Liu Chi-Leung, Fan Sheung-Tat, Lo Chung-Mau, Wong Yik, Ng Irene Oi-Lin, Lam Chi-Ming, Poon Ronnie Tung-Ping, Wong John
Department of Surgery, University of Hong Kong Medical Centre, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, China.
Ann Surg. 2004 Feb;239(2):194-201. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000109153.71725.8c.
The aim of this study was to determine whether abdominal drainage is beneficial after elective hepatic resection in patients with underlying chronic liver diseases.
Traditionally, in patients with chronic liver diseases, an abdominal drainage catheter is routinely inserted after hepatic resection to drain ascitic fluid and to detect postoperative hemorrhage and bile leakage. However, the benefits of this surgical practice have not been evaluated prospectively.
Between January 1999 and March 2002, 104 patients who had underlying chronic liver diseases were prospectively randomized to have either closed suction abdominal drainage (drainage group, n = 52) or no drainage (nondrainage group, n = 52) after elective hepatic resection. The operative outcomes of the 2 groups of patients were compared.
Fifty-seven (55%) patients had major hepatic resection with resection of 3 Coiunaud's segments or more. Sixty-nine (66%) patients had liver cirrhosis and 35 (34%) had chronic hepatitis. Demographic, surgical, and pathologic details were similar between both groups. The primary indication for hepatic resection was hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 100, 96%). There was no difference in hospital mortality between the 2 groups of patients (drainage group, 6% vs. nondrainage group, 2%; P = 0.618). However, there was a significantly higher overall operative morbidity in the drainage group (73% vs. 38%, P < 0.001). This was related to a significantly higher incidence of wound complications in the drainage group compared with the nondrainage group (62% vs. 21%, P < 0.001). In addition, a trend toward a higher incidence of septic complications in the drainage group was observed (33% vs. 17%, P = 0.07). The mean (+/- standard error of mean) postoperative hospital stay of the drainage group was 19.0 +/- 2.2 days, which was significantly longer than that of the nondrainage group (12.5 +/- 1.1 days, P = 0.005). With a median follow-up of 15 months, none of the 51 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in the drainage group developed metastasis at the drain sites. On multivariate analysis, abdominal drainage, underlying liver cirrhosis, major hepatic resection, and intraoperative blood loss of >1.5L were independent and significant factors associated with postoperative morbidity.
Routine abdominal drainage after hepatic resection is contraindicated in patients with chronic liver diseases.
本研究旨在确定对于患有潜在慢性肝病的患者,择期肝切除术后进行腹腔引流是否有益。
传统上,对于慢性肝病患者,肝切除术后常规插入腹腔引流管以引流腹水,并检测术后出血和胆漏。然而,这种手术操作的益处尚未进行前瞻性评估。
在1999年1月至2002年3月期间,对104例患有潜在慢性肝病的患者进行前瞻性随机分组,择期肝切除术后分别进行闭式负压腹腔引流(引流组,n = 52)或不进行引流(非引流组,n = 52)。比较两组患者的手术结果。
57例(55%)患者进行了大范围肝切除,切除3个或更多Couinaud肝段。69例(66%)患者患有肝硬化,35例(34%)患有慢性肝炎。两组患者的人口统计学、手术和病理细节相似。肝切除的主要指征是肝细胞癌(n = 100,96%)。两组患者的医院死亡率无差异(引流组6% vs. 非引流组2%;P = 0.618)。然而,引流组的总体手术并发症发生率显著更高(73% vs. 38%,P < 0.001)。这与引流组伤口并发症的发生率显著高于非引流组有关(62% vs. 21%,P < 0.001)。此外,观察到引流组感染并发症的发生率有升高趋势(33% vs. 17%,P = 0.07)。引流组患者术后平均(±平均标准误差)住院时间为19.0 ± 2.2天,显著长于非引流组(12.5 ± 1.1天,P = 0.005)。中位随访15个月,引流组51例肝细胞癌患者中,无1例在引流部位发生转移。多因素分析显示,腹腔引流、潜在肝硬化、大范围肝切除和术中失血>1.5L是与术后并发症相关的独立且显著的因素。
慢性肝病患者肝切除术后常规腹腔引流是禁忌的。