Full Robotic Whole Graft Liver Transplantation: A Step Into The Future.

OBJECTIVE: To report the first European series of full robotic whole liver transplantation (RLT) with technical details and future perspectives. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Few cases of liver transplantation with a minimally invasive approach using partial grafts have been reported so far, and no cases of robotic whole liver transplantation have been reported in the scientific literature. METHODS: The adopted technique was full robotic liver hepatectomy, followed by robotic implantation after graft introduction through a small midline incision. Patients presenting with Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) in liver cirrhosis with a small caudate lobe, low degree of portal hypertension, no porto-mesenteric thrombosis, as well as low MELD patients have been considered ideal candidates. RESULTS: Six patients underwent RLT between February and March 2024 at Lisbon and Modena University Liver Transplant Centers. Warm ischemia time during RLT ranged between 55 and 90 min, with a total surgery duration between 440 and 710 min. The median total operative time was 595 (±111,3) minutes. Only one recipient had prolonged hyperbilirubinemia, which was safely treated. The median in-hospital stay was 7.5 days, (±4.8 days). CONCLUSIONS: RLT is a promising technique to further reduce the impact of liver transplantation thanks to smaller incision, gentle tissue manipulation, high magnification and precision for vascular and biliary anastomosis, and reduced postoperative pain. This is the first step toward the demonstration of the feasibility of minimally invasive surgery in liver transplantation, although further selection and technical refinements are needed to improve reproducibility.

Towards a Standardization of Learning Curve Assessment in Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to analyze the learning curves of minimal invasive liver surgery(MILS) and propose a standardized reporting. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: MILS offers benefits compared to open resections. For a safe introduction along the learning curve, formal training is recommended. However, definitions of learning curves and methods to assess it lack standardization. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases identified studies on learning curves in MILS. The primary outcome was the number needed to overcome the learning curve. Secondary outcomes included endpoints defining learning curves, and characterization of different learning phases(competency, proficiency and mastery). RESULTS: 60 articles with 12'241 patients and 102 learning curve analyses were included. The laparoscopic and robotic approach was evaluated in 71 and 18 analyses and both approaches combined in 13 analyses. Sixty-one analyses (60%) based the learning curve on statistical calculations. The most often used parameters to define learning curves were operative time (n=64), blood loss (n=54), conversion (n=42) and postoperative complications (n=38). Overall competency, proficiency and mastery were reached after 34 (IQR 19-56), 50 (IQR 24-74), 58 (IQR 24-100) procedures respectively. Intraoperative parameters improved earlier (operative time: competency to proficiency to mastery: -13%, 2%; blood loss: competency to proficiency to mastery: -33%, 0%; conversion rate (competency to proficiency to mastery; -21%, -29%), whereas postoperative complications improved later (competency to proficiency to mastery: -25%, -41%). CONCLUSIONS: This review summarizes the highest evidence on learning curves in MILS taking into account different definitions and confounding factors. A standardized three-phase reporting of learning phases (competency, proficiency, mastery) is proposed and should be followed.

Full robotic versus open ALPPS: a bi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In primarily unresectable liver tumors, ALPPS (Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy) may offer curative two-stage hepatectomy trough a fast and extensive hypertrophy. However, concerns have been raised about the invasiveness of the procedure. Full robotic ALPPS has the potential to reduce the postoperative morbidity trough a less invasive access. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of open and full robotic ALPPS. METHODS: The bicentric study included open ALPPS cases from the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland and robotic ALPPS cases from the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy from 01/2015 to 07/2022. Main outcomes were intraoperative parameters and overall complications. RESULTS: Open and full robotic ALPPS were performed in 36 and 7 cases. Robotic ALPPS was associated with less blood loss after both stages (418 ± 237 ml vs. 319 ± 197 ml; P = 0.04 and 631 ± 354 ml vs. 258 ± 53 ml; P = 0.01) as well as a higher rate of interstage discharge (86% vs. 37%; P = 0.02). OT was longer with robotic ALPPS after both stages (371 ± 70 min vs. 449 ± 81 min; P = 0.01 and 282 ± 87 min vs. 373 ± 90 min; P = 0.02). After ALPPS stage 2, there was no difference for overall complications (86% vs. 86%; P = 1.00) and major complications (43% vs. 39%; P = 0.86). The total length of hospital stay was similar (23 ± 17 days vs. 26 ± 13; P = 0.56). CONCLUSION: Robotic ALPPS was safely implemented and showed potential for improved perioperative outcomes compared to open ALPPS in an experienced robotic center. The robotic approach might bring the perioperative risk profile of ALPPS closer to interventional techniques of portal vein embolization/liver venous deprivation.

