Skip to content

The ORANGE II PLUS - Trial: Open Versus Laparoscopic Hemihepatectomy

The ORANGE II PLUS - Trial: an International Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of Open Versus Laparoscopic Hemihepatectomies.

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01441856
Enrollment
350
Registered
2011-09-28
Start date
2013-10-01
Completion date
2023-12-04
Last updated
2025-05-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Liver Lesions Requiring Hemihepatectomy

Keywords

Open, Laparoscopic, Hemihepatectomy, Hepatectomy, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery, Functional recovery

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.

Interventions

PROCEDUREOpen or Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy

Patients in this arm will undergo a left hemihepatectomy within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program.

PROCEDUREOpen or Laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy

Patients in this arm will undergo a right hemihepatectomy within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program.

Sponsors

University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
CollaboratorOTHER
University Hospital, Ghent
CollaboratorOTHER
San Raffaele University Hospital, Italy
CollaboratorOTHER
Derriford Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
CollaboratorOTHER
Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
CollaboratorOTHER
King's College London
CollaboratorOTHER
Newcastle-upon-Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust
CollaboratorOTHER
Oslo University Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
General Hospital Groeninge
CollaboratorOTHER
Jessa Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel
CollaboratorOTHER
University Hospital, Aachen
CollaboratorOTHER
Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
CollaboratorOTHER_GOV
Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust
CollaboratorOTHER
Maastricht University Medical Center
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Caregiver)

Masking description

The patient, surgical ward physician and surgical ward nurses are blinded up and until postoperative day 4.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

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.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Time to functional recoveryexpected average of 4-10 daysTime until a patient is functionally recovered

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Composite endpoint of liver specific morbidity1 yearComposite endpoint of liver specific morbidity(intra-abdominal bleeding, intra-abdominal abcess, ascites, postresectional liver failure, intra-operative mortality, bile leakage)
Length of hospital stay30 daysTotal length of hospital stay
Readmission percentage1 yearTotal percentage of patients being readmitted
Long term incidence of incisional hernia1 yearIncidence of incisional hernia after 1 year
Quality of life: QLQ-C30 + LM 211 yearQuality of life assessment (QLQ-C30 + LM 21) during one year
Body image and cosmesis1 yearInfluence of intervention on body image and cosmesis during one year
Reasons for delay in discharge after functional recovery1 year
Total morbidity1 yearTotal morbidity during one year
Intraoperative timeSurgical time from incision to closure
Resection marginDuring pathology assessment
Time to adjuvant chemotherapy initiation1 year
Disease-free survival1 year
Hospital and societal costs1 year
Overall survival1 year and 5 years
Intraoperative blood lossDuring procedure

Countries

Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, United Kingdom

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 18, 2026