Trends and overall survival after combined liver resection and thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases: a nationwide population-based propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: In colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) patients, combination of liver resection and ablation permit a more parenchymal-sparing approach. This study assessed trends in use of combined resection and ablation, outcomes, and overall survival (OS). METHODS: This population-based study included all CRLM patients who underwent liver resection between 2014 and 2022. To assess OS, data was linked to two databases containing date of death for patients treated between 2014 and 2018. Hospital variation in the use of combined minor liver resection and ablation versus major liver resection alone in patients with 2-3 CRLM and ≤3 cm was assessed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to evaluate outcomes. RESULTS: This study included 3593 patients, of whom 1336 (37.2%) underwent combined resection and ablation. Combined resection increased from 31.7% in 2014 to 47.9% in 2022. Significant hospital variation (range 5.9-53.8%) was observed in the use of combined minor liver resection and ablation. PSM resulted in 1005 patients in each group. Major morbidity was not different (11.6% vs. 5%, P = 1.00). Liver failure occurred less often after combined resection and ablation (1.9% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.017). Five-year OS rates were not different (39.3% vs. 33.9%, P = 0.145). CONCLUSION: Combined resection and ablation should be available and considered as an alternative to resection alone in any patient with multiple metastases.

Hospital variation and outcomes after repeat hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases: a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 70% of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) experiences intrahepatic recurrence after initial liver resection. This study assessed outcomes and hospital variation in repeat liver resections (R-LR). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2022 in the Netherlands. Overall survival (OS) was collected for patients operated on between 2014 and 2018 by linkage to the insurance database. RESULTS: Data of 7479 liver resections (1391 (18.6%) repeat and 6088 (81.4%) primary) were analysed. Major morbidity and mortality were not different. Factors associated with major morbidity included ASA 3+, major liver resection, extrahepatic disease, and open surgery. Five-year OS after repeat versus primary liver resection was 42.3% versus 44.8%, P = 0.37. Factors associated with worse OS included largest CRLM >5 cm (aHR 1.58, 95% CI: 1.07-2.34, P = 0.023), >3 CRLM (aHR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.00-1.75, P = 0.046), extrahepatic disease (aHR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.25-2.04, P = 0.001), positive tumour margins (aHR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.09-1.85, P = 0.009). Significant hospital variation in performance of R-LR was observed, median 18.9% (8.2% to 33.3%). CONCLUSION: Significant hospital variation was observed in performance of R-LR in the Netherlands reflecting different treatment decisions upon recurrence. On a population-based level R-LR leads to satisfactory survival.

Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, and outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent minor liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2021. Factors associated with MILR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to compare outcomes between minor MILR and minor open liver resections. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan-Meier analysis on patients operated until 2018. RESULTS: Of 4,488 patients included, 1,695 (37.8%) underwent MILR. PSM resulted in 1,338 patients in each group. Implementation of MILR increased to 51.2% in 2021. Factors associated with not performing MILR included treatment with preoperative chemotherapy (aOR 0.61 CI:0.50-0.75, p < 0.001), treatment in a tertiary referral hospital (aOR 0.57 CI:0.50-0.67, p < 0.001), and larger diameter and number of CRLM. Significant hospital variation was observed in use of MILR (7.5% to 93.0%). After case-mix correction, six hospitals performed fewer, and six hospitals performed more MILRs than expected. In the PSM cohort, MILR was associated with a decrease in blood loss (aOR 0.99 CI:0.99-0.99, p < 0.01), cardiac complications (aOR 0.29, CI:0.10-0.70, p = 0.009), IC admissions (aOR 0.66, CI:0.50-0.89, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (aOR CI:0.94-0.99, p < 0.01). Five-year OS rates for MILR and OLR were 53.7% versus 48.6%, p = 0.21. CONCLUSION: Although uptake of MILR is increasing in the Netherlands, significant hospital variation remains. MILR benefits short-term outcomes, while overall survival is comparable to open liver surgery.

