Suppr超能文献

更好的 ALPPS 入路:微创与开放 ALPPS。

A better route to ALPPS: minimally invasive vs open ALPPS.

机构信息

HPB Surgical Unit, Dept. of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0HS, UK.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2020 Jun;34(6):2379-2389. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07437-3. Epub 2020 Apr 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) has gained both interest and controversy, as an alternative to portal vein embolisation (PVE) by inducing future liver remnant hypertrophy in patients at risk of liver failure following major hepatectomy. Open ALPPS induces more extensive hypertrophy in a shorter timespan than PVE; however, it is also associated with higher complication rates and mortality. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), with its known benefits, has been applied to ALPPS in the hope of reducing the surgical insult and improving functional recovery time while preserving the extensive FLR hypertrophy.

METHODS

A search of the PubMed, Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases was conducted on 10 July 2019. 1231 studies were identified and screened. 19 open ALPPS studies, 3 MIS ALPPS and 1 study reporting on both were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

1088 open and 46 MIS-ALPPS cases were included in the analysis. There were significant differences in the baseline characteristic: open ALPPS patients had a more diverse profile of underlying pathologies (p = 0.028) and comparatively more right extended hepatectomies (p = 0.006) as compared to right hepatectomy and left extended hepatectomy performed. Operative parameters (time and blood loss) did not differ between the two groups. MIS ALPPS had a lower rate of severe Clavien-Dindo complications (≥ IIIa) following stage 1 (p = 0.063) and significantly lower median mortality (0.00% vs 8.45%) (p = 0.007) compared to open ALPPS.

CONCLUSION

Although MIS ALPPS would seem to be better than open ALPPS with reduced morbidity and mortality rates, there is still limited evidence on MIS ALPPS. There is a need for a higher quality of evidence on MIS ALPPS vs. open ALPPS to answer whether MIS ALPPS can replace open ALPPS.

摘要

背景

联合肝脏离断和门静脉结扎的分阶段肝切除术(ALPPS)引起了关注和争议,它通过在因大肝切除而有肝功能衰竭风险的患者中诱导未来肝残留的肥大,作为门静脉栓塞(PVE)的替代方法。开放 ALPPS 在更短的时间内引起更广泛的肥大,比 PVE 更快;然而,它也与更高的并发症发生率和死亡率相关。微创手术(MIS)以其已知的益处已应用于 ALPPS,以期减少手术创伤,改善功能恢复时间,同时保留广泛的 FLR 肥大。

方法

于 2019 年 7 月 10 日在 PubMed、Medline、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库中进行了搜索。确定并筛选了 1231 项研究。纳入了 19 项开放 ALPPS 研究、3 项 MIS-ALPPS 研究和 1 项同时报告两种方法的研究进行分析。

结果

纳入了 1088 例开放和 46 例 MIS-ALPPS 病例进行分析。两组患者的基线特征存在显著差异:开放 ALPPS 患者的基础疾病谱更加多样化(p=0.028),与右肝切除术和左扩展肝切除术相比,右扩展肝切除术更为普遍(p=0.006)。手术参数(时间和失血量)在两组之间没有差异。MIS-ALPPS 在阶段 1 后严重 Clavien-Dindo 并发症(≥IIIa)的发生率较低(p=0.063),中位死亡率显著较低(0.00% vs 8.45%)(p=0.007),与开放 ALPPS 相比。

结论

虽然 MIS-ALPPS 似乎比开放 ALPPS 具有更低的发病率和死亡率,但关于 MIS-ALPPS 的证据仍然有限。需要更高质量的证据来回答 MIS-ALPPS 是否可以替代开放 ALPPS。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/64ed/7214383/ba34991f4038/464_2020_7437_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验