Impact of Liver Cirrhosis, Severity of Cirrhosis, and Portal Hypertension on the Difficulty and Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Major Liver Resections for Primary Liver Malignancies.

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.

Internal and external factors affecting the performance score of surgical trainees doing laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective, observational cohort study in a structured training programme.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy is a common procedure and introduced early in general surgical training. How internal (i.e. surgeon's experience) or external (i.e. disease severity) may affect procedure performance is not well-studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors that may have an influence on the performance scores for surgical trainees. METHODS: A prospective, observational cohort study of laparoscopic appendectomies performed by surgical trainees (experience < 4 years) operating under supervision. Trainers evaluated trainees' overall performance on a 6-point scale for proficiency. Perioperative data were recorded, including appendicitis severity, operating time and the overall difficulty of the procedure as assessed by the trainer. A "Challenging" procedure was defined as a combination of either/or "perforation" and "difficult". Trainees who had performed > 30 appendectomies were defined as "experienced". The trainees were asked if they had used simulation or web-based tools the week prior to surgery. RESULTS: 142 procedure evaluation forms were included of which 19 (13%) were "perforated", 14 (10%) "difficult" and 24 (17%) "Challenging". Perforated appendicitis was strongly associated with procedure difficulty (OR 21.2, 95% CI 6.0-75.6). Experienced trainees performed "proficient" more often than non-experienced (OR 34.5, 95% CI 6.8-176.5). "Difficult" procedures were inversely associated with proficiency (OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.0-0.9). In "Challenging" procedures, identifying the appendix had lowest proficiency (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.1-0.9). The procedures assessed as "difficult" had significantly longer operating time with a median (IQR) of 90 (75-100) min compared to 59 (25-120) min for the non-difficult (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both internal and external factors contribute to the performance score. Perforated appendicitis, technical difficult procedures and trainee experience all play a role, but a "difficult" procedure had most overall impact on proficiency evaluation.

Internal validation of the Tampa Robotic Difficulty Scoring System: real-time assessment of the novel robotic scoring system in predicting clinical outcomes after hepatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: As the robotic approach in hepatectomy gains prominence, the need to establish a robotic-specific difficulty scoring system (DSS) is evident. The Tampa Difficulty Score was conceived to bridge this gap, offering a novel and dedicated robotic DSS aimed at improving preoperative surgical planning and predicting potential clinical challenges in robotic hepatectomies. In this study, we internally validated the recently published Tampa DSS by applying the scoring system to our most recent cohort of patients. METHODS: The Tampa Difficulty Score was applied to 170 recent patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy in our center. Patients were classified into: Group 1 (score 1-8, n = 23), Group 2 (score 9-24, n = 120), Group 3 (score 25-32, n = 20), and Group 4 (score 33-49, n = 7). Key variables for each of the groups were analyzed and compared. Statistical significance was accepted at p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: Notable correlations were found between the Tampa Difficulty Score and key clinical parameters such as operative duration (p < 0.0001), estimated blood loss (p < 0.0001), and percentage of major resection (p = 0.00007), affirming the score's predictive capacity for operative technical complexity. The Tampa Difficulty Score also correlated with major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) (p < 0.0001), length of stay (p = 0.011), and 30-day readmission (p = 0.046) after robotic hepatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The Tampa Difficulty Score, through the internal validation process, has confirmed its effectiveness in predicting intra- and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy. The predictive capacity of this system is useful in preoperative surgical planning and risk categorization. External validation is necessary to further explore the accuracy of this robotic DSS.

Utilization of the modified Kama scoring system for predicting bail-out cholecystectomy: a valuable tool in the era of rising laparoscopic surgery prevalence.

