Patency for autologous vein is superior to cadaveric vein in portal-mesenteric venous reconstruction.
Journal
HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association
ISSN: 1477-2574
Titre abrégé: HPB (Oxford)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100900921
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2022
08 2022
Historique:
received:
17
11
2021
revised:
03
01
2022
accepted:
14
01
2022
pubmed:
10
2
2022
medline:
4
8
2022
entrez:
9
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Portal venous reconstruction (PVR) is often needed during resection of hepatopancreato-biliary (HPB) malignancies. Primary repair (PR), autologous vein (AV), or cryopreserved cadaveric vein (CCV) are frequently utilized, however relative patency is not well studied. All patients undergoing PVR between 2007-2019 at our center were identified. 3-year primary patency (PP), overall survival (OS), and survival-adjusted patency (SAP) were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards modeling. One-hundred-twenty patients were identified with a median follow-up of 11 months. PR, AV, and CCV reconstruction were used in 28 (23%), 35 (29%), and 57 (48%) patients, respectively, with two (7%), four (11%), and 29 (51%) thromboses, respectively. 3-year PP was greater for both primary repair (90%) and AV (83%) compared to CCV (33%, both p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, CCV had worse 3-year PP (HR 7.89, p=0.005) and SAP (HR 2.09, p=0.02) compared to PR; AV reconstruction had equivalent oncologic and patency-related outcomes to PR (p>0.4 for both comparisons). Primary patency for PR and AV reconstruction is superior to CCV for PVR during resection of HPB malignancies. AV conduit should be the preferred choice of reconstruction when PR is not achievable. Surgeons should only use CCV when factors preclude PR/AV reconstruction.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Portal venous reconstruction (PVR) is often needed during resection of hepatopancreato-biliary (HPB) malignancies. Primary repair (PR), autologous vein (AV), or cryopreserved cadaveric vein (CCV) are frequently utilized, however relative patency is not well studied.
METHODS
All patients undergoing PVR between 2007-2019 at our center were identified. 3-year primary patency (PP), overall survival (OS), and survival-adjusted patency (SAP) were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards modeling.
RESULTS
One-hundred-twenty patients were identified with a median follow-up of 11 months. PR, AV, and CCV reconstruction were used in 28 (23%), 35 (29%), and 57 (48%) patients, respectively, with two (7%), four (11%), and 29 (51%) thromboses, respectively. 3-year PP was greater for both primary repair (90%) and AV (83%) compared to CCV (33%, both p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, CCV had worse 3-year PP (HR 7.89, p=0.005) and SAP (HR 2.09, p=0.02) compared to PR; AV reconstruction had equivalent oncologic and patency-related outcomes to PR (p>0.4 for both comparisons).
CONCLUSIONS
Primary patency for PR and AV reconstruction is superior to CCV for PVR during resection of HPB malignancies. AV conduit should be the preferred choice of reconstruction when PR is not achievable. Surgeons should only use CCV when factors preclude PR/AV reconstruction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35135725
pii: S1365-182X(22)00037-5
doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2022.01.004
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1326-1334Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.