You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 136 No. 8, August 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Article
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (62)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Blood/ Coagulation
 •Randomized Controlled Trial
 •Hepatobiliary Surgery
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Randomized Comparison of Ultrasonic vs Clamp Transection of the Liver

Tadatoshi Takayama, MD; Masatoshi Makuuchi, MD,PhD; Keiichi Kubota, MD; Yasushi Harihara, MD; Ai-Min Hui, MD; Keiji Sano, MD; Masayoshi Ijichi, MD; Kiyoshi Hasegawa, MD

Arch Surg. 2001;136:922-928.

Hypothesis  Hepatic parenchymal transection is a technical priority in liver surgery. The use of an ultrasonic dissector for hepatectomy may result in less blood loss than conventional clamp crushing.

Design  Randomized controlled trial.

Setting  University teaching hospital.

Patients  The 132 patients scheduled to undergo partial hepatectomies were randomly assigned to receive hepatic transection by ultrasonic dissector or by clamp crushing (66 patients by each method).

Interventions  All resections were performed with inflow occlusion and were guided ultrasonographically. Hepatectomies were graded according to a predefined system based on 6 criteria (blood loss, transection time, technical error, surgical margin, landmark appearance, and postoperative morbidity), each with 3 scores (lower scores indicating higher quality).

Main Outcome Measures  Blood loss and hepatectomy grade.

Results  No difference was found between the ultrasonic and clamp groups in median blood loss (515 mL [range, 15-2527 mL] vs 452 mL [range, 17-1912 mL]; P = .63), transection time (61 minutes [range, 16-177 minutes] vs 54 minutes [range, 7-205 minutes]; P = .58), or transection speed (1.1 cm2/min [range, 0.4-4.0 cm2/min] vs 1.0 cm2/min [range, 0.4-3.0 cm2/min]; P = .90). Ultrasonic dissection caused more frequent histologically proven tumor exposure at the surgical margin (9 vs 3 patients; P = .09), incomplete appearance of landmark hepatic veins on the cut surface after anatomical resection (12 vs 4 patients; P = .03), and postoperative morbidity (20 vs 14 patients; P = .32) than did clamp crushing. The hepatectomies with clamp crushing had significantly higher grades than those with ultrasonic dissection (P = .05), as indicated by the lower median sum score (4.0 [range, 0-12] vs 5.0 [range, 0-19]; 95% confidence interval for difference, -2.0 to 0; P = .03). The transection method independently influenced hepatectomy grade (adjusted odds ratio = 3.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-6.92; P = .01).

Conclusions  Ultrasonic dissection offers no reduction in blood loss compared with clamp crushing for transection of the liver. Clamp crushing results in a higher quality of hepatectomy and is therefore the option of choice.


From the Division of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic and Transplantation Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.


RELATED ARTICLE

Randomized Comparison of Ultrasonic vs Clamp Transection of the Liver—Invited Critique
William C. Chapman
Arch Surg. 2001;136(8):928.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Liver Resection With a New Multiprobe Bipolar Radiofrequency Device
Ayav et al.
Arch Surg 2008;143:396-401.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The White Test: A New Dye Test for Intraoperative Detection of Bile Leakage During Major Liver Resection
Nadalin et al.
Arch Surg 2008;143:402-404.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Comparison Between the Minimum Margin Defined on Preoperative Imaging and the Final Surgical Margin After Hepatectomy for Cancer: How to Manage It?
Elias et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2008;15:777-781.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Safety of Prolonged Intermittent Pringle Maneuver During Hepatic Resection
Ishizaki et al.
Arch Surg 2006;141:649-653.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Hepatic Resection by the Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator(R) Increases the Incidence and Severity of Venous Air Embolism
Koo et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2005;101:966-970.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Techniques for Hepatectomies Without Blood Transfusion, Focusing on Interpretation of Postoperative Anemia
Torzilli et al.
Arch Surg 2004;139:1061-1065.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Results of R0 Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases Associated With Extrahepatic Disease
Elias et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2004;11:274-280.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Effect of Hypoventilation on Bleeding During Hepatic Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Hasegawa et al.
Arch Surg 2002;137:311-315.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2001 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.