Skip to main content
Log in

Robotic radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: perioperative and long-term outcomes of an initial series

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCa) is one of the most challenging abdominal procedures. Robotic-assisted approach is gaining popularity in hepatobiliary surgery but scarcely tried in the management of HCa. We herein report our initial experience of robotic radical resection for HCa.

Methods

Between May 2009 and October 2012, 10 patients underwent fully robotic-assisted radical resection for HCa in a single institute. The perioperative and long-term outcomes were analyzed and compared with a contemporaneous 32 patients undergoing traditional open surgery.

Results

The 10 patients presented one of Bismuth–Corlette type II, four of IIIa, one of IIIb and four of IV. There was no significant clinicopathological disparity between the robotic and open groups. The robotic radical resection involves hemihepatectomy plus caudate lobectomy or trisectionectomy, extrahepatic bile duct resection, radical lymphadenectomy and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy. No conversion to laparotomy occurred. Robotic resection compared unfavorably to traditional open resection in operative time (703 ± 62 vs. 475 ± 121 min, p < 0.001) and morbidity [90 (9/10) vs. 50 %, p = 0.031]. No significant difference was found in blood loss, mortality and postoperative hospital stay. Major complications (≥Clavien–Dindo III) occurred in three patients of robotic group. One patient died of posthepatectomy liver failure on postoperative day 18. The hospital expenditure was much higher in robotic group (USD 27,427 ± 21,316 vs. 15,282 ± 5957, p = 0.018). The tumor recurrence-free survival was inferior in robotic group (p = 0.029).

Conclusions

Fully robotic-assisted radical resection for HCa is technically achievable in experienced hands and should be limited to highly selective patients. Our current results do not support continued practice of robotic surgery for HCa, until significant technical and instrumental refinements are demonstrated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

HCa:

Hilar cholangiocarcinoma

PLAGH:

People’s Liberation Army General Hospital

LIOUS:

Laparoscopic intraoperative ultrasound

MHV:

Middle hepatic vein

LN:

Lymph node

SHV:

Short hepatic vein

IVC:

Inferior vena cava

AJCC:

American Joint Committee on Cancer

TBil:

Total bilirubin

PTBD:

Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage

sPVE:

Selective portal venous embolization

PHLF:

Posthepatectomy liver failure

References

  1. DeOliveira ML, Cunningham SC, Cameron JL et al (2007) Cholangiocarcinoma: thirty-one-year experience with 564 patients at a single institution. Ann Surg 245:755–762

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Nagino M (2012) Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a surgeon’s viewpoint on current topics. J Gastroenterol 47:1165–1176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ito F, Cho CS, Rikkers LF, Weber SM (2009) Hilar cholangiocarcinoma: current management. Ann Surg 250:210–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mansour JC, Aloia TA, Crane CH, Heimbach JK, Nagino M, Vauthey JN (2015) Hilar cholangiocarcinoma: expert consensus statement. HPB 17:691–699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Buell JF, Cherqui D, Geller DA et al (2009) The international position on laparoscopic liver surgery: the Louisville Statement, 2008. Ann Surg 250:825–830

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wakabayashi G, Cherqui D, Geller DA et al (2015) Recommendations for laparoscopic liver resection: a report from the second international consensus conference held in Morioka. Ann Surg 261:619–629

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ishizawa T, Gumbs AA, Kokudo N, Gayet B (2012) Laparoscopic segmentectomy of the liver: from segment I to VIII. Ann Surg 256:959–964

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gumbs AA, Jarufe N, Gayet B (2013) Minimally invasive approaches to extrapancreatic cholangiocarcinoma. Surg Endosc 27:406–414

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dagher I, O’Rourke N, Geller DA et al (2009) Laparoscopic major hepatectomy: an evolution in standard of care. Ann Surg 250:856–860

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ciria R, Cherqui D, Geller DA, Briceno J, Wakabayashi G (2016) Comparative short-term benefits of laparoscopic liver resection: 9000 cases and climbing. Ann Surg 263:761–777

