Propensity Score-Matching Analysis Comparing Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Limited Liver Resections of the Posterosuperior Segments: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic limited liver resections (RLLR) versus laparoscopic limited liver resections (LLLR) of the posterosuperior segments. BACKGROUND: Both laparoscopic and robotic liver resections have been used for tumors in the posterosuperior liver segments. However, the comparative performance and safety of both approaches have not been well examined in the existing literature. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 5446 patients who underwent RLLR or LLLR of the posterosuperior segments (I, IVa, VII, and VIII) at 60 international centers between 2008 and 2021. Data on baseline demographics, center experience and volume, tumor features, and perioperative characteristics were collected and analyzed. Propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis (in both 1:1 and 1:2 ratios) was performed to minimize selection bias. RESULTS: A total of 3510 cases met the study criteria, of whom 3049 underwent LLLR (87%), and 461 underwent RLLR (13%). After PSM (1:1: and 1:2), RLLR was associated with a lower open conversion rate [10 of 449 (2.2%) vs 54 of 898 (6.0%); P =0.002], less blood loss [100 mL [IQR: 50-200) days vs 150 mL (IQR: 50-350); P <0.001] and a shorter operative time (188 min (IQR: 140-270) vs 222 min (IQR: 158-300); P <0.001]. These improved perioperative outcomes associated with RLLR were similarly seen in a subset analysis of patients with cirrhosis-lower open conversion rate [1 of 136 (0.7%) vs 17 of 272 (6.2%); P =0.009], less blood loss [100 mL (IQR: 48-200) vs 160 mL (IQR: 50-400); P <0.001], and shorter operative time [190 min (IQR: 141-258) vs 230 min (IQR: 160-312); P =0.003]. Postoperative outcomes in terms of readmission, morbidity and mortality were similar between RLLR and LLLR in both the overall PSM cohort and cirrhosis patient subset. CONCLUSIONS: RLLR for the posterosuperior segments was associated with superior perioperative outcomes in terms of decreased operative time, blood loss, and open conversion rate when compared with LLLR.

Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy/H67: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to establish global benchmark outcomes indicators for L-RPS/H67. BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive liver resections has seen an increase in uptake in recent years. Over time, challenging procedures as laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomies (L-RPS)/H67 are also increasingly adopted. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 854 patients undergoing minimally invasive RPS (MI-RPS) in 57 international centers in 4 continents between 2015 and 2021. There were 651 pure L-RPS and 160 robotic RPS (R-RPS). Sixteen outcome indicators of low-risk L-RPS cases were selected to establish benchmark cutoffs. The 75th percentile of individual center medians for a given outcome indicator was set as the benchmark cutoff. RESULTS: There were 573 L-RPS/H67 performed in 43 expert centers, of which 254 L-RPS/H67 (44.3%) cases qualified as low risk benchmark cases. The benchmark outcomes established for operation time, open conversion rate, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity, 90-day mortality and textbook outcome after L-RPS were 350.8 minutes, 12.5%, 53.8%, 22.9%, 23.8%, 2.8%, 0% and 4% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The present study established the first global benchmark values for L-RPS/H6/7. The benchmark provided an up-to-date reference of best achievable outcomes for surgical auditing and benchmarking.

