Background: We sought to compare the outcomes in patients with hepatic carcinoid tumor metastases treated with open versus laparoscopic liver resection.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of our liver surgery database was performed. All patients who underwent liver resection for hepatic carcinoid tumor metastases were included. Patients were divided into 2 groups depending on the surgical approach. Patients with concomitant primary and metastatic liver lesions underwent open resection.
Results: Thirty-six patients underwent resection over a 10-year period (21 open and 15 laparoscopic). Both groups were similar in terms of gender, body mass index, tumor size, incidence of carcinoid syndrome, and extent of resection (P > .05). The laparoscopic group had less mean operative time (2.7 vs 5.4 hours), less mean blood loss (158.3 vs 538.9 mL), and a shorter hospital stay (3.2 vs 7.5 days; P < .05 for all). Complications were similar in both groups (20% vs 33%; P = .21). Two laparoscopic cases required conversion. The 3-year disease-free survival for the laparoscopic group was 73.3% compared to 47.6% for the open group (P = .2).
Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first reported study comparing laparoscopic versus open liver resection in the treatment of liver metastases from carcinoid tumors. Our series confirms that selective cases can safely be managed laparoscopically.
Copyright © 2012 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.