PURPOSE: Recently, bail-out cholecystectomy (BOC) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy to avoid severe complications, such as vasculobiliary injury, has become widely used and increased in prevalence. However, current predictive factors or scoring systems are insufficient. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to test the validity of existing scoring systems and determine a suitable cutoff value for predicting BOC. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed 305 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy and divided them into a total cholecystectomy group (n = 265) and a BOC group (n = 40). Preoperative and operative findings were collected, and cutoff values for the existing scoring systems (Kama's and Nassar's) were modified using a prospectively maintained database. RESULTS: The BOC rate was 13% with no severe complications. A logistic regression analysis revealed that the Kama's score (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval 0.91-0.96; P < 0.01) was an independent predictor of BOC. A cutoff value of 6.5 points gave an area under the curve of 0.81, with a sensitivity of 87% and a specificity of 67%. CONCLUSIONS: Kama's difficulty scoring system with a modified cutoff value (6.5 points) is effective for predicting BOC.

Risk Factors and Outcomes of Open Conversion During Minimally Invasive Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study on 3880 Procedures Comparing the Laparoscopic and Robotic Approaches.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the advances in minimally invasive (MI) liver surgery, most major hepatectomies (MHs) continue to be performed by open surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors and outcomes of open conversion during MI MH, including the impact of the type of approach (laparoscopic vs. robotic) on the occurrence and outcomes of conversions. METHODS: Data on 3880 MI conventional and technical (right anterior and posterior sectionectomies) MHs were retrospectively collected. Risk factors and perioperative outcomes of open conversion were analyzed. Multivariate analysis, propensity score matching, and inverse probability treatment weighting analysis were performed to control for confounding factors. RESULTS: Overall, 3211 laparoscopic MHs (LMHs) and 669 robotic MHs (RMHs) were included, of which 399 (10.28%) had an open conversion. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that male sex, laparoscopic approach, cirrhosis, previous abdominal surgery, concomitant other surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score 3/4, larger tumor size, conventional MH, and Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification III procedures were associated with an increased risk of conversion. After matching, patients requiring open conversion had poorer outcomes compared with non-converted cases, as evidenced by the increased operation time, blood transfusion rate, blood loss, hospital stay, postoperative morbidity/major morbidity and 30/90-day mortality. Although RMH showed a decreased risk of conversion compared with LMH, converted RMH showed increased blood loss, blood transfusion rate, postoperative major morbidity and 30/90-day mortality compared with converted LMH. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple risk factors are associated with conversion. Converted cases, especially those due to intraoperative bleeding, have unfavorable outcomes. Robotic assistance seemed to increase the feasibility of the MI approach, but converted robotic procedures showed inferior outcomes compared with converted laparoscopic procedures.

External validation of the Japanese difficulty score for laparoscopic hepatectomy in patients undergoing robotic-assisted hepatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: The Japanese difficulty score (JDS) categorizes laparoscopic hepatectomy into low, intermediate, and high complexity procedures, and correlates with operative and postoperative outcomes. We sought to perform a validation study to determine if the JDS correlates with operative and postoperative indicators of surgical complexity for patients undergoing robotic-assisted hepatectomy. METHODS: Retrospective review of 657 minimally invasive hepatectomy procedures was performed between January 2008 through March 2019. Outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion, complications, post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), length of stay, 30-day readmission, and 30-day and 90-day mortality. Patients were grouped based on JDS defined as: low (< 4), intermediate (4-6), and high (7 +) complexity procedures. Statistical comparisons were analyzed by ANOVA or χ2 test. RESULTS: 241 of 657 patients underwent robotic-assisted resection. Of these patients, 137 were included in the analysis based on JDS: 25 low, 58 intermediate, and 54 high. High JDS was associated with more major resections (≥ 4 contiguous segments) versus minor resections (median JDS 8 vs. 5, P < 0.0001). High JDS was associated with significantly longer operative times, higher EBL, and more blood transfusions. High JDS was associated with higher rates of PHLF at 16.7%, compared with 5.2% intermediate and 0.0% low, (P = 0.018). Complication rates, 30-day readmissions, and mortality rates were similar between groups. Median LOS was longer in patients with high JDS compared with intermediate and low (4 days vs. 3 days vs. 2 days; P = 0.0005). DISCUSSION: Higher JDS was associated with multiple indicators of operative complexity, including greater extent of resection, increased operative time, EBL, blood transfusion, PHLF, and LOS. This validation study supports the ability of the JDS to categorize patients undergoing robotic-assisted hepatectomy by complexity.

Association of standardized liver volume and body mass index with outcomes of minimally invasive liver resections.

INTRODUCTION: While minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) have demonstrated advantages in improved post-operative recovery, widespread adoption is hampered by inherent technical difficulties. Our study attempts to analyze the role of anthropometric measures in MILR-related outcomes. METHODS: Between 2012 and 2020, 676 consecutive patients underwent MILR at the Singapore General Hospital of which 565 met study criteria and were included. Patients were stratified based on Body Mass Index (BMI) as well as Standardized Liver Volumes (SLV). Associations between BMI and SLV to selected peri-operative outcomes were analyzed using restricted cubic splines. RESULTS: A BMI of ≥ 29 was associated with increase in blood loss [Mean difference (MD) 69 mls, 95% CI 2 to 137] as well as operative conversions [Relative Risk (RR) 1.63, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.62] among patients undergoing MILR while a SLV of 1600 cc or higher was associated with an increase in blood loss (MD 30 mls, 95% CI 10 to 49). In addition, a BMI of ≤ 20 was associated with an increased risk of major complications (RR 2.25, 95% 1.16 to 4.35). The magnitude of differences observed in these findings increased with each unit change in BMI and SLV. CONCLUSION: Both BMI and SLV were useful anthropometric measures in predicting peri-operative outcomes in MILR and may be considered for incorporation in future difficulty scoring systems for MILR.

Appropriate indications for laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) has increased, but appropriate indications for LRH are unclear. This study aimed to clarify appropriate indications for LRH. METHODS: We retrospectively compared surgical outcomes between open RH (ORH) (n = 57) and LRH (n = 40) groups. To detect difficult cases of complete pure LRH, we examined patients with unplanned intraoperative hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS)/open conversion (n = 6). RESULTS: In the LRH versus ORH group, as previous hepatectomy, laparoscopic (75% vs. 12%, p < 0.001) and partial hepatectomy (Hr0) (73% vs. 37%, p = 0.002) were more frequently performed, and as RH procedure, partial hepatectomy (Hr0) (88% vs. 47%, p = 0.0002) was more frequently performed. S1 tumor cases were higher in ORH group (11% vs. 0%), but S2-6 cases were higher in LRH group (73% vs. 49%) (p = 0.02). In LRH group, compared to the pure LRH patients, HALS/open conversion patients underwent significantly more previous hepatectomy with more than lobectomy (Hr2-3) (33% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.033) and more RH procedures with segmentectomy (HrS) (33% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.03). All LRH requiring a repeat hepatic hilar approach were HALS conversions. CONCLUSION: Appropriate indications for LRH were previous hepatectomy was laparoscopic partial hepatectomy (Hr0), and RH procedure was partial hepatectomy (Hr0) for S2-6 tumor location. When RH is more than segmentectomy (HrS) requiring a repeat hepatic hilar approach, planned HALS or ORH may be a better approach than pure LRH.