The Role of Salvage Transplantation in Patients Initially Treated With Open Versus Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery: An Intention-to-Treat Analysis.

Despite gaining wide consensus in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) has been poorly investigated for its role in the setting of salvage liver transplantation (SLT). A multicenter retrospective analysis was carried out in 6 Italian centers on 211 patients with HCC who were initially resected with open (n = 167) versus MILS (n = 44) and eventually wait-listed for SLT. The secondary endpoint was identification of risk factors for posttransplant death and tumor recurrence. The enrolled patients included 211 HCC patients resected with open surgery (n = 167) versus MILS (n = 44) and wait-listed for SLT between January 2007 and December 2017. We analyzed the intention-to-treat survival of these patients. MILS was the most important protective factor for the composite risk of delisting, posttransplant patient death, and HCC recurrence (OR, 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.63; P = 0.003). MILS was also the only independent protective factor for the risk of post-SLT patient death (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.93; P = 0.04). After propensity score matching, MILS was the only independent protective factor against the risk of delisting, posttransplant death, and HCC recurrence (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.07-0.75; P = 0.02). On the basis of the current analysis, MILS seems protective over open surgery for the risk of delisting, posttransplant patient death, and tumor recurrence. Larger prospective studies balancing liver function and tumor stage are strongly favored to better clarify the beneficial effect of MILS for HCC patients eventually referred to SLT.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: the first meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has gained increasing acceptance for surgical treatment of malignant and benign liver tumors. LLR for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is not commonly performed because of the concern for the frequent need for major hepatectomy, vascular-biliary reconstructions, and lymph node dissection (LND). The aim of this present meta-analysis is to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic (LLR) versus open liver resection (OLR) for ICC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane library database of published studies comparing LLR and OLR up to October 2019. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and quality of the studies. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR), and continuous data were calculated by mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Four retrospective observational studies describing 204 patients met the inclusion criteria. With respect to surgical outcomes, laparoscopic compared with open liver resection was associated with lower blood loss [MD - 173.86, (95% CI - 254.82, -92.91) p < 0.0001], less requirement of blood transfusion [OR 0.34, (95% CI 0.14, 0.82) p = 0.02], less need for Pringle maneuver [OR 0.17, (95% CI 0.07, 0.43) p = 0.0002], shorter hospital stay [MD - 3.77, (95% CI - 5.09, - 2.44; p < 0.0001], and less morbidity [OR 0.44, (95% CI 0.21, 0.94) p = 0.03]. With respect to oncological outcomes, the LLR group was prone to lower rates of lymphadenectomy [OR 0.12, (95% CI 0.06, 0.25) p < 0.0001], but surgical margins R0 and recurrence rate were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic liver resection for ICC seems to achieve better surgical outcomes, providing short-term benefits without negatively affecting oncologic adequacy in terms of R0 resections and disease recurrence. However, a higher LND rate was observed in the open group. Due to the risk of bias and the statistical heterogeneity between the studies included in this review, further RCTs are needed to reach stronger scientific conclusions.

Not just minor resections: robotic approach for cystic echinococcosis of the liver.

