Literature DB >> 12724635

Preoperative portal vein embolization for extended hepatectomy.

Alan W Hemming1, Alan I Reed, Richard J Howard, Shiro Fujita, Steven N Hochwald, James G Caridi, Irvin F Hawkins, Jean-Nicolas Vauthey.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the authors' experience with preoperative ipsilateral portal vein embolization (PVE) and assess its role in extended hepatectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Extended hepatectomy (five or more liver segments) has been associated with higher complication rates and increased postoperative liver dysfunction than have standard hepatic resections involving lesser volumes. Recently, PVE has been used in patients who have a predicted (postresection) future liver remnant (FLR) volume less than 25% of total liver volume in an attempt to increase the FLR and reduce complications.
METHODS: Sixty patients from 1996 to 2002 were reviewed. Thirty-nine patients had PVE preoperatively. Eight patients who had PVE were not resected either due to the discovery of additional unresectable disease after embolization but before surgery (n = 5) or due to unresectable disease at surgery (n = 3). Therefore, 31 patients who had PVE subsequently underwent extended hepatic lobectomy. A comparable cohort of 21 patients who had an extended hepatectomy without PVE were selected on the basis of demographic, tumor, and liver volume characteristics. Patients had colorectal liver metastases (n = 30), hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 15), Klatskin tumors (n = 9), peripheral cholangiocarcinoma (n = 3), and other tumors (n = 3). The 52 resections performed included 42 extended right hepatectomies, 6 extended left hepatectomies, and 4 right hepatectomies extended to include the middle hepatic vein and the caudate lobe but preserving the majority of segment 4. Concomitant vascular reconstruction of either the inferior vena cava or hepatic veins was performed in five patients.
RESULTS: There were no differences between PVE and non-PVE groups in terms of tumor number, tumor size, tumor type, surgical margin status, complexity of operation, or perioperative red cell transfusion requirements. The predicted FLR was similar between PVE and non-PVE groups at presentation. After PVE the FLR was higher than in the non-PVE group. No complications were observed after PVE before resection. There was no difference in postoperative mortality, with one death from liver failure in the non-PVE group and no operative mortality in the PVE group. Postoperative peak bilirubin was higher in the non-PVE than the PVE group, as were postoperative fresh-frozen plasma requirements. Liver failure (defined as the development of encephalopathy, ascites requiring sustained diuretics or paracentesis, or coagulopathy unresponsive to vitamin K requiring fresh-frozen plasma after the first 24 hours postresection) was higher in the non-PVE patients than the PVE patients. The hospital stay was longer in the non-PVE than the PVE group.
CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative PVE is a safe and effective method of increasing the remnant liver volume before extended hepatectomy. Increasing the remnant liver volume in patients with estimated postresection volumes of less than 25% appears to reduce postoperative liver dysfunction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12724635      PMCID: PMC1514515          DOI: 10.1097/01.SLA.0000065265.16728.C0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  30 in total

1.  Small-for-size grafts in living-related liver transplantation.

Authors:  Y Sugawara; M Makuuchi; T Takayama; H Imamura; S Dowaki; K Mizuta; H Kawarasaki; K Hashizume
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 6.113

2.  Standardized measurement of the future liver remnant prior to extended liver resection: methodology and clinical associations.

Authors:  J N Vauthey; A Chaoui; K A Do; M M Bilimoria; M J Fenstermacher; C Charnsangavej; M Hicks; G Alsfasser; G Lauwers; I F Hawkins; J Caridi
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 3.982

3.  Ex vivo liver resection with replacement of the inferior vena cava and hepatic vein replacement by transposition of the portal vein.

Authors:  A W Hemming; M S Cattral
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 4.  Portal vein embolization: rationale, technique and future prospects.

Authors:  E K Abdalla; M E Hicks; J N Vauthey
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 5.  Transhepatic portal vein embolization: anatomy, indications, and technical considerations.

Authors:  David C Madoff; Marshall E Hicks; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Chusilp Charnsangavej; Frank A Morello; Kamran Ahrar; Michael J Wallace; Sanjay Gupta
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  The Brisbane 2000 terminology of liver anatomy and resections. HPB 2000; 2:333-39.

