125I粒子条联合门静脉支架及化疗栓塞治疗原发性肝癌合并门静脉癌栓

目的 评估125I粒子条联合金属支架门静脉内植入+动脉化疗栓塞治疗原发性肝癌合并门静脉主干癌栓的疗效.方法 选取17例原发性肝癌伴门静脉主干癌栓患者,行125I粒子条联合门静脉内支架+TACE.粒子植入数量17～23粒(6711型,0.7 mCi/粒),第1个半衰期组织内平均吸收剂量为73.51～76.22 Gy.疗效和不良反应评价指标包括:术后并发症,肝肾功能及血常规改变等.采用Kaplan-Meier生存曲线分析患者的生存时间、支架通畅时间、累积生存率和累积支架通畅率.结果 所有患者门静脉支架和125I粒子条均成功植入,未发生手术相关严重并发症.术后随访2～13个月,12例存活,5例死亡(肝功能衰竭4例,多发转移1例).60、180和360 d的累积支架通畅率为94%、94%和94%;累积生存率为87%、65%和53%.结论 125I粒子条联合金属支架门静脉内植入+动脉化疗栓塞治疗原发性肝癌合并门静脉主干癌栓可以提高支架通畅率,延长生存时间.但远期效果尚需进一步观察.     

门静脉支架联合125I粒子条植入治疗门脉癌栓12例

目的 介绍用门静脉支架联合125I粒子条对合并门脉癌栓的肝癌患者的综合治疗方法.方法 汇集自2014年以来中国医科大学附属盛京医院放射科收治的肝癌合并门脉癌栓的患者12例,分析其临床、影像、实验室检查资料,完成经皮经肝门静脉穿刺及支架联合125I粒子条植入术,统计手术的可行性、安全性及并发症,讨论支架的通畅情况及患者的生存情况.结果 手术成功12例(100％),2例支架未开通,其中1例并发穿刺点出血,1例并发呕血.10例患者接受随访,平均随访时间8.0个月(2～15个月),平均生存时间8.0个月(2～15个月).术后3、6和9个月及1年生存率分别为7/9、7/9、5/8和3/6.门脉支架平均通畅时间7.5个月(0～15个月).术后3、6和9个月、1年门静脉通畅率分别为7/9、6/9、5/8和3/6.随访期内共8例患者行后续TACE治疗,共行TACE 18例次,术后肝功能稳定.结论 门静脉支架联合125I粒子条植入可以降低癌栓分级、维持支架通畅、保证门脉供血、扩大TACE适应证,对合并门脉癌栓的肝细胞癌患者具有较大的综合治疗价值.     

门静脉支架结合经动脉化疗栓塞在肝癌伴门静脉癌栓中的应用价值

目的：探讨门静脉支架结合经动脉化疗栓塞术（TACE）治疗肝癌伴门静脉癌栓的临床效果。方法．27例肝癌伴门静脉癌栓均采用经皮肝穿门静脉途径植入门静脉支架,1周后行TACE。记录手术成功、狭窄开通、并发症和手术死亡发生情况,随访支架通畅期和患者生存期。结果：门静脉通路穿刺成功率100％（27／27）;门静脉支架置入成功率96．3％（26／27）;发生肝性脑病3例及肝衰竭4例。支架中位通畅期6个月（1。18个月）,治疗后3个月、6个月、12个月以上患者生存率分别为51．85％（14／27）、29．63％（8／27）、18．52％（5／27）。结论：对肝癌伴门静脉癌栓,采用支架开通门静脉主干及分支为非肿瘤所在肝叶的门静脉,结合TACE治疗,可取得较好的疗效。     

