ObjectiveThe authors define more clearly the trends in morbidity and mortality after hepatic resection for malignant disease in matched patient groups during two discrete time periods.
Summary Background DataRecent reports have shown improvement in operative morbidity and mortality associated with hepatic resection; however, results often included resections for benign disease and trauma. Furthermore, specific factors contributing to the improvement in operative risks between the last two decades have not been defined.
MethodsA retrospective matched comparative analysis was conducted of patients with primary and metastatic hepatic malignancy resected with curative intent between two periods (1976 to 1980 and 1986 to 1990). Eighty-one patients met our inclusion criteria in the early period; this group was matched with 81 patients from the latter period by the following four parameters: age, gender, type of malignant disease, and extent of resection. Records of these two patient groups were abstracted for clinical presentation, co-morbid factors, operative techniques, and perioperative morbidity and mortality.
ResultsThe authors found a significant decrease in operative morbidity, median perioperative transfusion, and length of hospital stay in the latter period (1986 to 1990). The incidence of postoperative subphrenic abscess and intra-abdominal hemorrhage was significantly lower during this period. Operative mortality rate was similar for both periods, 4.9% and 1.2%, respectively (p > 0.05).
ConclusionHepatic resection for malignant disease currently can be performed with a low morbidity and mortality in the hands of trained and experienced hepatic surgeons; operative risks of hepatic resection should not deter its application in the treatment of primary and metastatic malignant diseases of the liver.
199
Controversy over whether intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) should be done routinely has intensified since the advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). As yet, no study has demonstrated a clear benefit to its use, although their have been suggestions in the literature that routine use may confer an advantage to detection of injuries. One-hundred seventy-seven biliary tract complications occurring secondary to LC were identified from the combined data of seven institutions. The goal of this retrospective study was to examine the impact of IOC on the occurrence, recognition, and correction of such complications. The complications identified include 39 cystic duct leaks, 69 major ductal leaks or strictures, and 69 major ductal transection or excision injuries. Whether IOC was performed was known in 157 (88%) patients with 53 patients definitely having and 104 not having an IOC. Data concerning IOC were unavailable in 20 cases. More injuries were detected intraoperatively in the group having IOC (P < 0.001). Conversion of the LC to a laparotomy, often for repair of the injury, occurred more commonly in the group having a correctly interpreted IOC (P < 0.001). Conversion resulted in detection of injuries sooner, resulting in fewer operative procedures to correct the injury (P < 0.001). A transecting injury was prevented in at least seven patients when no visualization of the proximal biliary tree was documented by IOC. These partial ductal incisions were treated by t-tube placement. Incorrect interpretation of the IOC occurred in at least eight patients, with no identification of the proximal biliary tree in six.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
In both Lahey and Nagoya patients, survival was most favorable when resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma was accomplished with margin-negative resections. Combined bile duct and liver resection with caudate lobectomy contributed to a higher margin-negative resection rate in the Nagoya cohort.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.