The use of laparoscopy for liver surgery is increasing rapidly. The Second International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resections (LLR) was held in Morioka, Japan, from October 4 to 6, ...2014 to evaluate the current status of laparoscopic liver surgery and to provide recommendations to aid its future development. Seventeen questions were addressed. The first 7 questions focused on outcomes that reflect the benefits and risks of LLR. These questions were addressed using the Zurich-Danish consensus conference model in which the literature and expert opinion were weighed by a 9-member jury, who evaluated LLR outcomes using GRADE and a list of comparators. The jury also graded LLRs by the Balliol Classification of IDEAL. The jury concluded that MINOR LLRs had become standard practice (IDEAL 3) and that MAJOR liver resections were still innovative procedures in the exploration phase (IDEAL 2b). Continued cautious introduction of MAJOR LLRs was recommended. All of the evidence available for scrutiny was of LOW quality by GRADE, which prompted the recommendation for higher quality evaluative studies. The last 10 questions focused on technical questions and the recommendations were based on literature review and expert panel opinion. Recommendations were made regarding preoperative evaluation, bleeding controls, transection methods, anatomic approaches, and equipment. Both experts and jury recognized the need for a formal structure of education for those interested in performing major laparoscopic LLR because of the steep learning curve.
We present the largest, most comprehensive, single center experience to date of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR).
Despite anecdotal reports of MILR, few large single center reports have ...examined these procedures by comparing them to their open counterparts.
Three hundred MILR were performed between July 2001 and November 2006 at our center for both benign and malignant conditions. These included 241 pure laparoscopic, 32 hand-assisted laparoscopic, and 27 laparoscopy-assisted open (hybrid) resections.These MILR were compared with 100 contemporaneous, cohort-matched open resections. MILR included segmentectomies (110), bisegmentectomies (63), left hepatectomies (47), right hepatectomies (64), extended right hepatectomies (8), and caudate lobe (8) resections. Benign etiologies encompassed cysts (70), hemangiomata (37), focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) (23), adenomata (47), and 20 live donor right lobectomies. Malignant etiologies included primary (43) and metastatic (60) tumors. Hepatic fibrosis/cirrhosis was present in 25 of 103 patients with malignant diseases (24%).
There was high data consistency within the 3 types of MILR. MILR compared favorably with standard open techniques: operative times (99 vs. 182 minutes), blood loss (102 vs. 325 ml), transfusion requirement (2 of 300 vs. 8 of 100), length of stay (1.9 vs. 5.4 days), overall operative complications (9.3% vs. 22%), and local malignancy recurrence (2% vs. 3%). No port-site recurrences occurred. Conversion from laparoscopic to hand-assisted laparoscopic resection occurred in 20 patients (6%), with no conversions to open. No hand-assisted procedures were converted to open, but 2 laparoscopy-assisted (7%) were converted to open.
Our data show that MILR outcomes compare favorably with those of the open standard technique. Our experience suggests that MILR of varying magnitudes is safe and effective for both benign and malignant conditions.
Laparoscopic liver resection has been established as a safe and feasible treatment option. Surgical approaches include pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopy (HALS), and the hybrid technique. ...The role of these three approaches, and their superiority over open laparotomy, is not yet known. A literature review was performed using specific search phrases, relating to hand-assisted or hybrid approaches to laparoscopic liver resection. Surgical results from 18 case series (HALS, nine series; hybrid technique, nine series), each with ≥ 10 patients, were analyzed. Results indicated that HALS was associated with a mean operative time of 82-264.5 min, an estimated blood loss of 82-300 mL, and a complication rate of 3.8-27.1%. Analysis of series involving the hybrid technique indicated a mean operative time of 111-366.5 min, an estimated blood loss of 93-936 mL, and a complication rate of 3.4-23.5%. In conclusion, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that any single approach is superior to the others, although HALS and the hybrid technique are useful when dealing with difficulties associated with pure laparoscopy. Conversely, the need for these two methods, which can function as a bridge to pure laparoscopic liver resection, may be overcome with appropriate training.
To summarize the current world position on laparoscopic liver surgery.
Multiple series have reported on the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic liver surgery. Small and medium sized procedures have ...become commonplace in many centers, while major laparoscopic liver resections have been performed with efficacy and safety equaling open surgery in highly specialized centers. Although the field has begun to expand rapidly, no consensus meeting has been convened to discuss the evolving field of laparoscopic liver surgery.
