Severity Grading Systems for Intraoperative Adverse Events. A Systematic Review of the Literature and Citation Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The accurate assessment and grading of adverse events (AE) is essential to ensure comparisons between surgical procedures and outcomes. The current lack of a standardized severity grading system may limit our understanding of the true morbidity attributed to AEs in surgery. The aim of this study is to review the prevalence in which intraoperative adverse event (iAE) severity grading systems are used in the literature, evaluate the strengths and limitations of these systems, and appraise their applicability in clinical studies. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were queried to yield all clinical studies reporting the proposal and/or the validation of iAE severity grading systems. Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched separately to identify the articles citing the systems to grade iAEs identified in the first search. RESULTS: Our search yielded 2957 studies, with 7 studies considered for the qualitative synthesis. Five studies considered only surgical/interventional iAEs, while 2 considered both surgical/interventional and anesthesiologic iAEs. Two included studies validated the iAE severity grading system prospectively. A total of 357 citations were retrieved, with an overall self/nonself-citation ratio of 0.17 (53/304). The majority of citing articles were clinical studies (44.1%). The average number of citations per year was 6.7 citations for each classification/severity system, with only 2.05 citations/year for clinical studies. Of the 158 clinical studies citing the severity grading systems, only 90 (56.9%) used them to grade the iAEs. The appraisal of applicability (mean%/median%) was below the 70% threshold in 3 domains: stakeholder involvement (46/47), clarity of presentation (65/67), and applicability (57/56). CONCLUSION: Seven severity grading systems for iAEs have been published in the last decade. Despite the importance of collecting and grading the iAEs, these systems are poorly adopted, with only a few studies per year using them. A uniform globally implemented severity grading system is needed to produce comparable data across studies and develop strategies to decrease iAEs, further improving patient safety.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a multicenter propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: The role of laparoscopy in the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) remains unclear. This multicenter study examined the outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for ICC. METHODS: Patients with ICC who had undergone laparoscopic or open liver resection between 2012 and 2019 at four European expert centers were included in the study. Laparoscopic and open approaches were compared in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. Propensity score matching was used for minimizing treatment selection bias and adjusting for confounders (age, ASA grade, tumor size, location, number of tumors and underlying liver disease). RESULTS: Of 136 patients, 50 (36.7%) underwent laparoscopic resection, whereas 86 (63.3%) had open surgery. Median tumor size was larger (73.6 vs 55.1 mm, p = 0.01) and the incidence of bi-lobar tumors was higher (36.6 vs 6%, p < 0.01) in patients undergoing open surgery. After propensity score matching baseline characteristics were comparable although open surgery was associated with a larger fraction of major liver resections (74 vs 38%, p < 0.01), lymphadenectomy (60 vs 20%, p < 0.01) and longer operative time (294 vs 209 min, p < 0.01). Tumor characteristics were similar. Laparoscopic resection resulted in less complications (30 vs 52%, p = 0.025), fewer reoperations (4 vs 16%, p = 0.046) and shorter hospital stay (5 vs 8 days, p < 0.01). No differences were found in terms of recurrence, recurrence-free and overall survival. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resection seems to be associated with improved short-term and with similar long-term outcomes compared with open surgery in patients with ICC. However, possible selection criteria for laparoscopic surgery are yet to be defined.

Re-interpreting mesenteric vascular anatomy on 3D virtual and/or physical models, part II: anatomy of relevance to surgeons operating splenic flexure cancer.

