From the Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Exp Clin Transplant. 2022 Sep;20(9):826-834. doi: 10.6002/ect.2022.0053.
This study aimed to assess portal and hepatic venous volumes as related to the planning of complex liver resections and segmental liver transplant.
We analyzed 3-dimensional computed tomography of portal and hepatic vein territorial maps of 140 potential living related liver donors. Portal and hepatic vein maps were simulated both separately and in overlap (cross-mapping) to calculate inflow and outflow volumes.
In total liver volume, the right hemiliver was always dominant (mean 64.7 ± 4.8%) and the right medial sector (mean 36.4 ± 6.8%) and segment 8 (mean 19.1 ± 4.3%) accounted for the largest volumes, whereas the left medial sector(mean 13.5 ± 3.1%) and segment 4A (mean 5.8 ± 1.8%) accounted for the smallest volumes (with exclusion of caudate lobe). The right hepatic vein was dominant for both right hemiliver and right lateral sector and had the largest drainage volume in total liver volume (mean 40.0 ± 11.2%). The left hepatic vein was dominant for both left hemiliver and left lateral sector but had the smallest drainage volume fortotal liver volume (mean 21.3 ± 5.0%). The middle hepatic vein drained 50.2 ± 12.5% of the right medial sector and 75.8 ± 15.4% of the left medial sector. In 67 cases, an accessory vein (inferior hepatic vein) drained 16.5 ± 13.2% ofthe right hemiliver, 31.4 ± 25.1% ofthe right lateral sector, 26.6 ± 23.2% of segment 7, and 37.4 ± 31.3% of segment 6.
The portal and hepatic vein territorial anatomy was characterized by extensive individual variability. An extremely smallremnant volume (<25% of total liver volume) precluded a minority of virtual extended left and a majority of extended right hepatectomies. Left trisectionectomy was associated with risky drainage from the middle hepatic vein, extensive segment 6 remnant congestion volume in 8% of cases, and right lateral sector-favorable inferior hepatic vein large drainage pattern in 13% of livers.
本研究旨在评估门静脉和肝静脉体积,以规划复杂的肝切除术和节段性肝移植。
我们分析了 140 例潜在活体相关肝供体的门静脉和肝静脉区域 3 维 CT。分别模拟门静脉和肝静脉地图,以及重叠(交叉映射)以计算流入和流出量。
在总肝体积中,右半肝始终占主导地位(平均 64.7±4.8%),右内侧段(平均 36.4±6.8%)和 8 段(平均 19.1±4.3%)占最大体积,而左内侧段(平均 13.5±3.1%)和 4A 段(平均 5.8±1.8%)占最小体积(不包括尾状叶)。右肝静脉对右半肝和右外侧段均占主导地位,在总肝体积中具有最大的引流量(平均 40.0±11.2%)。左肝静脉对左半肝和左外侧段均占主导地位,但在总肝体积中的引流量最小(平均 21.3±5.0%)。中肝静脉引流右内侧段的 50.2±12.5%和左内侧段的 75.8±15.4%。在 67 例中,一条副静脉(肝下静脉)引流右半肝的 16.5±13.2%,右外侧段的 31.4±25.1%,7 段的 26.6±23.2%和 6 段的 37.4±31.3%。
门静脉和肝静脉区域解剖具有广泛的个体变异性。极少数虚拟扩大左肝和多数扩大右肝切除术的残肝体积(<25%总肝体积)。左三叶切除术与中肝静脉引流风险相关,8%病例中广泛的 6 段残肝淤血量,13%肝脏中右外侧段有利的肝下静脉大引流模式。