ICG-Enhanced Compression Anatomical Segment 7 Segmentectomy in Laparoscopic and Robotic Approach.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive anatomical resection (AR) for posterosuperior lesions is technically challenging.1,2 The Glissonean approach or puncture technique is generally selected.3,4 The tumor-feeding portal pedicle compression AR (C-AR) is an established procedure in open surgery.5 This technique has benefited from the association with indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence, used to enhance the anatomical area to be resected.6 Recently, C-AR via the minimal access approach has been reported.7 Herein, we report the first cases of laparoscopic and robotic segment 7 (S7) segmentectomy using the ICG-enhanced compression technique. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two cases of CHILD-class A hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in segment 7 with a liver stiffness less than 7 kPa treated by laparoscopic and robotic anatomical S7 segmentectomies were reported. Using the intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS), the tumor-bearing portal pedicle and the level targeted for compression were identified. The right hemiliver was adequately mobilized to allow handling of the organ during dissection. Using the grasper and the probe itself, the S7 Glissonean pedicle was transparenchymally compressed under real-time IOUS control. To further enhance the visibility of the discolored S7, ICG was administered intravenously, obtaining the compressed area to be resected as a non-stained one. Dissection was performed under intermittent Pringle maneuver up to exposing the right hepatic vein, dividing the Glissonean pedicle to segment 7 and then completing the resection. RESULTS: Pathologic findings demonstrated a 4.9 cm and 7.3 cm HCC with a R0-resection margin (> 1 cm in both). Postoperative complications were nil. The patients were discharged 6 days after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary experience shows that the C-AR is a feasible and reliable technique in laparoscopic and robotic approach for posterosuperior lesions. Further studies are needed to investigate its applicability and standardization.

Anatomical liver resection using the ultrasound-guided compression technique in minimal access surgery.

BACKGROUND: Segmental or subsegmental anatomical resection (AR) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in minimal access liver surgery (MALS) has been technically proposed. The Glissonean approach or dye injection technique are generally adopted. The tumor-feeding portal pedicle compression technique (C-AR) is an established approach in open surgery, but its feasibility in the MALS environment has never been described. METHODS: Eligible patients were prospectively enrolled to undergo laparoscopic or robotic ultrasound-guided C-AR based on HCC location and preoperative identification of a single tumor-feeding portal pedicle. Initial C-AR experience was gained with laparoscopic cases in the beginning of 2020. Following our progressive experience in laparoscopic C-AR, patients requiring AR for HCC were consecutively selected for robotic C-AR. RESULTS: A total of 10 patients underwent minimal access C-AR. All patients had Child-Pugh A HCC. The surgical procedures included 6 laparoscopic and 4 robotic C-AR. Median tumor size was 3.1 cm (range 2-7 cm). All procedures had R0 margin. Postoperative complications were nil. CONCLUSION: C-AR technique is a feasible and promising technique for patients eligible for laparoscopic and robotic AR for HCC. Further data are necessary to validate its applicability to more complex minimal access AR.

Laparoscopic Ultrasound-Guided R1 Vascular Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases at Caval Confluence.

BACKGROUND: Patients with tumors involving the hepatic vein (HV) at the caval confluence (CC) usually receive major hepatectomies or HV grafting. For colorectal liver metastases (CLM), tumor-vessel detachment (R1vasc) has proven to be oncologically adequate.1-3 However, parenchyma-sparing R1vasc surgery has usually been confined to the open approach. The technical tricks for accomplishing this kind of surgery in laparoscopy are disclosed. METHODS: A patient with a CLM in contact with the middle HV (MHV) and left HV (LHV) at the CC underwent liver resection. No signs of vascular invasion were observed at preoperative imaging. On the basis of the low rate of tumor-vessel regression after chemotherapy,4 technical feasibility, and low tumor burden, patient was considered for upfront surgery. Surgery consisted in: (1) left liver mobilization with full exposure of the CC; (2) identification of the common trunk's root and its encirclement by tape; (3) the use of ultrasound to rule out HV invasion and to define a resection area favoring a transection plane smoothly approaching the point of vascular contact; and (4) careful vascular detachment by blunt dissection in a caudocranial fashion to separate the lesion from HVs. RESULTS: A limited resection of segments, four superior and two with MHV-LHV detachment, was performed. Operation time was 285 min, with 52 min of cumulative Pringle time and 20 ml of blood loss. Postoperative course was uneventful. The in-hospital stay was 6 days. CONCLUSION: Similarly to open surgery, laparoscopic R1vasc surgery for CLM at CC is feasible and represents an alternative to major hepatectomy. HV control by tape is recommended to manage any bleeding that may occur during tumor-vessel detachment.

