Comparison of acute kidney injury between open and laparoscopic liver resection: Propensity score analysis.
ABSTRACT: The inflammatory response has been shown to be a major contributor to acute kidney injury. Considering that laparoscopic surgery is beneficial in reducing the inflammatory response, we compared the incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury between laparoscopic liver resection and open liver resection. Among 1173 patients who underwent liver resection surgery, 222 of 926 patients who underwent open liver resection were matched with 222 of 247 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection, by using propensity score analysis. The incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury assessed according to the creatinine criteria of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes definition was compared between those 1:1 matched groups. A total 77 (6.6%) cases of postoperative acute kidney injury occurred. Before matching, the incidence of acute kidney injury after laparoscopic liver resection was significantly lower than that after open liver resection [1.6% (4/247) vs. 7.9% (73/926), P < 0.001]. After 1:1 matching, the incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury was still significantly lower after laparoscopic liver resection than after open liver resection [1.8% (4/222) vs. 6.3% (14/222), P = 0.008; odds ratio 0.273, 95% confidence interval 0.088-0.842, P = 0.024]. The postoperative inflammatory marker was also lower in laparoscopic liver resection than in open liver resection in matched set data (white blood cell count 12.7 ± 4.0 × 103/?L vs. 14.9 ± 3.9 × 103/?L, P < 0.001). Our findings suggest that the laparoscopic technique, by decreasing the inflammatory response, may reduce the occurrence of postoperative acute kidney injury during liver resection surgery.
Project description:Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy is being performed more frequently because of improved surgical techniques. Although several studies have demonstrated safety and favourable outcomes of laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy compared to open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy, few studies have focused on the development of postoperative acute kidney injury. This retrospective study compared the prevalence and risk factors of acute kidney injury following laparoscopic and open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. Data from 809 patients who underwent pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy between February 2012 and September 2016 were analysed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical procedure (open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy [n = 632] vs laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy [n = 177]). The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes criteria were used to define postoperative acute kidney injury and risk factors were investigated using multivariable logistic regression analysis with propensity score matching analysis and standardized mortality ratio weighting to compare outcomes. No significant differences were found in the occurrence of postoperative acute kidney injury and incidence of postoperative ICU admission between open and laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy groups after propensity score matching (p = 1.000, p = 0.999, respectivelyand standardized mortality ratio weighted analysis (p = 0.619, p = 0.982, respectively). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy group (propensity matched set, mean [SD], 16.7 [10.0] vs. 18.7 [9.6] days, p = 0.004; standardized mortality ratio, 16.6 [9.9] vs. 18.1 [8.8] days, p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in postoperative acute kidney injury incidence between both groups. Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy is promising with comparable postoperative outcomes to open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy and has the advantage of shorter hospital stay.
Project description:To compare surgical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases.A total of 14 retrospective studies with 1679 colorectal liver metastases patients were analyzed: 683 patients treated with laparoscopic liver resection and 996 patients with open liver resection. With respect to surgical outcomes, laparoscopic compared with open liver resection was associated with lower blood loss (MD, -216.7, 95% CI, -309.4 to -124.1; P < 0.00001), less requiring blood transfusion (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.55; P < 0.00001), lower postoperative complication morbidity (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P = 0.003), and shorter hospitalization time (MD, -3.85, 95% CI, -5.00 to -2.71; P < 0.00001). However, operation time and postoperative mortality were no significant difference between the two approaches. With respect to oncological outcomes, laparoscopic liver resection group was prone to lower recurrence rate (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99; P = 0.04), but surgical margins R0, overall survival and disease-free survival were no significant difference.We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for all relevant studies. All statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR) and continuous data were calculated by mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).Laparoscopic and open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases have the same effect on oncological outcomes, but laparoscopic liver resection achieves better surgical outcomes.
Project description:BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to accurately assess whether the duration of intraoperative carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (CDP) is associated with the induction of hepatic injury. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases (through February 2014) to identify case-match studies that compared high-pressure CDP with low-pressure CDP or varied the duration of CDP in patients who underwent abdominal surgery. The outcome of interest was postoperative liver function (ALT, AST, TB). RESULTS: Eleven comparative studies involving 2,235 participants were included. Overall, levels of ALT, AST, and TB (on postoperative days 1, 3, and 7) were significantly elevated in the study groups. However, the results of the subanalyses of those who underwent laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection (LCR) versus open colorectal cancer resection (OCR) and those who underwent laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGBP) versus open gastric bypass (OGBP) were inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence suggests that the duration of CDP during laparoscopic abdominal surgery may be associated with hepatic injury. Additional large-scale, randomized, controlled trials are urgently needed to further confirm this.
Project description:Laparoscopic liver resection is used in specialized centers all over the world. However, laparoscopic liver resection has never been compared with open liver resection in a prospective, randomized trial.The Oslo-CoMet Study is a randomized trial into laparoscopic versus open liver resection for the surgical management of hepatic colorectal metastases. The primary outcome is 30-day perioperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes include 5-year survival (overall, disease-free and recurrence-free), resection margins, recurrence pattern, postoperative pain, health-related quality of life, and evaluation of the inflammatory response. A cost-utility analysis of replacing open surgery with laparoscopic surgery will also be performed. The study includes all resections for colorectal liver metastases, except formal hemihepatectomies, resections where reconstruction of vessels/bile ducts is necessary and resections that need to be combined with ablation. All patients will participate in an enhanced recovery after surgery program. A biobank of liver and tumor tissue will be established and molecular analysis will be performed.After 35 months of recruitment, 200 patients have been included in the trial. Molecular and immunology data are being analyzed. Results for primary and secondary outcome measures will be presented following the conclusion of the study (late 2015). The Oslo-CoMet Study will provide the first level 1 evidence on the benefits of laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases.The trial was registered in ClinicalTrals.gov (NCT01516710) on 19 January 2012.
Project description:Pure laparoscopic liver resection is technically difficult for tumors located in the dorsal anterior and posterior sectors. We have developed a maneuver to perform pure laparoscopic hepatectomy in the semiprone position which was developed for resecting tumors located in these areas.The medical records have been reviewed retrospectively in 30 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection in the semiprone position for carcinoma in the dorsal anterior or posterior sectors of the right liver between 2008 and 2011.Seventeen liver tumors were primary liver tumors and 13 were colorectal metastases. Of the 30 patients, 11 (36.6 %) underwent major hepatectomy [right hemihepatectomy in 7 (23.3 %) and posterior sectionectomy in 4 (13.3 %)]. Anatomical minor resection, such as S6 or S7 segmentectomy, was performed in five patients (16.6 %). Five patients with liver metastasis underwent a simultaneous laparoscopic resection. There was no mortality, reoperation, or conversion to open procedures. There were no hepatectomy-related complications such as postoperative bleeding, bile leakage, or liver failure.Pure laparoscopic hepatectomy in the semiprone position for tumors present in the dorsal anterior and posterior sectors is feasible and safe. This method expands the indications for laparoscopic liver resection for tumors.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:The influence of obesity on the outcomes of curative liver resection for malignancies remains controversial. We aimed to compare the in-hospital outcomes of liver resection for malignancy between obese and non-obese patients. DESIGN:This was a population-based, retrospective, observational study using data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), the largest all-payer US inpatient care database. SETTING:Hospitalisations of adults ≥18 years old with diagnoses of primary hepatobiliary malignancy or secondary malignant neoplasms of liver in the USA were identified from the NIS database between 2005 and 2014. PARTICIPANTS:Data of 18 398 patients ≥18 years old and underwent liver resection without pancreatic resection in the NIS were extracted. All included subjects had primary hepatobiliary malignancy or secondary malignant neoplasms of the liver. Patients were divided into obese and non-obese groups. These groups were compared with respect to postoperative complications, length of hospital stay and hospital cost according to surgical extent and approach. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were undergoing lobectomy of liver or partial hepatectomy. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary endpoints of this study were postoperative complications, length of hospital stay and hospital cost. RESULTS:After adjustment, obese patients were significantly more likely to experience postoperative complications than were non-obese patients (adjusted OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.42), regardless of whether lobectomy or partial hepatectomy was performed. Furthermore, obesity was significantly associated with increased risk of postoperative complications in patients who underwent open liver resection, but not laparoscopic resection. No significant difference was observed in length of hospital stay or total hospital costs between obese and non-obese patients. CONCLUSIONS:After adjustment for preoperative comorbidities and other potential confounders, obesity is significantly associated with greater risk of complications in patients undergoing open liver resection for malignancy, but not laparoscopic resection.
Project description:Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has shown effectiveness in terms of reducing the hospital stay and cost associated with open liver resection. However, the benefit of ERAS in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection is still unclear, and clinical studies on this topic are limited.The ERAS program for laparoscopic liver resection was used in a group of 80 patients (ERAS group). The results were compared with those in a control group of 107 patients. All patients underwent laparoscopic liver resection. The primary endpoints were the postoperative hospital stay, defined as the number of days from surgery to discharge, and the hospitalization expense. The secondary endpoints were resumption of oral intake, readmissions, and complications.The median postoperative hospital stay was 6.2?±?2.6 days in the ERAS group, which was significantly shorter than that in the control group (9.9?±?5.9 d; P?<?0.001). The hospitalization cost was $6871?±?2571 in the ERAS group and $7948?±?3630 in the control group (P?=?0.020). The morbidity rate was 22.5% (18 of 80 patients) in the ERAS group and 43.9% (47 of 107 patients) in the control group (P?=?0.002). There were no significant differences the in rate of readmission between the 2 groups.Enhanced recovery after surgery for laparoscopic liver resection is safe and effective. Patients in the ERPS group had a shorter hospital stay, fewer complications, and lower hospital costs.
