ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the use of a self-expandable absorbable biliary stent (SEABS) to reduce biliary complications in liver transplant (LT). BACKGROUND: Complications related to biliary anastomosis are a still a challenge in LT with a high impact on the patient outcomes and hospital costs. METHODS: This non-randomized prospective study was conducted between July 2019 and September 2023 in adult LT patients with duct-to-duct biliary anastomoses. The primary endpoint was to assess early biliary complications at 90 days in LT patients with intraoperative SEABS versus no SEABS. We also compared overall biliary complications, costs and SEABS- adverse effects related. RESULTS: A total of 158 patients were included, 78 with SEABS and 80 no-SEABS (22 T-tube and 58 no-stent). There were no adverse effects related to SEABS. Early biliary complications (23.8 vs 2.6%, P <0.001) and hospital stay (19 vs 15 days, P= 0.001) were higher in no-SEABS. No-SEABS group required 63 ERCPs and 13 surgeries (including 2 LT) versus 35 ERCPs and 2 surgeries in SEABS group. After PSM between SEABS (n=58) vs no-SEABS (n=58), early biliary complications (40% vs 0%, P<.001) were higher in no-SEABS group. T-tube had more early biliary complications (22.7% vs 5%, P=0.23) compared SEABS high-risk biliary anastomosis. SEABS excess cost per patient was lower compared to T-Tube and no-stent (6.988 vs 17.992 vs 36.364, P=0.036 and P=0.002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: SEABS during biliary anastomosis in LT is feasible with no adverse effects and avoid the T-tube in high-risk biliary anastomoses. It use has been associated with less early biliary complications, hospital costs and reoperations or interventional treatments for biliary complications resolution.
ABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Hepatectomy , Laparoscopy , Propensity Score , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Hepatectomy/methods , Female , Male , Laparoscopy/methods , Retrospective Studies , Middle Aged , Aged , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Treatment Outcome , Liver Diseases/surgeryABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To propose to our community a common language about extreme liver surgery. BACKGROUND: The lack of a clear definition of extreme liver surgery prevents convincing comparisons of results among centers. METHODS: We used a two-round Delphi methodology to quantify consensus among liver surgery experts. For inclusion in the final recommendations, we established a consensus when the positive responses (agree and totally agree) exceeded 70%. The study steering group summarized and reported the recommendations. In general, a five-point Likert scale with a neutral central value was used, and in a few cases multiple choices. Results are displayed as numbers and percentages. RESULTS: A two-round Delphi study was completed by 38 expert surgeons in complex hepatobiliary surgery. The surgeon´s median age was 58 years old (52-63) and the median years of experience was 25 years (20-31). For the proposed definitions of total vascular occlusion, hepatic flow occlusion and inferior vein occlusion, the degree of agreement was 97%, 81% and 84%, respectively. In situ approach (64%) was the preferred, followed by ante situ (22%) and ex situ (14%). Autologous or cadaveric graft for hepatic artery or hepatic vein repair were the most recommended (89%). The use of veno-venous bypass or portocaval shunt revealed the divergence depending on the case. Overall, 75% of the experts agreed with the proposed definition for extreme liver surgery. CONCLUSION: Obtaining a consensus on the definition of extreme liver surgery is essential to guarantee the correct management of patients with highly complex hepatobiliary oncological disease. The management of candidates for extreme liver surgery involves comprehensive care ranging from adequate patient selection to the appropriate surgical strategy.
ABSTRACT
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.
ABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Hypertension, Portal , Laparoscopy , Liver Neoplasms , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Liver Neoplasms/complications , Liver Neoplasms/surgery , Hepatectomy/methods , Retrospective Studies , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/surgery , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Liver Cirrhosis/surgery , Liver Cirrhosis/pathology , Laparoscopy/methods , Hypertension, Portal/etiology , Hypertension, Portal/surgery , Length of Stay , Propensity ScoreABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Despite the increasing widespread adoption and experience in minimally invasive liver resections (MILR), open conversion occurs not uncommonly even with minor resections and as been reported to be associated with inferior outcomes. We aimed to identify risk factors for and outcomes of open conversion in patients undergoing minor hepatectomies. We also studied the impact of approach (laparoscopic or robotic) on outcomes. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of 20,019 patients who underwent RLR and LLR across 50 international centers between 2004-2020. Risk factors for and perioperative outcomes of open conversion were analysed. Multivariate and propensity score-matched analysis were performed to control for confounding factors. RESULTS: Finally, 10,541 patients undergoing either laparoscopic (LLR; 89.1%) or robotic (RLR; 10.9%) minor liver resections (wedge resections, segmentectomies) were included. Multivariate analysis identified LLR, earlier period of MILR, malignant pathology, cirrhosis, portal hypertension, previous abdominal surgery, larger tumor size, and posterosuperior location as significant independent predictors of open conversion. The most common reason for conversion was technical issues (44.7%), followed by bleeding (27.2%), and oncological reasons (22.3%). After propensity score matching (PSM) of baseline characteristics, patients requiring open conversion had poorer outcomes compared with successful MILR cases as evidenced by longer operative times, more blood loss, higher requirement for perioperative transfusion, longer duration of hospitalization and higher morbidity, reoperation, and 90-day mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple risk factors were associated with conversion of MILR even for minor hepatectomies, and open conversion was associated with significantly poorer perioperative outcomes.
Subject(s)
Conversion to Open Surgery , Hepatectomy , Laparoscopy , Liver Neoplasms , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Male , Female , Hepatectomy/methods , Hepatectomy/mortality , Laparoscopy/methods , Middle Aged , Conversion to Open Surgery/statistics & numerical data , Liver Neoplasms/surgery , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Aged , Follow-Up Studies , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Risk Factors , Operative Time , Prognosis , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming more useful as a decision-making and outcomes predictor tool. We have developed AI models to predict surgical complexity and the postoperative course in laparoscopic liver surgery for segments 7 and 8. METHODS: We included patients with lesions located in segments 7 and 8 operated by minimally invasive liver surgery from an international multi-institutional database. We have employed AI models to predict surgical complexity and postoperative outcomes. Furthermore, we have applied SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to make the AI models interpretable. Finally, we analyzed the surgeries not converted to open versus those converted to open. RESULTS: Overall, 585 patients and 22 variables were included. Multi-layer Perceptron (MLP) showed the highest performance for predicting surgery complexity and Random Forest (RF) for predicting postoperative outcomes. SHAP detected that MLP and RF gave the highest relevance to the variables "resection type" and "largest tumor size" for predicting surgery complexity and postoperative outcomes. In addition, we explored between surgeries converted to open and non-converted, finding statistically significant differences in the variables "tumor location," "blood loss," "complications," and "operation time." CONCLUSION: We have observed how the application of SHAP allows us to understand the predictions of AI models in surgical complexity and the postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic liver surgery in segments 7 and 8.
Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence , Hepatectomy , Laparoscopy , Liver Neoplasms , Humans , Laparoscopy/methods , Hepatectomy/methods , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Liver Neoplasms/surgery , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Aged , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Operative Time , AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Postoperative complications after perihilar cholangiocarcinoma surgical procedure are still very high. The implementation of a multimodal prehabilitation program could improve these outcomes. Based on our experience and that of the literature in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery, we propose a protocol to promote its implementation. METHODS: First, we performed a retrospective analysis of the implementation feasibility of a multimodal prehabilitation program in patients' candidates for elective perihilar cholangiocarcinoma surgery in our center. Second, we conducted a literature search of publications in PubMed until December 2022. Relevant data about hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery and prehabilitation programs in features and postoperative outcomes was analyzed. RESULTS: Since October 2020, 11 patients were evaluated for prehabilitation in our hospital. Two of them could not be resected intraoperatively due to disease extension. The median hospital stay was 10 days (iqr, 7-11). There were no major complications and 1 patient died. Of a total of 17 articles related to prehabilitation in hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, no reports focusing exclusively on perihilar cholangiocarcinoma were found. Six of the studies had nutritional therapies in addition to physical interventions, and 12 studies used home-based exercise therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our experience and the data obtained from other studies, a prehabilitation program could be useful to improve perioperative physical and mental fitness in patients' candidates for elective perihilar cholangiocarcinoma surgery. However, more well-designed studies are needed to allow us to obtain more evidence.
