Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2019 Feb;26(2):583-590.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-018-6928-1. Epub 2018 Oct 17.

Robotic Versus Open Minor Liver Resections of the Posterosuperior Segments: A Multinational, Propensity Score-Matched Study

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Robotic Versus Open Minor Liver Resections of the Posterosuperior Segments: A Multinational, Propensity Score-Matched Study

Carolijn L Nota et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Minor liver resections of posterosuperior segments (1, 4A, 7, 8) are challenging to perform laparoscopically and are mainly performed using an open approach. We determined the feasibility of robotic resections of posterosuperior segments and compared short-term outcomes with the open approach.

Methods: Data on open and robotic minor (≤ 3 segments) liver resections including the posterosuperior segments, performed between 2009 and 2016, were collected retrospectively from four hospitals. Robotic and open liver resections were compared, before and after propensity score matching.

Results: In total, 51 robotic and 145 open resections were included. After matching, 31 robotic resections were compared with 31 open resections. Median hospital stay was 4 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3-7) for the robotic group, versus 8 days (IQR 6-10) for the open group (p < 0.001). Median operative time was 222 min (IQR 164-505) for robotic cases versus 231 min (IQR 190-301) for open cases (p = 0.668). Median estimated blood loss was 200 mL (IQR 100-400) versus 300 mL (IQR 125-750), respectively (p = 0.212). In the robotic group, one patient (3%) had a major complication, versus three patients (10%) in the open group (p = 0.612). Readmissions were similar-10% in the robotic group versus 6% in the open group (p > 0.99). There was no mortality in either group.

Conclusion: Minor robotic liver resections of the posterosuperior segments are safe and feasible and display a shorter length of stay than open resections in selected patients at expert centers.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest

Yanghee Woo is a consultant for Ethicon and Verb Surgical. Yuman Fong is a scientific consultant to Medtronics Inc. Carolijn L. Nota, Mustafa Raoof, Thomas Boerner, I. Quintus Molenaar, Gi Hong Choi, T. Peter Kingham, Karen Latorre, Inne H. Borel Rinkes and Jeroen Hagendoorn have declared no conflicts of interest.

Figures

FIG. 1
FIG. 1
Included patients per hospital. MSKCC Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, UMC University Medical Center

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Jin S, Fu Q, Wuyun G, et al. Management of post-hepatectomy complications. World J Gastroenterol 2013;19(44):7983–91. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ciria R, Cherqui D, Geller DA, et al. Comparative Short-term Benefits of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: 9000 Cases and Climbing. Ann Surg 2016; 263(4):761–77. - PubMed
    1. Fretland AA, Dagenborg VJ, Bjornelv GMW, et al. Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases: The OSLO-COMET Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann Surg 2018; 267(2):199–207. - PubMed
    1. Buell JF, Cherqui D, Geller DA, et al. The international position on laparoscopic liver surgery: The Louisville Statement, 2008. Ann Surg 2009; 250(5):825–30. - PubMed
    1. Wakabayashi G, Cherqui D, Geller DA, et al. Recommendations for laparoscopic liver resection: a report from the second international consensus conference held in Morioka. Ann Surg 2015; 261(4):619–29. - PubMed