Project description:<h4>Backgrounds/aims</h4>Colorectal cancer is found with liver metastases about 20-25% due to characteristics of cancer itself. Approximately 20% of liver metastases are found to be resectable. The objective of this study was to evaluate short-term outcomes of patients who received liver resection with colorectal cancer operation in our center by laparoscopic surgery or open surgery.<h4>Methods</h4>Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery of liver resection (LSLR) group who underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) at a single institute from 2013 to 2016 were compared to those of open surgery of liver resection (OSLR) group.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 123 patients underwent liver resection for CRLM, including 101 (82.1%) patients in the OSLR group and 22 (17.9%) patients in the LSLR group. There were significant differences in tumor characteristics between the two groups, including synchronous and metachronous (<i>p</i>=0.004), tumor number (<i>p</i><0.001), and tumor margin (<i>p</i>=0.002). For postoperative outcomes, only the length of hospital stay (LOS) was significantly different between the two groups (8.5 days in LSLR vs. 11 days in OSLR, <i>p</i><0.001). There was no significant difference in overall rate of postoperative complications between the two groups (9.1% in LSLR vs. 23.8% in OSLR, <i>p</i>=0.158).<h4>Conclusions</h4>There are no significant differences in postoperative outcomes between LSLR and OSLR except LOS, liver metastasis number, and resection margin. LSLR may be favorable for highly selected patients with CRLM.
Project description:Backgrounds/Aims:The Pringle maneuver is generally performed to reduce the amount of blood loss during hepatic resection. During laparoscopic liver resection, the Pringle maneuver can be used in several ways. We have developed a new Pringle maneuver (PM) with Penrose drain tube to sufficiently control blood loss during laparoscopic liver resection. This study was performed to determine the safety and outcome during laparoscopic left-sided hepatectomy performed using this new method. Methods:We describe the technique and results of the left-sided liver resection with totally intracorporeal PM with Penrose drain tube. We performed 37 laparoscopic left-sided hepatic resections with (PM group) or without the Penrose PM (No PM group). We retrospectively compared the short-term operative outcome between the No PM group (n=12) and the PM group (n=25) during laparoscopic left-sided liver resection. Results:Median PM duration was 34.3 min. The median duration of the surgery using the totally intracorporeal PM with Penrose drain tube was 174 min, while the surgical duration required for resection without the PM was 156 min. The median volume of operative blood loss was lower in the PM group than in the No PM group (No PM group (341 ml) vs. PM group (165 ml)). There was no postoperative mortality and no open conversion. Conclusions:The totally intracorporeal PM with Penrose drain tube for laparoscopic hepatectomy is safe, reproducible, and can facilitate liver dissection during left-sided liver resection.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Hepatic tumors in the lower edge and lateral segments are commonly treated by laparoscopic liver resection. Tumors in the anterosuperior and posterior segments are often large and locally invasive, and resection is associated with a higher risk of insufficient surgical margins, massive intraoperative bleeding, and breaching of the tumor. Laparoscopic surgery for such tumors often involves major hepatectomy, including resection of a large volume of normal liver tissue. We developed a novel method of laparoscopic resection of tumors in these segments with the patient in the semiprone position, using a dual-handling technique with an intercostal transthoracic port. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and usefulness of our technique.<h4>Methods</h4>Of 160 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection at our center from June 2008 to May 2013, we retrospectively reviewed those with tumors in the anterosuperior and posterior segments. Patients were placed supine or semilateral during surgery until January 2010 and semiprone from February 2010.<h4>Results</h4>Before the introduction of the semiprone position in February 2010, a total of 7 of 40 patients (17.5%) with tumors in the anterosuperior and posterior segments underwent laparoscopic liver resection, and after introduction of the semiprone position, 69 of 120 patients (57.5%) with tumors in the anterosuperior and posterior segments underwent laparoscopic liver resection (P < 0.001). There were no conversions to open surgery, reoperations, or deaths. The semiprone group had a significantly higher proportion of patients who underwent partial resection or segmentectomy of S7 or S8, lower intraoperative blood loss, and shorter hospital stay than the supine group (all P < 0.05). Postoperative complication rates were similar between groups.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Laparoscopic liver resection in the semiprone position is safe and increases the number of patients who can be treated by laparoscopic surgery without increasing the frequency of major hepatectomy.