Perioperative and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic anatomical hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma introduced gradually in a single center
- 295 Downloads
Anatomical hepatectomy is an ideal curative treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We have standardized our laparoscopic anatomical hepatectomy (LAH) procedure, gradually extending its indications. In the present study, we describe our experience and the perioperative and oncological outcomes of LAH for HCC compared to those of open anatomical hepatectomy (OAH) during the gradual introduction of LAH.
Seventy patients with primary HCC underwent anatomical hepatectomy in our institution from November 2008 to April 2014. As we gained experience with LAH, our indications for choosing LAH over OAH gradually expanded. Ultimately, 40 and 30 patients underwent LAH and OAH, respectively. Perioperative and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups.
There were no significant differences in age, sex, background of liver disease, liver function, tumor size, tumor number, or type of liver resection between the two groups. Major complications and mortality rates were similar between the LAH and OAH groups (12.5% vs. 20%; p = 0.582, and 0% vs. 3.3%; p = 0.429, respectively). The median follow-up time after surgery was 40.5 months in the LAH group and 32.9 months in the OAH group (p = 0.835). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 89.9, 84.7, and 70.9%, in the LAH group, and 89.8, 68.0, and 63.1% in the OAH group, respectively (p = 0.255). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 79.5, 58.0, and 42.5%, in the LAH group, and 72.4, 56.1, and 50.4% in the OAH group, respectively (p = 0.980).
Through gradual introduction of LAH, we obtained comparable results to those achieved with OAH. LAH can be a feasible surgical treatment for primary HCC, with good oncological outcomes.
KeywordsHepatocellular carcinoma Anatomical hepatectomy Laparoscopic hepatectomy
Goro Honda has received lecture fees from Johnson & Johnson and Covidien. Tomoki Ryu, Masanao Kurata, Shin Kobayashi, Katsunori Sakamoto, and Masahiko Honjo have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
- 5.Eguchi S, Kanematsu T, Arii S, Okazaki M, Okita K, Omata M, Ikai I, Kudo M, Kojiro M, Makuuchi M, Monden M, Matsuyama Y, Nakanuma Y, Takayasu K, Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan (2008) Comparison of the outcomes between an anatomical subsegmentectomy and a non-anatomical minor hepatectomy for single hepatocellular carcinomas based on a Japanese nationwide survey. Surgery 143:469–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Nguyen KT, Gamblin TC, Geller DA (2009) World review of laparoscopic liver resection—2804 patients. Ann Surg 250:931–941Google Scholar
- 10.Soubrane O, Goumard C, Laurent A, Tranchart H, Truant S, Gayet B, Salloum C, Luc G, Dokmak S, Piardi T, Cherqui D, Dagher I, Boleslawski E, Vibert E, Cunha AS, Belghiti J, Pessaux P, Boelle PY, Scatton O (2014) Laparoscopic resection of hepatocellular carcinoma: a French survey in 351 patients. HPB 16:357–365CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Truant S, Bouras AF, Hebbar M, Boleslawski E, Fromont G, Dharancy S, Leteutre E, Zerbib P, Pruvot FR (2011) Laparoscopic resection vs. open liver resection for peripheral hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease: a case-matched study. Surg Endosc 25:3668–3677CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 24.Belghiti J, Clavien PA, Gadzijev E, Garden JO, Lau WY, Makuuchi M, Strong RW (2000) The Brisbane 2000 terminology of liver anatomy and resections. HBP 2:333–339Google Scholar
- 26.Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, de Santibanes E, Pekolj J, Slankamenac K, Bassi C, Graf R, Vonlanthen R, Padbury R, Cameron JL, Makuuchi M (2009) The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250:187–196CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan (2010) General rules for the clinical and pathological study of primary liver cancer, 3rd edn. Kanehara, TokyoGoogle Scholar