Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_1100_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
02.09.2026
Размер:
21 Мб
Скачать
21 Intraoperative Injury to Hepatic Arterial Structures
225
GDA if it has an initial inferior course. The PHA can also be mistaken for the LHA if the division into a RHA and LHA occurs distally in the porta hepatis. The safest technique to ensure selective ligation of the LHA is to perform a test clamp of the artery and ensure a contralateral pulse prior to division. A RLHA/ALHA is easily visualized in the gastrohepatic ligament, and contralateral arterial injury is not a concern as it is divided.
Hilar Tumors Tumors in the hepatic hilum can present unique surgical problems as they may invade vascular structures entering the liver. Hilar cholangiocarcinomas that extend along the left hepatic duct can present particular difficulty as they require a left hepatectomy to obtain a complete resection, while they can simultane­ously invade the RHA given the usual proximity of the RHA to the posterior aspect of the common hepatic duct. Both preoperative and intraopera­tive techniques have been described to address this, including preoperative embolization of the PHA [53, 80], and reconstruction of the RHA using the gastroepiploic artery, GDA, LHA, and vein grafts [75, 81].
Conclusions
Key Points: Preoperative Interventions
1. Evaluate normal and variant hepatic arterial anatomy using CT with arterial phase imaging and/or CT angiography.
2. Perform preoperative biliary drainage in jaun­diced patients with significant risk of injury, ligation, or thrombosis of any hepatic arterial branch.
3. In a hemi-hepatectomy, consider preoperative embolization of the arterial supply to the rem­nant liver if it is at substantial risk of ligation, injury, or thrombosis.
Consider stent or arterial bypass in patients
4. with hemodynamically rotic stenosis of the celiac artery and expect­ed operative ligation of the gastroduodenal artery.
Consider preoperative embolization of the
5. right
hepatic artery in patients requiring bili­ary reconstruction with significant risk of loss of both the right hepatic artery and the gastro­duodenal artery.
In situations where preservation of a hepatic
6. artery branch(es) is critical, preparations for possible operative recon­struction such as availability of appropriate grafts or surgical consultations.
significant atheroscle-
make necessary
The close relationship of hepatic arterial branch­es to structures in the porta hepatis and their frequent anatomic variations, compounded with the presence of tumors that often exhibit a tro­pism toward vasculature, render branches of the hepatic artery particularly susceptible to injury during HPB surgery. Fortunately, much experi­ence has been gained to aid our understanding of the anatomic and clinical factors that predispose the liver and biliary tree to complications follow­ing ligation of hepatic arterial branches. A thor­ough understanding of these clinical principles, comprehensive knowledge of normal and variant anatomy, careful preoperative radiologic evalu­ation, and meticulous intraoperative technique will allow surgeons to safely navigate potentially fatal clinical scenarios and minimize complica­tions following complex hepatobiliary and pan­creatic resections.
Key Points: Intraoperative Principles
1. Without jaundice, injury to a hepatic arterial branch(es) can generally be treated with li­gation, provided a single patent hepatic arte­rial branch remains. Injuries to the common and proper hepatic arteries have been safely treated with ligation, although reconstruction is reasonable.
2. With jaundice, injury to any hepatic arterial branch requires repair given the risk of hepat­ic necrosis and life-threatening complications with occlusion.
3. With a biliary-enteric anastomosis, ligation of either the right hepatic artery or the gastro­duodenal artery is safe. Ligation of both is not advised given the risk of anastomotic compli­cations.
226 V. P. Balachandran and M. I. D’Angelica
4. Loss of a pulse in the porta hepatis with gas­troduodenal artery clamping indicates celiac artery stenosis. Division of the gastroduodenal artery will hence risk significant hepatic/bili­ary ischemia and biliary-enteric anastomotic complications. Dividing sources of extrinsic compression and immediate or delayed opera­tive revascularization should be considered.
5.
During extrahepatic arterial ligation
in a he­mi-hepatectomy, test clamp and confirm a pulse to the contralateral liver remnant, and/or expose both hepatic arterial branches before ligation to avoid inadvertent injury to the con­tralateral arterial supply.
References
1. Shukla PJ, Barreto SG, Kulkarni A, Nagarajan G, Fingerhut A. Vascular anomalies encountered during pancreatoduodenectomy: do they inuence out­comes? Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;17(1):186–93.
2. Chamberlain RS, El-Sedfy A, rant hepatic arterial anatomy and the whipple procedure: lessons learned. Am Surg. [Review]. 2011;77(5):517–26.
3. Hann LE, Blumgart LH. Surgical anatomy of the liver, biliary tract, and pancreas. In: Jarnagin WR, editor. Blumgart’s surgery of the liver, pancreas and biliary tract. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2012.
4. Rocha FG. Liver blood ow: physiology, measure­ment, and clinical relevance. In: Jarnagin WR, editor. Blumgart’s surgery of the liver, pancreas, and biliary tract. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2012.