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Koffron AJ, Auffenberg G, Kung R, Abecassis M (2007) Evaluation of 300 minimally invasive liver resections at a single institution: less is more. Ann Surg 246:385–392

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Bryant R, Laurent A, Tayar C, Cherqui D (2009) Laparoscopic liver resection-understanding its role in current practice: the Henri Mondor Hospital experience. Ann Surg 250:103–111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nguyen KT, Gamblin TC, Geller DA (2009) World review of laparoscopic liver resection-2,804 patients. Ann Surg 250:831–841

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Berber E, Akyildiz HY, Aucejo F, Gunasekaran G, Chalikonda S, Fung J (2010) Robotic versus laparoscopic resection of liver tumours. HPB 12:583–586

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Sbrana F et al (2011) Robotic liver surgery: results for 70 resections. Surgery 149:29–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ho CM, Wakabayashi G, Nitta H, Ito N, Hasegawa Y, Takahara T (2013) Systematic review of robotic liver resection. Surg Endosc 27:732–739

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ji WB, Wang HG, Zhao ZM, Duan WD, Lu F, Dong JH (2011) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy in China: initial experience. Ann Surg 253:342–348

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Angelini M et al (2003) Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. Arch Surg 138:777–784

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Suarez-Munoz MA, Fernandez-Aguilar JL, Sanchez-Perez B et al (2013) Risk factors and classifications of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. World J Gastrointest Oncol 15(5):132–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML et al (2009) The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250:187–196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Igami T, Nishio H, Ebata T et al (2010) Surgical treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma in the “new era”: the Nagoya University experience. J Hepato Biliary Pancreat Sci 17:449–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cho A, Yamamoto H, Kainuma O et al (2014) Laparoscopy in the management of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. WJG 7(20):15153–15157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Machado MA, Makdissi FF, Surjan RC, Mochizuki M (2012) Laparoscopic resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 22:954–956

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lee W, Han HS, Yoon YS et al (2015) Laparoscopic resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg Treat Res 89:228–232

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Donati M, Stavrou GA, Oldhafer KJ (2011) Laparoscopic resections for hilar cholangiocarcinomas: a critical appraisal. Dig Surg 28(4):277–278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Talamini MA, Chapman S, Horgan S, Melvin WS (2003) Academic Robotics G. A prospective analysis of 211 robotic-assisted surgical procedures. Surg Endosc 17:1521–1524

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lai EC, Tang CN (2015) Robot-assisted laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy for advanced malignant biliary obstruction. Asian J Surg 38:210–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM et al (2010) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc 24:1646–1657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ozdemir-van Brunschot DM, van Laarhoven KC, Scheffer GJ, Pouwels S, Wever KE, Warle MC (2016) What is the evidence for the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum? A systematic review. Surg Endosc 30:2049–2065

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kubota K, Makuuchi M, Kusaka K et al (1997) Measurement of liver volume and hepatic functional reserve as a guide to decision-making in resectional surgery for hepatic tumors. Hepatology 26:1176–1181

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Shirabe K, Shimada M, Gion T et al (1999) Postoperative liver failure after major hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in the modern era with special reference to remnant liver volume. J Am Coll Surg 188:304–309

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Szold A, Bergamaschi R, Broeders I et al (2015) European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery. Surg Endosc 29:253–288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Drs. Daniel Cherqui and Yuman Fong for their efforts in revising this article and English editing.

Grants and financial support

The work is supported by the National Key Technology Research & Development Program of China (No. 2012BAI06B01) and the National Science & Technology Major Project for Infectious Diseases of China (No. 2012ZX10002-017).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jiahong Dong.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Drs. Yinzhe Xu, Hongguang Wang, Wenbin Ji, Maosheng Tang, Hao Li, Jianjun Leng, Xuan Meng and Jiahong Dong have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Yinzhe Xu, Hongguang Wang and Webin Ji have contributed equally to this work.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (MP4 134496 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xu, Y., Wang, H., Ji, W. et al. Robotic radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: perioperative and long-term outcomes of an initial series. Surg Endosc 30, 3060–3070 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4925-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4925-7

Keywords

Navigation