125I粒子条植入治疗原发性肝癌伴门静脉主干癌栓的近期疗效

目的探讨¹²⁵I粒子条植入治疗原发性肝癌伴门静脉主干癌栓的安全性及近期疗效。 方法15例原发性肝癌伴门静脉主干癌栓患者行门静脉¹²⁵I粒子条植入术,手术操作在超声及DSA引导下进行。术后对肝功能、血常规及凝血功能的变化、癌栓的改变、不良反应进行评价。 结果所有患者均成功植入放射性¹²⁵I粒子条,门静脉主干癌栓的有效率为40.00%(6/15),疾病控制率为86.67%(13/15)。术后2个月复查所有患者的肝功能、血常规、凝血功能与术前比较差异无统计学意义。未出现与粒子条植入相关的严重并发症。 结论植入¹²⁵I粒子条治疗肝癌伴门静脉主干癌栓是安全、可行、有效的。     

125I放射性粒子支架植入联合TACE治疗肝门部胆管癌的临床疗效对比分析

目的 对比分析125I放射性粒子支架植入联合TACE与单纯125I放射性粒子支架植入治疗肝门部胆管癌的临床疗效.方法 回顾性分析21例肝门部胆管癌患者,125I放射性粒子支架植入联合TACE 11例为A组,单纯125I放射性粒子支架植入10例为B组.A组患者125I放射性粒子支架植入后2～3周行TACE,以后根据复查结果按需行TACE.B组患者125I放射性粒子支架植入后未行任何放、化疗.结果 A、B两组125I放射性粒子支架植入后10 d、1个月、3个月、6个月总胆红素与术前相比较均明显下降,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05);A、B两组比较术后1个月差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05),术后10 d、3个月、6个月差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05).A、B两组患者术后1、3和6个月靶病灶进展率(PD)分别为9.1％、18.1％、36.4％和10.0％、30.0％、70.0％,A、B两组术后1个月比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),术后3、6个月比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).A组与B组的胆道平均通畅时间分别为(8.68±1.06)个月和(6.15±1.12)个月,A、B两组比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).A组患者中位生存期为9个月,B组患者中位生存期为8个月,A、B两组比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 与B组相比,A组患者术后的靶病灶进展率降低,胆道通畅时间及患者的生存时间明显延长,整个治疗过程中未出现与125I放射性胆道粒子支架及TACE治疗相关的严重并发症,125I放射性粒子支架植入联合TACE对肝门部胆管癌的治疗值得进一步临床研究.     

血管内近程放疗与序贯三维适形放疗治疗门静脉主干癌栓的疗效对比

目的 比较血管内近程放疗(EVBT)与序贯三维适形放疗(3-DCRT)治疗门静脉主干癌栓(MPVTT)的安全性和疗效.方法 对2012年5月至2014年6月接受支架植入和TACE治疗的176例肝细胞肝癌合并MPVTT患者的病历资料进行回顾性分析,其中123例(A组)同期在门脉主干内植入125I粒子条,余53例行序贯3-DCRT(B组).比较两组患者的生存期、疾病无进展生存期、支架通畅期及治疗相关不良事件的发生率.结果无严重治疗相关不良事件发生.平均随访(11.7±8.3)个月,A组及B组的平均生存期分别为(11.7±1.2)和(9.5±1.8)个月(P=0.002),平均疾病无进展生存期分别为(5.3±0.7)和(4.4±0.4)个月(P=0.010),平均支架通畅期分别为(10.3±1.1)及(8.7±0.7)个月(P=0.003).结论 相对序贯3-DCRT,EVBT联合支架植入和TACE能显著延长HCC伴MPVTT患者的生存期.     

经导管动脉化疗栓塞术联合经皮 125I粒子植入序贯治疗肝癌伴门静脉主干癌栓

目的评价经导管动脉化疗栓塞术（TACE）联合经皮125I放射性粒子植入序贯治疗肝癌伴门脉主干瘤栓的临床疗效及安全性。 方法2010年1月至2012年3月48例确诊为肝癌合并门静脉主干癌栓患者,TACE术后1周进行经皮门脉瘤栓125I放射性粒子植入序贯治疗。随访时间12-24月,对比序贯治疗前后各项临床指标、影像学的变化,以评价其疗效及安全性。 结果48例患者共接受215次TACE治疗,平均每例患者4.5次,每例患者平均植入粒子数16枚,技术成功率100%,全组未出现治疗相关性死亡,肝内病灶客现缓解率为37.3%（18/48）。瘤栓3个月后影像复查平均回缩3.9mm,完全缓解（CR）15例,部分缓解(PR)25例,稳定（SD）6例,进展（PD）2例,总有效率（CR+PR）为83.3%。门脉主干内径恢复大于80%共41例（85.4%）。1年生存率和2年生存率分别为47.9%,33.33%,中位生存时间为15.8月。48例患者术后3个月患者的肝功能、血常规与术时比较,P=0.028,差异均无统计学意义。 结论TACE联合经皮125I放射性粒子植入序贯治疗原发性肝癌伴门静脉主干癌栓是一种有效安全的方法。     

复合125I粒子植入技术联合TACE治疗肝癌合并门静脉癌栓

【摘要】 目的 评估复合125I粒子植入技术（125I粒子螺旋系统序贯肿瘤同侧分支癌栓粒子植入术）联合TACE治疗肝细胞癌（HCC）合并程氏Ⅲ型门静脉癌栓（PVTT）的安全性及有效性。方法 对24例HCC合并Ⅲ型PVTT患者行门静脉主干内125I粒子螺旋系统植入术,随后同期行TACE治疗;7～10 d后继行肿瘤同侧分支癌栓内125I粒子植入术。每6～8周行CT增强随访,并按需行再次TACE治疗。统计分析患者并发症、治疗反应率及总生存期。 结果 所有患者均未发生3级以上严重并发症。门静脉主干癌栓（MPVTT）的客观反应率（ORR）与疾病控制率（DCR）分别为54.2%及87.5%;肝内病变的ORR及DCR分别为29.2%及37.5%。患者中位生存期为（9.5±1.4）（95%CI,6.7～12.3）个月。结论 复合125I粒子植入技术联合TACE治疗HCC合并Ⅲ型PVTT是安全可行的,该模式有望进一步改善此类患者预后。     

栓塞肝动脉-门静脉瘘在TACE联合门静脉支架治疗肝癌伴门静脉癌栓中的临床意义

目的评价肝动脉-门静脉瘘(APVS)栓塞对肝癌伴门静脉主干癌栓(MPVTT)患者采用肝动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)联合门静脉支架治疗中的临床意义。方法 26例肝癌伴MPVTT且有明显APVS行TACE联合门静脉支架治疗的患者,采用经皮穿肝门静脉支架植入,门静脉支架植入后使用合适栓塞剂对APVS所属的肝动脉分支进行栓塞。分别于门静脉支架植入前、植入后以及APVS栓塞后行门静脉造影并测量门静脉压力。结果所有患者门静脉支架植入和APVS栓塞均获得成功。支架植入前肝动脉和门静脉造影显示16例患者门静脉为双相血流,10例为离肝血流。16例门静脉双相血流患者14例门静脉支架植入后门静脉向肝血流明显恢复,2例门静脉双相血流和10例离肝血流患者APVS栓塞后门静脉主干向肝血流恢复。支架植入前、后以及APVS栓塞后门静脉压力分别为(50.1±6.3)cm H2O、(43.5±7.5)cm H2O和(36.9±8.2)cm H2O,门静脉支架植入后门静脉压力较支架植入前明显下降,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),APVS栓塞后门静脉压力较门静脉支架植入后进一步下降(P<0.05)。结论对肝癌伴MPVTT和明显APVS患者,植入门静脉支架能有效复通门静脉血流,降低门静脉压力;APVS栓塞则进一步降低门静脉压力,从血液动力上使门静脉双相或离肝血流恢复为向肝血流。     

CT导向下放射性125I粒子瘤内植入联合肝动脉化疗栓塞术治疗肝癌的疗效

目的 探讨CT导向下放射性125I粒子瘤内植入联合肝动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)术治疗肝癌的疗效.方法 选取2011年1月-2013年1月我院收治的83例肝癌患者,依据随机数字表法分为观察组(50例)和对照组(33例).对照组患者给予单纯TACE治疗,观察组患者给予CT导向下放射性125I粒子瘤内植入联合TACE术治疗.结果 观察组患者术后第3、6、12个月的治疗总有效率分别为84％ (42/50)、76％(38/50)、68％(34/50),均显著高于对照组的51.5％ (17/33)、45.5％ (15/33)、36.4％ (12/33),两组比较,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05);观察组患者术后6、12个月的生存率分别为98％ (49/50)和86％ (43/50),均明显高于对照组的69.7％ (23/33)和45.5％ (15/33),两组比较差异也有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 CT导向下放射性125I粒子瘤内植入联合TACE术治疗肝癌的疗效良好.     

Portal Vein Recanalization for Noncirrhotic Portal Vein Cavernous Transformation: Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation versus Portal Vein Stent Placement

PurposeTo compare the clinical outcomes of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation versus portal vein stent placement (PVS) in patients with noncirrhotic cavernous transformation of the portal vein (CTPV).Materials and MethodsIn this retrospective study, clinical data from patients with noncirrhotic CTPV who underwent TIPS creation or PVS were compared. A total of 54 patients (mean age, 43.8 years ± 15.8; 31 men and 23 women) were included from January 2013 to January 2021; 29 patients underwent TIPS creation, and 25 patients underwent PVS. Stent occlusion, variceal rebleeding, survival, and postprocedural complications were compared between the 2 groups.ResultsThe mean follow-up time was 40.2 months ± 26.2 in the TIPS group and 35.3 months ± 21.1 in the PVS group. The stent occlusion rate in the PVS group (16%, 4 of 25) was significantly lower than that in the TIPS group (41.4%, 12 of 29) during the follow-up (P = .042). The cumulative variceal rebleeding rates in the TIPS group were significantly higher than those in the PVS group (28% vs 4%; P = .027). The procedural success rate was 69% in the TIPS group and 86% in the PVS group (P = .156). There was a higher number of severe adverse events after TIPS than after PVS (0% vs 24%; P = .012).ConclusionsPortal vein recanalization with PVS may be a preferable alternative to TIPS creation in the treatment of noncirrhotic CTPV because of higher stent patency rates, lower risk of variceal rebleeding, and fewer adverse events.     

Portal Vein Stenting for Portal Biliopathy with Jaundice

Portal biliopathy refers to obstruction of the bile duct by dilated peri- or para-ductal collateral channels following the main portal vein occlusion from various causes. Surgical shunt operation or endoscopic treatment has been reported. Herein, we report a case of portal biliopathy that was successfully treated by interventional portal vein recanalization.     

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Invading the Main Portal Vein: Treatment with Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization and Portal Vein Stenting

To retrospectively analyze the therapeutic results of percutaneous transhepatic portal vein stenting (PTPVS) and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) treatment in 58 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) invading the main portal vein (MPV). A total of 58 procedures of PTPVS were performed, immediately after which TACE was undertaken to control HCC. The clinical effects, complications, digital subtraction angiographic appearance, stent patency rates, cumulative survival rates, and predictive factors for survival were evaluated. The Kaplan–Meyer method and the log rank test were used for survival analysis. Multivariable analysis was also conducted by the Cox proportional hazard model. No patient died during stent placement or within the first 24 h. No severe procedure-related complications were observed. After stent placement, the mean ± standard deviation portal venous pressure levels decreased from 41.43 ± 8.56 cmH₂O to 37.19 ± 7.89 cmH₂O (p < 0.01). At the time of analysis, 9 of the 58 patients survived. The 60-, 180-, 360-, and 720-day cumulative patency rates were 98.1%, 71.0%, 52.6%, and 42.1%, respectively, with a mean patency time of 552.9 ± 88.2 days and a median patency time of 639.00 ± 310.00 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 31.40–1246.60) days. The 60-, 180-, 360-, and 720-day cumulative survival rates for the total study population were 74.1%, 27.1%, 17.2%, and 13.8%, respectively, with a median survival time of 113 ± 27.29 (95% CI, 59.51–166.49) days. In the univariate analysis, the following six variables were significantly associated with the prognosis: (1) HCC type; (2) Child-Pugh grade; (3) MPV stenosis/occlusion; (4) arteriovenous shunt; (5) iodized oil deposition; and (6) number of TACE procedure. In addition, having diffuse-type HCC and Child-Pugh grade B disease were each independent factors associated with decreased survival time in the multivariate analysis. PTPVS-TACE is feasible and may be useful to control HCC invading the MPV.     

Palliative Portal Vein Stent Placement in Malignant and Symptomatic Extrinsic Portal Vein Stenosis or Occlusion

This article evaluates the results of portal vein (PV) stent placement in patients with malignant extrinsic lesions stenosing or obstructing the PV and causing symptomatic PV hypertension (PVHT). Fourteen patients with bile duct cancer (n = 7), pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n = 4), or another cancer (n = 3) underwent percutaneous transhepatic portal venous stent placement because of gastroesophageal or jejunal varices (n = 9), ascites (n = 7), and/or thrombocytopenia (n = 2). Concurrent tumoral obstruction of the main bile duct was treated via the transhepatic route in the same session in four patients. Changes in portal venous pressure, complications, stent patency, and survival were evaluated. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) gradient of portal venous pressure decreased significantly immediately after stent placement from 11.2 mmHg ± 4.6 to 1.1 mmHg ± 1.0 (P < 0.00001). Three patients had minor complications, and one developed a liver abscess. During a mean ± SD follow-up of 134.4 ± 123.3 days, portal stents remained patent in 11 patients (78.6%); stent occlusion occurred in 3 patients, 2 of whom had undergone previous major hepatectomy. After stent placement, PVHT symptoms were relieved in four (57.1%) of seven patients who died (mean survival, 97 ± 71.2 days), and relieved in six (85.7%) of seven patients still alive at the end of follow-up (mean follow-up, 171.7 ± 153.5 days). Stent placement in the PV is feasible and relatively safe. It helped to relieve PVHT symptoms in a single session.     

激光门静脉血管内照射的作用

目的了解不同照射模式的激光在门静脉血管内照射的作用。方法用波长810nm半导体激光照射实验兔门静脉，观察连续激光和不同脉冲宽度激光照射后光纤头部血液和门静脉血管壁的变化以及动物的生存情况。结果脉冲激光门静脉内照射在光纤头部形成的血凝块明显小于连续激光照射门静脉内形成的血凝块，差异有非常显著意义（P〈0．01）。随脉冲宽度的增加血凝块相对增大，但是差异无显著意义。连续及脉冲激光作用后留存的动物，均观察3个月，无死亡。激光照射后即刻和3个月血管壁肉眼及镜下检查均未发现明显异常。结论脉冲模式、相对短的脉冲波宽810nm激光照射门静脉血管内不易形成血凝块；门静脉内可实施安全的激光照射。     

门静脉栓子的超声造影表现

目的探讨超声造影鉴别良、恶性门静脉栓子的价值.材料和方法回顾性分析14例经穿刺活检病理证实的肝细胞性肝癌合并门静脉瘤栓(其中1例合并血栓)和3例经CT、实验室检查及抗凝治疗证实的门静脉血栓患者的超声造影表现.结果13例门静脉瘤栓患者,超声造影动脉期见瘤栓呈线条状或点状快速增强,门静脉期管腔呈充盈性缺损.1例瘤栓合并血栓形成患者,动脉期栓子部分快速增强,部分始终未见增强,门静脉期管腔呈充盈性缺损.3例门静脉血栓患者,动脉期未见栓子增强,门静脉期管腔呈充盈性缺损.结论超声造影有助于良、恶性门静脉栓子的鉴别诊断.