Propensity Score-matched Analysis Comparing Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Minor Liver Resections of the Anterolateral Segments: an International Multi-center Study of 10,517 Cases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of robotic minor liver resections (RMLR) versus laparoscopic (L) MLR of the anterolateral segments. BACKGROUND: Robotic liver surgery has been gaining prominence over the years with increasing usage for a myriad of hepatic resections. Robotic liver resections(RLR) has demonstrated non-inferiority to laparoscopic(L)LR while illustrating advantages over conventional laparoscopy especially for technically difficult and major LR. However, the advantage of RMLR for the anterolateral(AL) (segments II, III, IVb, V and VI) segments, has not been clearly demonstrated. METHODS: Between 2008 to 2022, 15,356 of 29,861 patients from 68 international centres underwent robotic(R) or laparoscopic minor liver resections (LMLR) for the AL segments Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed for matched analysis. RESULTS: 10,517 patients met the study criteria of which 1,481 underwent RMLR and 9,036 underwent LMLR. A PSM cohort of 1,401 patients in each group were identified for analysis. Compared to the LMLR cohort, the RMLR cohort demonstrated significantly lower median blood loss (75ml vs. 100ml, P<0.001), decreased blood transfusion (3.1% vs. 5.4%, P=0.003), lower incidence of major morbidity (2.5% vs. 4.6%, P=0.004), lower proportion of open conversion (1.2% vs. 4.5%, P<0.001), shorter post operative stay (4 days vs. 5 days, P<0.001), but higher rate of 30-day readmission (3.5% vs. 2.1%, P=0.042). These results were then validated by a 1:2 PSM analysis. In the subset analysis for 3,614 patients with cirrhosis, RMLR showed lower median blood loss, decreased blood transfusion, lower open conversion and shorter post operative stay than LMLR. CONCLUSION: RMLR demonstrated statistically significant advantages over LMLR even for resections in the AL segments although most of the observed clinical differences were minimal.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Various Settings: An International Multicenter Propensity Score Matched Study of 10.075 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic liver surgery (RLS) and laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) in various settings. BACKGROUND: Clear advantages of RLS over LLS have rarely been demonstrated, and the associated costs of robotic surgery are generally higher than those of laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, the exact role of the robotic approach in minimally invasive liver surgery remains to be defined. METHODS: In this international retrospective cohort study, the outcomes of patients who underwent RLS and LLS for all indications between 2009 and 2021 in 34 hepatobiliary referral centers were compared. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare both approaches across several types of procedures: (1) minor resections in the anterolateral (2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6) or (2) posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8), and (3) major resections (≥3 contiguous segments). Propensity score matching was used to mitigate the influence of selection bias. The primary outcome was textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS), previously defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥grade 2, postoperative bile leak ≥grade B, severe morbidity, readmission, and 90-day or in-hospital mortality with the presence of an R0 resection margin in case of malignancy. The absence of a prolonged length of stay was added to define TOLS+. RESULTS: Among the 10.075 included patients, 1.507 underwent RLS and 8.568 LLS. After propensity score matching, both groups constituted 1.505 patients. RLS was associated with higher rates of TOLS (78.3% vs 71.8%, P < 0.001) and TOLS+ (55% vs 50.4%, P = 0.026), less Pringle usage (39.1% vs 47.1%, P < 0.001), blood loss (100 vs 200 milliliters, P < 0.001), transfusions (4.9% vs 7.9%, P = 0.003), conversions (2.7% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), overall morbidity (19.3% vs 25.7%, P < 0.001), and microscopically irradical resection margins (10.1% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.015), and shorter operative times (190 vs 210 minutes, P = 0.015). In the subgroups, RLS tended to have higher TOLS rates, compared with LLS, for minor resections in the posterosuperior segments (n = 431 per group, 75.9% vs 71.2%, P = 0.184) and major resections (n = 321 per group, 72.9% vs 67.5%, P = 0.086), although these differences did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: While both produce excellent outcomes, RLS might facilitate slightly higher TOLS rates than LLS.

Impact of Liver Cirrhosis, Severity of Cirrhosis, and Portal Hypertension on the Difficulty and Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Major Liver Resections for Primary Liver Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) offer potential benefits such as reduced blood loss and morbidity compared with open liver resections. Several studies have suggested that the impact of cirrhosis differs according to the extent and complexity of resection. Our aim was to investigate the impact of cirrhosis on the difficulty and outcomes of MILR, focusing on major hepatectomies. METHODS: A total of 2534 patients undergoing minimally invasive major hepatectomies (MIMH) for primary malignancies across 58 centers worldwide were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score (PSM) and coarsened exact matching (CEM) were used to compare patients with and without cirrhosis. RESULTS: A total of 1353 patients (53%) had no cirrhosis, 1065 (42%) had Child-Pugh A and 116 (4%) had Child-Pugh B cirrhosis. Matched comparison between non-cirrhotics vs Child-Pugh A cirrhosis demonstrated comparable blood loss. However, after PSM, postoperative morbidity and length of hospitalization was significantly greater in Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, but these were not statistically significant with CEM. Comparison between Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis demonstrated the latter had significantly higher transfusion rates and longer hospitalization after PSM, but not after CEM. Comparison of patients with cirrhosis of all grades with and without portal hypertension demonstrated no significant difference in all major perioperative outcomes after PSM and CEM. CONCLUSIONS: The presence and severity of cirrhosis affected the difficulty and impacted the outcomes of MIMH, resulting in higher blood transfusion rates, increased postoperative morbidity, and longer hospitalization in patients with more advanced cirrhosis. As such, future difficulty scoring systems for MIMH should incorporate liver cirrhosis and its severity as variables.

Open, laparoscopic liver resection and percutaneous thermal ablation in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: outcomes and therapeutic strategy.

BACKGROUND: Liver resection and percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA) are considered curative option for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aims to compare short- and long-term outcomes between open liver resection (OLR), laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), and PTA in elderly patients with single HCC and to define a liver map for therapeutic strategy according to HCC location and size. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was conducted in 10 European Hospital Center, including 239 consecutive liver resection (OLR and LLR) and PTA in elderly patients ≥ 70 years old with single HCC ≤ 30 mm. Perioperative data and long-term oncological outcomes were collected and compared between groups before and after propensity score matching. RESULTS: A total of 239 patients were enrolled, distributed as follows: 61 in the ORL group, 88 in the LLR group, and 90 in the PTA group. The hospital stay was longer in OLR and LLR groups compared to the PTA group (6, 5 and 3 days, respectively, p < 0.05). Morbidity was lower in the PTA group compared to the OLR group (11 vs. 26%, respectively, p < 0.05). Overall survival (OS) at 5 years was significantly higher in the OLR and LLR groups compared to the PTA group (82, 81, and 34%, respectively, p < 0.001). Disease-free survival (DFS) at 5 years was also significantly higher in the ORL and LLR groups compared to the PTA group (66, 50 and 20%, respectively, p < 0.001). These results were also confirmed after a propensity score matching analysis between surgery group (OLR and LLR) and the PTA group. PTA was the most used treatment for subcapsular and deep HCC not in contact with vascular structures compared to OLR and LLR. CONCLUSION: PTA in elderly patients ensures a shorter hospital stay and lower morbidity but worst survival compared to liver resection.

Is prolonged operative time associated with postoperative complications in liver surgery? An international multicentre cohort study of 5424 patients.

BACKGROUND: The relation between operative time and postoperative complications in liver surgery is unclear. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of operative time on the development of postoperative complications in patients who underwent minimally invasive or open liver resections of various anatomical extent and technical difficulty levels. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients that underwent a right hemihepatectomy (RH), technically major resection (anatomically minor resection in segment 1, 4a, 7 or 8; TMR) or left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) between 2000 and 2022 were extracted from a multicenter database comprising the prospectively maintained databases of 31 centers in 13 countries. Minimally invasive procedures performed during the learning curve were omitted. Logistic regression models, performed separately for 9 different groups based on stratification by procedure type and allocated surgical approach, were used to assess the association between the fourth quartile of operative time (25% of patients with the longest operative time) and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Overall, 5424 patients were included: 1351 underwent RH (865 open, 373 laparoscopic and 113 robotic), 2821 TMR (1398 open, 1225 laparoscopic and 198 robotic), and 1252 LLS (241 open, 822 laparoscopic and 189 robotic). After adjusting for potential confounders (age, BMI, gender, ASA grade, previous abdominal surgery, disease type and extent, blood loss, Pringle, intraoperative transfusions and incidents), the fourth quartile of operative time, compared to the first three quartiles, was associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications after open, laparoscopic and robotic TMR (aOR 1.35, p = 0.031; aOR 1.74, p = 0.001 and aOR 3.11, p = 0.014, respectively), laparoscopic and robotic RH (aOR 1.98, p = 0.018 and aOR 3.28, p = 0.055, respectively) and solely laparoscopic LLS (aOR 1.69, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: A prolonged operative time is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications, although it remains to be defined if this is a causal relationship.

Single large hepatocellular carcinoma > 5 cm with surgical indication: is it mandatory a major hepatectomy? a propensity-score weighted analysis.