Development and validation of a preoperative "difficulty score" for laparoscopic transabdominal adrenalectomy: a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: A difficulty score for laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) is lacking in the literature. A retrospective cohort study was designed to develop a preoperative "difficulty score" for LA. METHODS: A multicenter study was conducted involving four Italian tertiary centers for adrenal disease. The population was randomly divided into two subsets: training group and validation one. A multicenter study was undertaken, including 964 patients. Patient, adrenal lesion, surgeon's characteristics, and the type of procedure were studied as potential predictors of target events. The operative time (pOT), conversion rate (cLA), or both were used as indicators of the difficulty in three multivariate models. All models were developed in a training cohort (70% of the sample) and validated using 30% of patients. For all models, the ability to predict complicated postoperative course was reported describing the area under the curve (AUCs). Logistic regression, reporting odds ratio (OR) with p-value, was used. RESULTS: In model A, gender (OR 2.04, p = 0.001), BMI (OR 1.07, p = 0.002), previous surgery (OR 1.29, p = 0.048), site (OR 21.8, p < 0.001) and size of the lesion (OR 1.16, p = 0.002), cumulative sum of procedures (OR 0.99, p < 0.001), extended (OR 26.72, p < 0.001) or associated procedures (OR 4.32, p = 0.015) increased the pOT. In model B, ASA (OR 2.86, p = 0.001), lesion size (OR 1.20, p = 0.005), and extended resection (OR 8.85, p = 0.007) increased the cLA risk. Model C had similar results to model A. All scores obtained predicted the target events in validation cohort (OR 1.99, p < 0.001; OR 1.37, p = 0.007; OR 1.70, p < 0.001, score A, B, and C, respectively). The AUCs in predicting complications were 0.740, 0.686, and 0.763 for model A, B, and C, respectively. CONCLUSION: A difficulty score based on both pOT and cLA (Model C) was developed using 70% of the sample. The score was validated using a second cohort. Finally, the score was tested, and its results are able to predict a complicated postoperative course.

Utility of the Iwate difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy: do surgical outcomes differ for tumors in segments VI and VII?

INTRODUCTION: The Iwate Score (IS) have not been well-validated for specific procedures, especially for right posterior sectionectomy (RPS). In this study, the utility of the IS was determined for laparoscopic (L)RPS and the effect of tumor location on surgical outcomes was investigated. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of 647 L-RPS performed in 40 international centers of which 596L-RPS cases met the inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes of patients stratified based on the Iwate score were compared to determine whether a correlation with surgical difficulty existed. A 1:1 Mahalanobis distance matching was utilized to investigate the effect of tumor location on L-RPS outcomes. RESULTS: The patients were stratified into 3 levels of difficulty (31 intermediate, 143 advanced, and 422 expert) based on the IS. When using a stepwise increase of the IS excluding the tumor location score, only Pringle's maneuver was more frequently used in the higher surgical difficulty level (35.5%, 54.6%, and 65.2%, intermediate, advanced, and expert levels, respectively, Z = 3.34, p = 0.001). Other perioperative results were not associated with a statistical gradation toward higher difficulty level. 80 of 85 patients with a segment VI lesion and 511 patients with a segment VII lesion were matched 1:1. There were no significant differences in the perioperative outcomes of the two groups including open conversion, operating time, blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative stay, major morbidity, and mortality. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing L-RPS, the IS did not significantly correlate with most outcome measures associated with intraoperative difficulty and postoperative outcomes. Similarly, tumor location had no effect on L-RPS outcomes.

Impact of non-liver-related previous abdominal surgery on the difficulty of minimally invasive liver resections: a propensity score-matched controlled study.

INTRODUCTION: The presence of previous abdominal surgery (PAS) has traditionally been considered to add difficulty to and increase risk of complications of laparoscopic procedures. This study aims to analyse the impact of non-liver-related PAS on the difficulty of minimally invasive liver resections (MILRs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: After exclusion of patients with concomitant major surgical procedures as well as previous liver resections, 515 consecutive patients undergoing MILR in Singapore General Hospital from 2006 to 2019 were analysed, consisting of 161 MILR in patients with previous abdominal surgery (WPAS) and 354 MILR in patients without previous abdominal surgery (WOPAS). Propensity score-matched (PSM) comparison was performed between WPAS and WOPAS groups. In addition, subgroup analysis was made comparing previous upper or lower abdominal surgery and open versus minimally invasive approach of PAS. Outcomes measured include those associated with operative difficulty such as open conversion rates, operative time, blood loss, as well as morbidity and mortality rates. RESULTS: MILR outcomes in patients WPAS are not inferior to those WOPAS. Overall open conversion rate was 8.2%, higher in patients WOPAS compared to patients WPAS (11.9% versus 3.5%, p = 0.015). Operating time (p = 0.942), blood loss (p = 0.063), intraoperative blood transfusion (p = 0.750), length of hospital stay (p = 0.206), morbidity (p = 0.217) and 30- and 90-day mortality (p = 1 & p = 0.367) were comparable between the two groups and subgroup analysis. CONCLUSION: Outcomes of MILR in patients with previous non-liver-related abdominal surgery are not inferior to patients without previous abdominal surgery.

