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
. 2023 Jan 1;158(1):46-54.
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.5697.

Safety and Efficacy of Robotic vs Open Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Collaborators, Affiliations

Safety and Efficacy of Robotic vs Open Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Fabrizio Di Benedetto et al. JAMA Surg. .

Abstract

Importance: Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery remain a hotly debated topic in surgical oncology, but sparse data have been published thus far.

Objective: To analyze short- and long-term outcomes of robotic liver resection (RLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from Western high-volume centers to assess the safety, reproducibility, and oncologic efficacy of this technique.

Design, setting, and participants: This cohort study evaluated the outcomes of patients receiving RLR vs open liver resection (OLR) for HCC between 2010 and 2020 in 5 high-volume centers. After 1:1 propensity score matching, a group of patients who underwent RLR was compared with a validation cohort of OLR patients from a high-volume center that did not perform RLR.

Main outcomes and measures: A retrospective analysis was performed of prospectively maintained databases at 2 European and 2 US institutions of patients who underwent RLR for HCC between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2020. The main outcomes were safety and feasibility of RLR for HCC and its oncologic outcomes compared with a European OLR validation cohort. A 2-sided P < .05 was considered significant.

Results: The study included 398 patients (RLR group: 125 men, 33 women, median [IQR] age, 66 [58-71] years; OLR group: 315 men, 83 women; median [IQR] age, 70 [64-74] years), and 106 RLR patients were compared with 106 OLR patients after propensity score matching. The RLR patients had a significantly longer operative time (median [IQR], 295 [190-370] minutes vs 200 [165-255] minutes, including docking; P < .001) but a significantly shorter hospital length of stay (median [IQR], 4 [3-6] days vs 10 [7-13] days; P < .001) and a lower number of admissions to the intensive care unit (7 [6.6%] vs 21 [19.8%]; P = .002). Incidence of posthepatectomy liver failure was significantly lower in the RLR group (8 [7.5%] vs 30 [28.3%]; P = .001), with no cases of grade C failure. The 90-day overall survival rate was comparable between the 2 groups (RLR, 99.1% [95% CI, 93.5%-99.9%]; OLR, 97.1% [95% CI, 91.3%-99.1%]), as was the cumulative incidence of death related to tumor recurrence (RLR, 8.8% [95% CI, 3.1%-18.3%]; OLR, 10.2% [95% CI, 4.9%-17.7%]).

Conclusions and relevance: This study represents the largest Western experience to date of full RLR for HCC. Compared with OLR, RLR performed in tertiary centers represents a safe treatment strategy for patients with HCC and those with compromised liver function while achieving oncologic efficacy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Identification With Integrated Firefly
Tumor cells can be either hypofluorescent or hyperfluorescent after indocyanine green (ICG) injection according to histologic features. Well-differentiated HCC tumors usually show a homogenous fluorescence pattern, whereas poorly differentiated HCC tumors show an inhomogeneous one or even a rim-type fluorescence pattern.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Overall Survival and Cumulative Incidence Function (CIF) of Death Related to Tumor Recurrence After Propensity Score Matching by Type of Surgery
Seventeen patients received a liver transplant and were censored on the date of transplant (2 in the open liver resection [OLR] group without recurrence, and 15 in the robotic liver resection [RLR] group [9 without recurrence and 6 with liver transplant after recurrence]). Deaths related to tumor recurrence were considered as events; deaths as a result of other causes were considered as competing events. aMedian (IQR) follow-up, 19 (10-33) months. bHazard ratio of surgery adjusted for number of nodules, grading, and microvascular invasion.

Comment in

References

    1. Abu Hilal M, Aldrighetti L, Dagher I, et al. . The Southampton consensus guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery: from indication to implementation. Ann Surg. 2018;268(1):11-18. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002524 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chin KM, Linn YL, Cheong CK, et al. . Minimally invasive vs open major hepatectomies for liver malignancies: a propensity score-matched analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2022;26(5):1041-1053. doi:10.1007/s11605-021-05226-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chong CC, Fuks D, Lee KF, et al. ; International Robotic and Laparoscopic Liver Resection Study Group Investigators . Propensity score–matched analysis comparing robotic and laparoscopic right and extended right hepatectomy. JAMA Surg. 2022;157(5):436-444. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2022.0161 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cipriani F, Fiorentini G, Magistri P, et al. . Pure laparoscopic versus robotic liver resections: multicentric propensity score-based analysis with stratification according to difficulty scores. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. Published online July 22, 2021. doi:10.1002/jhbp.1022 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Magistri P, Tarantino G, Assirati G, et al. . Robotic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review. Int J Med Robot. 2019;15(4):e2004. doi:10.1002/rcs.2004 - DOI - PubMed