Laparoscopic vs. open left lateral sectionectomy: An update meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials. (January 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Macacari, Rodrigo Luiz; Coelho, Fabricio Ferreira; Bernardo, Wanderley Marques; Kruger, Jaime Arthur Pirola; Jeismann, Vagner Birk; Fonseca, Gilton Marques; Cesconetto, Danielle Menezes; Cecconello, Ivan; Herman, Paulo
• Is Part Of: International journal of surgery. Volume 61(2019)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 10
• Publication Date: 2019-01
• Subjects: Hepatectomy -- Laparoscopy -- Liver neoplasms/surgery -- Review [publication type] -- Meta-analysis [publication type]; Surgery -- Periodicals; Surgical Procedures, Operative -- Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.11.021
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1743-9191

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) is thought to be the anatomical liver resection most suitable for the laparoscopic approach. Despite increasing popularity, comparative analysis of laparoscopic and open LLS are mostly limited to retrospective, underpowered studies with small sample size. Recent population-based studies and prospective trials have generated new data; however, this new body of knowledge has not been submitted systematic reviews or meta-analyses and high quality evidence regarding the actual benefits of minimally invasive LLS is lacking. Methods: Systematic review of studies published until December 31st, 2017 and indexed in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Central and Scielo/LILACS databases. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing perioperative results of laparoscopic and open LLS were included. Studies with patients submitted to LLS for living donation were excluded. Treatment outcomes, including conversion rates, estimated blood loss, transfusion rates, operative time, length of in-hospital stay, morbidity and mortality rates, were evaluated. Results: The primary search yielded 2838 articles, 23 of which (21 observational studies and 2 randomized controlled trials; 3415 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall conversion rate was 7.4%. Patients submitted to laparoscopic LLS had less blood loss (mean difference, MD = −119.81 ml, 95% CI = −127.90, −111.72, P < .00001, I 2 = 32%, N = 618), lower transfusion rates (4.1% vs. 10.1%; risk difference, RD = - 0.06, 95% CI = - 0.08, - 0.05, P < .00001, I 2 = 13%, N = 2968) and shorter length of in-hospital stay (MD = - 2.02 days, 95% CI = - 2.15, - 1.89, P < .00001, I 2 = 77%, N = 3160) compared to those undergoing open surgery. Marginally decreased overall complication (21.4% vs. 27.5%; RD = - 0.03, 95% CI = - 0.06, 0.00, P = .05, I 2 = 0%, N = 3268) and perioperative mortality (0.3% vs. 1.5%; RD = - 0.01, 95% CI = - 0.02, - 0.00, P = .01, I 2 = 0%; N = 3332) rates were also observed. Operative time and biliary, cardiac or pulmonary complication rates did not differ significantly between groups. Conclusion: Current evidence supports the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic LLS. The laparoscopic approach is associated with reduced blood loss, lower transfusion rates and shorter length of in-hospital stay and should be considered the gold-standard for LLS. Highlights: Left Lateral Sectionectomy (LLS) is a suitable laparoscopic liver resection. This study is a high quality evidence by a systematic review and meta-analysis. Laparocopic LLS shows a lower blood loss, with shorter hospital stay. This current evidence supports laparoscopic as the gold-standard approach for LLS. LLS is a safe and feasible procedure.