The diagnostic value of staging laparoscopy in gallbladder cancer: a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Disseminated disease (DD) is often found at (re-)exploration in gallbladder cancer (GBC) patients. We aimed to assess the yield of staging laparoscopy (SL) and identify predictors for DD. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients from all Dutch academic centres with primary GBC (pGBC) and incidentally diagnosed GBC (iGBC) planned for (re-)resection. The yield of SL was determined. In iGBC, predictive factors for DD were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 290 patients were included. Of 183 included pGBC patients, 143 underwent laparotomy without SL, and 42 (29%) showed DD perioperatively. SL, conducted in 40 patients, identified DD in eight. DD was found in nine of 32 patients who underwent laparotomy after SL. Of 107 included iGBC patients, 100 underwent laparotomy without SL, and 19 showed DD perioperatively. SL, conducted in seven patients, identified DD in one. Cholecystitis (OR = 4.25; 95% CI 1.51-11.91) and primary R1/R2 resection (OR = 3.94; 95% CI 1.39-11.19) were independent predictive factors for DD. CONCLUSIONS: In pGBC patients, SL may identify DD in up to 20% of patients and should be part of standard management. In iGBC patients, SL is indicated after primary resection for cholecystitis and after initial R1/R2 resection due to the association of these factors with DD.

Use and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery in the European E-MIPS registry.

BACKGROUND: The European registry for minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (E-MIPS) collects data on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS in low- and high-volume centers across Europe. METHODS: Analysis of the first year (2019) of the E-MIPS registry, including minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) and minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). Primary outcome was 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Overall, 959 patients from 54 centers in 15 countries were included, 558 patients underwent MIDP and 401 patients MIPD. Median volume of MIDP was 10 (7-20) and 9 (2-20) for MIPD. Median use of MIDP was 56.0% (IQR 39.0-77.3%) and median use of MIPD 27.7% (IQR 9.7-45.3%). MIDP was mostly performed laparoscopic (401/558, 71.9%) and MIPD mostly robotic (234/401, 58.3%). MIPD was performed in 50/54 (89.3%) centers, of which 15/50 (30.0%) performed ≥20 MIPD annually. This was 30/54 (55.6%) centers and 13/30 (43%) centers for MIPD respectively. Conversion rate was 10.9% for MIDP and 8.4% for MIPD. Overall 90 day mortality was 1.1% (n = 6) for MIDP and 3.7% (n = 15) for MIPD. CONCLUSION: Within the E-MIPS registry, MIDP is performed in about half of all patients, mostly using laparoscopy. MIPD is performed in about a quarter of patients, slightly more often using the robotic approach. A minority of centers met the Miami guideline volume criteria for MIPD.

Somatostatin analogues for the prevention of pancreatic fistula after open pancreatoduodenectomy: A nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Somatostatin analogues (SA) are currently used to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) development. However, its use is controversial. This study investigated the effect of different SA protocols on the incidence of POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy in a nationwide population. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective open pancreatoduodenectomy were included from the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2017). Patients were divided into six groups: no SA, octreotide, lanreotide, pasireotide, octreotide only in high-risk (HR) patients and lanreotide only in HR patients. Primary endpoint was POPF grade B/C. The updated alternative Fistula Risk Score was used to compare POPF rates across various risk scenarios. RESULTS: 1992 patients were included. Overall POPF rate was 13.1%. Lanreotide (10.0%), octreotide-HR (9.4%) and no protocol (12.7%) POPF rates were lower compared to the other protocols (varying from 15.1 to 19.1%, p = 0.001) in crude analysis. Sub-analysis in patients with HR of POPF showed a significantly lower rate of POPF when treated with lanreotide (10.0%) compared to no protocol, octreotide and pasireotide protocol (21.6-26.9%, p = 0.006). Octreotide-HR and lanreotide-HR protocol POPF rates were comparable to lanreotide protocol, however not significantly different from the other protocols. Multivariable regression analysis demonstrated lanreotide protocol to be positively associated with a low odds-ratio (OR) for POPF (OR 0.387, 95% CI 0.180-0.834, p = 0.015). In-hospital mortality rates were not affected. CONCLUSION: Use of lanreotide in all patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy has a potential protective effect on POPF development. Protocols for HR patients only might be favorable too. However, future studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

