The 2
nd
International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resection (ICCLLR) was held 4
th
–6
th
October, 2014, in Morioka, Japan. The level of evidence appears to be low in the field of ...laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) to create strong recommendations. Therefore, an independent jury-based consensus model was applied to better define the current role of LLR and to develop internationally accepted recommendations. The three-day conference was very intense with full of insightful discussions on assessment of LLR and its future directions. The jury drew the statements based on the presentations and documents prepared by the expert. LLR is theoretically superior to open liver resection (OLR) because the laparoscope allows better exposure with a magnified view, and the pneumoperitoneum pressure reduces hepatic vein bleeding from the cut surface. During the ICCLLR, we shared these theoretical advantages in LLR and the conceptual change of liver resection. After the ICCLLR, a couple of important studies have been published to prove this theoretical superiority of LLR over OLR in short-term outcomes without deteriorating long-term outcomes. Another new concept was proposed at the ICCLLR: parenchyma sparing (limited) anatomical resection. Review of the literature supports anatomical resection with parenchyma sparing strategy for LLR irrespective of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). Just after the ICCLLR, sensational news of clustered mortality after LLR was reported in the Japanese media and they impacted on daily practice of LLR in Japan. The most important message from the ICCLLR is to protect patients from this new surgical procedure. The ICCLLR recommended three actions for the protection of patients: (I) prospective reporting registry for transparency; (II) a difficulty scoring system to select patients; (III) creation of a formal structure of education. The online prospective registry system including items to calculate the difficulty score has been created in Japan after the ICCLLR for the safe development of LLR.
The beginnings of laparoscopic liver resection(LLR)were at the start of the 1990s,with the initial reports being published in 1991 and 1992.These were followed by reports of left lateral ...sectionectomy in 1996.In the years following,the procedures of LLR were expanded to hemi-hepatectomy,sectionectomy,segmentectomy and partial resection of posterosuperior segments,as well as the parenchymal preserving limited anatomical resection and modified anatomical(extended and/or combining limited)resection procedures.This expanded range of LLR procedures,mimicking the expansion of open liver resection in the past,was related to advances in both technology(instrumentation)and technical skill with conceptual changes.During this period of remarkable development,two international consensus conferences were held(2008 in Louisville,KY,United States,and 2014 in Morioka,Japan),providing up-to-date summarizations of the status and perspective of LLR.The advantages of LLR have become clear,and include reduced intraoperative bleeding,shorter hospital stay,and-especially for cirrhotic patients-lower incidence of complications(e.g.,postoperative ascites and liver failure).In this paper,we review and discuss the developments of LLR in operative procedures(extent and style of liver resections)during the first quarter century since its inception,from the aspect of relationships with technological/technical developments with conceptual changes.
Early on, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was limited to partial resection, but major LLR is no longer rare. A difficulty scoring system is required to guide surgeons in advancing from simple to ...highly technical laparoscopic resections. Subjects were 90 patients who had undergone pure LLR at three medical institutions (30 patients/institution) from January 2011 to April 2014. Surgical difficulty was assessed by the operator using an index of 1–10 with the following divisions: 1–3 low difficulty, 4–6 intermediate difficulty, and 7–10 high difficulty. Weighted kappa statistic was used to calculate the concordance between the operators' and reviewers' (expert surgeon) difficulty index. Inter‐rater agreement (weighted kappa statistic) between the operators' and reviewers' assessments was 0.89 with the three‐level difficulty index and 0.80 with the 10‐level difficulty index. A 10‐level difficulty index by linear modeling based on clinical information revealed a weighted kappa statistic of 0.72 and that scored by the extent of liver resection, tumor location, tumor size, liver function, and tumor proximity to major vessels revealed a weighted kappa statistic of 0.68. We proposed a new scoring system to predict difficulty of various LLRs preoperatively. The calculated score well reflected difficulty.
Background
The morbidity rate after pancreaticoduodenectomy remains high. The objectives of this retrospective cohort study were to clarify the risk factors associated with serious morbidity ...(Clavien–Dindo classification grades IV–V), and create complication risk calculators using the Japanese National Clinical Database.
Methods
Between 2011 and 2012, data from 17,564 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy at 1,311 institutions in Japan were recorded in this database. The morbidity rate and associated risk factors were analyzed.
Results
The overall and serious morbidity rates were 41.6% and 4.5%, respectively. A pancreatic fistula (PF) with an International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) grade C was significantly associated with serious morbidity (P < 0.001). Twenty‐one variables were considered statistically significant predictors of serious complications, and 15 of them overlapped with those of a PF with ISGPF grade C. The predictors included age, sex, obesity, functional status, smoking status, the presence of a comorbidity, non‐pancreatic cancer, combined vascular resection, and several abnormal laboratory results. C‐indices of the risk models for serious morbidity and grade C PF were 0.708 and 0.700, respectively.
Conclusions
Preventing a PF grade C is important for decreasing the serious morbidity rate and these risk calculations contribute to adequate patient selection.
HighlightAoki and colleagues clarified the risk factors associated with serious morbidity (Clavien‐Dindo classification grades IV–V) and created risk calculators using a Japanese nationwide database of 17,564 patients after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Preventing pancreatic fistula grade C is important for reducing serious morbidity and these risk calculations contribute to more appropriate patient selection.
Background
The dissemination of robotic liver surgery is slow‐paced and must face the obstacle of demonstrating advantages over open and laparoscopic (LLS) approaches. Our objective was to show the ...current position of robotic liver surgery (RLS) worldwide and to identify if improved short‐term outcomes are observed, including secondary meta‐analyses for type of resection, etiology, and cost analysis.
