Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Laparoscopic liver resection is considered a safe and feasible alternative to open surgery for malignant liver lesions. However, laparoscopic surgery in cirrhotic patients remains challenging. The aim of this retrospective case–control study was to compare morbidity, mortality, and long-term patient survival between laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) and open liver resections (OLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with histologically proven cirrhosis. Methods A total of 45 patients treated with LLR were matched by cause of cirrhosis, Child-Pugh score, type of surgical resection (subsegmentectomy, segmentectomy, and bisegmentectomy), tumor number, tumor size, and alpha-fetoprotein value with 45 patients treated with OLR. Pre-, intra-, and post-operative variables were compared between groups. Results Compared with OLR, the LLR group displayed a significantly shorter operative time (140 vs. 180 min; p  = 0.02), shorter hospital stay (7 vs. 12 days; p  < 0.0001), and lower morbidity rate (20 vs. 45 % of patients; p  = 0.01). A higher rate of R0 resection was observed in the LLR group than in the OLR group (95 vs. 85 %; p  = 0.03). Postoperative ascites was more frequently observed in the OLR group (18 vs. 2 %; p  = 0.01). Mortality, patient, and disease-free survival rates were similar between groups. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates were 88, 59, and 12 %, respectively, in the LLR group and 63, 44, and 22 % in the OLR group ( p  = 0.27). Conclusions Significantly shorter operative times, better resection margins, lower postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stay were observed in the LLR group compared with the OLR group. LLR and OLR have similar overall and disease-free survival rates in cirrhotic HCC patients.

Background A defunctioning loop ileostomy mitigates the consequences of anastomotic leak from low rectal anastomosis but it is associated with significant morbidity. In this study, the outcome of early reversal of defunctioning ileostomy during the same admission with the primary operation was assessed. Methods This randomized study was carried out at York Teaching Hospital during the period 2003–2007. All patients with defunctioning ileostomy were considered for an early second operation if they had an uneventful recovery and were in good general condition. Patients on steroids, at high cardiorespiratory risk and those experiencing any postoperative complication were excluded. Eligible patients with satisfactory gastrografin enema on postoperative day 6 were randomized to early versus late reversal at 6–8 weeks. Outcome measures were ease of closure as assessed by a visual analog scale by the operating surgeon, all postoperative complications, duration of the operation, total length of hospital stay and associated costs. Results Thirty-nine consecutive patients were assessed for eligibility and finally 26 were included in the study. Sixteen patients underwent early reversal. The median(interquartile range (IQR)) age was 62(22) years. Early reversal was significantly superior in terms of ease of abdominal wall closure, ease of reversal ( p  < 0.01 each), duration of the operation (median(IQR) 20(13) vs. 40(9) min, p  < 0.01) and costs of stoma care (median(IQR) 27(9) vs. 311(108) £, p  < 0.01). There were no major (grade III/IV) complications in either group. Total length of hospital stay was similar between groups. Conclusion In carefully selected patients, early reversal of defunctioning ileostomy is feasible, technically easier and has shorter operative time which can also lead to significant cost savings.

Background The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of the medial approach (MA) and the lateral approach (LA) in the treatment of colorectal disease. Methods Studies published since 1994 that compared MA versus LA in laparoscopic colorectal resection were collected. Data on conversion rate, operative time, blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, hospital stay, complications, mortality, rate of recurrence, and hospitalization costs for MA and LA were meta-analyzed using fixed-effect and random-effect models. Results Five cohort studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 3 retrospective studies) that included 881 patients were studied. Of these patients, 475 and 582 had undergone laparoscopic colorectal resection via MA and LA, respectively. There were significant reductions in conversion rate and operative time and possible reductions in blood loss and hospitalization costs for MA compared to LA; however, there were fewer harvested lymph nodes for MA compared with LA, which remains to be further studied. Other outcome variables such as postoperative complications, postoperative immune function, mortality, and rate of recurrence were not found to be statistically significant for either group. Sensitivity analysis on the pooled data from randomized controlled trials showed that the conversion rates were not significantly different between MA and LA. Conclusions Compared with the lateral approach, the medial approach has the advantages of shorter operative time and possibly lower conversion rate; it also can be as safe as the lateral approach. Whether the MA has less blood loss and lower hospitalization costs remains to be confirmed, and its oncological safety and long-term prognosis are not clear. Due to insufficient data from a limited number of studies, inadequate assessment of the results may arise.

Purpose This study aimed to compare short-term outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) with those of open esophagectomy (OE) for thoracic esophageal cancer using a nationwide Japanese database. Methods Overall, 9584 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at 864 hospitals in 2011–2012 were evaluated. We performed one-to-one matching between the MIE and OE groups on the basis of estimated propensity scores for each patient. Results After propensity score matching, operative time was significantly longer in the MIE group ( n  = 3515) than in the OE group ( n  = 3515) [526 ± 149 vs. 461 ± 156 min, p  < 0.001], whereas blood loss was markedly less in the MIE group than in the OE group (442 ± 612l vs. 608 ± 591 ml, p  < 0.001). The populations of patients who required more than 48 h of postoperative respiratory ventilation was significantly less in the MIE group than in the OE group (8.9 vs. 10.9%, p  = 0.006); however, reoperation rate within 30 days was significantly higher in the MIE group than in the OE group (7.0 vs. 5.3%, p  = 0.004). There were no significant differences between the MIE and OE groups in 30-day mortality rates (0.9 vs. 1.1%) and operative mortality rates (2.5 vs. 2.8%, respectively). Conclusions MIE was comparable with conventional OE in terms of short-term outcome after esophagectomy. It was particularly beneficial in reducing postoperative respiratory complications, but may be associated with higher reoperation rates.

