Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 12/2006

01-12-2006

Disruption of the Middle Hepatic Vein is not Crucial for Liver Regeneration of the Remnant Liver After Right Hemihepatectomy for Hepatic Tumors

Authors: Daisuke Morioka, MD, PhD, Kuniya Tanaka, MD, PhD, Hitoshi Sekido, MD, PhD, Ken-ichi Matsuo, MD, PhD, Mitsutaka Sugita, MD, PhD, Michio Ueda, MD, Itaru Endo, MD, PhD, Shinji Togo, MD, PhD, Hiroshi Shimada, MD, PhD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 12/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To clarify the role of the middle hepatic vein (MHV) in liver regeneration of the remnant liver after right hemihepatectomy for hepatic tumors, we reviewed 29 patients to evaluate liver regeneration for up to 12 postoperative months.

Methods

Volume regeneration of the remnant liver was investigated by computed tomography at 3, 6, and 12 postoperative months. The remnant liver was divided into the following three areas: the medial section (segment IV), the lateral section (segments II and III), and segment I. The patients were divided into two groups: group A (n = 17), in which the MHV was preserved in the remnant liver, and group B (n = 12), in which the MHV was removed.

Results

Volume regeneration of each area continued until 6 postoperative months but did not increase thereafter. On univariate analysis, differences in the volume regeneration of each area between the groups were not significant at any measured time point. Furthermore, disruption of the MHV was determined to not be crucial to the volume regeneration of any liver area on multivariate analysis. Only the resection volume (percentage) significantly affected liver regeneration of the remnant liver.

Conclusions

Disruption of the MHV does not decisively affect liver regeneration of remnant liver after right hemihepatectomy for hepatic tumors.
Literature
1.
Ou QJ, Hermann RE. The role of hepatic veins in liver operations. Surgery 1984; 95:381–91PubMed
2.
Beppu M, Fukuzaki T, Mitani K, Fujimoto K, Taniguchi S. Hepatic subsegmentectomy with segmental hepatic vein sacrifice. Arch Surg 1990; 125:1170–5PubMed
3.
Maema A, Imamura H, Takayama T, et al. Impaired volume regeneration of split livers with partial venous disruption: a latent problem in partial liver transplantation. Transplantation 2002; 73:765–9PubMedCrossRef
4.
Kido M, Ku Y, Fukumoto T, et al. Significant role of middle hepatic vein in remnant liver regeneration of right-lobe living donors. Transplantation 2003; 75:1598–600PubMedCrossRef
5.
Akamatasu N, Sugawara Y, Kaneko J, et al. Effects of middle hepatic vein reconstruction on right liver graft regeneration. Transplantation 2003; 76:832–7CrossRef
6.
Pomfret EA, Pomposelli JJ, Gordon FD, et al. Liver regeneration and surgical outcome in donors of right-lobe liver grafts. Transplantation 2003; 76:5–10PubMedCrossRef
7.
Heymsfield SB, Fulenwider T, Nordlinger B, Barlow R, Sones P, Kutner M. Accurate measurement of liver, kidney, and spleen volume and mass by computerized axial tomography. Ann Intern Med 1979; 90:185–7PubMed
8.
Kawasaki S, Makuuchi M, Matsunami H, et al. Preoperative measurement of segmental liver volume of donors for living related liver transplantation. Hepatology 1993; 18:1115–20PubMedCrossRef
9.
Urata K, Kawasaki S, Matsunami H, et al. Calculation of child and adult standard liver volume for liver transplantation. Hepatology 1995; 21:1317–21PubMedCrossRef
10.
Kubota K, Makuuchi M, Kusaka K, et al. Measurement of liver volume and hepatic functional reserve as a guide to decision-making in resectional surgery for hepatic tumors. Hepatology 1997; 26:1176–81PubMed
11.
The Brisbane 2000 Terminology of Liver Anatomy and Resection. Terminology Committee of the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association. HPB 2000; 2:333–9
12.
Uesaka K, Nimura Y, Nagino M. Changes in hepatic lobar function after right portal vein embolization. An appraisal by biliary indocyanine green excretion. Ann Surg 1996; 223:77–83PubMedCrossRef
13.
Nagino M, Ando M, Kamiya J, Uesaka K, Sano T, Nimura Y. Liver regeneration after major hepatectomy for biliary cancer. Br J Surg 2001; 88:1084–91PubMedCrossRef
14.
Yamanaka N, Okamoto E, Oriyama T, et al. A prediction scoring system to select the surgical treatment of liver cancer. Further refinement based on 10 years of use. Ann Surg 1994; 219:342–6PubMedCrossRef
15.
Liu CL, Fan ST, Lo CM, Poon RTP, Wong J. Anterior approach for major right hepatic resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg 2000; 232:25–31PubMedCrossRef
16.
Du Bois D, Du Bois EF. A formula to estimate the approximate surface area if height and weight be known. Arch Intern Med 1916; 17:863–71
17.
Ichida F, Omata M, Tsuji T. Diagnostic criterion of chronic hepatitis: new Inuyama classification. In: Proceedings of the 19th Inuyama Symposium. Tokyo, Japan, 1996
18.
Kokudo N, Tada K, Seki M, et al. Anatomical major resection versus nonanatomical limited resection for liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Am J Surg 2001; 181:153–9PubMedCrossRef
19.
Naganuma H, Ishida H, Konno K, et al. Intrahepatic venous collaterals. Abdom Imaging 1998; 23:166–71PubMedCrossRef
20.
Kaneko T, Kaneko K, Sugimoto H, et al. Intrahepatic anastomosis formation between the hepatic veins in the graft liver of the living related liver transplantation: observation by Doppler ultrasonography. Transplantation 2000; 70:982–5PubMedCrossRef
21.
Sugimoto H, Kaneko T, Nakao A. Anastomosis between the middle and right hepatic vein. Hepatogastroenterology 2002; 49:1257–8PubMed
Metadata
Title
Disruption of the Middle Hepatic Vein is not Crucial for Liver Regeneration of the Remnant Liver After Right Hemihepatectomy for Hepatic Tumors
Authors
Daisuke Morioka, MD, PhD
Kuniya Tanaka, MD, PhD
Hitoshi Sekido, MD, PhD
Ken-ichi Matsuo, MD, PhD
Mitsutaka Sugita, MD, PhD
Michio Ueda, MD
Itaru Endo, MD, PhD
Shinji Togo, MD, PhD
Hiroshi Shimada, MD, PhD
Publication date
01-12-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 12/2006
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-006-9087-8

Other articles of this Issue 12/2006

Annals of Surgical Oncology 12/2006 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Nuclear Translocation of β-Catenin Protein but Absence of β-Catenin and APC Mutation in Gastrointestinal Carcinoid Tumor

OriginalPaper

Surgery in Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: The Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie (AGO) DESKTOP OVAR Trial

OriginalPaper

Utilizing Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction to Evaluate Prostate Stem Cell Antigen as a Tumor Marker in Pancreatic Cancer

OriginalPaper

Second Hepatectomy for Recurrent Colorectal Liver Metastasis: Analysis of Preoperative Prognostic Factors

OriginalPaper

Learning Curve for Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation of Pulmonary Metastases From Colorectal Carcinoma: A Prospective Study of 70 Consecutive Cases

OriginalPaper

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Atypical Melanocytic Lesions with Spitzoid Features