脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术治疗肝硬化门脉高压症患者预防门静脉血栓形成研究

目的 探讨脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术治疗肝硬化门脉高压症患者门静脉血栓(PVT)的预测措施。方法 2017年1月～2019年3月我院肝胆外科诊治的肝硬化并发门脉高压症患者60例,均接受脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术。术后将患者分成A组和B组。在B组,当出现抗凝指针时给予低分子肝素短期抗凝治疗。使用彩超检查门脉指标和诊断PVT形成。结果 术后,在B组30例患者中有20例(66.7%)接受了短期抗凝治疗;在术后3 w末,超声检查发现PVT患者15例(25.0%),其中A组11例(36.7%),显著高于B组的4例【(13.3%),P<0.05】;血栓形成组门静脉直径为(1.5±0.3)cm,与无血栓形成组比,无显著性差异【(1.4±0.2)cm,P>0.05】,门静脉血流流速为(12.3±1.4)cm/s,显著低于无血栓形成组【(14.5±1.7)cm/s,P＜0.05】;血栓形成组血清D-二聚体水平显著高于无血栓形成组(P＜0.05);血栓形成组外周血血小板计数为(142.6±58.9)×10⁹/L,显著高于无血栓形成组【(91.4±52.4)×10⁹/L,P＜0.05】。结论 在采取脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术治疗肝硬化并发门脉高压症患者时,需警惕术后PVT的形成。对术后血小板计数急剧升高、血清D-二聚体显著升高和门脉血流减慢的患者应该及时给予抗凝治疗。     

肝硬化脾切除术后门静脉系统血栓形成的危险因素分析*

目的 分析影响肝硬化患者脾切除术后门静脉系统血栓形成（PVT）的危险因素。方法 2015年1月~2018年6月我院收治的肝硬化患者94例,接受脾切除联合食管下段周围曲张血管离断术,使用彩色多普勒超声检查门静脉系统。采用多因素Logistic回归分析影响术后PVT形成的危险因素。结果 术后1个月随访,经彩色多普勒超声检查,发现PVT形成30例,未发生PVT患者64例;PVT组有腹水者为56.7%,显著高于无PVT组的32.8%（P<0.05）,脾脏厚度为（75.8±9.4） mm,显著大于无PVT组【（69.1±8.8） mm,P<0.05】,脾脏体积为（141.7±18.1） mm2,显著大于无PVT组【（126.8±17.2） mm2,P<0.05】,门静脉内径为（16.2±2.1） mm,显著大于无PVT组【（14.1±1.9） mm,P<0.05】,门静脉血流流速为（12.2±1.5） cm/s,显著慢于无PVT组【（14.6±1.6） cm/s,P<0.05】;应用低分子右旋糖苷或低分子肝素抗凝干预患者所占比例显著低于无PVT组（P<0.05）;Logistic回归分析显示,未应用抗凝治疗（OR=0.503,P=0.023）、门静脉流速减慢（OR=0.491,P=0.014）、脾脏体积增加（OR=1.872,P=0.044）和门静脉内径增宽（OR=1.982,P=0.021）是肝硬化脾切除术患者术后PVT形成的独立危险因素。结论 肝硬化脾切除术患者术后可能存在PVT形成,了解一些危险因素并给予积极的干预可能减少PVT形成的发生,使患者获益。     

脾切除术联合门奇静脉断流术治疗肝硬化门脉高压症患者疗效研究*

目的 研究腹腔镜门奇静脉断流术联合脾切除术治疗肝硬化门脉高压症合并巨脾患者的效果。方法 2016年12月～2018年12月我院收治的86例肝硬化并发门脉高压症合并巨脾患者被分为两组,每组43例,其中对照组行开腹,而观察组实施腹腔镜下门奇静脉断流术联合脾切除术。结果 观察组术中出血量为(180.8±23.1)ml,显著少于对照组的【(286.4±35.7)ml,P<0.05】,术后住院日为(6.0±1.3)d,显著短于对照组的【(8.6±1.5)d,P<0.05】;观察组术后7 d外周血WBC为(8.9±1.4)×10⁹/L,PLC为(132.0±28.9)×10⁹/L,对照组分别为(7.2±1.8)×10⁹/L,PLC为(125.6±30.3)×10⁹/L,均较术前显著升高(P<0.05);观察组术后门静脉直径为(1.2±0.1)cm,血流量为(911.7±261.7)ml/min,对照组分别为(1.2±0.2)cm,血流量为(888.5±191.5)ml/min,均较术前显著缩小或下降(P<0.05);观察组术后并发症发生率为9.3%,显著低于对照组的37.2%(P＜0.05)。结论 腹腔镜下门奇静脉断流术联合脾切除术治疗肝硬化门脉高压症合并巨脾患者临床疗效确切,创伤小,术后并发症发生率低,恢复快。     