Validation of the IWATE criteria as a laparoscopic liver resection difficulty score in a single North American cohort.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) involves a difficult learning curve, for which multiple difficulty scores have been proposed to assist with safe adaptation. The IWATE Criteria is a 4-level difficulty score shown to correlate with conversion to open surgery, estimated blood loss (EBL), and operative time in Japanese and French cohorts. We set out to validate the IWATE Criteria in a North American cohort, describe the evolution of our LLR program, and analyze the IWATE Criteria's ability to predict conversion to open surgery. METHODS: Patients that underwent LLR between January 2006 and December 2019 were selected from a prospectively maintained database. Difficulty outcomes, including conversion to open surgery, EBL, operative time, and post-operative complications were analyzed according to IWATE difficulty level, both overall and between chronological eras. The IWATE Criteria's ability to predict conversion to open surgery was assessed with a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: A total of 426 patients met inclusion criteria. Operative time, EBL, and conversion to open surgery increased in concordance with low to advanced IWATE difficulty. ROC analysis for conversion to open surgery demonstrated an overall area under the curve (AUC) of 0.694. Predictive performance was superior during the first two eras, with AUCs of 0.771 and 0.775; predictive value decreased as the LLR program gained experience, with AUCs of 0.708 and 0.551 for eras three and four. CONCLUSIONS: This study validated the IWATE Criteria in a North American population distinct from previous Japanese and French cohorts, based on its correlation with operative time, EBL, and conversion to open surgery. The IWATE Criteria may be of utility for identification of LLR cases appropriate for surgeon experience, as well as determination of laparoscopic feasibility. Interval difficulty score recalibration may be warranted as surgeon perception of difficulty evolves.

Resection type is a predictor of postoperative complications in laparoscopic partial liver resection.

BACKGROUND: Partial laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is a procedure that can have varying levels of surgical difficulty depending on the tumor status and procedure. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the surgical outcomes of partial LLR using a new resection classification system. METHODS: From January 2009 to May 2021, 156 patients underwent LLR; of them, 87 patients who underwent pure partial LLR were included in this study. They were classified according to the IWATE criteria as the low (n = 56) and intermediate (n = 31) difficulty groups and reclassified according to the resection type as the edge (ER, n = 45), bowl-shaped (BSR, n = 27), and dome-shaped resection (DSR, n = 15) groups. The following surgical outcomes were comparatively analyzed among the groups: intraoperative blood loss, the operation time, and complication rates. Preoperative risk factors for intraoperative blood transfusion and complications were evaluated. RESULTS: In the IWATE criteria-based analysis, the intermediate-difficulty group had significantly higher intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.005), operation time (p = 0.005), and Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade-based complication rates (CD grade 2 or higher, p = 0.03) than the low-difficulty group. When analyzing the resection type, the CD grade-based complication rate (p = 0.013) and surgical site infection (SSI, p = 0.005) were significantly higher and the postoperative hospitalization was significantly longer (p = 0.028) in the bowl-shaped resection (BSR) group than in the edge- (ER) and dome-shaped resection (DSR) groups. The tumor size (p = 0.011) and IWATE criteria score (p = 0.006) were independent risk factors for intraoperative blood transfusion in the multivariate analysis. The tumor depth (p = 0.011) and BSR (p = 0.002) were independent risk factors for complications of CD grade 2 or higher in the multivariate analysis. BSR was an independent risk factor for SSI in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Resection type could predict the rate of postoperative complications, while the IWATE criteria could predict the intraoperative surgical difficulty.

