|
RW Parks, OJ Garden
Department
of Clinical and Surgical Sciences (Surgery), University of
Edinburgh, UK
Correspondence to: RW Parks, MD FRCS, Senior Lecturer in
Surgery
, Department of Clinical and Surgical Sciences (Surgery), University
of Edinburg
h, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Lauriston Place, Edinburgh, EH3
9YW, UK. r.w.p
arks@ed.ac.uk
Telephone: +44-131-536 3817, Fax: +44-131-226 2881
Received 2001-05-15 Accepted 2001-06-15
Subject headings: hepatectomy; liver neoplasms/surgery; human;
review
Parks RW, Garden OJ. Liver resection for cancer. World J
Gastroenterol, 2001;7(6):766-771
HISTORY OF HEPATIC RESECTION
The earliest hepatic surgery was almost exclusively performed
for trauma with records from as far back as 1870[1,2].Among
the earliest liver resectio
ns performed for tumor were those of Langenbuch in 1888[3],
Tiffany in
1890[4], and Lucke in 1891[5]. By 1899, 76
cases of liver resect
ion had been reported with a mortality rate of 14.9%[6],
a remarkably low figure for operations of this magnitude, all
performed at the end of the 19th century. Wendel undertook the first
anato
mical resection for liver cancer in 1911 when he performed a right
lobectomy. The patient who had a primary hepatocellular carcinoma
survived for 9 years following the resection[7]. The
earliest methods of achieving haemostasis were by electrocautery,
elastic tourniquet, and suturing with flexible blunt needles. In
1902, Pringle described
compression of the portal triad as a technique to reduce bleeding. A
year later Anschutz described finger fracture although this was
popularized much late
r by Lin[8]. Over the past 50 years, the basic techniques
of liver surgery have been refined and developed. Improved survival
and reduced mortality
rates associated with hepatic resection have resulted in a broader
application
of these operations, nonetheless, the majority of procedures are
performed with a curative intent, although occasionally a palliative
procedure may be considered.
BASIC HEPATIC ANATOMY
Precise knowledge of the surgical anatomy of the liver is
essential before embar
king on hepatic resection. The liver is supported beneath the
diaphragm by the reflections of its visceral peritoneum, namely the
right and left coronary ligaments, the left triangular ligament and
the falciform ligament. There have been many descriptions of the
internal architecture of the liver, but that reported by Couinard in
1957[9] is the most widely recognized and remain
s the most clinically useful description for the hepatic surgeon.
The anatomical divide between the right and left liver is not at the
falciform ligament but in a plane which runs from the gallbladder
fossa to the inferior vena cava and is known as the midplane of the
liver (the principal plane or Cantlie’s line). Within this
imaginary plane runs the middle hepatic vein whic
h drains into the vena cava at a common confluence with the left
hepatic vein. The right and left hemilivers are themselves further
divided by the right and left hepatic vein and the right and left
branches of the portal vein. Couinaud identified eight segments in
the liver, each supplied by its own portal venous and hepatic
arterial pedicle and each drained by a single bile duct. Terminology
for various anatomical portions of the liver and the surgical remova
l of these portions continues to evolve. The Terminology Committee
of the Intern
ational Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association recently published a
description
of the newest terminology of hepatic anatomy and liver resections[10].
It had no responsibility to investigate anatomy per se and based its
report
on accepted internal liver anatomy. Right hepatectomy (or
hemihepatectomy) and left hepatectomy (or hemihepatectomy) are the
appropriate terms for removal of the right and left sides of the
liver respectively. Any individual anatomical segment of the liver
can be removed, the procedure being referred to as a segmentectomy.
Groupings of segments can also be removed and these procedures may
be referred to as sectionectomies (or sectorectomies) (Figure 1 a,b).
Figure 1(PDF)
(a) Solitary hepatic metastasis occupying segment 4, 5 and 8,
managed by trisegmental resection. (b) CT scan at one year showing
hypertrophy of residual left lobe and segments 6/7.
PREOPERATIVE ASSESSMENT
The aim of preoperative investigations should be to determine
the nature of the
lesion and assess whether it is resectable. Furthermore, the
relationship of the
tumour to the hepatic vasculature will aid a decision as to the
probable surgic
al procedure. Liver function tests are frequently abnormal in
patients with malignant liver disease and particular attention
should be paid to the coagulation profile. Hepatitis B and C antigen
screening should be undertaken in view of the associat
ion between primary hepatocellular carcinoma and hepatitis.
Elevation in tumour
markers such as carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) or alphafetoprotein (AFP)
may point towards a diagnosis of colorectal liver metastasis or
primary hepatocellul
ar carcinoma and will serve as a useful baseline for further
follow-up. Characterisation of hepatic lesions is provided by
radiological imaging of the liver. Ultrasonography (US) and computed
tomography (CT) are the cornerstone of diagnosis and often
complement one another. However, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is
becoming more widely available and may supersede these imaging
techniques as the principal radiological investigation. A particular
advantage of MRI is its ability to show major blood vessels
accurately and demonstrate their relationship to tumour masses.
Abdominal ultrasonography gives information regarding the number and
size of hep
atic lesions and will distinguish liver cysts from solid tumours. If
ultrasonography shows multiple solid lesions suggesting incurable
malignancy, a biopsy may
be performed during the same session to obtain a pathological
diagnosis. Duplex
ultrasonography may provide additional information regarding
involvement of majo
r blood vessels and may be particularly useful in the preoperative
evaluation of
hilar cholangiocarcinoma[11]. Computed tomography may
provide more detailed information on the number and size
of liver lesions. Most metastases are hypovascular and appear as low
attenuatio
n lesions on contrast-enhanced CT scanning. Tumours that may be
hypervascular i
n relation to normal hepatic parenchyma (e.g. primary hepatocellular
carcinoma and metastases from pancreatic islet cell tumou
r, carcinoid and renal cell carcinoma) may become isodense on a
contrast-enhanced CT scan and therefore these patients should
undergo both a non-contrast and dynamic contrast study. Dynamic CT
scanning ensures enhancement of
branches of the portal vein and the hepatic veins so that the
relationship of the lesion can be assessed with regard to the
hepatic vasculature. This enables
determination of resectability and planning of surgical resection.
CT arterioportography (CTAP) is a technique whereby the contrast
medium is delivered into the portal venous system without prior
systemic distrib
ution and dilution. This is achieved by selective catheterisation of
the superio
r mesenteric artery and results in greater hepatic parenchymal
enhancement. Technology now allows three-dimensional modelling of
the liver based on spiral
computed tomography images[12-14]. Such techniques not
only permit detai
led reconstruction of the vascular and biliary anatomy of the liver
but also offer the potential to measure liver volume before surgery
which could be useful
in determining the extent and nature of hepatic resection. Accurate
assessment
of liver volume and an estimate of liver function may also allow
prediction of postoperative liver failure in patients undergoing
resection, assist in volume-
enhancing embolisation procedures, help with planning of staged
hepatic resection for bilobar disease and aid in selection of
living-related liver donors. Wigmore et al have recently
demonstrated that virtual hepatectomy of 3-D CTAP reconstructed
images provides an accurate prediction of liver mass removed during
subsequent hepatic resection[15].
Several
techniques have been described for functional assessment of liver
capaci
ty. These measure drug excretion (e.g. lidocaine clearance[16]or
its metabolite monoethylglycinexylidine[17]) or dye
excretion (indocy
anine green[18,19]). In the future, in patients with
impaired hepatic function for whom liver resection is being
contemplated, it may be advantageous to combine a functional
assessment with
an estimation of liver volume to be resected by virtual hepatectomy
as described above. Hepatic angiography is not employed routinely in
modern clinical practice to pro
vide a specific diagnosis or aid in the planning of surgical
intervention, altho
ugh it may facilitate infusion of lipiodol which may demonstrate
“occult” hepatoma in cirrhotic patients being considered for
curative resection of primary hepatic malignancy. Laparoscopy is
increasingly used to allow direct visualisation of liver lesions and
can be combined with laparoscopic ultrasonogr
aphy to provide high resolution images[20]. Liver lesions
amenable to resection in patients who are fit for surgical interve
ntion should not be biopsied as this may be associated with
haemorrhage, samplin
g error, misdiagnosis and needle-tract tumour seeding. Percutaneous
biopsy should only be performed in those patients who are not
considered candidates for surgical intervention and only where the
results of biopsy might influence further management. In patients
with primary hepatocellular carcinoma, it may be valuable to take a
biopsy of the uninvolved liver to detect and determine the severity
of parenchymal liver disease such as chronic hepatitis or cirrhosis.
Extrahepatic
metastases should be sought by means of a chest CT scan before majo
r resection is undertaken, although it is accepted that pulmonary
nodules may no
t always represent metastatic deposits. Upper and lower
gastrointestinal endosco
py or barium studies, intravenous urography and mammography (in
female patients)
may be valuable in patients with a solitary liver metastasis of
unknown origin.
More recently, positron emission tomography (PET) and isotope
scanning using CE
A antibodies have been investigated and have shown promising results
in demonstr
ation of the hepatic lesions and in determining the extent of
extrahepatic disea
se[21]. Portal vein embolisation (PVE) of the hemiliver
to be resected has been proposed
to induce homolateral atrophy and contralateral compensatory
hypertrophy of the
remnant liver and thereby reduce the risk of postoperative liver
failure[22]. The concept of PVE appears to be well
accepted when performed on healthy liver when extensive resections
are being considered[23,24], however, its use in injured
liver is also becoming more widely accepted[23,
25,26].
PREOPERATIVE PREPARATION
Anaemia and coagulation disturbances should be corrected
preoperatively. Adminis
tration of vitamin K will improve coagulation disorders secondary to
poor nutrit
ion and absence of luminal bile salts in patients with biliary
obstruction, but
will not reverse coagulopathy secondary to hepatocellular
dysfunction. Fresh fro
zen plasma should be administered to correct the prothrombin time to
within 2 seconds of control before surgery if possible. Patients
with obstructive jaundice and portal hypertension have a higher risk
of
bleeding complications and hepatic decompensation in the
postoperative period.
Preoperative biliary drainage may improve some of the
pathophysiological disturb
ances associated with obstructive jaundice[27], however
placement of bil
iary endoprostheses may introduce infection and exacerbate
subsequent complicati
ons[28,29]. The role of preoperative biliary
decompression prior to definitive hepatic resection remains unclear.
Surgery in patients with active alcoholic hepatitis carries a
substantial risk and abstinence for as little as 3 months will
reduce this risk. Patients with active hepatitis who are on
long-term steroid therapy may require an increase in steroid cover
during the perioperative period. Ascites should be controlled
preoperatively by salt restriction and diuretic therapy as ascites
increases the risk of impaired wound healing. Assessment of
underlying liver disease is vitally important because, although ex
tensive hepatic resection may be well tolerated when the remaining
liver has nor
mal function, even minor resections in cirrhotic patients may be
poorly tolerate
d. The use of clinical and biochemical parameters (using the
modified Child-Pugh classification) in the assessment of surgical
risk in cirrhotic patients is well established and correlates well
with surgical risk.
OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES
Hepatic resection is performed under general anaesthetic with a
controlled centr
al venous pressure of less than mmHg. For the majority of hepatic
resecti
ons, the initial incision should be a bilateral subcostal incision.
Exposure may
be further improved in some patients with a narrow costal margin by
extending the incision in the midline upwards to the xiphoid
process. In patients with hepatic malignancy, a thorough search is
made of the peritoneum
and regional lymph nodes to exclude extrahepatic dissemination of
malignancy. The liver is carefully palpated and intraoperative
ultrasound is undertaken to confirm the position of the tumour and
its relationship to the hepatic vasculature. All major hepatic
resections mandate control of the inflow vasculature and hepat
ic venous outflow to and from the portion of the liver to be
resected with maint
enance of good hepatic arterial and portal venous blood supply to
the remnant. This may be done by dissection of the relevant portal
pedicle at the hilus and outside the liver substance as is the
authors’ preference, or alternatively, the major branches may be
secured within the liver following division of liver tissue. We have
not found it necessary to consider the use of total vascular
exclusion[30] in the last 10 years and have favoured
“classical” hepatic resection in preference to segmental
resections particularly for metastatic tumours[31].
Detailed descriptions of these various techniques are outwith the
scope of this article but can be referred to in many major texts[32,33].
The liver parenchyma can be transected in a number of ways, but it
is the authors’ preference to employ a Cavitron ultrasonic
surgical aspirator (CUSA) which skeletonises the vessels within the
hepatic parenchyma, allowing their identification before they are
damaged. Small vessels (<2mm)
can be secured by diathermy before division, although larger vessels
and branches of the hepatic veins are best secured by ligation or
application of clips. The relevant hepatic vein(s) may be divided
using a vascular stapler or clamped, divided and oversewn with a
continuous non-absorbable suture.
The
exposed raw surface of the transected liver, vena cava and
retroperitoneum are carefully inspected for any bleeding which
should be controlled with diathermy or suture. An argon beam
coagulator can be applied to the raw surface to ensure haemostasis.
Thrombin glue can also be sprayed on these areas to minimize the
risk of postoperative bile leakage. It is the authors’ preference
to place routinely a large tube drain connected to a closed drainage
system before wound closure.