Authors:  Yeung Yuk Pang
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 3.647

7.  Is preoperative portal vein embolization effective in improving prognosis after major hepatic resection in patients with advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma?

Authors:  H Wakabayashi; K Ishimura; K Okano; K Izuishi; Y Karasawa; F Goda; T Maeba; H Maeta
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2001-11-01       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Evaluation of the effect of portal vein embolization on liver function by (99m)tc-galactosyl human serum albumin scintigraphy.

Authors:  Shoji Kubo; Susumu Shiomi; Hiromu Tanaka; Taichi Shuto; Shigekazu Takemura; Shinichi Mikami; Takahiro Uenishi; Yoshihiro Nishino; Kazuhiro Hirohashi; Etsushi Kawamura; Hiroaki Kinoshita
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.192

9.  Proliferative activity of intrahepatic colorectal metastases after preoperative hemihepatic portal vein embolization.

Authors:  N Kokudo; K Tada; M Seki; H Ohta; K Azekura; M Ueno; K Ohta; T Yamaguchi; T Matsubara; T Takahashi; T Nakajima; T Muto; T Ikari; A Yanagisawa; Y Kato
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 17.425

10.  Postoperative liver failure after major hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in the modern era with special reference to remnant liver volume.

Authors:  K Shirabe; M Shimada; T Gion; H Hasegawa; K Takenaka; T Utsunomiya; K Sugimachi
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 6.113

View more
  122 in total

Review 1.  Review article: surgical, neo-adjuvant and adjuvant management strategies in biliary tract cancer.

Authors:  J R A Skipworth; S W M Olde Damink; C Imber; J Bridgewater; S P Pereira; M Malagó
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 8.171

2.  Total resection of the right hepatic vein drainage area with the aid of three-dimensional computed tomography.

Authors:  Akinobu Taketomi; Kazuki Takeishi; Yohei Mano; Takeo Toshima; Takashi Motomura; Shinichi Aishima; Hideaki Uchiyama; Tomoharu Yoshizumi; Ken Shirabe; Yoshihiko Maehara
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 3.  Complications of intraoperative radiofrequency ablation of liver metastases.

Authors:  Tsiriniaina Razafindratsira; Milène Isambert; Serge Evrard
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2010-12-07       Impact factor: 3.647

4.  ALPPS for patients with colorectal liver metastases: effective liver hypertrophy, but early tumor recurrence.

Authors:  Karl J Oldhafer; Marcello Donati; Robert M Jenner; Axel Stang; Gregor A Stavrou
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 5.  Hepatocellular carcinoma: From clinical practice to evidence-based treatment protocols.

Authors:  Danijel Galun; Dragan Basaric; Marinko Zuvela; Predrag Bulajic; Aleksandar Bogdanovic; Nemanja Bidzic; Miroslav Milicevic
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-09-18

6.  [Mesohepatectomy-an alternative to extended hepatectomy in the treatment of central liver tumors].

Authors:  H Lang; G C Sotiropoulos; N R Frühauf; A Radtke; M Malagó; Ch E Broelsch
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2004-03-12       Impact factor: 0.955

7.  Combined resection of the liver and inferior vena cava for hepatic malignancy.

Authors:  Alan W Hemming; Alan I Reed; Max R Langham; Shiro Fujita; Richard J Howard
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Is extended hepatectomy for hepatobiliary malignancy justified?

Authors:  Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Timothy M Pawlik; Eddie K Abdalla; James F Arens; Rabih A Nemr; Steven H Wei; Debra L Kennamer; Lee M Ellis; Steven A Curley
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 9.  Liver embolizations in oncology. A review. Part II. Arterial radioembolizations, portal venous embolizations, experimental arterial embolization procedures.

Authors:  Peter Gunvén
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.064

Review 10.  Role of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy in colorectal liver metastases: a review.

Authors:  Kristina Hasselgren; Per Sandström; Bergthor Björnsson
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.