Clinical trial NCT01441856: The ORANGE II PLUS - Trial: Open Versus Laparoscopic Hemihepatectomy
Official title: The ORANGE II PLUS - Trial: an International Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of Open Versus Laparoscopic Hemihepatectomies.
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Phase: NA
Conditions: Liver Lesions Requiring Hemihepatectomy
Keywords: Open
Laparoscopic
Hemihepatectomy
Hepatectomy
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery
Functional recovery
Lead sponsor: Maastricht University Medical Center
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
name: University Hospital, Ghent
name: San Raffaele University Hospital, Italy
name: Derriford Hospital
name: Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
name: Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
name: King's College London
name: Newcastle-upon-Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust
name: Oslo University Hospital
name: General Hospital Groeninge
name: Jessa Hospital
name: Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel
name: University Hospital, Aachen
name: Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
name: Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust
First posted: 2011-09-28
Enrollment: 350
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Primary purpose: TREATMENT

Brief summary: The added value of the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy compared to the open hemihepatectomy has never been studied in a randomized controlled setting. Therefore, the multicenter international ORANGE II PLUS - trial has been constructed and will provide evidence on the merits of laparoscopic versus open hemihepatectomy in terms of time to functional recovery, hospital length of stay, intraoperative blood loss, operation time, resection margin, time to adjuvant chemotherapy initiation, readmission percentage, (liver-specific) morbidity, quality of life, body image, reasons for delay of discharge after functional recovery, long term incidence of incisional hernias, hospital and societal costs during one year and overall five-year survival.

Detailed description: Liver resection for colorectal metastasis is the only potentially curative therapy and has become the standard of care in appropriately staged patients, offering 5-year survival rates of approximately 35-40%. Also for symptomatic benign lesions and those of uncertain nature or large size, liver resection is a widely accepted treatment. Open hepatectomy (OH) is the current standard of care for the management of primary and secondary malignancies. Although the feasibility of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has been established, only select centres have used this technique as their primary modality.

Laparoscopic liver resection was first reported in 1991. Over the last decade the method has gained wide acceptance for various liver resection procedures. Multiple retrospective case series and reviews comparing open with laparoscopic liver resection indicate that laparoscopic liver resection can be applied safely for both malignant and benign liver lesions. Laparoscopic liver resection has been associated with shorter hospital length of stay, reduced intraoperative blood loss, less postoperative pain, earlier recovery and better quality of life. Initially the left lateral segments of the liver were chosen for anatomic laparoscopic resection with good results. Many liver centres worldwide are currently adopting laparoscopic surgery for resection of anterior segments, but relatively low volumes to operate on, a significant learning curve and lack of evidence restrict the majority of liver surgeons to further adopt and disseminate this technique.

Recently, indications for resectability have been broadened by new (neo)adjuvant chemotherapies and (radio)embolisation techniques. A new impulse for the laparoscopic management of liver lesions came after the first reports of laparoscopic hemihepatectomies. Major hepatic resections can be technically demanding and hold an increased risk for morbidity. It was demonstrated that in expert hands major anatomical laparoscopic liver resections were feasible with good efficacy and safety. Expert liver centers are already performing laparoscopic (extended) hemihepatectomies. Currently, in European centers, a median hospital length of stay of 6.0 to 13.1 and 3.5 to 10.0 days is observed after respectively open and laparoscopic hepatic resection. In expert hands median duration of admission after major hepatic resection varies between 6 - 12.5 for open and 4 - 8.2 for laparoscopic surgery. However, reports are scarce and level 1 evidence on this matter is still to be presented.

