We have located links that may give you full text access.
Feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection for tumors located in the posterosuperior segments of the liver, with a special reference to overcoming current limitations on tumor location.
Surgery 2008 July
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection is usually limited to the anterolateral segments of the liver (AL; Segments II, III, V, VI, and the inferior part of IV). We evaluated the feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection in the posterosuperior segments (PS; Segments I, VII, VIII, and the superior part of IV).
METHOD: We analyzed retrospectively the clinical data of 82 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection for tumors from September 2003 to September 2007. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to tumor location: group AL (n=54) and group PS (n=28).
RESULTS: There was no mortality, reoperation, or major complications. Four (5%) conversions to open procedures were necessary. There were no differences in tumor characteristics, including mean tumor size and number of tumors between 2 groups (P = .427 and .611); however, there was a greater proportion of deeply seated tumors in group PS than group AL (P < .001). The predominant type of resection was a minor liver resection (left lateral sectionectomy, segmentectomy, or tumorectomy) in group AL, and a major liver resection (hemihepatectomy or right posterior sectionectomy) in group PS (P < .001). The median operative time in group PS was greater than that in group AL (320 vs 210 min; P < .001). There were no differences in the conversion rate (P = .113), median blood loss (P = .214), rate of intraoperative transfusion (P = .061), median tumor-free margin (P = .613), median hospital stay (P = .166), and rate of complications (P = .148) between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic liver resection for tumors located in PS is more difficult than in AL but is feasible in selected patients.
METHOD: We analyzed retrospectively the clinical data of 82 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection for tumors from September 2003 to September 2007. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to tumor location: group AL (n=54) and group PS (n=28).
RESULTS: There was no mortality, reoperation, or major complications. Four (5%) conversions to open procedures were necessary. There were no differences in tumor characteristics, including mean tumor size and number of tumors between 2 groups (P = .427 and .611); however, there was a greater proportion of deeply seated tumors in group PS than group AL (P < .001). The predominant type of resection was a minor liver resection (left lateral sectionectomy, segmentectomy, or tumorectomy) in group AL, and a major liver resection (hemihepatectomy or right posterior sectionectomy) in group PS (P < .001). The median operative time in group PS was greater than that in group AL (320 vs 210 min; P < .001). There were no differences in the conversion rate (P = .113), median blood loss (P = .214), rate of intraoperative transfusion (P = .061), median tumor-free margin (P = .613), median hospital stay (P = .166), and rate of complications (P = .148) between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic liver resection for tumors located in PS is more difficult than in AL but is feasible in selected patients.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app