Introduction: While uptake of laparoscopic hepatectomy has improved, evidence on laparoscopic re-hepatectomy (LRH) for colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) is limited and has never been compared to the open approach. We sought to define outcomes of LRH compared to open re-hepatectomy (ORH).
Methods: Patients undergoing re-hepatectomy for CRLM at 39 institutions (2006-2013) were identified. Primary outcomes were 30-day post-operative overall morbidity, mortality, and length of stay. Secondary outcomes were recurrence and survival at latest follow-up. LRHs were matched to ORHs (1:3) using a propensity score created by comparing pre-operative clinicopathologic factors (number and size of liver metastases and major hepatectomy).
Results: Of 376 re-hepatectomies included, 27 were LRH, including 1 (3.7%) conversion. The propensity-matched cohort included 108 patients. Neither median operative time (252 vs. 230 min; p = 0.82) nor overall 30-day morbidity (48.1 vs. 38.3%; p = 0.37) differed. Non-specific morbidity (including cardiac, respiratory, infectious, and renal events) decreased with LRH (11.1 vs. 30.9%, p = 0.04), while surgical-specific morbidity, including liver insufficiency, was higher (44.4 vs. 22.2%, p = 0.03). One ORH and 0 LRH suffered 30-day mortality. Median length of stay (9 vs. 12 days; p = 0.60) was comparable. At latest follow-up, 26 (96.3%) LRH and 67 (82.7%) ORH patients were alive. Eight (29.6%) LRH and 36 (44.4%) ORH patients were alive without disease.
Conclusion: LRH for recurrent CRLM was associated with overall short-term outcomes comparable to ORH, but different morbidity profiles. While it may offer a safe and feasible approach, further insight is necessary to better define patient selection.