选择性肝血流阻断技术在肝肿瘤切除术中的应用

目的 探讨选择性肝静脉血流阻断术(SHVE)在复杂肝肿瘤切除术中的有效性和安全性.方法 在246例复杂肝肿瘤切除手术中采用选择性肝血流阻断技术,统计分析患者术前一般情况、术中情况、病理诊断、术后并发症等.结果 从2000年1月～2007年7月,在复杂肝肿瘤切除手术中246例肿瘤采用了选择性肝血流阻断技术.根据肝血流阻断方法的不同,完全SHVE(阻断第一肝门和所有主肝静脉,Total SHVE)145例,部分SHVE中阻断第一肝门和右肝静脉54例,阻断第一肝门和左中肝静脉47例.3例因术中发现瘤体侵犯下腔静脉壁而改为全肝血流阻断.结果 显示血流阻断过程中患者均保持血流动力学稳定,仅外周循环阻力和肺循环阻力轻度升高.术后患者无死亡发生,总并发症率为24.8%,平均住院天数为9.6 d.结论 选择性肝血流阻断技术是一种安全、有效的血流阻断技术,尤其适合用于位于第二肝门未侵犯下腔静脉的肿瘤切除.     

Selective Hepatic Vascular Exclusion versus Pringle Maneuver in Major Liver Resections: Prospective Study

Selective hepatic vascular exclusion (SHVE) and the Pringle maneuver are two methods used to control bleeding during hepatectomy. They are compared in a prospective randomized study, where 110 patients undergoing major liver resection were randomly allocated to the SHVE group or the Pringle group. Data regarding the intraoperative and postoperative courses of the patients are analyzed. Intraoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements were significantly decreased in the SHVE group, and postoperative liver function was better in that group. Although there was no difference between the two groups regarding the postoperative complications rate, patients offered the Pringle maneuver had a significantly longer hospital stay. The application of SHVE did not prolong the warm ischemia time or the total operating time. It is evident from the present study that SHVE performed by experienced surgeons is as safe as the Pringle maneuver and is well tolerated by the patients. It is much more effective than the Pringle maneuver for controlling intraoperative bleeding, and it is associated with better postoperative liver function and shorter hospital stay.     

选择性肝血流阻断切肝术(附213例报道)

目的分析选择性肝血流阻断切肝术在防止术中肝脏大出血及术后肝功能衰竭方面的作用。方法根据肿瘤部位、大小及肝硬化情况,采用半肝血流阻断,半肝全血流阻断,交替半肝血流阻断,交替半肝全血流阻断,单纯门静脉阻断及肝褥式缝合等区域性肝血流阻断技术切除肝肿瘤共213例。观察肝门阻断时间、出血量、术后肝功能恢复情况及并发症发生率。结果半肝血流阻断144例,其中左肝门阻断32倒,右肝门阻断112例。半肝全血流阻断39例,其中右肝门 右肝静脉阻断26例,左肝门 左、中肝静脉阻断13例。交替半肝血流阻断7例,交替半肝全血流阻断5例,单纯门静脉阻断8例,局部褥式缝扎10例。肿瘤切除率100%, 第一肝门及肝静脉分离均成功。无一例发生肝静脉破裂出血及空气栓塞,术后无一例发生肝功能衰竭。术后胆漏6例,保守治疗痊愈。结论区域性肝血流阻断切肝术是一种安全、简便的方法,对防止肝静脉破裂出血,降低术后肝功能衰竭发生率具有重要作用。     

Portal Triad Clamping Versus Vascular Exclusion for Vascular Control During Hepatic Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective  To compare the clinical outcome of patients undergoing liver resection under portal triad clamping (PTC) versus hepatic vascular exclusion (HVE). Methods  A systematic literature search was performed following the guidelines of the Cochrane collaboration. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing PTC to any technique of HVE were eligible for inclusion. Two authors independently assessed methodological quality of included trials and extracted data on overall morbidity, mortality, cardiopulmonary and hepatic morbidity, intraoperative blood loss, transfusion rates, postoperative transaminase and bilirubin levels, prothrombin time, and hospital stay. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Results  Of the 1,383 identified references, four RCTs were finally included. These trials compared PTC to selective hepatic vascular exclusion (SHVE), total hepatic vascular exclusion (THVE), and a modified technique of HVE (MTHVE), respectively. Meta-analyses revealed no significant difference in morbidity and mortality between PTC and techniques of HVE. Further analyses showed significantly reduced overall morbidity for the PTC compared to the THVE group. There was a significantly lower transfusion rate for HVE compared to PTC. Conclusion  Hepatic vascular exclusion does not offer any benefit regarding outcome of patients undergoing hepatic resection compared to PTC alone. Further, well-designed RCTs evaluating adequate vascular control in major hepatectomy and in patients with underlying liver disease appear justified. Nuh N. Rahbari and Moritz Koch contributed equally to this work     

