Totally laparoscopic right hepatectomy

Gayet, Brice; Cavaliere, Davide; Vibert, Éric; Perniceni, Thierry; Levard, H; Denet, Christine; Christidis, Christos; Blain, Antoine; Mal, F.

doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.11.044

Cited by 180 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Operative time and mortality in our study were comparable with reports of previous LRH with (Kim et al, 2016) or without LHM (Gayet et al, 2007;Dagher et al, 2008;Medbery et al, 2014;Lainas et al, 2015), as shown in Table 4. Specifically, there was no severe liver-related morbidity, reoperation, readmission, or death in our series, demonstrating that our technique represents a safe and feasible approach.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Besides less blood loss, our series showed a lower conversion rate (0% versus ranging from 10% to 14%) compared with previous reports of LRH without LHM (Gayet et al, 2007;Dagher et al, 2008;Medbery et al, 2014;Lainas et al, 2015), and a less operating time compared with ORH with LHM (Wu et al, 2010). Operative time and mortality in our study were comparable with reports of previous LRH with (Kim et al, 2016) or without LHM (Gayet et al, 2007;Dagher et al, 2008;Medbery et al, 2014;Lainas et al, 2015), as shown in Table 4.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…If massive bleeding was encountered, portal triad clamping or IVC exclusion was suggested for its control (Wu et al, 2010). We reviewed reports of large series (of at least 10 cases) utilizing LRH with (Kim et al, 2016) or without LHM (Gayet et al, 2007;Dagher et al, 2008;Medbery et al, 2014;Lainas et al, 2015) and ORH with LHM (Wu et al, 2010) in recent years (Table 4). Our series presented a lower intraoperative blood loss in comparison with previous series of LRH with or without LHM, and ORH with LHM.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Can retrohepatic tunnel be quickly and easily established for laparoscopic liver hanging maneuver by Goldfinger dissector in laparoscopic right hepatectomy?

Cai

Wei

et al. 2016

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Objective: The liver hanging maneuver (LHM) is rarely applied in laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) because of the difficulty encountered in retrohepatic tunnel (RT) dissection and tape positioning. Thus far no report has detailed how to quickly and easily establish RT for laparoscopic LHM in LRH, nor has employment of the Goldfinger dissector to create a total RT been reported. This study's aim was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of establishing RT for laparoscopic LHM using the Goldfinger dissector in LRH. Methods: Between March 2015 and July 2015, five consecutive patients underwent LRH via the caudal approach with laparoscopic LHM. A five-step strategy using the Goldfinger dissector to establish RT for laparoscopic LHM was adopted. Perioperative data were analyzed. Results: The median age of patients was 58 (range, 51-65) years. Surgery was performed for one intrahepatic lithiasis and four hepatocellular carcinomas with a median size of 90 (40-150) mm. The median operative time was 320 (282-358) min with a median blood loss of 200 (200-600) ml. Laparoscopic LHM was achieved in a median of 31 (21-62) min, and the median postoperative hospital stay was 14 (9-16) d. No transfusion or conversion was required, and no severe liver-related morbidity or death was observed. Conclusions: The Goldfinger dissector is a useful instrument for the establishment of RT. A five-step strategy using the Goldfinger dissector can quickly and easily facilitate an RT for a laparoscopic LHM in LRH.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can retrohepatic tunnel be quickly and easily established for laparoscopic liver hanging maneuver by Goldfinger dissector in laparoscopic right hepatectomy?

Cai

Wei

et al. 2016

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is possible that the risk of gas embolism under pneumoperitoneum is increased by low CVP. Gayet et al 43. reported, to reduce the risk of gas embolism, PP should be reduced to the minimum required to maintain a clear operative field (8–10 mmHg) during transection of liver parenchyma.…”

Section: Surgical Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution and revolution of laparoscopic liver resection in Japan

Kaneko

Otsuka

Kubota

et al. 2017

Annals of Gastroent Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to important technological developments and improved endoscopic techniques, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now considered the approach of choice and is increasingly performed worldwide. Recent systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of observational data reported that LLR was associated with less bleeding, fewer complications, and no oncological disadvantage; however, no prospective randomized trials have been conducted. LLR will continue to evolve as a surgical approach that improves patient's quality of life. LLR will not totally supplant open liver surgery, and major LLR remains to be technically challenging procedure. The success of LLR depends on individual learning curves and adherence to surgical indications. A recent study proposed a scoring system for stepwise application of LLR, which was based on experience at high‐volume Japanese centers. A cluster of deaths after major LLR was sensationally reported by the Japanese media in 2014. In response, the Japanese Society of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Surgery conducted emergency data collection on operative mortality. The results demonstrated that mortality was not higher than that for open procedures except for hemi‐hepatectomy with biliary reconstruction. An online prospective registry system for LLR was established in 2015 to be transparent for patients who might potentially undergo treatment with this newly developed, technically demanding surgical procedure.

show abstract

“…With improvements of laparoscopic equipment, the present high definition feature of most monitoring units provides magnificent magnification of the operation field. The margin of resection is thus not compromised even although the operation is conducted through a very small opening [32][33][34] . The risk of hemorrhage is an important concern when conducting hepatic resection on patients who have received chemotherapy treating their primary cancer and the location of liver metastasis can be a challenge in laparoscopic hepatic resection.…”

Section: Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synchronous resections of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis by laparoscopic approach

Cheung¹,

Poon²

2013

WJH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liver metastasis of colorectal cancer is common. Resection of solitary tumors of primary and metastatic colorectal cancer can have a favorable outcome. Open resection of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis in one operation or in separate operations is currently common practice. Reports have shown that synchronous resections do not jeopardize short or long-term surgical outcomes and that this is a safe and effective approach in open surgery. The development of laparoscopic colorectal surgery and laparoscopic hepatectomy has made a minimally invasive surgical approach to treating colorectal cancer with liver metastasis feasible. Synchronous resections of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis by laparoscopy have recently been reported. The efficacy and safety of laparoscopic colorectal resection and laparoscopic hepatectomy have been proven separately but synchronous resections by laparoscopy are in hot debate. As it has been shown that open resection of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis in one operation results in an equally good short-term outcome when compared with that done in separate operations, laparoscopic resection of the same in one single operation seems to be a good option. Recent evidence has shown that this new approach is a safe alternative with a shorter hospital stay. Large scale randomized controlled trials are needed to demonstrate the effectiveness of this minimally invasive approach.© 2013 Baishideng. All rights reserved.Key words: Colorectal cancer; Hepatectomy; Laparoscopic; Liver resection; Simultaneous; Synchronous Core tip: Open resection of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis in one operation or in separate operations is currently common practice but synchronous resections of the same by laparoscopy are controversial. Since open resection of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis in one operation results in an equally good short-term outcome when compared with that done in separate operations, laparoscopic resection of the same in one single operation seems to be a good option. Recent evidence has shown that this new approach is a safe alternative with a shorter hospital stay. Large scale randomized controlled trials are needed to demonstrate its effectiveness.Cheung TT, Poon RTP. Synchronous resections of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis by laparoscopic approach.

show abstract

Totally laparoscopic right hepatectomy

Cited by 180 publications

References 12 publications

Can retrohepatic tunnel be quickly and easily established for laparoscopic liver hanging maneuver by Goldfinger dissector in laparoscopic right hepatectomy?

Can retrohepatic tunnel be quickly and easily established for laparoscopic liver hanging maneuver by Goldfinger dissector in laparoscopic right hepatectomy?

Evolution and revolution of laparoscopic liver resection in Japan

Synchronous resections of primary colorectal tumor and liver metastasis by laparoscopic approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About