Renal resistive index as a predictor of postoperative complications in liver resection surgery. Observational study.

Mortality after liver surgery reduced during the last three decades to less than 2%, but post-operative morbidity occurs in 20-50% of cases. Patients are often considered eligible for post-operative intensive-care unit (ICU) admission. Predicting which patients that are at higher risk could lead to a more precise perioperative management. We investigated whether renal resistive index (RRI), alone or along with other items, can predict post-operative complication after hepatic resection. All consecutive patients undergoing hepatectomy for primary or metastatic neoplasm at our Institution between February 2015 and March 2017 were enrolled. They received RRI measurement before entering in operative room and after awakening from general anesthesia. 183 Patients were enrolled. High surgical invasiveness, surgery time > 360 min, pre-operative RRI and postoperative serum lactate clearance < - 6%, showed to be associated with postoperative complications. Pre-operative RRI, complex liver resection, long-lasting surgery and poor lactate clearance (cLac) close to awakening from general anesthesia, all together may permit to classify the risk of post-operative adverse outcome after hepatic resection surgery.

Ultrasound-guided anatomical liver resection using a compression technique combined with indocyanine green fluorescence imaging.

BACKGROUND: Anatomical resection (AR) is a recommended surgical treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the conventional procedure (dye injection) for AR is difficult to reproduce. As an alternative, the tumour-feeding portal pedicle compression technique (finger-compression technique) has been proposed as an easy and reversible procedure. Here, we propose a new method combining indocyanine green (ICG) imaging with the finger-compression technique. METHODS: Eligible patients were prospectively enrolled to undergo ICG compression (ICG-C) anatomical hepatectomy for HCC. RESULTS: Fifteen patients underwent AR using the ICG-C technique. Overall, the surgical procedures included six segmentectomies, seven subsegmentectomies, and two right posterior sectionectomies. The median tumour size was 5.8 cm (range 2-7 cm). All procedures had an R0 margin. There were no major complications among patients, and minor morbidity occurred in three patients. CONCLUSIONS: ICG-C is a safe, feasible and effective technique for patients eligible for AR.

Prediction of remnant liver volume using 3D simulation software in patients undergoing R1vasc parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy for multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases: reliability, clinical impact, and learning curve.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of the future liver remnant (FLR) is routinely performed before major hepatectomy. In R1-vascular one-stage hepatectomy (R1vasc-OSH), given the multiplanar dissection paths, the FLR is not easily predictable. Preoperative 3D-virtual casts may help. We evaluated the predictability of the FLR using the 3D-virtual cast in the R1vasc-OSH for multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CLM). METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients with multiple bilobar CLMs scheduled for R1vasc-OSH were included. Predicted and real-FLRs were compared. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to determine the impact of 3D-virtual cast on postoperative complications. RESULTS: Median number of CLM and resection areas were 12 (4-33) and 3 (1-8). Median predicted-FLR was 899 ml (558-1157) and 60% (42-85), while for the real-FLR 915 ml (566-1777) and 63% (43-87). Median discrepancy between predicted and real-FLR was -0.6% (p = 0.504), indicating a slight tendency to underestimate the FLR. The difference was more evident in more than 12 CLMs (p = 0.013). A discrepancy was not evident according to the number of resection areas (p = 0.316). No mortality occurred. Patients in virtual-group had lower major complications compared to nonvirtual-group (0% vs 18%, p-value 0.014). CONCLUSION: FLR estimation based on 3D-analysis is feasible, provides a safe surgery and represents a promising method in planning R1vasc-OSH for patients with multiple bilobar CLMs.