On November 7 to 8, 2008, 45 experts in hepatobiliary surgery were invited to participate in a consensus conference convened in Louisville, KY, US. In addition, over 300 attendees were present from 5 continents. The conference was divided into sessions, with 2 moderators assigned to each, so as to stimulate discussion and highlight controversies. The format of the meeting varied from formal presentation of experiential data to expert opinion debates. Written and video records of the presentations were produced. Specific areas of discussion included indications for surgery, patient selection, surgical techniques, complications, patient safety, and surgeon training.
The consensus conference used the terms pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopy, and the hybrid technique to define laparoscopic liver procedures. Currently acceptable indications for laparoscopic liver resection are patients with solitary lesions, 5 cm or less, located in liver segments 2 to 6. The laparoscopic approach to left lateral sectionectomy should be considered standard practice. Although all types of liver resection can be performed laparoscopically, major liver resections (eg, right or left hepatectomies) should be reserved for experienced surgeons facile with more advanced laparoscopic hepatic resections. Conversion should be performed for difficult resections requiring extended operating times, and for patient safety, and should be considered prudent surgical practice rather than failure. In emergent situations, efforts should be made to control bleeding before converting to a formal open approach. Utilization of a hand assist or hybrid technique may be faster, safer, and more efficacious. Indications for surgery for benign hepatic lesions should not be widened simply because the surgery can be done laparoscopically. Although data presented on colorectal metastases did not reveal an adverse effect of the laparoscopic approach on oncological outcomes in terms of margins or survival, adequacy of margins and ability to detect occult lesions are concerns. The pure laparoscopic technique of left lateral sectionectomy was used for adult to child donation while the hybrid approach has been the only one reported to date in the case of adult to adult right lobe donation. Laparoscopic liver surgery has not been tested by controlled trials for efficacy or safety. A prospective randomized trial appears to be logistically prohibitive; however, an international registry should be initiated to document the role and safety of laparoscopic liver resection.
Laparoscopic liver surgery is a safe and effective approach to the management of surgical liver disease in the hands of trained surgeons with experience in hepatobiliary and laparoscopic surgery. National and international societies, as well as governing boards, should become involved in the goal of establishing training standards and credentialing, to ensure consistent standards and clinical outcomes.
Background & Aims: Reports of complications among adult right hepatic lobe donors have been limited to single centers. The rate and severity of complications in living donors were investigated in the ...9-center Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL). Methods: A retrospective observational study design was used. Participants included all potential living donors evaluated between 1998 and 2003. Complication severity was graded using the Clavien scoring system. Results: Of 405 donors accepted for donation, 393 underwent donation, and 12 procedures were aborted. There were 245 donors (62%) who did not experience complications; 82 (21%) had 1 complication, and 66 (17%) had 2 or more. Complications were scored as grade 1 (minor; n = 106, 27%), grade 2 (potentially life threatening; n = 103, 26%), grade 3 (life threatening; n = 8, 2%), and grade 4 (leading to death; n = 3, 0.8%). Common complications included biliary leaks beyond postoperative day 7 (n = 36, 9%), bacterial infections (n = 49, 12%), incisional hernia (n = 22, 6%), pleural effusion requiring intervention (n = 21, 5%), neuropraxia (n = 16, 4%), reexploration (n = 12, 3%), wound infections (n = 12, 3%), and intraabdominal abscess (n = 9, 2%). Two donors developed portal vein thrombosis, and 1 had inferior vena caval thrombosis. Fifty-one (13%) donors required hospital readmission, and 14 (4%) required 2 to 5 readmissions. Conclusions: Adult living liver donation was associated with significant donor complications. Although most complications were of low-grade severity, a significant proportion were severe or life threatening. Quantification of complication risk may improve the informed consent process, perioperative planning, and donor care.