Subject(s)
Bile Duct Neoplasms , Cholangiocarcinoma , Klatskin Tumor , Humans , Bile Duct Neoplasms/surgery , Bile Ducts, Intrahepatic , Klatskin Tumor/surgery , Preoperative Exercise , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In recent years, there has been growing interest in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and the audit of the results of surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to define reference values for LLR in segments 7 and 8. METHODS: Data on LLR in segments 7 and 8 between January 2000 and December 2020 were collected from 19 expert centers. Reference cases were defined as no prior hepatectomy, ASA <3, body mass index <35 kg/m2, no chronic kidney disease, no cirrhosis and portal hypertension, no chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (FEV1<80%), and no cardiac disease. Reference values were obtained from the 75th percentile of the medians of all reference centers. RESULTS: Of 585 patients, 461 (78.8%) met the reference criteria. The overall complication rate was 27.5% (6% were Clavien-Dindo≥3a) with a mean CCI of 7.5 ± 16.5. At 90-day follow-up, the references values for overall complications were 31%, Clavien≥3a 7.4%, conversion 4.4%, hospital stay < 6 days, and readmission rate < 8.33%, respectively. Eastern centers patients categorized as low risk had a lower rate of overall complications (20.9% vs 31.2%, p=0.01) with similar Clavien-Dindo≥3a (5.5% and 4.8%, p=0.83) compared to Western centers, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study shows the need to establish standards for the postoperative outcomes in LLR based on the complexity of the resection and the location of the lesions.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Iatrogenic bile duct injury (BDI) during cholecystectomy is associated with a complex and heterogeneous management owing to the burden of morbidity until their definitive treatment. This study aimed to define the textbook outcomes (TOs) after BDI with the purpose to indicate the ideal treatment and to improve it management. METHODS: We collected data from patients with an BDI between 1990 and 2022 from 27 hospitals. TO was defined as a successful conservative treatment of the iatrogenic BDI or only minor complications after BDI or patients in whom the first repair resolves the iatrogenic BDI without complications or with minor complications. RESULTS: We included 808 patients and a total of 394 patients (46.9%) achieved TO. Overall complications in TO and non-TO groups were 11.9% and 86%, respectively (P < .001). Major complications and mortality in the non-TO group were 57.4% and 9.2%, respectively. The use of end-to-end bile duct anastomosis repair was higher in the non-TO group (23.1 vs 7.8, P < .001). Factors associated with achieving a TO were injury in a specialized center (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.01; 95% CI, 2.68-5.99; P < .001), transfer for a first repair (aOR, 5.72; 95% CI, 3.51-9.34; P < .001), conservative management (aOR, 5.00; 95% CI, 1.63-15.36; P = .005), or surgical management (aOR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.50-4.00; P < .001). CONCLUSION: TO largely depends on where the BDI is managed and the type of injury. It allows hepatobiliary centers to identify domains of improvement of perioperative management of patients with BDI.
Subject(s)
Bile Ducts , Iatrogenic Disease , Intraoperative Complications , Humans , Male , Female , Bile Ducts/injuries , Bile Ducts/surgery , Middle Aged , Intraoperative Complications/etiology , Aged , Retrospective Studies , Cholecystectomy/adverse effects , Adult , Anastomosis, Surgical , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Conservative TreatmentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In the last three decades, minimally invasive liver resection has been replacing conventional open approach in liver surgery. More recently, developments in neoadjuvant chemotherapy have led to increased multidisciplinary management of colorectal liver metastases with both medical and surgical treatment modalities. However, the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the surgical outcomes of minimally invasive liver resections remains poorly understood. METHODS: A multicenter, international, database of 4998 minimally invasive minor hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases was used to compare surgical outcomes in patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy with surgery alone. To correct for baseline imbalance, propensity score matching, coarsened exact matching and inverse probability treatment weighting were performed. RESULTS: 2546 patients met the inclusion criteria. After propensity score matching there were 759 patients in both groups and 383 patients in both groups after coarsened exact matching. Baseline characteristics were equal after both matching strategies. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with statistically significant worse surgical outcomes of minimally invasive minor hepatectomy. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy had no statistically significant impact on short-term surgical outcomes after simple and complex minimally invasive minor hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases.