首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>HPB : The Official Journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association >Vascular inflow control during hemi-hepatectomy: a comparison between intrahepatic pedicle ligation and extrahepatic vascular ligation
【2h】

Vascular inflow control during hemi-hepatectomy: a comparison between intrahepatic pedicle ligation and extrahepatic vascular ligation

机译:半肝切除术中的血管流入控制:肝内椎弓根结扎与肝外血管结扎的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background Intrahepatic pedicle ligation (IPL) is an alternative to extrahepatic portal dissection (EPD). Although IPL has been well described, concern has arisen over a possible association with increased complication rates.>Methods Patients who underwent hemi-hepatectomy during January 1995 to December 2010 were reviewed and the inflow control technique (IPL versus EPD) documented. Patient, tumour, treatment and outcome variables were compared.>Results A total of 798 patients underwent hemi-hepatectomy, 568 (71.2%) of the right and 230 (28.8%) of the left liver. In univariate analysis, factors associated with the choice of IPL included surgeon, right hepatectomy, preoperative portal vein embolization, diagnosis of colorectal cancer liver metastasis, and smaller tumour size (P < 0.011). In multivariate analysis, right hepatectomy [versus left: hazard ratio (HR) 3.878, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15–13.14; P = 0.029] and smaller tumour size (median of 4.5 cm versus 5.5 cm: HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59–0.88; P = 0.002) were associated with IPL. Pringle manoeuvre time was longer in IPL procedures (40 min versus 29 min; P < 0.001). Complication rates (49.8% in IPL versus 48.4% in EPD; P = 0.706) were similar in both groups, as was the severity of complications; 17.6% of EPD and 22.3% of IPL patients experienced complications of grade ≥3 (P = 0.225).>Conclusions Patients with small tumours undergoing right hepatectomy were more likely to undergo IPL. In selected patients, IPL was not associated with an increased complication rate and thus it should be considered a safe approach.
机译:>背景肝内椎弓根结扎术(IPL)是肝外门静脉剥离术(EPD)的替代方法。尽管已经对IPL进行了很好的描述,但人们对引起并发症发生率增加的担忧已引起关注。>方法对1995年1月至2010年12月接受半肝切除术的患者进行了回顾,并研究了流入控制技术(IPL与EPD) )记录下来。比较了患者,肿瘤,治疗和预后变量。>结果总共798例患者接受了半肝切除术,右侧568例(71.2%),左侧肝230例(28.8%)。在单因素分析中,与IPL选择相关的因素包括外科医生,右肝切除术,术前门静脉栓塞,大肠癌肝转移的诊断和较小的肿瘤大小(P <0.011)。在多变量分析中,右肝切除术[相对于左:危险比(HR)3.878,95%置信区间(CI)1.15–13.14; P = 0.029]和较小的肿瘤大小(中位数为4.5 cm对5.5 cm:HR 0.72,95%CI 0.59-0.88; P = 0.002)与IPL相关。在IPL手术中,Pringle操纵时间更长(40分钟/ 29分钟; P <0.001)。两组的并发症发生率(IPL分别为49.8%和EPD的48.4%; P = 0.706)和并发症的严重程度相似。 EPD患者中有17.6%和IPL患者中有22.3%发生了≥3级并发症(P = 0.225)。>结论患有右肝切除术的小肿瘤患者更有可能接受IPL。在某些患者中,IPL与并发症发生率增高无关,因此应将其视为安全的方法。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号