• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • MIS Fellows Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • Search
    • Search the SAGES Site
    • Guidelines Search
    • Video Search
    • Search Images
    • Search Abstracts
  • OWLS/FLS
  • Login
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Comparison of Resection Techniques in Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

Comparison of Resection Techniques in Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

Koray Karabulut, MD, Federico Aucejo, MD, John Fung, MD PhD, Eren Berber, MD. Department of Endocrine Surgery, Endocrinology and Metabolism Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.

Background: Precoagulation using radiofrequency (RF) has been advocated to decrease blood loss in laparoscopic liver resection. We previously reported on the techniques of RF-precoagulation. The aim of this study is to compare RF-precoagulation with other resectional techniques regarding perioperative outcomes.
Methods: Between 1997 and 2010, 75 patients underwent laparoscopic liver resection in a single academic institution. Different tools were used for resection based on surgeon-preference, including RF-precoagulation, staplers or Harmonic scalpel and Tissue-Link. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, types of resection and technique, perioperative outcome and follow up data were analyzed from a prospective IRB-approved database. Statistical analyses were performed using student t-test and Kaplan Meier survival. All data are expressed as mean ± SEM.
Results: Mean age was 60.2 ± 1.6 years. There were 26 (35%) men and 49 (65%) women. The resections performed for primary or metastatic malign liver lesions in 48 (64%) and for benign disease in 27 (36%) patients. Mean tumor size and number of tumors were 4.3 ± 0.4 cm and 1.3 ± 0.1, respectively. The procedure was laparoscopic in 46 patients (60%), robotic in 10 (14%), hand-assisted in 14 (19%) and hybrid in 5 (7%) patients. The resection type was wedge resection or segmentectomy in 45 (59%) patients, bisegmentectomy in 25 (34%) patients and hemihepatectomy in 5 (7%) patients. Resections were performed with RF-precoagulation in 37 patients (49%) and without in 38 patients (51%). The rate of conversion to open was 4% (3 patients). Overall estimated blood loss (EBL) was 119 ± 27 ml, operative time 215 ± 14 minutes, and length of stay (LOS) 3.2 ± 0.2 days. Morbidity was seen in 5 patients (7%) with no mortality. Resection margin for malignant tumors was 7 ± 2 mm. With a median follow up of 16 months, Kaplan Meier median disease-free survival was 14.5 months for these patients. Local recurrence was seen in 2 patients (3%). There was no statistical difference in EBL, operative time, complications, LOS or local tumor recurrence between patients who underwent resection with or without RF-precoagulation.
Conclusions: The limitation of the study is that selection of a given technique was surgeon-dependent. Within this limitation, the study shows that different hepatectomy techniques yield equivalent outcomes when used by experienced surgeons.


Session: Poster
Program Number: P394
View Poster

183


  • Foundation
  • SAGES.TV
  • MyCME
  • Educational Activities

Copyright © 2025 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons