Chang-Ku Jia1, Jie Weng1, You-Ke Chen1, Yu Fu1. 1. Chang-Ku Jia, Jie Weng, You-Ke Chen, Yu Fu, Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic Surgery, the Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical College, Haikou 570102, Hainan Province, China.
Abstract
AIM: To report the devised anatomic liver resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 to improve the resection rate for patients with right liver tumors. METHODS: We performed anatomic liver resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 to guarantee the maximum preservation of the remaining normal liver tissue. Segment 5 was determined by two steps of Glissonean pedicle occlusion. And a "┏┛" shaped broken resection line was marked upon the diaphragmatic surface of the liver. Selective right hemihepatic inflow occlusion was used to reduce blood loss during parenchymal transection between segments 6 and 5 and between segments 8 and 5. If needed, total hepatic Glissonean pedicle occlusion was used during parenchymal transection between segment 8 and the left liver. RESULTS: Compared to right hemihepatectomy, the percentage of future liver remnant volume was increased by an average of 13.9% if resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 was performed. Resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 was completed uneventfully. After hepatectomy, the inflow and outflow of segment 5 were maintained. There was no perioperative mortality, postoperative abdominal bleeding or bile leakage in this group. Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) returned to the normal range within 2 mo after the operation in all the patients. One patient died 383 d postoperatively due to obstructive suppurative cholangitis. One patient suffered from severe liver dysfunction shortly after surgery and had intrahepatic recurrence 4 mo postoperatively. Postoperative lung metastasis was found in one patient. No tumor recurrence was found in the other patients and the parameters including liver function and AFP level were in the normal range. CONCLUSION: Anatomic liver resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 can be a conventional operation to improve the overall resection rate for hepatocellular carcinoma.
AIM: To report the devised anatomic liver resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 to improve the resection rate for patients with right liver tumors. METHODS: We performed anatomic liver resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 to guarantee the maximum preservation of the remaining normal liver tissue. Segment 5 was determined by two steps of Glissonean pedicle occlusion. And a "┏┛" shaped broken resection line was marked upon the diaphragmatic surface of the liver. Selective right hemihepatic inflow occlusion was used to reduce blood loss during parenchymal transection between segments 6 and 5 and between segments 8 and 5. If needed, total hepatic Glissonean pedicle occlusion was used during parenchymal transection between segment 8 and the left liver. RESULTS: Compared to right hemihepatectomy, the percentage of future liver remnant volume was increased by an average of 13.9% if resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 was performed. Resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 was completed uneventfully. After hepatectomy, the inflow and outflow of segment 5 were maintained. There was no perioperative mortality, postoperative abdominal bleeding or bile leakage in this group. Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) returned to the normal range within 2 mo after the operation in all the patients. One patient died 383 d postoperatively due to obstructive suppurative cholangitis. One patient suffered from severe liver dysfunction shortly after surgery and had intrahepatic recurrence 4 mo postoperatively. Postoperative lung metastasis was found in one patient. No tumor recurrence was found in the other patients and the parameters including liver function and AFP level were in the normal range. CONCLUSION: Anatomic liver resection of segments 6, 7 and 8 can be a conventional operation to improve the overall resection rate for hepatocellular carcinoma.
Authors: N N Rahbari; M N Wente; P Schemmer; M K Diener; K Hoffmann; E Motschall; J Schmidt; J Weitz; M W Büchler Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Kui-Hin Liau; Leyo Ruo; Jinru Shia; Aasim Padela; Mithat Gonen; William R Jarnagin; Yuman Fong; Michael I D'Angelica; Leslie H Blumgart; Ronald P DeMatteo Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-11-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: A Nanashima; Y Sumida; T Abo; T Nagasaki; S Tobinaga; H Fukuoka; H Takeshita; S Hidaka; K Tanaka; T Sawai; T Yasutake; T Nagayasu Journal: Acta Chir Belg Date: 2008 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.090
Authors: Wilmar de Graaf; Krijn P van Lienden; Sander Dinant; Joris J T H Roelofs; Olivier R C Busch; Dirk J Gouma; Roelof J Bennink; Thomas M van Gulik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Yun Shin Chun; Dario Ribero; Eddie K Abdalla; David C Madoff; Melinda M Mortenson; Steven H Wei; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2007-10-09 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Vincent S K Yip; Ronnie T P Poon; Kenneth S H Chok; Albert C Y Chan; Wing Chiu Dai; Simon H Y Tsang; See Ching Chan; Chung Mau Lo; Tan To Cheung Journal: World J Surg Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 3.352