Performance with robotic surgery versus 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy during pancreatic and biliary anastomoses in a biotissue model: pooled analysis of two randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery may improve surgical performance during minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy but comparative studies are lacking. This study assessed the impact of robotic surgery versus 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy on surgical performance and operative time using a standardized biotissue model for pancreatico- and hepatico-jejunostomy using pooled data from two randomized controlled crossover trials (RCTs). METHODS: Pooled analysis of data from two RCTs with 60 participants (36 surgeons, 24 residents) from 11 countries (December 2017-July 2019) was conducted. Each included participant completed two pancreatico- and two hepatico-jejunostomies in biotissue using 3D-robotic surgery, 3D-laparoscopy, or 2D-laparoscopy. Primary outcomes were the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS: 12-60) rating, scored by observers blinded for 3D/2D and the operative time required to complete both anastomoses. Sensitivity analysis excluded participants with excess experience compared to others. RESULTS: A total of 220 anastomoses were completed (robotic 80, 3D-laparoscopy 70, 2D-laparoscopy 70). Participants in the robotic group had less surgical experience [median 1 (0-2) versus 6 years (4-12), p < 0.001], as compared to the laparoscopic group. Robotic surgery resulted in higher OSATS ratings (50, 43, 39 points, p = .021 and p < .001) and shorter operative time (56.5, 65.0, 81.5 min, p = .055 and p < .001), as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy, respectively, which remained in the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: In a pooled analysis of two RCTs in a biotissue model, robotic surgery resulted in better surgical performance scores and shorter operative time for biotissue pancreatic and biliary anastomoses, as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy.

Hospital variation and outcomes of simultaneous resection of primary colorectal tumour and liver metastases: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment sequence for patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remains uncertain. This study aimed to assess factors associated with the use of simultaneous resections and impact on hospital variation. METHOD: This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver surgery for synchronous colorectal liver metastases between 2014 and 2019 in the Netherlands. Factors associated with simultaneous resection were identified. Short-term surgical outcomes of simultaneous resections and factors associated with 30-day major morbidity were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 2146 patients included, 589 (27%) underwent simultaneous resection in 28 hospitals. Simultaneous resection was associated with age, sex, BMI, number, size and bilobar distribution of CRLM, and administration of preoperative chemotherapy. More minimally invasive and minor resections were performed in the simultaneous group. Hospital variation was present (range 2.4%-83.3%) with several hospitals performing simultaneous procedures more and less frequently than expected. Simultaneous resection resulted in 13% 30-day major morbidity, and 1% mortality. ASA classification ≥3 was independently associated with higher 30-day major morbidity after simultaneous resection (aOR 1.97, CI 1.10-3.42, p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Distinctive patient and tumour characteristics influence the choice for simultaneous resection. Remarkable hospital variation is present in the Netherlands.

Added value of 3D-vision during robotic pancreatoduodenectomy anastomoses in biotissue (LAEBOT 3D2D): a randomized controlled cross-over trial.

BACKGROUND: We tested the added value of 3D-vision on procedure time and surgical performance during robotic pancreatoduodenectomy anastomoses in biotissue. Robotic surgery has the advantage of articulating instruments and 3D-vision. Consensus is lacking on the added value of 3D-vision during laparoscopic surgery. Given the improved dexterity with robotic surgery, the added value of 3D-vision may be even less with robotic surgery. METHODS: In this experimental randomized controlled cross-over trial, 20 surgeons and surgical residents from 5 countries performed robotic pancreaticojejunostomy and hepaticojejunostomy anastomoses in a biotissue organ model using the da Vinci® system and were randomized to start with either 3D- or 2D-vision. Primary endpoint was the time required to complete both anastomoses. Secondary endpoint was the objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS; range 12-60) rating; scored by two observers blinded to 3D/2D. RESULTS: Robotic 3D-vision reduced the combined operative time from 78.1 to 57.3 min (24.6% reduction, p < 0.001; 20.8 min reduction, 95% confidence intervals 12.8-28.8 min). This reduction was consistent for both anastomoses and between surgeons and residents, p < 0.001. Robotic 3D-vision improved OSATS performance by 6.1 points (20.8% improvement, p = 0.003) compared to 2D (39.4 to 45.1 points, ± 5.5). CONCLUSION: 3D-vision has a considerable added value during robotic pancreatoduodenectomy anastomoses in biotissue in both time reduction and improved surgical performance as compared to 2D-vision.

Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic and open resection of benign liver tumours in the Netherlands: a nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Data on surgical outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) versus open liver resection (OLR) of benign liver tumour (BLT) are scarce. This study aimed to provide a nationwide overview of postoperative outcomes after LLR and OLR of BLT. METHODS: This was a nationwide retrospective study including all patients who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular adenoma, haemangioma and focal nodular hyperplasia in the Netherlands from 2014 to 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to compare 30-day overall and major morbidity and 30-day mortality after OLR and LLR. RESULTS: In total, 415 patients underwent BLT resection of whom 230 (55.4%) underwent LLR. PSM for OLR and LLR resulted in 250 matched patients. Median (IQR) length of stay was shorter after LLR than OLR (4 versus 6 days, 5.0-8.0, p < 0.001). Postoperative 30-day overall morbidity was lower after LLR than OLR (12.0% vs. 22.4%, p = 0.043). LLR was associated with reduced 30-day overall morbidity in multivariable analysis (aOR:0.46, CI:0.22-0.95, p = 0.043). Both 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality were not different. CONCLUSIONS: LLR for BLT is associated with shorter hospital stay and reduced overall morbidity and is preferred if technically feasible.

Short-term postoperative outcomes after liver resection in the elderly patient: a nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Liver resection is high-risk surgery in particular in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to explore postoperative outcomes after liver resection in elderly patients. METHODS: In this nationwide study, all patients who underwent liver resection for primary and secondary liver tumours in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2019 were included. Age groups were composed as younger than 70 (70-), between 70 and 80 (septuagenarians), and 80 years or older (octogenarians). Proportion of liver resections per age group and 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 6587 patients were included of whom 4023 (58.9%) were younger than 70, 2135 (32.4%) were septuagenarians and 429 (6.5%) were octogenarians. The proportion of septuagenarians increased during the study period (aOR:1.06, CI:1.02-1.09, p < 0.001). Thirty-day major morbidity was higher in septuagenarians (11%) and octogenarians (12%) compared to younger patients (9%, p = 0.049). Thirty-day mortality was higher in septuagenarians (4%) and octogenarians (4%) compared to younger patients (2%, p < 0.001). Cardiopulmonary complications occurred more frequently with higher age, liver-specific complications did not. Higher age was associated with higher 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality in multivariable logistic regression. CONCLUSION: Thirty-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality are higher after liver resection in elderly patients, attributed mainly to non-surgical cardiopulmonary complications.

Hospital variation in combined liver resection and thermal ablation for colorectal liver metastases and impact on short-term postoperative outcomes: a nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Combining resection and thermal ablation can improve short-term postoperative outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This study assessed nationwide hospital variation and short-term postoperative outcomes after combined resection and ablation. METHODS: In this population-based study, all CRLM patients who underwent resection in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2018 were included. After propensity score matching for age, ASA-score, Charlson-score, diameter of largest CRLM, number of CRLM and earlier resection, postoperative outcomes were compared. Postoperative complicated course (PCC) was defined as discharge after 14 days or a major complication or death within 30 days of surgery. RESULTS: Of 4639 included patients, 3697 (80%) underwent resection and 942 (20%) resection and ablation. Unadjusted percentage of patients who underwent resection and ablation per hospital ranged between 4 and 44%. Hospital variation persisted after case-mix correction. After matching, 734 patients remained in each group. Hospital stay (median 6 vs. 7 days, p = 0.011), PCC (11% vs. 14.7%, p = 0.043) and 30-day mortality (0.7% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.018) were lower in the resection and ablation group. Differences faded in multivariable logistic regression due to inclusion of major hepatectomy. CONCLUSION: Significant hospital variation was observed in the Netherlands. Short-term postoperative outcomes were better after combined resection and ablation, attributed to avoiding complications associated with major hepatectomy.