Portal triad clamping or hepatic vascular exclusion for major liver resection. A controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: The authors compared operative course of patients undergoing major liver resections under portal triad clamping (PTC) or under hepatic vascular exclusion (HVE). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Reduced blood loss during liver resection is achieved by PTC or HVE. Specific complications and postoperative hepatocellular injury mediated with two procedures have not been compared. METHODS: Fifty-two noncirrhotic patients undergoing major liver resections were included in a prospective randomized study comparing both the intraoperative and postoperative courses under PTC (n = 24) or under HVE (n = 28). RESULTS: The two groups were similar at entry, but eight patients were crossed over to the other group during resection. In the HVE group, hemodynamic intolerance occurred in four (14%) patients. In the PTC group, pedicular clamping was not efficient in four patients, including three with involvement of the cavohepatic intersection and one with persistent bleeding due to tricuspid insufficiency. Intraoperative blood losses and postoperative enzyme level reflecting hepatocellular injury were similar in the two groups. Mean operative duration and mean clampage duration were significantly increased after HVE. Postoperative abdominal collections and pulmonary complications were 2.5-fold higher after HVE but without statistical significance, whereas the mean length of postoperative hospital stay was longer after HVE. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that both methods of vascular occlusion are equally effective in reducing blood loss in major liver resections. The HVE is associated with unpredictable hemodynamic intolerance, increased postoperative complications with a longer hospital stay, and should be restricted to lesions involving the cavo-hepatic intersection.     

第二肝门区域肿瘤切除中两种肝血流阻断方法的比较

目的比较入肝血流加肝静脉血流阻断术与单纯第一肝门阻断术在第二肝门区域肿瘤切除中的作用。方法从2000年1月至2005年10月,共施行2100例肝脏肿瘤切除术,其中235例肿瘤紧贴或压迫1根以上主肝静脉,根据肝血流阻断方法的不同,将235例患者分为两组：选择性肝血流阻断组（SHVE组,125例）和第一肝门阻断组（Pringle组,110例）。分析两组患者的术中及术后情况。在SHVE组,完全SHVE（阻断第一肝门和所有主肝静脉）25例,部分SHVE（阻断第一肝门和部分主肝静脉）100例。肝静脉阻断方法有3种：丝线结扎肝静脉,止血带阻断和辛氏钳阻断。结果两组间年龄、性别、肿瘤大小、肝硬化发生率、HBsAg阳性率、术中热缺血时间和手术时间的差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。SHVE组的术中失血量及输血量明显少于Pringle组（P〈0．05）。Pringle组有17例发生主肝静脉破裂,其中大出血14例,空气栓塞3例。而SHVE组无1例肝静脉破裂、大出血或空气栓塞发生。Pringle组术后再出血、再次手术和肝功能衰竭等并发症发生率高于SHVE组,ICU时间和住院时间长于SHVE组（P〈0．05）。结论SHVE较Pringle法能更有效地控制术中大出血,防止肝静脉破裂导致的大出血和空气栓塞,降低术后并发症和手术病死率。用辛氏钳阻断肝静脉较结扎法和止血带阻断法更安全和简便。     

���г����е�һ������Ϻ�ѡ���Ը�Ѫ�������ЧMeta����

目的对第一肝门阻断和选择性肝血流阻断(SHVE)在肝切除术的疗效进行综合比较及Meta分析。方法对1996年5月至2011年7月通过Medline、Elsevier、中国期刊全文数据库、万方数据检索、Pubmed发表的有关肝切除术中采用第一肝门阻断和SHVE进行肝血流阻断的相关随机对照研究(RCT)文献,采用Cochrance协作网提供的ReMan5.1软件用固定效应模型进行Meta分析。结果按照入选标准,有9项临床试验纳入。Meta结果显示:SHVE组术中出血量较第一肝门阻断组少131.29mL(P<0.001);手术时间SHVE组较第一肝门阻断组延长12.66min;住院时间SHVE组较第一肝门阻断组少2.68d(P<0.001);SHVE组术后肝功能衰竭发生率以及其他并发症(包括大量腹水、胸腔积液、肺部感染等)发生率较第一肝门阻断组明显降低(P<0.05);胆漏发生率两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论肝脏手术中采用选择性肝血流阻断安全可靠,相比传统第一肝门阻断减少了术中出血、缩短术后住院时间,降低了肝功能衰竭等并发症发生率。     

肝下下腔静脉阻断在肝切除术中控制出血的临床应用

如何有效地控制肝切除术中出血一直是肝胆外科领域研究的热点。肝脏有流人道和流出道两套血管系统,对肝脏的血流控制包括对流人道和流出道血流的控制。控制流人道出血有许多简单而有效的方法,而如何有效地控制流出道出血一直是个难题。学者们创立了许多方法,包括全肝血流阻断、选择性全肝血流阻断等,但是这些方法都存在一定的弊端,只在特定的患者中被采用。有学者发现通过降低中心静脉压可减少肝切除术中肝静脉系统的出血,但是对其有效性仍存在争议。近年来,有文献报道在第一肝门阻断的同时,阻断肝下下腔静脉即可有效减少肝切除时来自肝静脉系统的出血。此方法相对于其他控制肝脏流出道出血的方法都简单易行,在肝切除术中有很高的应用价值。本文对肝下下腔静脉阻断在肝切除术中应用的现状进行讨论,对其减少肝切除术中出血的有效性及安全性进行总结和评价。     

Ischemic Preconditioning Confers Antiapoptotic Protection During Major Hepatectomies Performed Under Combined Inflow and Outflow Exclusion of the Liver. A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background  Extensive experimental studies and a few clinical series have shown that ischemic preconditioning (IPC) attenuates oxidative ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injuries in liver resections performed under inflow vascular control. Selective hepatic vascular exclusion (SHVE) employed during hepatectomies completely deprives the liver of blood flow, as it entails simultaneous clamping of the portal triad and the main hepatic veins. The aim of the present study was to identify whether IPC can also protect hepatocytes during liver resections performed under SHVE. Methods  Patients undergoing major liver resection were randomly assigned to have either only SHVE (control group, n = 43) or SHVE combined with IPC—10 min of ischemia followed by 15 min of reperfusion before SHVE was applied (IPC group, n = 41). Results  The two groups were comparable with regard to age, liver resection volume, blood loss and transfusions, warm ischemic time, and total operative time. In liver remnant biopsies obtained 60 min post-reperfusion, IPC patients had significantly fewer cells stained positive by TUNEL compared to controls (19% ± 8% versus 45% ± 12%; p < 0.05). Also IPC patients had attenuated hepatocyte necrosis, systemic inflammatory response, and oxidative stress as manifested by lower postoperative peak values of aspartate transaminase, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, and malondialdehyde compared to controls. Morbidity was similar for the two groups, as were duration of intensive care unit stay and extent of total hospital stay. Conclusions  In major hepatectomies performed under SHVE, ischemic preconditioning appears to attenuate apoptotic response of the liver remnant, possibly through alteration of inflammatory and oxidative pathways. A preliminary report of this study was awarded the ISS/SIC (International Society of Surgery/Société Internationale de Chirugie) Lloyd Nyhus Prize for the best free paper in gastrointestinal surgery during the International Surgical Week and the 41st World Congress of Surgery of ISS/SIC in Durban, South Africa, August 2005.     

Vascular occlusion techniques during liver resection

Control of bleeding from the transected liver basically consists of vascular inflow occlusion and control of hepatic venous backflow from the caval vein. Central venous pressure determines the pressure in the hepatic veins and is an extremely important factor in controlling blood loss through venous backflow. Vascular inflow occlusion (Pringle maneuver) involves clamping of the portal vein and the hepatic artery in the hepatic pedicle and gives rise to postischemic, reperfusion injury. Several strategies have been devised to reduce reperfusion injury (pharmacological interventions) or to increase ischemic tolerance of the liver (ischemic preconditioning). Intermittent clamping is recommended in complex liver resections or in patients with diseased livers. The combination of occlusion of vascular inflow and outflow of the liver results in total hepatic vascular exclusion (THVE) and is mainly used in tumors invading the caval vein. During THVE the liver can be cooled by hypothermic perfusion allowing for extended ischemia times. Selective THVE entails clamping of the main hepatic veins in their extrahepatic course, thus preserving caval flow. Safe liver surgery requires knowledge of the regular techniques of vascular occlusion for 'on demand' use when necessitated to reduce blood loss.     

Hepatic Vascular Exclusion With Preservation of the Caval Flow for Liver Resections

OBJECTIVE: To report the technique and results of an alternative method of vascular clamping during liver resections. BACKGROUND: Most liver resections require vascular clamping to avoid excessive blood loss. Portal triad clamping is often sufficient, but it does not suppress backflow bleeding, which can be prevented only by hepatic vascular exclusion. The latter method adds clamping of the inferior vena cava, which results in hypotension, requiring invasive anesthetic management. There is growing evidence that intermittent clamping is better tolerated than continuous clamping, especially in the presence of underlying liver disease. METHODS: Hepatic vascular exclusion with preservation of the caval flow (HVEPC) involved conventional inflow clamping associated with outflow control by clamping the major hepatic veins, thus avoiding caval occlusion. HVEPC was used in 40 patients undergoing major or complex liver resection, including 16 with underlying liver disease. HVEPC was total (clamping of the porta hepatis and all major hepatic veins) in 20 cases and partial (clamping of the porta hepatis and the hepatic veins of the resected territory) in 20. Clamping was continuous in 22 cases and intermittent in 18. Resections included 12 hemihepatectomies, 12 extended hepatectomies, 3 central hepatectomies, and 13 uni- or bisegmentectomies. RESULTS: Hemodynamic tolerance of clamping was excellent in all cases, without the need for therapeutic adjustment. Median red cell transfusion requirements were 0 units, and 28 patients (70%) did not receive any transfusions during the hospital stay. There were no deaths, and the morbidity rate was 17.5%. Median hospital stay was 10 days. CONCLUSION: HVEPC is a safe and effective procedure applicable to liver tumors without invasion to the inferior vena cava. It offers the advantages of conventional hepatic vascular exclusion without its hemodynamic drawbacks, and it can be applied intermittently or partially.     

Total vascular exclusion for hepatic resection in cirrhotic patients. Application of venovenous bypass.

Hepatic vascular exclusion with double venovenous bypass using a centrifugal force pump was used in major hepatic resections in eight patients with hepatocellular carcinoma combined with cirrhosis, and results were compared with those in four patients with hepatocellular carcinoma without cirrhosis and eight with metastatic tumors without cirrhosis among 521 patients undergoing liver resection. Concomitant resection of the retrohepatic inferior vena cava was performed in three of eight patients with cirrhosis and five of 12 patients without cirrhosis. All patients, except one with cirrhosis, tolerated major resection without any hemodynamic impairment, which is often observed in hepatic vascular exclusion without venovenous bypass. One patient, whose complete inflow occlusion period was 70 minutes, died of liver failure. In this patient, the recovery of the arterial ketone body ratio above 1.0 was delayed until 3 days after recirculation, whereas the ratio in the others recovered promptly. Postoperative complications such as increased bilirubin level, pleural effusion, and gastrointestinal tract bleeding were observed in seven of eight patients with cirrhosis compared with six of 12 without cirrhosis. Hepatic vascular exclusion is feasible even in cirrhotics as long as it is applied with venovenous bypass and is kept within the time limit of 60 minutes.     

合理阻断肝脏血流切除累及肝门区肿瘤

目的探讨肝脏血流阻断技术在累及肝门区肿瘤切除中的合理应用。方法对采用第一肝门阻断法（Pringle法）和常温下全肝血流阻断法（THVE）相结合切除14例累及肝门区肿瘤的临床资料进行回顾性分析,统计肿瘤和肝门区血管的毗邻关系、阻断次数、阻断时间、术中出血量、输血量、术后并发症等指标。结果本组Pringle法平均阻断（4.2±2.0）次,第一肝门平均阻断时间（49.6±30.8）min;THVE平均阻断（1.8±0.4）次,平均阻断时间（18.8±7.4）min;术中出血量平均（1100±360）ml,输血量平均（800±220）ml;术中修补下腔静脉4次,主肝静脉2次,门静脉主干2次;术后检测ALT、胆红素有不同程度升高,经治疗2～3周后恢复正常,未发生肝功能衰竭、肝肾综合征等严重并发症。结论Pringle法与THVE法分步结合使用可增加肝门区肿瘤切除的安全性。     

Comparison of Two Methods of Selective Hepatic Vascular Exclusion for Liver Resection Involving the Roots of the Hepatic Veins

Background  Selective hepatic vascular exclusion (SHVE) is an effective hepatic vascular exclusion in controlling both inflow and outflow without interruption of caval flow, as it combines Pringle maneuver with extrahepatic selective occlusion of hepatic veins. But SHVE has not been widely used due to difficulty in extrahepatic dissection of hepatic veins. When the tumor is very close to the roots of the hepatic veins, dissecting the posterior wall of the hepatic vein may lead to rupture and massive bleeding of the hepatic vein. With our experience, clamping hepatic veins with Satinsky clamps is a safer and easier occlusion method by which the posterior wall of the hepatic veins does not need to be separated and encircled. In this report, we compared the results of selective hepatic vascular occlusion with tourniquet and Satinsky clamp for major liver resection involving the roots of the hepatic veins. Methods  Between January 2003 to June 2006, 180 patients who underwent major liver resection with SHVE were divided into two groups according to different methods of hepatic vascular occlusion: occlusion with tourniquet (tourniquet group, n = 95) and occlusion with Satinsky clamp (Satinsky clamp group, n = 85). In the tourniquet group, the hepatic veins were encircled and occluded with tourniquet. In the Satinsky clamp group, the hepatic veins were not encircled and clamped directly by Satinsky clamp. Results  Intraoperative and postoperative consequences of the patients were analyzed. The dissecting time for each hepatic vein was significantly shorter in the Satinsky group (6.2 ± 2.4 min vs 18.3 ± 6.2 min) than in the tourniquet group. In the tourniquet group, five hepatic veins (one right hepatic vein and four common trunk of left-middle hepatic veins) could not be dissected and encircled because the tumors involved the cava hepatic junction, and another common trunk of the left-middle hepatic vein had a small rupture during the dissection. These six patients then received successful occlusion with Satinsky clamp. There was no difference between the two groups regarding the operation duration, ischemia time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complication rate. Conclusion  Both methods of the hepatic vein occlusion have the same effect on controlling hepatic vein bleeding, but occlusion with Satinsky clamp is safer, easier, and consumes less time in dissecting. Li Ai-Jun And Pan Ze-Ya contributed equally to this work.     

The role of central venous pressure and type of vascular control in blood loss during major liver resections

BACKGROUND: Blood loss during liver resection constitutes the primary determinant of the postoperative outcome. Various techniques of vascular control and maintenance of a low central vein pressure (CVP) have been used in order to prevent intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications. Our study aims at assessing the effects of different levels of CVP in relation to type of vascular control on perioperative blood loss and patient outcome. METHODS: The records of 102 consecutive patients who underwent a major hepatectomy were retrospectively analyzed. Forty-two patients were operated on with a CVP of 6 mm Hg or more and 60 patients had a CVP of 5 mm Hg or less. The Pringle maneuver was used in 45 patients and selective hepatic vascular exclusion (SHVE) in 57 patients. Blood loss, complications, and mortality were analyzed comparing the two CVP groups in relation to type of vascular control. RESULTS: The Pringle maneuver is associated with more blood loss when CVP is 6 mm Hg or more compared with CVP 5 mm Hg or less (1,250 mL [250 to 2,850] versus 780 mL [150 to 3,100]; P <0.05). Conversely, blood loss during SHVE is independent of the CVP levels. A significant difference in blood loss between the Pringle maneuver and SHVE was observed, only when CVP was 6 mm Hg or more (1,250 mL [250 to 2,850] versus 680 mL [150 to 1,260]; P <0.05). Hospital stay was also significantly longer in patients operated on with CVP 6 mm Hg or more (15 days [4 to 38] than in patients with CVP 5 mm Hg or less (10 days [4 to 32]; P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Elevated CVP during major liver resections results in greater blood loss and a longer hospital stay. The Pringle maneuver with CVP 5 mm Hg or less is associated with blood loss not significantly different from that with SHVE. The latter, though, has been shown not to be affected by CVP levels and should be used whenever CVP remains high despite adequate anesthetic management.     

Vascular exclusion technique in liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

An overview of the vascular exclusion technique in liver resection is presented. The technical aspects of hepatic vascular exclusion (HVE) are described along with the hemodynamic monitoring requirements. The hepatic tolerance to normothermic liver ischemia of 60-min duration is quite good in the absence of underlying chronic liver disease such as cirrhosis or steatosis. However, our recent experience with cirrhotic patients has demonstrated that vascular clamping may be well tolerated even after major liver resection if normothermic liver ischemia is limited (33 min for HVE, 55 min for Pringle maneuver). The main advantages of HVE are: reduction of operative blood loss, increased resectability rate of HCC when the tumor is close or invades the hepatic veins and/or the vena cava, and better safety during the performance of the most hazardous liver resections.     

腹腔镜肝切除术中两种选择性入肝血流阻断方法的比较

目的:比较腹腔镜肝切除术(LH)中两种选择性入肝血流阻断方法的临床效果。方法:回顾性分析2005年5月—2011年6月28例行LH患者的临床资料。根据不同的选择性入肝血流阻断方式将患者分为A组(14例,经Glisson鞘阻断)和B组(14例,打开Glisson鞘分离血管并阻断)。比较两组手术时间、术中出血及输血量,术后肝功能及血常规,术后住院天数、并发症及肝癌复发率、生存率。结果:手术时间、术中出血及输血量两组间无统计学差异(均P>0.05);术后各时间点的肝功能及血常规以及术后住院天数、并发症等两组间均无统计学差异(均P>0.05)。肝癌术后随访结果 1,2年复发率及2,3年生存率两组间亦无统计学差异(均P>0.05)。结论:经Glisson鞘阻断和打开Glisson鞘分离血管并阻断的两种方法在阻断入肝血流及保护剩余肝脏功能上无明显差异,方法的选择可由手术者习惯及手术方式决定。     

入肝血流阻断和全肝血流阻断对肝组织氧压影响

目的 研究兔常温下入肝血流阻断（portal triad clamp,PTC)及全肝血流阻断（total hepatic vascular exclusion,THVE)对肝组织氧压（tissue oxygen pressure,Ptio2)的影响。方法 24只兔均分二组即PTC和THVE组。分别测定二组缺血前、缺血30min及再灌注30min后肝Ptio2值及血清丙氨酸氨基转氨酶（ALT）值变化。结果 PTC和THVE组均表现为肝Ptio2下降，但THVE较PTC组肝Ptio2值下降更显著（P＜0．01）、血清ALT值也明显升高（P＜0．05）。结论 PTC组较THVE组对肝缺血的耐受性增加。     

经腹经心包全肝血流阻断肝切除术

目的 探讨经腹经心包全肝血流阻断方法在肝切除术中的地位。方法 2003年1月至2007年12月,安徽医科大学第一附属医院肝胆外科将38例肝切除术按血流阻断方法分为两组,传统全肝血流阻断组（THVE组)22例,经腹经心包全肝血流阻断组（经心包组）16例,分析应用不同血流阻断方法对术后肝功能及并发症发生的影响。结果 两组病人均成功切除肿瘤,两组手术时间、阻断时间及术后并发症发生率差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。两组术后第3天和第7天血清丙氨酸转氨酶(ALT)之间差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,术后第7天血清天冬氨酸转氨酶(AST)之间差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,经心包组术后近期肝功能恢复快。结论 经腹经心包全肝血流阻断肝切除术可提高肿瘤切除率,改善病人预后。     

Vascular occlusions for liver resections. Operative management and tolerance to hepatic ischemia: 142 cases.

The intra- and early postoperative courses of 142 consecutive patients who underwent liver resections using vascular occlusions to reduce bleeding were reviewed. In 127 patients, the remnant liver parenchyma was normal, and 15 patients had liver cirrhosis. Eighty-five patients underwent major liver resections: right, extended right, or left lobectomies. Portal triad clamping (PTC) was used alone in 107 cases. Complete hepatic vascular exclusion (HVE) combining PTC and occlusion of the inferior vena cava below and above the liver was used for 35 major liver resections. These 35 patients had large or posterior liver tumors, and HVE was used to reduce the risks of massive bleeding or air embolism caused by an accidental tear of the vena cava or a hepatic vein. Duration of normothermic liver ischemia was 32.3 +/- 1.2 minutes (mean +/- SEM) and ranged from 8 to 90 minutes. Amount of blood transfusion was 5.5 +/- 0.5 (mean +/- SEM) units of packed red blood cells. There were eight operative deaths (5.6%). Overall, postoperative complications occurred in 46 patients (32%). The patients who experienced complications after surgery had received more blood transfusion than those with an uneventful postoperative course (p less than 0.001). The length of postoperative hospital stay was also correlated with the amount of blood transfused during surgery (p less than 0.001). On the other hand, there was no correlation between the durations of liver ischemia of up to 90 minutes and the lengths of postoperative hospital stay. The longest periods of ischemia were not associated with increased rates of postoperative complications, liver failures, or deaths. There was no difference in mortality or morbidity after major liver resections performed with the use of HVE as compared with major liver resections carried out with PTC alone, although the lesions were larger in the former group. It is concluded that the main priority during liver resections is to reduce operative bleeding. Vascular occlusions aim at achieving this goal and can be extended safely for up to 60 minutes.