Новости | Магазин | Журналы | Контакты | Правила | Доставка | |
Вход Регистрация |
Цель. Оценка эффективности чрескожного варианта ALPPS как способа профилактики пострезекционной печеночной недостаточности. Материал и методы. Проведено ретроспективное изучение результатов портовенозной эмболизации и чрескожного радиочастотного разделения печени с эмболизацией воротной вены при объеме будущего остатка печени 40%. Оценивали степень гипертрофии будущего остатка печени, ее скорость в двух группах. Изучали осложнения манипуляций, частоту пострезекционной печеночной недостаточности. Результаты. Первым этапом 38 больным выполнена успешная портовенозная эмболизация, 47 – успешное чрескожное радиочастотное разделение печени с эмболизацией воротной вены. Вторым этапом резекция печени выполнена 27 (71,1%) и 33 (70%) пациентам. Наиболее частым осложнением чрескожного радиочастотного разделения печени с эмболизацией воротной вены было скопление желчи в зоне радиочастотной абляции (13,1%). Частота других осложнений первого этапа не различалась между группами. Не отмечено различий в кровопотере или частоте печеночной недостаточности после второго этапа. Летальных исходов не было. Средняя степень гипертрофии и рост не различались между группами. Среднее время гипертрофии будущего остатка печени после чрескожного радиочастотного разделения паренхимы с эмболизацией воротной вены и портовенозной эмболизации составило 13 ± 5 и 18 ± 7 дней (p = 0,008). Заключение. Результаты чрескожного радиочастотного разделения печени с эмболизацией воротной вены сопоставимы с результатами портовенозной эмболизации по безопасности. Радиочастотное разделение паренхимы с эмболизацией воротной вены позволяет быстрее добиться оптимальной гипертрофии будущего остатка печени.
Ключевые слова:
печень, обширная резекция, FLR, портовенозная эмболизация, радиочастотное разделение, PRALPPS, печеночная недостаточность
Литература:
1. Shoup M., Gonen M., D'Angelica M., Jarnagin W.R., DeMatteo R.P., Schwartz L.H., Tuorto S., Blumgart L.H., Fong Y. Volumetric analysis predicts hepatic dysfunction in patients undergoing major liver resection. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2003; 7 (3): 325–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1091255x(02)003700
2. Imamura H., Shimada R., Kubota M., Matsuyama Y., Nakayama A., Miyagawa S., Makuuchi M., Kawasaki S. Preoperative portal vein embolization: an audit of 84 patients. Hepatology. 1999; 29 (4): 1099–1105. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.510290415
3. Lang H., Baumgart J., Mittler J. Associated Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy (ALPPS) Registry: what have we learned? Gut Liver. 2020; 14 (6): 699–706. https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl19233
4. Chan A., Zhang W.Y., Chok K., Dai J., Ji R., Kwan C., Man N., Poon R., Lo C.M. ALPPS versus portal vein embolization for hepatitisrelated hepatocellular carcinoma: a changing paradigm in modulation of future liver remnant before major hepatectomy. Ann. Surg. 2021; 273 (5): 957–965. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003433
5. Azoulay D., Castaing D., Smail A., Adam R., Cailliez V., Laurent A., Lemoine A., Bismuth H. Resection of nonresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer after percutaneous portal vein embolization. Ann. Surg. 2000; 231 (4): 480–486. https://doi.org/10.1097/0000065820000400000005
6. Peng S.Y., Wang X.A., Huang C.Y., Zhang Y.Y., Li J.T., Hong D.F., Cai X.J. Evolution of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy: simpler, safer and equally effective methods. World J. Gastroenterol. 2017; 23 (23): 4140–4145. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v23.i23.4140
7. Gimenez M.E., Houghton E.J., Davrieux C.F., Serra E., Pessaux P., Palermo M., Acquafresca P.A., Finger C., Dallemagne B., Marescaux J. Percutaneus Radiofrequency Assisted Liver Partition with Portal vein embolization for Staged hepatectomy (PRALPPS). Arq. Bras. Cir. Dig. 2018; 31 (1): e1346. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102672020180001e1346
8. Hammond J.S., Guha I.N., Beckingham I.J., Lobo D.N. Prediction, prevention and management of postresection liver failure. Br. J. Surg. 2011; 98 (9): 1188–1200. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7630
9. Rahbari N.N., Garden O.J., Padbury R., BrookeSmith M., Crawford M., Adam R., Koch M., Makuuchi M., Dematteo R.P., Christophi C., Banting S., Usatoff V., Nagino M., Maddern G., Hugh T.J., Vauthey J.N., Greig P., Rees M., Yokoyama Y., Fan S.T., Nimura Y., Figueras J., Capussotti L., Buchler M.W., Weitz J. Posthepatectomy liver failure: a definition and grading by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS). Surgery. 2011; 149 (5): 713–724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2010.10.001
