RFA group. After one-to-one PSM, 31 LLR patients and 31 RFA patients were selected for further analyses. The advantages of LLR over RFA were observed in terms of RFS (p < 0.0001) and OS (p = 0.00029). CONCLUSION: LLR should probably be recommended as the preferred method for solitary caudate lobe HCC.

Efficacy of surgical staple line reinforcement in Glissonean stapling: A single-center pilot study.

Vascular staplers are routinely used in laparoscopic liver resection, which has become a standard procedure in advanced medical facilities. Although previous reports have outlined the benefits of staple line reinforcement (SLR), its application in Glissonean pedicle transection during hepatic resection remains poorly studied. This study investigated surgical SLR as a tool to enhance staple line strength and improve perioperative hemostasis. Here, 10 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection using the Tri-StapleTM2.0 Reinforced Reload were included. Patient characteristics, surgical details, and outcomes were assessed. The results demonstrated successful outcomes with no complications related to bile leakage or injuries during staple insertion. Overall, our findings suggest that SLR can be safely utilized in Glissonean pedicle transection during laparoscopic liver resections. Further studies are required to comprehensively evaluate its benefits compared with conventional surgical staplers.

Comparison between laparoscopic liver resection and open liver resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Recently, the outcomes of surgical treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have improved. However, despite the technical advancements in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), it is still not recommended as the standard treatment for HCC with portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) because of the poor oncological outcomes. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of open liver resection (OLR) and LLR in patients with HCC with PVTT. METHODS: A total of 86 patients with PVTT confirmed in the pathological report between January 2014 and December 2018, were enrolled. Short-term, postoperative, and long-term outcomes, including recurrence-free survival and overall survival rates, were evaluated. RESULTS: No difference between the two groups, except for age, was detected. The median age in the laparoscopic group was significantly higher than that in the open group. Regarding the pathological features, the maximal tumor size was significantly larger in the OLR; other pathological factors did not differ. There was no significant difference between overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Vp3 PVTT (hazards ratio [HR] 6.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-18.5), Edmondson grade IV (HR 4.7, 95% CI 1.7-12.9, p = 0.003), and intrahepatic metastasis (HR 3.9, 95% CI 2.1-7.2, p < 0.001) remained the unique independent predictors of recurrence-free survival according to a multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic liver resection for the management of HCC with PVTT provides the same short- and long-term results as those of the open approach.

Revisiting the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris Difficulty Classification of Laparoscopic Liver Resection with the Data from a Personal Series-Evaluations for the Difficulty of Left Medial Sectionectomy and Length of Hospital Stay.

The IMM (Institut Mutualiste Montsouris) difficulty classification for laparoscopic liver resection is based only on the type of surgical procedure. It is useful for assessing outcomes and setting benchmarks in a group sharing the same indications. There is, however, no left medial sectionectomy in the system. Its difficulty was evaluated using the same methodology as IMM with the data from a personal series. Furthermore, length of hospital stay was evaluated as the representative of short-term outcomes. IMM scores of our right and left hemihepatectomies, right anterior sectionectomy, and segment 7 or 8 segmentectomies are 3. That of left medial sectionectomies is 2, the same as right posterior sectionectomy and segment or less anatomical resections. Those of left lateral sectionectomy and partial resection are 0. The group with a score of 3 was divided into two groups-with and without extended hospital stays (extended only for right hemihepatectomies and right anterior sectionectomies). The difficulty of medial sectionectomy was positioned at the same level as posterior sectionectomy and segment or less anatomical resections. The result from the second evaluation may indicate that there are other factors with an impact on difficulty related to short-term outcomes, other than intraoperative surgical difficulty from the procedure itself.

Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation in patients with early and small hepatocellular carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis and meta-regression of observational studies.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common type of liver cancer, accounting for 90% of cases worldwide and a significant contributor to cancer-related deaths. This study comprehensively compares the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) versus laparoscopic or percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (LRFA or PRFA) in patients with early and small HCC. METHODS: We systematically searched Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to include studies comparing LLR versus LRFA or PRFA in patients with early HCC meets the Milan criteria (defined as solitary nodule < 5 cm or three nodules ≤ 3 cm with no extrahepatic spread or vascular invasion). Pooled results were examined for overall survival, disease-free survival, recurrence-free survival, local, intrahepatic and extrahepatic recurrence rates, and complications. We conducted subgroup analyses based on the type of RFA. Meta-regression analyzed the association between overall survival, local recurrence, and various factors. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We analyzed the data using the R (v.4.3.0) programming language and the "meta" package of RStudio software. RESULTS: We included 19 observational studies, compromising 3756 patients. LLR showed higher 5-year overall survival compared to RFA (RR = 1.17, 95% CI [1.06, 1.3], P > 0.01). Our subgroup analysis showed that LLR had higher 5-year survival than PRFA (RR = 1.15, 95% CI [1.02, 1.31], P = 0.03); however, there was no significant difference between LLR and LRFA (RR = 1.26, 95% CI [0.98, 1.63], P = 0.07). LLR was associated with higher disease-free survival) RR = 1.19, 95% CI [1.05, 1.35], P < 0.01; RR = 1.61, 95% CI [1.31, 1.98], P < 0.01(and recurrence-free survival) RR = 1.21, 95% CI [1.09, 1.35], P < 0.01; RR = 1.45, 95% CI [1.15, 1.84], P < 0.01(at 1 and 3 years. LLR was associated with lower local (RR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.16, 0.47], P < 0.01) and intrahepatic recurrence (RR = 0.7, 95% CI [0.5, 0.97], P = 0.03) than RFA. However, complications were significantly higher with LLR (RR = 2.01, 95% CI [1.51, 2.68], P < 0.01). Our meta-regression analysis showed that younger patients had higher risk for local recurrence (P = 0.008), while age wasn't significantly linked to overall survival (P = 0.25). Other covariates like total bilirubin, alpha-fetoprotein levels, and tumor size also showed no significant associations with either overall survival or local recurrence. CONCLUSION: LLR offers improved long-term outcomes and lower recurrence rates than PRFA. However, no significant distinctions were observed between LRFA and LLR in overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and local recurrence. More robust well-designed RCTs are essential to validate our findings.

Intraoperative artificial intelligence system identifying liver vessels in laparoscopic liver resection: a retrospective experimental study.

BACKGROUND: The precise recognition of liver vessels during liver parenchymal dissection is the crucial technique for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). This retrospective feasibility study aimed to develop artificial intelligence (AI) models to recognize liver vessels in LLR, and to evaluate their accuracy and real-time performance. METHODS: Images from LLR videos were extracted, and the hepatic veins and Glissonean pedicles were labeled separately. Two AI models were developed to recognize liver vessels: the "2-class model" which recognized both hepatic veins and Glissonean pedicles as equivalent vessels and distinguished them from the background class, and the "3-class model" which recognized them all separately. The Feature Pyramid Network was used as a neural network architecture for both models in their semantic segmentation tasks. The models were evaluated using fivefold cross-validation tests, and the Dice coefficient (DC) was used as an evaluation metric. Ten gastroenterological surgeons also evaluated the models qualitatively through rubric. RESULTS: In total, 2421 frames from 48 video clips were extracted. The mean DC value of the 2-class model was 0.789, with a processing speed of 0.094 s. The mean DC values for the hepatic vein and the Glissonean pedicle in the 3-class model were 0.631 and 0.482, respectively. The average processing time for the 3-class model was 0.097 s. Qualitative evaluation by surgeons revealed that false-negative and false-positive ratings in the 2-class model averaged 4.40 and 3.46, respectively, on a five-point scale, while the false-negative, false-positive, and vessel differentiation ratings in the 3-class model averaged 4.36, 3.44, and 3.28, respectively, on a five-point scale. CONCLUSION: We successfully developed deep-learning models that recognize liver vessels in LLR with high accuracy and sufficient processing speed. These findings suggest the potential of a new real-time automated navigation system for LLR.

Minimally invasive liver resection for cholangiolocellular carcinoma: A single-institution experience.