Indocyanine Green Compression Technique for Anatomical S8 Dorsal Subsegmentectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Anatomical resection (AR) is a recommended surgical treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), although the conventional procedure (dye injection) for AR is difficult to reproduce.1,2 The tumor-feeding portal pedicle compression technique has been proposed as an easy, reversible, repeatable, and oncologically suitable procedure,3-5 and its only drawback is the sometimes faint discoloration of the compressed area. For enhancing its visibility, indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging has been introduced. This technique is herein disclosed while performing an anatomical S8 dorsal subsegmentectomy. METHODS: A 66-year-old male was admitted for a 3.7 cm HCC in segment 8 dorsal (S8d) grown in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. The preoperative liver function was graded as Child-Pugh class A. After adequate liver mobilization, the subsegmental Glissonian pedicle to S8d was identified by intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) and compressed transparenchymally between the probe and the surgeon's fingertip positioned at the opposed side of the liver. Once IOUS-guided vessel compression had begun, ICG was administered intravenously. The compressed vessel created a non-stained area, which was marked using electrocautery. RESULTS: An anatomical S8d subsegmentectomy using the ICG compression technique was performed. There was no congested area and the right hepatic vein was exposed at the hepatocaval confluence because the resection was conducted in a subsegmental fashion. There was no morbidity and no blood transfusions were necessary. The patient was discharged on day 6 after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This video shows, for the first time, the finger compression technique successfully implemented by ICG imaging for performing an AR for HCC.

Oncological outcome of R1 vascular margin for mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma. A single center observational cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies validated the possibility to detach colorectal liver metastases from vessels (R1vasc) featuring R1vasc equivalent to R0 and superior to tumor exposure along the transection plane (R1par). To clarify the outcome of R1 surgery (margin <1 mm) in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (MFCCC), distinguishing R1par and R1vasc resections. METHODS: Patients undergoing resection for MFCCC between 2008 and 2016 were considered. Tumor detachment from 1st/2nd-order Glissonean pedicles or hepatic veins was performed in advanced diseases. R0, R1par, and R1vasc were compared. RESULTS: The study included 84 resection areas in 59 patients (17 R1vasc). R1vasc group had local recurrence risk similar to R1par group (per-patient analysis 29% vs. 36%; per-resection area analysis 29% vs. 32%), higher than R0 group (3% and 2%, p = 0.003 and p = 0.0003). R1vasc and R1par groups had similar overall and recurrence-free survival (median OS 30 vs. 30 months; RFS 10 vs. 8 months), lower than R0 group (70 and 39 months, p = 0.066 and p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: In MFCCC patients, R1vasc resection is not an adequate treatment. Local disease control and survival after R1vasc resection are lower than after R0 resection and similar to R1par resection. R1vasc resection could be exclusively considered to achieve resectability in otherwise unresectable patients.

The Liver Tunnel: Intention-to-treat Validation of a New Type of Hepatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: This prospective intention-to-treat validation study evaluated the liver tunnel (LT) technique for patients having ≥1 deep centrally located liver tumor, with or without middle hepatic vein (MHV) invasion. BACKGROUND: Conservative surgery has been proposed for patients with deep liver tumors having complex relationships. LT is one such novel technique. METHODS: Eligible patients were prospectively enrolled for LT. LT relies on tumor-vessel detachment, and the presence of communicating veins if MHV resection is necessary. RESULTS: Twenty consecutive patients met the inclusion criteria: 17 had colorectal liver metastases, 1 had hepatocellular carcinoma, 1 had mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma, and 1 had mixed hepatocellular carcinoma-mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma. Nineteen patients underwent LT. The MHV was resected in 6 patients, always sparing segments 4i and 5. Overall, 180 lesions were removed (median 7; range 1-37): 79 lesions were included in the LT specimen (median 3; range 1-13). There was no in-hospital 90-day mortality. Overall morbidity occurred in 10 (50%) patients: major in 2 (10%). All complications were managed conservatively. After a median 15-month follow-up (range 6-48), 2 instances of cut-edge local recurrences were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that LT is technically feasible and safe. Further studies are needed for standardizing its use.