PURPOSE: Single large hepatocellular carcinoma >5cm (SLHCC) traditionally requires a major liver resection. Minor resections are often performed with the goal to reduce morbidity and mortality. Aim of the study was to establish if a major resection should be considered the best treatment for SLHCC or a more limited resection should be preferred. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective analysis of the HE.RC.O.LE.S. Group register was performed. All collected patients with surgically treated SLHCC were divided in 5 groups of treatment (major hepatectomy, sectorectomy, left lateral sectionectomy, segmentectomy, non-anatomical resection) and compared for baseline characteristics, short and long-term results. A propensity-score weighted analysis was performed. RESULTS: 535 patients were enrolled in the study. Major resection was associated with significantly increased major complications compared to left lateral sectionanectomy, segmentectomy and non-anatomical resection (all p<0.05) and borderline significant increased major complications compared to sectorectomy (p=0.08). Left lateral sectionectomy showed better overall survival compared to major resection (p=0.02), while other groups of treatment resulted similar to major hepatectomy group for the same item. Absence of oncological benefit after major resection and similar outcomes among the 5 groups of treatment was confirmed even in the sub-population excluding patients with macrovascular invasion. CONCLUSION: Major resection was associated to increased major post-operative morbidity without long-term survival benefit; when technically feasible and oncologically adequate, minor resections should be preferred for the surgical treatment of SLHCC.

Metaverse and Telementoring: From Surgery to Workshop.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has favored the growth of telemedicine systems and in this context the idea of Metaverse was born and developed. A 3D reality in which people can interact with each other through digital reproductions of themselves. Metaverse has already been tested in numerous medical fields due to its ability to combine visual and auditory information with tactile sensations. The purpose of this study is to highlight its potential also in its ability to be used as a telementoring place where the skills and knowledge of surgeons from all over the world can be combined. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The first HPB Surgery Workshop was held at the "Metaverse Surgical Hospital, USA". During the workshop, surgeons located in various parts of the world reported on hepatic, pancreatic and biliary tract surgery and remotely supported the execution of a robotic liver resection. RESULTS: The Metaverse gave the opportunity for surgeons to meet and discuss HPB pathologies and its surgical strategies and for surgeons in training to interface with experts by participating in a moment of advanced training. CONCLUSION: In the Metaverse, telementoring can be used at very low cost to improve clinical and surgical practice.

Is robotic liver resection feasible in patients with lesions in close proximity to major vessels? A propensity score matching analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic surgery is widely diffused in the surgical field and is becoming increasingly prevalent, however several aspects need more detailed assessment. One of them concerns the role of robotic liver surgery for lesions in contact with major vascular (CMV) pedicles. The aim of our study is to evaluate and compare intra and post operative outcomes in patients undergoing robotic liver resections between lesions in contact or free from major vessels. METHODS: A multicentric retrospective study was performed including 1030 patients who underwent robotic liver resection. Patients were divided into two groups according to vascular contact. Intra and post-operative outcomes were compared between the groups before and after Propensity Score Matching. RESULTS: After propensity score matching 889 patients were included in the study. Among these lesions, 595 were not in contact with major vessels (NCMV) and 294 were in contact with major vessels (CMV). Use of Pringle Manoeuvre was more associated with CMV resections (49.8 % vs 31.2 %, p = 0,0001). No differences in terms of operative time, conversion rate, morbidity and type of complications were observed after PSM. CONCLUSION: The presents study shows how robotic surgery is a valid and safe technique also for resection of tumors close to vascular pedicles.

Dynamic surgical anatomy using 3D reconstruction technology in complex hepato-biliary surgery with vascular involvement. Results from an international multicentric survey.

INTRODUCTION: Three-dimensional liver modeling can lead to substantial changes in choosing the type and extension of liver resection. This study aimed to explore whether 3D reconstruction helps to better understand the relationship between liver tumors and neighboring vascular structures compared to standard 2D CT scan images. METHODS: Contrast-enhanced CT scan images of 11 patients suffering from primary and secondary hepatic tumors were selected. Twenty-three experienced HBP surgeons participated to the survey. A standardized questionnaire outlining 16 different vascular structures (items) having a potential relationship with the tumor was provided. Intraoperative and histopathological findings were used as the reference standard. The proper hypothesis was that 3D accuracy is greater than 2D. As a secondary endpoint, inter-raters' agreement was explored. RESULTS: The mean difference between 3D and 2D, was 2.6 points (SE: 0.40; 95 % CI: 1.7-3.5; p < 0.0001). After sensitivity analysis, the results favored 3D visualization as well (mean difference 1.7 points; SE: 0.32; 95 % CI: 1.0-2.5; p = 0.0004). The inter-raters' agreement was moderate for both methods (2D: W = 0.45; 3D: W = 0.44). CONCLUSION: 3D reconstruction may give a significant contribution to better understanding liver vascular anatomy and the precise relationship between the tumor and the neighboring structures.

