Transarterial therapies versus portal vein embolization prior to major hepatectomy: A national comparison of perioperative outcomes.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Surgery Pub Date : 2026-09-03 DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2026.110614
Alexa J Hughes, Dhruv J Patel, Thomas K Maatman, C Max Schmidt, Eugene P Ceppa, Paul M Haste, Nicholas J Zyromski, Alexandra Roch, Cary Jo R Schlick, Michael G House, Ryan J Ellis
{"title":"Transarterial therapies versus portal vein embolization prior to major hepatectomy: A national comparison of perioperative outcomes.","authors":"Alexa J Hughes, Dhruv J Patel, Thomas K Maatman, C Max Schmidt, Eugene P Ceppa, Paul M Haste, Nicholas J Zyromski, Alexandra Roch, Cary Jo R Schlick, Michael G House, Ryan J Ellis","doi":"10.1016/j.surg.2026.110614","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Preoperative liver remnant hypertrophy has historically been achieved with portal vein embolization, but transarterial embolizations, such as radioembolization, have gained interest as alternative hypertrophy mechanisms in select patients. National practice patterns and outcomes between these 2 modalities are poorly characterized. The objective of this study is to compare preoperative utilization of transarterial therapies versus portal vein embolization and assess perioperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients undergoing right hepatectomy or trisegmentectomy after preoperative portal vein embolization or transarterial embolization between 2014 and 2024. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with utilization, perioperative transfusion, posthepatectomy liver failure, and serious morbidity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 1,240 patients who met inclusion criteria, 1,068 (86.1%) underwent portal vein embolization and 172 (13.9%) underwent transarterial embolization. Transarterial embolization utilization increased from 8.8% in 2014 to 23.7% in 2024 (P < .001). In multivariable analysis, patients were more likely to receive transarterial embolization if they underwent resection in 2020 and after (odds ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.46-3.26; P < .001) or had hepatocellular carcinoma (odds ratio, 4.35; 95% confidence interval, 2.41-7.99; P < .001). Rates of transfusion (374/1,068 [35.0%] vs 61/172 [35.5%], P = .978), serious posthepatectomy liver failure (120/1,068 [11.2%] vs 17/172 [9.9%], P = .695), and serious morbidity (391/1,068 [36.6%] vs 59/172 [34.3%], P = .618) were comparable between portal vein embolization and transarterial embolization, respectively, with no further differences on adjusted multivariable analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Utilization of transarterial embolization prior to major hepatectomy has increased over the past decade with no associated increase in relative morbidity. In appropriate clinical scenarios, transarterial embolization may serve as a reasonable alternative to portal vein embolization prior to major hepatectomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":22152,"journal":{"name":"Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"110614"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13643064/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2026.110614","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Preoperative liver remnant hypertrophy has historically been achieved with portal vein embolization, but transarterial embolizations, such as radioembolization, have gained interest as alternative hypertrophy mechanisms in select patients. National practice patterns and outcomes between these 2 modalities are poorly characterized. The objective of this study is to compare preoperative utilization of transarterial therapies versus portal vein embolization and assess perioperative outcomes.

Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients undergoing right hepatectomy or trisegmentectomy after preoperative portal vein embolization or transarterial embolization between 2014 and 2024. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with utilization, perioperative transfusion, posthepatectomy liver failure, and serious morbidity.

Results: Among 1,240 patients who met inclusion criteria, 1,068 (86.1%) underwent portal vein embolization and 172 (13.9%) underwent transarterial embolization. Transarterial embolization utilization increased from 8.8% in 2014 to 23.7% in 2024 (P < .001). In multivariable analysis, patients were more likely to receive transarterial embolization if they underwent resection in 2020 and after (odds ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.46-3.26; P < .001) or had hepatocellular carcinoma (odds ratio, 4.35; 95% confidence interval, 2.41-7.99; P < .001). Rates of transfusion (374/1,068 [35.0%] vs 61/172 [35.5%], P = .978), serious posthepatectomy liver failure (120/1,068 [11.2%] vs 17/172 [9.9%], P = .695), and serious morbidity (391/1,068 [36.6%] vs 59/172 [34.3%], P = .618) were comparable between portal vein embolization and transarterial embolization, respectively, with no further differences on adjusted multivariable analysis.

Conclusion: Utilization of transarterial embolization prior to major hepatectomy has increased over the past decade with no associated increase in relative morbidity. In appropriate clinical scenarios, transarterial embolization may serve as a reasonable alternative to portal vein embolization prior to major hepatectomy.

肝大切除术前经动脉治疗与门静脉栓塞:围手术期结果的全国比较。
背景:术前肝残余肥厚历来是通过门静脉栓塞实现的,但经动脉栓塞,如放射栓塞,已成为选择性肥厚患者的替代机制。这两种模式之间的国家实践模式和结果特征不明确。本研究的目的是比较术前经动脉治疗与门静脉栓塞的应用,并评估围手术期的结果。方法:查询美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划数据库2014 - 2024年间术前门静脉栓塞或经动脉栓塞后行右肝切除术或三节切除术的患者。进行单变量和多变量回归分析,以确定与用药、围手术期输血、肝切除后肝功能衰竭和严重发病率相关的因素。结果:1240例符合纳入标准的患者中,1068例(86.1%)行门静脉栓塞,172例(13.9%)行经动脉栓塞。经动脉栓塞使用率由2014年的8.8%上升至2024年的23.7% (P < 0.001)。在多变量分析中,如果患者在2020年及之后接受了切除(优势比2.17;95%可信区间,1.46-3.26;P < .001)或患有肝细胞癌(优势比4.35;95%可信区间,2.41-7.99;P < .001),则更有可能接受经动脉栓塞。门静脉栓塞和经动脉栓塞的输血率(374/ 1068[35.0%]比61/172 [35.5%],P = 0.978)、术后严重肝功能衰竭(120/ 1068[11.2%]比17/172 [9.9%],P = 0.695)和严重发病率(391/ 1068[36.6%]比59/172 [34.3%],P = 0.618)具有可比性,经校正多变量分析无进一步差异。结论:在过去十年中,肝大切除术前经动脉栓塞的使用有所增加,但相对发病率没有相应的增加。在适当的临床情况下,经动脉栓塞可以作为大肝切除术前门静脉栓塞的合理替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Surgery
Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
687
审稿时长
64 days
期刊介绍: For 66 years, Surgery has published practical, authoritative information about procedures, clinical advances, and major trends shaping general surgery. Each issue features original scientific contributions and clinical reports. Peer-reviewed articles cover topics in oncology, trauma, gastrointestinal, vascular, and transplantation surgery. The journal also publishes papers from the meetings of its sponsoring societies, the Society of University Surgeons, the Central Surgical Association, and the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书