103

In contrast to these somewhat convincing surgical obs

103

In contrast to these somewhat convincing surgical observations, several reports provided data challenging this “hyperperfusion theory”. A series of small grafts (GRWR <0.8%) were successfully used without any attempt at a decompression of the venous system.14 Other researchers113 compared patients who received large versus small grafts. Both reports failed to identify selleck screening library any differences in outcome, suggesting that a high portal flow is of little relevance. The group of S. T. Fan, in Hong Kong, China, recently suggested that the limiting factor is at the level of the outflow (hepatic veins) rather than the inflow (portal vein).114 In a study including 46 LDLT recipients, they did not observe any correlation between portal inflow, portal pressure, and SFSS. The authors explained this observation by the routine GS 1101 inclusion of the middle hepatic vein for the right hemi-liver grafts. Despite the use of a number of grafts with GRWR <0.8%, only one patient disclosed signs of moderate sinusoidal congestion114

(Fig. 8). These results lead to the conclusion that the protective effects of interventions leading to decompression of the portal system are only useful in the presence of an outflow impairment. However, the definition of SFSS requires that technical problems are excluded. Therefore, we propose that the “portal hyperperfusion theory” should not be a feature of SFSS. In this section, we will cover a variety of proven and promising protective strategies to prevent and treat SFSS after major liver resection and partial OLT. Several strategies apply only to one of the procedures, whereas others may confer benefits

in both hepatectomy and transplantation. There is strong evidence that impaired regeneration is the major mechanism leading to SFSS in animal models as well as in humans. Therefore, most of the strategies target on liver regeneration. Some novel strategies MCE公司 are available to increase volume and function of the potential remnant liver (also called future remnant liver) in patients who will undergo major liver resection. It is well-described that selective occlusion of a portal branch causes atrophy of the hepatic territory supplied by this vein and hypertrophy of the contralateral part.115 Atrophy of the occluded hemi-liver occurs through an increased apoptotic activity, whereas hypertrophy of the nonoccluded lobe is due to increased hepatocyte proliferation (hyperplasia). Interruption of a portal branch can be achieved by several methods such as selective embolization by a radiology-guided transhepatic approach,13 or by surgical ligation. In most cases, occlusion is performed at the right portal vein in preparation for a right or extended right hemi-hepatectomy, if the potential left liver remnant is thought to be too small.1, 115-117 Most surgeons consider a major resection about 4 weeks after portal vein occlusion.

This entry was posted in Antibody. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>