Progression of Colorectal Liver Metastases from the End of Chemotherapy to Resection: A New Contraindication to Surgery?

BACKGROUND: Not all patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases (CLM) benefit from liver resection (LR); only patients with disease progression during chemotherapy are excluded from surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to determine whether tumor behavior (stable disease/progression) from the end of chemotherapy to LR impacts prognosis. METHODS: Patients undergoing LR after tumor response or stabilization during chemotherapy were considered. Overall, 128 patients who underwent examination by two imaging modalities (computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging) after chemotherapy with a > 3-week interval between the two imaging modalities were analyzed. Any variation in CLM size was registered. Tumor progression was defined according to the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) criteria. RESULTS: Among 128 patients with stable disease or partial response to preoperative chemotherapy, 32 (25%) developed disease progression in the chemotherapy to LR interval, with a disease progression rate of 17% when this interval was < 8 weeks. Survival was lower among patients with progression than those with stable disease [3-year overall survival (OS) 23.0 vs. 52.4%, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) 6.3% vs. 21.6%; p < 0.001]. Survival was extremely poor in patients with early progression (< 8 weeks) (0.0% 2-year OS, 12.5% 6-month RFS). Disease progression in the chemotherapy to LR interval was an independent negative prognostic factor for OS and RFS [hazard ratio 3.144 and 2.350, respectively; p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Early disease progression in the chemotherapy to LR interval occurred in approximately 15% of patients and was associated with extremely poor survival. Even if these data require validation, the risk for early disease progression after chemotherapy should be considered, and, if progression is evident, the indication for surgery should be cautiously evaluated.

Impact of the FloTrac/VigileoTM Monitoring on Intraoperative Fluid Management and Outcome after Liver Resection.

BACKGROUNDS: Perioperative fluid-therapy is a still a debated issue. In hepatic surgery, volume load must be strictly monitored to assure both a safe hemodynamics and low central venous pressure (CVP) to limit the backflow bleeding. Retrospectively, we compared intraoperative fluid management before and after the adoption of a semi-invasive hemodynamic monitoring. METHODS: We compared patients submitted to liver resection monitored by FloTrac/VigileoTM (group A) vs. patients who did not (group B). We searched for differences about hemodynamics, fluid therapy and outcome. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-five patients underwent hepatic resection due to neoplasm: group A - n = 179 and group B - n = 176. At the end of the resection, patients of group A showed a higher mean arterial pressure (MAP) than group B (74 ± 12 vs. 49.4 ± 8 mm Hg, respectively; p < 0.001). Cardiac index and stroke volume variation in group A were within a normal range. Fluid input was higher in group B than in group A (12.0 ± 3.4 vs. 7.6 ± 3.1 mL/kg/h, respectively; p < 0.001) and fluid balance was significantly different: group A -400 ± 1,527 vs. group B 326 ± 1,527 mL (p < 0.001). Group B showed a greater number of cases complicated outcomes (36 vs. 20; p = 0.014). Considering only those subjects who were able to reach their hemodynamic targets (MAP ≥65 mm Hg and CVP ≤7 mm Hg), we found similar data. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received a monitored fluid therapy experienced a safer outcome.

Open Liver Resection, Laparoscopic Liver Resection, and Percutaneous Thermal Ablation for Patients with Solitary Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma (≤30 mm): Review of the Literature and Proposal for a Therapeutic Strategy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤3 cm and preserved liver function have the highest likelihood to be cured if treated. The most adequate treatment methods are yet a matter that is debated. METHODS: We reviewed the literature about open anatomic resection (AR), laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), and percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA). RESULTS: PTA is effective as resection for HCC < 2 cm, when they are neither subcapsular nor perivascular. PTA in HCC of 2-3 cm is under evaluation. AR with the removal of the tumor-bearing portal territory is recommended for HCC > 2 cm, except for subcapsular ones. In comparison with open surgery, LRR has better short-term outcomes and non-inferior long-term outcomes. LLR is standardized for superficial limited resections and for left-sided AR. CONCLUSIONS: According to the available evidences, the following therapeutic proposal can be advanced. Laparoscopic limited resection is the standard for any subcapsular HCC. PTA is the first-line treatment for deep-located HCC < 2 cm, except for those in contact with Glissonean pedicles. Laparoscopic AR is the standard for deep-located HCC of 2-3 cm of the left liver, while open AR is the standard for deep-located HCC of 2-3 cm in the right liver. HCC in contact with Glissonean pedicles should be scheduled for resection (open or laparoscopic) independent of their size. Liver transplantation is reserved to otherwise untreatable patients or as a salvage procedure at recurrence.

Hepatectomy with or without the thoraco-abdominal approach: impact on perioperative outcome.

BACKGROUND: Hepatectomy using the thoraco-abdominal approach (TAA) compared to the abdominal approach (AA) remains under debate. This study assessed the perioperative outcomes of patients operated with or without TAA. METHODS: 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was applied in 744 patients operated between 2007 and 2013, identifying 246 patients who underwent hepatectomy with TAA compared to 246 patients with AA. These groups were matched for demographics, liver disease, comorbidity, tumor features, and extent of resection. Rates of morbidity and mortality were the study endpoints. RESULTS: The rates of morbidity or mortality were not different. With the TAA length of the operations (P = 0.002), length of the Pringle maneuver (P = 0.012), and rate of blood transfusions (P = 0.041) were significantly different. Hospital stay was similar. Independent significant prognostic factors for adverse perioperative outcome were: renal comorbidity (OR = 2.7; P = 0.001), extent of the resection (OR = 3.7; P = 0.001), and increased BILCHE score (OR = 2.4; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatectomy using the TAA was not associated with adverse perioperative outcome. The associations with length of operation, Pringle maneuver and blood transfusions may have reflected the complexity of the tumor presentation rather than the technical approach.

Individualized risk estimation for postoperative morbidity after hepatectomy: the Humanitas score.

BACKGROUND: Estimation of postoperative morbidity after hepatectomy remains challenging. The aim of this prospective study was to develop a surgical score to predict an individual risk of post-hepatectomy complications. METHODS: All consecutive patients scheduled for hepatectomy from February 2012 to September 2015 were included and randomly assigned into a derivation or validation cohort. We developed a score based on preoperative variables, and we tested them using multivariate analyses. Odds-ratio (OR) values were used to build the score. RESULTS: 340 patients were included, 240 in the derivation and 100 in the validation cohort. Multivariate analysis showed that major hepatectomy (OR = 1.62; 95% CI 1.39-3.51), liver stiffness ≥9.7 kPa (OR = 2.46; 95% CI 1.16-5.28), BILCHE score (combination of serum bilirubin and cholinesterase) ≥2 (OR = 2.76; 95% CI 0.82-4.28) and esophageal varices (OR = 1.59; 95% CI 1.51-3.61) were independent complications predictors. A 10-point scoring system was introduced. Patients with a score ≤4 did not experience complications, whereas patients with ≥7 points experienced up to 54% of complications (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A new, easy and clinically reliable surgical score based on the liver stiffness, BILCHE score, type of hepatectomy, and presence of varices may be used to predict post-hepatectomy morbidity. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT02454686 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/).

