PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15972177

Vascular occlusion to decrease blood loss during hepatic resection.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Historically, the primary hazard with liver surgery has been intraoperative blood loss. This led to the refinement of inflow and outflow occlusive techniques. The utility of the different methods of inflow and outflow techniques for hepatic surgery were reviewed. METHODS: A search of the English literature (Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, Cochrane clinical trials registry, hand searches, and bibliographic reviews) using the terms "liver," "hepatic," "Pringle," "total vascular exclusion," "ischemia," "reperfusion," "inflow," and "outflow occlusion" was performed. RESULTS: A multitude of techniques to minimize blood loss during hepatic resection have been studied. The evidence suggests that inflow occlusion techniques are generally well tolerated. These should be used with caution in patients with cirrhosis, fibrosis, steatosis, cholestasis, and recent chemotherapy, and for prolonged time intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Harmful effects of intraoperative blood loss and transfusion occur during hepatic resection. Portal triad clamping (PTC) is associated with less blood loss compared with no clamping. In procedures with ischemic times <1 hour in length, PTC-C (continuous) is likely equal to PTC-I (intermittent). In patients with chronic liver disease or undergoing lengthy operations, PTC-I is likely superior to PTC-C. PTC is superior to total vascular exclusion except in patients with tumors that are large and deep seated, hypervascular, and/or abutting the hepatic veins or vena cava and in patients with increased right-sided heart pressures.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Elijah Dixon, Charles M Vollmer, Oliver F Bathe, Francis Sutherland. 2005. Vascular occlusion to decrease blood loss during hepatic resection.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2004.10.007

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↗