Predicting Axial Impairment in Parkinson's Disease through a Single Inertial Sensor.

BACKGROUND: Current telemedicine approaches lack standardised procedures for the remote assessment of axial impairment in Parkinson's disease (PD). Unobtrusive wearable sensors may be a feasible tool to provide clinicians with practical medical indices reflecting axial dysfunction in PD. This study aims to predict the postural instability/gait difficulty (PIGD) score in PD patients by monitoring gait through a single inertial measurement unit (IMU) and machine-learning algorithms. METHODS: Thirty-one PD patients underwent a 7-m timed-up-and-go test while monitored through an IMU placed on the thigh, both under (ON) and not under (OFF) dopaminergic therapy. After pre-processing procedures and feature selection, a support vector regression model was implemented to predict PIGD scores and to investigate the impact of L-Dopa and freezing of gait (FOG) on regression models. RESULTS: Specific time- and frequency-domain features correlated with PIGD scores. After optimizing the dimensionality reduction methods and the model parameters, regression algorithms demonstrated different performance in the PIGD prediction in patients OFF and ON therapy (r = 0.79 and 0.75 and RMSE = 0.19 and 0.20, respectively). Similarly, regression models showed different performances in the PIGD prediction, in patients with FOG, ON and OFF therapy (r = 0.71 and RMSE = 0.27; r = 0.83 and RMSE = 0.22, respectively) and in those without FOG, ON and OFF therapy (r = 0.85 and RMSE = 0.19; r = 0.79 and RMSE = 0.21, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Optimized support vector regression models have high feasibility in predicting PIGD scores in PD. L-Dopa and FOG affect regression model performances. Overall, a single inertial sensor may help to remotely assess axial motor impairment in PD patients.

Impact of liver cirrhosis on the difficulty of minimally-invasive liver resections: a 1:1 coarsened exact-matched controlled study.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of liver cirrhosis on the difficulty of minimal invasive liver resection (MILR) remains controversial and current difficulty scoring systems do not take in to account the presence of cirrhosis as a significant factor in determining the difficulty of MILR. We hypothesized that the difficulty of MILR is affected by the presence of cirrhosis. Hence, we performed a 1:1 matched-controlled study comparing the outcomes between patients undergoing MILR with and without cirrhosis including the Iwate system and Institut Mutualiste Montsouris (IMM) system in the matching process. METHODS: Between 2006 and 2019, 598 consecutive patients underwent MILR of which 536 met the study inclusion criteria. There were 148 patients with cirrhosis and 388 non-cirrhotics. One-to-one coarsened exact matching identified approximately exact matches between 100 cirrhotic patients and 100 non-cirrhotic patients. RESULTS: Comparison between MILR patients with cirrhosis and non-cirrhosis in the entire cohort demonstrated that patients with cirrhosis were associated with a significantly increased open conversion rate, transfusion rate, need for Pringles maneuver, postoperative, stay, postoperative morbidity and postoperative 90-day mortality. After 1:1 coarsened exact matching, MILR with cirrhosis were significantly associated with an increased open conversion rate (15% vs 6%, p = 0.03), operation time (261 vs 238 min, p < 0.001), blood loss (607 vs 314 mls, p = 0.002), transfusion rate (22% vs 9%, p = 0.001), need for application of Pringles maneuver (51% vs 34%, p = 0.010), postoperative stay (6 vs 4.5 days, p = 0.004) and postoperative morbidity (26% vs 13%, p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: The presence of liver cirrhosis affected both the intraoperative technical difficulty and postoperative outcomes of MILR and hence should be considered an important parameter to be included in future difficulty scoring systems for MILR.

Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy: application of the difficulty scoring system.

BACKGROUND: The development of robotic system may help to relieve the difficulties encountered during laparoscopic hepatectomy. A difficulty scoring system (DSS) was developed to assess the difficulty of various laparoscopic liver resection procedures. The aim of this study is to explore if the DSS is applicable in robotic hepatectomy and to compare the outcomes of robotic hepatectomy and laparoscopic hepatectomy among different difficulty levels. METHODS: Clinical data from all consecutive patients who underwent robotic and conventional laparoscopic hepatectomy at the Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, were prospectively collected and reviewed. The difficulty level of operations was graded using the DSS. Perioperative outcomes of robotic and conventional laparoscopic hepatectomy were compared at each difficulty level. RESULTS: A total of 107 and 94 patients underwent robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomy during the study period, respectively. Among them, 16 and 2 patients were operated for recurrent pyogenic cholangitis, respectively, and were excluded because no mark for tumour location can be assigned. For robotic hepatectomy, a higher DSS was significantly correlated with higher minor complication rate (p = 0.001), more intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.002), longer operation time (p < 0.001) and longer post-operative hospital stay (p < 0.001). The mean DSS scores of robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomy were 4.5 and 3.6, respectively. (p = 0.004). For cases with low (DSS 1-3) and intermediate (DSS 4-6) difficulty level, there was no significant difference in operative blood loss, operation time and overall complications rate. Only 2 cases (2.2%) with high difficulty level were operated with laparoscopic approach while 20% of patients operated with robotic approach had DSS > 6. CONCLUSIONS: DSS significantly correlated with surgical outcomes in patient who underwent robotic hepatectomy. Perioperative outcomes following robotic and conventional laparoscopic hepatectomy were similar in cases with low and intermediate difficulty. However, robotic system allowed minimally invasive approach in cases with higher difficulty level.

Comparison and validation of three difficulty scoring systems in laparoscopic liver surgery: a retrospective analysis on 300 cases.

BACKGROUND: Difficulty scores (DSs) have been proposed to rate laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) technical difficulty increasing surgical safety. The aim of the study was to validate three DSs (Hasegawa, Halls and Kawaguchi) and compare their ability to predict technical difficulty and postoperative outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent LLR from January 2006 to January 2019 were analyzed. Exclusion criteria were cyst fenestrations, thermal ablation, missing data for the computation of the DS and a follow-up < 90 days. RESULTS: The population comprised 300 patients. The DS distribution in the study population was: Halls low 55 (18.3%), moderate 82 (27.3%), high 111 (37%) and extremely high 52 (17.3%); Hasegawa low 130 (43.3%), medium 105 (35%) and high 65 (21.7%); Kawaguchi Grade I 194 (64.7%), Grade II 47 (15.7%) and Grade III 59 (19.7%). Hasegawa and Kawaguchi showed the strongest correlation (r = 0.798, p < 0.001). Technical complexity, evaluated using the Pringle maneuver, Pringle time, blood loss and operative time, increased significantly with Hasegawa and Kawaguchi score classes (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). None of the scores properly stratified postoperative complications. The highest Kawaguchi (23.7% grade III vs. 13.7% grades I and II, p = 0.057) and Hasegawa (24.6% high vs. 13.2% low/medium, p = 0.025) classes had a higher overall morbidity rate than medium-low ones. CONCLUSIONS: Kawaguchi and Hasegawa scores predicted LLR's technical difficulty. None of the scores discriminated the postoperative complication risk of low classes compared with medium ones.

Laparoscopic repeat liver resection after open liver resection: A comparative study from a single-centre.

