Laparoscopic versus open two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases: A bi-institutional, propensity score-matched study

Abstract

Background: The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic, two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases is poorly evaluated.

Methods: We reviewed retrospectively 86 consecutive patients who underwent complete two-stage hepatectomy (left lobe clearance as the first stage and standard/extended right hepatectomy as the second stage) for bilobar colorectal liver metastases between 2007 and 2017 in 2 tertiary centers. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between laparoscopic and open two-stage hepatectomy before and after propensity score matching.

Results: Laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy was performed in 38 patients and open two-stage hepatectomy in 48. After propensity score matching, 25 laparoscopic and 25 open patients showed similar preoperative characteristics. For the first stage, a laparoscopic approach was associated with lesser hospital stays (4 vs 7.5 days; P < .001). For the second stage, a laparoscopic approach was associated with less blood loss (250 vs 500 mL; P = .040), less postoperative complications (32% vs 60%; P = .047), lesser hospital stays (9 vs 16 days; P = .013), and earlier administration of chemotherapy (1.6 vs 2 months; P = .039). Overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and liver-recurrence-free survival were comparable between the groups (3-year overall survival: 80% vs 54%; P = .154; 2-year recurrence-free survival: 20% vs 18%; P = .200; 2-year liver-recurrence-free survival: 39% vs 33%; P = .269). Although both groups had comparable recurrence patterns, repeat hepatectomies for recurrence were performed more frequently in the laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy group (56% vs 0%; P = .006).

Conclusion: Laparoscopic two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar colorectal liver metastases is safe and feasible with favorable surgical and oncologic outcomes compared to open two-stage hepatectomy.