Factors associated with failure to rescue after liver resection and impact on hospital variation: a nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Failure to rescue (FTR) is defined as postoperative complications leading to mortality. This nationwide study aimed to assess factors associated with FTR and hospital variation in FTR after liver surgery. METHODS: All patients who underwent liver resection between 2014 and 2017 in the Netherlands were included. FTR was defined as in-hospital or 30-day mortality after complications Dindo grade ≥3a. Variables associated with FTR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 4961 patients included, 3707 (74.4%) underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases, 379 (7.6%) for other metastases, 526 (10.6%) for hepatocellular carcinoma and 349 (7.0%) for biliary cancer. Thirty-day major morbidity was 11.5%. Overall mortality was 2.3%. FTR was 19.1%. Age 65-80 (aOR: 2.86, CI:1.01-12.0, p = 0.049), ASA 3+ (aOR:2.59, CI: 1.66-4.02, p < 0.001), liver cirrhosis (aOR:4.15, CI:1.81-9.22, p < 0.001), biliary cancer (aOR:3.47, CI: 1.73-6.96, p < 0.001), and major resection (aOR:6.46, CI: 3.91-10.9, p < 0.001) were associated with FTR. Postoperative liver failure (aOR: 26.9, CI: 14.6-51.2, p < 0.001), cardiac (aOR: 2.62, CI: 1.27-5.29, p = 0.008) and thromboembolic complications (aOR: 2.49, CI: 1.16-5.22, p = 0.017) were associated with FTR. After case-mix correction, no hospital variation in FTR was observed. CONCLUSION: FTR is influenced by patient demographics, disease and procedural burden. Prevention of postoperative liver failure, cardiac and thromboembolic complications could decrease FTR.

Re-resection in Incidental Gallbladder Cancer: Survival and the Incidence of Residual Disease.

BACKGROUND: Re-resection for incidental gallbladder cancer (iGBC) is associated with improved survival but little is known about residual disease (RD) and prognostic factors. In this study, survival after re-resection, RD, and prognostic factors are analyzed. METHODS: Patients with iGBC were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, and pathology reports of re-resected patients were reviewed. Survival and prognostic factors were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 463 patients were included; 24% (n = 110) underwent re-resection after a median interval of 66 days. RD was present in 35% of patients and was most frequently found in the lymph nodes (23%). R0 resection was achieved in 93 patients (92%). Median overall survival (OS) of patients without re-resection was 13.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.6-15.6), compared with 52.6 months (95% CI 36.3-68.8) in re-resected patients (p < 0.001). After re-resection, median OS was superior in patients without RD versus patients with RD (not reached vs. 23.1 months; p < 0.001). In patients who underwent re-resection, RD in the liver (hazard ratio [HR] 5.54; p < 0.001) and lymph nodes (HR 2.35; p = 0.005) were the only significant prognostic factors in multivariable analysis. Predictive factors for the presence of RD were pT3 stage (HR 25.3; p = 0.003) and pN1 stage (HR 23.0; p = 0.022). CONCLUSION: Re-resection for iGBC is associated with improved survival but remains infrequently used and is often performed after the optimal timing interval. RD is the only significant prognostic factor for survival after re-resection and can be predicted by pT and pN stages.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): A Multicenter Patient-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This trial followed a structured nationwide training program in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP), according to the IDEAL framework for surgical innovation, and aimed to compare time to functional recovery after minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). BACKGROUND: MIDP is increasingly used and may enhance postoperative recovery as compared with ODP, but randomized studies are lacking. METHODS: A multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled superiority trial was performed in 14 centers between April 2015 and March 2017. Adult patients with left-sided pancreatic tumors confined to the pancreas without vascular involvement were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo MIDP or ODP. Patients were blinded for type of surgery using a large abdominal dressing. The primary endpoint was time to functional recovery. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5689). RESULTS: Time to functional recovery was 4 days [interquartile range (IQR) 3-6) in 51 patients after MIDP versus 6 days (IQR 5-8) in 57 patients after ODP (P < 0.001). The conversion rate of MIDP was 8%. Operative blood loss was less after MIDP (150 vs 400 mL; P < 0.001), whereas operative time was longer (217 vs 179 minutes; P = 0.005). The Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complication rate was 25% versus 38% (P = 0.21). Delayed gastric emptying grade B/C was seen less often after MIDP (6% vs 20%; P = 0.04). Postoperative pancreatic fistulas grade B/C were seen in 39% after MIDP versus 23% after ODP (P = 0.07), without difference in percutaneous catheter drainage (22% vs 20%; P = 0.77). Quality of life (day 3-30) was better after MIDP as compared with ODP, and overall costs were non-significantly less after MIDP. No 90-day mortality was seen after MIDP versus 2% (n = 1) after ODP. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with left-sided pancreatic tumors confined to the pancreas, MIDP reduces time to functional recovery compared with ODP. Although the overall rate of complications was not reduced, MIDP was associated with less delayed gastric emptying and better quality of life without increasing costs.