5. Northover JM, Terblanche rial supply of the bile duct in man and its surgical implications. Br J Surg. 1979;66(6):379–84.
6. Michels NA. Newer anatomy of the liver and its variant blood supply and collateral circulation. Am J Surg. 1966;112(3):337–47.
7. Hiatt JR, Gabbay J, Busuttil R of the hepatic arteries in 1000 cases. Ann Surg. [Review]. 1994;220(1):50–2.
8. Covey AM, Brody LA, Maluccio MA, Getrajdman GI, Brown KT. Variant hepatic arterial anatomy revisited: digital subtraction angiography performed in 600 patients. Radiology. 2002;224(2):542–7.
9. Koops A, Wojciechowski B, Broering DC, Adam G, Krupski-Berdien G. Anatomic variations of the hepatic arteries in 604 selective celiac and supe­rior mesenteric angiographies. Surg Radiol Anat. 2004;26(3):239–44.
10. Abdullah SS, Mabrut J-Y, Garbit V, Roche E, Olagne E, Rode A, et al. Anatomical variations of the hepatic
Rajkumar D. Aber-
and ragiologic
J. A new look at the arte-
W. Surgical anatomy
artery: study of 932 cases in liver transplantation. Surg Radiol Anat. 2006;28(5):468–73.
11.
López-Andújar R, Moya A, Montalvá E, Beren
guer M, De Juan M, San Juan F, et learned from anatomic variants of the hepatic artery in 1081 transplanted livers. Liver Transplant. 2007;13(10):1401–4.
12. Suzuki T, Nakayasu A, Kawabe K, Takeda H, Honjo
I. Surgical signicance of anatomic variations of the
hepatic artery. Am J Surg. 1971;122(4):505–12.
Daly JM, Kemeny N, Oderman P
13. hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy. Anatomic considerations, operative technique, and treatment morbidity. Arch Surg. 1984;119(8):936–41.
Rygaard H, Forrest M, Mygind
14. tomic variants of the hepatic arteries. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1986;27(4):425–7.
Chen CY, Lee RC, Tseng HS, Chiang JH, Hwang JI,
15. Teng MM. Normal and variant anatomy of hepatic arteries: angiographic experience. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi (Taipei). 1998;61(1):17–23.
16. De Santis M, Ariosi P, Calo GF, Romagnoli R. Hepatic arterial vascular anatomy and its variants. Radiol Med. 2000;100(3):145–51.
17.
Song S-Y, Chung JW,
al. Celiac axis
UB, et variations in 5002 patients: systematic analysis with spiral CT and DSA. Radiology. 2010;255(1):278–88.
Woods MS, T
18. common hepatic artery during pancreaticoduodenec­tomy. Am Surg. 1993;59(11):719–21.
19. Volpe CM, Peterson S, Hoover EL, Doerr RJ. Justi­cation for visceral angiography prior to pancreatico­duodenectomy. Am Surg. 1998;64(8):758–61.
20. Furukawa H, Shimada K, Iwata R, Moriyama N. A replaced common hepatic artery running through the pancreatic parenchyma. Surgery. 2000;127(6):711–2.
21.
Sakorafas GH, Sarr MG, Peros G. Celiac Artery Ste-
nosis: an underappreciated patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206(2):349–56.
22. Park CM, Chung JW, Kim HB, Shin SJ, Park JH. Celiac axis stenosis: incidence and etiologies in asymptomatic individuals. Korean J Radiol. 2001;2(1):8–13.
23. Berney T, Pretre R, Chassot G, Morel P. The role of revascularization in celiac occlusion and pancreato­duodenectomy. Am J Surg. 1998;176(4):352–6.
24. Corinne Winston JT. Computer tomography of the liver, biliary tract, and pancreas. In: Jarnagin WR, editor. Blumgart’s surgery of the liver, pancreas, and biliary tract. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders;
2012.
25. Sahani D, Saini S, Pena C, Nichols S, Prasad SR, Hahn PF, et al. Using multidetector CT operative vascular evaluation of liver neoplasms: technique and results. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179(1):53–9.
Takahashi S, Murakami T, Takamura M, Kim T, Hori
26. M, Narumi Y, et al. Multi-detector row helical CT
Yin YH, Jae HJ, Kim H-C, Jeon
and common hepatic artery
raverso LW. Sparing a replaced
and unpleasant surprise in
al. Lessons
, Botet J. Long-term
T, Baden H. Ana-
for pre-
-
21 Intraoperative Injury to Hepatic Arterial Structures
angiography of hepatic vessels: depiction with dual­arterial phase acquisition during single breath hold. Radiology. 2002;222(1):81–8.
27.
Winston CB, Lee NA, Jarnagin
J, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y, et for deline artery variants in patients undergoing hepatobi­liary and pancreatic surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189(1):W13–9.
28.
Tamm EP, Balachandran
Fleming JB, Lee JH, et al. Imaging of pancreatic ade­nocarcinoma: update on staging/resectability. Radiol Clin North Am. 2012;50(3):407–28.
