Robotic-Assisted Versus Open Hemi-Hepatectomy: A Propensity Score Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The robotic-assisted surgical system has been widely used in hepatectomy. However, the effectiveness and feasibility of robotic-assisted hemi-hepatectomy (RH) has not been well-documented. METHODS: Patients who underwent RH or open hemi-hepatectomy (OH) performed by a single surgeon at our hospital between January 2010 and August 2023 were included in this study. A stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting adjusted analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of the 163 consecutive patients identified, 60 underwent RH, and 103 underwent OH. After stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting adjustment, RH demonstrated less blood loss than OH. In subgroup analyses, robotic-assisted left hemi-hepatectomy was associated with a shorter postoperative stay, a lower postoperative complication rate, and less blood loss compared with open left hemi-hepatectomy. While robotic-assisted right hemi-hepatectomy (RRH) was associated with less blood loss and a lower intraoperative blood transfusion rate, but a longer operation time compared with open right hemi-hepatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: RH is a safe and effective technique. In addition to less blood loss, robotic-assisted left hemi-hepatectomy had advantages in postoperative complications and postoperative stay, while RRH had advantages in intraoperative blood transfusions. However, operation time was longer for RRH than for open right hemi-hepatectomy.

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy using augmented reality navigation plus ICG fluorescence imaging for hepatolithiasis: a retrospective single-arm cohort study (with video).

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) has been shown to be an effective and safe method for treating hepatolithiasis primarily affecting the left hemiliver. However, this procedure still presents challenges. Due to pathological changes in intrahepatic duct stones, safely dissecting the hilar vessels and determining precise resection boundaries remains difficult, even with fluorescent imaging. Our team proposed a new method of augmented reality navigation (ARN) combined with Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging for LLH in hepatolithiasis cases. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of this combined approach in the procedure. METHODS: Between May 2021 and September 2023, 16 patients with hepatolithiasis who underwent LLH were included. All patients underwent preoperative 3D evaluation and were then guided using ARN and ICG fluorescence imaging during the procedure. Perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were assessed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the method. RESULTS: All 16 patients successfully underwent LLH. The mean operation time was 380.31 ± 92.17 min, with a mean estimated blood loss of 116.25 ± 64.49 ml. ARN successfully aided in guiding hilar vessel dissection in all patients. ICG fluorescence imaging successfully identified liver resection boundaries in 11 patients (68.8%). In the remaining 5 patients (31.3%) where fluorescence imaging failed, virtual liver segment projection (VLSP) successfully identified their resection boundaries. No major complications occurred in any patients. Immediate stone residual rate, stone recurrence rate, and stone extraction rate through the T-tube sinus tract were 12.5%, 6.3%, and 6.3%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The combination of ARN and ICG fluorescence imaging enhances the safety and precision of LLH for hepatolithiasis. Moreover, ARN may serve as a safe and effective tool for identifying precise resection boundaries in cases where ICG fluorescence imaging fails.

Classification of left-side hepatolithiasis for laparoscopic middle hepatic vein-guided anatomical hemihepatectomy combined with transhepatic duct lithotomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic middle hepatic vein-guided anatomical hemihepatectomy combined with transhepatic duct lithotomy (MATL) is an approach that can substantially improve stone clearance rates while reducing the rate of postoperative biliary fistula formation, residual stone rates, and rates of recurrence. In this study, we classified left-side hepatolithiasis cases into four subtypes based upon the diseased stone-containing bile duct, the middle hepatic vein, and the right hepatic duct. We then investigated the risk associated with different subtypes and evaluated the safety and efficacy of the MATL procedure. METHODS: In total, 372 patients who underwent left hemihepatectomy for left intrahepatic bile duct stones were enrolled. Based on the distribution of the stones, the cases could be divided into four types. The risk of surgical treatment was compared for the four types and the safety, short-term efficacy, and long-term efficacy of the MATL procedure in the four types of left intrahepatic bile duct stones were studied. RESULTS: Type II was found to be the most likely to cause intraoperative bleeding while type III was likely to cause biliary tract damage and type IV was associated with the highest stone recurrence rate. The MATL procedure did not increase the risk of surgery and was found to reduce the rate of bile leakage, residual stones, and stone recurrence. CONCLUSION: Left-side hepatolithiasis-associated risk classification is feasible and may represent a viable means of improving the safety and feasibility of the MATL procedure.

