15 30

Cited 0 times in

Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection for huge (≥10 cm) liver tumors: an international multicenter propensity-score matched cohort study of 799 cases

Authors
 Tan-To Cheung  ;  Rong Liu  ;  Federica Cipriani  ;  Xiaoying Wang  ;  Mikhail Efanov  ;  David Fuks  ;  Gi-Hong Choi  ;  Nicholas L Syn  ;  Charing C N Chong  ;  Fabrizio Di Benedetto  ;  Ricardo Robles-Campos  ;  Vincenzo Mazzaferro  ;  Fernando Rotellar  ;  Santiago Lopez-Ben  ;  James O Park  ;  Alejandro Mejia  ;  Iswanto Sucandy  ;  Adrian K H Chiow  ;  Marco V Marino  ;  Mikel Gastaca  ;  Jae Hoon Lee  ;  T Peter Kingham  ;  Mathieu D'Hondt  ;  Sung Hoon Choi  ;  Robert P Sutcliffe  ;  Ho-Seong Han  ;  Chung-Ngai Tang  ;  Johann Pratschke  ;  Roberto I Troisi  ;  Go Wakabayashi  ;  Daniel Cherqui  ;  Felice Giuliante  ;  Davit L Aghayan  ;  Bjorn Edwin  ;  Olivier Scatton  ;  Atsushi Sugioka  ;  Tran Cong Duy Long  ;  Constantino Fondevila  ;  Mohammad Abu Hilal  ;  Andrea Ruzzenente  ;  Alessandro Ferrero  ;  Paulo Herman  ;  Kuo-Hsin Chen  ;  Luca Aldrighetti  ;  Brian K P Goh 
Citation
 HEPATOBILIARY SURGERY AND NUTRITION, Vol.12(2) : 205-215, 2023-04 
Journal Title
HEPATOBILIARY SURGERY AND NUTRITION
ISSN
 2304-3881 
Issue Date
2023-04
Keywords
Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) ; colorectal liver metastases ; hepatocellular carcinoma ; huge ; robotic liver resection (RLR)
Abstract
Background: The use of laparoscopic (LLR) and robotic liver resections (RLR) has been safely performed in many institutions for liver tumours. A large scale international multicenter study would provide stronger evidence and insight into application of these techniques for huge liver tumours >= 10 cm. Methods: This was a retrospective review of 971 patients who underwent LLR and RLR for huge (>= 10 cm) tumors at 42 international centers between 2002-2020. Results: One hundred RLR and 699 LLR which met study criteria were included. The comparison between the 2 approaches for patients with huge tumors were performed using 1: 3 propensity- score matching (PSM) (73 vs. 219). Before PSM, LLR was associated with significantly increased frequency of previous abdominal surgery, malignant pathology, liver cirrhosis and increased median blood. After PSM, RLR and LLR was associated with no significant difference in key perioperative outcomes including media operation time (242 vs. 290 min, P=0.286), transfusion rate rate (19.2% vs. 16.9%, P=0.652), median blood loss (200 vs. 300 mL, P=0.694), open conversion rate (8.2% vs. 11.0%, P=0.519), morbidity (28.8% vs. 21.9%, P=0.221), major morbidity (4.1% vs. 9.6%, P=0.152), mortality and postoperative length of stay (6 vs. 6 days, P=0.435). Conclusions: RLR and LLR can be performed safely for selected patients with huge liver tumours with excellent outcomes. There was no significant difference in perioperative outcomes after RLR or LLR.
Files in This Item:
T999202663.pdf Download
DOI
10.21037/hbsn-22-283
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Surgery (외과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Choi, Gi Hong(최기홍) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1593-3773
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/198463
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links