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with open or laparoscopic reconstruction during the learning curve: a multicenter propensity score matched study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with open reconstruction (LPD-OR) has been suggested to lower the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula reported after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with laparoscopic reconstruction (LPD). Propensity score matched studies are, lacking. METHODS: This is a multicenter prospective cohort study including patients from 7 Dutch centers between 2014-2018. Patients undergoing LPD-OR were matched LPD patients in a 1:1 ratio based on propensity scores. Main outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) grade B/C and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications. RESULTS: A total of 172 patients were included, involving the first procedure for all centers. All 56 patients after LPD-OR could be matched to a patient undergoing LPD. With LPD-OR, the unplanned conversion rate was 21% vs. 9% with LPD (P < 0.001). Median blood loss (300 vs. 400 mL, P = 0.85), operative time (401 vs. 378 min, P = 0.62) and hospital stay (10 vs. 12 days, P = 0.31) were comparable for LPD-OR vs. LPD, as were Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (38% vs. 52%, P = 0.13), POPF grade B/C (23% vs. 21%, P = 0.82), and 90-day mortality (4% vs. 4%, P > 0.99). CONCLUSION: In this propensity matched cohort performed early in the learning curve, no benefit was found for LPD-OR, as compared to LPD.

Implementation and outcome of minor and major minimally invasive liver surgery in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: While most of the evidence on minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is derived from expert centers, nationwide outcomes remain underreported. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation and outcome of MILS on a nationwide scale. METHODS: Electronic patient files were reviewed in all Dutch liver surgery centers and all patients undergoing MILS between 2011 and 2016 were selected. Operative outcomes were stratified based on extent of the resection and annual MILS volume. RESULTS: Overall, 6951 liver resections were included, with a median annual volume of 50 resections per center. The overall use of MILS was 13% (n = 916), which varied from 3% to 36% (P < 0.001) between centers. The nationwide use of MILS increased from 6% in 2011 to 23% in 2016 (P < 0.001). Outcomes of minor MILS were comparable with international studies (conversion 0-13%, mortality <1%). In centers which performed ≥20 MILS annually, major MILS was associated with less conversions (14 (11%) versus 41 (30%), P < 0.001), shorter operating time (184 (117-239) versus 200 (139-308) minutes, P = 0.010), and less overall complications (37 (30%) versus 58 (42%), P = 0.040). CONCLUSION: The nationwide use of MILS is increasing, although large variation remains between centers. Outcomes of major MILS are better in centers with higher volumes.

