Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2017 Jun;21(6):967-974.
doi: 10.1007/s11605-017-3389-y. Epub 2017 Mar 10.

Dynamic Evaluation of Liver Volume and Function in Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy

Ernesto Sparrelid  1 , Eduard Jonas  2 , Antonios Tzortzakakis  3 , Ulrika Dahlén  4 , Gustav Murquist  4 , Torkel Brismar  3 , Rimma Axelsson  3 , Bengt Isaksson  2
Affiliations
Observational Study

Dynamic Evaluation of Liver Volume and Function in Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy

Ernesto Sparrelid et al. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Despite a fast and potent growth of the future liver remnant (FLR), patients operated with associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) are at risk of developing posthepatectomy liver failure. In this study, the relation between liver volume and function in ALPPS was studied using a multimodal assessment.

Methods: Nine patients with colorectal liver metastases treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and operated with ALPPS were studied with hepatobiliary scintigraphy, computed tomography, indocyanine green clearance test, and serum liver function tests. A comparison between liver volume and function was conducted.

Results: The preoperative FLR volume of 19.5% underestimated the preoperative FLR function of 25.3% (p = 0.011). The increase in FLR volume exceeded the increase in function at day 6 after stage 1 (FLR volume increase 56.7% versus FLR function increase 28.2%, p = 0.021), meaning that the increase in function was 50% of the increase in volume. After stage 2, functional increase exceeded the volume increase, resulting in similar values 28 days after stage 2.

Conclusions: In the inter-stage period of ALPPS, the high volume increase is not paralleled by a corresponding functional increase. This may in part explain the high morbidity and mortality rates associated with ALPPS. Functional assessment of the FLR is advised.

Keywords: ALPPS; Colorectal cancer; Liver function tests; Liver metastases.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors do not have any disclosures to report and no financial support was received for this study.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
HBS with SPECT/CT in a patient with insufficient growth after previous PVE before stage 1 (a), on day 6 after stage 1 (b), day 7 (c), and day 28 (d) after stage 2
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Indocyanine green retention at 15 min (ICG-R15%) at six time points before and after both stages of the ALPPS procedure. Data are presented as median with inter-quartile range. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
a FLR volume (FLR-V in ml) compared to kinetic growth rate (KGR) of volume increase (%/day) at the four time points: pre-stage 1, day 6 after stage 1, day 7 and 28 after stage 2. b FLR function (FLR-F as %/min/m2) compared to KGR of function increase (%/day) at the four time points: pre-stage 1, day 6 after stage 1, day 7 and 28 after stage 2. Data are presented as median with inter-quartile range
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Comparison of percentage increase in FLR volume (FLR-V) and function (FLR-F) day 6 after stage 1 and days 7 and 28 after stage 2, with preoperative FLR-V and FLR-F as reference. Data are presented as median with range. ns not significant
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Median percentage change per day (KGR) in FLR volume (FLR-V) and function (FLR-F) between stage 1 and 2 operations, during the first 7 days after stage 2 and during days 8–28 after stage 2 as measured on CT volumetry (FLR-V) and planar dynamic scintigraphy (FLR-F). Data are presented as median with inter-quartile range
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Ekberg H, et al. Determinants of survival in liver resection for colorectal secondaries. Br J Surg. 1986;73(9):727–31. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800730917. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Altendorf-Hofmann A, Scheele J. A critical review of the major indicators of prognosis after resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2003;12(1):165–92. doi: 10.1016/S1055-3207(02)00091-1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pawlik TM, Schulick RD, Choti MA. Expanding criteria for resectability of colorectal liver metastases. Oncologist. 2008;13(1):51–64. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2007-0142. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Worni M, Shah KN, Clary BM. Colorectal cancer with potentially resectable hepatic metastases: optimizing treatment. Curr Oncol Rep. 2014;16(10):407. doi: 10.1007/s11912-014-0407-z. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Robles R, et al. Comparative study of right portal vein ligation versus embolisation for induction of hypertrophy in two-stage hepatectomy for multiple bilateral colorectal liver metastases. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012;38(7):586–93. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2012.03.007. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms