Complications of Liver Resection: Laparoscopic Versus Open Procedures

Department of Surgery, Tulane University School of Medicine, 1430 Tulane Ave, SL-22, New Orleans, LA 70112-2699, USA. .
JSLS: Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons / Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons (Impact Factor: 0.91). 06/2013; 17(1):46-55. DOI: 10.4293/108680812X13517013317716
Source: PubMed


Minimally invasive surgery for liver resection remains controversial. This study was designed to compare open versus laparoscopic surgical approaches to liver resection.
We performed a single-center retrospective chart review.
We compared 45 laparoscopic liver resections with 17 open cases having equivalent resections based on anatomy and diagnosis. The overall complication rate was 25.8%. More open resection patients had complications (52.9% vs 15.5%, P < .008). The conversion rate was 11.1%. The mean blood loss was 667.1 ± 1450 mL in open cases versus 47.8 ± 89 mL in laparoscopic cases (P < .0001). Measures of intravenous narcotic use, intensive care unit length of stay, and hospital length of stay all favored the laparoscopic group. Patients were more likely to have complications or morbidity in the open resection group than in the laparoscopic group for both the anterolateral (P < .085) and posterosuperior (P < .002) resection subgroups.
In this series comparing laparoscopic and open liver resections, there were fewer complications, more rapid recovery, and lower morbidity in the laparoscopic group, even for those resections involving the posterosuperior segments of the liver.

Download full-text


Available from: Eric R Simms, Mar 11, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite initial concerns regarding safety and oncological adequacy, the use of laparoscopic liver resections for benign and malignant diseases has spread worldwide. As in open liver surgery, anatomical orientation and the ability to control intraoperative challenges as bleeding have to be combined with expertise in advanced laparoscopic techniques. In this review, we provide an overview regarding the literature on laparoscopic liver resection for benign and malignant liver tumors with the aim to discuss the current standards and define remaining challenges. Although numerous case series and meta-analyses have addressed the evolving field of laparoscopic liver surgery recently, data from randomized controlled trials are still not available. Laparoscopic liver resection is feasible and safe in selected patients and experienced hands. Even major liver resections can be performed laparoscopically. The minimal invasive approach offers benefits in perioperative short-term outcome without compromising oncological outcomes compared to open liver resections. Further randomized trials are needed to formally prove these statements and to define the optimal indication and techniques for the individual patient.
    Langenbeck s Archives of Surgery 09/2013; 398(7). DOI:10.1007/s00423-013-1117-y · 2.19 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the effect of low central venous pressure (LCVP) on blood loss and blood transfusion in patients undergoing hepatectomy. Electronic databases and bibliography lists were searched for potential articles. A meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating LCVP in hepatectomy was performed. The following three outcomes were analyzed: blood loss, blood transfusion and duration of operation. Five RCTs including 283 patients were assessed. Meta-analysis showed that blood loss in the LCVP group was significantly less than that in the control group (MD = -391.95, 95%CI: -559.35--224.56, P < 0.00001). In addition, blood transfusion in the LCVP group was also significantly less than that in the control group (MD = -246.87, 95%CI: -427.06--66.69, P = 0.007). The duration of operation in the LCVP group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (MD = -18.89, 95%CI: -35.18--2.59, P = 0.02). Most studies found no significant difference in renal and liver function between the two groups. Controlled LCVP is a simple and effective technique to reduce blood loss and blood transfusion during liver resection, and appears to have no detrimental effects on liver and renal function.
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 01/2014; 20(1):303-309. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v20.i1.303 · 2.37 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is a complex procedure, offered to selected patients at institutions highly experienced with the procedure. It is still not clear if this approach may enhance patient recovery and reduce postoperative complications comparing to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD), as demonstrated for other abdominal procedures. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD. Perioperative outcomes (e.g., morbidity and mortality, pancreatic fistula rates, blood loss) constituted the study end points. Metaanalyses were performed using a random-effects model. Results For the metaanalysis, 8 studies including 204 patients undergoing MIPD and 419 patients undergoing OPD were considered suitable. The patients in the two groups were similar with respect to age, sex and histological diagnosis, and different with respect to tumor size, rate of pylorus preservation, and type of pancreatic anastomosis. There were no statistically significant differences between MIPD and OPD regarding development of delayed gastric emptying (DGE), pancreatic fistula, wound infection, or rates of reoperation and overall mortality. MIDP resulted in lower post-operative complication rates, less intra-operative blood loss, shorter hospital stays, lower blood transfusion rates, higher numbers of harvested lymph nodes, and improved negative margin status rates. However, MIPD was associated with longer operating times when compared to OPD. Conclusions The MIPD procedure is feasible, safe, and effective in selected patients. MIPD may have some potential advantages over OPD, and should be performed and further developed by use in selected patients at highly experienced medical centers.
    The surgeon: journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland 08/2014; 12(4). DOI:10.1016/j.surge.2014.01.006 · 2.18 Impact Factor
Show more