Towards a Standardization of Learning Curve Assessment in Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to analyze the learning curves of minimal invasive liver surgery(MILS) and propose a standardized reporting. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: MILS offers benefits compared to open resections. For a safe introduction along the learning curve, formal training is recommended. However, definitions of learning curves and methods to assess it lack standardization. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases identified studies on learning curves in MILS. The primary outcome was the number needed to overcome the learning curve. Secondary outcomes included endpoints defining learning curves, and characterization of different learning phases(competency, proficiency and mastery). RESULTS: 60 articles with 12'241 patients and 102 learning curve analyses were included. The laparoscopic and robotic approach was evaluated in 71 and 18 analyses and both approaches combined in 13 analyses. Sixty-one analyses (60%) based the learning curve on statistical calculations. The most often used parameters to define learning curves were operative time (n=64), blood loss (n=54), conversion (n=42) and postoperative complications (n=38). Overall competency, proficiency and mastery were reached after 34 (IQR 19-56), 50 (IQR 24-74), 58 (IQR 24-100) procedures respectively. Intraoperative parameters improved earlier (operative time: competency to proficiency to mastery: -13%, 2%; blood loss: competency to proficiency to mastery: -33%, 0%; conversion rate (competency to proficiency to mastery; -21%, -29%), whereas postoperative complications improved later (competency to proficiency to mastery: -25%, -41%). CONCLUSIONS: This review summarizes the highest evidence on learning curves in MILS taking into account different definitions and confounding factors. A standardized three-phase reporting of learning phases (competency, proficiency, mastery) is proposed and should be followed.

Complexity and Experience Grading to Guide Patient Selection for Minimally-invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: An ISGPS Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: The ISGPS aims to develop a universally accepted complexity and experience grading system to guide the safe implementation of robotic and laparoscopic minimally-invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). BACKGROUND: Despite the perceived advantages of MIPD, its global adoption has been slow due to the inherent complexity of the procedure and challenges to acquiring surgical experience. Its wider adoption must be undertaken with an emphasis towards appropriate patient selection according to adequate surgeon and center experience. METHODS: The ISGPS developed a complexity and experience grading system to guide patient selection for MIPD based on an evidence-based review and a series of discussions. RESULTS: The ISGPS complexity and experience grading system for MIPD is subclassified into patient-related risk factors and provider experience-related variables. The patient-related risk factors include anatomical (main pancreatic and common bile duct diameters), tumor-specific (vascular contact), and conditional (obesity and previous complicated upper abdominal surgery/disease) factors, all incorporated in an A-B-C classification, graded as no, a single, and multiple risk factors. The surgeon and center experience-related variables include surgeon total MIPD experience (cut-offs 40 and 80) and center annual MIPD volume (cut-offs 10 and 30), all also incorporated in an A-B-C classification. CONCLUSION: This ISGPS complexity and experience grading system for robotic and laparoscopic MIPD may enable surgeons to optimally select patients after duly considering specific risk factors known to influence the complexity of the procedure. This grading system will likely allow for a thoughtful and stepwise implementation of MIPD and facilitate a fair comparison of outcome between centers and countries.

Differences in Lymph Node Metastases Patterns Among Non-pancreatic Periampullary Cancers and Histologic Subtypes: An International Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study and Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Standard lymphadenectomy for pancreatoduodenectomy is defined for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and adopted for patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC), ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC), distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA), or duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC). This study aimed to compare the patterns of lymph node metastases among the different NPPCs in a large series and in a systematic review to guide the discussion on surgical lymphadenectomy and pathology assessment. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for NPPC with at least one lymph node metastasis (2010-2021) from 24 centers in nine countries. The primary outcome was identification of lymph node stations affected in case of a lymph node metastasis per NPPC. A separate systematic review included studies on lymph node metastases patterns of AAC, dCCA, and DAC. RESULTS: The study included 2367 patients, of whom 1535 had AAC, 616 had dCCA, and 216 had DAC. More patients with pancreatobiliary type AAC had one or more lymph node metastasis (67.2% vs 44.8%; P < 0.001) compared with intestinal-type, but no differences in metastasis pattern were observed. Stations 13 and 17 were most frequently involved (95%, 94%, and 90%). Whereas dCCA metastasized more frequently to station 12 (13.0% vs 6.4% and 7.0%, P = 0.005), DAC metastasized more frequently to stations 6 (5.0% vs 0% and 2.7%; P < 0.001) and 14 (17.0% vs 8.4% and 11.7%, P = 0.015). CONCLUSION: This study is the first to comprehensively demonstrate the differences and similarities in lymph node metastases spread among NPPCs, to identify the existing research gaps, and to underscore the importance of standardized lymphadenectomy and pathologic assessment for AAC, dCCA, and DAC.