BACKGROUND: Technological innovations have made it possible to use laparoscopic liver resection in cases with pre-existing adhesions or cicatricial changes. However, laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) still represents a challenge for surgeons, especially in case of previous open liver surgery. This study evaluated the outcomes of LRLR after open liver resection (OLR) in cases of recurrent liver cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 62 patients who underwent laparoscopic minor liver resection at our institution between September 2012 and September 2016 were retrospectively divided into an LRLR group (n = 13) and a laparoscopic primary liver resection group (LPLR; n = 49). The two groups were compared in terms of patient demographics, surgical procedures and short-term outcomes. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). RESULTS: There was a significant intergroup difference in the hepatitis virus background, although the two groups' primary histology and pre-operative liver function were comparable. The two groups had statistically similar values for extent of resection, operative time, estimated blood loss, transfusion requirement, conversion to laparotomy, post-operative complications, surgical margins, time to oral intake and hospital stay. No significant differences were detected when we stratified the cases according to low and intermediate difficulty. Furthermore, there were no intergroup differences in RFS or OS in the two groups for patients with HCC and CRLM. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that minor LRLR after OLR is safe and comparable with minor LPLR in the present study.

May predictors of difficulty in thyroid surgery increase the incidence of complications? Prospective study with the proposal of a preoperative score.

BACKGROUND: Although thyroidectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures performed worldwide, some permanent complications, despite the considerably reducing incidence, may affect dramatically the patients quality of life. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether factors identified preoperatively and expressed in a score could be predictors of major surgical difficulty during total thyroidectomy and influence the incidence of complications. METHODS: A total of 164 patients who underwent total thyroidectomy were examined. For each patient we calculated a preoperative score, including seven parameters, which we evaluated to be predictors of difficulty in thyroid surgery, that is, sex, body mass index (BMI), neck length, neck extension, thyroid gland volume, thyroiditis, and increased parenchymal vascularization. The overall score was also compared with peri- and post-operative factors describing objectively the difficulty in thyroid surgery. These factors are the duration of the operation, the length of hospitalization, the incidence of complications such as hemorrhage, hypoparathyroidism, and recurrent laryngeal nerve injuries. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant association between our score and either the percentage of postoperative complications or the length of hospitalization. The operative time was the only variable remarkably associated with the score value (p < 0.00001). Comparing the duration of the operation with each of the preoperative predictive factors, we found that none of the factors reached the value of statistical significance, but a close association could be noted with the thyroid volume and the BMI. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, predictors of difficulty in thyroidectomy did not affect morbidity rates, as suggested by previous studies, but only operative times, which were significantly increased in patients with higher score. Although our results have limited statistical significance, they allow us to confirm the fundamental role of a systematic use of optical magnification and microsurgical technique in thyroidectomy. Further studies, with a larger cohort of patients, are needed to validate our results and to formulate a universally accepted predictive score of difficulty in thyroidectomy preoperatively.

Preoperative difficulty factors in delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Tokyo Guidelines 2018 surgical difficulty score analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) recommend early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for low-risk acute cholecystitis (AC); however, some patients undergo delayed LC (DLC) after conservative treatment. DLC, influenced by chronic inflammation, is a difficult procedure. Previous studies on LC difficulty lacked objective measures. Recently, TG18 introduced a novel 25 findings difficulty score, which objectively assesses intraoperative factors. The purpose of this study was to use the difficulty score proposed in TG18 to identify and investigate the predictors of preoperative high-difficulty cases of DLC for AC. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 100 patients with DLC after conservative AC treatment. The surgical difficulty of DLC was evaluated using a difficulty score. Based on previous studies, the highest scores in each category were categorized as grades A-C. RESULTS: The severity of AC was mild in 51 patients and moderate in 49. Surgical outcomes revealed a distribution of difficulty scores, with grade C indicating high difficulty, showing significant differences in operative time, blood loss, achieving a critical view of safety, bailout procedures, and postoperative hospital stay compared with grades A and B. Regarding the preoperative risk factors, multivariate analysis identified age >61 years (p = .008), body mass index >27.0 kg/m2 (p = .007), and gallbladder wall thickness >6.2 mm (p = .001) as independent risk factors for grade C in DLC. CONCLUSION: The difficulty score proposed in TG18 provides an objective framework for evaluating surgical difficulty, allowing for more accurate risk assessments and improved preoperative planning in DLC for AC.