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
. 2021 Jun 2;11(1):11605.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-89864-3.

Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic repeat liver resection and re-operation for liver tumor

Affiliations

Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic repeat liver resection and re-operation for liver tumor

Koki Takase et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been reported as a safe, minimally invasive, and effective surgery for the management of liver tumor. However, the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) for recurrent liver tumor are unclear. Here, we analyzed the surgical results of LRLR. From June 2010 to May 2019, we performed 575 LLR surgeries in our department, and 454 of them underwent pure LLR for the single tumor. We classified the patients who received pure LLR for the single tumor into three groups: LRLR (n = 80), laparoscopic re-operation after previous abdominal surgery (LReOp; n = 136), and laparoscopic primary liver resection (LPLR; n = 238). We compared patient characteristics and surgical results between patients undergoing LRLR, LReOp and LPLR. We found no significant differences between LRLR and LPLR in the conversion rate to laparotomy (p = 0.8033), intraoperative bleeding (63.0 vs. 152.4 ml; p = 0.0911), or postoperative bile leakage rate (2.50 vs. 3.78%; p = 0.7367). We also found no significant difference in the surgical results between LReOp and LPLR. However, the number of patients undergoing the Pringle maneuver was lower in the LRLR group than the LPLR group (61.3 vs. 81.5%; p = 0.0004). This finding was more pronounced after open liver resection than laparoscopic liver resection (38.9 vs. 67.7%; p = 0.0270). The operative time was significantly longer in patients with proximity to previous cut surface than patients with no proximity to previous cut surface (307.4 vs. 235.7 min; p = 0.0201). LRLR can safely be performed with useful surgical results compared to LPLR.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

    1. Tranchart H, Di Giuro G, Lainas P, Roudie J, Agostini H, Franco D, Dagher I. Laparoscopic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: A matched-pair comparative study. Surg. Endosc. 2010;24:1170–1176. doi: 10.1007/s00464-009-0745-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gaillard M, Tranchart H, Dagher I. Laparoscopic liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma: Current role and limitations. World J. Gastroenterol. 2014;20:4892–4899. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i17.4892. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Xiong J-J, Altaf K, Javed MA, Huang W, Mukherjee R, Mai G, Sutton R, Liu X-B, Wei-Ming Hu. Meta-analysis of laparoscopic vs open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. World J. Gastroenterol. 2012;18:6657–6668. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i45.6657. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Imura S, Shimada M, Utsunomiya T, Morine Y, Wakabayashi G, Kaneko H. Current status of laparoscopic liver surgery in Japan: Results of a multicenter Japanese experience. Surg. Today. 2014;44:1214–1219. doi: 10.1007/s00595-013-0668-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kawaguchi Y, Otsuka Y, Kaneko H, Nagai M, Nomura Y, Yamamoto M, Otani M, Ohashi Y, Sugawara K, Koike D, Ishida T, Kokudo N, Tanaka N. Comparisons of financial and short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open hepatectomy: Benefits for patients and hospitals. Surg. Today. 2016;46:535–542. doi: 10.1007/s00595-015-1189-0. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms