Abstract
Over the past two decades, minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) has progressively become the standard for minor resection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In contrast, its implementation in major hepatectomy has been slower due to its higher technical complexity and morbidity. However, studies published in recent years have demonstrated that minimally invasive major hepatectomy (MIMH) is safe and feasible with less blood loss, fewer complications, earlier recovery, decreased hospital stay, and improved cosmetic outcomes compared with open surgery. This review examines the current status of MIMH, focusing on the respective strengths and weaknesses of the laparoscopic and robotic approaches, as well as assessing their cost-effectiveness and possible future directions. The earlier introduction of laparoscopic liver resection has led to its widespread utilization as a safe and accurate alternative to open hepatectomy. Of note is that the robotic approach has also been increasingly utilized, demonstrating better perioperative outcomes and decreased need for conversion to open hepatectomy vs. the laparoscopic approach. Advantages associated with the robotic approach include the three-dimensional large visual field and instrumental flexibility, allowing for improved bleeding control. Even though evidence has been slowly accumulating regarding long-term outcomes, most studies report no notable differences between open, robotic, and laparoscopic resection for HCC. Regarding cost-effectiveness, MIMH has been characterized by higher operating room and anesthesia costs, especially for robotic procedures that require highly expensive equipment. The increase in cost is often offset by the lower morbidity and, thus, shorter hospital stays associated with MIMH. Future developments, such as the implementation of artificial intelligence and augmented reality, may potentially maximize the safety and applicability of MIMH and, in time, lead to improved postoperative and oncological outcomes.