Conversion to open surgery in obese patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: results from a multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is considered a standard approach it still presents a non-negligible rate of conversion to open that is mainly related to some difficulty factors, as obesity. The aim of this study is to analyze the preoperative factors associated with conversion in obese patients with MIDP. METHODS: In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent MIDP at 18 international expert centers were included. The preoperative factors associated with conversion to open surgery were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of 436 patients, 91 (20.9%) underwent conversion to open, presenting higher blood loss, longer operative time and similar rate of major complications. Twenty (22%) patients received emergent conversion. At univariate analysis, the type of approach, radiological invasion of adjacent organs, preoperative enlarged lymphnodes and ASA ≥ III were significantly associated with conversion to open. At multivariate analysis, robotic approach showed a significantly lower conversion rate (14.6 % vs 27.3%, OR = 2.380, p = 0.001). ASA ≥ III (OR = 2.391, p = 0.002) and preoperative enlarged lymphnodes (OR = 3.836, p = 0.003) were also independently associated with conversion. CONCLUSION: Conversion rate is significantly lower in patients undergoing robotic approach. Radiological enlarged lymphnodes and ASA ≥ III are also associated with conversion to open. Conversion is associated with poorer perioperative outcomes, especially in case of intraoperative hemorrhage.

The Effect of a Liver Transplant Program on the Outcomes of Resectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Nationwide Multicenter Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of a liver transplantation (LT) program on the outcomes of resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment of HCC includes both hepatic resection (HR) and LT. However, the presence of cirrhosis and the possibility of recurrence make the management of this disease complex and probably different according to the presence of a LT program. METHODS: Patients undergoing HR for HCC between January 2005 and December 2019 were identified from a national database of HCC. The main study outcomes were major surgical complications according to the Comprehensive Complication Index, posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), 90-day mortality, overall survival, and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes were salvage liver transplantation (SLT) and postrecurrence survival. RESULTS: A total of 3202 patients were included from 25 hospitals over the study period. Three of 25 (12%) had an LT program. The presence of an LT program within a center was associated with a reduced probability of PHLF (odds ratio=0.38) but not with overall survival and disease-free survival. There was an increased probability of SLT when HR was performed in a transplant hospital (odds ratio=12.05). Among transplant-eligible patients, those who underwent LT had a significantly longer postrecurrence survival. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the presence of a LT program was associated with decreased PHLF rates and an increased probability to receive SLT in case of recurrence.

Propensity-score Matched and Coarsened-exact Matched Analysis Comparing Robotic and Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study of 4822 Cases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes between robotic major hepatectomy (R-MH) and laparoscopic major hepatectomy (L-MH). BACKGROUND: Robotic techniques may overcome the limitations of laparoscopic liver resection. However, it is unknown whether R-MH is superior to L-MH. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of patients undergoing R-MH or L-MH at 59 international centers from 2008 to 2021. Data on patient demographics, center experience volume, perioperative outcomes, and tumor characteristics were collected and analyzed. Both 1:1 propensity-score matched (PSM) and coarsened-exact matched (CEM) analyses were performed to minimize selection bias between both groups. RESULTS: A total of 4822 cases met the study criteria, of which 892 underwent R-MH and 3930 underwent L-MH. Both 1:1 PSM (841 R-MH vs. 841 L-MH) and CEM (237 R-MH vs. 356 L-MH) were performed. R-MH was associated with significantly less blood loss {PSM:200.0 [interquartile range (IQR):100.0, 450.0] vs 300.0 (IQR:150.0, 500.0) mL; P = 0.012; CEM:170.0 (IQR: 90.0, 400.0) vs 200.0 (IQR:100.0, 400.0) mL; P = 0.006}, lower rates of Pringle maneuver application (PSM: 47.1% vs 63.0%; P < 0.001; CEM: 54.0% vs 65.0%; P = 0.007) and open conversion (PSM: 5.1% vs 11.9%; P < 0.001; CEM: 5.5% vs 10.4%, P = 0.04) compared with L-MH. On subset analysis of 1273 patients with cirrhosis, R-MH was associated with a lower postoperative morbidity rate (PSM: 19.5% vs 29.9%; P = 0.02; CEM 10.4% vs 25.5%; P = 0.02) and shorter postoperative stay [PSM: 6.9 (IQR: 5.0, 9.0) days vs 8.0 (IQR: 6.0 11.3) days; P < 0.001; CEM 7.0 (IQR: 5.0, 9.0) days vs 7.0 (IQR: 6.0, 10.0) days; P = 0.047]. CONCLUSIONS: This international multicenter study demonstrated that R-MH was comparable to L-MH in safety and was associated with reduced blood loss, lower rates of Pringle maneuver application, and conversion to open surgery.

Liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation in octogenarian patients for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND: Liver resection (LR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are considered curative options for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after LR and RFA in octogenarian patients with HCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included 102 elderly patients (> 80 years old) treated between January 2009 and January 2019, who underwent LR or RFA for HCC (65 and 37 with, respectively). RESULTS: After Propensity Score Matching, the postoperative course of LR was burdened by a higher rate of complications than RFA group (64% vs 14%, respectively, p: 0.001). The LR group had also significantly longer operative time (207 ± 85 min vs 33 ± 49 min, p < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stays than the RFA group (7 d vs 2 d, p = 0.019). Overall survival at 1-, 2-, and 3-year were 86%, 86%, and 70% for the LR group and 82%, 64%, and 52% for the RFA group (p = 0.380). Disease-free survival at 1-, 2-, and 3-year were 89%, 74%, and 56% for the LR group, and 51%, 40%, and 40% for the RFA group (p = 0.037). CONCLUSION: Despite a higher rate of Dindo-Clavien I-II post-operative complications, a longer operative time and length of hospital stay, LR in octogenarian patients can provide comparable 90d mortality than RFA and better long-term outcomes.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in obese patients.

BACKGROUND: Although robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has a lower conversion rate to open surgery and causes less blood loss than laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), clear evidence on the impact of the surgical approach on morbidity is lacking. Prior studies have shown a higher rate of complications among obese patients undergoing pancreatectomy. The primary aim of this study is to compare short-term outcomes of RDP vs. LDP in patients with a BMI ≥ 30. METHODS: In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent RDP or LDP for any indication between 2012 and 2022 at 18 international expert centers were included. The baseline characteristics underwent inverse probability treatment weighting to minimize allocation bias. RESULTS: Of 446 patients, 219 (50.2%) patients underwent RDP. The median age was 60 years, the median BMI was 33 (31-36), and the preoperative diagnosis was ductal adenocarcinoma in 21% of cases. The conversion rate was 19.9%, the overall complication rate was 57.8%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 0.7% (3 patients). RDP was associated with a lower complication rate (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89; p = 0.005), less blood loss (150 vs. 200 ml; p < 0.001), fewer blood transfusion requirements (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.50; p < 0.001) and a lower Comprehensive Complications Index (8.7 vs. 8.9, p < 0.001) than LPD. RPD had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.19-0.39; p < 0.001) and achieved better spleen preservation rate (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13-3.39; p = 0.016) than LPD. CONCLUSIONS: In obese patients, RDP is associated with a lower conversion rate, fewer complications and better short-term outcomes than LPD.

Multi-visceral resection for left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a multicenter retrospective analysis from European countries.

BACKGROUND: Due to delayed diagnosis and a lower surgical indication rate, left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is often associated with a poor prognosis in comparison to pancreatic head tumors. Multi-visceral resections (MVR) associated with distal pancreatectomy could be proposed for patients presenting with locally infiltrating disease. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a multi-centric cohort of left-sided PDAC patients operated on from 2009 to 2020. Thirteen European high-volume HPB centers participated in this study. We analyzed patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy (DP) associated with MVR and compared them to standard DP patients. RESULTS: Among 258 patients treated curatively for PDAC of the body and tail, 28 patients successfully underwent MVR. A longer operative time was observed in the MVR group (295 min +/- 74 vs. 250 min +/- 96, p= 0.248). The post-operative complication rate was comparable between the two groups (46.4% in the MVR group vs. 62.2% in the control group, p= 0.108). The incidence of positive margin (R1) was similar between the two groups (28.6% vs. 26.6%; p=0.827). After a median follow-up of 25 (9-111) months, overall survival was comparable between the two groups (p= 0.519). CONCLUSIONS: Multi-visceral resection in left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is safe and feasible and should be considered in selected cases as it seems to provide acceptable surgical and oncological outcomes.

