Hai-Jie Hu1, Yan-Wen Jin1, Rong-Xing Zhou1, Anuj Shrestha1,2, Wen-Jie Ma1, Qin Yang1, Jun-Ke Wang1, Fei Liu1, Nan-Sheng Cheng1, Fu-Yu Li3. 1. Department of Biliary Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, 610041, China. 2. Department of General Surgery, Gandaki Medical College, Pokhara, Nepal. 3. Department of Biliary Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, 610041, China. lfy_74@hotmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to examine the feasibility of hepatic artery resection (HAR) without subsequent reconstruction (RCS) in specified patients of Bismuth type III and IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 63 patients who underwent hepatic artery resection for Bismuth type III and IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma. These patients were subsequently enrolled into two groups based on whether the artery reconstruction was conducted. Postoperative morbidity and mortality, and long-term survival outcome were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were 29 patients in HAR group and 34 patients in the HAR + RCS group. Patients with hepatic artery reconstruction tended to have longer operative time (545.6 ± 143.1 min vs. 656.3 ± 192.8 min; P = 0.013) and smaller tumor size (3.0 ± 1.1 cm vs. 2.5 ± 0.9 cm; P = 0.036). The R0 resection margin was comparable between the HAR group and HAR + RCS group (86.2 vs. 85.3%; P > 0.05). Twelve patients (41.4%) with 24 complications in HAR group and 13 patients (38.2%) with 25 complications in HAR + RCS group were recorded (P = 0.799). The postoperative hepatic failure rate (13.8 vs. 5.9%) and postoperative mortality rate (3.4% vs. 2.9%) were also comparable between the two groups. In the HAR group, the overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 72, 41, and 19%, respectively; while in the HAR + RCS group, the overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 79, 45, and 25%, respectively (P = 0.928). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic artery resection without reconstruction is also a safe and feasible surgical procedure for highly selected cases of Bismuth type III and IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to examine the feasibility of hepatic artery resection (HAR) without subsequent reconstruction (RCS) in specified patients of Bismuth type III and IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 63 patients who underwent hepatic artery resection for Bismuth type III and IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma. These patients were subsequently enrolled into two groups based on whether the artery reconstruction was conducted. Postoperative morbidity and mortality, and long-term survival outcome were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were 29 patients in HAR group and 34 patients in the HAR + RCS group. Patients with hepatic artery reconstruction tended to have longer operative time (545.6 ± 143.1 min vs. 656.3 ± 192.8 min; P = 0.013) and smaller tumor size (3.0 ± 1.1 cm vs. 2.5 ± 0.9 cm; P = 0.036). The R0 resection margin was comparable between the HAR group and HAR + RCS group (86.2 vs. 85.3%; P > 0.05). Twelve patients (41.4%) with 24 complications in HAR group and 13 patients (38.2%) with 25 complications in HAR + RCS group were recorded (P = 0.799). The postoperative hepatic failure rate (13.8 vs. 5.9%) and postoperative mortality rate (3.4% vs. 2.9%) were also comparable between the two groups. In the HAR group, the overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 72, 41, and 19%, respectively; while in the HAR + RCS group, the overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 79, 45, and 25%, respectively (P = 0.928). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic artery resection without reconstruction is also a safe and feasible surgical procedure for highly selected cases of Bismuth type III and IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bismuth type III and IV; Hepatic artery resection; Hilar cholangiocarcinoma; Reconstruction
Authors: Eduardo de Santibañes; Victoria Ardiles; Fernando A Alvarez; Juan Pekolj; Claudio Brandi; Axel Beskow Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2011-10-23 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Helmut Witzigmann; Frieder Berr; Ulrike Ringel; Karel Caca; Dirk Uhlmann; Konrad Schoppmeyer; Andrea Tannapfel; Christian Wittekind; Joachim Mossner; Johann Hauss; Marcus Wiedmann Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Sander Dinant; Michael F Gerhards; E A J Rauws; Olivier R C Busch; Dirk J Gouma; Thomas M van Gulik Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2006-04-14 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Liu Yubin; Fang Chihua; Jian Zhixiang; Ou Jinrui; Liu Zixian; Zheng Jianghua; Lin Ye; Jin Haosheng; Lu Chaomin Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2008-06-11 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Ali Majlesara; Omid Ghamarnejad; Elias Khajeh; Mohammad Golriz; Negin Gharabaghi; Katrin Hoffmann; De-Hua Chang; Markus W Büchler; Arianeb Mehrabi Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Daniele Dondossola; Michele Ghidini; Francesco Grossi; Giorgio Rossi; Diego Foschi Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2020-07-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: T Sugiura; K Uesaka; Y Okamura; T Ito; Y Yamamoto; R Ashida; K Ohgi; S Otsuka; M Nakagawa; T Aramaki; K Asakura Journal: BJS Open Date: 2021-07-06