Abstract Background Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (MILR) is an evolving procedure in the adult population for benign and malignant lesions, offering less morbidity while maintaining acceptable ...outcomes. However, there lacks a published MILR experience in the pediatric population besides case reports. This report describes a pediatric MILR experience in terms of pathology, clinical specifics, and patient outcomes. Methods This is a retrospective review of 36 pediatric patients undergoing MILR for benign and malignant conditions. MILR was performed by pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopy, and a hybrid laparoscopic assisted method. Data points reviewed include patient demographics, pathology, operative technique, complications, and recurrence. Results Patients with benign (15) and malignant (21) conditions underwent segmentectomy, sectionectomy, or hemihepatectomy by MILR. Thirty-one were completed with pure laparoscopy and 20 underwent hemihepatectomy. Operative time and blood loss correlated with magnitude of resection with five patients requiring a blood transfusion. Complications were minor and included a seroma, port infection, port dehiscence, line infection, and hypertrophic scar. At median follow-up of 12 months (range 6–36 months), there were no mortalities, re-operations, or recurrences. Discussion MILR can be performed in pediatric patients for benign and malignant conditions with good technical and oncologic outcomes and low morbidity.
A standardized classification for the potential complications of living donor nephrectomy is an essential step in establishing a construct for monitoring and reporting the outcomes of this procedure. ...It is also helpful in informing potential donors about the inherent risks of the donor operation as part of the informed choice process.
We reviewed 600 laparoscopic live donor nephrectomies performed at our center. A modification of the Clavien classification system describing procedure-related complications was developed and used to grade the severity of all complications.
We observed 43 complications (7.2%) in our series of 600 patients. Grade 1 defines all events that, if left untreated, would have a spontaneous resolution or needed a simple bedside procedure (39.5%). Grade 2 complications differ from grade 1 in that they are potentially life-threatening and usually require some form of intervention, but do not result in ongoing disability. We subdivided grade 2 complications (55.8% in our study) into 2a, 2b, and 2c. The latter describes complications requiring open conversion of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy for patient treatment. Grade 3 complications are events with residual or lasting disability (4.7% in our review). Grade 4 events are those resulting in renal failure or death because of any complication (none occurred in our series).
A graded classification scheme for reporting the complications of donor nephrectomy may be useful for maintaining registry information on donor outcomes and when informing potential donors about the risks and benefits of this procedure.
The purpose of donor evaluation for adult‐to‐adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is to discover medical conditions that could increase the donor postoperative risk of complications and to ...determine whether the donor can yield a suitable graft for the recipient. We report the outcomes of LDLT donor candidates evaluated in a large multicenter study of LDLT. The records of all donor candidates and their respective recipients between 1998 and 2003 were reviewed as part of the Adult‐to‐Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL). The outcomes of the evaluation were recorded along with demographic data on the donors and recipients. Of the 1011 donor candidates evaluated, 405 (40%) were accepted for donation. The donor characteristics associated with acceptance (P < 0.05) were younger age, lower body mass index, and biological or spousal relationship to the recipient. Recipient characteristics associated with donor acceptance were younger age, lower Model for End‐stage Liver Disease score, and shorter time from listing to first donor evaluation. Other predictors of donor acceptance included earlier year of evaluation and transplant center. Conclusion: Both donor and recipient features appear to affect acceptance for LDLT. These findings may aid the donor evaluation process and allow an objective assessment of the likelihood of donor candidate acceptance. (HEPATOLOGY 2007.)
Minimally invasive techniques have been described recently for liver resections. We have developed a surgical approach to liver resection that combines the benefits of minimally invasive surgery with ...the safety of open liver resection. We have applied this hybrid approach to selected cases, and we feel that it can be adopted by most hepatobiliary surgeons, even those with minimal or no laparoscopic experience. Briefly, this technique consists of laparoscopic mobilization of the target liver lobe, followed by standard open liver resection through the extraction site. The required incisions parallel those needed for hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resections. We have compared these hybrid procedures with contemporaneous laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and open liver resections at our institution and have found that they compare favorably with minimally invasive procedures. A wider utilization of this approach by both general and hepatobiliary surgeons will result in a more generalized acceptance of minimally invasive liver resection that ultimately will advance the field and benefit patients in need of liver surgery.
Despite the historical success of liver transplantation in the face of a positive lymphocytic crossmatch, increased incidence of acute cellular rejection and graft loss have been reported in this ...setting. Given the potential adverse effects of antirejection treatment, especially in hepatitis C virus-positive recipients, identification of predisposing factors could allow for better surveillance, avoidance of rejection, and potentially better graft outcomes.
PDF
