Objective: Vascular reconstruction can facilitate pancreas tumor resection, but optimal methods of reconstruction are not well studied. We report our results for portal vein reconstruction (PVR) for pancreatic resection and determinants of postoperative patency.
Methods: We identified 173 patients with PVR in a prospective database of 6522 patients who underwent pancreatic resection at our hospital from 1970 to 2014. There were 128 patients who had >1 year of follow-up with computed tomography imaging. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors were recorded. Patients with and without postoperative PVR thrombosis were compared by univariable, multivariable, and receiver operating characteristic curve analyses.
Results: The survival of patients was 100% at 1 month, 88% at 6 months, 66% at 1 year, and 39% on overall median follow-up of 310 days (interquartile range, 417 days). Median survival was 15.5 months (interquartile range, 25 months); 86% of resections were for cancer. Four types of PVR techniques were used: 83% of PVRs were performed by primary repair, 8.7% with interposition vein graft, 4.7% with interposition prosthetic graft, and 4.7% with patch. PVR patency was 100% at 1 day, 98% at 1 month, 91% at 6 months, and 83% at 1 year. Patients with PVR thrombosis were not significantly different from patients with patent PVR in age, survival, preoperative comorbidities, tumor characteristics, perioperative blood loss or transfusion, or postoperative complications. They were more likely to have had preoperative chemotherapy (53% vs 9%; P < .0001), radiation therapy (35% vs 2%; P < .0001), and prolonged operative time (618 ± 57 vs 424 ± 20 minutes; P = .002) and to develop postoperative ascites (76% vs 22%; P < .001). Among patients who developed ascites, 38% of those with PVR thrombosis did so in the setting of tumor recurrence at the porta detected on imaging, whereas among patients with patent PVR, 50% did so (P = .73). Patients with PVR thrombosis were more likely to have had prosthetic graft placement compared with patients with patent PVRs (18% vs 2.7%; P = .03; odds ratio [OR], 7.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-42). PVR patency overall was significantly worse for patients who had an interposition prosthetic graft reconstruction (log-rank, P = .04). On multivariable analysis, operative time (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02) and prosthetic graft placement (OR, 8.12; 95% CI, 1.1-74) were independent predictors of PVR thrombosis (C statistic = 0.88).
Conclusions: Long operative times and use of prosthetic grafts for reconstruction are risk factors for postoperative portal vein thrombosis. Primary repair, patch, or vein interposition should be preferentially used for PVR in the setting of pancreatic resection.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2015.01.061 | DOI Listing |
Gastro Hep Adv
September 2024
Section of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Portal vein recanalization transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS) is a safe and effective procedure for decompression of portal hypertension (PH). In this short case series, 2 women with chronic noncirrhotic portal vein thrombosis were treated with PVR-TIPS. Both patients hoped to conceive.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCardiovasc Intervent Radiol
January 2025
Interventional Radiology, Hospital Sírio Libanês, São Paolo, Brazil.
Purpose: This study assesses the efficacy and safety of Portal Vein Recanalization with Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (PVR-TIPS) in non-cirrhotic patients with chronic portal vein occlusion (CPVO), cavernomatous transformation, and symptomatic portal hypertension (PH) and/or portal vein thrombotic progression.
Material And Methods: Medical records of 21 non-cirrhotic patients with CPVO and portal cavernoma undergoing PVR-TIPS were analyzed. Hemodynamic (intraprocedural reduction in portosystemic pressure gradient), clinical (data on gastrointestinal bleeding, abdominal pain, ascites, and presence of esophageal varices from imaging exams) and technical success (PVR-TIPS) assessed efficacy.
CVIR Endovasc
December 2024
Department of Gastroenterology, Medical University Innsbruck, Anichstrasse 35, Innsbruck, 6020, Austria.
Background: Three patients with portal hypertension and gastrointestinal bleeding due to non-cirrhotic portal vein thrombosis were treated with portal venous recanalization transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS) via a trans-splenic access.
Main Body: A "bottoms-up" retrograde puncture of the right hepatic vein was performed using a re-entry catheter to gain access to the right hepatic vein. In all patients a successful retrograde puncture of the right hepatic vein was achieved, thereby restoring the splenoportal tract.
Ann Surg
December 2024
Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Objective: To investigate the incidence and risk factors of portomesenteric venous thrombosis (PVT) after pancreatic cancer surgery with portomesenteric venous resection (PVR).
Summary Background Data: Pancreatic cancer surgery with PVR can be complicated by PVT, but the long-term associations, risk factors, and consequences of PVT have not been clearly elucidated.
Methods: This study included pancreatic cancer patients undergoing any type of pancreatic resection with PVR at the University of Colorado Hospital between January 2012 and June 2023.
Eur Radiol
September 2024
Department of Radiology, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Bergamo, Italy.
Objectives: Portal hypertension resulting from non-cirrhotic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) in children has been primarily managed with the Meso-Rex bypass, but only a few patients have a viable Rex recessus, required by surgery. This study reports a preliminary series of patients who underwent interventional radiology attempts at portal vein recanalization (PVR), with a focus on technical aspects and safety.
Methods: A retrospective review of consecutive patients with severe portal hypertension due to non-cirrhotic EHPVO at a single institution from 2022, who underwent percutaneous attempts at PVR, was performed.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!