Robotic vs laparoscopic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: multicentric propensity-score matched analysis of surgical and oncologic outcomes in 647 patients.
Stefano Di Sandro, Leonardo Centonze, Francesca Ratti, Nadia Russolillo, Simone Conci, Enrico Gringeri, Francesco Ardito, Marco Colasanti, Carlo Sposito, Riccardo De Carlis, Mario Giuffrida, Pasquale Bonsignore, Matteo Zanello, Samuele Frassoni, Roberta Odorizzi, Vincenzo Bagnardi, Elio Jovine, Salvatore Gruttadauria, Maurizio Iaria, Andrea Lauterio, Vincenzo Mazzaferro, Giuseppe Maria Ettorre, Felice Giuliante, Umberto Cillo, Andrea Ruzzenente, Alessandro Ferrero, Luca Aldrighetti, Fabrizio Di Benedetto
{"title":"Robotic vs laparoscopic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: multicentric propensity-score matched analysis of surgical and oncologic outcomes in 647 patients.","authors":"Stefano Di Sandro, Leonardo Centonze, Francesca Ratti, Nadia Russolillo, Simone Conci, Enrico Gringeri, Francesco Ardito, Marco Colasanti, Carlo Sposito, Riccardo De Carlis, Mario Giuffrida, Pasquale Bonsignore, Matteo Zanello, Samuele Frassoni, Roberta Odorizzi, Vincenzo Bagnardi, Elio Jovine, Salvatore Gruttadauria, Maurizio Iaria, Andrea Lauterio, Vincenzo Mazzaferro, Giuseppe Maria Ettorre, Felice Giuliante, Umberto Cillo, Andrea Ruzzenente, Alessandro Ferrero, Luca Aldrighetti, Fabrizio Di Benedetto","doi":"10.1007/s13304-025-02293-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been linked to several advantages compared to open approach, but the actual benefit of robotic liver resection (RLR) over LLR in HCC needs further investigation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a multicentric propensity-score matched (PSM) analysis comparing perioperative and oncologic outcomes of LLR vs. RLR for HCC. The PSM model was estimated using a multivariable logistic regression, with type of surgery as dependent variable and age, BMI, clinically-significant portal hypertension, αFP, size of principal lesion, number of nodules and Kawaguchi difficulty score as covariates. Overall (OS) and recurrence-free (RFS) survivals were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six-hundred-forty-seven HCC patients from 12 IGoMILS registry centers treated by LLR (553 patients) or RLR (94 patients) were included. After PSM, RLR resulted in wider surgical margins (median: 10 vs 5 mm; p = 0.002) with higher prevalence of R0 resection (98.9 vs 93.1%; p = 0.037), lower conversion rate (2.1 vs. 8.5%; p = 0.039) and shorter hospital stay (median: 4 vs 5 days; p = 0.025), with no significant difference in postoperative complication rate. We observed similar OS among RLR and LLR cohorts [5-y OS: 68.7 vs 65.0%; univariable HR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.60-1.49); p = 0.82], with significantly better RFS in RLR cohort [5-y RFS: 46.8 vs 24.0%; univariable HR = 0.71 (95% CI: 0.52-0.98); p = 0.04].</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Perioperative outcomes were significantly better in the RLR cohort, with a lower conversion rate and shorter hospital stay, although the latter may be influenced by the multi-institutional study design. Notably, we observed wider resection margins in the RLR group, which were associated with significantly improved RFS.</p>","PeriodicalId":23391,"journal":{"name":"Updates in Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1451-1462"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Updates in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02293-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been linked to several advantages compared to open approach, but the actual benefit of robotic liver resection (RLR) over LLR in HCC needs further investigation.
Methods: We performed a multicentric propensity-score matched (PSM) analysis comparing perioperative and oncologic outcomes of LLR vs. RLR for HCC. The PSM model was estimated using a multivariable logistic regression, with type of surgery as dependent variable and age, BMI, clinically-significant portal hypertension, αFP, size of principal lesion, number of nodules and Kawaguchi difficulty score as covariates. Overall (OS) and recurrence-free (RFS) survivals were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.
Results: Six-hundred-forty-seven HCC patients from 12 IGoMILS registry centers treated by LLR (553 patients) or RLR (94 patients) were included. After PSM, RLR resulted in wider surgical margins (median: 10 vs 5 mm; p = 0.002) with higher prevalence of R0 resection (98.9 vs 93.1%; p = 0.037), lower conversion rate (2.1 vs. 8.5%; p = 0.039) and shorter hospital stay (median: 4 vs 5 days; p = 0.025), with no significant difference in postoperative complication rate. We observed similar OS among RLR and LLR cohorts [5-y OS: 68.7 vs 65.0%; univariable HR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.60-1.49); p = 0.82], with significantly better RFS in RLR cohort [5-y RFS: 46.8 vs 24.0%; univariable HR = 0.71 (95% CI: 0.52-0.98); p = 0.04].
Conclusions: Perioperative outcomes were significantly better in the RLR cohort, with a lower conversion rate and shorter hospital stay, although the latter may be influenced by the multi-institutional study design. Notably, we observed wider resection margins in the RLR group, which were associated with significantly improved RFS.
期刊介绍:
Updates in Surgery (UPIS) has been founded in 2010 as the official journal of the Italian Society of Surgery. It’s an international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the surgical sciences. Its main goal is to offer a valuable update on the most recent developments of those surgical techniques that are rapidly evolving, forcing the community of surgeons to a rigorous debate and a continuous refinement of standards of care. In this respect position papers on the mostly debated surgical approaches and accreditation criteria have been published and are welcome for the future.
Beside its focus on general surgery, the journal draws particular attention to cutting edge topics and emerging surgical fields that are publishing in monothematic issues guest edited by well-known experts.
Updates in Surgery has been considering various types of papers: editorials, comprehensive reviews, original studies and technical notes related to specific surgical procedures and techniques on liver, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, robotic and bariatric surgery.