脾切除联合食管胃底曲张静脉断流术后应用华法林对门静脉血栓的防治作用

目的 探讨脾切除联合食管胃底曲张静脉断流术后应用华法林对门静脉血栓的防治效果。方法 2010年4月~2015年9月收治的48例门静脉血栓（PVT）患者,在行脾切除联合食管胃底曲张静脉断流术后,对25例患者短期应用华法林治疗1个月,23例患者应用华法林6个月,常规行彩色多普勒超声检查判断门静脉血栓变化。随访比较两组门静脉血栓变化和预后情况。结果 随访2年,48例术前存在PVT患者在脾切除联合断流术后,PVT进展20例（41.7%）,其中长期应用华法林组6例（26.1%）,显著低于短期应用华法林组的14例（56.0%,P<0.05）;PVT显著进展11例（22.9%）,其中长期应用华法林组2例（8.7%）,也显著低于短期应用华法林组的9例（36.0%,P<0.05）;短期应用华法林组PVT再通、再出血、肝癌和死亡发生率分别为0.0%、4.0%、8.0%和4.0%,与长期应用华法林组（分别为4.3%、4.3%、4.3%和0.0%）比,无显著性差异（P>0.05）。结论 在脾切除联合食管胃底曲张静脉断流术后应用华法林防治门静脉系统血栓安全、有效,可使患者获益。     

Preoperative predictors of portal vein thrombosis after splenectomy with periesophagogastric devascularization

AIM: To evaluate the predictive value of preoperative predictors for portal vein thrombosis (PVT) after splenectomy with periesophagogastric devascularization.METHODS: In this prospective study, 69 continuous patients with portal hypertension caused by hepatitis B cirrhosis underwent splenectomy with periesophagogastric devascularization in West China Hospital of Sichuan University from January 2007 to August 2010. The portal vein flow velocity and the diameter of portal vein were measured by Doppler sonography. The hepatic congestion index and the ratio of velocity and diameter were calculated before operation. The prothrombin time (PT) and platelet (PLT) levels were measured before and after operation. The patients’ spleens were weighed postoperatively.RESULTS: The diameter of portal vein was negatively correlated with the portal vein flow velocity (P < 0.05). Thirty-three cases (47.83%) suffered from postoperative PVT. There was no statistically significant difference in the Child-Pugh score, the spleen weights, the PT, or PLT levels between patients with PVT and without PVT. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed four variables (portal vein flow velocity, the ratio of velocity and diameter, hepatic congestion index and diameter of portal vein) could be used as preoperative predictors of postoperative portal vein thrombosis. The respective values of the area under the curve were 0.865, 0.893, 0.884 and 0.742, and the respective cut-off values (24.45 cm/s, 19.4333/s, 0.1138 cm/s^-1 and 13.5 mm) were of diagnostically efficient, generating sensitivity values of 87.9%, 93.9%, 87.9% and 81.8%, respectively, specificities of 75%, 77.8%, 86.1% and 63.9%, respectively.CONCLUSION: The ratio of velocity and diameter was the most accurate preoperative predictor of portal vein thrombosis after splenectomy with periesophagogastric devascularization in hepatitis B cirrhosis-related portal hypertension.     

Portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis(PVT) is considered to be a frequent complication of liver cirrhosis. However, unlike PVT in patients without cirrhosis, very few data are available on the natural history and management of PVT in cirrhosis, despite its association with potentially life-threatening conditions, such as gastroesophageal bleeding and acute intestinal ischemia. Moreover, no consensus regarding PVT in cirrhosis exists. Suggested causes of PVT in cirrhosis include reduced portal blood flow velocity, multiple congenital or acquired thrombophilic factors, inherited or acquired conditions, and derangement of liver architecture. However, the understanding of PVT in cirrhosis is incomplete. In addition, information on the management of PVT in cirrhosis is inadequate. The aims of this review are to:(1) assemble data on the physiopathological mechanism, clinical findings, diagnosis and management of PVT in cirrhosis;(2) describe the principal factors most frequently involved in PVT development; and(3) summarize the recent knowledge concerning diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.     

Portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis简

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is considered to be a frequent complication of liver cirrhosis. However, unlike PVT in patients without cirrhosis, very few data are available on the natural history and management of PVT in cirrhosis, despite its association with potentially life-threatening conditions, such as gastroesophageal bleeding and acute intestinal ischemia. Moreover, no consensus regarding PVT in cirrhosis exists. Suggested causes of PVT in cirrhosis include reduced portal blood flow velocity, multiple congenital or acquired thrombophilic factors, inherited or acquired conditions, and derangement of liver architecture. However, the understanding of PVT in cirrhosis is incomplete. In addition, information on the management of PVT in cirrhosis is inadequate. The aims of this review are to: (1) assemble data on the physiopathological mechanism, clinical findings, diagnosis and management of PVT in cirrhosis; (2) describe the principal factors most frequently involved in PVT development; and (3) summarize the recent knowledge concerning diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.     

Machine learning predicts portal vein thrombosis after splenectomy in patients with portal hypertension: Comparative analysis of three practical models

BACKGROUNDFor patients with portal hypertension (PH), portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a fatal complication after splenectomy. Postoperative platelet elevation is considered the foremost reason for PVT. However, the value of postoperative platelet elevation rate (PPER) in predicting PVT has never been studied.AIMTo investigate the predictive value of PPER for PVT and establish PPER-based prediction models to early identify individuals at high risk of PVT after splenectomy.METHODSWe retrospectively reviewed 483 patients with PH related to hepatitis B virus who underwent splenectomy between July 2011 and September 2018, and they were randomized into either a training (n = 338) or a validation (n = 145) cohort. The generalized linear (GL) method, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), and random forest (RF) were used to construct models. The receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC), calibration curve, decision curve analysis (DCA), and clinical impact curve (CIC) were used to evaluate the robustness and clinical practicability of the GL model (GLM), LASSO model (LSM), and RF model (RFM).RESULTSMultivariate analysis exhibited that the first and third days for PPER (PPER1, PPER3) were strongly associated with PVT [odds ratio (OR): 1.78, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.24-2.62, P = 0.002; OR: 1.43, 95%CI: 1.16-1.77, P < 0.001, respectively]. The areas under the ROC curves of the GLM, LSM, and RFM in the training cohort were 0.83 (95%CI: 0.79-0.88), 0.84 (95%CI: 0.79-0.88), and 0.84 (95%CI: 0.79-0.88), respectively; and were 0.77 (95%CI: 0.69-0.85), 0.83 (95%CI: 0.76-0.90), and 0.78 (95%CI: 0.70-0.85) in the validation cohort, respectively. The calibration curves showed satisfactory agreement between prediction by models and actual observation. DCA and CIC indicated that all models conferred high clinical net benefits.CONCLUSIONPPER1 and PPER3 are effective indicators for postoperative prediction of PVT. We have successfully developed PPER-based practical models to accurately predict PVT, which would conveniently help clinicians rapidly differentiate individuals at high risk of PVT, and thus guide the adoption of timely interventions.     

早期应用低分子肝素预防腹腔镜脾切除食管胃底静脉断流术后门静脉血栓形成临床研究*

目的 研究早期使用低分子肝素预防腹腔镜脾切除食管胃底静脉断流术（LSED）治疗患者术后门静脉血栓（PVST）发生的作用。方法 我院2014年3月至2015年6月期间收治的112例肝硬化门静脉高压症（PHT）患者,所有患者均行LSED治疗,按患者入院顺序分为两组,每组56例,对照组56例患者采用常规抗凝治疗,另56例患者在上述基础上采用低分子肝素治疗（观察组）。随访两组患者两周,观察两组患者肝功能、门静脉血流状况、凝血功能、PVST以及并发症发生情况。结果 两组患者治疗前后血清TBIL、ALB、INR水平均无显著性差异（P＞0.05）;治疗前两组患者门静脉最大血流速度、平均血流速度和门静脉直径无明显差异（P＞0.05）;治疗后观察组患者门静脉最大血流速度、平均血流速度和门静脉直径分别为（20.83±1.15）cm/s、（15.12±1.19cm/s）和（15.86±3.12）mm,均大于对照组的上述指标【分别为（14.36±0.74）cm/s、（10.28±0.71）cm/s和（14.27±2.96）mm,P＜0.05】;治疗前两组患者凝血功能指标比较无显著差异（P＞0.05）;治疗后,观察组患者血APTT、PT、FIB和TT分别为（25.72±3.64） s、（14.96±2.26）s、（3.51±0.86）g/L和（20.11±3.65）s,均长于对照组的上述指标【分别为（23.37±3.52）s、（13.87±2.14）s、（2.62±0.73）g/L和（18.14±3.23）s,均P＜0.05】;术后观察组和对照组PVST发生率分别为7.14%和42.86%,观察组明显较低（P＜0.05）,观察组和对照组其他并发症发生率无显著相差（P>0.05）。结论 早期应用低分子肝素对预防LSED术后门静脉血栓具有良好的作用,能有效改善凝血功能,同时降低各种并发症,安全性高。     