Within the framework of optimising postoperative recovery, broader indications for resection and further adoption of laparoscopic liver surgery there is a need for a randomized trial.Regarding postoperative care, enthusiasm has arisen for the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) program. This multimodal program, derived from Kehlet's 1990's pioneer work in the multimodal surgical care field, involves optimization of several aspects of the perioperative management of patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. In patients undergoing segmental colectomy, the ERAS® -program enabled earlier recovery and consequently shorter hospital length of stay. Furthermore, a reduction of postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing intestinal resection was reported. These results stimulated liver surgeons of the ERAS® group (Maastricht, Edinburgh and Tromsö) to adapt the ERAS®-program to patients undergoing open liver resection. Van Dam et al. found a significantly reduced hospital length of stay after open liver resection when patients were managed within a multimodal ERAS®-program. Besides a reduction of median total hospital length of stay from 8 to 6 days (25%), the data also suggested that a further reduction of stay could be possible as there was a delay between recovery and actual discharge of the patients. Moreover, Stoot et al. showed - retrospectively - a further reduction in length of stay from 7 days to 5 days when patients were operated laparoscopically and managed within an ERAS®-program. In this study there was also a delay between recovery and actual discharge of the patients. Earlier, Maessen et al. reported a median delay to discharge of 2 days after patients had functionally recovered from colonic surgery managed within an ERAS®-program. This delay is often linked to social problems, problems in homecare support or logistic problems.

The added value of the laparoscopic hemihepatectomy compared to the open hemihepatectomy has never been studied in a randomized controlled setting. Therefore, the multicenter international ORANGE II PLUS - trial has been constructed and will provide evidence on the merits of laparoscopic versus open hemihepatectomy.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* Patients requiring open or laparoscopic left / right hemihepatectomy, with or without the need for one additional hepatic wedge resection or metastasectomy, for accepted indications.
* Able to understand the nature of the study and what will be required of them.
* Men and non-pregnant, non-lactating women age 18 years and older.
* BMI between 18-35.
* Patients with ASA I-II-III.

Exclusion Criteria:

* Inability to give written informed consent.
* Patients undergoing liver resection other than left or right hemihepatectomy, with or without the need for one additional hepatic wedge resection or metastasectomy.
* Patients with hepatic lesion(s), that are located with insufficient margin from vascular or biliary structures to be operated laparoscopically.
* Patients with ASA IV-V.
* Repeat hepatectomy.

Primary outcomes:
measure: Time to functional recovery
timeFrame: expected average of 4-10 days
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Length of hospital stay
timeFrame: 30 days
measure: Readmission percentage
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Total morbidity
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Composite endpoint of liver specific morbidity
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Long term incidence of incisional hernia
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Quality of life: QLQ-C30 + LM 21
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Body image and cosmesis
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Reasons for delay in discharge after functional recovery
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Intraoperative blood loss
timeFrame: During procedure
measure: Intraoperative time
timeFrame: Surgical time from incision to closure
measure: Resection margin
timeFrame: During pathology assessment
measure: Time to adjuvant chemotherapy initiation
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Disease-free survival
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Hospital and societal costs
timeFrame: 1 year
measure: Overall survival
timeFrame: 1 year and 5 years
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Brussels
country: Belgium
facility: Erasmus Hospital
city: Ghent
country: Belgium
facility: Ghent University Hospital
city: Hasselt
country: Belgium
facility: Jessa Hospital
city: Kortrijk
country: Belgium
facility: General Hospital Groeninge
city: Aachen
country: Germany
facility: University Hospital Aachen
city: Milan
country: Italy
facility: San Raffaele Hospital
city: Amsterdam
country: Netherlands
facility: Academic Medical Center
city: Maastricht
country: Netherlands
facility: Maastricht University Medical Center+
city: Oslo
country: Norway
facility: University Hospital Oslo
city: Aintree
country: United Kingdom
facility: Aintree University Hospital
city: Birmingham
country: United Kingdom
facility: Queen Elizabeth Hospital
city: London
country: United Kingdom
facility: King's College Hospital
city: Newcastle
country: United Kingdom
facility: Freeman Hospital
city: Oxford
country: United Kingdom
facility: Oxford University Hospitals
city: Plymouth
country: United Kingdom
facility: Derriford Hospital
city: Southampton
country: United Kingdom
facility: University Hospital Southampton
Study officials:
affiliation: Maastricht University Medical Center
name: R.M. van Dam, MD PhD
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References: