Maria Baimas-George1, Kyle J Thompson2, Michael D Watson1, David A Iannitti1, John B Martinie1, Erin H Baker1, David Levi3, Dionisios Vrochides4. 1. Division of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, Carolinas Center for Surgical Outcomes Science, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA. 3. Division of Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA. 4. Division of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA. Dionisios.Vrochides@atriumhealth.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Ex vivo hepatectomy is the incorporation of liver transplant techniques in the non-transplant setting, providing opportunity for locally advanced tumors found conventionally unresectable. Because the procedure is rare and reports in the literature are limited, we sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating technical variations of ex vivo hepatectomies. METHODS: In the literature, there is a split in those performing the procedure between venovenous bypass (VVB) and temporary portacaval shunts (PCS). Of the 253 articles identified on the topic of ex vivo resection, 37 had sufficient data to be included in our review. RESULTS: The majority of these procedures were performed for hepatic alveolar echinococcosis (69%) followed by primary and secondary hepatic malignancies. In 18 series, VVB was used, and in 18, a temporary PCS was performed. Comparing these two groups, intraoperative variables and morbidity were not statistically different, with a cumulative trend in favor of PCS. Ninety-day mortality was significantly lower in the PCS group compared to the VVB group (p=0.03). CONCLUSION: In order to better elucidate these differences between technical approaches, a registry and consensus statement are needed.
PURPOSE: Ex vivo hepatectomy is the incorporation of liver transplant techniques in the non-transplant setting, providing opportunity for locally advanced tumors found conventionally unresectable. Because the procedure is rare and reports in the literature are limited, we sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating technical variations of ex vivo hepatectomies. METHODS: In the literature, there is a split in those performing the procedure between venovenous bypass (VVB) and temporary portacaval shunts (PCS). Of the 253 articles identified on the topic of ex vivo resection, 37 had sufficient data to be included in our review. RESULTS: The majority of these procedures were performed for hepatic alveolar echinococcosis (69%) followed by primary and secondary hepatic malignancies. In 18 series, VVB was used, and in 18, a temporary PCS was performed. Comparing these two groups, intraoperative variables and morbidity were not statistically different, with a cumulative trend in favor of PCS. Ninety-day mortality was significantly lower in the PCS group compared to the VVB group (p=0.03). CONCLUSION: In order to better elucidate these differences between technical approaches, a registry and consensus statement are needed.
Entities:
Keywords:
Ex vivo hepatectomy; Hypothermic preservation; Meta-analysis; Portacaval shunt; Systematic review; Venovenous bypass
Authors: R Pichlmayr; H J Bretschneider; E Kirchner; B Ringe; P Lamesch; G Gubernatis; J Hauss; K J Niehaus; J Kaukemüller Journal: Langenbecks Arch Chir Date: 1988
Authors: J G Fortner; M H Shiu; D W Kinne; D K Kim; E B Castro; R C Watson; W S Howland; E J Beattie Journal: Ann Surg Date: 1974-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: R Pichlmayr; A Weimann; K J Oldhafer; H J Schlitt; J Klempnauer; A Bornscheuer; A Chavan; E Schmoll; H Lang; G Tusch Journal: World J Surg Date: 1995 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.352