Background Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is an emerging surgical technique for rectal cancer. However, the oncological and perioperative outcomes are controversial when compared with conventional laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (laTME). Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane database. All original studies published in English that compared taTME with laTME were included for critical appraisal and meta-analysis. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.3 software. Results A total of seven studies including 573 patients (taTME group = 270; laTME group = 303) were included in our meta-analysis. Concerning the oncological outcomes, no differences were observed in harvested lymph nodes, distal resection margin (DRM) and positive DRM between the two groups. However, the taTME group showed a higher rate of achievement of complete grading of mesorectal quality (OR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.02–3.01, P =  0.04), a longer circumferential resection margin (CRM) and less involvement of positive CRM (CRM: WMD = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.60–1.31, P < 0.01; positive CRM: OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.17–0.86, P =  0.02). Concerning the perioperative outcomes, the results for hospital stay, intraoperative complications and readmission were comparable between the two groups. However, the taTME group showed shorter operation times (WMD = –23.45, 95% CI = –37.43 to –9.46, P < 0.01), a lower rate of conversion (OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.11–0.81, P =  0.02) and a higher rate of mobilization of the splenic flexure (OR = 2.34, 95% CI = 0.99–5.54, P =  0.05). Although the incidence of anastomotic leakage, ileus and urinary morbidity showed no difference between the groups, a significantly lower rate of overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.45–0.95, P =  0.03) was observed in the taTME group. Conclusions In comparison with laTME, taTME seems to achieve comparable technical success with acceptable oncologic and perioperative outcomes. However, multicenter randomized controlled trials are required to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of taTME.

ObjectiveWith the increased adoption of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy, the effects of unplanned conversions to an ‘open’ operation are ill-defined. This study aims to describe the impact of unplanned conversions of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy on short-term outcomes and suggest a stepwise approach for safe unplanned conversions during robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy.MethodsThis is an analysis of 400 consecutive patients undergoing robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy in a single high-volume institution. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD), and significance is accepted with 95% probability.ResultsBetween November 2012 and February 2023, 184 (46%) women and 216 (54%) men, aged 70 (68 ± 11.0) years, underwent a robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Unplanned conversions occurred in 42 (10.5%) patients; 18 (5%) were converted due to unanticipated vascular involvement, 13 (3%) due to failure to obtain definitive control of bleeding, and 11 (3%) due to visceral obesity. Men were more likely to require a conversion than women (29 vs. 13, p = 0.05). Conversions were associated with shorter operative time (376 (323 ± 182.2) vs. 434 (441 ± 98.7) min, p < 0.0001) but higher estimated blood loss (675 (1010 ± 1168.1) vs. 150 (196 ± 176.8) mL, p < 0.0001). Patients that required an unplanned conversion had higher rates of complications with Clavien–Dindo scores of   III-V (31% vs. 12%, p = 0.003), longer length of stay (8 (11 ± 11.6) vs. 5 (7 ± 6.2), p = 0.0005), longer ICU length of stay (1 (2 ± 5.1) vs. 0 (0 ± 1.3), p < 0.0001) and higher mortality rates (21% vs. 4%, p = 0.0001). The conversion rate significantly decreased over time (p < 0.0001).ConclusionsUnplanned conversions of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy significantly and negatively affect short-term outcomes, including postoperative mortality. Men were more likely to require a conversion than women. The unplanned conversions rates significantly decreased over time, implying that increased proficiency and patient selection may prevent unplanned conversions. An unplanned conversion should be undertaken in an organized stepwise approach to maximize patient safety.

Background Laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is currently perceived a complex and challenging laparoscopic procedure and is limited to a few expert teams. This study analyzed the short- and long-term outcomes of LMH for HCC compared with open hepatectomy. Methods From January 2006 to May 2014, 38 patients underwent LMH for HCC (10 left and 28 right hepatectomy). They were matched and compared to 38 patients (10 left and 28 right hepatectomy) who underwent a conventional open approach. Short-term operative and postoperative outcomes as well as long-term outcomes, including disease-free survival and overall survival rates, were evaluated. Results Patients were well matched for several preoperative factors. Overall complication rates were significantly higher for the open group. No significant difference was seen in 3-year overall survival between the open and laparoscopic groups (69.2 vs. 73.4 %; p  = 0.951). A trend toward better 3-year disease-free survival after laparoscopy was observed (29.7 vs. 50.3 %; p  = 0.219), even though the difference did not reach statistical significance. The same trend was seen in subgroup analyses of right and left hepatectomy. Conclusions This study shows the feasibility of LMH for HCC compared to open hepatectomy in regard to both short- and long-term outcomes. LMH offers many advantages commonly attributed to laparoscopy and is well suited for HCC with cirrhosis when performed by experienced surgeons.

BackgroundRepeat hepatectomy is often required for hepatocellular carcinoma and metastatic tumors. However, this procedure is technically challenging, so laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy (LRH) has not been widely adopted. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of LRH compared with open repeat hepatectomy (ORH) and laparoscopic primary hepatectomy (LPH).MethodsWe introduced laparoscopic hepatectomy at our institution in April 2014. We performed 127 LPH (LPH group) and 33 LRH procedures (LRH group) from April 2014 to April 2017; 37 patients underwent ORH from January 2010 to April 2017 (ORH group). This study retrospectively compared the patient characteristics and short-term outcomes of the LRH and ORH groups as well as the LRH and LPH groups.ResultsThere were no conversions to open surgery in the LRH group. In comparing the LRH and ORH groups, there were no significant differences in patient characteristics except for the type of approach to the previous hepatectomy (p = 0.004) and indocyanine green retention rate at 15 min (median 12.5 vs. 8.75%, p = 0.026). The LRH group had less blood loss (median 30 mL vs. 652 mL; p < 0.001), less intraoperative transfusion (6.1 vs. 32.4%; p = 0.006), and shorter postoperative hospital stays (median 6.5 days vs. 9.0 days; p < 0.001). There were no differences with regard to operation time, severe postoperative complications, and mortality. In comparing the LRH and LPH groups, there was a significant difference only in past history of abdominal surgery (100 vs. 61.4%; p < 0.001). In the short-term outcomes, the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LRH group (median 6.5 days vs. 7 days; p = 0.033), and the other results were comparable between the two groups.ConclusionsLRH is feasible and useful for repeat hepatectomy, achieving good short-term outcomes.

IntroductionPulsed-field energy (PFA) and very high-power short-duration radiofrequency (vHPSD-RF) are two novel ablation methods for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). Both PFA and vHPSD-RF show promise for improving efficacy, safety, and reducing procedure durations. However, direct comparisons between these two techniques are scarce.Methods and resultsRetrospective analysis of 82 patients with symptomatic AF. Of these, 52 patients received PFA and 30 received vHPSD-RF (90 W, 4 s) as index procedure. At the 6-month follow-up, AF recurrence occurred in 4 patients following PFA and 5 patients following vHPSD-RF (p-value = 0.138). Significant improvements in the EHRA and NYHA stages were evident in both PFA (p < 0.001 and p = 0.047, respectively) and vHPSD-RF groups (p = 0.007 and p = 0.012, respectively). The total procedure duration and the left atrial dwell time were significantly shorter in the PFA group (64 ± 19 min vs. 99 ± 32 min, p < 0.001 and 41 ± 12 min vs. 62 ± 29 min, p < 0.001, respectively). The fluoroscopy time and dose area product were significantly higher in PFA (14 ± 6 vs. 9 ± 5 min, p < 0.001 and 14 ± 9 vs. 11 ± 9 Gy cm2, p = 0.046, respectively). One patient in the vHPSD-RF group suffered a stroke, not directly linked to the procedure (0 vs. 1 major complication, p = 0.366).ConclusionBased on this retrospective single-center study, PFA and vHPSD-RF were associated with similar effectiveness and safety profiles. PFA was linked to shorter procedure times and higher radiation exposure compared to vHPSD-RF.

BackgroundWith the improvements in laparoscopic or robotic surgical techniques and instruments, a growing number of surgeons have attempted to complete all digestive tract reconstruction intracorporeally; these procedures include totally robotic gastrectomy (TRG) and totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG). This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the TRG and compare the short-term outcomes of the TRG and TLG in patients with gastric cancer.MethodsBetween January 2018 and June 2023, 346 consecutive patients who underwent TRG or TLG at a high-volume academic gastric cancer specialty center were included. 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce confounding bias. The surgical outcomes, postoperative morbidity, and surgical burden were compared in PSM cohort.ResultsAfter PSM, a well-balanced cohort of 194 patients (97 in each group) was included in the analysis. The total operation time of the TRG group was significantly longer than that of the TLG group (244.9 vs. 213.0 min, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the effective operation time between the 2 groups (217.8 vs. 207.2 min, P = 0.059). The digestive tract reconstruction time of the TRG group was significantly shorter than that of the TLG group (39.4 vs. 46.7 min, P < 0.001). The mean blood loss in the TRG group was less than that in the TLG group (101.1 vs. 126.8 mL, P = 0.014). The TRG group had more retrieved lymph nodes in the suprapancreatic area than that in the TLG group (16.6 vs 14.2, P = 0.002). The TRG group had a lower surgery task load index (38.9 vs. 43.1, P < 0.001) than the TLG group. No significant difference was found in terms of postoperative morbidity between the 2 groups (14.4% vs. 16.5%, P = 0.691).ConclusionThis study demonstrated that TRG is a safe and feasible procedure, and is preferable to TLG in terms of invasion and ergonomics. The TRG may maximize the superiority of robotic surgical systems and embodies the theory of minimally invasive surgery.