Annals of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery (한국간담췌외과학회지)

The Korean Association of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery (한국간담췌외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Procedural outcomes of laparoscopic caudate lobe resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Shahab Hajibandeh (Cardiff Liver Unit, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust) ;
  • Ahmed Kotb (Department of General Surgery, Glan Clwyd Hospital) ;
  • Louis Evans (Department of General Surgery, Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Cwm Taf University Health Board) ;
  • Emily Sams (Department of General Surgery, Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Cwm Taf University Health Board) ;
  • Andrew Naguib (Undergraduate Department, School of Medicine, Cardiff University) ;
  • Shahin Hajibandeh (Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Queen Elizabeth Hospital) ;
  • Thomas Satyadas (Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Manchester Royal Infirmary Hospital)
  • Received : 2022.06.16
  • Accepted : 2022.07.12
  • Published : 2023.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

A systematic review was conducted in compliance with PRISMA statement standards to identify all studies reporting outcomes of laparoscopic resection of benign or malignant lesions located in caudate lobe of liver. Pooled outcome data were calculated using random-effects models. A total of 196 patients from 12 studies were included. Mean operative time, volume of intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 225 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], 181-269 minutes), 134 mL (95% CI, 85-184 mL), and 7 days (95% CI, 5-9 days), respectively. The pooled risk of need for intraoperative transfusion was 2% (95% CI, 0%-5%). It was 3% (95% CI, 1%-6%) for conversion to open surgery, 6% (95% CI, 0%-19%) for need for intra-abdominal drain, 1% (95% CI, 0%-3%) for postoperative mortality, 2% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for biliary leakage, 2% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for intra-abdominal abscess, 1% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for biliary stenosis, 1% (95% CI, 0%-3%) for postoperative bleeding, 1% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for pancreatic fistula, 2% (95% CI, 1%-5%) for pulmonary complications, 1% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for paralytic ileus, and 1% (95% CI, 0%-4%) for need for reoperation. Although the available evidence is limited, the findings of the current study might be utilized for hypothesis synthesis in future studies. They can be used to inform surgeons and patients about estimated risks of perioperative complications until a higher level of evidence is available.

Keywords

References

  1. Wang ZY, Chen QL, Sun LL, He SP, Luo XF, Huang LS, et al. Laparoscopic versus open major liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative cohort studies. BMC Cancer 2019;19:1047.
  2. Zhang XL, Liu RF, Zhang D, Zhang YS, Wang T. Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies with propensity score-based analysis. Int J Surg 2017;44:191-203.
  3. Hajibandeh S, Hajibandeh S, Dave M, Tarazi M, Satyadas T. Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for tumors in the posterosuperior segments: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2020;30:93-105.
  4. Kazaryan AM, Rosok BI, Marangos IP, Rosseland AR, Edwin B. Comparative evaluation of laparoscopic liver resection for posterosuperior and anterolateral segments. Surg Endosc 2011;25:3881-3889.
  5. Koh YX, Lee SY, Chiow AKH, Kam JH, Goh BKP, Chan CY. Laparoscopic caudate lobe resection: navigating the technical challenge. Ann Laparosc Endosc Surg 2017;2:39.
  6. Oh D, Kwon CH, Na BG, Lee KW, Cho WT, Lee SH, et al. Surgical techniques for totally laparoscopic caudate lobectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2016;26:689-692.
  7. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 2009;339:b2700.
  8. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI Systematic Reviews. Checklist for Case Series [Internet]. Adelaide: Joanna Briggs Institute 2017 [cited 2021 Sep 1]. Available from: https://jbi.global/sites/default/files/2019-05/JBI_Critical_Appraisal-Checklist_for_Case_Series2017_0.pdf.
  9. Petrie A, Bulman JS, Osborn JF. Further statistics in dentistry Part 8: systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Br Dent J 2003;194:73-78.
  10. Chen KH, Jeng KS, Huang SH, Chu SH. Laparoscopic caudate heaptectomy for cancer--an innovative approach to the no-man's land. J Gastrointest Surg 2013;17:522-526.
  11. Salloum C, Lahat E, Lim C, Doussot A, Osseis M, Compagnon P, et al. Laparoscopic isolated resection of caudate lobe (Segment 1): a safe and versatile technique. J Am Coll Surg 2016;222:e61-e66.
  12. Araki K, Fuks D, Nomi T, Ogiso S, Lozano RR, Kuwano H, et al. Feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection for caudate lobe: technical strategy and comparative analysis with anteroinferior and posterosuperior segments. Surg Endosc 2016;30:4300-4306.
  13. Chai S, Zhao J, Zhang Y, Xiang S, Zhang W. Arantius ligament suspension: a novel technique for retraction of the left lateral lobe liver during laparoscopic isolated caudate lobectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2018;28:740-744.
  14. Jin B, Jiang Z, Hu S, Du G, Shi B, Kong D, et al. Surgical technique and clinical analysis of twelve cases of isolated laparoscopic resection of the hepatic caudate lobe. Biomed Res Int 2018;2018:5848309.
  15. Hayami S, Ueno M, Kawai M, Miyamoto A, Suzaki N, Hirono S, et al. Standardization of surgical procedures for laparoscopic Spiegel lobectomy: a single-institutional experience. Asian J Endosc Surg 2019;12:232-236.
  16. Cappelle M, Aghayan DL, van der Poel MJ, Besselink MG, Sergeant G, Edwin B, et al. A multicenter cohort analysis of laparoscopic hepatic caudate lobe resection. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2020;405:181-189.
  17. Ding Z, Huang Y, Liu L, Xu B, Xiong H, Luo D, et al. Comparative analysis of the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic versus open caudate lobe resection. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2020;405:737-744.
  18. Xu G, Tong J, Ji J, Wang H, Wu X, Jin B, et al. Laparoscopic caudate lobectomy: a multicenter, propensity score-matched report of safety, feasibility, and early outcomes. Surg Endosc 2021;35:1138-1147.
  19. Peng Y, Liu F, Xu H, Guo S, Wei Y, Li B. Propensity score matching analysis for outcomes of laparoscopic versus open caudate lobectomy. ANZ J Surg 2021;91:E168-E173.
  20. Ruzzenente A, Ciangherotti A, Aldrighetti L, Ettorre GM, De Carlis L, Ferrero A, et al. Technical feasibility and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic isolated caudate lobe resection: an IgoMILS (Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery) registry-based study. Surg Endosc 2022;36:1490-1499.
  21. Ding Z, Liu L, Xu B, Huang Y, Xiong H, Luo D, et al. Safety and feasibility for laparoscopic versus open caudate lobe resection: a meta-analysis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2021;406:1307-1316.