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy guided by real-time indocyanine green fluorescence imaging using the arantius-first approach.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Laparoscopic hepatectomy approaches, including major hepatectomy, were rapidly developed in the past decade. However, standard laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) is still only performed in high-volume medical centres. In our series, we describe our technical details and surgical outcomes of LLH. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients who underwent LLH in our institute were enrolled in the study. Among these, 13 patients underwent LLH guided by real-time ICG fluorescence imaging using the Arantius-first approach (ICG-LLH group), and the other 26 underwent conventional LLH (conventional LLH group). Demographic characteristics and perioperative data were retrospectively collected and analysed. We compared the technical and postoperative short-term outcomes of the two groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the demographic or clinicopathological characteristics of the patients in the two groups. ICG-LLH required significantly fewer pringle manoeuvres (1 vs. 3 times, p < 0.0001), had a shorter parenchyma dissection time (26 vs. 78 min, p < 0.001), and required fewer vessel clips (18 vs. 28, p < 0.001). Although there was no significant difference, the ICG-LLH group had less bile leakage (0 vs. 5, p = 0.09) and less blood loss (120 vs. 165, p = 0.119). There were no significant differences in the overall complication or R0 resection rates between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate that laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy guided by real-time ICG fluorescence imaging using the Arantius-first approach is safe and feasible in selected patients, thus improving the fluency of the surgical procedure and postoperative short-term outcomes.

The proximity of the middle hepatic vein to the hepatic hilus: a retrospective radiological study.

PURPOSE: The middle hepatic vein (MHV) is an important landmark in anatomical hemihepatectomy. The proximity between the MHV and the hilar plate was suspected to be associated with tumor exposure during left hemihepatectomy for advanced perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and is reported to facilitate a dorsal approach to the MHV during laparoscopic hemihepatectomy. However, the precise distance between these locations is unknown. METHODS: To investigate the "accurate and normal" distance between the MHV and the hilar plate, the present study focused on patients who presented without perihilar tumor. One hundred and sixty-eight consecutive patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy were included. Retrospective radiological measurement was performed using preoperative multi-detector row CT. The optimized CT slices perpendicular to the MHV were made using the multiplanar reconstruction technique. The shortest distance between the MHV and the hilar plate was measured on the left and right sides on the perpendicular slices. The diameters of the left and right hepatic ducts were also measured. RESULTS: The distance was 9.0 mm (1.9-20.0 mm) on the left side and 11.3 mm (2.3-21.8) on the right side (p < 0.001). The distance on the left side was < 10 mm in 60% of patients (n = 100). Only one-third of patients (n = 55) had a distance of ≥ 10 mm on both sides. As the hepatic ducts became more dilated, the distance from the MHV to the hilar plate became shorter. CONCLUSION: The MHV was located in close proximity to the hepatic hilus, especially on the left side.

Optimization of a laparoscopic procedure for advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma based on the concept of "waiting time": a preliminary report.

INTRODUCTION: Clinicians increasingly perform laparoscopic surgery for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). However, this surgery can be difficult in patients with advanced-stage ICC because of the complicated procedures and difficulty in achieving high-quality results. We compared the effects of a three-step optimized procedure with a traditional procedure for patients with advanced-stage ICC. METHODS: Forty-two patients with advanced-stage ICC who received optimized laparoscopic hemihepatectomy with lymph node dissection (LND, optimized group) and 84 propensity score-matched patients who received traditional laparoscopic hemihepatectomy plus LND (traditional group) were analyzed. Surgical quality, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared. RESULTS: The optimized group had a lower surgical bleeding score (P = 0.038) and a higher surgeon satisfaction score (P = 0.001). Blood loss during hepatectomy was less in the optimized group (190 vs. 295 mL, P < 0.001). The optimized group had more harvested LNs (12.0 vs. 8.0, P < 0.001) and more positive LNs (8.0 vs. 5.0, P < 0.001), and a similar rate of adequate LND (88.1% vs. 77.4%, P = 0.149). The optimized group had longer median DFS (9.0 vs. 7.0 months, P = 0.018) and median OS (15.0 vs. 13.0 months, P = 0.046). In addition, the optimized group also had a shorter total operation time (P = 0.001), shorter liver resection time (P = 0.001), shorter LND time (P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001), and lower incidence of total morbidities (14.3% vs. 36.9%, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Our optimization of a three-step laparoscopic procedure for advanced ICC was feasible, improved the quality of liver resection and LND, prolonged survival, and led to better intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

Back Table Preparation of the Right Lobe Live Donor Liver Allograft: A Crucial Part of the Adult Live Donor Liver Transplant Procedure.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to describe our procedure for vascular reconstruction and back table bench preparation for the right lobe live donor allograft. Live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) remains an important option for the expansion of the donor pool. The procedure has been widely used, and its success is dependent on a technically perfect operation with appropriate inflow and outflow of the allograft. Adequate preparation of the right lobe (RL) allograft prior to implantation remains a vital part of the procedure. METHODS: Our technique of back table vascular reconstruction of the RL allograft has been performed using a hepatic vein patch venoplasty, inferior hepatic vein inclusion, portal vein reconstruction, and segment V and VIII reconstruction for all of our LDLTs. RESULTS: Between March 2009 and January 2020, 321 consecutive adult LDLTs were performed and underwent back table reconstruction with the techniques described. During that time period, no patients had hepatic insufficiency. There was a single thrombosis of a superior mesenteric vein (SMV) to PV jump conduit. CONCLUSIONS: Our technique of back table reconstruction of the LDLT right lobe graft remains a crucial part of the operative procedure. Our experience with RL grafts without middle hepatic vein (MHV) and our systematic approach for inflow and outflow reconstruction has yielded excellent results with no technical outflow issues and minimal inflow complications.

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy using the extrahepatic Glissonean approach: Technical tips for entering gaps.

There are two methods for selective inflow control from the liver hilum: individual hilar dissection and the Glissonean pedicle approach. The Glissonean pedicle approach has been increasingly used in laparoscopic anatomical liver resection. Recently, the extrahepatic Glissonean approach has been standardized due to the anatomical concept of Laennec's capsule. This article describes the technical details of entering gaps between the Laennec's capsule and Glissonean pedicle in laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy using the extrahepatic Glissonean approach. The key procedures of the laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy using the extrahepatic Glissonean approach included the following: (1) Dissection of left side of the hilar plate, (2) Dissection of ventral side of caudal end of the Arantius ligament, (3) Dissection and transection of left Glissonean pedicle. Our standardized technique is to create gap between the Laennec's capsule and Glissonean pedicle through appropriate traction and countertraction at the anatomical landmarks. Our procedure helps the surgeons to reproduce the extrahepatic Glissonean approach without parenchymal transection.

Laparoscopic middle-hepatic-vein-guided anatomical hemihepatectomy in the treatment of hepatolithiasis: a 10-year case study.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective 10-year case study evaluated the perioperative results and long-term efficacy of laparoscopic middle-hepatic-vein-guided hemihepatectomy (L-MHV-H) and traditional anatomical hemihepatectomy (TAH) in the treatment of hepatolithiasis (HL). METHODS: From January 2010 to December 2019, 99 patients with regional HL underwent laparoscopic anatomical hemihepatectomy (LAH) at our centre, including 43 patients in the L-MHV-H group and 56 patients in the TAH group. RESULTS: All patients in both groups were Child-Pugh grade A before operation. No significant between-group differences in general information, stone distribution, comorbidities, history of previous abdominal surgery or co-occurrence of gallstones and common bile duct stones were observed. The L-MHV-H group exhibited a higher intraoperative stone clearance rate (95.3% vs. 75.0%, p = 0.014) and a lower postoperative complication rate (10.1% vs. 48.2%, p = 0.005) compared with the TAH group. In the median follow-up time of 60 months (range 6-125 months), the L-MHV-H group had lower stone recurrence (2.3% vs. 19.6%, p = 0.013) and cholangitis recurrence (2.3% vs. 17.9%, p = 0.034) rates. No significant between-group differences in the other results were observed. CONCLUSIONS: L-MHV-H is safe and feasible for HL with certain advantages over TAH in improving the intraoperative stone clearance rate, reducing postoperative complication incidence and reducing stone and cholangitis recurrence rates.

Is the anterior approach suitable for laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy in patients with large HCC (5-10 cm)? A propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Right hemihepatectomy via the anterior approach was initially employed to improve the survival of patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). To date, the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy via the anterior approach (ALRH) for patients with large HCC remains unclear; thus, we compared short-term and long-term outcomes between ALRH and open right hemihepatectomy via the anterior approach (AORH). METHODS: 161 patients with HCC who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria in our department were enrolled in this study between January 2015 and August 2018. Perioperative and oncological outcomes were compared using propensity score matching analysis (PSM). RESULTS: There were 45 patients in the ALRH group and 116 patients in the AORH group. After 1:3 PSM, 40 ALRH patients and 95 AORH patients were well matched. The intraoperative time was longer in the ALRH group than in the AORH group after PSM (median, 297.5 vs. 205 min, P < 0.001). However, ALRH led to less intraoperative blood loss than AORH after PSM (median, 265 vs. 350 ml, P = 0.049). The rates of overall complications (12.5% vs. 30.5%, P = 0.028) in the ALRH group were significantly lower than those in the AORH group after PSM. Moreover, the survival outcomes were equivalent between the two groups with regard to 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates (P = 0.698) and disease-free survival rates (P = 0.510). CONCLUSION: ALRH could be safe and feasible for some patients with large HCCs (5-10 cm) when performed by experienced surgeons, and it had superior perioperative outcomes and equivalent oncological outcomes to AORH.

Dorsal vs ventral approach to the middle hepatic vein during laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy: multicenter retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Left hemihepatectomy requires exposure of the middle hepatic vein (MHV) at the cutting-surface. Two procedures are used to approach the MHV: a conventional ventral approach and a laparoscopy-specific dorsal approach. This multicenter retrospective observational study aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of these two procedures. METHODS: Clinical records of 38 consecutive patients that underwent laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy in four university hospitals between 2016 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Outcome measurements were operative blood loss, operating time, trend of postoperative laboratory data within 7 days after hepatectomy, and postoperative complications. Quality of MHV exposure was also evaluated and compared by three-grade evaluation (excellent/good/poor) using recorded still images of the cut-surface of the remnant liver (n = 35). RESULTS: Dorsal and ventral approaches were performed in 9 and 29 patients, respectively. Median operating time was 316 min (dorsal) and 314 min (ventral) (P = 0.71). Median operative blood loss was 45 ml (dorsal) and 105 ml (ventral) (P = 0.10). Two patients in the ventral approach group had bleeding in excess of 500 ml, which was not seen in the dorsal approach group. Excellent/good/poor MHV appearance on the cutting-surface was observed in 5/3/1 patients in the dorsal approach group, respectively, and in 7/8/11 patients in the ventral approach group, respectively (P = 0.03). In the ventral approach group, significant increases of aspartate aminotransferase (on postoperative day 1 and day 4/5) and of alanine aminotransferase (on postoperative day 2/3 and 4/5) were observed (P < 0.05). Postoperative complications were observed only in the ventral approach group (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: The dorsal approach could achieve safe and precise anatomical left hemihepatectomy with operation time and operative blood loss comparable to the conventional ventral approach.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in the Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing Hemihepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing hemihepatectomy. METHODS: From January 2017 to June 2019, 54 and 56 patients were enrolled into the control and ERAS group, retrospectively. All the indicators related to operation, liver functions, and postoperative outcomes were included in the analysis. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis identified 72 patients for further analysis. RESULTS: The clinicopathological characteristics were well-matched after PSM, and there were no significant differences in the operative duration, blood loss, blood transfusion, hospital costs, and most postoperative indicators in these 2 groups. In the ERAS group, D-dimer and fibrin degradation product values were significantly reduced (3.57 (2.874.60) µg/ml vs 4.81 (3.948.29) µg/ml and 11.90 (10.0418.02) µg/ml vs 15.80 (11.5529.24) µg/ml; P = .002 and P = .023, respectively). The days that semiliquid diet was allowed after surgery (2.00 (2.003.00) days vs 5.00 (4.006.00) days, P < .001), abdominal drainage tube indwelling duration (5.00 (4.005.00) days vs 5.00 (4.756.25) days, P = .004), and hospital stay after surgery (6.00 (6.007.00) days vs 8.00 (7.0010.00) days, P < .001) were also significantly shorter. The proportion of patients requiring analgesic treatment was significantly lower in the postoperative day 2 and day 4 (P < .001 and P = .025, respectively). The morbidity was significantly less (36.11% vs 69.44%, P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: ERAS programs are feasible and safe in HCC patients undergoing hemihepatectomy. Postoperative anticoagulant therapy may be one of the necessary steps.

Robotic versus open hemihepatectomy: a propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive approach has been increasingly applied in liver resection. However, laparoscopic major hepatectomy is technically demanding and is practiced only in expert centers around the world. Conversely, use of robot may help to overcome the difficulty and facilitate major hepatectomy. METHODS: Between September 2010 and March 2019, 151 patients received robotic hepatectomy for various indications in our center. 36 patients received robotic hemihepatectomy: 26 left hepatectomy and 10 right hepatectomy. During the same period, 737 patients received open hepatectomy and out of these, 173 patients received open hemihepatectomy. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS: After matching, there were 36 patients each in the robotic and open group. The two groups were comparable in demographic data, type of hemihepatectomy, underlying pathology, size of tumor, and background cirrhosis. Conversion was needed in 3 patients (8.3%) in the robotic group. There was no operative mortality. The operative blood loss and resection margin were similar. Though not significantly different, there was a higher rate of complications in the robotic group (36.1% vs. 22.2%) and this difference was mostly driven by higher intra-abdominal collection (16.7% vs. 5.6%) and bile leak (5.6% vs. 2.8%). Operative time was significantly longer (400.8 ± 136.1 min vs 255.4 ± 74.4 min, P < 0.001) but the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (median 5 days vs 6.5 days, P = 0.040) in the robotic group. When right and left hepatectomy were analyzed separately, the advantage of shorter hospital stay remained in left but not right hepatectomy. For patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, there was no difference between the two groups in 5-year overall and disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: Compared with the open approach, robotic hemihepatectomy has longer operation time but shorter hospital stay. Thus, use of robot is feasible and effective in hemihepatectomy with the benefit of shorter hospital stay.

Laparoscopic portal branch ligation of the right caudate lobe concomitant with portal vein embolization for planned right hemihepatectomy in advanced hepatobiliary cancers.

BACKGROUND: The role of ligation of the portal venous branches to the caudate lobe (cPVL) as preparation for planned major hepatectomy is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of laparoscopic cPVL (Lap-cPVL) concomitant with transileocolic portal vein embolization of the right portal venous system (rTIPE), namely, Lap-cPVL/rTIPE, for planned right hemihepatectomy (rHx) in advanced hepatobiliary cancer patients. METHODS: Thirty-one patients who underwent rHx after rTIPE with/without Lap-cPVL between March 2013 and March 2020 were enrolled in this study. The Lap-cPVL was performed for the portal branches of the right caudate lobe. RESULTS: Eight of the 31 patients underwent Lap-cPVL/rTIPE. The degree of hypertrophy was significantly increased in Lap-cPVL/rTIPE (19.3%, range 6.5-25.6%) as compared to rTIPE (7.2%, range - 1.1 to 21.2%) (p=0.027). The functional kinetic growth rate was also significantly increased in Lap-cPVL/rTIPE (5.40%, range 2.17-5.97) than that in rTIPE (1.85%, range - 0.22 to 6.45%) (p=0.046). Postoperative liver failure ≧ grade B occurred in 21.7% of patients in rTIPE, while there was no postoperative liver failure ≧ grade B in Lap-cPVL/rTIPE. Mortality rates were zero after rHx in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Lap-cPVL/rTIPE is safe and provides an additional effect on liver hypertrophy in advanced hepatobiliary cancers.

Laennec's approach for laparoscopic anatomical hemihepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laennec's capsule has been found for about 200 years. However, laparoscopic anatomical right and left hemihepatectomy (LARH and LALH) using Laennec's approach are rarely reported. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the technical details and the surgical outcomes of 15 patients who underwent LAH via Laennec's approach between May 2017 and July 2020. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, and hospital stay were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Four of 15 patients were diagnosed with hepatic hemangioma, 2 had hepatolithiasis, and 9 patients had primary liver cancer. During the surgery, Laennec's approach was used for LAH without conversion to open surgery. Four patients were treated with LARH, and 11 patients were cured with LALH. The mean age of the patients was 62.1 ± 6.5 years, and four were male. The mean operative time, blood loss, and length of the postoperative hospital stay were 193 ± 49 min, 247 ± 120 mL, and 8.7 ± 2.0 days, respectively. There was no incidence of postoperative bile leakage and bleeding. No mortality occurred. We also demonstrated that Laennec's capsule does exist around the peripheral hepatic veins with histological confirmation. CONCLUSIONS: Laennec's approach is safe and feasible for LAH. Precise isolation of Laennec's approach based on Laennec's capsule helps to standardize the surgical techniques for laparoscopic anatomical hepatectomy.

Safety and effectiveness evaluation of a two-handed technique combining harmonic scalpel and laparoscopic Peng's multifunction operative dissector in laparoscopic hemihepatectomy.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a two-hand technique combining harmonic scalpel (HS) and laparoscopic Peng's multifunction operative dissector (LPMOD) in patients who underwent laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LHH). METHODS: We designed and conducted a case-control study nested in a prospectively collected laparoscopic liver surgery database. Patients who underwent LHH for liver parenchyma transection using HS + LPMOD were defined as cases (n = 98) and LPMOD only as controls (n = 47) from January 2016 to May 2018. Propensity score matching (1:1) between the case and control groups was used in the analyses. RESULTS: The case group had significantly less intraoperative blood loss in milliliters (169.4 ± 133.5 vs. 221.5 ± 176.3, P = 0.03) and shorter operative time in minutes (210.5 ± 56.1 vs. 265.7 ± 67.1, P = 0.02) comparing to the control group. The conversion to laparotomy, postoperative hospital stay, resection margin, the mean peak level of postoperative liver function parameters, bile leakage rate, and others were comparable between the two groups. There was no perioperative mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the two-handed technique combing HS and LPMOD in LHH is safe and effective which is associated with shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss compared with LPMOD alone. The technique facilitates laparoscopic liver resection and is recommended for use.

Robotic, laparoscopic or open hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas over 10 cm in diameter.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas. METHODS: From April 2011 to April 2017, consecutive patients who underwent hemihepatectomy for giant liver haemangiomas were included in this study. According to the type of operation, these patients were divided into the robotic hemihepatectomy (RH) group, the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) group, and the open hemihepatectomy (OH) group. The perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared among the three groups. The study was reported following the STROCSS criteria. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, sex, tumour location, body surface area (BSA), future liver remnant volume (FLR), standard liver volume (SLV), liver haemangioma volume, FLR/SLV, resected normal liver volume/resected volume, hepatic disease, rates of blood transfusion, liver function after 24 h of surgery, operative morbidity and mortality among the three groups. Compared with patients in the RH group (n = 19) and the LH group (n = 13), patients in the OH group (n = 25) had a significantly longer postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.05), time to oral intake (P < 0.05), and time to get-out-of-bed (P < 0.05); a higher VAS score after 24 h of surgery (P < 0.05); and a shorter operative time (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in these postoperative outcomes (P>0.05) between the RH group and the LH group. When the setup time in the RH group was excluded, the operative time in the RH group was significantly shorter than that in the LH group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the operative time between the RH group and the OH group (P>0.05). The amount of intraoperative blood loss in the RH group was the lowest among the three groups (P<0.05), and the amount of intraoperative blood loss in the LH group was less than that in the OH group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Robotic and laparoscopic hemihepatectomies were associated with less intraoperative blood loss,better postoperative recovery and lower pain score. Compared with laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, robotic hemihepatectomy was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter operative time.

[Abdominal pain and unclear focal liver lesion in 46-year-old female patient]. / Rechtsseitiger Oberbauchschmerz und unklare Leberraumforderung bei einer 46-jährigen Patientin.

A 46-year-old woman presented with recurrent right upper quadrant pain. Abdominal ultrasound revealed an inhomogeneous liver lesion (4â€¯× 7 cm) with complex echotexture. Since further contrast-enhanced imaging tests were inconclusive and lesion integrity remained unclear, a left hemihepatectomy was performed. Histological examination revealed a hepatic epithelioid angiomyolipoma. Hepatic epithelioid angiomyolipoma is a rare, mostly benign, mesenchymal hepatic tumor, composed of smooth muscle cells, adipose tissue, and blood vessels of varying proportions, and its correct diagnosis remains a clinical challenge.

[Blood-saving technologies in extensive liver resections]. / Taktika krovosberezheniya pri obshirnykh rezektsiyakh pecheni.

The researches devoted to blood-saving technologies in extensive liver resections are analyzed in the manuscript. Resection of three and more liver segments is effective method of surgical treatment of various focal liver lesions. Surgical (anatomical resection with hilar glissonean access, Pringle maneuver, modern technical equipment, etc.), anesthesiological (reduction of central venous pressure, hemostatic agents) and transfusion (autologous blood donation, transfusion, cell saver, etc.) methods contribute to prevention and reduction of blood loss. Intraoperative measures for blood loss prevention should include adequate surgical incision and liver mobilization, precise techniques of parenchymal dissection (for example, cavitation surgical aspirator-destructor), use of clip applicators and local or systemic hemostatic agents.

Robotic vs laparoscopic hemihepatectomy: A comparative study from a single center.

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery is increasingly being used in hepatectomy. Previous studies comparing the robotic and laparoscopic minor hepatectomy have been documented, but comparative studies on robotic and laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (LH) involving a large patient cohort are rare. The objective of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes between robotic and LH. METHODS: Data on the demographics, clinicopathologic characteristics, and perioperative outcomes of consecutive patients who underwent robotic or LH in a single center between November 2011 and July 2017 were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 92 patients underwent robotic and 48 LH. Multiple linear regression analysis showed no significant difference in perioperative outcomes including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, and mortality between the groups. Compared to the laparoscopic cohort, the robotic cohort had a significantly less estimated blood loss (120.24 mL; 95% confidence interval, 53.72-186.76) and a significantly lower conversation rate (1.09% vs 10.42%; P = .034). Stratified and interaction analyses demonstrated that disease type had an interaction effect on the association between the operative approach and the estimated blood loss. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic hemihepatectomy was safe and feasible in selected patients. It had similar perioperative outcomes as LH and was better than LH regarding estimated blood loss and open conversion.