29.
Schwartz LH. Magnetic resonance imaging of the
liver editor. Blumgart’s surgery of the liver, pancreas and biliary tract. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2012.
30. Varadarajulu S, Eloubeidi ultrasonography in the evaluation of pancreatico-bili­ary cancer. Surg Clin North Am. 2010;90(2):251–63.
31.
Winston CB, Lee NA, Jarnagin
J, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y, et for deline artery variants in patients undergoing hepatobi­liary and pancreatic surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189(1):W13–9.
32. Graham RR, Cannell CD. Accidental ligation of the hepatic artery. Br J Surg. 1933;20:566.
33. Brittain RS, Marchioro TL, WR, Starzl TE. Accidental hepatic artery ligation in humans. Am J Surg. 1964;107:822–32.
34.
Plengvanit U, Chearanai O, Sindhvananda K, Dam-
brongsak D, Tuchinda S, Viranuvatti V. Collateral arterial blood supply of the liver after hepatic artery ligation, angiographic study of twenty patients. Ann Surg. 1972;175(1):105–10.
35.
Mays ET, Wheeler
arterial ow after interruption of hepatic arteries in
man. N Engl J Med. 1974;290(18):993–6.
36.
Lewis FR, Lim RC Jr, Blaisdell
ligation: adjunct in the management of massive hem­orrhage from the liver. J Trauma. 1974;14(9):743–55.
37.
Flint LM, Mays ET, Aaron
Selectivity in the management of hepatic trauma. Ann Surg. 1977;185(6):613–8.
38.
McDermott WV Jr
to the liver treated by hepatic dearterialization. Ann Surg. 1974;180(3):305–8.
39.
Lee YT. Liver function tests after ligation of hepatic
artery. J Surg Oncol. 1978;10(4):305–20.
40. Allen PJ, Stojadinovic A, Ben-Porat L, Gonen M, Kooby D, Blumgart L, et al. The management of variant rial infusion pump placement. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(9):875–80.
41
Nancy E. Kemeny ASE. Regional chemotherapy
liver tumors. In: Jarnagin WR, editor. Blumgart’s sur­gery of the liver, pancreas and biliary tract. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier-Saunders; 2012.
ation of celiac and superior mesenteric
A, Bhosale PR, Katz MH,
, biliary tract, and pancreas. In: Jarnagin WR,
MA. The role of endoscopic
ation of celiac and superior mesenteric
CS. Demonstration of collateral
WS, Fulton RL, Polk HC.
, Hensle TW. Metastatic carcinoid
arterial anatomy during hepatic arte-
WR, Teitcher
al. CT angiography
WR, Teitcher
al. CT angiography
Hermann G, Waddell
FW. Hepatic artery
for
227
42.
Makary MA, Fishman EK, Cameron JL. Resection of
the celiac axis for invasive pancreatic cancer. J Gas­trointest Surg. 2005;9(4):503–7.
43.
Smoot RL, Donohue
dure for resection of tumors of the pancreatic body and tail with celiac axis involvement. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(11):2167–9.
Doppman JL, Girton M, V
44. hepatic artery embolization in the presence of obstructive jaundice. Radiology. 1982;143(1):37–43.
45.
Soares AF, Castro e Silva Junior O, Ceneviva
Roselino JE, Zucoloto S. Biochemical and mor­phological changes in the liver after hepatic artery ligation in the presence or absence of extrahepatic cholestasis. Int J Exp Pathol. 1993;74(4):367–70.
46. Nath B, Szabo G. Hypoxia and hypoxia inducible factors: diverse roles in liver diseases. Hepatology. 2012;55(2):622–33.
47.
Alves A, Farges O, Nicolet
Belghiti J. Incidence and consequence of an hepatic artery injury in patients with postcholecystectomy bile duct strictures. Ann Surg. 2003;238(1):93–6.
48.
Traverso LW
The importance of preserving hepatic blood ow to prevent biliary stula. Am Surg. 1989;55(7):421–6.
49.
Kochhar G, Parungao JM, Hanouneh
Biliary complications following liver transplantation. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19(19):2841–6.
50. Mezhir JJ, Brennan MF, Baser RE, D’Angelica MI, Fong study of preoperative biliary drainage in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: routine drainage is not
justied. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13(12):2163–9.
51.
van der Gaag NA, Rauws EA, van Eijck CH, Bruno
MJ, van der Harst E, Kubben FJ, et al. Preoperative biliary drainage for cancer of the head of the pan­creas. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(2):129–37.
52. Tol JA, Busch OR, van der Gaag NA, van Gulik TM, Gouma DJ. The quandary of preresection biliary drainage for pancreatic cancer. Cancer J. 2012;18(6):550–4.
53. Miura T, Hakamada K, Ohata T, Narumi S, Toyoki Y, Nara M, et al. Resection of tumor and the hepatic artery after stepwise hepatic arterial embolization: a case report. World J Gastro­enterol. 2008;14(22):3587–90.
54. Hasegawa K, Imamura H, Akahane M, Miura Takayama T, Ohtomo K, et for celiac tomy. Surgery. 2003;133(4):440–2.
55.
Halazun KJ, Kotru A, Menon KV, Patel J, Prasad KR.
Stenting of coeliac axis stenosis facilitates pancre­atectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32(7):811–2.
56. Farma JM, Hoffman JP axis occlusion in patients undergoing pancreati­coduodenectomy. Am J Surg. 2007;193(3):341–
4. Discussion 4.
57.
Lochan R, White
stenting of the coeliac trunk. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2008;90(2):173–4.
, Freeny PC. Pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Y, DeMatteo RP, et
axis stenosis before pancreaticoduodenec-
JH. Modied Appleby proce-
ermess M. The risk of
R,
J, Watrin T, Sauvanet A,
IA, Parsi MA.
al. A matche
a locally advanced hilar
al. Endovascular stenting
. Nonneoplastic celiac
SA. Pre-operative endovascular
d case-control
Y,
228 V. P. Balachandran and M. I. D’Angelica
58. Sharafuddin MJ, Olson CH, Sun S, Kresowik TF, Corson JD. Endovascular treatment of celiac and mesenteric arteries stenoses: applications and results. J Vasc Surg. 2003;38(4):692–8.
59.
van Wanroij
Mensink PB, Gerrits DG, Kolkman JJ, et vascular Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2004;28(2):193–200.
60.
Cloyd JM, Chandra V, Louie
Preoperative embolization of replaced right hepatic artery prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2012;106(4):509–12.
61.
Turrini O, W
lemoe KD, Schmidt CM. Preservation of replaced or accessory right hepatic artery during pancre­aticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma: impact on margin status and survival. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14(11):1813–9.
62. Eshuis WJ, Olde Loohuis KM, Busch ORC, van
Gulik TM,
hepatic artery on perioperative course and long­term survival after pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB (Oxford). 2011;13(3):161–7.
63.
Cikrit DF,
MJ, Goulet RJ, et creatobiliary surgery. Am Surg. 1993;59(10):692–6. Discussion 7.
64.
Lygidakis NJ. Regional vascular resection
creatic head carcinoma. Hepatogastroenterology. 1996;43(11):1327–33.
65.
Fischer CP, Rosenberg
troduodenal artery used for arterial reconstruction during the Whipple operation. Hepatogastroenterol­ogy. 2007;54(80):2228–9.
66.
Kusano T, Tamai O, Miyazato H, Isa T, Shiraishi M,
Muto Y. Vascular reconstruction of the hepatic artery using the gastroepiploic artery: a case report. Hepa­togastroenterology. 1999;46(28):2278–80.
67.
Sarmiento JM, Panneton JM, Nagorney DM. Recon-
struction of the hepatic artery using the gastroduode nal artery. Am J Surg. 2003;185(4):386–7.
68.
Faulds J, Johner A, Klass D, Buczkowski A, Scuda
more CH. Hepatic artery transection reconstructed with splenic artery transposition graft. Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther. 2012;24(2):87–9.
69.
Ohwada S, Ogawa T, Ohya
mura S, Satoh Y, et artery reconstruction. 1999;46(27):1823–6.
70.
Pessaux P, V
nectomy: superior mesenteric artery rst approach. J
Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10(4):607–11.
JL, van Petersen AS, Huisman AB,
treatment of chronic splanchnic syndrome.
JD, Rao S, Visser BC.
iebke EA, Delpero JR, Viret F, Lil-
Gouma DJ. Inuence of aberrant right
Dalsing MC, Sawchuk AP, Lalka SG, Harl
arma D, Arnaud JP. Pancreaticoduode-
ascular injuries during pan-
al. V
W, Bridget F, Bass B. Gas-
al. Gonadal vein graft for hepatic
T, Kawashima Y, Naka-
Hepatogastroenterology.
al. Endo-
for pan-
71.
Dumitrascu T,
versus standard approach in pancreatoduodenec­tomy: a case-match study. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2010;395(6):677–84.
72.
Pessaux P, Marzano E, Rosso E. A
rst dissection during pancreaticoduodenectomy. J
Am Coll Surg. 2010;211(1):142–3.
73. Weitz J, Rahbari N, Koch M, Buchler MW. The
“artery rst” approach for resection of pancreatic
head cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210(2):e1–4.
74.
Lupascu C, Moldovanu R, Andronic D, Ursulescu
Vasiluta C, Raileanu G, et
C, pancreaticoduodenectomy: best option for hepatic
anatomical variants. Hepatogastroenterology.
artery 2011;58(112):2112–4.
75.
Sakamoto Y, Sano
Y, Sakuraba M, et
struction of the right hepatic artery for biliary malig­nancy. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2006;391(3):203–8.
76.
Allendorf JD, Bellemare S. Reconstruction of
the replaced right hepatic artery at the time of pancreaticoduodenectomy 2009;13(3):555–7.
77. Amano H, Miura F Hayano K, et tion of the right and left hepatic arteries for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2009;16(6):777–80.
78.
Yamamoto S, Kubota
Sakuma A. Disposal of replaced common hepatic artery coursing within the pancreas during pan­creatoduodenectomy: report of a case. Surg Today. 2005;35(11):984–7.
79.
Nagai H, Ohki J, Kondo Y,
Kanazawa K. Pancreatoduodenectomy with preser­vation of the pylorus and gastroduodenal artery. Ann Surg. 1996;223(2):194–8.
80. Yasuda Y Toei H. Resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma
-
-
with left hepatectomy after pre-operative emboli­zation of the proper hepatic artery. HPB (Oxford). 2010;12(2):147–52.
81.
de Santibanes E, Ardiles
Brandi C, Beskow A. Hepatic artery reconstruc­tion rst for the treatment of hilar cholangiocarci­noma bismuth type IIIB with contralateral arterial invasion: a novel technical strategy. HPB (Oxford). 2012;14(1):67–70.
82.
Blumgart LH, Hann LE.
liver, pancreas and biliary tract. Vol. Springer; 2012.
David L, Popescu I. Posterior
plea for the artery-
al. Posterior approach
T, Shimada K, Kosuge T, Kimata
al. Clinical signicance
. J Gastrointest Surg.
, Toyota N, Wada K, Katoh K,
al. Pancreatectomy with reconstruc-
K, Rokkaku K, Nemoto T,
Yasuda T, Kasahara K,
, Larsen PN, Ishibashi T, Yamashita K,
V, Alvarez FA, Pekolj J,
Blumgart's surgery of the
1. New Y
of recon-
ork:
Hepatic Abscess
Michael A. Woods, Orhan S. Ozkan and Sharon M. Weber
22
Etiology
Recent advances in surgical technique and peri­operative management, as well as more careful patient selection and better understanding of liver anatomy and physiology, have significantly im­proved mortality rates to less than 3–5 % after liver and pancreas surgery. However, the overall morbidity rate after hepatic resection remains high, ranging from 15 to 45 %, and up to 80 % in prospectively collected series evaluating pan­creaticoduodenectomy (PD) [112]. The inci­dence of postoperative hepatic infection has been reported to vary between 2.6 and 8.6 % in more recent large studies [112]. In pancreas surgery, the risk occurs following PD but not distal pan­createctomy, which is likely due to the most well­recognized contributing factor—the presence of a biliary-enteric anastomosis [8].
The negative impact of postoperative com-
plications on long-term oncological outcome
S. M. Weber () Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, H4/730 Clinical Science Center, Madison, WI 53792, USA e-mail: webers@surgery.wisc.edu
M. A. Woods · O. S. Ozkan Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Madison, WI, USA e-mail: mwood@uwhealth.org
O. S. Ozkan e-mail: oozkan2@uwhealth.org
has been reported after partial hepatectomy for colorectal metastases and hepatocellular carci­noma with postoperative sepsis being an inde­pendent predictor influencing disease free and overall survival [3, 4, 1315]. The mechanism behind which postoperative sepsis negatively af­fects long-term outcomes in oncologic surgery is not completely understood, but has been linked to negative effects of the systemic inflammatory response on the immune system. In addition to the adverse effect of postoperative infectious complications on long-term outcomes after liver and pancreas surgery, the morbidity of infectious complications also results in increased hospital stay, resource utilization with subsequent higher costs of inpatient stay, and mortality. Therefore, early recognition and aggressive treatment of in­fectious complications are of pivotal importance to reduce postoperative complications and im­prove oncologic outcomes.
Perioperative blood loss and blood transfusion have been associated with systemic side effects and negative impacts on postoperative outcome, with blood loss remaining one of the main pre­dictors of morbidity and mortality after liver and pancreas resection [1419]. Blood product trans­fusion has been assumed to have a deleterious ef­fect on the immune system by suppressive effects on host immunity via a reduction in natural killer cell function, decreased cytotoxic T-cell function, increased numbers of suppressor T cells, and decreased function of macrophages and mono­cytes. Some of these effects may be mitigated by the use of leukocyte depleted allogenic blood
T. M. Pawlik et al. (eds.), Gastrointestinal Surgery, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-2223-9_22, © Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015
229
230 M. A. Woods et al.
transfusions; however, larger studies are required to confirm this assumption [20]. The correlation between blood loss and blood transfusion and postoperative infection has been demonstrated in multiple studies involving hepatic resections for colorectal metastases, hepatocellular carcinoma, and cholangiocarcinoma [36, 8, 11, 21]. Metic­ulous surgical technique and advances in hemo­static approaches for liver and pancreas resection have led to a significant decrease in perioperative blood loss and the need for blood transfusion in patients. Despite this, a number of factors con­tribute to poor postoperative outcomes following liver and pancreas surgery.
The presence of bile leakage is associated with postoperative infectious complications [5,
810, 12]. The incidence of bile leakage ranges
in the literature from approximately 4.0 to 17 %, with common etiologies consisting of inadequate control from the parenchymal transection mar­gin, leakage at a bile duct-intestinal anastomosis, or injury of the remnant bile duct [10, 2224]. Biliary stricture plays a significant role in devel­opment of postoperative hepatic abscess, particu­larly in patients who have had a biliary stent and thus have contaminated bile. In a recent series evaluating hepatic abscess after PD, both the need for reoperation, the majority of whom re­quired revision of their choledochojejunostomy, and the presence of a biliary fistula contributed to the risk of hepatic abscess [8]. There was no ef­fect on long-term survival, although the numbers were small. If suspicion for bile leak remains elevated, imaging techniques such as hepatic scintigraphy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with hepatocyte-specific contrast agents or more invasive techniques such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography can be employed.
Significant steatosis (> 30 %) has also been as­sociated with a threefold increase in overall post­operative complications following hepatectomy, with a twofold increase in patients with < 30 % steatosis undergoing more extensive resections involving greater than three segments compared to patients without steatosis [25]. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease may affect up to 30 % of the Western adult population with its prevalence
mirroring that of obesity and the metabolic syndrome which is also expected to increase in non-Western countries due to globalization of the Western diet [26]. Imaging techniques, spe­cifically MRI, are being developed to quantify fat composition of the liver, which would allow hepatobiliary surgeons to have an informed dis­cussion with patients with significant steatosis about the risks of major hepatic surgery.
Vascular injury plays a strong role in the de­velopment of postoperative hepatic abscess. A poorly perfused liver remnant and/or ischemia to the biliary anastomosis will increase the risk of hepatic abscess, particularly in the setting of contaminated bile and/or biliary stricture. Thus, meticulous technique is essential. Other factors have been associated with postoperative infec­tious complications, such as serum albumin level, presence of multiple medical comorbidities, lon­ger operative times, and increasing complexity of hepatic resection. Preoperative biliary drain­age in patients with hyperbilirubinemia second­ary to obstruction has also been associated with increased postoperative infectious complications due to bacterial contamination.
Diagnosis
Technological advances have significantly en­hanced the role of radiology in the detection, characterization, and management of postop­erative changes in the liver. All cross-sectional imaging techniques allow for a high rate of de­tection of postoperative fluid collections, and in addition, image-guided percutaneous drainage procedures have greatly improved the clinical treatment of patients with postoperative infec­tions throughout the abdomen and pelvis.
Computed Tomography
Due to its ready availability with high spatial and contrast resolution, computed tomography (CT) is the best approach for imaging patients who are stable enough to be transported to the radiology department. Intravenous contrast is preferred to
23122 Hepatic Abscess
evaluate for any complications in the periopera­tive period as well as to assess the enhancement characteristics of postoperative fluid collections in order to improve detection of infected collec­tions rather than postoperative fluid. The use of intravenous contrast and multiphasic imaging also allows for the assessment of patency of the hepatic vasculature. However, iodinated contrast agents must be used cautiously or not at all in the setting of acute or chronic renal failure and in patients with an iodinated contrast allergy, unless they are appropriately pretreated. Oral contrast is not mandatory but if tolerated will likely be of benefit in aiding the detection of bowel pathology or to distinguish postoperative fluid collections from adjacent loops of bowel. On CT examina­tion, abscesses generally are hypoattenuating on both contrast-enhanced and noncontrast exami­nations with attenuation values between 0 and 45 Hounsfield units, and are most commonly di­rectly adjacent to the resection bed. Infected col­lections typically demonstrate a rim of contrast enhancement and will usually result in adjacent inflammatory changes in the peritoneal cavity or retroperitoneal fat. The presence of gas within a collection either as an air-fluid level or bubbles of gas can be a specific sign for postoperative in­fection, however is not commonly present. High­er attenuation collections in the postoperative bed may represent hematoma or the residual of hemostatic material used intraoperatively. Post­operative intrahepatic abscesses are also hypoat­tenuating and are generally well-defined masses, which may be unilocular with smooth margins or complex with internal septations and irregu­lar contours [27]. The presence of gas within a collection either as an air-fluid level or bubbles of gas can be a specific sign for postoperative infection, although it is not commonly present. Higher attenuation collections in the postopera­tive bed may represent hematoma or residual he­mostatic material used intraoperatively. The use of oxidized regenerated cellulose (Surgicel) can be identified in the surgical bed up to 1 month after placement. During placement, air likely gets trapped with blood within the interstices of the oxidized cellulose sponge and produces focal
linear or curvilinear gas collections which can be confused for postoperative infections [28].
Ultrasound
Ultrasonography (US) is an imaging modality, which can be performed at the bedside in patients not stable enough to travel to the radiology de­partment for other modes of cross-sectional im­aging. US is, however, limited by the fact that certain anatomic areas are difficult to visualize and can be affected by patient body habitus, wounds, surgical drains, and overlying bowel gas in the setting of postoperative ileus. Ultrasound is also subject to operator variability and has been shown to be inferior to CT in evaluating postop­erative patients with sepsis [29]. At the time of US, large perihepatic fluid collections can dem­onstrate an appearance ranging from hypoechoic to hyperechoic, with varying degrees of internal echoes and debris. Gas in postoperative fluid collections causes acoustic shadowing or rever­beration artifacts. Small intrahepatic abscesses often appear as discrete hypoechoic nodules or ill-defined areas of distorted hepatic echogenec­ity [27]. Surgical hemostatic packing or omental flaps may appear as echogenic masses in the op­erative bed and may demonstrate reverberation artifact, which can be suggestive of infection [30]. The patency of the hepatic vasculature can also be assessed at the time of US with the addi­tion of color and pulsed Doppler evaluation when waveform and velocity analysis is included.
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
The role of MRI in evaluation of the early post­operative patient who is displaying signs of po­tential sepsis may be limited due to patient fac­tors; however, with its multiplanar multisequence capability and the use of hepatobiliary-specific contrast agents, MRI is being used more often for imaging of the postoperative patient. Postopera­tive fluid collections can have variable T1 and T2 signal intensity based on the protein content in
232 M. A. Woods et al.
the collection. Abscesses commonly demonstrate inhomogeneous areas of low T1 signal intensity with intermediate to high T2 signal intensity. After the administration of gadolinium contrast, an infected fluid collection will often display pe­ripheral rim enhancement. Intrahepatic abscesses may also demonstrate some mild perilesional edema, which manifests as intermediate to high signal intensity on T2-weighted images. Air within a collection will demonstrate a signal void on all acquired sequences and may be difficult to differentiate from calcifications; however, the shape and location of the signal void should allow the correct diagnosis. Diffusion-weighted imag­ing also has been shown to be helpful in distin­guishing infected fluid collections from cystic or necrotic tumors and noninfected fluid collections with abscesses typically showing restricted dif­fusion [31]. Also, in the postoperative setting, if there is concern for bile leak or bile duct injury, the use of hepatocyte-specific contrast agents can add functional information to that obtained using conventional T2-weighted imaging and may be particularly useful in identifying the site of a bile leak, or identifying an area of biliary stricture which may be contributing to the hepatic abscess [32]. Multiphasic MRI protocols also are ideally suited to evaluate the patency of the hepatic vas­culature, which may be a complicating factor in the development of abscess formation. Surgicel demonstrates marked low signal intensity on T2­weighted images and is easy to distinguish on MRI from a postoperative fluid collection [33].
Treatment
Once the diagnosis of postoperative hepatic in­fection is suspected on the basis of clinical find­ings and supportive imaging results, prompt treatment is of paramount importance, as delay in initiation of treatment may adversely affect patient outcomes [2]. Administration of broad­spectrum antibiotics should not be delayed and aggressive source control should be pursued. The choice of antibiotic regimen should cover the more common pathogens associated with postop­erative hepatic infection such as Gram-negative
enteric and Gram-positive cocci organisms [2,
3437]. The choice of antibiotic regimen and du-
ration of therapy is guided by culture results and sensitivities as well as clinical factors such as im­provement in symptoms, decreased leukocytosis, and duration of drainage if a catheter is placed.
Minimally invasive image-guided percutane­ous treatments such as needle aspiration and cath­eter drainage have supplanted surgical therapy for the treatment of pyogenic liver abscesses, with resultant significant decreases in hospital stay, overall cost, and morbidity. Thus, percutaneous therapy is now considered first-line treatment in the setting of postoperative hepatic infections [38,
39]. Repeat laparotomy still plays a critical role
for the treatment of recalcitrant infections which are failing more conservative percutaneous treat­ment strategies, but this is exceedingly rare in the context of modern era interventional radiologic techniques and contemporary broad-spectrum antibiotics. Abscesses less than 3 cm in size can usually be treated successfully with parenteral an­tibiotics alone; however, aspiration plays a criti­cal role in establishing the diagnosis of infection in postoperative fluid collections and specific mi­crobial identification in order to direct antibiotic therapy [40] (See Fig. 22.1). Image-guided nee­dle aspiration by either US or CT has been shown to be highly effective for simple abscesses less than 5 cm in size [38, 41, 42]. Multiple aspiration sessions may be required for complete success. Image-guided percutaneous catheter drainage is preferred for abscesses larger than 5 cm in size, complex abscesses, or those in direct continuity with bile ducts or bowel [38, 39, 42, 43].
Prior to minimally invasive image-guided therapies, assessment should include evalua­tion of coagulation parameters with a target INR < 1.5, aPTT of less than 1.5x control, and platelet count > 50,000/µL with correction of these pa­rameters on a case by case basis [44]. Ultrasound or CT guidance can be used for aspiration or catheter drainage based on operator preference. When choosing a puncture path, the least amount of hepatic parenchyma should be traversed, and care should be taken to avoid damaging adja­cent organs or traversing the pleura due to the risk of empyema (See Fig. 22.2). Ultrasound is
22 Hepatic Abscess
233
Fig. 22.1 A 50-year-old female presenting with biopsy- proven recurrent epitheliod hemangioendothelioma 6 years post living-related liver transplantation measur­ing 3.8 × 2.9 cm (a) underwent an uneventful nonanatomic wedge resection of the lesion with adequate margins. The patient presented to the hospital on postoperative day 12 with worsening right upper quadrant pain, subjec­tive fevers, and chills. A CT examination demonstrated
× 4.6 cm hypoattenuating
a 7.8 section bed with a few small foci of scattered gas with­out significant rim enhancement (b). The patient’s white
fluid collection in the re-
the preferred imaging modality in most cases due to real-time guidance, multiplanar imaging, portability, visualization, and avoidance of major blood vessels and pleura/lung, and lack of ioniz­ing radiation. Ultrasound-guided procedures can be performed via a subcostal or intercostal ap­proach. A subcostal approach is generally favored over an intercostal puncture due to a lower risk of pneumothorax, empyema, or intercostal artery injury. Sonographically guided interventions can be performed using either a free-hand technique (which provides for greater freedom in needle placement), or with an attached biopsy guide which provides greater accuracy. Local anesthet­ic should be liberally applied from the skin entry site down through the subcutaneous fat and peri­toneum directly adjacent to the fluid collection. If possible, the needle should be placed during
blood cell count was not elevated at 8.8 K/uL; however, due to her immunosuppression and presenting symptoms there was concern for postoperative infection. The patient was initiated on broad-spectrum antibiotics and the fluid collection was subsequently aspirated under US guidance where it demonstrated a complex appearance with pre­dominantly hypoechoic appearing fluid with echogenic debris (c). The collection was completely aspirated with removal of approximately 60 mL of dark bilious appear­ing fluid (d). The Gram stain and culture were negative and the patient did not require any further management
a breath hold to reduce the risk of capsule lac­eration and to facilitate needle entry at the site of local anesthetic administration. Visualization of any adjacent large vascular structures can also be assessed with Doppler US prior to needle place­ment. CT guidance may be beneficial in scenarios where sonographic visualization is limited by ei­ther appearance of the collection on US, adjacent wound complications necessitating a different trajectory, and also to confirm appropriate needle placement utilizing US guidance (See Fig. 22.3). Most interventional CT units are capable of CT fluoroscopy and gantry angle adjustment which aid in procedural planning. Needle aspiration is usually performed with an 18-gauge needle and samples should be appropriately sent for microbiologic analysis. During attempted needle aspiration, if the fluid is too viscous for adequate
234 M. A. Woods et al.
Fig. 22.2 A 68-year-old female with history of cirrhosis secondary to NASH and alcoholism, Child Pugh class A, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, and coronary artery disease who presented with a 5.6 cm arterially enhanc­ing exhophytic mass in segment 6 of the liver with portal venous washout consistent with hepatocellular carcinoma (a). The patient underwent an uneventful nonanatomic wedge resection, which revealed a well-differentiated HCC without vascular invasion. Her postoperative course was remarkable for postoperative bleeding which was managed with transfusion of two units of packed red blood cells and she was discharged on postoperative day number 8. She presented with increasing right upper quadrant pain approximately 8 laboratory evaluation revealed a normal white blood cell count. A CT of the abdomen and pelvis demonstrated a
10.8
× 3.5 cm rim tion with an air-fluid level along the right lateral liver (b). CT guidance was utilized for an intercostal approach into the collection and a 10 Fr locking loop drainage catheter
enhancing hypoattenuating fluid collec-
weeks after sur
gery and
was placed with aspiration of 60 mL of purulent fluid, which grew Enterobacter cloacae and Escherichia coli (c). She was discharged on appropriate antibiotic therapy, however, presented to the hospital 2.5 weeks after percu­taneous drainage catheter placement with altered mental status. A CT examination demonstrated near-complete resolution of the abscess cavity; however, the drainage catheter was noted to cross the pleura and there was a new pleural effusion with enhancement (d). A diagnostic tho­racentesis was performed with aspiration of 260 serosanguinous fluid, which grew methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (images not shown). The patient’s antibiotic regimen was adjusted accordingly and an ab­scessogram was performed demonstrating no significant residual collection or evidence of biliary or bowel fistula and the catheter was removed (e). A follow-up CT exami­nation 6 weeks status post drainage catheter removal dem­onstrates no residual pleural fluid and a small amount of residual inflammatory changes in the abscess cavity with no evidence of residual or recurrent disease (f)
mL
of
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана