Mirhasan Rahimli

Dr. Mirhasan Rahimli

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
27 February 2025 in Surgical Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MRMirhasan Rahimli
Mirhasan Rahimli
AGAndrew A. Gumbs
Andrew A. Gumbs
APAristotelis Perrakis
Aristotelis Perrakis
SASara Al-Madhi
Sara Al-Madhi
MDMaximilian Dölling
Maximilian Dölling
Roland S. CronerRoland S. Croner
Roland S. Croner
Background: Robotic liver surgery, as part of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS), offers advantages like enhanced dexterity and stable camera and instrument control. However, the learning curve — particularly the number of cases required for proficiency — remains underexplored. This study analyzes 100 consecutive robotic liver resections performed by a single surgeon to assess the learning curve and outcomes. Patients and methods: This retrospective analysis reviewed data from the Magdeburg registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS) from June 2013 to July 2024, to identify surgeons who performed at least 100 robotic liver resections. Operation time and Iwate difficulty score were used as indicators of surgical proficiency and learning progression. Results: One surgeon fulfilled the inclusion criteria of performing 100 robotic liver resections. Of these, 41 (41%) were major and 59 (59%) were minor liver resections. A significant reduction in average operation time was observed across the series, decreasing from an initial average of 450 min to approximately 300 min by the 100th operation. Similarly, the Iwate difficulty score showed a significant upward trend, reflecting the increasing technical challenges of the procedures. The learning curve was divided into four distinct phases: Competency (Cases 1–20), Proficiency (Cases 21–30), Early Mastery (Cases 31–65), and Full Mastery (Cases 66–100), highlighting the progression in skill acquisition and case complexity. Major complications (21%), such as bile leak, bilioma, and pulmonary embolism, were observed during the study period. Conclusion: Over 100 robotic liver resections, significant learning curve progression was evident, with marked improvements in operation time and handling of complex cases. The results suggest that approximately 65 cases are needed for a surgeon experienced in open and laparoscopic liver surgery to achieve consistent proficiency in robotic liver resections. These findings underscore the importance of standardized training protocols to support the learning curve in robotic liver surgery.

11 July 2022 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MRMirhasan Rahimli
Mirhasan Rahimli
Aristotelis PerrakisAristotelis Perrakis
Aristotelis Perrakis
MAMihailo Andric
Mihailo Andric
JSJessica Stockheim
Jessica Stockheim
MFMareike Franz
Mareike Franz
Roland S. CronerRoland S. Croner
Roland S. Croner
Background: Robotic procedures are an integral part of modern liver surgery. However, the advantages of a robotic approach in comparison to the conventional laparoscopic approach are the subject of controversial debate. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare robotic and laparoscopic liver resection with particular attention to the resection margin status in malignant cases. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Cochrane Library in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Only studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic liver resections were considered for this meta-analysis. Furthermore, the rate of the positive resection margin or R0 rate in malignant cases had to be clearly identifiable. We used fixed or random effects models according to heterogeneity. Results: Fourteen studies with a total number of 1530 cases were included in qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Malignancies were identified in 71.1% (n = 1088) of these cases. These included hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma, colorectal liver metastases and other malignancies of the liver. Positive resection margins were noted in 24 cases (5.3%) in the robotic group and in 54 cases (8.6%) in the laparoscopic group (OR = 0.71; 95% CI (0.42–1.18); p = 0.18). Tumor size was significantly larger in the robotic group (MD = 6.92; 95% CI (2.93–10.91); p = 0.0007). The operation time was significantly longer in the robotic procedure (MD = 28.12; 95% CI (3.66–52.57); p = 0.02). There were no significant differences between the robotic and laparoscopic approaches regarding the intra-operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, overall and severe complications and conversion rate. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the robotic and laparoscopic procedures regarding the resection margin status. Tumor size was significantly larger in the robotic group. However, randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are needed to demonstrate the benefits of robotics in liver surgery.

22 December 2020 in World Journal of Surgical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MRMirhasan Rahimli
Mirhasan Rahimli
APAristotelis Perrakis
Aristotelis Perrakis
VSVera Schellerer
Vera Schellerer
AGAndrew Gumbs
Andrew Gumbs
ELEric Lorenz
Eric Lorenz
RCRoland Siegfried Croner
Roland Siegfried Croner
Background: Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is increasing in incidence. The aim of this work was to present our experience by reporting short-term and long-term outcomes after MILS for CRLM with comparative analysis of laparoscopic (LLS) and robotic liver surgery (RLS). Methods: Twenty-five patients with CRLM, who underwent MILS between May 2012 and March 2020, were selected from our retrospective registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS). Thirteen of these patients underwent LLS and 12 RLS. Short-term and long-term outcomes of both groups were analyzed. Results: Operating time was significantly longer in the RLS vs. the LLS group (342.0 vs. 200.0 min; p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the laparoscopic vs. the robotic group regarding length of postoperative stay (8.8 days), measured blood loss (430.4 ml), intraoperative blood transfusion, overall morbidity (20.0%), and liver surgery related morbidity (4%). The mean BMI was 27.3 (range from 19.2 to 44.8) kg/m2. The 30-day mortality was 0%. R0 resection was achieved in all patients (100.0%) in RLS vs. 10 patients (76.9%) in LLS. Major resections were carried out in 32.0% of the cases, and 84.0% of the patients showed intra-abdominal adhesions due to previous abdominal surgery. In 24.0% of cases, the tumor was bilobar, the maximum number of tumors removed was 9, and the largest tumor was 8.5 cm in diameter. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 84, 56.9, and 48.7%, respectively. The 1- and 3-year overall recurrence-free survival rates were 49.6 and 36.2%, respectively, without significant differences between RLS vs. LLS. Conclusion: Minimally invasive liver surgery for CRLM is safe and feasible. Minimally invasive resection of multiple lesions and large tumors is also possible. RLS may help to achieve higher rates of R0 resections. High BMI, previous abdominal surgery, and bilobar tumors are not a barrier for MILS. Laparoscopic and robotic liver resections for CRLM provide similar long-term results which are comparable to open techniques.