POST-OPERATIVE MANAGEMENT
High dependency nursing care is required to provide adequate
observation of vita
l signs and conscious level in the postoperative period. Monitoring
includes reg
ular measurement of heart rate, blood pressure, central venous
pressure, oxygen
saturation, urine output and drain losses. Patients undergoing major
hepatic resection and those with poor preoperative liv
er function are at particular risk of developing postoperative
hepatic decompens
ation. Maintenance of adequate liver function can be judged by
regular assessmen
t of conscious level, acid base status, blood glucose levels, blood
lactate leve
ls and prothrombin time.
COMPLICATIONS
Despite improvements in surgical technique and perioperative
care, major complic
ations and death may occur following major hepatic resection and the
risks to th
e patient should not be underestimated. In a series of 133 hepatic
resections in
129 patients published from our own unit[34], the overall
operative mor
tality was 4.7%. Major early morbidity occurred in 20% of patients
and resulted in unplanned radiological or repeat operative
intervention, transfer to
the intensive care unit in some patients and prolongation of
hospital stay. Oth
er major series report similar morbidity and mortality rates[35,36].Postoperative
liver failure from inadequate functional residual liver tissue is
the leading cause of death after hepatectomy[37,38]. It
has been previou
sly reported that patients with a postoperative residual volume of
35% with good function are at low risk of developing liver failure[39].
However, in patients with impaired liver function, smaller
resections may be hazardous.
INDICATIONS FOR HEPATIC RESECTION
The main indication for hepatic resection is primary or
secondary hepatic malign
ancy. (Figure 2 a,b). Primary malignant hepatic lesions include
hepatocellular
carcinoma, and less common tumours such as cholangiocellular
carcinoma and haem
angiosarcoma. Liver resection for metastatic disease is
predominantly undertaken
for patients with colorectal metastases, however, resection has been
performed
for non-colorectal liver metastases. Hepatic resection is also
undertaken for c
ontiguous tumours involving the liver, such as in selected patients
with gallbla
dder carcinoma or cholangiocarcinoma involving the extrahepatic
biliary tree. The indication for hepatic resection for malignancy in
our own unit is shown in Table 1.
Hepatocellular
carcinoma (HCC) is one of the world’s most common malignancies and
is particularly challenging because it usually develops on a
background of chronic inflammatory liver disease[40]. The
mean overall survival of patients with untreated HCC is generally
reported to be 3 to 4 months after symptom
s appear, however, in Japan and other parts of the world where HCC
is being detected earlier, median survival times are nearly 6
months. Surgical resection
is the treatment of choice for HCC if the resection can be performed
safely and
will not leave gross residual disease, however, unfortunately only a
small propo
rtion of HCC’s are amenable to surgical removal. In non-cirrhotic
patients, the tumour has often reached a substantial size by the
time of presentation, whereas cirrhotic patients frequently have
compromised liver function sufficient to preclude even segmental
resection. The average survival time of patients who have undergone
resection is about 3 years. Five year actuarial survival rates of
60%-70% have been repor
ted in patients with Stage Ⅰ/Ⅱ
disease compared with corresponding survival
rates of 20%-30% in patients with more advanced disease (stage Ⅲ/Ⅳ)[41
,42]. Although the operative mortality rate from liver failure
after hepatect
omy for patients with HCC has decreased with experience[43],
it still ranges from 0%[44,45] to 32%[46-48].
Table 1 Indication for hepatic resection for malignancy in
Edinburgh (1988-2001)
|
Indication
|
Number
|
|
Primary
li
ver tumor
|
|
|
Hepatocellular
carcinoma
|
30
|
|
Intrahepatic
cholangiocarcinoma
|
8
|
|
Angiosarcoma
|
1
|
|
Clear
cell carcinoma
|
1
|
|
Metastatic
liver tumor
|
|
|
Colorectal
adenocarcinoma
|
131
|
|
Stromal
tumor
|
8
|
|
Carcinoid
tumor
|
7
|
|
Breast
metastases
|
2
|
|
Appendiceal
metastases
|
2
|
|
Metastatic
melanoma
|
2
|
|
Contiguous
tumor involving liver
|
|
|
Hilar
cholangiocarcinoma
|
29
|
|
Gallbladder
carcinoma
|
7
|
|
Adrenocortical
tumor
|
1
|
|
Total
|
230
|
Figure
2(PDF) (a)
Large solitary metastasis resected by extended right hepatectomy.
(b) CT scan showing hypertrophied left and caudate lobes with no
evidence of recurrence at one year.
Resection
if possible is the treatment of choice for colorectal metastases and
offers the only potential for cure[35,49]. Several
studies have document
ed the unfavourable prognosis of untreated hepatic metastases from
colorectal cancer. Without treatment, 60%-75% of patients are dead
at 1 year and the morta
lity rate at 3 years is almost 100%[50,51]. Five year
survival rates in patients undergoing hepatic resection for
colorectal metastases range between
25%-40% in most major centres[35,52,53]. Figures from the
authors’ unit demonstrate a 3-year survival rate of 65% in
patients who underwent resection of colorectal liver metastases[34].
The number of metastases is no longer considered to be as important
a predictor of long-term survival as previously[53,54].
Complete excision of all demonstrable tumour with clear resection
margins has been shown to be of much greater importance[35].
Segmental-based resection allows excision of bilateral or multiple
liver lesions that previously might have been deemed irresectable.
Staged resection is another technique whereby large volumes of liver
parenchyma may be resected without inducing hepatic insufficiency.
There is increasing evidence that selected patients who develop
recurrent hepatic tumour following previous resect
ion of colorectal liver metastases will benefit from re-resection[55,56].
Surgical
resection of hepatic metastases from neuroendocrine tumours is
curative
in some cases and is usually effective in relieving symptoms[57].
Palliative debulking or cytoreductive surgery is often worthwhile as
it offers a chance of prolonged survival and may cause complete or
partial relief of the incapacitating symptoms related to hormone
production. McEntee et al reported the outcome of 37 patients
(24 carcinoids and 13 islet cell tumours) who unde
rwent hepatic resection for metastatic neuroendocrine tumours[58].
Seventeen resections were considered curative and in this group,
results were encouraging in terms of survival and symptom relief,
however in patients undergo
ing palliative resection the mean duration of symptom relief was
only 6 months. Thompson et al, however, reported that
half their patients with islet cell tumours had symptomatic
improvement with a
mean duration of 39 months after noncurative resection[59].
The role of hepatic resection for non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine
metastases
is less well defined. Most studies report small numbers of patients
and must be
regarded as anecdotal. Schwartz’ review of the literature
concluded that litt
le improvement could be anticipated for resection of metastases from
tumours of
the oesophagus, stomach, small intestine or pancreas[60].
Similarly, there was little evidence to support routine resection of
metastases
from gynaecological or breast carcinomas, however, resection of
metastases from
primary renal cell carcinoma, Wilms’ tumour, and adrenocortical
carcinoma was
indicated. Harrison et al reported a single centre experience
of 96 patients
who underwent liver resection for non-colorectal, non-neuroendocrine
metastas
es with no perioperative deaths[61]. The overall survival
rate at 1, 3 and 5 years was 80%, 45% and 37% respectively (median
survival, 32 months), with 12 actual 5 year survivors. Patients with
genitourinary primary tumours exhibited the best outcome followed by
patients with primary soft tissue tumours (breast, melanoma and
sarcoma). Hepatic resection for non-colorectal gastroint
estinal primary tumours was generally associated with a poor
survival. Similar results have been reported from other centres
where long-term survival was only seen in patients with
non-GI-origin metastases[62
]. Contiguous cancer arising from the extrahepatic biliary
tree or gallbladder may
also be amenable to hepatic resection. A more aggressive approach to
the managem
ent of hilar cholangiocarcinoma in recent years has been associated
with improve
d long-term survival and quality of life[63-65]. In a
recently reported
series of 114 patients who presented with hilar cholangiocarcinoma,
98 patients
had a radical resection, three underwent palliative resection and
only 13 were
not treated surgically[66]. The operative mortality rate
was 4% and the 5-year survival rate was 28%. This report supports
the widely held view that radical resection provides the best
prognosis for selected patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma. A
number of recent studies have reported long-term survival after
radical surgery for gallbladder cancer[67,68]. Radical
regional lymphadenopathy may have survival benefits for patients
with node-positive disease[69,70]. Aggressive reresection
has been shown to be beneficial for patients with gallbladder cancer
discovered during or after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients
other than those with T1 tumours[71].
SUMMARY
Recent reports have highlighted consistently improved
perioperative morbidity an
d mortality rates following hepatic resection. Operative mortality
rates, even i
n cirrhotic patients, are less than 5% in most recent series. The
commonest indi
cation for hepatic resection is primary or secondary hepatic
malignancy and ther
efore appropriate preoperative assessment of such tumours is vitally
important.
Accurate radiological imaging, including the use of
three-dimensional reconstruction, will indicate if lesions are
resectable and will aid the decision regarding the likely surgical
procedure. Portal vein embolisati
on is becoming a more wid
ely accepted technique to induce contralateral hypertrophy reducing
the risk of
postoperative hepatic impairment and therefore increasing the
indications for li
ver resection. The selection and subsequent management of patients
with primary
and secondary hepatic malignancy requires a multidisciplinary team
approach invo
lving hepatologists, radiologists, anaesthetists and surgeons and
therefore the
care of such patients should be undertaken in specialist
hepatobiliary centres.
Whilst accepting that hepatic resection offers the only prospect of
cure for man
y patients, it is evident that future efforts will also be focused
on determinin
g the role of adjuvant treatments to reduce the inevitable
recurrence of tumour
which occurs in the majority of patients.
REFERENCES
1
Terrier F, Auvray M. Les traumatismes du foie et des voies biliaires.
Rev Chir, 1896;16:717-776
2 Beck J. Surgery of the liver. JAMA,
1902;38:1063-1068
3 Langenbuch C. Ein Fall von Resektion eines
linksseitigen Schnurlappens der Leber, Heilung. Berl Klin Wochenschr,
1888;25:37-38
4 Tiffany LM. Surgery of the liver. Boston Med
Surg J, 1890;122:557
5 Lucke T. Entfernung des linken krebsigen
Leberlappans. Zentralbl Chir, 1891;18:115-116
6 Keen WW. Report of a case of resection of the
liver for the removal of a neoplasm, with a table of seventy-six
cases
of
resection of the liver
for hepatic tumours. Ann Surg, 1899;30:267-283
7 Wendel W. Ueber Leberlappenresektion. Arch Klin
Chir, 1920;114:982-1000
8 Lin TY, Chen KM, Liu TK. Total right hepatic
lobectomy for primary hepatoma. Surgery, 1960;48:1048-1060
9 Couinaud C. Le foie. Etudes anatomique et
chirurgicales. Paris, Masson, 1957
10 Terminology Committee of the International Hepato-Pancreat
o-Biliary Association. The Brisbane 2000 terminology of
liver
anatomy and re
sections. HPB, 2000; 2: 333-339
11 Hann LE, Greatrex K, Bach AM, Fong Y, Blumgart LH.
Cholangiocarcin
oma at the hepatic hilus: sonographic findings.
Am
J Roenterol, 1997;168:985-989
12 Marescaux J, Clement J, Tassetti V. Virtual reality applied
to hepatic
surgery simulation: the next revolution.
Ann
Surg, 1998;228:627-634
13 Hashimoto D, Dohi T, Eng D. Development of a computer-aided
surgery system: three-dimensional graphic
reconstruction
for treatment of liver ca
ncer. Surgery, 1991;109:589-596
14 Soyer P, Breittmayer F, Gad M. Imagerie tridimensionelle de
la segme
ntation heapique: anatomie et volumetrie. Rev
Imag
Med, 1991;3:741-745
15 Wigmore SJ, Redhead DN, Yan XJ, Casey J, Madhavan K, Dejong
CHC, Currie EJ, Garden OJ. Virtual hepatic resection
using
three-dimensional recon
struction of helical computed tomography angioportograms. Ann Surg,
2001;233:221-226
16 Forrest JA, Finlayson ND, Adjepon-Yamoah K. Antipyrine,
paracet
amol and lignocaine elimination in chronic liver disease.
Br
Med J, 1977;1:1384-1387
17 Oellerich M, Ringe B, Gubernatis G. Lignocaine metabolite
formation as a measure of pre-transplant liver function.
Lancet,
1989;1:640-642
18 Moody FG, Rikkers LF, Aldrete JS. Estimation of the
functional reserv
e of the human liver. Ann Surg, 1974;180:592-598
19 Hemming AW, Scudamore CH, Shackleton CR. Indocyanine green
clearance
as a predictor of successful hepatic
resection
in cirrhotic patients. Am J Surg, 1992;163:515-518
20 John TG, Greig JD, Crosbie JL, Miles WFA, Garden OJ.
Superior staging
of liver tumours with laparoscopy and
laparoscopic
ultrasound. Ann Surg, 1994;220:711-719
21 Hughes K, Pinsky CM, Petrelli NJ. Use of carcinoembryonic
antig
en radioimmunodetection and computed tomography
for
predicting the resectabili
ty of recurrent colorectal cancer. Ann Surg, 1997;226:621-631
22 Makuuchi M, Le Thai B, Takayasu K. Preoperative portal
embolization
to increase safety of major hepatectomy for hilar
bile
duct carcinoma: a preliminary report. Surgery,
1990;107:521-527
23 Imamura H, Shimada R, Kubota M. Preoperative portal vein
embo
lization: an audit of 84 cases. Hepatology,
1999;29:1099-1105
24 Azoulay D, Castaing D, Smail A. Resection of nonresectable
liver metastases from colorectal cancer after percutaneous
portal
vein embolization. Ann Surg, 2000;231:480-486
25 Yamakado K, Takeda K, Matsumara K. Regeneration of the
unembolized liver parenchyma following portal vein
embolization.
J Hepatol, 1997;27:871-880
26 Azoulay D, Castaing D, Krissat J. Percutaneous portal vein
embo
lization increases the feasibility and safety of major
liver
resection for hepatocellular
carcinoma in injured liver. Ann Surg, 2000;232:665-672
27 Parks RW, Clements WDB, Smye M, Pope C, Rowlands BJ,
Diamond T. Inte
stinal barrier dysfunction in clinical and
experimental
obstructive jaundice and its reversal by internal biliary
drainage. Br J Surg, 1996;83:1345-1349
28 Parks RW, Currie EJ, Madhavan KK, Garden OJ. Increased
bacterobili
a associated with preoperative biliary drainage in
patients
with hilar cholangio
carcinoma. HPB (In press).
29 Hochwald SN, Burke EC, Jarnagin WR. Association of
preoperative biliary stenting with increased postoperative
infectious
complications in
proximal cholangiocarcinoma. Arch Surg, 1999;134:261-266
30 Bismuth H, Castaing D, Garden OJ. Major hepatic resection
under total
vascular exclusion. Ann Surg, 1989;210:13-19
31 Wigmore SJ, Madhavan K, Currie EJ, Bartolo DC, Garden OJ.
Does the subspeciality of the surgeon performing primary
colonic
resection influence the outcome of patients with hepatic
metastases referred for resection? Ann Surg,
1999;230:759-766
32 Carter DC, Russell RCG, Pitt HA, Bismuth H. Rob &
Smith’s Operative Surgery-Hepatobiliary and pancreatic
surgery.
5th ed.
London: Chapman & Hall Medical, 1996.
33 Blumgart LH, Fong Y. Surgery of the liver and biliary
tract. 3rd
ed. London: WB Saunders, 2000.34Finch MD, Crosbie JL,
Currie
E, Garden OJ. An 8-year experience of hepatic resection: indications
and outcome. Br J Surg, 1998;85:315-319
35 Scheele J, Stang R, Attendorf-Hofmann A, Martin P.
Resection of colorectal liver metastases. World J Surg,
1995;19:59-71
36 Rees M, Plant G, Bygrave S. Late results justify resection
for multipl
e hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Br J
Surg,
1997;84:1136-1140
37 Detroz B, Sugarbakar PH, Knol JA. Causes of death in
patients undergoing liver surgery. Cancer Treat Res,
1994;69:241-257
38 Zimmermann H, Reichen J. Hepatectomy: preoperative analysis
of hepatic
function and postoperative liver function.
Review
Dig Surg, 1998;15:1-11
39 Yanaga K, Honda H, Ikeda Y. Significance of liver size in
hepatic surgery. HPB Surg, 1997;10:195-200
40 Akriviadis EA, Llovet JM, Efremidis SC, Shouval D, Canelos
R, Ringe B, Meyers WC. Hepatocellular carcinoma.
Br
J Surg, 1998;85:1319-1331
41 Ringe B, Pichlmayer R, Wittekind C, Tusch G. Surgical
treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: experience with liver
resection
and transplantation in 198 patients. World J Surg,
1991;15:270-285
42 Iwatsuki S, Starzl TE, Sheahan DG, Yokoyama I, Demetris AJ,
Todo S.
Hepatic resection versus transplantation for
hepatocellular
carcinoma. Ann Surg, 1991;214:221-229
43 Glasgow RE, Showstack JA, Katz PP. The relationship between
hospital volume and outcomes of hepatic resection for
hepatocellular
carcinoma. Arch Surg, 1999;134:30-35
44 Fan ST, Lo CM, Liu CL. Hepatectomy for hepatocellular
carcinoma: towards zero hospital mortality. Ann Surg,
1999;229:322-330
45 Torzilli G, Makuuchi M, Inoue K. No-mortality liver
resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic and noncirrhotic
patients.
Arch Surg, 1999;134:984-992
46 Fong Y, Sun RL, Jarnagin W, Blumgart LH. An analysis of 412
cases of hepatocellular carcinoma at a Western centre.
Ann
Surg, 1999;229:790-800
47 Shuto T, Hirohashi K, Kubo S. Efficacy of major hepatic
resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma.
Hepato-Gastroenterology,
1999;46:413-416
48 Farges O, Malassagne B, Flejou JF. Risk of major liver
resection in patients with underlying chronic liver disease. A
reappraisal.
Ann Surg,
1999;229:210-215
49 Fong Y, Blumgart LH, Cohen AM. Surgical treatment of
colorectal metastases to the liver. CA Cancer J Clin,
1995;45:50-62
50 Pestana C, Reitemeier RJ, Moertel CG. The natural history
of carcinoma of the colon and rectum. Am J Surg,
1964;108:826-829
51 Bengmark S, Hafstrom L, Keppsson B. Metastatic disease in
the liver from colorectal cancer: an appraisal of liver
surgery.
World J Surg, 1982;6:61-65
52 Taylor M, Forster J, Langer B, Taylor BR, Greig PD, Mahut
C. A study of prognostic factors for hepatic resection for
colorectal
metastases. Am J Surg, 1997;173:467-471
53 Jaeck D, Bachellier P, Guiguet M. Long-term survival
following resection of colorectal hepatic metastases.
Br
J Surg, 1997;84:977-980
54 Geoghegan JG, Scheele J. Treatment of colorectal liver
metastases. Br J Surg, 1999;86:158-169
55 Fong Y, Blumgart LH, Cohen A, Fortner J, Brennan MF. Repeat
hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann
Surg,
1994;220:657-662
56 Hemming AW, Langer B. Repeat resection of recurrent hepatic
colorectal
metastases. Br J Surg, 1994;81:1553-1554
57 Ihse I, Persson B, Tibblin S. Neuroendocrine metastases of
the liver.
World J Surg, 1995;19:76-82
58 McEntee GP, Nagorney DM, Kvols LK, Moertel CG, Grant CS.
Cytoreductive
hepatic surgery for neuroendocrine tumors.
Surgery,
1990;108:1091-1096
59 Thompson GB, van Heerden JA, Grant CS. Islet cell carcinoma
of the pancreas: a twenty year experience.
Surgery,
1988;104:1011-1017
60 Schwartz SI. Hepatic resection for noncolorectal
nonneuroendocrine metastases. World J Surg, 1995;19:72-75
61 Harrison LE, Brennan MF, Newman E, Fortner JG, Picardo A,
Blumgart
LH, Fong Y. Hepatic resection for noncolorectal
nonneuroendocrine
metastases: A fifteen-year experience with ninety-six patients.
Surgery, 1997;121:625-632
62 Hemming AW, Sielaff TD, Gallinger S, Cattral MS, Taylor BR,
Greig PD, Langer B. Hepatic resection of noncolorectal
nonneuroendocrine
metastases. Liver Transplantation, 2000;6:97-101
63 Su CH, Tsay SH, Wu CC, Shyr YM, King KL, Lee CH. Factors
infl
uencing postoperative morbidity, mortality, and survival
after
resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg,
1996;223:384-394
64 Nimura Y, Kamiya J, Nagino M, Kanai M, Uesaka K, Kondo S.
Aggressi
ve surgical treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma.
J
Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surg,
1998;5:52-61
65 Burke EC, Jarnagin WR, Hochwald SN, Pisters PWT, Fong Y,
Blumgart LH. Hilar cholangiocarcinoma patterns of spread,
the
importance of hepatic resection for curative operation, and a
presurgical clinical staging system. Ann Surg,
1998;228:385-394
66 Todoroki T, Kawamoto T, Koike N, Takahashi H, Yoshida S,
Kashiwagi H, Takada Y, Otsuka M, Fukao K. Radical
resection
of hilar bile duct
carcinoma and predictors of survival. Br J Surg, 2000;87:306-313
67 Barlett DL, Fong Y, Fortner JG, Brennan MF, Blumgart LH.
Long-term results after resection for gallbladder cancer.
Implications
for staging and management. Ann Surg, 1996;224:639-646
68 Benoist S, Panis Y, Fagniez PL. French University
Association for Surgical Research. Long-term results after
curative
resection
for carcinoma of
the gallbladder. Am J Surg, 1998;175:118-122
69 Shimada H, Endo I, Togo S, Nakano A, Izumi T, Nakagawara G.
The role of lymph node dissection in the treatment of
gallbladder
cancer. Cancer, 1997;79:892-899
70 Kondo S, Nimura Y, Hayakawa N, Kamiya J, Nagino M, Uesaka
K. Regional and para-aortic lymphadenectomy in radical
surgery
for advanced gallbladder
carcinoma. Br J Surg, 2000;87:418-422
71 Fong Y, Heffernan N, Blumgart LH. Gallbladder carcinoma
discovered during
laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Cancer,
1998;83:423-427
| |