PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10930479

Mesohepatectomy.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Formal anatomic (lobar) or extended hepatectomies are recommended for liver malignancies located centrally within the liver (Couinaud's segments IVA, IVB, V, and VIII). Mesohepatectomy, resection of central hepatic segments and leaving the right and left segments in situ, removes large central tumors preserving more functioning liver tissue than either extended left or right hepatectomy. Mesohepatectomy is a seldom used, technically demanding procedure, and its application is yet to be defined. METHODS: Medical charts of 244 consecutive liver resection patients were reviewed retrospectively. Eighteen patients were treated with mesohepatectomy. Six patients had metastatic liver tumor (MLT), 11 had hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and 1 had gallbladder adenocarcinoma. The operative results were compared with groups of patients treated by lobar hepatectomy (n = 71) and extended left or right hepatectomy (n = 43). RESULTS: The mean mesohepatectomy operative time was 238 versus 304 minutes in the extended group. Inflow occlusion mean time was longer in the mesohepatectomy group than in extended procedures, 45 versus 39 minutes (P = not significant). Comparing the extended hepatectomy group, the mesohepatectomy group had a mean operative estimated blood loss 914 cc versus 1628 cc (P <0.01), postoperative hospital stay 9 versus 16 days (P = 0.054) and volume of resected liver 560cc versus 1500cc (P <0.01) respectively. The late complication rate was lower in the mesohepatectomy group than in the extended group and was comparable to the lobar hepatectomy group (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite its technical demands, mesohepatectomy should be considered as an alternative to extended hepatectomy for selected patients with primary and secondary hepatic tumors localized in middle liver segments, as its complication rate, postoperative recovery, and preserved liver tissue compare favorably with extended hepatic resection.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C H Scudamore, A K Buczkowski, H Shayan, S G Ho, G M Legiehn, S W Chung, D A Owen. 2000. Mesohepatectomy.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9610(00)00374-3

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Retropubic versus perineal radical prostatectomy in early prostate cancer: eight-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy in men and the second leading cause of cancer death. A randomized study was performed on patients with localized prostate cancer and treated with radical prostatectomy using the perineal or the retropubic approach comparing oncological outcomes, cancer control, and functional results. STUDY DESIGN: Between 1997 and 2004, in a randomized study 200 patients underwent a radical prostatectomy performed by retropubic (100 patients) or perineal (100 patients) approach. RESULTS: Differences between hospital stay, duration of catheter drainage, intraoperative blood loss, and transfusion requirements were statistically significant in favor of perineal prostatectomy. Differences between positive surgical margins and urinary continence in the two groups were not statistically significant at 6 and 24 months. Differences between erectile function at 24 months were statistically significant in favor of retropubic prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Radical perineal prostatectomy is an excellent alternative approach for radical surgery in the treatment of early prostate cancer.

Blood Loss, Surgical↗

Bipolar pulse coagulation for resection of the cirrhotic liver.

BACKGROUND: The major technical challenge of liver surgery is controlling bleeding during transection of the parenchyma. The Gyrus hand piece (GHP) is a bipolar diathermy pulsation instrument that is similar in design to a large hemostat (Péan) clamp that divides tissue while the clamp remains closed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the peri-operative data from 10 patients with early cirrhosis (stage 1-4) who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular cancer between February 2004 and July 2005. Five consecutive patients who underwent resection using the GHP were compared to five other patients who underwent resection using the traditional "crush clamp technique" (CCT). Six patients underwent minor hepatectomy (<3 segments) and four underwent major hepatectomy (>3 segments). RESULTS: When the GHP was used, the mean Pringle time was 13 +/- 5 min, mean blood loss was 520 mL +/- 118, and mean operative time was 252 +/- 15 min. When the CCT was used, the average Pringle time was 13 +/- 3 min, mean blood loss was 630 +/- 67 mL, and mean operative time was 312 +/- 29 min. There were 2 major complications in the GHP group and 3 in the CCT group. Major complications included transient hepatic failure (i.e., ascites/encephalopathy) and biloma formation. CONCLUSIONS: One patient from each group suffered a minor wound complication. The average hospital stay was 8 days (range, 6-9) for the GHP group, and 8 days (range, 7-10) for CCT group. The operative mortality rate was 0%. Our preliminary results demonstrate that GHP provides an excellent and safe alternative to CCT for dividing the liver parenchyma in cirrhotic patients.

Blood Loss, Surgical↗