BACKGROUND: The splenic flexure is irrigated from two vascular areas, both from the middle colic and the left colic artery. The challenge for the surgeon is to connect these two vascular areas in an oncological safe procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The vascular anatomy, manually 3D reconstructed from 32 preoperative high-resolution CT datasets using Osirix MD, Mimics Medical and 3-matic Medical Datasets, were exported as STL-files, video clips, stills and supplemented with 3D printed models. RESULTS: Our first major finding was the difference in level between the middle colic and the inferior mesenteric artery origins. We have named this relationship a mesenteric inter-arterial stair. The middle colic artery origin could be found cranial (median 3.38 cm) or caudal (median 0.58 cm) to the inferior mesenteric artery. The lateral distance between the two origins was 2.63 cm (median), and the straight distance 4.23 cm (median). The second finding was the different trajectories and confluence pattern of the inferior mesenteric vein. This vein ended in the superior mesenteric/jejunal vein (21 patients) or in the splenic vein (11 patients). The inferior mesenteric vein confluence could be infrapancreatic (17 patients), infrapancreatic with retropancreatic arch (7 patients) or retropancreatic (8 patients). Lastly, the accessory middle colic artery was present in ten patients presenting another pathway for lymphatic dissemination. CONCLUSION: The IMV trajectory when accessible, is the solution to the mesenteric inter-arterial stair. The surgeon could safely follow the IMV to its confluence. When the IMV trajectory is not accessible, the surgeon could follow the caudal border of the pancreas.

Re-interpreting mesenteric vascular anatomy on 3D virtual and/or physical models: positioning the middle colic artery bifurcation and its relevance to surgeons operating colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the position of the middle colic artery (MCA) bifurcation and the trajectory of the accessory MCA (aMCA) on adequate lymphadenectomy when operating colon cancer have as of yet not been described and/or analysed in the literature. The aim of this study was to determine the MCA bifurcation position to anatomical landmarks and to assess the trajectory of aMCA. METHODS: The colonic vascular anatomy was manually reconstructed in 3D from high-resolution CT datasets using Osirix MD and 3-matic Medical and analysed. CT datasets were exported as STL files and supplemented with 3D printed models when required. RESULTS: Thirty-two datasets were analysed. The MCA bifurcation was left to the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) in 4 (12.1%), in front of SMV in 17 (53.1%) and right to SMV in 11 (34.4%) models. Median distances from the MCA origin to bifurcation were 3.21 (1.18-15.60) cm. A longer MCA bifurcated over or right to SMV, while a shorter bifurcated left to SMV (r = 0.457, p = 0.009). The main MCA direction was towards right in 19 (59.4%) models. When initial directions included left, the bifurcation occurred left to or anterior to SMV in all models. When the initial directions included right, the bifurcation occurred anterior or right to SMV in all models. The aMCA was found in 10 (31.3%) models, following the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) in 5 near the lower pancreatic border. The IMV confluence was into SMV in 18 (56.3%), splenic vein in 11 (34.4%) and jejunal vein in 3 (9.4%) models. CONCLUSION: Awareness of the wide range of MCA bifurcation positions reported is crucial for the quality of lymphadenectomy performed. The aMCA occurs in 31.3% models and its trajectory is in proximity to the lower pancreatic border in one half of models, indicating that it needs to be considered when operating splenic flexure cancer.

Evolution of laparoscopic liver surgery: 20-year experience of a Norwegian high-volume referral center.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver surgery has evolved to become a standard surgical approach in many specialized centers worldwide. In this study we present the evolution of laparoscopic liver surgery at a single high-volume referral center since its introduction in 1998. METHODS: Patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) between August 1998 and December 2018 at the Oslo University Hospital were analyzed. Perioperative outcomes were compared between three time periods: early (1998 to 2004), middle (2005 to 2012) and recent (2013-2018). RESULTS: Up to December 2020, 1533 LLRs have been performed. A total of 1232 procedures were examined (early period, n = 62; middle period, n = 367 and recent period, n = 803). Colorectal liver metastasis was the main indication for surgery (68%). The rates of conversion to laparotomy and hand-assisted laparoscopy were 3.2% and 1.4%. The median operative time and blood loss were 130 min [interquartile range (IQR), 85-190] and 220 ml (IQR, 50-600), respectively. The total postoperative complications rate was 20.3% and the 30-day mortality was 0.3%. The median postoperative stay was two (IQR, 2-4) days. When comparing perioperative outcomes between the three time periods, shorter operation time (median, from 182 to 120 min, p < 0.001), less blood loss (median, from 550 to 200 ml, p = 0.023), decreased rate of conversions to laparotomy (from 8 to 3%) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (median, from 3 to 2 days, p < 0.001) was observed in the later periods, while the number of more complex liver resections had increased. CONCLUSION: During the last two decades, the indications, the number of patients and the complexity of laparoscopic liver procedures have expanded significantly. Initially being an experimental approach, laparoscopic liver surgery is now safely implemented across our unit and has become the method of choice for surgical treatment of most liver tumors.

Long-term oncological outcomes after laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing redo liver resections for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a European multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic redo resections for colorectal metastases are poorly investigated. This study aims to explore long-term results after second, third, and fourth resections. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospectively updated databases of primary and redo laparoscopic liver resections in six European HPB centers were analyzed. Procedure-related overall survival after first, second, third, and fourth resections were evaluated. Furthermore, patients without liver recurrence after first liver resection were compared to those with one redo, two or three redo, and patients with palliative treatment for liver recurrence after first laparoscopic liver surgery. Survival was calculated both from the date of the first liver resection and from the date of the actual liver resection. In total, 837 laparoscopic primary and redo liver resections performed in 762 patients were included (630 primary, 172 first redo, 29 second redo, and 6 third redo). Patients were bunched into four groups: Group 1-without hepatic recurrence after primary liver resection (n = 441); Group 2-with liver recurrence who underwent only one laparoscopic redo resection (n = 154); Group 3-with liver recurrence who underwent two laparoscopic redo resections (n = 29); Group 4-with liver recurrence who have not been found suitable for redo resections (n = 138). RESULTS: No significant difference has been found between the groups in terms of baseline characteristics and surgical outcomes. Rate of positive resection margin was higher in the group with palliative recurrence (group 4). Five-year survival calculated from the first liver resection was 67%, 62%, 84%, and 7% for group 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Procedure-specific 5-year overall survival was 50% after primary laparoscopic liver resection, 52% after the 1st reoperation, 52% after the 2nd, and 40% after the 3rd reoperation made laparoscopic. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple redo recurrences can be performed laparoscopically with good long-term results. Liver recurrence does not aggravate prognosis as long as the patient is suitable for reoperation.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for locally advanced and metastatic gastric cancer complicated with bleeding and/or stenosis: short- and long-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery has justified its efficacy in the treatment of early gastric cancer. There are limited data indicating the eligibility of laparoscopic interventions in locally advanced gastric cancer. Publications describing the safety of laparoscopic techniques in the treatment of local and metastatic gastric cancer complicated by bleeding and stenosis are scarce. METHODS: The study included patients with histologically confirmed locally advanced and disseminated gastric cancer and complicated with bleeding and/or stenosis who underwent gastrectomy with vital indications between February 2012 and August 2018. Surgical and oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic surgery (laparoscopic surgery) and open surgery (OS) were compared. RESULTS: In total, 127 patients (LS, n = 52; OS, n = 75) were analyzed. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Forty-four total gastrectomies with resection of the abdominal part of the esophagus, 63 distal subtotal (43 Billroth-I and 20 Billroth-II), and 19 proximal gastrectomies were performed. The median duration of surgery was significantly longer in the LS group, 253 min (interquartile range [IQR], 200-295) versus 210 min (IQR, 165-220) (p < 0.001), while median intraoperative blood loss in the LS group was significantly less, 180 ml (IQR, 146-214) versus 320 ml (IQR, 290-350), (p < 0.001). Early postoperative complications occurred in 35% in the LS group and in 45 % of patients in the OS group (p = 0.227). There was no difference in postoperative mortality rates between the groups (3 [6 %] versus 5 (7 %), p = 1.00). Median intensive care unit stay and median postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter after laparoscopy, 2 (IQR, 1-2) versus 4 (IQR, 3-4) days, and 8 (IQR, 7-9) versus 10 (IQR, 8-12) days, both p < 0.001. After laparoscopy, patients started adjuvant chemotherapy significantly earlier than those after open surgery, 20 vs. 28 days (p < 0.001). However, overall survival rates were similar between the group. Three-year overall survival was 24% in the LS group and 27% in the OS groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the technical complexity, in patients with complicated locally advanced and metastatic gastric cancer, laparoscopic gastrectomies were associated with longer operation time, reduced intraoperative blood loss, shorter reconvalescence, and similar morbidity, mortality rates and long-term oncologic outcomes compared to conventional open surgery.

Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes After Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases : A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the recent worldwide dissemination of laparoscopic liver surgery, no high-level evidence supports the oncologic safety of this approach. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic versus open liver resection in patients with colorectal metastases. DESIGN: A single-center, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial (OSLO-COMET [Oslo Randomized Laparoscopic Versus Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases Trial]). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01516710). SETTING: Oslo University Hospital, the only provider of liver surgery for the 3 million inhabitants of southeastern Norway. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases were randomly assigned to have open or laparoscopic liver resection. INTERVENTION: From February 2012 to January 2016, a total of 280 patients were included in the trial (laparoscopic surgery: n = 133; open surgery: n = 147). MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was postoperative morbidity within 30 days. Five-year rates of overall and recurrence-free survival were predefined secondary end points. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 70 months, rates of 5-year overall survival were 54% in the laparoscopic group and 55% in the open group (between-group difference, 0.5 percentage point [95% CI, -11.3 to 12.3 percentage points]; hazard ratio, 0.93 [CI, 0.67 to 1.30]; P = 0.67). Rates of 5-year recurrence-free survival were 30% in the laparoscopic group and 36% in the open group (between-group difference, 6.0 percentage points [CI, -6.7 to 18.7 percentage points]; hazard ratio, 1.09 [CI, 0.80 to 1.49]; P = 0.57). LIMITATION: The trial was not powered to detect differences in secondary end points and was not designed to address a noninferiority hypothesis for survival outcomes. CONCLUSION: In this randomized trial of laparoscopic and open liver surgery, no difference in survival outcomes was found between the treatment groups. However, differences in 5-year overall survival up to about 10 percentage points in either direction cannot be excluded. This trial should be followed by pragmatic multicenter trials and international registries. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority.

Does tumor size influence the outcome of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is a safe procedure, but its role in resection of large pancreatic lesions has been questioned. METHODS: Patients who underwent LDP for pancreatic solitary tumors in 1997-2017 were included in this study. The patients were divided into three groups in accordance with tumor size: <3.5 cm (group I); from 3.5 cm to 7.0 cm (group II), and ≥7 cm (group III). RESULTS: 218, 146 and 58 patients were identified in the groups I, II and III. Median tumor size in the groups I, II and III was 20, 47 and 81.5 mm (p < 0.001). Nine procedures (2.1%) were converted including 1(0.5%), 5(3.4%) and 3(5.2%) in the groups I, II and III (p = 0.036). Median operative time was longer in the group III compared with the groups I and II - 195 vs 158 and 159 min (p = 0.005). Median blood loss did not differ. Regression analysis revealed correlation between tumor size and operative time (R = 0.103; P = 0.035) and no correlation between tumor size and blood loss (R = 0.075; P = 0.125). Hospital stay was 5 days, similar in all groups.Postoperative morbidity was similar - 38.5, 32 and 34% in the group I, II and III. CONCLUSION: LDP can be safely performed laparoscopically with outcomes similar to those for smaller tumors.

Can we ablate liver lesions close to large portal and hepatic veins with MR-guided HIFU? An experimental study in a porcine model.

OBJECTIVES: Invasive treatment of tumors adjacent to large hepatic vessels is a continuous clinical challenge. The primary aim of this study was to examine the feasibility of ablating liver tissue adjacent to large hepatic and portal veins with magnetic resonance imaging-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU). The secondary aim was to compare sonication data for ablations performed adjacent to hepatic veins (HV) versus portal veins (PV). MATERIALS AND METHODS: MRgHIFU ablations were performed in six male land swine under general anesthesia. Ablation cells of either 4 or 8 mm diameter were planned in clusters (two/animal) adjacent either to HV (n = 6) or to PV (n = 6), with diameter ≥ 5 mm. Ablations were made using 200 W and 1.2 MHz. Post-procedure evaluation was made on contrast-enhanced MRI (T1w CE-MRI), histopathology, and ablation data from the HIFU system. RESULTS: A total of 153 ablations in 81 cells and 12 clusters were performed. There were visible lesions with non-perfused volumes in all animals on T1w CE-MRI images. Histopathology showed hemorrhage and necrosis in all 12 clusters, with a median shortest distance to vessel wall of 0.4 mm (range 0-2.7 mm). Edema and endothelial swelling were observed without vessel wall rupture. In 8-mm ablations (n = 125), heat sink was detected more often for HV (43%) than for PV (19%; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Ablations yielding coagulative necrosis of liver tissue can be performed adjacent to large hepatic vessels while keeping the vessel walls intact. This indicates that perivascular tumor ablation in the liver is feasible using MRgHIFU. KEY POINTS: • High-intensity focused ultrasound ablation is a non-invasive treatment modality that can be used for treatment of liver tumors. • This study shows that ablations of liver tissue can be performed adjacent to large hepatic vessels in an experimental setting. • Liver tumors close to large vessels can potentially be treated using this modality.

Implementation of 3D printed superior mesenteric vascular models for surgical planning and/or navigation in right colectomy with extended D3 mesenterectomy: comparison of virtual and physical models to the anatomy found at surgery.

BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has recently been well approved as an emerging technology in various fields of medical education and practice; e.g., there are numerous studies evaluating 3D printouts of solid organs. Complex surgery such as extended mesenterectomy imposes a need to analyze also the accuracy of 3D printouts of more mobile and complex structures like the diversity of vascular arborization within the central mesentery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the linear dimensional anatomy landmark differences of the superior mesenteric artery and vein between (1) 3D virtual models, (2) 3D printouts, and (3) peroperative measurements. METHODS: The study included 22 patients from the ongoing prospective multicenter trial "Safe Radical D3 Right Hemicolectomy for Cancer through Preoperative Biphasic MDCT Angiography," with preoperative CT and peroperative measurements. The patients were operated in Norway between January 2016 and 2017. Their CT datasets underwent 3D volume rendering and segmentation, and the virtual 3D model produced was then exported for stereolithography 3D printing. RESULTS: Four parameters were measured: distance between the origins of the ileocolic and the middle colic artery, distance between the termination of the gastrocolic trunk and the ileocolic vein, and the calibers of the middle colic and ileocolic arteries. The inter-arterial distance has proven a strong correlation between all the three modalities implied (Pearson's coefficient 0.968, 0.956, 0.779, respectively), while inter-venous distances showed a weak correlation between peroperative measurements and both virtual and physical models. CONCLUSION: This study showed acceptable dimensional inter-arterial correlations between 3D printed models, 3D virtual models and authentic soft tissue anatomy of the central mesenteric vessels, and weaker inter-venous correlations between all the models, reflecting the highly variable nature of veins in situ.