Twelve-year experience of "radical but conservative" liver surgery for colorectal metastases: impact on surgical practice and oncologic efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Liver surgery for colorectal metastases (CLM) is moving toward parenchyma-sparing approaches. The authors reported the technical feasibility of parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy for deeply located tumors, but its impact on daily practice and long-term outcomes remain unclear. METHODS: The patients undergoing liver resection (LR) for CLM with vascular contact (first-/second-order pedicle or hepatic vein (HV) trunk) were considered. Those undergoing major hepatectomy were excluded. The authors' technique included tumor-vessel detachment, partial resection of marginally infiltrated HVs, and detection of communicating vessels (CVs) among HVs to preserve outflow after HV resection. RESULTS: Among 169 patients with major vascular contact, parenchyma-sparing LR was feasible in 146 (86%). Twenty-eight SERPS, 13 transversal hepatectomies, 6 mini-mesohepatectomies, and 4 liver tunnels were performed. Sixty-six (45%) patients underwent CLM-vessel detachment, 25 (17%) underwent partial HV resection, and 30 (21%) achieved outflow preservation by CV identification. The mortality and severe morbidity rates were 1.4% and 8.2%, respectively. The 5-year survival rate was 30.7%. The parenchyma-sparing strategy failed in 14 (7%) patients because of recurrence in the spared parenchyma or cut edge; 13 were radically retreated. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided parenchyma-sparing surgery is feasible in most patients with ill-located CLMs. This procedure is safe and achieves adequate oncologic outcomes.

State of the Art of Intraoperative Ultrasound in Liver Surgery: Current Use for Resection-guidance.

The performance of hepatic surgery without a parenchyma-sparing strategy carries significant risks for patient survival because of the not negligible occurrence of postoperative liver failure. In the modern liver surgery the use of the intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) allows the performance of the so-called “radical but conservative surgery”, which is the pivotal factor to offer a chance of cure to an increasing proportion of patients, who until few years ago were considered only for palliative care. The present article details the rationale of IOUS for resection-guidance in liver surgery.

Is Tumor Detachment from Vascular Structures Equivalent to R0 Resection in Surgery for Colorectal Liver Metastases? An Observational Cohort.

BACKGROUND: R0 resection is the standard for colorectal liver metastases (CLMs). Adequacy of R1 resections is debated. Detachment of CLMs from vessels has been proposed to prioritize parenchyma sparing and increase resectability, but outcomes are still to be elucidated. The present study aimed to clarify the outcomes of R1 surgery (margin <1 mm) in patients with CLMs, distinguishing standard R1 resection (parenchymal margin, R1Par) and R1 resection with detachment of CLMs from major intrahepatic vessels (R1Vasc). METHODS: All patients undergoing first resection between 2004 and June 2013 were prospectively considered. R0, R1Par, and R1Vasc were compared in per-patient and per-resection area analyses. RESULTS: The study included 627 resection areas in 226 consecutive patients. Fifty-one (8.1 %) resections in 46 (20.4 %) patients were R1Vasc, and 177 (28.2 %) resections in 107 (47.3 %) patients were R1Par. Thirty-two (5.1 %) surgical margin recurrences occurred in 28 (12.4 %) patients. Local recurrence risk was similar between the R0 and R1Vasc groups (per-patient analysis 5.3 vs. 4.3 %; per-resection area analysis 1.5 vs. 3.9 %, p = n.s.) but increased in the R1Par group (19.6 and 13.6 %, p < 0.05 for both). The R1Par group had a higher rate of hepatic-only recurrences (49.5 vs. 36.1 %, p = 0.042). On multivariate analysis, R1Par was an independent negative prognostic factor of overall survival (p = 0.034, median follow-up 33 months); conversely R1Vasc versus R0 had no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: R1Par resection is not adequate for CLMs. R1Vasc surgery achieves outcomes equivalent to R0 resection. CLM detachment from intrahepatic vessels can be pursued to increase patient resectability and resection safety (parenchymal sparing).