INTRODUCTION: Human echinococcosis is among the 17 neglected tropical diseases recognized by the World Health Organization. It is responsible for over $3 billion of health costs every year being endemic in large areas worldwide, and liver is affected in 70% of the cases. Surgery associated to medical treatment is the gold standard and robotic approach may be a valuable tool to achieve safe, parenchyma sparing resections. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of patients that underwent robotic radical surgical treatment for hydatid liver disease, from prospectively maintained databases of three Italian centers. RESULTS: 15 patients were included in this study, median age 51 years (24-76). 1 right hepatectomy, 2 left lateral sectionectomies, 5 segmentectomies (including 1 caudatectomy), 3 wedge resections and 5 cyst-pericystectomies were performed. Median estimated blood loss was of 100 ml (50-550 ml), and median operative time including docking was 210 min (95-590 min), with no need for conversion to open. Median hospital stay was 4 days, with only one readmission for fever. Only one patient experienced recurrence in a different liver segment. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, robotic approach for cystic echinococcosis of the liver proved to be a safe and effective strategy also in the so-called "difficult segments", with short post-operative stay and quick return to daily activities, along with the absence of surgical site recurrences. To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest report of robotic approach to hydatid liver disease.

Laparoscopic versus robotic surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma: the first 46 consecutive cases.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma has a growing incidence worldwide, and represents a leading cause of death in patients with cirrhosis. Nowadays, minimally invasive approaches are spreading in every field of surgery and in liver surgery as well. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed demographics, clinical, and pathologic characteristics and short-term outcomes of patients who had undergone minimally invasive resections for hepatocellular carcinoma at our institution between June 2012 and May 2016. RESULTS: No significant differences in demographics and comorbidities were found between patients in the laparoscopic (n = 24) and robotic (n = 22) groups, except for the rates of cirrhotic patients (91.7% and 68.2%, respectively, P = 0.046). Perioperative data analysis showed that the operative time (mean, 211 and 318 min, respectively, P < 0.001) was the only parameter in favor of laparoscopy. Conversely, robotic-assisted resections were related to less Clavien I-II postoperative complications (22 cases versus 13 cases; P = 0.03). As regards resection margins, the two groups were similar with no statistically significant differences in rates of disease-free resection margins. CONCLUSIONS: A modern hepatobiliary center should offer both open and minimally invasive approaches to liver disease to provide the best care for each patient, according to the individual comorbidities, risk factors, and personal quality of life expectations. Our results show that the robotic approach is a reliable tool for accurate oncologic surgery, comparable to the laparoscopic approach. Robotic surgery also allows the surgeon to safely approach liver segments that are difficult to resect in laparoscopy, namely segments I-VII-VIII.

Current role and perspectives of living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review of the past 20 years.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) poses a significant global health challenge, and liver transplantation (LT) remains the best curative option. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) emerged as a potential solution to organ scarcity, reducing waitlist times. This comprehensive review explores LDLT practices, focusing on patient selection criteria and oncologic outcomes. A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines included 50 studies (2004-2023) with 8062 patients. Data encompassed baseline characteristics, HCC features, and oncologic outcomes. Further analysis categorized results by geography and publication year. Heterogeneity in patient demographics, tumor burden, and transplant characteristics was observed. Recent LDLT series demonstrated a shift towards refined selection criteria, increased neoadjuvant treatment, and improved oncologic outcomes. Geographic disparities revealed unique challenges in Eastern and Western practices. LDLT proves effective for HCC, addressing donor shortages. Evolving practices highlight the importance of refining inclusion criteria and optimizing tumor management. While geographic differences exist, LDLT, when judiciously applied, offers promising outcomes.

Robotic ALPPS for primary and metastatic liver tumours: short-term outcomes versus open approach.

Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) is one of the strategies available for patients initially unresectable. High risk of peri-operative morbidity and mortality limited its application and diffusion. We aimed to analyse short-term outcomes of robotic ALPPS versus open approach, to assess safety and reproducibility of this technique. A retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained databases at University of Modena and Reggio Emilia on patients that underwent ALPPS between January 2015 and September 2022 was conducted. The main aim of the study was to evaluate safety and feasibility of robotic approach, either full robotic or only first-stage robotic, compared to a control group of patients who underwent open ALPPS in the same Institution. 23 patients were included. Nine patients received a full open ALPPS (O-ALPPS), 7 received a full robotic ALPPS (R-ALPPS), and 7 underwent a robotic approach for stage 1, followed by an open approach for stage 2 (R + O-ALPPS). PHLF grade B-C after stage 1 was 0% in all groups, rising to 58% in the R + O-ALPPS group after stage 2 and remaining 0% in the R-ALPPS group. 86% of R-ALPPS cases were discharged from the hospital between stages 1 and 2, and median total in-hospital stay and ICU stay favoured full robotic approach as well. This contemporary study represents the largest series of robotic ALPPS, showing potential advantages from full robotic ALPPS over open approach, resulting in reduced hospital stay and complications and lower incidence of 90-day mortality.

Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly versus Younger Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

(1) Background: With ageing, the number of pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD) for benign or malignant disease is expected to increase in elderly patients. However, whether minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) should be performed in the elderly is not clear yet and it is still debated. (2) Materials and Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted including seven published articles comparing the technical and post-operative outcomes of MIPD in elderly versus younger patients up to December 2022. (3) Results: In total, 1378 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In term of overall and Clavien-Dindo I/II complication rates, post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade > A rates and biliary leakage, abdominal collection, post-operative bleeding and delayed gastric emptying rates, no differences emerged between the two groups. However, this study showed slightly higher intraoperative blood loss [MD 43.41, (95%CI 14.45, 72.38) p = 0.003], Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complication rates [OR 1.87, (95%CI 1.13, 3.11) p = 0.02] and mortality rates [OR 2.61, (95%CI 1.20, 5.68) p = 0.02] in the elderly compared with the younger group. Interestingly, as a minor endpoint, no differences in terms of the mean number of harvested lymphnode and of R0 resection rates were found. (4) Conclusion: MIPD seems to be relatively safe; however, there are slightly higher major morbidity, lung complication and mortality rates in elderly patients, who potentially represent the individuals that may benefit the most from the minimally invasive approach.

Robotic approach for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: from Bismuth 1 to vascular resection.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of minimally invasive surgical approaches for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) has been relatively slow compared to other indications. This is due to the complexity of the disease and the need of advanced skills for the reconstructive phase. The robot may contribute to close the gap between open and minimally invasive surgery in patients with Klastkin tumors. STUDY DESIGN: We report details of our experience with robotic approach in patients affected by pCCA. In particular selection criteria, ERAS management, technical tips and robotic setup are discussed. Finally, results from our cohort are reported. A video clip of a patient that underwent left hepatectomy with en-bloc caudatectomy and portal vein resection at the confluence with end-to-end reconstruction for a pCCA 3-b according to Bismuth-Corlette classification with full robotic approach is enclosed. RESULTS: Fourteen patients underwent robotic resection of pCCA over the three-year interval with a median follow-up interval of 18.7 months. The pre-operative Bismuth-Corlette classification was 1 for two patients (14.2%) and 2 for one patient (7.1%), 3-a for three (21.4%) patients, 3-b for four (28.6%) patients and 4 for four (28.6%) patients. Median estimated blood loss was 150 ml (range 50-800 ml) and median operative time was 490 min (range 390-750 min). The median length of hospital stay after the index operation was 6 days (range 3-91). Final histology revealed a median of 19 (range 11-40) lymph nodes retrieved, with 92.9% R0 resections. 90-days mortality was nihil and 3-year survival exceeds 50%. CONCLUSION: With adequate preparation, outcomes of robotic approach to pCCA can be safe and in line with the current international benchmark outcomes, as showed in this study, when performed in expert high volume centers for complex major hepatectomy and robotic HPB.

Liver transplantation for iatrogenic injuries secondary to cholecystectomy: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Iatrogenic injury to the liver hilum during cholecystectomy is a severe surgical complication, with liver transplantation (LT) as the final drastic solution. The authors report the experience of our center and conduct a review of the literature on the outcomes of LT performed in this setting. METHODS: Data sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from inception to 19 June 2022. Studies reporting on patients treated with LT for liver hilar injuries following cholecystectomy were included. Incidence, clinical outcomes, and survival data were synthesized through a narrative review. RESULTS: Twenty-seven articles were identified, including 213 patients. Eleven (40.7%) articles highlighted deaths within 90-days post-LT. Post-LT mortality was reported in 28 (13.1%) patients. Severe complications (≥Clavien III) occurred in at least 25.8% ( n =55) of patients. Within larger cohorts, 1-year overall survival (OS) was 76.5-84.3%, and 5-year OS was 67.2-83.0%. The authors also highlight our own experience managing 14 patients with liver hilar injury secondary to cholecystectomy, of which two required LT. CONCLUSION: While short-term morbidity and mortality is significant, available long-term data suggests reasonable OS in these patients following LT. Future studies are necessary to better understand the relationship between different types of liver hilar injury, transplant indication, and outcomes of LT in this setting.

Successful living donor liver transplantation from an HIV and HCV positive donor: report from the first case in the world.

HIV (human-immunodeficiency-virus) and HCV (hepatitis-C-virus) infections cause millions of deaths across the world every year. Since the introduction of effective therapies for HIV, in the middle of 1990s, and HCV, after 2013, those two untreatable infections became completely controlled. Donor safety is the main goal in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). An accurate predonation screening is mandatory for excluding risk factors related with any increase of donors' short-term and long-term morbidity. We present the first LDLT from a donor with both HIV and HCV previous infections. Donor and recipient did not experience any complication. Individuals with well controlled HIV/HCV infections and without any risk factors may be suitable for donation of a part of their healthy liver. Abstract video, http://links.lww.com/QAD/C833.

Laparoscopic Management of Blunt Pancreatic Trauma in Adults and Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review.

Background: Pancreatic trauma is an uncommon injury that occurs usually in a young population and is frequently overlooked and not readily appreciated on initial examination. Nowadays, the diagnosis and management of pancreatic trauma are still controversial, and there is no gold standard for the treatment. The aim of this study is to describe our experience in the management of blunt pancreatic trauma with a laparoscopic approach and review the literature on laparoscopic management of pancreatic trauma. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed, and 40 cases were reported and analysed; 10 cases were excluded because the complete data were not retrievable. We also reported our experience with the case of an 18-year-old male diagnosed with a deep laceration of the pancreas between body and tail, involving the main pancreatic duct, and with a concomitant hematoma. The patient underwent exploratory laparoscopy with abdominal toilet, necrosectomy, and suture of main pancreatic duct; the total blood loss was less than 200 ml, and the total operative time was 180 minutes. The patient recovered uneventfully and was discharged on the 6th postoperative day. Results: 30 patients with pancreatic trauma, 10 adults and 20 pediatrics (mean age 28.2 years and 10.5 years), underwent a total laparoscopic approach: 2 distal pancreatic-splenectomy, 22 spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, and 6 laparoscopic drainage. The mean operative time for the adult and pediatric populations was 160.6 and 214.5 minutes, the mean estimated blood loss was 400 ml and 75 ml, and the mean hospital stay was 14.9 and 9 days, respectively. Conclusion: Laparoscopic management for pancreatic trauma can be considered feasible and safe when performed by an experienced laparoscopic pancreatic team, and in such a setting, it can be considered a viable alternative to open surgery, offering the well-known benefits of minimally invasive surgery.