Multicenter Observational Study of Adhesion Formation After Open-and Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare adhesion formation after laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer resection. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: After colorectal surgery, most patients develop adhesions, with a high burden of complications. Laparoscopy seems to reduce adhesion formation, but evidence is poor. Trials comparing open- and laparoscopic colorectal surgery have never assessed adhesion formation. METHODS: Data on adhesions were gathered during resection of colorectal liver metastases. Incidence of adhesions adjacent to the original incision was compared between patients with previous laparoscopic- and open colorectal resection. Secondary outcomes were incidence of any adhesions, extent and severity of adhesions, and morbidity related to adhesions or adhesiolysis. RESULTS: Between March 2013 and December 2015, 151 patients were included. Ninety patients (59.6%) underwent open colorectal resection and 61 patients (40.4%) received laparoscopic colorectal resection. Adhesions to the incision were present in 78.9% after open and 37.7% after laparoscopic resection (P < 0.001). The incidence of abdominal wall adhesions and of any adhesion was significantly higher after open resection; the incidence of visceral adhesions did not significantly differ. The extent of abdominal wall and visceral adhesions and the median highest Zühlke score at the incision were significantly higher after open resection. There were no differences in incidence of small bowel obstruction during the interval between the colorectal and liver operations, the incidence of serious adverse events, and length of stay after liver surgery. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection is associated with a lower incidence, extent, and severity of adhesions to parietal surfaces. Laparoscopy does not reduce the incidence of visceral adhesions.

Radiofrequency ablation compared to surgical resection for curative treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases - a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic resection and ablative treatments, such as RFA are available treatment options for liver tumors. Advantages and disadvantages of these treatment options in patients with colorectal liver metastases need further evaluation. The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the role of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) compared to surgery in the curative treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: A systematic search was performed from MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for studies directly comparing RFA with resection for CRLM, after which variables were evaluated. RESULTS: RFA had significantly lower complication rates (OR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.26-0.75, P = 0.002) compared to resection. However, RFA showed a higher rate of any recurrence (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.15-2.40, P = 0.007), local recurrence (OR = 9.56, 95% CI = 6.85-13.35, P = 0.001), intrahepatic recurrence (OR = 1.96, 95% CI = 1.34-2.87, P = 0.001) and extrahepatic recurrence (OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.90-1.63, P = 0.22). Also, 5-year disease-free survival (OR = 2.20, 95% CI = 1.28-3.79, P = 0.005) and overall survival (OR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.49-3.69, P = 0.001) were significantly lower in patients treated with RFA. CONCLUSIONS: RFA showed a significantly lower rate of complications, but also a lower survival and a higher rate of recurrence as compared to surgical resection. All the included studies were subject to possible patient selection bias and therefore randomized clinical trials are needed to accurately evaluate these treatment modalities.

Single-incision and NOTES cholecystectomy, are there clinical or cosmetic advantages when compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A case-control study comparing single-incision, transvaginal, and conventional laparoscopic technique for cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical and cosmetic results of transvaginal hybrid cholecystectomy (TVC), single-port cholecystectomy (SPC), and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). Recently, single-incision laparoscopic surgery and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery have been developed as minimally invasive alternatives for CLC. Few comparative studies have been reported. METHODS: Female patients with symptomatic gallstone disease who were treated in 2011 with SPC, TVC, or CLC were entered into a database. Patients were matched for age, body mass index, and previous abdominal surgery. After the operation all patients received a survey with questions about recovery, cosmesis, and body image. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients, 30 in each group, were evaluated. Median operative time for CLC was significantly shorter (p < 0.001). There were no major complications. Length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, and postoperative complications were not significantly different. The results for cosmesis and body image after the transvaginal approach were significantly higher. None of the sexually active women observed postoperative dyspareunia. CONCLUSIONS: Both SPC and TVC are feasible procedures when performed in selected patients. CLC is a faster procedure, but other clinical outcomes and complication rates were similar. SPC, and especially TVC, offer a better cosmetic result. Randomized trials are needed to specify the role of SPC and TVC in the treatment of patients with symptomatic gallstone disease.