Laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy after right hepatopancreaticoduodenectomy

Abstract

Although laparoscopic hepatectomy is widely accepted for primary hepatectomy, the clinical value of laparoscopic hepatectomy for repeat hepatectomy is still challenging. We herein describe our experience with laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy after right hepatopancreaticoduodenectomy. A 72-year-old woman who had undergone right hepatopancreaticoduodenectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma 31 months prior was diagnosed with liver metastasis in segment 3. We performed laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy. Because mild adhesions in the left side of the abdominal cavity were detected by laparoscopy, the planned procedure was accomplished. The operative time and intraoperative blood loss were 139 min and less than 1 mL, respectively. The patient was discharged at 6 days after surgery and was healthy with no evidence of recurrence at 21 months after laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy. Laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy is a suitable and safe procedure for minor hepatectomy, provided that careful technique is used after the working space is secured under pneumoperitoneum.

The role of minimally invasive hepatectomy for hilar and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A systematic review of the literature

“…Regarding noncomparative studies, the intraoperative outcomes were investigated and are demonstrated in Figure , and shown in Table . Meta‐analysis of single proportions for noncomparative studies has shown estimated sizes of 0.49 for major liver resections (95% CI, 0.24‐0.74/heterogeneity I 2 36.53%, Figure A), 0.18 for overall (95% CI, 0.05‐0.34/heterogeneity I 2 = 0; Figure B) and 0.07 for major morbidities (95% CI, 0.03‐0.17; heterogeneity; likelihood ratio test χ 2 = 0; Figure C) and 0.03 for perioperative mortality (95% CI, 0.01‐0.11/heterogeneity; likelihood ratio test χ 2 = 0; Figure D).…”

“…13 | 865 cohort studies) and nine noncomparative studies were included for analysis. 7,[26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37] For pCCA analysis, one comparative study (retrospective cohort) and nine noncomparative studies were included. [38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49] Two records had data regarding both iCCA and pCCA.…”

“…Twenty‐five studies were considered eligible for the systematic review and eligible for the meta‐analysis, as depicted in Figure . For iCCA, four comparative studies (retrospective cohort studies) and nine noncomparative studies were included for analysis . For pCCA analysis, one comparative study (retrospective cohort) and nine noncomparative studies were included .…”