Predictive value of D-dimer for portal vein thrombosis after portal hypertension surgery in hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis

AIM: To evaluate the predictive value of D-dimer as a predictive indicator of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) after portal hypertension surgery in hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis. METHODS: A prospective study was carried out in 52 patients who had undergone surgery for portal hypertension in hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis. Changes in perioperative dynamic D-dimer were observed. The sensitivity, specifi city, positive predictive values and negative predictive values of D-dimer were calculated, and ROC curves were analyzed. RESULTS: The D-dimer levels in the group developing postoperative PVT was signifi cantly higher than those in the group not developing PVT (P = 0.001), and the ROC semi-quantitative and qualitative analysis of D-dimer showed a moderate predictive value in PVT (semi- quantitative value Az = 0.794, P = 0.000; qualitative analysis: Az = 0.739, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Dynamic monitoring of D-dimer levels in patients with portal hypertension after surgery can help early diagnosis of PVT, as in cases where the D-dimer levels steadily increase and exceed 16 μg/mL, the possibility of PVT is very high.     

肝硬化脾切除术后门静脉系统血栓形成的研究进展

门静脉血栓(portal vein thrombosis,PVT)是指发生于门静脉系统的任何一段,包括门静脉主干、肠系膜上静脉、肠系膜下静脉或脾静脉的血栓。目前,PVT是肝硬化患者脾切除联合断流术后最常见、最严重的并发症,可导致入肝血流异常、门静脉高压症加重,进一步诱发肝功能衰竭,甚至死亡。可见,全面认识PVT有利于早期术前评估风险和监测PVT的发生。该文将对肝硬化脾切除术后PVT形成的研究进展作一综述。     

门静脉高压脾切除门奇静脉离断术后再出血的食管胃静脉曲张分类研究

目的：探讨门静脉（门脉）高压患者脾切除门奇静脉离断术（脾切断流术）后再发上消化道出血的平均时间、内镜下食管和胃静脉曲张的分类特点及门脉高压性胃病的发病率。方法：190例肝硬化门脉高压出血患者分为脾切断流术后再出血组（40例）和未行手术组（150例）,统计手术患者术后至首次出血的平均时间间隔,每组患者分别行内镜检查,观察并对比其曲张静脉的分型特点及门脉高压性胃病发生率。结果：脾切断流术后再发出血时间平均为24个月,再出血患者内镜皆提示存有食管和（或）胃静脉曲张,2组患者内镜下的曲张静脉分型构成比有明显差异,脾切断流术者以单纯食管静脉曲张及食管胃静脉曲张（GOV）1型为主,未发现孤立性胃静脉曲张（IGV）1型及IGV2型,60．0％患者存在门脉高压性胃病,其发病率及严重程度均高于未行手术组患者。结论：脾切断流术治疗门脉高压近期止血疗效确切,但术后曲张静脉并未有效消退,须强调手术的规范性,并在再出血高发时段定期内镜随访．及时掌握食管胃曲张静脉及门脉高压性胃病的发展情况,早期干预治疗,从而改善患者预后。     

术前CT/MRI检查指标对肝硬化脾切除术后门静脉血栓形成的预测价值

目的 观察术前CT/MRI检查门静脉系统指标预测肝硬化脾切除术后门静脉血栓形成（PVT）的价值。方法 2016年7月~2018年7月我院收治的87例乙型肝炎肝硬化脾切除术后患者接受CT和MRI检查,随访3个月,观察PVT发生率,采用多因素Logistic回归分析肝硬化脾切除术后PVT形成的独立影响因素。结果 在随访3个月末,在87例肝硬化脾切除术后患者发现PVT者46例（52.9%）,均为PVT Ⅰ级,门静脉附壁血栓45例（51.7%）,其中伴肠系膜上静脉附壁血栓14例（16.1%）;46例PVT组门静脉直径为（16.7±2.2） mm,显著大于41例非PVT组【（14.8±1.5） mm,P<0.05】,门静脉流速差为（8.4±5.5） cm/s,显著高于非PVT组【（6.1±3.6） cm/s,P<0.05】,脾容积为（1370.8±370.1） cm³,显著大于非PVT组【（1205.2±357.3） cm³,P<0.05】;多因素Logistic回归分析显示,门静脉直径（OR=0.869,95%CI=0.608~1.246）、门静脉流速差（OR=1.185,95%CI=1.079~1.317）和脾容积（OR=3.427,95%CI=2.215~5.302）均是肝硬化脾切除术后PVT形成的独立影响因素（P<0.05）。结论 术前CT/MRI检查指标可以预测肝硬化脾切除术后PVT形成,及时处理和预防将改善患者预后。     

加速康复外科在脾切除贲门周围血管离断术治疗门脉高压症患者临床应用研究*

目的 探讨加速康复外科理念（ERAS）在门脉高压症患者围手术期的临床应用价值。方法 随机将80例门脉高压症患者分成两组,40例在围手术期采用ERAS理念管理,另40例在围手术期采用传统处理方案处理。结果 ERAS组患者术后24 h和48 h疼痛评分分别为（2.1±0.6）分和（2.2±0.6）分,显著低于对照组[（3.7±0.8）和（3.0±0.6）,P<0.01];ERAS组术后肛门排气时间、术后拔管时间和术后住院时间分别为（2.4±0.5） d、（5.2±0.8） d和（8.5±2.2） d,显著短于对照组[（3.5±0.7） d、（7.6±3.0） d和（11.6±5.3） d,P<0.01];术后第5 d,ERAS组血清谷丙转氨酶、总胆红素和白蛋白水平分别为（27.6±11.3） U/L、（18.3±6.2） μmol/L和（41.8±5.4） g/L,与对照组的[（48.6±44.3） U/L、（23.3±11.5） μmol/L和（37.1±5.1） g/L比,差异显著（P<0.01）;ERAS组术后19例（47.5%）出现并发症,显著低于对照组的29例（72.5%）（P<0.05）。结论 应用ERAS在门脉高压症患者围手术期管理中安全有效,可加快患者术后康复。     

完全腹腔镜与开腹行脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术治疗门脉高压症的临床效果比较

目的探讨完全腹腔镜与开腹行脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术治疗门脉高压症的安全性及临床疗效。方法回顾性分析该院72例门脉高压症患者完全腹腔镜与开腹行脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术的临床治疗效果。结果完全腹腔镜组术中平均出血量、术后并发症发生率、住院时间与病死率明显低于开腹组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论门脉高压症患者行完全腹腔镜脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术,安全可靠,创伤小,出血量少,并发症少,恢复快,值得临床推广。     

脾切除术与TIPS术治疗肝硬化患者门静脉血栓发生率比较*

目的 比较脾切除术与经颈静脉肝内门腔静脉内支架分流术(TIPS)治疗肝硬化患者门静脉血栓(PVT)发生率的差异。方法 2017年1月～2018年12月兰州大学第一医院诊治的肝硬化并发脾功能亢进症患者96例,其中接受脾切除者45例,接受TIPS术治疗者51例。术后随访12个月,使用腹部超声或CT或CTA检查诊断PVT。应用Kaplan-Meier法计算PVT累计发生率。结果 在术后1个月、3个月、6个月和12个月,脾切除术组PVT累计发生率分别为40.0%、46.7%、48.9%和48.9%,显著高于TIPS术组(分别为7.8%、9.8%、15.7%和21.6%,P<0.05);在接受脾切除术患者,基线指标比较发现PVT组门静脉主干直径显著大于非PVT组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);在TIPS术后1年,发生PVT患者11例(21.6%)。基线指标比较,未发现发生与未发生PVT组各指标具有统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论 在肝硬化并发脾功能亢进症患者,接受脾切除术后PVT累计发生率显著高于TIPS术。因此,术前应认真评估病情,严格掌握适应证,择优选择手术方法,并积极给予防治处理。     

