External validation of different difficulty scoring systems of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Lin, Hanyang; Bai, Yang; Yin, Mengqiu; Chen, Zewei; Yu, Shian

doi:10.1007/s00464-021-08687-5

Cited by 10 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[44][45][46] Two articles were excluded by virtue of them being review articles with no unique datasets 10,46 and one article was found to be a duplicate, 19 and the remaining 37 articles were included in the qualitative analysis. 3,[6][7][8][9][11][12][13][14]17,18,…”

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twelve studies in the literature had supporting data for the Iwate DSS for MILR. [11][12][13]18,32,[33][34][35][36][37][38][39] Notably, the Iwate DSS was not formulated based on any data but as a modification of the Ban DSS based on expert opinion. Ten studies had supporting data for Iwate DSS for LLR against various outcome measures, 11,12,18,[32][33][34][35][36]38,39 of which eight studies 11,12,18,21,[32][33][34][35][36] published data that was amenable to pooling (Table 3).…”

Section: Iwate Dssmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[11][12][13]18,32,[33][34][35][36][37][38][39] Notably, the Iwate DSS was not formulated based on any data but as a modification of the Ban DSS based on expert opinion. Ten studies had supporting data for Iwate DSS for LLR against various outcome measures, 11,12,18,[32][33][34][35][36]38,39 of which eight studies 11,12,18,21,[32][33][34][35][36] published data that was amenable to pooling (Table 3). On pooling of data, Iwate DSS was found to be significant discriminator for operative time, blood loss, need for transfusion, need for Pringle's maneuver, conversion rate, intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, and mortality for LLR (P < .05), but not for Pringle's time (P = .77) and length of stay (P = .37).…”

Section: Iwate Dssmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four studies (one formulation and three validations) 7,12,18,40 in the literature had supporting data for the Hasegawa DSS for LLR/MILR (Table 4), which found the DSS to be a significant discriminator for operative time, blood loss, need for transfusion, need for Pringle's maneuver and Pringle's time, postoperative complication rate, and length of stay (P < .05) for LLR/MILR, but not conversion rate (P = .06) and mortality rate (P = .055). There were no studies which had supporting data for Hasegawa DSS for RLR.…”

Section: Hasegawa Dssmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Systematic review and meta‐analysis of difficulty scoring systems for laparoscopic and robotic liver resections

Linn

Han

et al. 2022

J Hepato Biliary Pancreat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:The ability to stratify the difficulty of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) allows surgeons at different phases of the learning curve to tackle cases of appropriate difficulty safely. Several difficulty scoring systems (DSS) have been formulated which attempt to accurately stratify this difficulty. The present study aims to review the literature pertaining to the existing DSS for MILR. Methods:We performed a systematic review and metanalysis of the literature reporting on the formulation, supporting data, and comparison of DSS for MILR.Results: A total of 11 studies were identified which reported on the formulation of unique DSS for MILR. Five of these (Ban, Iwate, Hasegawa, Institut Mutaliste

show abstract

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Iwate Dssmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Iwate Dssmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hasegawa Dssmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systematic review and meta‐analysis of difficulty scoring systems for laparoscopic and robotic liver resections

Linn

Han

et al. 2022

J Hepato Biliary Pancreat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lin et al conducted a single-center study specifically designed to validate these scores in HCC patients [33]. They found significant distributions of applying bleeding control, surgical time, estimated blood loss, postoperative major complications and hospital stay among different groups of each system, and that the IWATE-DSS was also able to predict conversion.…”

Section: Difficulty Scoresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic Approach for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Cipriani

Aldrighetti

2022

Hepatocellular Carcinoma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) was born in 1991 and gradually expanded during the following thirty years [1]. Even extremely complex procedures are performed in centers with adequate experience [2,3].Curative treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) include liver resection (LR) and local ablation therapy, which can now be performed using the laparoscopic technique. Moreover, laparoscopy is increasingly being used to expand the indications for surgical treatment for HCC patients, being able to overcome some of the limits or issues linked to traditional open LR. Short-Term OutcomesMany studies have documented the feasibility and safety of LLR and reported advantages with respect to perioperative outcomes. Among the most frequent are the reduction of blood loss, transfusion needs, complications, and length of hospital stay, as well as earlier recovery of physiological functions and patient's autonomy. This is extremely important for HCC, since hepatectomy in cirrhosis is associated with higher complication rates than other conventional settings. In many studies focusing on HCC, the benefits of laparoscopy have been particularly evident and often associated with specific advantages. Of particular interest is the reduction of ascites, a very fearful and frequent complication in the cirrhotic patient, which laparoscopy is able to contain by avoiding large abdominal incisions, thus allowing the surgeon to preserve the parietal circulation and lymphatics and to limit the dispersion of fluids [4,5]. Also, the incidence of postoperative liver failure was shown to be reduced by many studies F. Cipriani (*) • L.

show abstract

Sub‐classification of laparoscopic left hepatectomy based on hierarchic interaction of tumor location and size with perioperative outcomes

Ruzzenente

Valle

Poletto

et al. 2023

J Hepato Biliary Pancreat

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this multicentric study was to investigate the impact of tumor location and size on the difficulty of Laparoscopic‐Left Hepatectomy (L‐LH).MethodsPatients who underwent L‐LH performed across 46 centers from 2004 to 2020 were analyzed. Of 1236 L‐LH, 770 patients met the study criteria. Baseline clinical and surgical characteristics with a potential impact on LLR were included in a multi‐label conditional interference tree. Tumor size cut‐off was algorithmically determined.ResultsPatients were stratified into 3 groups based on tumor location and dimension: 457 in antero‐lateral location (Group 1), 144 in postero‐superior segment (4a) with tumor size ≤40 mm (Group 2), and 169 in postero‐superior segment (4a) with tumor size >40 mm (Group 3). Patients in the Group 3 had higher conversion rate (7.0% vs. 7.6% vs. 13.0%, p‐value .048), longer operating time (median, 240 min vs. 285 min vs. 286 min, p‐value <.001), greater blood loss (median, 150 mL vs. 200 mL vs. 250 mL, p‐value <.001) and higher intraoperative blood transfusion rate (5.7% vs. 5.6% vs. 11.3%, p‐value .039). Pringle's maneuver was also utilized more frequently in Group 3 (66.7%), compared to Group 1 (53.2%) and Group 2 (51.8%) (p = .006). There were no significant differences in postoperative stay, major morbidity, and mortality between the three groups.ConclusionL‐LH for tumors that are >40 mm in diameter and located in PS Segment 4a are associated with the highest degree of technical difficulty. However, post‐operative outcomes were not different from L‐LH of smaller tumors located in PS segments, or tumors located in the antero‐lateral segments.

show abstract

External validation of different difficulty scoring systems of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Cited by 10 publications

References 32 publications

Systematic review and meta‐analysis of difficulty scoring systems for laparoscopic and robotic liver resections

Systematic review and meta‐analysis of difficulty scoring systems for laparoscopic and robotic liver resections

Laparoscopic Approach for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Sub‐classification of laparoscopic left hepatectomy based on hierarchic interaction of tumor location and size with perioperative outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About