Faculty Bibliography

An evaluation of the literature demonstrates atypical wedge or single segment resections to be the most commonly performed laparoscopic liver procedures. Lesions that are both visible on the surface of segments 2-6 and ≤2-3 cm can be resected by most surgeons holding a fundamental understanding of liver anatomy. These criteria are based on the anatomical circumstance that sectoral and segmental pedicles should not course through depths necessary to obtain negative margins for these sized and positioned lesions. Videos of laparoscopic liver resections referenced in PubMed demonstrate complex procedures that are rarely performed and assume an advanced skill set for laparoscopic dissection and transection of parenchyma and management of vascular and biliary structures. Herein is demonstrated basic skill for peripheral resections via two cases in one video, so that these procedures can be safely performed by surgeons with commonly available laparoscopic equipment.

BACKGROUND:Management of patients with synchronous liver metastasis (SLM) is complex and the surgical decision process should be based on a comprehensive oncological strategy. The aim of the study was to compare outcome of single-center management of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and resectable SLM to those of referred patients for liver resection only after removal of their primary tumor (PT). METHODS:Between 2000 and 2007, 47 patients with CRC and SLM underwent resection of both the PT and metastases under our care (unicentric) and 32 were referred after resection of their PT. RESULTS:The two groups were comparable for demographics, PT and metastatic disease data. In unicentric group, 23% received upfront chemotherapy with the PT in place, 53% had a combined CRC and SLM resection, 11% had a two-stage hepatectomy with resection of the primary during the first stage and 36% underwent delayed hepatectomy. The number of surgical interventions, the delay between diagnosis and liver resection (9 vs. 5 months, P < 0.001), the median number of cycles of chemotherapy before hepatectomy (12 vs. 6 months, P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the referred group. Postoperative morbidity was significantly higher in the referred group (75 vs. 47%, P = 0.023). The median follow-up was 43 months. OS and DFS were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Although the survival benefit is not proven, single-center management of patients with CRC and resectable SLM reduces the number of interventions, the number of cycles of chemotherapy and postoperative morbidity.

The current treatment of HCC is truly multidisciplinary. Notwithstanding, surgical management remains the gold standard which other therapies are compared to. Operative management is divided into transplantation and resection; the latter is further subdivided among open and laparoscopic approaches. Resection has become safer, remains superior to locoregional treatments, and can be a life-prolonging bridge to transplantation. The decision to pursue laparoscopic resection for HCC is driven by safety and a view toward the long-term management of both the malignancy and the underlying liver disease. For patients with a solitary HCC <5 cm in segments 2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6, no evidence of extrahepatic tumor burden, compensated liver disease, and the absence of significant portal hypertension, laparoscopy has an important role. Under these circumstances, resection can be performed with reduced mortality and morbidity and equivalent oncologic outcomes, disease-free survival, and overall survival when compared with similarly selected cirrhotic patients undergoing open resection. Blood loss and transfusion requirements are low, and laparoscopy itself does not expose the patient to complications and does not increase the risk of cancer recurrence or dissemination. Finally, because HCC recurrence remains high in the cirrhotic liver, treatment following surgical resection mandates routine surveillance and treatment by locoregional therapy, reresection, or transplantation as required-the latter two of which are facilitated by an initial laparoscopic resection.

Laparoscopic major hepatectomy remains a relatively rare operation because it is a difficult and technically demanding procedure, and a standard, safe, reproducible technique has not been widely adopted. This is compounded by "major hepatectomy" encompassing multiple different operations each with their own anatomic and procedural considerations. In 2010, we investigated our learning curve for laparoscopic liver resection. We found a significant increase in the number of major hepatectomies performed over a 12-year period, with concurrent reductions in the use of hand-assistance, pedicle clamping, median clamping time, median operative time, blood loss and morbidity. This learning curve was confirmed by a subsequent multinational study. Both hospital and surgeon volume have been shown to affect outcomes, and defining a sufficient number of repetitions before the learning curve plateaus is not easy for laparoscopic major hepatectomy. We recommend that laparoscopic competencies be developed upon a foundation of open liver surgery and that laparoscopic major hepatectomy should only be attempted after competency with less technically complex laparoscopic resections. A center advanced along its institutional learning curve provides the collective expertise necessary for safe patient selection and management. An environment with colleagues willing to share their acquired proficiency allows the surgeon to observe and critique his or her performance against colleagues. Also, the guidance of like-minded surgeons supports technical development and improved outcomes. In conclusion, steady progress can be made along the learning curve through committed practice of increasingly complex tasks and with proper coaching in a high-volume environment.

BACKGROUND:According to international guidelines [European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) and the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD)], portal hypertension (PHTN) is considered a contraindication for liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and patients should be referred for other treatments. However, this statement remains controversial. The aim of this study was to elucidate surgical outcomes of minor hepatectomies in patients with PHTN (defined by the presence of esophageal varices or a platelet count of <100,000 in association with splenomegaly) and well-compensated liver disease. METHODS:Between 1997 and 2012, a total of 223 cirrhotic patients [stage A according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classification] were eligible for this analysis and were divided into two groups according to the presence (n = 63) or absence (n = 160) of PHTN. The demographic data were comparable in the two patient groups. RESULTS:Operative mortality was not different (only one patient died in the PHTN group). However, patients with PHTN had higher liver-related morbidity (29% versus 14%; P = 0.009), without differences in hospital stay (8.8 versus 9.8 days, respectively). The PHTN group showed a worse survival rate only if biochemical signs of liver decompensation existed. Multivariate analysis identified albumin levels as an independent predictive factor for survival. CONCLUSIONS:PHTN should not be considered an absolute contraindication to a hepatectomy in cirrhotic patients. Patients with PHTN have short- and long-term results similar to patients with normal portal pressure. A limited hepatic resection for early-stage tumours is an option for Child-Pugh class A5 patients with PHTN.

BACKGROUND:Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by transient elastography (TE) (FibroScan) is a validated method of quantifying liver fibrosis in non-transplanted patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV). It could be useful in follow-up after liver transplantation (LT). The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of LSM in evaluating liver fibrosis after LT in patients with and without recurrent HCV. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:Forty-three patients (mean age 57.6 ± 9.9 years), 28 (65.1%) HCV-positive patients and 15 (34.9%) HCV-negative patients underwent gold standard liver biopsy and TE 55.8 ± 4.9 months after transplantation. Liver fibrosis was scored on biopsy specimens according to METAVIR (F0-F4). Accuracy of TE and optimal stiffness cut-off values for fibrosis staging were determined by a receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS:Median stiffness values were significantly different for METAVIR score less than 2 (5.8 kPa) vs. METAVIR score greater to equal to 2 (9.6 kPa) (P<0.001). The area under the ROC curve was 0.83 for METAVIR score greater to equal to 2 (95%CI: 0.71-0.95). The optimal stiffness cut-off value was 7 kPa for METAVIR scores greater to equal to 2. The results were similar whether the patients had recurrent HCV infection or not. CONCLUSIONS:These results indicate that transient elastography accurately identifies LT recipients with significant fibrosis, irrespective of HCV status. It is a promising non-invasive tool to assess graft fibrosis progression after LT in patients with HCV recurrence, as well as for screening of late graft fibrosis of other etiologies. Transient elastography could reduce the use of invasive protocol biopsies.