Minor laparoscopic liver resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma is safer than minor open resection, especially for less compensated cirrhotic patients: Propensity score analysis

Background: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has gained significant popularity over the last 10 years. First experiences of LLR compared to open liver resection (OLR) reported a similar survival and a better safety profile for LLR. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of all consecutive patients treated by liver resection for HCC on liver cirrhosis between January 2005 and March 2017. The choice of procedure (LLR vs OLR) was generally based on tumor localization, history of previous upper abdominal surgery and patient's preference. The type of resection and indication for surgery were unrelated to the adopted technique. Based on pre-operative variables and confirmed cirrhosis, a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) model was developed to compare outcomes of LLR and OLR in patients with HCC. Outcomes of interest included morbidity, mortality and long-term cure potential. Results: After-PSM, the LLR group demonstrated better perioperative results including: lower complication rate (50.7% in OLR vs 29.3% in LLR, p = 0.0035), significantly lower intra-operative blood loss (200 ml in OLR vs 150 ml in LLR, p = 0.007) and shorter hospital length of stay (median 9 days in OLR vs 7 days in LLR, p = 0.0018). Moreover there was no significant difference between the two groups in 3-year survival (76%, CI: 60%–86% in LLR vs 68%, CI: 55%–79% in OLR, p = 0.32) or recurrence-free survival rates (44%, CI: 28%–58%, vs 44%, CI: 31%–57%, p = 0.94). Conclusions: Minor LLR appeared significantly safer compared to minor OLR for HCC. LLR was associated with fewer post-operative complication, lower operative blood loss and a shorter hospital stay along with similar survival and recurrence-free survival rates