-
Journal of Vascular Surgery. Venous and... Mar 2024Thrombi in the axial calf veins have quite different anatomical and physiological characteristics from that in the muscular calf veins, but their treatment was usually... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Thrombi in the axial calf veins have quite different anatomical and physiological characteristics from that in the muscular calf veins, but their treatment was usually addressed in the same manner. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized and cohort studies to compare clinical outcomes among patients with isolated axial vs muscular calf deep vein thrombosis (DVT).
METHODS
Recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) was selected as the primary outcome. Resolution, proximal propagation of calf DVT, pulmonary embolism (PE), major bleeds, and clinically relevant non-major bleeds were separately analyzed as secondary outcomes. Data were pooled and compared with risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
Thirteen studies, consisting of 4889 patients, met the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. A greater rate of recurrent VTE (FE model: RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.00-1.53; I = 29%), resolution (FE model: RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.01-1.72; I = 31%), proximal propagation (FE model: RR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10-2.41; I = 40%), and PE (FE model: RR, 2.79; 95% CI, 1.31-5.95; I = 0%) in the axial group compared with the muscular group. There was no difference in the pooled estimates for major bleeds (FE model: RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.61-1.95; I = 0%), and clinically relevant non-major bleeds (FE model: RR, 1.80; 95% CI, 0.93-3.48) in the axial and muscular arms.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients with calf DVT limited to muscular veins might have a lower rate of recurrent VTE, resolution, proximal propagation, and PE vs those with axial calf vein involvement and exhibited similar safety outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Anticoagulants; Venous Thromboembolism; Mesenteric Ischemia; Venous Thrombosis; Pulmonary Embolism; Hemorrhage
PubMed: 38043681
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2023.101727 -
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia... 2022Knowledge of the portal system and its anatomical variations aids to prevent surgical adverse events. The portal vein is usually made by the confluence of the superior...
AIM
Knowledge of the portal system and its anatomical variations aids to prevent surgical adverse events. The portal vein is usually made by the confluence of the superior mesenteric and splenic veins, together with their main tributaries, the inferior mesenteric, left gastric, and pancreaticoduodenal veins; however, anatomical variations are frequent. This article presents a literature review regarding previously described anatomical variations of the portal venous system and their frequency.
METHODS
A systematic review of primary studies was performed in the databases PubMed, SciELO, BIREME, LILACS, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Scopus. Databases were searched for the following key terms: Anatomy, Portal vein, Mesenteric vein, Formation, Variation, Variant anatomic, Splenomesenteric vein, Splenic vein tributaries, and Confluence.
RESULTS
We identified 12 variants of the portal venous bed, representing different unions of the splenic vein, superior mesenteric vein, and inferior mesenteric vein. Thomson classification of the end of 19th century refers to the three most frequent variants, with type I as predominant (M=47%), followed by type III (M=27.8%) and type II (M=18.6%).
CONCLUSION
Thomson classification of variants is the most well-known, accounting for over 90% of portal venous variant found in clinical practice, inasmuch as the sum of the three junctions are found in over 93% of the patients. Even though rarer and accounting for less than 7% of variants, the other nine reported variations will occasionally be found during many abdominal operations.
Topics: Abdomen; Humans; Mesenteric Veins; Portal Vein; Splenic Vein; Stomach
PubMed: 35766611
DOI: 10.1590/0102-672020210002e1666 -
Medicine Oct 2021Vein resection pancreatoduodenectomy (VRPD) may be performed in selected pancreatic cancer patients. However, the main risks and benefits related to VRPD remain... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Vein resection pancreatoduodenectomy (VRPD) may be performed in selected pancreatic cancer patients. However, the main risks and benefits related to VRPD remain controversial.
OBJECTIVE
This review aimed to evaluate the risks and survival benefits that the VRPD may add when compared with standard pancreatoduodenectomy (PD).
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing VRPD and PD were performed.
RESULTS
VRPD was associated with a higher risk for postoperative mortality (risk difference: -0.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.02 to -0.00) and complications (risk difference: -0.05; 95% CI -0.09 to -0.01) than PD. The length of hospital stay was not different between the groups (mean difference [MD]: -0.65; 95% CI -2.11 to 0.81). In the VRPD, the operating time was 69 minutes higher on average (MD: -69.09; 95% CI -88.4 to -49.78), with a higher blood loss rate (MD: -314.04; 95% CI -423.86 to -195.22). In the overall survival evaluation, the hazard ratio for mortality during follow-up on the group of VRPD was higher compared to the PD group (hazard ratio: 1.13; 95% CI 1.03-1.23).
CONCLUSION
VRPD is associated with a higher risk of short-term complications and mortality and a lower probability of survival than PD. Knowing the risks and potential benefits of surgery can help clinicians to properly manage pancreatic cancer patients with venous invasion. The decision for surgery with major venous resection should be shared with the patients after they are informed of the risks and prognosis.
Topics: Aged; Blood Loss, Surgical; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Female; Humans; Length of Stay; Male; Mesenteric Veins; Middle Aged; Operative Time; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Portal Vein
PubMed: 34622858
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000027438 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Apr 2021Contemporary practice for superior mesenteric/portal vein (SMV-PV) reconstruction during pancreatectomy with vein resection involves biological (autograft, allograft,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Contemporary practice for superior mesenteric/portal vein (SMV-PV) reconstruction during pancreatectomy with vein resection involves biological (autograft, allograft, xenograft) or synthetic grafts as a conduit or patch. The aim of this study was to systematically review the safety and feasibility of the different grafts used for SMV-PV reconstruction.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in PubMed and Embase according to the PRISMA guidelines (January 2000-March 2020). Studies reporting on ≥ 5 patients undergoing reconstruction of the SMV-PV with grafts during pancreatectomy were included. Primary outcome was rate of graft thrombosis.
RESULTS
Thirty-four studies with 603 patients were included. Four graft types were identified (autologous vein, autologous parietal peritoneum/falciform ligament, allogeneic cadaveric vein/artery, synthetic grafts). Early and overall graft thrombosis rate was 7.5% and 22.2% for synthetic graft, 5.6% and 11.7% for autologous vein graft, 6.7% and 8.9% for autologous parietal peritoneum/falciform ligament, and 2.5% and 6.2% for allograft. Donor site complications were reported for harvesting of the femoral, saphenous, and external iliac vein. No cases of graft infection were reported for synthetic grafts.
CONCLUSION
In selected patients, autologous, allogenic or synthetic grafts for SMV-PV reconstruction are safe and feasible. Synthetic grafts seems to have a higher incidence of graft thrombosis.
Topics: Humans; Mesenteric Veins; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Portal Vein; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Patency
PubMed: 33288403
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.11.008 -
Scandinavian Journal of Surgery : SJS :... Jun 2021Acute mesenteric venous thrombosis accounts for up to 20% of all patients with acute mesenteric ischemia in high-income countries. Acute mesenteric venous thrombosis is...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Acute mesenteric venous thrombosis accounts for up to 20% of all patients with acute mesenteric ischemia in high-income countries. Acute mesenteric venous thrombosis is nowadays relatively more often diagnosed with intravenous contrast-enhanced computed tomography in the portal phase than at explorative laparotomy No high-quality comparative studies between anticoagulation alone, endovascular therapy, or surgery exists. The aim of the present systematic review was to offer a contemporary overview on management.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Eleven relevant published original studies with series of at least ten patients were retrieved from a Pub Med search between 2015 and 2020 using the Medical Subject Heading term "mesenteric venous thrombosis."
RESULTS
When MVT is diagnosed early, immediate anticoagulation with either unfractionated heparin or subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin should commence. Surgeons need to be aware of the importance to scrutinize the computed tomography images themselves for assessment of secondary intestinal abnormalities to mesenteric venous thrombosis and the risk of bowel resection and worse prognosis. Progression toward peritonitis is an indication for explorative laparotomy and assessment of bowel viability. Frank transmural small bowel necrosis should be resected and bowel anastomosis may be delayed for several days until second look. Meanwhile, intravenous full-dose unfractionated heparin should be given at the end of the first operation. Postoperative major intra-abdominal or gastrointestinal bleeding occurs rarely, but the heparin effect can instantaneously be reversed by . Patients who do not improve during conservative therapy with anticoagulation alone but without developing peritonitis may be subjected to endovascular therapy in expert centers. When the patient's intestinal function has recovered, with or without bowel resection, switch from parenteral unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin therapy to oral anticoagulation can be performed. There is a trend that direct oral anticoagulants are increasingly used instead of vitamin K antagonists. Up to now, direct oral anticoagulants have been shown to be equally effective with the same rate of bleeding complications. Patients with no strong permanent trigger factor for mesenteric venous thrombosis such as intra-abdominal cancer should undergo blood screening for inherited and acquired thrombophilia.
CONCLUSION
Early diagnosis with emergency computed tomography with intravenous contrast-enhancement and imaging in the portal phase and anticoagulation therapy is necessary to be able to have a succesful non-operative succesful course.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Heparin; Humans; Mesenteric Ischemia; Mesenteric Veins; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 33118463
DOI: 10.1177/1457496920969084 -
BMC Surgery Jul 2019Although pancreaticoduodenectomy with vein resection (PDVR) is widely performed in selected patients with indications, its benefits remain controversial. In this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Although pancreaticoduodenectomy with vein resection (PDVR) is widely performed in selected patients with indications, its benefits remain controversial. In this meta-analysis, we evaluate the safety and efficacy of PDVR in comparison to standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane as well as the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Weipu, and Wanfang databases for studies that evaluate the value of PVDR. The data of the patients who underwent PD or PDVR were analyzed using Review Manager and STATA software.
RESULTS
In comparison with the PD group, the PDVR group had a lower R0 resection rate and higher rates of complications such as biliary fistula, reoperation rate, delayed gastric emptying, cardiopulmonary abnormalities, hemorrhage, in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality. The blood loss, duration of operation, total hospital stay is higher in PDVR group.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to standard PD, PDVR was associated with a greater risk of some specific complications and increase the mortality rate, total hospital stay time, combine with vein resection have a lower R0 resection rate. Therefore, combine with vascular resection for pancreatic cancer needs to be carefully selected by the surgeon.
Topics: Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Humans; Mesenteric Veins; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Portal Vein; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Neoplasms; Vascular Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 31286916
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-019-0540-6