Novel Use of the Falciform Ligament for MHV Reconstruction During Laparoscopic Hepatectomy of Colorectal Liver Metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) with oncological R0 resection combined with systemic therapy offers the best chance of cure for colorectal liver metastasis. However, tumors in vicinity of major hepatic veins require complex technique. Parenchyma-sparing resection with involved vein resection and peritoneal patch reconstruction could be an efficacious alternative to preserve liver volume for adjuvant chemotherapy and avoid venous congestion of the remnant liver.1,2 METHODS: A 64-year-old female, with history of colon cancer, had new diagnosis of liver metastatic tumor of S8 (2.8 cm), which was considering encroached on middle hepatic vein (MHV) with distal part patent. Thus margin-negative, parenchyma-sparing liver resection with involved vein resection and proximal MHV reconstruction was indicated for oncological radicality. RESULTS: With the patient in modified French position, we dissected falciform ligament and right coronary ligament to expose the crypt between right hepatic vein (RHV) and MHV. Intraoperative ultrasound localized the tumor and resection margin. Parenchymal dissection was performed caudally to cranially, left to right, to ligate dorsal branch of G8 (G8d) and V8 and expose main trunk of MHV. The involved side-wall of MHV was incised after the proximal and distal parts clamped. Peritoneal patch was harvested from falciform ligament to repair MHV side-wall before clamps released. The patient had an uneventful recovery and remained disease-free at 1 year postoperatively with patency of distal MHV by image. CONCLUSIONS: LH with MHV reconstruction by falciform ligament for metastatic lesion is technically demanding but feasible with oncological radicality and volume preservation for adjuvant chemotherapy.

Goldilocks principle of minimally invasive surgery for gastric subepithelial tumors.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery had been tailored to individual cases of gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs) after comparing the clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection (ER), laparoscopic resection (LR), and hybrid methods. AIM: To study the use of Goldilocks principle to determine the best form of minimally invasive surgery for gastric SETs. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 194 patients of gastric SETs with high probability of surgical intervention were included. All patients underwent tumor resection in the operating theater between January 2013 and December 2021. The patients were divided into two groups, ER or LR, according to the tumor characteristics and the initial intent of intervention. Few patients in the ER group required further backup laparoscopic surgery after an incomplete ER. The patients who had converted open surgery were excluded. A logistic regression model was used to assess the associations between patient characteristics and the likelihood of a treatment strategy. The area under the curve was used to assess the discriminative ability of tumor size and Youden's index to determine the optimal cut-off tumor size. RESULTS: One-hundred ninety-four patients (100 in the ER group and 94 in the LR group) underwent tumor resection in the operating theater. In the ER group, 27 patients required backup laparoscopic surgery after an incomplete ER. The patients in the ER group had small tumor sizes and shorter procedure durations while the patients in the LR group had large tumor sizes, exophytic growth, malignancy, and tumors that were more often located in the middle or lower third of the stomach. Both groups had similar durations of hospital stays and a similar rate of major postoperative complications. The patients in the ER group who underwent backup surgery required longer procedures (56.4 min) and prolonged stays (2 d) compared to the patients in the LR group without the increased rate of major postoperative complications. The optimal cut-off point for the tumor size for laparoscopic surgery was 2.15 cm. CONCLUSION: Multidisciplinary teamwork leads to the adoption of different strategies to yield efficient clinical outcomes according to the tumor characteristics.

Saline irrigation versus gauze wiping and suction only for peritoneal decontamination during laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer disease.

The aim of current single-center study was to compare the short-term outcome of suction and gauze wiping alone versus the irrigation and suction technique for peritoneal decontamination among patients who underwent laparoscopic repair of PPU. Using data from our institution's prospectively maintained database, 105 patients who underwent laparoscopic repair were enrolled in this study. The participants were further divided into the group who received peritoneal irrigation (irrigation group, n = 67) and group who received gauze wiping and suction only (suction only group, n = 38). The irrigation group had a longer operative time (140 vs. 113 min, p = 0.0001), higher number of drainage tubes (38.8% vs. 0%, p < 0.0001) and a higher incidence of intra-abdominal abscess (10.4% vs. 0%, p = 0.0469) than the suction only group. Peritoneal irrigation may be associated with a prolonged operative time and a higher number of abdominal drains. Meanwhile, gauze wiping and suction may be sufficient for peritoneal decontamination during the laparoscopic repair of PPU as further infectious complications are not observed.