Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (3)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = splenic vein reconstruction

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
12 pages, 328 KB  
Review
Necessity and Reconstruction Methods of Splenic Vein After Resection of the Portomesenteric Junction During Resections for Pancreatic Cancer
by Moath Alarabiyat and Nikolaos Chatzizacharias
Curr. Oncol. 2025, 32(6), 316; https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol32060316 - 30 May 2025
Viewed by 1274
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer involving the porto-mesenteric junction (PMJ) represents a challenge to pancreatic surgeons. Restoring mesenteric venous drainage is an essential component of vascular reconstruction after tumour resection. In contrast, management of the splenic venous drainage can involve the ligation or reconstruction of the [...] Read more.
Pancreatic cancer involving the porto-mesenteric junction (PMJ) represents a challenge to pancreatic surgeons. Restoring mesenteric venous drainage is an essential component of vascular reconstruction after tumour resection. In contrast, management of the splenic venous drainage can involve the ligation or reconstruction of the splenic vein (SV). Evidence suggests that splenic vein ligation (SVL) is commonly associated with sinistral portal hypertension (SPH), especially if multiple venous tributaries were divided to facilitate resection. Although the association between SVL and SPH is well documented, the risk of symptomatic SPH is not widely reported, presumably due to the low incidence and poor survival of pancreatic cancer patients. Splenic vein reconstruction (SVR) has been proposed to decrease the risk of SPH but is fraught with technical complexity and increased morbidity. Moreover, SVR does not guarantee the prevention of SPH, as patency rates vary and associated hemodynamic changes are unpredictable. Patient selection and the surgical expertise available can guide SV intraoperative management, taking into consideration the risks and benefits associated with each approach. A comprehensive review of the current literature highlighting the incidence and clinical impact of SPH after the resection of pancreatic cancer involving the PMJ is presented. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Gastrointestinal Oncology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

24 pages, 10892 KB  
Article
Pancreatectomy with En Bloc Superior Mesenteric Vein and All Its Tributaries Resection without PV/SMV Reconstruction for “Low” Locally Advanced Pancreatic Head Cancer
by Viacheslav Egorov, Pavel Kim, Soslan Dzigasov, Eugeny Kondratiev, Alexander Sorokin, Alexey Kolygin, Mikhail Vyborniy, Grigoriy Bolshakov, Pavel Popov, Anna Demchenkova and Tatiana Dakhtler
Cancers 2024, 16(12), 2234; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16122234 - 15 Jun 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 3250
Abstract
The “vein definition” for locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (LA PDAC) assumes portal-to-superior mesenteric vein (PV/SMV) unreconstructability due to tumor involvement or occlusion. Radical pancreatectomies with SMV resection without PV/SMV reconstruction are scarcely discussed in the literature. Retrospective analysis of 19 radical pancreatectomies [...] Read more.
The “vein definition” for locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (LA PDAC) assumes portal-to-superior mesenteric vein (PV/SMV) unreconstructability due to tumor involvement or occlusion. Radical pancreatectomies with SMV resection without PV/SMV reconstruction are scarcely discussed in the literature. Retrospective analysis of 19 radical pancreatectomies for “low” LA PDAC with SMV and all its tributaries resection without PV/SMV reconstruction has shown zero mortality; overall morbidity—56%; Dindo–Clavien—3–10.5%; R0—rate—82%; mean operative procedure time—355 ± 154 min; mean blood loss—330 ± 170 mL; delayed gastric emptying—25%; and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula—8%. In three cases, surgery was associated with superior mesenteric (n2) and common hepatic artery (n1) resection. Surgery was completed without vein reconstruction (n13) and with inferior mesenteric-to-splenic anastomosis (n6). There were no cases of liver, gastric, or intestinal ischemia. A specific complication of the SMV resection without reconstruction was 2–3 days-long intestinal edema (48%). Median overall survival was 25 months, and median progression-free survival was 18 months. All the relapses, except two, were distant. The possibility of successful SMV resection without PV/SMV reconstruction can be predicted before surgery by CT-based reconstructions. The mandatory anatomical conditions for the procedure were as follows: (1) preserved SMV-SV confluence; (2) occluded SMV for any reason (tumor or thrombus); (3) well-developed inferior mesenteric vein collaterals with dilated intestinal veins; (4) no right-sided vein collaterals; and (5) no varices in the upper abdomen. Conclusion: “Low” LA PDACs involving SMV with all its tributaries can be radically and safely resected in highly and specifically selected cases without PV/SMV reconstruction with an acceptable survival rate. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Abdominal Surgical Oncology and Intraperitoneal Therapies)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 12709 KB  
Article
The Atlas of the Inferior Mesenteric Artery and Vein under Maximum-Intensity Projection and Three-Dimensional Reconstruction View
by Hongwei Zhang, Shurong Liu, Bingqi Dong, Jing Liu, Xiaochao Guo, Guowei Chen, Yong Jiang, Yingchao Wu, Junling Zhang and Xin Wang
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(3), 879; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13030879 - 2 Feb 2024
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 2760
Abstract
(1) Background: Understanding vascular patterns is crucial for minimizing bleeding and operating time in colorectal surgeries. This study aimed to develop an anatomical atlas of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and vein (IMV). (2) Methods: A total of 521 patients with [...] Read more.
(1) Background: Understanding vascular patterns is crucial for minimizing bleeding and operating time in colorectal surgeries. This study aimed to develop an anatomical atlas of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and vein (IMV). (2) Methods: A total of 521 patients with left-sided colorectal cancer were included. IMA and IMV patterns were identified using maximum-intensity projection (MIP) and three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction techniques. The accuracy of these techniques was assessed by comparing them with surgical videos. We compared the amount of bleeding and operating time for IMA ligation across different IMA types. (3) Results: Most patients (45.7%) were classified as type I IMA, followed by type II (20.7%), type III (22.6%), and type IV (3.5%). Newly identified type V and type VI patterns were found in 6.5% and 1% of patients, respectively. Of the IMVs, 49.9% drained into the superior mesenteric vein (SMV), 38.4% drained into the splenic vein (SPV), 9.4% drained into the SMV–SPV junction, and only 2.3% drained into the first jejunal vein (J1V). Above the root of the left colic artery (LCA), 13.1% of IMVs had no branches, 50.1% had one, 30.1% had two, and 6.7% had three or more branches. Two patients had two main IMV branches, and ten had IMVs at the edge of the mesocolon with small branches. At the IMA root, 37.2% of LCAs overlapped with the IMV, with 34.0% being lateral, 16.9% distal, 8.7% medial, and both the marginal type of IMV and the persistent descending mesocolon (PDM) type represented 1.4%. MIP had an accuracy of 98.43%, and 3D reconstruction had an accuracy of 100%. Blood loss and operating time were significantly higher in the complex group compared to the simple group for IMA ligation (p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: A comprehensive anatomical atlas of the IMA and IMV was provided. Complex IMA patterns were associated with increased bleeding and operating time. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Laparoscopic and Surgical Treatment for Colorectal Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop