Portal triad clamping or hepatic vascular exclusion for major liver resection. A controlled study.

OBJECTIVE

The authors compared operative course of patients undergoing major liver resections under portal triad clamping (PTC) or under hepatic vascular exclusion (HVE).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Reduced blood loss during liver resection is achieved by PTC or HVE. Specific complications and postoperative hepatocellular injury mediated with two procedures have not been compared.

METHODS

Fifty-two noncirrhotic patients undergoing major liver resections were included in a prospective randomized study comparing both the intraoperative and postoperative courses under PTC (n = 24) or under HVE (n = 28).

RESULTS

The two groups were similar at entry, but eight patients were crossed over to the other group during resection. In the HVE group, hemodynamic intolerance occurred in four (14%) patients. In the PTC group, pedicular clamping was not efficient in four patients, including three with involvement of the cavohepatic intersection and one with persistent bleeding due to tricuspid insufficiency. Intraoperative blood losses and postoperative enzyme level reflecting hepatocellular injury were similar in the two groups. Mean operative duration and mean clampage duration were significantly increased after HVE. Postoperative abdominal collections and pulmonary complications were 2.5-fold higher after HVE but without statistical significance, whereas the mean length of postoperative hospital stay was longer after HVE.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that both methods of vascular occlusion are equally effective in reducing blood loss in major liver resections. The HVE is associated with unpredictable hemodynamic intolerance, increased postoperative complications with a longer hospital stay, and should be restricted to lesions involving the cavo-hepatic intersection.