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 an...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.展开更多
基金Dr.T.P.Kingham was partially supported by the US National Cancer Institute MSKCC Core Grant number P30 CA00878 for this study.
文摘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.