INTRODUCTION: Cholangiolocellular carcinoma (CoCC) resembles cholangiocellular carcinoma (CCC) and presents a variety of imaging findings; thus, preoperative diagnosis is often difficult. METHODS: We retrospectively studied patients who were diagnosed with CoCC at the Kansai Rosai Hospital from 2006 to 2021 and treated by laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) or open liver resection (OLR). RESULT: Among 918 liver resections, 15 patients were diagnosed with CoCC: 11 underwent LLR and 4 OLR. For LLR and OLR, respectively, patient age was 69.9 ± 6.8 and 72.8 ± 10.6, sex was M/F: 10/1 and 2/2, Child-Pugh was A/B/C: 10/1/0 and 4/0/0, liver damage was A/B/C: 8/3/0 and 4/0/0, preoperative diagnosis was CoCC/CCC/HCC: 1/2/8 and 2/2/0, pathological stage of Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) was IA/IB/II/IIIA/IIIB/IV: 8/0/2/1/0/0 and 0/0/3/0/1/0 (p = .0312), and extent of liver resection was Hr0/HrS/Hr1/Hr2/: 3/0/5/3 and 1/1/0/2. In LLR and OLR, respectively, operation time was 417.5 ± 191.0 and 407.5 ± 187.9 min, blood loss was 123.3 ± 217.4 and 1385.0 ± 1038.7 mL, and postoperative hospital stay was 12.2 ± 13.7 and 15.0 ± 6.6 days. For stages I and II/III, respectively, the 5-year disease-free survival rates were 100.0% and 34.3%, and the 5-year overall survival rates were 100.0% and 55.6%. For stage II/III LLR and OLR, respectively, the 3-year disease-free survival rates were 33.3% and 37.5% (p = .8418), and the 5-year overall survival rates were 66.7% and 50.0% (p = .8084). CONCLUSION: Although further studies are still needed to confirm, minimally invasive liver resection without lymph node dissection is one of a safe and effective approach to the management of CoCC.

Impact of Minimally Invasive Surgery on Anatomic Liver Segmentectomy Using the Extrahepatic Glissonean Approach.

Accurate minimally invasive anatomic liver (sub)segmentectomy (MIAS) is technically demanding and not yet standardized, and its surgical outcomes are undefined. To study the impact of the minimally invasive approach on perioperative outcomes of anatomic liver (sub)segmentectomy (AS), we retrospectively studied and compared perioperative outcomes of 99 open AS (OAS) and 112 MIAS (laparoscopic 77, robotic 35) cases using the extrahepatic Glissonean approach, based on the 1:1 propensity score matched analyses. After matching (71:71), MIAS was superior to OAS in terms of blood loss (p < 0.0001), maximum postoperative serum total bilirubin (p < 0.0001), C-reactive protein (p = 0.034) levels, R0 resection rate (p = 0.021), bile leak (p = 0.049), and length of hospital stay (p < 0.0001). The matched robotic and laparoscopic AS groups (30:30) had comparable outcomes in terms of operative time, blood loss, transfusion, open conversion, postoperative morbidity and mortality, R0 resection, and hospital stay, although the rate of Pringle maneuver application (p = 0.0002) and the postoperative aspartate aminotransferase level (p = 0.002) were higher in the robotic group. Comparing the matched posterosuperior (sub)segmentectomy cases or unmatched repeat hepatectomy cases between MIAS and OAS, we observed significantly less blood loss and shorter hospital stays in MIAS. Robotic AS yielded comparable outcomes with laparoscopic AS in the posterosuperior (sub)segmentectomy and repeat hepatectomy settings, despite the worse tumor and procedural backgrounds in robotic AS. In conclusion, various types of MIAS standardized by the extrahepatic Glissonean approach were feasible and safe with more favorable perioperative outcomes than those of OAS. Although robotic AS had almost comparable outcomes with laparoscopic AS, robotics may serve to decrease the surgical difficulty of MIAS in selected patients undergoing posterosuperior (sub)segmentectomy and repeat hepatectomy.