Literature DB >> 22504194

Outcomes of liver resection for intrahepatic stones: a comparative study of unilateral versus bilateral disease.

Shao-Qiang Li1, Li-Jian Liang, Bao-Gang Peng, Yun-Peng Hua, Ming-De Lv, Sun-Jun Fu, Dong Chen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of liver resection for unilateral and bilateral intrahepatic stones.
BACKGROUND: Hepatectomy is effective in treating intrahepatic stones accompanied by biliary stricture or segmental atrophy. The outcomes between unilateral and bilateral intrahepatic stones may be varied because of different complexity of these 2 subtypes of disease.
METHODS: From January 1992 to December 2008, 718 consecutive patients with intrahepatic stones underwent elective hepatectomy in our center were reviewed. The outcomes of patients with unilateral stones (n = 461) and bilateral stones (n = 257) were compared. The consistency between extent of liver resection (ELR) and stone-affected segments (SAS) was classified into 2 categories: ELR = SAS and ELR < SAS. The risk factors of stone recurrence were identified by Cox regression model.
RESULTS: The immediate stone clearance rates of the unilateral group and the bilateral group were 93.5% and 71.1%, respectively. Postoperative cholangioscopic lithotomy raised the clearance rates to 99.3% and 90.2%, respectively. The surgical morbidities were 20.4% and 38.5%, respectively. The hospital mortality rates of both groups were 0.4%. The 5-year stone recurrence rates were 6.2% and 16.7%, respectively. Cox regression analysis showed that stone distribution (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.462, P = 0.007) and consistency between ELR and SAS (HR = 3.100, P = 0.002) were independent prognostic factors for stone recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: Generally, patients with unilateral stones have better outcomes than those with bilateral stones after hepatectomy associated with cholangioscopic lithotomy. But for the patients with ELR equals to SAS, the stone recurrence rates of unilateral and bilateral stones are low and comparable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22504194     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31824dedc2

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


  24 in total

Review 1.  Surgical management of hepatolithiasis: A minireview.

Authors:  Chuan Li; Tianfu Wen
Journal:  Intractable Rare Dis Res       Date:  2017-05

2.  Left hepatic trisectionectomy for hepatolithiasis with occluded left and right anterior branches of the portal vein: report of a case.

Authors:  Isamu Hosokawa; Hiroaki Shimizu; Hiroyuki Yoshidome; Masayuki Ohtsuka; Atsushi Kato; Hideyuki Yoshitomi; Katsunori Furukawa; Tsukasa Takayashiki; Satoshi Kuboki; Daiki Okamura; Daisuke Suzuki; Masayuki Nakajima; Masaru Miyazaki
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 2.549

3.  Hepatic lobectomy and segmental resection of liver for hepatolithiasis.

Authors:  O Qiao; P Hu; Y Jin
Journal:  West Indian Med J       Date:  2014-04-11       Impact factor: 0.171

4.  Outcomes of anatomical versus non-anatomical resection for hepatocellular carcinoma according to circulating tumour-cell status.

Authors:  Lu-Nan Qi; Liang Ma; Yuan-Yuan Chen; Zu-Shun Chen; Jian-Hong Zhong; Wen-Feng Gong; Yan Lu; Bang-De Xiang; Le-Qun Li
Journal:  Ann Med       Date:  2020-01-20       Impact factor: 4.709

5.  One-Step Multichannel Percutaneous Transhepatic Cholangioscopic Lithotripsy Applied in Bilateral Hepatolithiasis.

Authors:  Haisu Tao; Ping Wang; Beiwang Sun; Kun Li; Canhua Zhu
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Risk Factors for Cholangiocarcinoma After Initial Hepatectomy for Intrahepatic Stones.

Authors:  Ze-Wu Meng; Sheng-Hua Han; Jin-Hai Zhu; Liang-Yi Zhou; Yan-Ling Chen
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Incidence and Prognosis of Subsequent Cholangiocarcinoma in Patients with Hepatic Resection for Bile Duct Stones.

Authors:  Hyun Jung Kim; Tae Uk Kang; Heather Swan; Min Ji Kang; Nayoung Kim; Hyeong Sik Ahn; Seon Mee Park
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-08-31       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 8.  Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis 2016.

Authors:  Susumu Tazuma; Michiaki Unno; Yoshinori Igarashi; Kazuo Inui; Kazuhisa Uchiyama; Masahiro Kai; Toshio Tsuyuguchi; Hiroyuki Maguchi; Toshiyuki Mori; Koji Yamaguchi; Shomei Ryozawa; Yuji Nimura; Naotaka Fujita; Keiichi Kubota; Junichi Shoda; Masami Tabata; Tetsuya Mine; Kentaro Sugano; Mamoru Watanabe; Tooru Shimosegawa
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-12-10       Impact factor: 7.527

Review 9.  Hepatolithiasis and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A review.

Authors:  Hyo Jung Kim; Jae Seon Kim; Moon Kyung Joo; Beom Jae Lee; Ji Hoon Kim; Jong Eun Yeon; Jong-Jae Park; Kwan Soo Byun; Young-Tae Bak
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Comparison of concomitant and subsequent cholangiocarcinomas associated with hepatolithiasis: Clinical implications.

Authors:  Chia-Cheng Lin; Ping-Yi Lin; Yao-Li Chen
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-01-21       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.