Methods
A PRISMA‐based systematic review was performed to identify manuscripts comparing RLS vs open or LLS approaches. Quality analysis was performed using the Newcatle‐Ottawa score. Statistical analysis was performed after heterogeneity test and fixed‐ or random‐effect models were chosen accordingly.
Results
After removing duplications, 2728 RLS cases were identified from the final set of 150 manuscripts. More than 75% of the cases have been performed on malignancies. Meta‐analysis from the 38 comparative reports showed that RLS may offer improved short‐term outcomes compared to open procedures in most of the variables screened. Compared to LLS, some advantages may be observed in favour of RLS for major resections in terms of operative time, hospital stay and rate of complications. Cost analyses showed an increased cost per procedure of around US$5000.
Conclusions
The advantages of RLS still need to be demonstrated although early results are promising. Advantages vs open approach are demonstrated. Compared to laparoscopic surgery, minor perioperative advantages may be observed for major resections although cost analyses are still unfavorable to the robotic approach.
Highlight
Ciria and colleagues analyzed the impact of robotics in liver surgery. The largest systematic review and short‐term outcomes meta‐analysis performed to date was done on 2728 cases. Few initial advantages were observed for the robotic approach compared with laparoscopy, contrary to significant higher costs. However, a high potential was highlighted.
Background
Extending the clinical indications for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) should be carefully considered based on a surgeon’s experience and skill. However, objective indexes to help ...surgeons assess the estimated difficulty of LLR are scarce. The aim of our study was to develop the first objective numerical rating scale to predict the surgical difficulty of various LLR procedures.
Methods
We performed a retrospective review of the operative outcomes of 187 patients who underwent a pure LLR. First, the value of preoperative factors for predicting surgical time was evaluated by multivariate linear regression analyses, and a scoring system was constructed. Next, the integrity of our predictive linear model was evaluated against the documented operative outcomes for patients forming our study group.
Results
Four predictive factors were identified and scored based on the weighted contribution of each factor predicting surgical time: extent of resection (scored 0, 2, or 3); location of tumor (scored 0, 1, or 2); obesity (scored 0 or 1); and platelet count (scored 0 or 1). The scores were summed to classify surgical difficulty into three levels: low (total score ≤1); medium (total score 2–3); and high (total score ≥4). Operative outcomes, including surgical time, volume of blood loss, length of hospital stay, and rate of morbidity, were significantly different between the three surgical difficulty levels.
Conclusion
Our novel model will be useful for surgeons to predict the difficulty of an LLR procedure relative to their own experience and skill.
Abstract Background Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is widely used for hepatic disease treatment. Preoperative prediction of operative difficulty can be beneficial as a roadmap for surgeons ...advancing from simple to highly technical LLR. We performed a multicenter analysis to investigate a “difficulty scoring system” for predicting the difficulty of LLR. Study Design The proposed “difficulty scoring system” includes three difficulty levels based on five factors. The system was validated in a cohort of 2,199 patients who underwent LLR at 74 Japanese centers between 2010 and 2014; the difficulty level was rated as low (n = 965), intermediate (n = 891), and high (n = 343). Operative parameters, postoperative complications, and outcomes were compared according to the difficulty levels. Results The median operation time and blood loss were 258 min (range, 30–1275) and 75 cc (range, 0–7798), respectively. The overall conversion rate was 5.0% (n = 110). The incidences of postoperative complications, liver failure, and in-hospital death were 5.3% (n = 116), 1.5% (n = 32), and 0.5% (n = 12), respectively. Median hospital stay was 9 days (range, 1–189). Conversion rate, operation time, and blood loss showed a direct correlation with the difficulty level. A strong correlation was observed among the difficulty level, incidence of postoperative complications, and hospital stay. Incidence of postoperative liver failure and in-hospital death in the high-difficulty group was higher than that in the low-difficulty group. Conclusion Preoperative evaluation with the “difficulty scoring system” predicted the difficulty of the operation and the postoperative outcomes of LLR. In the beginning of LLR training, surgeons should start with low-difficulty-level operations.
Pre‐operative simulation using three‐dimensional (3D) reconstructions have been suggested to enhance surgical planning of hepatectomy. Evidence on its benefits for hepatectomy patients remains ...limited. This systematic review examined the use and impact of pre‐operative simulation and intraoperative navigation on hepatectomy outcomes. A systematical searched electronic databases for studies reporting on the use and results of simulation and navigation for hepatectomy was performed. The primary outcome was change in operative plan based on simulation. Secondary outcomes included operating time (min), estimated blood loss, surgical margins, 30‐day postoperative morbidity and mortality, and study‐specific outcomes. From 222 citations, we included 11 studies including 497 patients. All were observational cohort studies. No study compared hepatectomy with and without simulation. All studies performed 3D reconstruction and segmentation, most commonly with volumetrics measurements. In six studies reporting intraoperative navigation, five relied on ultrasound, and one on a resection map. Of two studies reporting on it, the resection line was changed intraoperatively in one third of patients, based on simulation. Virtually predicted liver volumes (Pearson correlation r = 0.917 to 0.995) and surgical margins (r = 0.84 to 0.967) correlated highly with actual ones in eight studies. Heterogeneity of the included studies precluded meta‐analysis.Pre‐operative simulation seems accurate in measuring volumetrics and surgical margins. Current studies lack intraoperative transposition of simulation for direct navigation. Simulation appears useful planning of hepatectomies, but further work is warranted focusing on the development of improved tools and appraisal of their clinical impact compared to traditional resection.
PDF
