PURPOSE: Several factors have been reported to affect liver regeneration after portal vein embolization (PVE); however, the effect of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) has not been evaluated. Therefore, we assessed the effect of SOS on liver regeneration after PVE in patients with multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases scheduled to undergo two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) combined with PVE. METHODS: The subjects of this study were 78 patients prospectively scheduled to undergo TSH between December 1996 and August 2009. Archived formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded nontumoral tissue samples were collected from the 1st- and 2nd-stage hepatectomies in 42 and 45 patients, respectively, and SOS and steatohepatitis were diagnosed pathologically. We analyzed the clinicopathological variables affecting liver regeneration after PVE. RESULTS: Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome was diagnosed in 11 (26.2%) and 20 patients (44.4%) at the time of the 1st- and 2nd-stage hepatectomy, respectively. Patients with SOS at the 1st-stage hepatectomy had a significantly lower hypertrophy ratio of the future remnant liver (FRL) after PVE than patients without SOS (16.8 ± 24.0 vs 55.6 ± 32.5; P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that SOS was an independent factor predicting lower FRL hypertrophy after PVE (Δ% FRL <20: hazard ratio 31.7, 95% confidence interval 2.84-355.12; P = 0.005). The incidence of postoperative transient liver failure after the 2nd-stage hepatectomy in patients presenting with SOS was higher than that in those without SOS, but the difference did not reach significance (25.0% vs 4.0%; P = 0.052). Steatohepatitis was confirmed at the 1st- and 2nd-stage hepatectomy in 6 (14.3%) and 3 (6.7%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome inhibits FRL hypertrophy after PVE and induces postoperative liver failure. Therefore, an alternative strategy is needed to perform TSH safely in the presence of SOS.
PURPOSE: Several factors have been reported to affect liver regeneration after portal vein embolization (PVE); however, the effect of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) has not been evaluated. Therefore, we assessed the effect of SOS on liver regeneration after PVE in patients with multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases scheduled to undergo two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) combined with PVE. METHODS: The subjects of this study were 78 patients prospectively scheduled to undergo TSH between December 1996 and August 2009. Archived formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded nontumoral tissue samples were collected from the 1st- and 2nd-stage hepatectomies in 42 and 45 patients, respectively, and SOS and steatohepatitis were diagnosed pathologically. We analyzed the clinicopathological variables affecting liver regeneration after PVE. RESULTS:Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome was diagnosed in 11 (26.2%) and 20 patients (44.4%) at the time of the 1st- and 2nd-stage hepatectomy, respectively. Patients with SOS at the 1st-stage hepatectomy had a significantly lower hypertrophy ratio of the future remnant liver (FRL) after PVE than patients without SOS (16.8 ± 24.0 vs 55.6 ± 32.5; P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that SOS was an independent factor predicting lower FRL hypertrophy after PVE (Δ% FRL <20: hazard ratio 31.7, 95% confidence interval 2.84-355.12; P = 0.005). The incidence of postoperative transient liver failure after the 2nd-stage hepatectomy in patients presenting with SOS was higher than that in those without SOS, but the difference did not reach significance (25.0% vs 4.0%; P = 0.052). Steatohepatitis was confirmed at the 1st- and 2nd-stage hepatectomy in 6 (14.3%) and 3 (6.7%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSION:Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome inhibits FRL hypertrophy after PVE and induces postoperative liver failure. Therefore, an alternative strategy is needed to perform TSH safely in the presence of SOS.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: D A Wicherts; R J de Haas; P Andreani; D Sotirov; C Salloum; D Castaing; R Adam; D Azoulay Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: S Hayashi; Y Baba; K Ueno; M Nakajo; F Kubo; S Ueno; T Aikou; T Komokata; N Nakamura; R Sakata Journal: Acta Radiol Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 1.990
Authors: Universe Leung; Amber L Simpson; Raphael L C Araujo; Mithat Gönen; Conor McAuliffe; Michael I Miga; E Patricia Parada; Peter J Allen; Michael I D'Angelica; T Peter Kingham; Ronald P DeMatteo; Yuman Fong; William R Jarnagin Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2014-06-25 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Stuart M Robinson; Colin H Wilson; Alastair D Burt; Derek M Manas; Steven A White Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-07-06 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Amir A Rahnemai-Azar; Jordan M Cloyd; Sharon M Weber; Mary Dillhoff; Carl Schmidt; Emily R Winslow; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Clin Transl Hepatol Date: 2017-11-30