Various minimally invasive therapies are important adjuncts to management of hepatic injuries. However, there is a certain subset of patients who will benefit from liver resection, but there are no reports in the literature on laparoscopic anatomical liver resection for the management of complications after blunt liver trauma. A 20-year-old male was admitted to the Emergency Unit of a tertiary referral center following a car accident. The patient was hemodynamically stable, and a radiologic workup demonstrated an isolated grade 3 injury of the left hemiliver. Initially, a nonoperative management was indicated, but during days following the injury, a high-volume biliary fistula complicated the clinical course. Despite percutaneous drainage, the development of devastating consequences of biliary peritonitis was imminent. A pure laparoscopic anatomical liver resection was performed. Left lateral sectionectomy eliminated the source of bile leak, and the surgery was completed with abdominal cavity lavage. Postoperative outcome was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on day 9 after injury and day 4 after surgery returning to his normal activity. In highly selected, hemodynamically stable patients with no other life-threatening concomitant injuries, laparoscopic liver resection in elective setting is feasible and safe for the management of complications after complex blunt trauma of the left liver. Extensive experience with hepatic surgery is needed, and surgeons should understand the increased risk they assume by taking on more complex surgical techniques.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is a minimally invasive approach for the surgical treatment of neoplasms in the distal pancreas. This study aimed to compare this approach to the open procedure. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of 400 pancreatectomies was performed. The laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy group (LDP) was compared to the open distal pancreatectomy group (ODP). A propensity score matching analysis (PSM) was performed. From 2016 to 2023, 108 distal pancreatectomies were carried out, 19 (17.6%) laparoscopically and 89 (82.4%) openly. The conversion rate was 13.6%. The severe morbidity rates were 28.1% in the ODP group, 47.4% in the LDP group, and 15.8% in the ODP-PSM group. The difference between the latter two was statistically significant (p = 0.034) due to the high rate of Clavien–Dindo grade 3a complications (42.1% versus 10.5%, p = 0.042) in the LDP group. The 90-day mortality rates were 3.3% in the ODP group and 5.3% in the other two groups. The LDP group had a shorter duration of intravenous narcotic analgesia (5 versus 7 days, p = 0.041). There was no difference in the R0 resection or postoperative pancreatic fistula rates. Our attention should be drawn to preventing postoperative complications because the oncological outcomes are already comparable with those of the open procedure, and postoperative pain management is promising.

Background: To determine the effects of perioperative treatment of gastric cancer patients, we conducted an analysis with propensity score matched patient groups to determine the role of perioperative chemotherapy in patients after D2 lymphadenectomy. Patients and methods: From our database of 1563 patients, 482 patients were selected with propensity score matching and divided into two balanced groups: 241 patients in the surgery only group and 241 patients in the perioperative group. The long-term results of treatment were compared between the two groups. Results: Most of the included patients received radio-chemotherapy with capecitabine (n = 111; 46%) and perioperative chemotherapy with epirubicin, oxalliplatin and capecitabine (n = 91; 37.7%). 92.9% of the patients received a D2 lymph node dissection. Perioperative morbidity was similar between surgery only (18.3%) and perioperative treatment groups (20.7%) (p = 0.537). The perioperative mortality was not influenced by perioperative treatment. A pathological response was observed in 12.5% of patients. The overall 5-year and median survivals were significantly higher in the perioperative treatment group (50.5%; 51.7 moths) compared to surgery only group (41.8%; 34.9 months; p = 0.038). The subgroup analysis revealed that only patients with the TNM stages T3 (p = 0.028), N2 (p = 0.009), N3b (p = 0.043), and UICC stages IIIb (p = 0.003) and IIIc (p = 0.03) significantly benefit from perioperative treatment. Conclusions: Perioperative treatment in radically resected gastric cancer patients after D2 lymphadenectomy was beneficial in stages IIIb and IIIc. The effects of perioperative treatment in lower stages could be negated by the effects of the radical surgery in lower stages and in higher stages by the biology of the disease.