Safety and Efficacy of Robotic vs Open Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Importance: Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery remain a hotly debated topic in surgical oncology, but sparse data have been published thus far. Objective: To analyze short- and long-term outcomes of robotic liver resection (RLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from Western high-volume centers to assess the safety, reproducibility, and oncologic efficacy of this technique. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated the outcomes of patients receiving RLR vs open liver resection (OLR) for HCC between 2010 and 2020 in 5 high-volume centers. After 1:1 propensity score matching, a group of patients who underwent RLR was compared with a validation cohort of OLR patients from a high-volume center that did not perform RLR. Main Outcomes and Measures: A retrospective analysis was performed of prospectively maintained databases at 2 European and 2 US institutions of patients who underwent RLR for HCC between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2020. The main outcomes were safety and feasibility of RLR for HCC and its oncologic outcomes compared with a European OLR validation cohort. A 2-sided P < .05 was considered significant. Results: The study included 398 patients (RLR group: 125 men, 33 women, median [IQR] age, 66 [58-71] years; OLR group: 315 men, 83 women; median [IQR] age, 70 [64-74] years), and 106 RLR patients were compared with 106 OLR patients after propensity score matching. The RLR patients had a significantly longer operative time (median [IQR], 295 [190-370] minutes vs 200 [165-255] minutes, including docking; P < .001) but a significantly shorter hospital length of stay (median [IQR], 4 [3-6] days vs 10 [7-13] days; P < .001) and a lower number of admissions to the intensive care unit (7 [6.6%] vs 21 [19.8%]; P = .002). Incidence of posthepatectomy liver failure was significantly lower in the RLR group (8 [7.5%] vs 30 [28.3%]; P = .001), with no cases of grade C failure. The 90-day overall survival rate was comparable between the 2 groups (RLR, 99.1% [95% CI, 93.5%-99.9%]; OLR, 97.1% [95% CI, 91.3%-99.1%]), as was the cumulative incidence of death related to tumor recurrence (RLR, 8.8% [95% CI, 3.1%-18.3%]; OLR, 10.2% [95% CI, 4.9%-17.7%]). Conclusions and Relevance: This study represents the largest Western experience to date of full RLR for HCC. Compared with OLR, RLR performed in tertiary centers represents a safe treatment strategy for patients with HCC and those with compromised liver function while achieving oncologic efficacy.

Surgical Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Multicenter Competing-risk Analysis of Tumor-related Death Following Liver Resection and Transplantation Under an Intention-to-treat Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma could benefit from upfront liver resection (LR) or liver transplantation (LT), but the optimal strategy in terms of tumor-related outcomes is still debated. We compared the oncological outcomes of LR and LT for hepatocellular carcinoma, stratifying the study population into a low-, intermediate-, and high-risk class according to the risk of death at 5-y predicted by a previously developed prognostic model. The impact of tumor pathology on oncological outcomes of low- and intermediate-risk patients undergoing LR was investigated as a secondary outcome. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicentric cohort study involving 2640 patients consecutively treated by LR or LT from 4 tertiary hepatobiliary and transplant centers between 2005 and 2015, focusing on patients amenable to both treatments upfront. Tumor-related survival and overall survival were compared under an intention-to-treat perspective. RESULTS: We identified 468 LR and 579 LT candidates: 512 LT candidates underwent LT, whereas 68 (11.7%) dropped-out for tumor progression. Ninety-nine high-risk patients were selected from each treatment cohort after propensity score matching. Three and 5-y cumulative incidence of tumor-related death were 29.7% and 39.5% versus 17.2% and 18.3% for LR and LT group ( P = 0.039), respectively. Low-risk and intermediate-risk patients treated by LR and presenting satellite nodules and microvascular invasion had a significantly higher 5-y incidence of tumor-related death (29.2% versus 12.5%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: High-risk patients showed significantly better intention-to-treat tumor-related survival after upfront LT rather than LR. Cancer-specific survival of low- and intermediate-risk LR patients was significantly impaired by unfavorable pathology, suggesting the application of ab-initio salvage LT in such scenarios.

