Rubber tourniquet technique: A simple, safe, and cost-effective method of hepatic resection in neonates and infants.

BACKGROUND: Despite the improvements in patient care, understanding of surgical anatomy of liver and surgical techniques, liver resection is a high-risk procedure specifically in infants and neonates; whose blood volume is limited (80 ml/kg). This report shares the experience of hepatic resection with "Rubber tourniquet technique" in patients less than 6-months of age. METHODS: Hepatic resection in a 4-month-old pair of Conjoined twins with shared liver and a 3-day old baby with large Congenital Hepatoblastoma was performed using Penrose rubber drain as a tourniquet around the liver parenchyma to reduce blood loss. RESULTS: Blood loss was minimal (<20CC) and all the three babies survived the procedure without complications. CONCLUSION: Rubber tourniquet technique is simple, safe and cost-effective for liver resections in neonates and infants with hepatic lesions and separation of conjoined twins with shared liver and it can easily be employed in resource constraint settings.

[Robot-assisted liver resection]. / Roboterassistierte Leberresektion.

Robotic liver resection can overcome some of the limitations of laparoscopic liver surgery; therefore, it is a promising tool to increase the proportion of minimally invasive liver resections. The present article gives an overview of the current literature. Furthermore, the results of a nationwide survey on robotic liver surgery among hospitals in Germany with a DaVinci system used in general visceral surgery and the perioperative results of two German robotic centers are presented.

Secure, low-cost technique for laparoscopic hepatic resection using the crush-clamp method with a bipolar sealer.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic hepatectomy is difficult because surgeons must perform the transection using many (four and more) energy devices and without direct manual maneuvers. Here we introduce hepatic transection by the classical method with a few (two or three) energy devices. MATERIALS AND SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: We performed laparoscopic hepatectomy for 40 patients with hepatic tumor and liver dysfunction. For parenchymal transection, we used bipolar radiofrequency coagulation forceps connected to a voltage-controlled electrosurgical generator and ultrasonic dissector. The demarcation of the liver surface was made by an ultrasonic dissector. Along the demarcation line, the blades of a BiClamp were opened slightly and inserted into the hepatic parenchyma. We clamped slowly, softly, and gradually, and a small amount of hepatic parenchyma was consequently coagulated and fractured. After the crush, the small vessels and intrahepatic bile duct that were sealed were left as atrophic strings, and the strings were divided by an ultrasonic dissector. Large vessels and Glisson's sheaths were left because of the small clamp. Large Glisson's sheaths and hepatic veins were ligated with a titanium clip or autosutures, and cut without bile leakage or bleeding. The mean operation time of the procedure was 196.9 min, mean blood loss was 69.9 mL, and mean postoperative hospitalization was 9.5 days. No blood transfusions were needed. Two cases had perioperative complications-one involving right shoulder pain and the other involving ascites due to liver dysfunction-but there were no serious postoperative complications. DISCUSSION: The present results appear to demonstrate that this simple and safe method helps decrease intraoperative bleeding and shorten hospital stay.

Validation of the laparoscopically stapled approach as a standard technique for left lateral segment liver resection.

BACKGROUND: Left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) is the most common type of anatomic laparoscopic liver resection performed, accounting for 20 % of all laparoscopic hepatectomies. Because there has been no standardized surgical technique for laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS), we offer an established operation: laparoscopically stapled left lateral sectionectomy (LSLLS). Our aim was to perform a case-controlled study of LSLLS with traditional (without vascular staplers) laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (TLLLS), validating the standardization and reproducibility of LSLLS. METHODS: From February 2009 to December 2011, a total of 49 LSLLSs were performed. The results were compared with 33 cohort-matched TLLLSs from an earlier time period. Ordered sample cluster analysis was used to determine the learning curve of LSLLS based on the operating time and blood loss. RESULTS: All LSLLS were performed successfully. There were no conversions to laparotomy or hand-assisted laparoscopic resection. Two endoscopic linear staplers were used in each case. Despite a higher hospital cost ($10,892 ± $944 vs. $8,962 ± $943, p < 0.05), LSLLS compared favorably with TLLLS regarding operating time (103 ± 21 vs. 151 ± 32 min, p < 0.05) and blood loss (70.8 ± 41.6 vs. 173.3 ± 131.1 ml, p < 0.05). No specific complications related to laparoscopy were observed. Ordered sample cluster analysis demonstrated a learning curve of 18 cases for LSLLS. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the standardization and reproducibility of LSLLS. We therefore propose LSLLS as the standard technique for lesions located in the left lateral section of the liver.

Transection of the liver parenchyma with an ultrasound dissector or a stapler device: results of a randomized clinical study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative hemorrhage and postoperative bile leakage are severe complications of liver surgery. They may be related to the techniques used to divide the tissue. We designed a randomized clinical trial to compare the cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator (CUSA) and an endoscopic stapler device applied in routine clinical hepatic surgical practice. METHODS: All consecutive patients admitted for elective hepatic resective surgery--at least bisegmentectomy of the liver--were assessed for enrollment in the study. A total of 100 patients were subsequently randomized. There was a good balance between the study groups concerning issues that may be of relevance for the perioperative and postoperative courses. The primary objective of the study was to achieve an approximately 25 % reduction in perioperative blood loss and postoperative bile leakage. Secondary outcome variables were operating time, general postoperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, and direct medical costs. RESULTS: The amount of perioperative or postoperative blood loss did not differ significantly between the two groups. We observed a trend toward shorter transection and operating time for patients in whom staplers were used, but the difference did not reach statistical significance. The postoperative courses were close to identical in the respective study arms with no difference in bile leakage rates or in the total morbidity profiles. The direct medical costs were nonsignificantly lower in the group where staplers were used for liver transection. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that the use of endoscopic vascular staplers in liver surgery is feasible and safe. It offers an attractive alternative for division of the liver parenchyma during routine hepatic surgery, being comparable to the use of CUSA without adding extra costs.

Choice of device for parenchymal transection in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic hepatic surgery has only recently become an established field. Technological limitations in devices used to transect the liver parenchyma and control hemostasis have been a rate limiting step. However, as a result of advances in products specifically tailored to liver surgery, there has been steady progress in the complexity of laparoscopic hepatectomies performed, from the minimally invasive fenestration of liver cysts, to peripheral wedge resections, major hepatectomy, and recently donor hepatectomy. Herein, we discuss the role of several laparoscopic devices which include the endoscopic stapler, pre-coagulators, ultrasonic dissector, ultrasonic shears, and vessel sealing devices. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic liver surgery introduces new challenges to even the experienced surgeon. It is important to have a solid understanding of the advantages and limitations of available instruments in order to safely and effectively expand the use of laparoscopy in hepatic surgery.

Randomized clinical trial of efficacy and costs of three dissection devices in liver resection.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades a variety of instruments for liver dissection has become available. This randomized controlled trial analysed the efficacy and costs of three different liver dissection devices. METHODS: Ninety-six patients without cirrhosis undergoing liver resection were randomized to either ultrasonic dissection, waterjet dissection or dissecting sealer (32 in each group). Patients were unaware of the device used. The primary endpoint was dissection speed. Secondary endpoints were intraoperative blood loss, morbidity and mortality, and costs of dissection devices, staplers and haemostatic agents. RESULTS: Dissection was slower with the dissecting sealer (P = 0.004 versus waterjet dissector). The difference was more pronounced for extended resections (mean(s.e.m.) 1.62(0.36) cm(2)/min versus 3.42(0.53) and 3.63(0.51) cm(2)/min for ultrasonic and water dissectors respectively; P = 0.037). Costs were significantly higher for the dissecting sealer when atypical or segmental resections were performed. Four patients died after extended resections; postoperative complications did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: The dissecting sealer is slower than the ultrasonic dissector or water dissector. The three devices are equally safe in terms of blood loss, transfusions and postoperative complications. Ultrasonic and water dissectors might be more favourable economically than the dissecting sealer. REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN52294555 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Hepatic resections: changing mortality and morbidity.

Hepatic resections have been associated with high mortality and morbidity; therefore, this procedure was not used frequently. With increasing safety, acceptance of the procedure grew. A review of recent series still reveals a strikingly high incidence of complications. However, in a review of the last 100 hepatic resections performed at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, Los Angeles, the average blood loss was 1351 mL, (range 90-10,000 mL) with a median of 900 mL. Blood transfusion requirements averaged 1.5 units, with 50 per cent of patients requiring no transfusion, and 80 per cent of patients requiring two units or less. Cirrhosis, present in 15 per cent of our patients, was associated with increased blood loss and morbidity. The use of the Cavitron Ultrasonic Aspirator (CUSA) and the liver clamp have had a major impact on reducing intraoperative blood loss and transfusion requirement. Operative time was significantly reduced from previous reports, to an average of 221 minutes (90 to 410 minutes). Hospital stay averaged 7 days, with a median of 6 days. Both the mortality rate of 2 per cent and the morbidity rate of 22 per cent represent significant improvements. Utilizing modern techniques, hepatic resections can be done with acceptable mortality and mortality, and may lead to its increased application.

Prospective evaluation of ultrasonic surgical dissectors in hepatic resection: a cooperative multicenter study.

Blood loss is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity associated with hepatic resection. A prospective multicenter study was conducted to determine if ultrasonic dissectors (USD) were useful in hepatic resection and could reduce this hemorrhagic risk. Forty-seven hepatic resections were performed in 42 consecutive patients during a two month period in 11 public, surgical centers. Twenty-one patients had primary or secondary malignancies, six had benign tumors, two had biliary cysts, one had cholangiocarcinoma, one had Caroli's disease, and 11 had hydatid cysts of the liver. Two different USD devices were evaluated (CUSA System-Lasersonics and NIIC-DX 101 T). The hepatic resections tested included a wide range of procedures. Each surgeon had the possibility of choosing between the USD and his own usual technique for each operative step and according to local conditions. The average volume of blood infused, irrespective of the underlying pathology or the procedure performed, was 1.0 L (range 0-4.8 L). Fourteen patients required no transfusions. No operative or immediate postoperative deaths were recorded. Five major complications, all unrelated to the use of the USD, developed in three patients. Access to intra and extraparenchymal arterial and venous tributaries and particularly the control of the hepatic veins were facilitated by USD. While transection of hepatic parenchyma was neither easier nor faster than with conventional techniques, it was found to be less hemorrhagic. Overall appraisal was expressed on an analog scale; the USD was found to be helpful or very helpful in 75 percent of all resections. With regard to the pathology being treated, total or partial excision of hydatid cysts was greatly enhanced by the use of the USD while this benefit was not found for wedge resections of other hepatic lesions. With regard to user friendliness and maintenance, the NIIC-DX 101 T device was preferred. We conclude that the USD facilitates formal hepatic resections. Converging opinions emerging from various surgical centers reinforce this conclusion.