• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Vascular inflow control during hemi-hepatectomy: a comparison between intrahepatic pedicle ligation and extrahepatic vascular ligation.肝切除术时的血管入流控制:肝内蒂结扎与肝外血管结扎的比较。
HPB (Oxford). 2013 Jun;15(6):449-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00618.x. Epub 2012 Dec 2.
2
Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Primary Hepatobiliary Malignancies and Non-Colorectal Liver Metastases.肝部分离联合门静脉结扎治疗原发性肝胆恶性肿瘤及非结直肠癌肝转移
Scand J Surg. 2016 Sep;105(3):158-62. doi: 10.1177/1457496915613650. Epub 2016 Feb 29.
3
Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS): impact of the inter-stages course on morbi-mortality and implications for management.联合肝脏分隔和门静脉结扎的分期肝切除术(ALPPS):分期过程对病死率的影响及管理意义
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015 May;41(5):674-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2015.01.004. Epub 2015 Jan 17.
4
Impact of split completeness on future liver remnant hypertrophy in associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) in hepatocellular carcinoma: Complete-ALPPS versus partial-ALPPS.在肝细胞癌的联合肝脏离断和门静脉结扎分期肝切除术(ALPPS)中,分割完整性对未来肝剩余体积增大的影响:完全性ALPPS与部分性ALPPS对比
Surgery. 2017 Feb;161(2):357-364. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.07.029. Epub 2016 Sep 3.
5
Feasibility of the Glissonian approach during right hepatectomy.Glissonian 入路在右半肝切除术中的可行性。
HPB (Oxford). 2013 Aug;15(8):638-45. doi: 10.1111/hpb.12035. Epub 2013 Jan 10.
6
Right portal vein ligation combined with in situ splitting induces rapid left lateral liver lobe hypertrophy enabling 2-staged extended right hepatic resection in small-for-size settings.右门静脉结扎联合原位劈裂诱导快速左外侧肝叶肥大,使小肝体积下 2 期扩大右半肝切除术成为可能。
Ann Surg. 2012 Mar;255(3):405-14. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31824856f5.
7
Indications and limits for associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS). Lessons Learned from 15 cases at a single centre.联合肝脏分隔和门静脉结扎的分期肝切除术(ALPPS)的适应证与局限性:单中心15例经验教训
Z Gastroenterol. 2014 Jan;52(1):35-42. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1356364. Epub 2014 Jan 13.
8
Modified Anterior Approach for the ALPPS Procedure: How We Do It.用于ALPPS手术的改良前路入路:我们的操作方法
World J Surg. 2015 Nov;39(11):2831-5. doi: 10.1007/s00268-015-3174-6.
9
Indicating ALPPS for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Critical Analysis of Patients in the International ALPPS Registry.针对结直肠癌肝转移患者行 ALPPS:国际 ALPPS 注册中心患者的批判性分析。
Surgery. 2018 Sep;164(3):387-394. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2018.02.026. Epub 2018 May 24.
10
To Pringle or not to pringle: is Pedicle clamping a necessity in liver resection?采用或不采用普林格尔手法:肝切除术中肝门阻断是否必要?
Hepatogastroenterology. 2014 Jul-Aug;61(133):1402-14.

引用本文的文献

1
The Application of Selective Hepatic Inflow Vascular Occlusion with Anterior Approach in Liver Resection: Effectiveness in Managing Major Complications and Long-Term Survival.前入路选择性肝血流阻断在肝切除术中的应用:对主要并发症的处理效果及长期生存情况
Int J Hepatol. 2021 Apr 28;2021:6648663. doi: 10.1155/2021/6648663. eCollection 2021.
2
Clinical practice guidelines for the management of metastatic colorectal cancer: a consensus statement of the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncologists (HeSMO).转移性结直肠癌管理的临床实践指南:希腊医学肿瘤学家协会(HeSMO)共识声明
Ann Gastroenterol. 2016 Oct-Dec;29(4):390-416. doi: 10.20524/aog.2016.0050. Epub 2016 Jun 3.
3
Symptomatic Perihepatic Fluid Collections After Hepatic Resection in the Modern Era.现代肝切除术后有症状的肝周积液
J Gastrointest Surg. 2016 Apr;20(4):748-56. doi: 10.1007/s11605-015-3041-7. Epub 2015 Dec 7.
4
TorCH manoeuver: Toronto caudate process hepatotomy for laparoscopic exposure and division of the right portal vein branch.TorCH手术:用于腹腔镜下暴露和分离右门静脉分支的多伦多尾状突肝切开术。
HPB (Oxford). 2014 Dec;16(12):1133. doi: 10.1111/hpb.12271. Epub 2014 May 15.

本文引用的文献

1
Oncologic resection for malignant tumors of the liver.肝恶性肿瘤的肿瘤切除术。
Ann Surg. 2011 Apr;253(4):656-65. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181fc08ca.
2
Evaluation of intrahepatic, extra-Glissonian stapling of the right porta hepatis vs. classical extrahepatic dissection during right hepatectomy.评价右半肝切除术中肝内、Glisson 鞘外与经典肝外解剖式肝门阻断的效果。
HPB (Oxford). 2009 Sep;11(6):493-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2009.00083.x.
3
V. Notes on the Arrest of Hepatic Hemorrhage Due to Trauma.五、创伤性肝出血的止血注意事项
Ann Surg. 1908 Oct;48(4):541-9. doi: 10.1097/00000658-190810000-00005.
4
Hilar dissection versus the "glissonean" approach and stapling of the pedicle for major hepatectomies: a prospective, randomized trial.肝门部解剖术与“肝蒂”入路及肝蒂钉合术用于肝大部切除术的前瞻性随机试验
Ann Surg. 2003 Jul;238(1):111-9. doi: 10.1097/01.SLA.0000074981.02000.69.
5
Improvement in perioperative outcome after hepatic resection: analysis of 1,803 consecutive cases over the past decade.肝切除术后围手术期结局的改善:对过去十年中1803例连续病例的分析
Ann Surg. 2002 Oct;236(4):397-406; discussion 406-7. doi: 10.1097/01.SLA.0000029003.66466.B3.
6
Quality of complication reporting in the surgical literature.外科文献中并发症报告的质量。
Ann Surg. 2002 Jun;235(6):803-13. doi: 10.1097/00000658-200206000-00007.
7
Recent advances in hepatic resection.肝切除术的最新进展
Semin Surg Oncol. 2000 Sep-Oct;19(2):200-7. doi: 10.1002/1098-2388(200009)19:2<200::aid-ssu11>3.0.co;2-m.
8
Seven hundred forty-seven hepatectomies in the 1990s: an update to evaluate the actual risk of liver resection.20世纪90年代的747例肝切除术:评估肝切除实际风险的最新情况
J Am Coll Surg. 2000 Jul;191(1):38-46. doi: 10.1016/s1072-7515(00)00261-1.
9
Comparison of controlled and Glisson's pedicle transections of hepatic hilum occlusion for hepatic resection.肝切除术中肝门阻断的控制性与肝蒂横断法对比研究
J Am Coll Surg. 1999 Sep;189(3):300-4. doi: 10.1016/s1072-7515(99)00127-1.
10
Glissonean pedicle transection method for hepatic resection: a new concept of liver segmentation.肝切除的Glissonean蒂横断法:肝脏分段的新概念
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 1998;5(3):286-91. doi: 10.1007/s005340050047.

肝切除术时的血管入流控制:肝内蒂结扎与肝外血管结扎的比较。

Vascular inflow control during hemi-hepatectomy: a comparison between intrahepatic pedicle ligation and extrahepatic vascular ligation.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Hepatopancreatobiliary Division, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.

出版信息

HPB (Oxford). 2013 Jun;15(6):449-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00618.x. Epub 2012 Dec 2.

DOI:10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00618.x
PMID:23659568
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3664049/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Intrahepatic pedicle ligation (IPL) is an alternative to extrahepatic portal dissection (EPD). Although IPL has been well described, concern has arisen over a possible association with increased complication rates.

METHODS

Patients who underwent hemi-hepatectomy during January 1995 to December 2010 were reviewed and the inflow control technique (IPL versus EPD) documented. Patient, tumour, treatment and outcome variables were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 798 patients underwent hemi-hepatectomy, 568 (71.2%) of the right and 230 (28.8%) of the left liver. In univariate analysis, factors associated with the choice of IPL included surgeon, right hepatectomy, preoperative portal vein embolization, diagnosis of colorectal cancer liver metastasis, and smaller tumour size (P < 0.011). In multivariate analysis, right hepatectomy [versus left: hazard ratio (HR) 3.878, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-13.14; P = 0.029] and smaller tumour size (median of 4.5 cm versus 5.5 cm: HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.88; P = 0.002) were associated with IPL. Pringle manoeuvre time was longer in IPL procedures (40 min versus 29 min; P < 0.001). Complication rates (49.8% in IPL versus 48.4% in EPD; P = 0.706) were similar in both groups, as was the severity of complications; 17.6% of EPD and 22.3% of IPL patients experienced complications of grade ≥3 (P = 0.225).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with small tumours undergoing right hepatectomy were more likely to undergo IPL. In selected patients, IPL was not associated with an increased complication rate and thus it should be considered a safe approach.

摘要

背景

肝内蒂结扎术(IPL)是一种替代肝外门静脉解剖术(EPD)的方法。尽管 IPL 已经得到了很好的描述,但人们对其可能与更高的并发症发生率有关的问题表示担忧。

方法

回顾了 1995 年 1 月至 2010 年 12 月期间接受半肝切除术的患者,并记录了血流控制技术(IPL 与 EPD)。比较了患者、肿瘤、治疗和结局变量。

结果

共有 798 例患者接受了半肝切除术,其中 568 例(71.2%)为右半肝切除术,230 例(28.8%)为左半肝切除术。单因素分析显示,与 IPL 选择相关的因素包括手术医生、右半肝切除术、术前门静脉栓塞术、结直肠肿瘤肝转移的诊断和肿瘤较小(P < 0.011)。多因素分析显示,右半肝切除术(与左半肝切除术相比:风险比[HR]3.878,95%置信区间[CI]1.15-13.14;P = 0.029)和肿瘤较小(中位数 4.5 cm 比 5.5 cm:HR 0.72,95%CI 0.59-0.88;P = 0.002)与 IPL 相关。IPL 手术中的普林格尔操作时间较长(40 分钟比 29 分钟;P < 0.001)。两组的并发症发生率(IPL 为 49.8%,EPD 为 48.4%;P = 0.706)相似,并发症严重程度也相似;EPD 组和 IPL 组分别有 17.6%和 22.3%的患者发生≥3 级并发症(P = 0.225)。

结论

接受右半肝切除术且肿瘤较小的患者更有可能接受 IPL。在选择的患者中,IPL 并不与更高的并发症发生率相关,因此它应被视为一种安全的方法。