Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for benign and malignant tumors: a comparative study of postoperative outcomes

Abstract

Background: Initially, liver resections were limited due to various factors. However, over the last decade, there has been significant development. Many studies have demonstrated that the laparoscopic approach is superior to the open approach in terms of length of hospital stay, complication rate, and blood transfusion requirements, with equivalent oncological outcomes. However, most resections are still performed the conventional approach, and most publications focus on a specific disease or population.
Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open liver resections.
Material and methods: We conducted a retrospective, comparative and descriptive study of patients undergoing liver resections for solid tumors measuring up to 6 cm between March 2017 and February 2024.
Results: The postoperative length of hospital stay was shorter for the laparoscopic approach (3.76 vs. 8.28 days, p = 0.002), as were the days spent in the intensive care unit (1 vs. 4 days, p = 0.036). The minimally invasive approach demonstrated a reduced complication rate (6% vs. 28%, p = 0.028) and need for transfusion of red blood cells (6% vs. 39%, p = 0.003). There was only one death in the open surgery group and there were no statistically significant differences in the resection margins.
Conclusion: The laparoscopic approach showed benefits in terms of postoperative length of hospital stay, days spent in the intensive care unit, complication rate, and red blood cell transfusion, with no differences in mortality or surgical resection margins.