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: The largest meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been increasingly used in the treatment of gastric cancer (GC). Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has shown several advantages over open surgery in dealing with GC, although it is still considered a demanding procedure. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is now being employed with increased frequency worldwide and has been reported to overcome some limitations of conventional LG. The aim of this updated meta-analysis is to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of RG versus LG for gastric cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using the PubMed, MEDLINE and Cochrane library database of published studies comparing RG and LG up to March 2020. The evaluated end-points were intra-operative, post-operative and oncological outcomes. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR) and continuous data were calculated by mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and a random-effect model was always applied. RESULTS: Forty retrospective studies describing 17,712 patients met the inclusion criteria. With respect to surgical outcomes, robotic compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with higher operating time [MD 44.73, (95%CI 36.01, 53.45) p < 0.00001] and less intraoperative blood loss [MD -18.24, (95%CI -25.21, -11.26) p < 0.00001] and lower rate of surgical complication in terms of Dindo-Clavien ≥ 3 classification [OR 0.66, (95%CI 0.49, 0.88) p = 0.005]. With respect to oncological outcomes, the RG group showed a significantly increased mean number of retrieved lymph nodes [MD 1.84, (95%CI 0.84, 2.84) p = 0.0003], but mean proximal and distal resection margin distance and the recurrence rate were not significantly different between the two approaches. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to safety, technical feasibility and oncological adequacy, robotic and laparoscopic groups were comparable, although the robotic approach seems to achieve better short-term surgical outcomes. Moreover, a higher rate of retrieved lymph nodes was observed in the RG group.

Robotic Liver Resection Versus Percutaneous Ablation for Early HCC: Short- and Long-Term Results.

BACKGROUND: The correct approach for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is debatable, since multiple options are currently available. Percutaneous ablation (PA) is associated in some series to reduced morbidity compared to liver resection (LR); therefore, minimally invasive surgery may play a significant role in this setting. METHODS: All consecutive patients treated by robotic liver resection (RLR) or PA between January 2014 and October 2019 for a newly diagnosed single HCC, less than 3 cm in size (very early/early stages according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC)) on chronic liver disease or liver cirrhosis, were enrolled in this retrospective study. The aim of this study was to compare short- and long-term outcomes to define the best approach in this specific cohort. RESULTS: 60 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria: 24 RLR and 36 PA. The two populations were homogeneous in terms of baseline characteristics. There were no statistically significant differences regarding the incidence of postoperative morbidity (RLR 38% vs. PA 19%, p = 0.15). The cumulative incidence of recurrence (CIR) was significantly higher in patients who underwent PA, with the one, two, and three years of CIR being 42%, 69%, and 73% in the PA group and 17%, 27%, and 27% in the RLR group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RLR provides a significantly higher potential of cure and tumor-related free survival in cases of newly diagnosed single HCCs smaller than 3 cm. Therefore, it can be considered as a first-line approach for the treatment of patients with those characteristics in high-volume centers with extensive experience in the field of hepatobiliary surgery and minimally invasive approaches.

Case report: Acute hepatic failure secondary to metastatic LIVER'S infiltration by upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Acute liver failure (ALF) secondary to malignant infiltration of the liver from urothelial carcinoma is a very rare clinical condition and is often diagnosed only after death. Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is a rare, from 5% to 10% of all urothelial tumours, but possible cause of ALF when there is extensive liver metastatic involvement. We report the case of a patient who died in the intensive care unit (ICU) of our hospital from multiple organ failure (MOF) secondary to ALF, as a result of infiltration of the liver from UTUC diagnosed after surgery.PRESENTATION OF THE CASE: A 69-year-old Caucasian man was referred to our hospital for hematuria, melena, right upper quadrant (RUQ) pain and jaundice developed over the previous two weeks. After multidisciplinary discussion, he underwent emergency exploratory laparotomy to perform cholecystectomy because of suspected acute cholecystitis considered as a septic focus within the left kidney. He developed MOF and died on the 6th postoperative day. DISCUSSION: From the diagnosis of the renal mass and the death of the patient, a few days have passed, and the diagnosis of UTUC has been put only at histological examination.The most common sites of metastases from UTUC are lymph nodes, lungs, liver, bones and peritoneum. Moreover, liver metastases have been identified to have an independent negative impact on overall survival in a patient affected by UTUC. CONCLUSION: The authors suggest that this condition should be taken into account when dealing with patients with evidence of a renal mass and simultaneous ALF.