12 November 2021 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Aristotelis PerrakisAristotelis Perrakis
Aristotelis Perrakis
MRMirhasan Rahimli
Mirhasan Rahimli
Andrew A. GumbsAndrew A. Gumbs
Andrew A. Gumbs
VNVictor Negrini
Victor Negrini
MAMihailo Andric
Mihailo Andric
Roland S. CronerRoland S. Croner
Roland S. Croner
Background: The implementation of robotics in liver surgery offers several advantages compared to conventional open and laparoscopic techniques. One major advantage is the enhanced degree of freedom at the tip of the robotic tools compared to laparoscopic instruments. This enables excellent vessel control during inflow and outflow dissection of the liver. Parenchymal transection remains the most challenging part during robotic liver resection because currently available robotic instruments for parenchymal transection have several limitations and there is no standardized technique as of yet. We established a new strategy and share our experience. Methods: We present a novel technique for the transection of liver parenchyma during robotic surgery, using three devices (3D) simultaneously: monopolar scissors and bipolar Maryland forceps of the robot and laparoscopic-guided waterjet. We collected the perioperative data of twenty-eight patients who underwent this procedure for minor and major liver resections between February 2019 and December 2020 from the Magdeburg Registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS). Results: Twenty-eight patients underwent robotic-assisted 3D parenchyma dissection within the investigation period. Twelve cases of major and sixteen cases of minor hepatectomy for malignant and non-malignant cases were performed. Operative time for major liver resections (≥ 3 liver segments) was 381.7 (SD 80.6) min vs. 252.0 (70.4) min for minor resections (p < 0.01). Intraoperative measured blood loss was 495.8 (SD 508.8) ml for major and 256.3 (170.2) ml for minor liver resections (p = 0.090). The mean postoperative stay was 13.3 (SD 11.1) days for all cases. Liver surgery-related morbidity was 10.7%, no mortalities occurred. We achieved an R0 resection in all malignant cases. Conclusions: The 3D technique for parenchyma dissection in robotic liver surgery is a safe and feasible procedure. This novel method offers an advanced locally controlled preparation of intrahepatic vessels and bile ducts. The combination of precise extrahepatic vessel handling with the 3D technique of parenchyma dissection is a fundamental step forward to the standardization of robotic liver surgery for teaching purposing and the wider adoption of robotic hepatectomy into routine patient care.

10 May 2022 in BMC Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MRMirhasan Rahimli
Mirhasan Rahimli
CWCora Wex
Cora Wex
FWFelix Wiesmueller
Felix Wiesmueller
FWFrederike Weber
Frederike Weber
MDMaximilian Dölling
Maximilian Dölling
APAristotelis Perrakis
Aristotelis Perrakis
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a global health crisis in 2020. This pandemic also had a negative impact on standard procedures in general surgery. Surgeons were challenged to find the best treatment plans for patients with acute cholecystitis. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed in a tertiary care hospital in Germany. Patients and methods: We examined perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the pandemic from March 22, 2020 (first national lockdown in Germany) to December 31, 2020. We then compared these to perioperative outcomes from the same time frame of the previous year. Results: A total of 182 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the above-mentioned periods were enrolled. The pandemic group consisted of 100 and the control group of 82 patients. Subgroup analysis of elderly patients (> 65 years old) revealed significantly higher rates of acute [5 (17.9%) vs. 20 (58.8%); p = 0.001] and gangrenous cholecystitis [0 (0.0%) vs. 7 (20.6%); p = 0.013] in the “pandemic subgroup”. Furthermore, significantly more early cholecystectomies were performed in this subgroup [5 (17.9%) vs. 20 (58.8%); p = 0.001]. There were no significant differences between the groups both in the overall and subgroup analysis regarding the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospitalization, morbidity and mortality. Conclusion: Elderly patients showed particularly higher rates of acute and gangrenous cholecystitis during the pandemic. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed safely in the COVID-19 era without negative impact on perioperative results. Therefore, we would assume that laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be recommended for any patient with acute cholecystitis, including the elderly.

1 September 2021 in Digestive Medicine Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Roland S. CronerRoland S. Croner
Roland S. Croner
Andrew A. GumbsAndrew A. Gumbs
Andrew A. Gumbs
Aristotelis PerrakisAristotelis Perrakis
Aristotelis Perrakis
MAMihailo Andric
Mihailo Andric
JSJessica Stockheim
Jessica Stockheim
MRMirhasan Rahimli
Mirhasan Rahimli
Robotic vs. laparoscopic liver surgery: what are the advantages of the robot? Roland S. Croner, Andrew A. Gumbs, Aristotelis Perrakis, Mihailo Andric, Jessica Stockheim, Eric Lorenz, Joerg Arend, Mareike Franz, Mirhasan Rahimli