门静脉血栓介入治疗研究进展

正门静脉血栓是指门静脉主干及其分支血栓形成,可导致门静脉部分或完全性梗阻,部分门静脉血栓可以延伸至脾静脉或肠系膜上静脉。门静脉血栓的形成原因有多种,主要包括肝硬化、肿瘤、免疫系统疾病、感染、凝血功能障碍和口服避孕药物等~([1])。在肝硬化进展期或合并肿瘤患者,门静脉血栓的发生率更高~([2,3])。据统计,肝硬化并发门静脉高压患者门静脉血栓发生率约为0.6%～15.8%~([4])。伴有门静脉血栓的肝硬化患者发生消化道出血的风险更高~([5])。门静脉血栓形成所导致的临床表现差异较大,轻症患者可无任何临床症状,常常在随访过程中被发现。     

脾切除联合门奇静脉断流术治疗乙型肝炎肝硬化门脉高压症患者疗效研究

目的 探讨采用脾切除(SPL)联合门奇静脉断流术(PAD)治疗乙型肝炎肝硬化门脉高压症患者的临床疗效.方法 2017年2月～2019年11月我院诊治的87例乙型肝炎肝硬化门脉高压症患者,其中45例接受SPL联合PAD治疗(观察组),另42例接受胃底曲张静脉栓塞术和部分脾栓塞术(对照组).测量上臂围和三头肌皮褶厚度,使用...     

肝硬化门静脉血栓形成的临床分析

目的　探讨肝硬化 (LC)门静脉血栓 (PVT)形成对LC病程发展的影响。方法　检索我院自 1 995至 2 0 0 2年肝硬化PVT形成患者 ,血栓诊断依据彩色多普勒和 (或 )CT。 4 8例肝硬化PVT形成患者入选血栓组 ;同阶段LC门脉高压症的非血栓病例中选择 5 2例作为对照组。对两组患者的肝功能Child Pugh分级、凝血功能、门静脉、脾静脉宽度及脾脏面积、厚度进行比较。行t检验 ,χ2 检验 ,Logistic回归分析。结果　肝硬化PVT形成除继发于脾切除等手术后 ,75 .0 %隐匿发病 ,85 .4 %的血栓发生于门静脉主干 ,脾脏增大与门静脉增宽是PVT形成的危险因素 (P =0 .0 0 3、0 .0 1 0 )。血栓组门静脉及脾静脉宽度分别为 (1 .4 8± 0 .2 6 )cm ,(1 .2 3± 0 .38)cm ,与对照组比较差异有显著性 [(1 .37± 0 .2 2 )cm ,(1 .0 5± 0 .30 )cm ,P =0 .0 37,0 .0 31 ]。血栓组脾面积平均值为 (96 .6 4± 33.4 )cm2 ,脾厚径为 (6 .0 7± 1 .2 0 )cm ,分别大于对照组的 (80 .81± 2 8.9)cm2 ,(5 .2 3± 1 .0 8)cm(P =0 .0 36 ,0 .0 0 1 )。血栓组食管胃底静脉曲张程度重于非血栓组 ,大出血、大量腹水比例高 (P <0 .0 5 )。血栓形成后 1年内死亡率为1 6 .6 % ,较非血栓组增高 (P =0 .0 2 3)。两组肝功能Child Pugh分级、凝血功能、血小板计     

腹腔镜食管胃底曲张静脉断流术联合脾切除或脾保留对肝硬化性门静脉高压症患者近远期预后的影响

目的 比较在行腹腔镜食管胃底曲张静脉断流术时联合脾切除或采取脾保留对肝硬化性门静脉高压症患者近远期预后的影响。方法 3 0例肝硬化性门静脉高压症患者接受腹腔镜下断流术联合脾切除术,另30例采取断流术和脾保留术。结果 术后2 w,脾切除组门静脉内径和血流量分别为（1.1±0.2） cm和（820.1±101.1） ml/min,明显低于脾保留组【分别为（1.3±0.2） cm和（941.0±188.1） ml/min,P<0.05】,平均血流速度为（19.2±3.1）cm/s,明显快于脾保留组的（16.2±2.5） cm/s（P<0.05）;术后3 m,脾切除组血清层粘连蛋白水平为（100.9±29.1） ng/L,显著低于脾保留组的（126.7±30.1） ng/L（P<0.05）;随访发现脾切除组门静脉血栓、消化道出血和腹水发生率分别为3.3%、0.0%和10.0%,显著低于脾保留组的16.7%、26.7%和33.3%（P<0.05）,脾保留组死亡2例（6.7%）。结论 对于肝硬化性门静脉高压症患者在行腹腔镜下曲张静脉断流术时要谨慎采取脾保留手术,可能带来不利的临床后果。