International multicenter propensity score matched study on laparoscopic versus open left lateral sectionectomy

Background: Despite a lack of high-level evidence, current guidelines recommend laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) as the routine approach over open LLS (OLLS). Randomized studies and propensity score matched studies on LLLS vs OLLS for all indications, including malignancy, are lacking.Methods: This international multicenter propensity score matched retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing LLLS or OLLS in six centers from three European countries (January 2000-December 2016). Propensity scores were calculated based on nine preoperative variables and LLLS and OLLS were matched in a 1:1 ratio. Short-term operative outcomes were compared using paired tests.Results: A total of 560 patients were included. Out of 200 LLLS, 139 could be matched to 139 OLLS. After matching, baseline characteristics were well balanced. LLLS was associated with shorter operative time (144 (110-200) vs 199 (138-283) minutes, P &lt; 0.001), less blood loss (100 (50-300) vs 350 (100-750) mL, P = 0.005) and a 3-day shorter postoperative hospital stay (4 (3-7) vs 7 (5-9) days, P &lt; 0.001).Conclusion: This international multicenter propensity score matched study confirms the superiority of LLLS over OLLS based on shorter postoperative hospital stay, operative time, and less blood loss thus validating current guideline advice.</p

Bile leakage after laparoscopic and open liver resection; incidence and clinical impact: an international multicenter propensity score-matched study of 13,379 patients

Despite many developments, postoperative bile leakage (POBL) remains a relatively common postoperative complication after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR). Previous studies regarding the incidence and clinical impact of POBL have mainly focused on patients undergoing OLR. The aim of this study is to compare the incidence and clinical impact of POBL between patients undergoing LLR and OLR in a large international multicenter cohort using a propensity score matched analysis

Implementation and outcome of minor and major minimally invasive liver surgery in the Netherlands

Background: While most of the evidence on minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is derived from expert centers, nationwide outcomes remain underreported. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation and outcome of MILS on a nationwide scale. Methods: Electronic patient files were reviewed in all Dutch liver surgery centers and all patients undergoing MILS between 2011 and 2016 were selected. Operative outcomes were stratified based on extent of the resection and annual MILS volume. Results: Overall, 6951 liver resections were included, with a median annual volume of 50 resections per center. The overall use of MILS was 13% (n = 916), which varied from 3% to 36% (P < 0.001) between centers. The nationwide use of MILS increased from 6% in 2011 to 23% in 2016 (P < 0.001). Outcomes of minor MILS were comparable with international studies (conversion 0–13%, mortality <1%). In centers which performed ≥20 MILS annually, major MILS was associated with less conversions (14 (11%) versus 41 (30%), P < 0.001), shorter operating time (184 (117–239) versus 200 (139–308) minutes, P = 0.010), and less overall complications (37 (30%) versus 58 (42%), P = 0.040). Conclusion: The nationwide use of MILS is increasing, although large variation remains between centers. Outcomes of major MILS are better in centers with higher volumes

Implementation and outcome of minor and major minimally invasive liver surgery in the Netherlands

Background: While most of the evidence on minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is derived from expert centers, nationwide outcomes remain underreported. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation and outcome of MILS on a nationwide scale. Methods: Electronic patient files were reviewed in all Dutch liver surgery centers and all patients undergoing MILS between 2011 and 2016 were selected. Operative outcomes were stratified based on extent of the resection and annual MILS volume. Results: Overall, 6951 liver resections were included, with a median annual volume of 50 resections per center. The overall use of MILS was 13% (n = 916), which varied from 3% to 36% (P < 0.001) between centers. The nationwide use of MILS increased from 6% in 2011 to 23% in 2016 (P < 0.001). Outcomes of minor MILS were comparable with international studies (conversion 0–13%, mortality <1%). In centers which performed ≥20 MILS annually, major MILS was associated with less conversions (14 (11%) versus 41 (30%), P < 0.001), shorter operating time (184 (117–239) versus 200 (139–308) minutes, P = 0.010), and less overall complications (37 (30%) versus 58 (42%), P = 0.040). Conclusion: The nationwide use of MILS is increasing, although large variation remains between centers. Outcomes of major MILS are better in centers with higher volumes