The safety and effect of transhepatic hilar approach for the treatment of bismuth type Ⅲ and Ⅳ hilar cholangiocarcinoma
10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-5815.2018.05.008
- VernacularTitle: 顺逆结合肝中裂劈开肝门显露法治疗Bismuth Ⅲ、Ⅳ型肝门胆管癌的安全性与疗效分析
- Author:
Min HE
1
;
Haolu WANG
;
Jiayan YAN
;
Sunwang XU
;
Wei CHEN
;
Jian WANG
Author Information
1. Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200127, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Bile duct neoplasms;
Treatment outcome;
Transhepatic hilar approach;
Hepatic hilus exposing;
Middle hepatic cleavage
- From:
Chinese Journal of Surgery
2018;56(5):360-366
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the efficiency between the transhepatic hilar approach and conventional approach for the surgical treatment of Bismuth type Ⅲ and Ⅳ hilar cholangiocarcinoma.
Methods:There were 42 consecutive patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma of Bismuth type Ⅲ and Ⅳ who underwent surgical treatment at Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University from January 2008 to December 2013.The transhepatic hilar approach was used in 19 patients and conventional approach was performed in 23 patients.There were no differences in clinical parameters between the two groups(all P>0.05). The t-test was used to analyze the measurement data, and the χ2 test was used to analyze the count data.Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to analyze the survival period.Multivariate COX regression analysis was used to analyze the prognosis factors.
Results:Among the 19 patients who underwent transhepatic hilar approach, 3 patients changed the operative planning after reevaluated by exposing the hepatic hilus.The intraoperative blood was 300(250-400)ml in the transhepatic hilar approach group, which was significantly less than the conventional approach group, 800(450-1 300)ml(t=4.276, P=0.00 1), meanwhile, the R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the transhepatic hilar approach group than in the conventional approach group(89.4% vs. 52.2; χ2=6.773, P=0.009) and the 3-year and 5-year cumulative survival rate was better in the transhepatic hilar approach group than in the conventional approach group(63.2% vs. 47.8%, 26.3% vs. 0; χ2=66.363, 127.185, P=0.000). On univariate analysis, transhepatic hilar approach, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, R0 resection and lymph node metastasis were significant risk factors for patient survival(all P<0.05). On multivariate analysis, use of transhepatic hilar approach, intraoperative blood loss, R0 resection and lymph node metastasis were significant independent risk factors for patient survival(all P<0.05).
Conclusion:The transhepatic hilar approach is the preferred technique for surgical treatment for hilar cholangiocarcinoma because it can improve accuracy of surgical planning, safety of operation, R0 resection rate and survival rate compared with the conventional approach.