The Five Periampullary Cancers, not Just Different Siblings but Different Families: An International Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer arising in the periampullary region can be anatomically classified in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA), duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC), and ampullary carcinoma. Based on histopathology, ampullary carcinoma is currently subdivided in intestinal (AmpIT), pancreatobiliary (AmpPB), and mixed subtypes. Despite close anatomical resemblance, it is unclear how ampullary subtypes relate to the remaining periampullary cancers in tumor characteristics and behavior. METHODS: This international cohort study included patients after curative intent resection for periampullary cancer retrieved from 44 centers (from Europe, United States, Asia, Australia, and Canada) between 2010 and 2021. Preoperative CA19-9, pathology outcomes and 8-year overall survival were compared between DAC, AmpIT, AmpPB, dCCA, and PDAC. RESULTS: Overall, 3809 patients were analyzed, including 348 DAC, 774 AmpIT, 848 AmpPB, 1,036 dCCA, and 803 PDAC. The highest 8-year overall survival was found in patients with AmpIT and DAC (49.8% and 47.9%), followed by AmpPB (34.9%, P < 0.001), dCCA (26.4%, P = 0.020), and finally PDAC (12.9%, P < 0.001). A better survival was correlated with lower CA19-9 levels but not with tumor size, as DAC lesions showed the largest size. CONCLUSIONS: Despite close anatomic relations of the five periampullary cancers, this study revealed differences in preoperative blood markers, pathology, and long-term survival. More tumor characteristics are shared between DAC and AmpIT and between AmpPB and dCCA than between the two ampullary subtypes. Instead of using collective definitions for "periampullary cancers" or anatomical classification, this study emphasizes the importance of individual evaluation of each histopathological subtype with the ampullary subtypes as individual entities in future studies.

Global Outcomes Benchmarks in Laparoscopic Liver Surgery for Segments 7 and 8: International Multicenter Analysis.

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.

Are enhanced recovery protocols after pancreatoduodenectomy still efficient when applied in elderly patients? A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis investigated the effects of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols compared to conventional care on postoperative outcomes in patients aged 70 years or older undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). METHODS: Five databases were systematically searched. Comparative studies with available individual patient data (IPD) were included. The main outcomes were postoperative morbidity, length of stay, readmission and postoperative functional recovery elements. To assess an age-dependent effect, the group was divided in septuagenarians (70-79 years) and older patients (≥80 years). RESULTS: IPD were obtained from 15 of 31 eligible studies comprising 1109 patients. The overall complication and major complication rates were comparable in both groups (OR 0.92 [95% CI: 0.65-1.29], p = .596 and OR 1.22 [95% CI: 0.61-2.46], p = .508). Length of hospital stay tended to be shorter in the ERAS group compared to the conventional care group (-0.14 days [95% CI: -0.29 to 0.01], p = .071) while readmission rates were comparable and the total length of stay including days in hospital after readmission tended to be shorter in the ERAS group (-0.28 days [95% CI: -0.62 to 0.05], p = .069). In the subgroups, the length of stay was shorter in octogenarians treated with ERAS (-0.36 days [95% CI: -0.71 to -0.004], p = .048). The readmission rate increased slightly but not significantly while the total length of stay was not longer in the ERAS group. CONCLUSION: ERAS in the elderly is safe and its benefits are preserved in the care of even in patients older than 80 years. Standardized care protocol should be encouraged in all pancreatic centers.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Hemihepatectomy: The ORANGE II PLUS Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: To compare outcomes after laparoscopic versus open major liver resection (hemihepatectomy) mainly for primary or metastatic cancer. The primary outcome measure was time to functional recovery. Secondary outcomes included morbidity, quality of life (QoL), and for those with cancer, resection margin status and time to adjuvant systemic therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized controlled, patient-blinded, superiority trial on adult patients undergoing hemihepatectomy. Patients were recruited from 16 hospitals in Europe between November 2013 and December 2018. RESULTS: Of the 352 randomly assigned patients, 332 patients (94.3%) underwent surgery (laparoscopic, n = 166 and open, n = 166) and comprised the analysis population. The median time to functional recovery was 4 days (IQR, 3-5; range, 1-30) for laparoscopic hemihepatectomy versus 5 days (IQR, 4-6; range, 1-33) for open hemihepatectomy (difference, -17.5% [96% CI, -25.6 to -8.4]; P < .001). There was no difference in major complications (laparoscopic 24/166 [14.5%] v open 28/166 [16.9%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.84; P = .58). Regarding QoL, both global health status (difference, 3.2 points; P < .001) and body image (difference, 0.9 points; P < .001) scored significantly higher in the laparoscopic group. For the 281 (84.6%) patients with cancer, R0 resection margin status was similar (laparoscopic 106 [77.9%] v open 122 patients [84.1%], OR, 0.60; P = .14) with a shorter time to adjuvant systemic therapy in the laparoscopic group (46.5 days v 62.8 days, hazard ratio, 2.20; P = .009). CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing hemihepatectomy, the laparoscopic approach resulted in a shorter time to functional recovery compared with open surgery. In addition, it was associated with a better QoL, and in patients with cancer, a shorter time to adjuvant systemic therapy with no adverse impact on cancer outcomes observed.

