Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been proposed as a safe and feasible treatment option for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). However, the short-term and oncologic outcomes of LLR versus open liver resection (OLR) for CRLM have not been adequately assessed. Thus, we herein provide an updated systematic review comparing short-term and oncologic outcomes of CRLM patients undergoing LLR versus OLR.

A systematic literature search was performed in the Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases (until November 2, 2016) with a limitation to the publications in English. Quality assessment was performed based on the modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR), and continuous data were calculated by weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

A total of 28 studies enrolling 4591 patients with CRLM were included. With respect to short-term outcomes, patients in LLR group showed significantly reduced blood loss (WMD: -143.64; 95% CI: -180.56 to -106.73; I² = 86%; P < 0.001), lower operative transfusion requirement (OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.30-0.53; I² = 0%; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (WMD: -2.47; 95% CI: -2.99 to -1.94; I² = 82%; P < 0.001), reduced overall postoperative morbidity (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.42-0.66; I² = 38%; P < 0.001) and reduced severe morbidity (OR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.32-0.60; I² = 35%; P < 0.001). Regarding oncologic outcomes, there were no significant differences between the two surgical procedures in recurrence and 1-, 3-, and 5-overall survival and disease-free survival except for slightly higher R0 resection rate in LLR group was slightly higher than that of OLR group (OR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.03-1.97; I² = 37%; P = 0.03).

LLR should be the standard approach for selected patients with CRLM, and further research should focus on determining which patients would benefit most from LLR.