OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and results of prosthetic venous replacement, as inferior vena cava (IVC) and iliofemoral vein resection and replacement are sometimes necessary when they are extensively involved by a large and fixed tumour thrombus from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) or other urological malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five men and two women (age range 41-75 years) were treated over a 10-year period (1991-2001) by aggressive venous surgery to achieve complete tumour resection, with prosthetic graft replacement to re-establish venous flow. The tumours included RCC of the right kidney (two), retroperitoneal liposarcoma (two), bladder cancer (one), retroperitoneal fibrosarcoma (one) and inguino-pelvic lymphoma (one). Two patients had a vena caval replacement, of whom one had a circular reinforced PTFE and one a Dacron silver graft; five patients had either an iliofemoral or an ilio-iliac circular reinforced PTFE graft. The prosthetic diameter was 18-20 mm for the IVC grafts and 8-10 mm for the iliac grafts. In all the patients, graft patency was evaluated during the follow-up by colour flow duplex imaging, and in one it was determined by angio-computed tomography scan and venography. RESULTS: One patient died 30 days after surgery; of the remaining six patients one had no evidence of regional recurrence or metastatic disease at 12 months, and five died from recurrent tumour 8-30 months after surgery. The mean time to death was 23 months. At 3 months all six prosthesis were patent; at 6 months four were patent and at 12 months three of five prostheses were patent. CONCLUSION: Resecting and replacing the IVC allows complete tumour resection and avoids renal failure, providing durable relief from the symptoms of venous obstruction. Iliofemoral prosthetic reconstruction for urological-related malignancies represents a viable option to avoid venous engorgement and lower extremity swelling, at least in the early postoperative period. The mean time to death for the present patients must be considered the limit for these aggressive operations.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and results of prosthetic venous replacement, as inferior vena cava (IVC) and iliofemoral vein resection and replacement are sometimes necessary when they are extensively involved by a large and fixed tumour thrombus from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) or other urological malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five men and two women (age range 41-75 years) were treated over a 10-year period (1991-2001) by aggressive venous surgery to achieve complete tumour resection, with prosthetic graft replacement to re-establish venous flow. The tumours included RCC of the right kidney (two), retroperitoneal liposarcoma (two), bladder cancer (one), retroperitoneal fibrosarcoma (one) and inguino-pelvic lymphoma (one). Two patients had a vena caval replacement, of whom one had a circular reinforced PTFE and one a Dacron silver graft; five patients had either an iliofemoral or an ilio-iliac circular reinforced PTFE graft. The prosthetic diameter was 18-20 mm for the IVC grafts and 8-10 mm for the iliac grafts. In all the patients, graft patency was evaluated during the follow-up by colour flow duplex imaging, and in one it was determined by angio-computed tomography scan and venography. RESULTS: One patient died 30 days after surgery; of the remaining six patients one had no evidence of regional recurrence or metastatic disease at 12 months, and five died from recurrent tumour 8-30 months after surgery. The mean time to death was 23 months. At 3 months all six prosthesis were patent; at 6 months four were patent and at 12 months three of five prostheses were patent. CONCLUSION: Resecting and replacing the IVC allows complete tumour resection and avoids renal failure, providing durable relief from the symptoms of venous obstruction. Iliofemoral prosthetic reconstruction for urological-related malignancies represents a viable option to avoid venous engorgement and lower extremity swelling, at least in the early postoperative period. The mean time to death for the present patients must be considered the limit for these aggressive operations.
Authors: Philipp Fueglistaler; Lorenz Gurke; Peter Stierli; Tamim Obeid; Christoph Koella; Daniel Oertli; Christoph Kettelhack Journal: World J Surg Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: S Aufderklamm; T Todenhöfer; J Hennenlotter; J Mischinger; A Sim; J Böttge; S Rausch; S Bier; O Halalsheh; A Stenzl; G Gakis; C Schwentner Journal: Urologe A Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Aikaterini Mastoraki; Sotiria Mastoraki; Maria Tsikala-Vafea; Ioannis S Papanikolaou; Andreas Lazaris; Vassilios Smyrniotis; Nikolaos Arkadopoulos Journal: Indian J Surg Oncol Date: 2016-05-04
Authors: Joe L Pantoja; Rhusheet P Patel; Donald T Baril; William Quinones-Baldrich; Peter F Lawrence; Karen Woo Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2019-11-09 Impact factor: 1.466
Authors: Vital Hevia; Gaetano Ciancio; Victoria Gómez; Sara Álvarez; Víctor Díez-Nicolás; Francisco Javier Burgos Journal: Springerplus Date: 2016-02-20