International consensus guidelines on robotic pancreatic surgery in 2023.

Background: With the rapid development of robotic surgery, especially for the abdominal surgery, robotic pancreatic surgery (RPS) has been applied increasingly around the world. However, evidence-based guidelines regarding its application, safety, and efficacy are still lacking. To harvest robust evidence and comprehensive clinical practice, this study aims to develop international guidelines on the use of RPS. Methods: World Health Organization (WHO) Handbook for Guideline Development, GRADE Grid method, Delphi vote, and the AGREE-II instrument were used to establish the Guideline Steering Group, Guideline Development Group, and Guideline Secretary Group, formulate 19 clinical questions, develop the recommendations, and draft the guidelines. Three online meetings were held on 04/12/2020, 30/11/2021, and 25/01/2022 to vote on the recommendations and get advice and suggestions from all involved experts. All the experts focusing on minimally invasive surgery from America, Europe and Oceania made great contributions to this consensus guideline. Results: After a systematic literature review 176 studies were included, 19 questions were addressed and 14 recommendations were developed through the expert assessment and comprehensive judgment of the quality and credibility of the evidence. Conclusions: The international RPS guidelines can guide current practice for surgeons, patients, medical societies, hospital administrators, and related social communities. Further randomized trials are required to determine the added value of RPS as compared to open and laparoscopic surgery.

Recurrence and tumor-related death after resection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with metabolic syndrome.

Background & Aims: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a growing epidemic and a risk factor for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study investigated the long-term outcomes of liver resection (LR) for HCC in patients with MS. Rates, timing, patterns, and treatment of recurrences were investigated, and cancer-specific survivals were assessed. Methods: Between 2001 and 2021, data from 24 clinical centers were collected. Overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and cancer-specific survival were analyzed as well as recurrence patterns and treatment. The analysis was conducted using a competing-risk framework. The trajectory of the risk of recurrence over time was applied to a competing risk analysis. For post-recurrence survival, death resulting from tumor progression was the primary endpoint, whereas deaths with recurrence relating to other causes were considered as competing events. Results: In total, 813 patients were included in the study. Median OS was 81.4 months (range 28.1-157.0 months), and recurrence occurred in 48.3% of patients, with a median RFS of 39.8 months (range 15.7-174.7 months). Cause-specific hazard of recurrence showed a first peak 6 months (0.027), and a second peak 24 months (0.021) after surgery. The later the recurrence, the higher the chance of receiving curative intent approaches (p = 0.001). Size >5 cm, multiple tumors, microvascular invasion, and cirrhosis were independent predictors of recurrence showing a cause-specific hazard over time. RFS was associated with death for recurrence (hazard ratio: 0.985, 95% CI: 0.977-0.995; p = 0.002). Conclusions: Patients with MS undergoing LR for HCC have good long-term survival. Recurrence occurs in 48% of patients with a double-peak incidence and time-specific hazards depending on tumor-related factors and underlying disease. The timing of recurrence significantly impacts survival. Surveillance after resection should be adjusted over time depending on risk factors. Impact and implications: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a growing epidemic and a significant risk factor for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The present study demonstrated that patients who undergo surgical resection for HCC on MS have a good long-term survival and that recurrence occurs in almost half of the cases with a double peak incidence and time-specific hazards depending on tumor-related factors and underlying liver disease. Also, the timing of recurrence significantly impacts survival. Clinicians should therefore adjust follow-up after surgery accordingly, considering timing of recurrence and specific risk factors. Also, the results of the present study might help design future trials on the use of adjuvant therapy following resection.