Laparoscopic liver resection for non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine metastases: perioperative and oncologic outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Liver resection is a treatment of choice for colorectal and neuroendocrine liver metastases, and laparoscopy is an accepted approach for surgical treatment of these patients. The role of liver resection for patients with non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases (NCNNLM), however, is still disputable. Outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for this group of patients have not been analyzed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection for NCNNLM at Oslo University Hospital between April 2000 and January 2018 were analyzed. Perioperative and oncologic data of these patients were examined. Postoperative morbidity was classified using the Accordion classification. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. Median follow-up was 26 (IQR, 12-41) months. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were identified from a prospectively collected database. The histology of primary tumors was classified as adenocarcinoma (n = 16), sarcoma (n = 4), squamous cell carcinoma (n = 4), melanoma (n = 16), gastrointestinal stromal tumor (n = 9), and adrenocortical carcinoma (n = 2). The median operative time was 147 (IQR, 95-225) min, while the median blood loss was 200 (IQR, 50-500) ml. Nine (18%) patients experienced postoperative complications. There was no 90-day mortality in this study. Thirty-five (68%) patients developed disease recurrence or progression. Seven (14%) patients underwent repeat surgical procedure for recurrent liver metastases. One-, three-, and five-year overall survival rates were 85%, 52%, and 38%, respectively. The median overall survival was 37 (95%CI, 25 to 49) months. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic liver resection for NCNNLM results in good outcomes and should be considered in patients selected for surgical treatment.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection in the posterosuperior segments: a sub-group analysis from the OSLO-COMET randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection in the posterosuperior segments is technically challenging. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes for laparoscopic and open resection of colorectal liver metastases located in the posterosuperior segments. METHODS: This was a subgroup analysis of the OSLO-COMET randomized controlled trial, where 280 patients were randomly assigned to open or laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resections of colorectal metastases. Patients with tumors in the posterosuperior segments were identified, and perioperative outcomes and health related quality of life (HRQoL) were compared. RESULTS: We identified a total of 136 patients, 62 in the laparoscopic and 74 in the open group. The postoperative complication rate was 26% in the laparoscopic and 31% in the open group. The blood loss was less in the open group (500 vs. 250 ml, P = 0.006), but the perioperative transfusion rate was similar. The operative time was similar, while postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (2 vs. 4 days, P < 0.001). HRQoL was significantly better after laparoscopy at 1 month. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing laparoscopic or open liver resection of colorectal liver metastases in the posterosuperior segments, laparoscopic surgery was associated with shorter hospital stay and comparable perioperative outcomes.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: The OSLO-COMET Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To perform the first randomized controlled trial to compare laparoscopic and open liver resection. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly used for the surgical treatment of liver tumors. However, high-level evidence to conclude that laparoscopic liver resection is superior to open liver resection is lacking. METHODS: Explanatory, assessor-blinded, single center, randomized superiority trial recruiting patients from Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway from February 2012 to January 2016. A total of 280 patients with resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to undergo laparoscopic (n = 133) or open (n = 147) parenchyma-sparing liver resection. The primary outcome was postoperative complications within 30 days (Accordion grade 2 or higher). Secondary outcomes included cost-effectiveness, postoperative hospital stay, blood loss, operation time, and resection margins. RESULTS: The postoperative complication rate was 19% in the laparoscopic-surgery group and 31% in the open-surgery group (12 percentage points difference [95% confidence interval 1.67-21.8; P = 0.021]). The postoperative hospital stay was shorter for laparoscopic surgery (53 vs 96 hours, P < 0.001), whereas there were no differences in blood loss, operation time, and resection margins. Mortality at 90 days did not differ significantly from the laparoscopic group (0 patients) to the open group (1 patient). In a 4-month perspective, the costs were equal, whereas patients in the laparoscopic-surgery group gained 0.011 quality-adjusted life years compared to patients in the open-surgery group (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing parenchyma-sparing liver resection for colorectal metastases, laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly less postoperative complications compared to open surgery. Laparoscopic resection was cost-effective compared to open resection with a 67% probability. The rate of free resection margins was the same in both groups. Our results support the continued implementation of laparoscopic liver resection.

Laparoscopic liver resection for metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Stage IV metastatic melanoma carries a poor prognosis. In the case of melanoma liver metastasis (MLM), surgical resection may improve survival and represents a therapeutic option, with varying levels of success. Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for metastatic melanoma is poorly studied. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of LLR in patients with MLM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between April 2000 and August 2013, 11 (1 cutaneous, 9 ocular and 1 unknown primary) patients underwent LLR for MLM at Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet and 13 procedures in total were carried out. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. Postoperative morbidity was classified using the Accordion classification. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. RESULTS: A total of 23 liver specimens were resected. The median operative time was 137 (65-470) min, while the median blood loss was less than 50 (<50-900) ml. No intraoperative unfavorable incidents and 30-day mortality occurred. Median follow-up was 33 (9-92) months. Ten patients (91%) developed recurrence within a median of 5 months (2-18 months) and two patients underwent repeat LLR for recurrent liver metastases. One-, three-, and five-year overall survival rates were 82, 45 and 9%, respectively. The median overall survival was 30 (9-92) months. CONCLUSION: Perioperative morbidity and long-term survival after LLR for MLM seems to be comparable to open liver resection. Thus, LLR may be preferred over open liver resection due to the well-known advantages of laparoscopy, such as reduced pain and improved possibility for repeated resections.

Extended laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma in the body and tail of the pancreas: a single-center experience.

PURPOSE: Extended resection is required for pancreatic adenocarcinoma infiltrating adjacent organs and structures. The role of laparoscopy in this setting is unclear. In this study, the outcomes of extended laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (ELDP) for pancreatic body/tail adenocarcinoma were examined. METHODS: Perioperative and oncologic data were analyzed in patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for adenocarcinoma at Oslo University Hospital. ELDP was defined as suggested by the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery. The outcomes of ELDP were compared to those following standard LDP (SLDP). RESULTS: From August 2001 to June 2016, 460 consecutive patients underwent LDP for pancreatic neoplasms including 116 (25%) adenocarcinoma. SLDP and ELDP were applied in 78 and 31 patients, respectively. The adrenal gland (33%) and colon (21%) were the most frequently resected organs during ELDP. The latter was associated with larger tumor size (5.5 vs 4 cm, p = 0.03), longer operative time (236 vs 158 min, p = 0.001) and higher conversion rate (16 vs 3%, p = 0.019) compared with SLDP. Morbidity and 90-day mortality were similar. Median follow-up was 18 months. In patients with ductal adenocarcinoma, ELDP (n = 22) was associated with significantly shorter recurrence-free and overall survival than SLDP (n = 59) (6.2 vs 9.6 months, p = 0.047 and 12.9 vs 27 months, p < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: Although technically challenging, ELDP is feasible in patients with adenocarcinoma providing acceptable surgical outcomes. ELDP for ductal adenocarcinoma is associated with worse prognosis than SLDP, while its potential benefits over palliative care deserve further scrutiny.

Can standardized pathology examination increase the lymph node yield following laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma?

BACKGROUND: Lymph node yield (LNY) is an indicator of oncological adequacy of surgery in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Our hypothesis is that standardized pathology examination (SPE) aimed at accurate staging can increase the LNY without changing surgical technique. METHODS: After the introduction of SPE for distal pancreatosplenectomy specimens at Oslo University Hospital, prospective data were collected on patients with PDAC undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatosplenectomy (LDP). Their data were compared with retrospective data from specimens examined in a non-standardized way (NSPE). RESULTS: SPE and NSPE were applied to 20 and 33 specimens, respectively. SPE was associated with a higher LNY and a higher median number of positive lymph nodes (PLN) in the specimen (18 vs 7, P = 0.001 and 4 vs 1, P = 0.005, respectively). In the stepwise regression model, SPE and younger age resulted in an increased LNY. In the logistic regression model, increased LNY and larger tumor size positively correlated with the presence of PLN. CONCLUSION: SPE of distal pancreatosplenectomy specimens is associated with higher LNY in patients with PDAC, which increases the likelihood of detecting PLN and reduces the risk of understaging. These findings also indicate that the LDP technique provides an adequate LNY in patients with PDAC.