HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2019
Techniques for splenic vein reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy with portal vein resection for pancreatic cancer.
СтатьяVideo-Audio MediaНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ono Yoshihiro, Tanaka Masayuki, Matsueda Kiyoshi, Hiratsuka Makiko, Takahashi Yu, Mise Yoshihiro, Inoue Yosuke, Sato Takafumi, Ito Hiromichi, Saiura Akio
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with splenic vein (SV) ligation may result in sinistral portal hypertension (SPH). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of various types of SV reconstruction to prevent SPH and to define the optimal reconstruction method.
METHODS: This study included patients who underwent PD with SV resection and reconstruction for pancreatic cancer between December 2013 and June 2017. The patency of various types of SV anastomosis and SPH was evaluated by follow up computed tomography.
RESULTS: The type of SV reconstruction was divided into two groups: (i) end-to-side anastomosis (n = 10), in which the SV was anastomosed with either the left renal vein (LRV; n = 8) or portal vein (n = 2); and (ii) end-to-end anastomosis (n = 20), in which the SV was anastomosed with another smaller vein or graft. The patency rate for Group 1 was 90% (9/10), compared with 45% (9/20) for Group 2 (P = 0.024). Half the patients in whom the SV anastomosis was occluded (6/12) developed gastrointestinal varices, whereas only 11% of patients with a patent SV anastomosis (2/9) had varices (P = 0.034).
CONCLUSION: SV-LRV reconstruction is widely applicable, effectively reduces the risk of SPH, and should be considered for the case of extended PD.
METHODS: This study included patients who underwent PD with SV resection and reconstruction for pancreatic cancer between December 2013 and June 2017. The patency of various types of SV anastomosis and SPH was evaluated by follow up computed tomography.
RESULTS: The type of SV reconstruction was divided into two groups: (i) end-to-side anastomosis (n = 10), in which the SV was anastomosed with either the left renal vein (LRV; n = 8) or portal vein (n = 2); and (ii) end-to-end anastomosis (n = 20), in which the SV was anastomosed with another smaller vein or graft. The patency rate for Group 1 was 90% (9/10), compared with 45% (9/20) for Group 2 (P = 0.024). Half the patients in whom the SV anastomosis was occluded (6/12) developed gastrointestinal varices, whereas only 11% of patients with a patent SV anastomosis (2/9) had varices (P = 0.034).
CONCLUSION: SV-LRV reconstruction is widely applicable, effectively reduces the risk of SPH, and should be considered for the case of extended PD.