Laparoscopic Glissonian pedicle versus hilar dissection approach hemihepatectomy: A prospective, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: This over 7-year case study is the first to compare the results of laparoscopic Glissonian pedicle approach hemihepatectomy (LGAH) and laparoscopic hilar dissection approach hemihepatectomy (LHAH) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

Patients who had undergone laparoscopic hemihepatectomy, either LGAH or LHAH, between March 2012 and December 2019 at our center were prospectively enrolled and assigned to the LGAH or LHAH group. Both groups were stratified and compared, and the preoperative and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. The primary endpoint was total operative time.

RESULTS

The groups were equally matched for age, sex, HBsAg, Child-Pugh class, benign disease, malignancy, liver cirrhosis, tumor diameter and type of resection. Ninety-six patients had undergone LGAH and 94 had undergone LHAH. No preoperative death occurred in the two groups. LGAH did not enhance the postoperative overall complication rates (P = .465) or intraoperative blood loss (P = .535) compared with LHAH. However, the overall operative time (P = .014) and hilar dissection time (P = .000) were significantly shorter in the LGAH group than in the LHAH group. No significant differences were found between the groups regarding the 1-year (P = .384), 3-year (P = .332), and 5-year overall survival rates (P = .662) or 1-year (P = .856), 3-year (P = .348), and 5-year disease-free survival rates (P = .573).

CONCLUSIONS

LGAH and LHAH are both effective procedures for treating the hilar structures in selected patients. LGAH has advantages over LHAH in reducing total operation time under the condition where both procedures can be used. LGAH for selected patients is worthy of promotion owing to its simplicity and convenience.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01567631 (http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov).