Comparison of pure laparoscopic versus open left hemihepatectomy by multivariate analysis: a retrospective cohort study

Abstract

Introduction: To compare the outcomes of pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) versus open left hemihepatectomy (OLH) for benign and malignant conditions using multivariate analysis.

Materials and methods: All consecutive cases of LLH and OLH between October 2007 and December 2013 in a tertiary referral hospital were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. All surgical procedures were performed by one surgeon. The LLH and OLH groups were compared in terms of patient demographics, preoperative data, clinical perioperative outcomes, and tumor characteristics in patients with malignancy. Multivariate analysis of the prognostic factors associated with severe complications was then performed.

Results: The LLH group (n = 62) had a significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay than the OLH group (n = 118) (9.53 ± 3.30 vs 14.88 ± 11.36 days, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that the OLH group had >4 times the risk of the LLH group in terms of developing severe complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III) (odds ratio 4.294, 95% confidence intervals 1.165-15.832, p = 0.029).

Discussion: LLH was a safe and feasible procedure for selected patients. LLH required shorter hospital stay and resulted in less operative blood loss. Multivariate analysis revealed that LLH was associated with a lower risk of severe complications compared to OLH. The authors suggest that LLH could be a reasonable treatment option for selected patients.

Keywords: Comparative study; Multivariate analysis; Open left hemihepatectomy; Pure laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy.