Background: Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is established as a safe and feasible treatment option for liver tumors. However, whether the adoption of laparoscopic approach for malignant tumors, such as hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), will compromise the long-term result is still unknown. This study was designed to evaluate the long-term results of LH compared with a cohort of case-matched open hepatectomy (OH).
Methods: Thirty-three patients who underwent LH for HCC in our institution between June 2004 and March 2010 were recruited. A group of 50 patients who underwent OH for HCC during the same period was identified by matching to magnitude of operation, size of tumor, site of tumor, and the absence of concomitant local ablation or major procedure. The perioperative outcomes, disease recurrence, and survival of the two groups of patients were determined and compared.
Results: LH resulted in less operative complications (6.1% vs. 24%, P = 0.033) and shorter median hospital stay (5 vs. 7 days, P < 0.0005) but required longer operative time compared with OH (225 vs. 195 min, P = 0.019). There was no difference between LH and OH in recurrence rate (45.5% vs. 38%, P = 0.499). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival were 86.9%, 81.8%, and 76% for LH and 98%, 80.6%, and 76.1% for OH respectively (P = 0.646). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival were 78.8%, 51%, and 45.3% for LH and 69.2%, 55.9%, and 55.9% for OH, respectively (P = 0.849).
Conclusions: Compared with OH, LH for HCC has similar long-term outcomes, but it has short-term advantages of less operative complications and shorter hospital stay.