选择性肝静脉阻断与全肝血流阻断治疗肝外伤伴主肝静脉损伤的疗效比较

Comparative study on selective hepatic vascular exclsion and total hepatic vascular exclusion for hepatic trauma with major hepatic vein injury

目的比较选择性肝静脉血流阻断(SHVE)与全肝血流阻断(THVE)治疗肝外伤伴主肝静脉损伤的临床疗效.方法采用回顾性病例对照研究分析2000年4月—2017年12月多中心收治的42例肝外伤伴主肝静脉损伤患者的临床资料,其中男30例,女12例;年龄14~65岁[(40.2±18.8)岁].22例采用SHVE控制出血(SHVE组),20例采用THVE控制出血(THVE组).SHVE组中男16例,女6例;年龄(40.1±19.4)岁.肝损伤美国创伤外科协会(AAST)分级:Ⅳ级10例,Ⅴ级12例.肝静脉损伤类型:Ⅰ型13例,Ⅲ型8例,Ⅳ型1例.THVE组中男14例,女6例;年龄(39.9±18.2)岁.肝损伤分级:Ⅳ级9例,Ⅴ级11例.肝静脉损伤类型:Ⅰ型11例,Ⅲ型7例,Ⅳ型2例.比较两组手术方式、手术时间、肝脏热缺血时间、肝静脉血流阻断时间、腹腔积血量、术中失血量、术后失血量、术中输液量、总输血量、术后住ICU时间、术后住院时间、术后肝肾功能、术后并发症发生率和病死率.结果两组患者手术方式、腹腔积血量、术中失血量、术后失血量、总输血量、术后肝肾功能比较差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05),但THVE组手术时间、肝脏热缺血时间、肝静脉血流阻断时间、术后住ICU时间及术后住院时间等均较SHVE组显著延长(P均<0.05).SHVE组术中输液量少于THVE组(P<0.05).SHVE组并发症发生率为27%(6/22),低于THVE组[60%(12/20)](P<0.05).SHVE组病死率为14%(3/22),低于THVE组[45%(9/20)](P<0.05).结论SHVE和THVE治疗肝外伤伴主肝静脉损伤,均能有效控制出血.但SHVE在缩短手术时间、肝脏热缺血时间、肝静脉血流阻断时间、术后住ICU时间及术后住院时间及降低术中输液量等方面较THVE更有优势,且能降低并发症发生率和病死率.

Objective To compare the effect of selective hepatic vascular exclsion ( SHVE) and total hepatic vascular exclusion ( THVE ) in the treatment of hepatic trauma with major hepatic vein injury. Methods A retrospective case control study was conducted to analyze the clinical data of 42 patients with hepatic trauma accompanied by hepatic vein injury admitted to multiple centers from April 2000 to December 2017. There were 30 males and 12 females, aged 14-65 years [(40. 2 ± 18. 8)years]. Blood flow exclusion was operated through HVE in 22 patients ( SHVE group ) and through THVE in 20 patients (THVE group). SHVE group included 22 patients (16 males and six females), aged (40. 1 ±19. 4)years. There were 10 patients with grade IV and 12 with grade V according to American Association of Traumatic Surgery ( AAST) classification of liver injury. In terms of the hepatic vein injury, there were 13 patients with type I, eight with type III, and one with type IV. THVE group included 20 patients (14 males and six females), aged (39.9 ±18.2)years. There were nine patients with grade IV and 11 with grade V according to AAST classification of liver injury. In terms of the hepatic vein injury, there were 11 patients with type I, seven with type III, and two with type IV. The operation approach, operation time, hepatic warm ischemia time, blocking time of hepatic vein blood flow, amount of abdominal hemorrhage, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative blood loss, intraoperative infusion, total blood transfusion, length of ICU stay after operation, length of hospital stay after operation, function of liver and kidney after operation, incidence of complications and mortality were compared between the two groups. Results There were no significant differences in the amount of abdominal hemorrhage, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative blood loss, perioperative blood transfusion, surgical procedure, and postoperative liver and kidney function between the two groups (P>0. 05). The THVE group had significantly longer operation time, hepatic warm ischemia time, hepatic venous blood flow blocking time, postoperative ICU time and postoperative hospital stay than the SHVE group (P<0. 05). The amount of infusion in the SHVE group was less than that in the THVE group (P <0. 05). The incidence of complications in SHVE group was 27%(6/22), lower than that in THVE group [60%(12/20)](P<0. 05). The mortality of SHVE group was 14%(3/22), lower than that of THVE group [45%(9/20)](P<0. 05). Conclusions SHVE and THVE can effectively control bleeding in the treatment of hepatic trauma with main hepatic vein injury. SHVE has more advantages over THVE in shortening operation time, warm ischemia time of liver, blocking time of hepatic vein blood flow, ICU stay after operation, hospital stay after operation and reducing intraoperative infusion volume, and can reduce the incidence of complications and mortality.