Innovation? Robotic Hepatectomy Compared to Laparoscopic or Open Resection for HCC

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Innovation for the Sake of Innovation? How Does Robotic Hepatectomy Compare to Laparoscopic or Open Resection for HCC—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

August 5, 2022

HEIDELBERG, GERMANY – On July 11, 2022, Liver Surgery Research’s new research, “Innovation for the Sake of Innovation? How Does Robotic Hepatectomy Compare to Laparoscopic or Open Resection for HCC—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” authored by Anastasia Murtha-Lemekhova, Juri Fuchs, and Katrin Hoffmann was published. This manuscript was published by the peer reviewed, open access journal, MDPI Cancers; which has an impact factor of 6.575.

Robot-assisted surgery has gained popularity in urology and colorectal surgery. Some benefits claimed are less complications and faster recovery due to a gentler approach. We aimed to evaluate current evidence on robot-assisted surgery in HCC resection in comparison to standard approaches—laparoscopic and open resections through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Robot-assisted resection was comparable to standardly utilized methods in terms of complication rates. Major complications occurred less but liver-specific complications, such as liver dysfunction or biliary leakage, were similar in frequency. Prospective studies are lacking but are needed to evaluate which patients would really benefit from robot-assisted liver surgery.

Abstract

Robot-assisted hepatectomy is a novel approach to treat liver tumors. HCC is on the rise as the cause of cancer and mortality and is often preceded by cirrhosis. Robot-assisted hepatectomy has been suggested to offer benefits to cirrhotic patients. We aimed to evaluate current evidence for robot-assisted hepatectomy for HCC and compare it to open and laparoscopic approaches. This systematic review and meta-analysis has been conducted in accordance with most recent PRISMA recommendations and the protocol has been registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022328544). There were no randomized controlled trials available, and no study focused on cirrhotic patients exclusively. Robot-assisted hepatectomy was associated with less major complications than the laparoscopic approach, but comparable with open hepatectomy. No difference was seen in overall or minor complications, as well as liver specific or infectious complications. Cumulative survivals were similar in robot-assisted hepatectomy and laparoscopic or open approaches. There is a clear lack of evidence to suggest particular benefits for robot-assisted hepatectomy in cirrhotic patients. Otherwise, the robot-assisted approach has similar complication rates as open or laparoscopic methods. Non-industry driven randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of robot-assisted liver surgery. To learn more about this study, visit https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14143359.

About Liver Surgery Research

Liver Surgery Research (LSR) is a medical research group, located at Heidelberg University in Heidelberg, Germany. LSR specializes in research investigating liver regeneration after hepatectomy (liver resection) and post-hepatectomy liver failure, HCC development and treatment (especially in the context of MAFLD [metabolically associated fatty liver disease]), and rare liver lesions and diseases. LSR is the founder and leader of the RELIVE (RarE LIVEr) Initiative; a multidisciplinary project to establish evidence-based therapies for rare liver diseases. LSR is currently working on over 20 research projects and has over 100 peer reviewed published authorships. To learn more about Liver Surgery Research, visit www.liversurgeryresearch.com.

Contact:

Nicholas Murtha

Communications Manager

Liver Surgery Research at Heidelberg University

liversurgeryresearch@protonmail.com

nicholas.murtha@protonmail.com

Reference:

Murtha-Lemekhova, A., Fuchs, J., & Hoffmann, K. (2022). Innovation for the Sake of Innovation? How Does Robotic Hepatectomy Compare to Laparoscopic or Open Resection for HCC—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers, 14(14), 3359. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14143359

###