10. Luz J.H.M., Gomes F.V., Coimbra E., Costa N.V., Bilhim T. Preoperative portal vein embolization in hepatic surgery: a review about the embolic materials and their effects on liver regeneration and outcome. Radiol. Res. Pract. 2020; 2020: 9295852. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/9295852
11. Gall T.M., Sodergren M.H., Frampton A.E., Fan R., Spalding D.R., Habib N.A., Pai M., Jackson J.E., Tait P., Jiao L.R. Radiofrequencyassisted Liver Partition with Portal vein ligation (RALPP) for liver regeneration. Ann. Surg. 2015; 261 (2): e45–46. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000607
12. Sandstrom P., Rosok B.I., Sparrelid E., Larsen P.N., Larsson A.L., Lindell G., Schultz N.A., Bjornbeth B.A., Isaksson B., Rizell M., Bjornsson B. ALPPS improves resectability compared with conventional twostage hepatectomy in patients with advanced colorectal liver metastasis: results from a scandinavian multicenter randomized controlled trial (LIGRO Trial). Ann. Surg. 2018; 267 (5): 833–840. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002511
13. Melekhina O., Efanov M., Alikhanov R., Tsvirkun V., Kulezneva Y., Kazakov I., Vankovich A., Koroleva A., Khatkov I. Percutaneous radiofrequencyassisted liver partition versus portal vein embolization before hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. BJS Open. 2020; 4 (1): 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50225
14. Hong D.F., Zhang Y.B., Peng S.Y., Huang D.S. Percutaneous microwave ablation liver partition and portal vein embolization for rapid liver regeneration: a minimally invasive first step of ALPPS for hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann. Surg. 2016; 264 (1): e1–2. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001707
15. Zhang Y.B., Hong D.F., Fan X.M., Luo Z.Y., Shen G.L. Percutaneous microwave/radiofrequency ablation liver partition and portal vein embolization for planned hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases with insufficient future liver remnant. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2017; 39 (7): 545–546. (In Chinese) https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.02533766.2017.07.014
16. Kasai Y., Hatano E., Iguchi K., Seo S., Taura K., Yasuchika K., Mori A., Kaido T., Tanaka S., Shibata T., Uemoto S. Prediction of the remnant liver hypertrophy ratio after preoperative portal vein embolization. Eur. Surg. Res. 2013; 51 (3–4): 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1159/000356297
17. Yeom Y.K., Shin J.H. Complications of portal vein embolization: evaluation on crosssectional imaging. Korean J. Radiol. 2015; 16 (5): 1079–1085. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2015.16.5.1079
18. Abulkhir A., Limongelli P., Healey A.J., Damrah O., Tait P., Jackson J., Habib N., Jiao LR. Preoperative portal vein embolization for major liver resection: a metaanalysis. Ann. Surg. 2008; 247 (1): 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31815f6e5b
Aim. To evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous ALPPS as a method for preventing post-resection liver failure. Materials and methods. The methodology involved a retrospective study of the results of portovenous embolization and percutaneous radiofrequency assisted liver partition with portal vein embolization (PRALLPS), in case of the future liver volume 40%. The degree of hypertrophy of the future liver remnant and its rate were assessed in two groups. Complications of manipulation and frequency of postresection hepatic failure were studied. Results. In the first stage, portenous embolization was successfully performed in 38 patients and PRALLPS was successfully performed in 47 patients. In the second stage, liver resection was performed in 27 (71.1%) and 33 (70%) patients. The most frequent complication of PRALLPS was bile accumulation in the radiofrequency ablation area (13.1%). The incidence of other complications of the first stage did not differ between groups. No differences in blood loss or incidence of liver failure were reported after the second stage. No fatal outcomes reported. The mean degree of hypertrophy and growth did not differ between the groups. The mean time of hypertrophy of the future liver remnant after percutaneous radiofrequency assisted partition of the parenchyma with portal vein embolization and portenous embolization was 13 ± 5 and 18 ± 7 days (p = 0.008). Conclusion. The results of percutaneous radiofrequency assisted liver partition with portal vein embolization are comparable in terms of safety with those of portenous embolization. Radiofrequency partition of the parenchyma with portal vein embolization enables optimal hypertrophy of the future liver remnant to be achieved faster.
Keywords:
liver, extensive resection, FLR, portovenous embolization, radiofrequency assisted partition, PRALPPS, hepatic failure