Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a safe procedure. Repeat surgery is more often required, and the role of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is not yet clearly defined. The present study analyzes data compiled by the Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery (IGoMILS) on LLR. To compare repeated LLR with the first LLR for HCC is the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the outcome of repeat LLR in the case of primary open versus primary MILS surgery. The data cohort is divided into two groups. Group 1: first liver resection and Group 2: Repeat LLR. To compare the two groups a 3:1 Propensity Score Matching is performed to analyze open versus MILS primary resection. Fifty-two centers were involved in the present study, and 1054 patients were enrolled. 80 patients underwent to a repeat LLR. The type of resection was different, with more major resections in the group 1 before matching the two groups. After propensity score matching 3:1, each group consisted of 222 and 74 patients. No difference between the two groups was observed. In the subgroup analysis, in 44 patients the first resection was performed by an open approach. The other 36 patients were resected with a MILS approach. We found no difference between these two subgroups of patients. The present study in repeat MILS for HCC using the IGoMILS Registry has observed the feasibility and safety of the MILS procedure.

Is minimally invasive liver surgery a reasonable option in recurrent HCC? A snapshot from the I Go MILS registry / Levi Sandri G. B.; Colasanti M.; Aldrighetti L.; Guglielmi A.; Cillo U.; Mazzaferro V.; Dalla Valle R.; De Carlis L.; Gruttadauria S.; Di Benedetto F.; Ferrero A.; Ettorre G. M.; Antonucci A.; Batignani G.; Belli G.; Belli A.; Berti S.; Boggi U.; Bonsignore P.; Brolese A.; Calise F.; Ceccarelli G.; Cecconi S.; Colledan M.; Coratti A.; Ercolani G.; Ferla F.; Filauro M.; Floridi A.; Frena A.; Giuliani A.; Giuliante F.; Grazi G. L.; Gringeri E.; Griseri G.; Guerriero S.; Jovine E.; Magistri P.; Maida P.; Massani M.; Mezzatesta P.; Morelli L.; Russolillo N.; Navarra G.; Parisi A.; Patriti A.; Ravaioli M.; Ratti F.; Romito R.; Reggiani P.; Ruzzenente A.; Santambrogio R.; Berardi G.; Sgroi G.; Slim A.; Spada M.; Sposito C.; Tedeschi U.; Tisone G.; Torzilli G.; Veneroni L.; Vincenti L.; Zamboni F.; Zimmitti G.. - In: UPDATES IN SURGERY. - ISSN 2038-131X. - ELETTRONICO. - 74:(2022), pp. 87-96. [10.1007/s13304-021-01161-w]

Is minimally invasive liver surgery a reasonable option in recurrent HCC? A snapshot from the I Go MILS registry

Batignani G.;Grazi G. L.;
2022

Abstract

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a safe procedure. Repeat surgery is more often required, and the role of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is not yet clearly defined. The present study analyzes data compiled by the Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery (IGoMILS) on LLR. To compare repeated LLR with the first LLR for HCC is the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the outcome of repeat LLR in the case of primary open versus primary MILS surgery. The data cohort is divided into two groups. Group 1: first liver resection and Group 2: Repeat LLR. To compare the two groups a 3:1 Propensity Score Matching is performed to analyze open versus MILS primary resection. Fifty-two centers were involved in the present study, and 1054 patients were enrolled. 80 patients underwent to a repeat LLR. The type of resection was different, with more major resections in the group 1 before matching the two groups. After propensity score matching 3:1, each group consisted of 222 and 74 patients. No difference between the two groups was observed. In the subgroup analysis, in 44 patients the first resection was performed by an open approach. The other 36 patients were resected with a MILS approach. We found no difference between these two subgroups of patients. The present study in repeat MILS for HCC using the IGoMILS Registry has observed the feasibility and safety of the MILS procedure.
2022
74
87
96
Levi Sandri G. B.; Colasanti M.; Aldrighetti L.; Guglielmi A.; Cillo U.; Mazzaferro V.; Dalla Valle R.; De Carlis L.; Gruttadauria S.; Di Benedetto F.; Ferrero A.; Ettorre G. M.; Antonucci A.; Batignani G.; Belli G.; Belli A.; Berti S.; Boggi U.; Bonsignore P.; Brolese A.; Calise F.; Ceccarelli G.; Cecconi S.; Colledan M.; Coratti A.; Ercolani G.; Ferla F.; Filauro M.; Floridi A.; Frena A.; Giuliani A.; Giuliante F.; Grazi G. L.; Gringeri E.; Griseri G.; Guerriero S.; Jovine E.; Magistri P.; Maida P.; Massani M.; Mezzatesta P.; Morelli L.; Russolillo N.; Navarra G.; Parisi A.; Patriti A.; Ravaioli M.; Ratti F.; Romito R.; Reggiani P.; Ruzzenente A.; Santambrogio R.; Berardi G.; Sgroi G.; Slim A.; Spada M.; Sposito C.; Tedeschi U.; Tisone G.; Torzilli G.; Veneroni L.; Vincenti L.; Zamboni F.; Zimmitti G.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
LeviSandri2022_Article_IsMinimallyInvasiveLiverSurger.pdf

Accesso chiuso

Dimensione 1.73 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.73 MB Adobe PDF   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in FLORE sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificatore per citare o creare un link a questa risorsa: https://hdl.handle.net/2158/1301211
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 10
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 9
social impact