Anastomotic Leak Rate and Prolonged Postoperative Paralytic Ileus in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery for Colo-Rectal Cancer After Placement of No-Coil Endoanal Tube.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common gastrointestinal tumor in men and the third in women. Left-hemicolectomy (LC) and low anterior resection (LAR) are considered the gold standard curative treatment. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the presence or absence of post-operative complications, in all patients who underwent Video-laparoscopic (VLS) LAR/LC with No Coil trans-anal tube positioning, and compared the data with the current literature on the topic. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients diagnosed with CRC of the descending colon, splenic flexure, sigma, and rectum were recruited. LC was performed for sigmoid and descending colon cancers, while LAR was applied for tumors of the upper two-thirds of the rectum. The No Coil trans-anal tube (SapiMed Spa, Alessandria, Italy) was placed in all patients of the study at the end of surgical treatment. RESULTS: Eighteen patients received a LAR-VLS (46%) and 21 patients received a LC-VLS (54%). The average length of hospital stay after surgery was 7 days. PPOI occurred in only one in 39 patients (2.6%) who had undergone LAR-VLS. As for complications, in no patient of the study did AL (0%) occur. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing LAR-VLS and LC-VLS, we performed colorectal anastomosis and in the same surgical operation we introduced the No-Coil device. Although this is a preliminary study and subject to further investigation, we believe that the No Coil tube positioning may reduce the time of presence of first flatus and feces and the risk of AL.

New Robotic Platforms in General Surgery: What's the Current Clinical Scenario?

Background and Objectives: Robotic surgery has been widely adopted in general surgery worldwide but access to this technology is still limited to a few hospitals. With the recent introduction of new robotic platforms, several studies reported the feasibility of different surgical procedures. The aim of this systematic review is to highlight the current clinical practice with the new robotic platforms in general surgery. Materials and Methods: A grey literature search was performed on the Internet to identify the available robotic systems. A PRISMA compliant systematic review was conducted for all English articles up to 10 February 2023 searching the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Clinical outcomes, training process, operating surgeon background, cost-analysis, and specific registries were evaluated. Results: A total of 103 studies were included for qualitative synthesis after the full-text screening. Of the fifteen robotic platforms identified, only seven were adopted in a clinical environment. Out of 4053 patients, 2819 were operated on with a new robotic device. Hepatopancreatobiliary surgery specialty performed the majority of procedures, and the most performed procedure was cholecystectomy. Globally, 109 emergency surgeries were reported. Concerning the training process, only 45 papers reported the background of the operating surgeon, and only 28 papers described the training process on the surgical platform. Only one cost-analysis compared a new robot to the existing reference. Two manufacturers promoted a specific registry to collect clinical outcomes. Conclusions: This systematic review highlights the feasibility of most surgical procedures in general surgery using the new robotic platforms. Adoption of these new devices in general surgery is constantly growing with the extension of regulatory approvals. Standardization of the training process and the assessment of skills' transferability is still lacking. Further studies are required to better understand the real clinical and economical benefit.

Educational Scoring System in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Is It the Right Time to Standardize?

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is one of the most performed surgeries worldwide. Procedure difficulty and patient outcomes depend on several factors which are not considered in the current literature, including the learning curve, generating confusing and subjective results. This study aims to create a scoring system to calculate the learning curve of LC based on hepatobiliopancreatic (HPB) experts' opinions during an educational course. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire was submitted to the panel of experts attending the HPB course at Research Institute against Digestive Cancer-IRCAD (Strasbourg, France) from 27-29 October 2022. Experts scored the proposed variables according to their degree of importance in the learning curve using a Likert scale from 1 (not useful) to 5 (very useful). Variables were included in the composite scoring system only if more than 75% of experts ranked its relevance in the learning curve assessment ≥4. A positive or negative value was assigned to each variable based on its effect on the learning curve. Results: Fifteen experts from six different countries attended the IRCAD HPB course and filled out the questionnaire. Ten variables were finally included in the learning curve scoring system (i.e., patient body weight/BMI, patient previous open surgery, emergency setting, increased inflammatory levels, presence of anatomical bile duct variation(s), and appropriate critical view of safety (CVS) identification), which were all assigned positive values. Minor or major intraoperative injuries to the biliary tract, development of postoperative complications related to biliary injuries, and mortality were assigned negative values. Conclusions: This is the first scoring system on the learning curve of LC based on variables selected through the experts' opinions. Although the score needs to be validated through future studies, it could be a useful tool to assess its efficacy within educational programs and surgical courses.