Prognosis after splenectomy plus pericardial devascularization vs transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for esophagogastric variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND Portal hypertension combined with esophagogastric variceal bleeding(EGVB)is a serious complication in patients with hepatitis B virus(HBV)-related cirrhosis in China.Splenectomy plus pericardial devascularization(SPD)and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt(TIPS)are effective treatments for EGVB.However,a comparison of the effectiveness and safety of those methods is lacking.AIM To compare the prognosis after SPD vs TIPS for acute EGVB after failure of endoscopic therapy or secondary prophylaxis of variceal rebleeding(VRB)in patients with HBV-related cirrhosis combined with portal hypertension.METHODS This retrospective cohort study included 318 patients with HBV-related cirrhosis and EGVB who underwent SPD or TIPS at West China Hospital of Sichuan University during 2009-2013.Propensity score-matched analysis(PSM),the Kaplan-Meier method,and multivariate Cox regression analysis were used to compare overall survival,VRB rate,liver function abnormality rate,and hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC)incidence between the two patient groups.RESULTS The median age was 45.0 years(n=318;226(71.1%)males).During a median follow-up duration of 43.0 mo,18(11.1%)and 33(21.2%)patients died in the SPD and TIPS groups,respectively.After PSM,SPD was significantly associated with better overall survival(OS)(P=0.01),lower rates of abnormal liver function(P<0.001),and a lower incidence of HCC(P=0.02)than TIPS.The VRB rate did not differ significantly between the two groups(P=0.09).CONCLUSION Compared with TIPS,SPD is associated with higher postoperative OS rates,lower rates of abnormal liver function and HCC,and better quality of survival as acute EGVB treatment after failed endoscopic therapy or as secondary prophylaxis of VRB in patients with HBV-related cirrhosis combined with portal hypertension.There is no significant between-group difference in VRB rates.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus open splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization for portal hypertension with recurrent variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND： Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt（TIPS） and open splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization（OSED） are widely used to treat patients with portal hypertension and recurrent variceal bleeding（PHRVB）. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness between TIPS and OSED for the treatment of PHRVB.METHODS： The data were retrospectively retrieved from 479 cirrhotic patients（Child-Pugh A or B class） with PHRVB, who had undergone TIPS（TIPS group） or OSED（OSED group） between January 1, 2010 and October 31, 2014.RESULTS： A total of 196 patients received TIPS, whereas 283 underwent OSED. Within one month after TIPS and OSED, the rebleeding rates were 6.1% and 3.2%, respectively（P=0.122）. Significantly lower incidence of pleural effusion,splenic vein thrombosis, and pulmonary infection, as well as higher hepatic encephalopathy rate, shorter postoperative length of hospital stay, and higher hospital costs were observed in the TIPS group than those in the OSED group. During the follow-up periods（29 months）, significantly higher incidences of rebleeding（15.3% vs 4.6%, P=0.001） and hepatic encephalopathy（17.3% vs 3.9%, P=0.001） were observed in the TIPS group than in the OSED group. The incidence of instent stenosis was 18.9%. The survival rates were 91.3% in the TIPS group and 95.1% in the OSED group. The long-term liver function did not worsen after either TIPS or OSED.CONCLUSION： For the patients with liver function in the Child-Pugh A or B class, TIPS is not superior over OSED in terms of PHRVB treatment and rebleeding prevention.

Combined Laparoscopic Splenectomy and Esophagogastric Devascularization versus Open Splenectomy and Esophagogastric Devascularization for Portal Hypertension due to Liver Cirrhosis

This study was conducted to compare the feasibility,safety and effectiveness of the combined-laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization(C-LSED)with open splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization surgery(OSED)in patients with portal hypertension due to liver cirrhosis.From February 2014 to June 2018,68 patients with portal hypertension were diagnosed as having serious gastroesophageal varices and/or hypersplenism in our center.Thirty patients underwent C-LSED and 38 patients received OSED.Results and outcomes were compared retrospectively.No patients of C-LSED group required an intraoperative conversion to open surgery.Significantly shorter operating time,less blood loss,lower transfusion rates,shorter postoperative hospital stay,lower rates of complications were found in C-LSED group than in C-LSED group(P<0.05).No death and rebleeding were documented in both groups during the follow-up periods of one year Postoperative endoscopy revealed that varices in the patients of both groups were alleviated significantly from severe to mild,and in a part of cases,the varices disappeared.The final results suggest that the C-LSED technique is superior to open procedure,due to slightly invasive,simplified operative procedure,significantly shorter operating time,less intraoperative bleeding and lower post-operative complication rates.And C-LSED offers comparable long-term effects to open surgery.

A Prospective Randomized Trial of Selective versus Nonselective Esophagogastric Devascularization for Portal Hypertension

Cirrhosis with portal hypertension is a common disease which has a significant impact on the quality of patients＇ life. Esophagogastric devascularization（EGDV） has been demonstrated to be an effective method to treat portal hypertension, however certain complications are associated with it. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and clinical outcome of the selective EGDV（sEGDV） for the treatment of portal hypertension. The study was conducted prospectively from Jan. 1 2011 to Dec. 31, 2012, and 180 patients were randomized to the sEGDV group（n=90） or the non-sEGDV（n-sEGDV） group（n=90）. Patients＇ demographics, preoperative lab test results and operative details were comparable between the two groups. Postoperative and short-term complications were analyzed in two groups. There was statistically significant difference（P〈0.01） in the PVF reduction between the two groups. Post-operative complications showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of bleeding, ascites, acute portal vein thrombosis, fever and hepatic encephalopathy. Mortality between two groups was comparable. The incidence of splenic fossa effusion after the surgery was lower in sEGDV group than in n-sEGDV group. There were no significant differences in the short-term follow-up data such as esophageal varices and portal hypertensive gastropathy（P〉0.05）. It is suggested that sEGDV is a safe, simple and effective surgical procedure. It has both the advantages of the shunt and devascularization because it preserves body＇s voluntary diversion. With the advantage of low incidence of postoperative complications, it is an ideal surgical approach for the treatment of portal hypertension.

Two surgical procedures for esophagogastric variceal bleeding in patients with portal hypertension

AIM:To determine the clinical value of a splenorenal shunt plus pericardial devascularization(PCVD)in portal hypertension(PHT)patients with variceal bleeding.METHODS:From January 2008 to November 2012,290 patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension were treated surgically in our department for the prevention of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding:207 patients received a routine PCVD procedure(PCVD group),and83 patients received a PCVD plus a splenorenal shunt procedure(combined group).Changes in hemodynamic parameters,rebleeding,encephalopathy,portal vein thrombosis,and mortality were analyzed.RESULTS:The free portal pressure decreased to 21.43±4.35 mmHg in the combined group compared with24.61±5.42 mmHg in the PCVD group(P<0.05).The changes in hemodynamic parameters were more significant in the combined group(P<0.05).The long-term rebleeding rate was 7.22%in the combined group,which was lower than that in the PCVD group(14.93%),(P<0.05).CONCLUSION:Devascularization plus splenorenal shunt is an effective and safe strategy to control esophagogastric variceal bleeding in PHT.It should be recommended as a first-line treatment for preventing bleeding in PHT patients when surgical interventions are considered.

Esophagogastric devascularization without splenectomy in portal hypertension: safe and effective?

BACKGROUND： Esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage is a life-threatening complication of portal hypertension. In this study, we compared the therapeutic effect of a novel surgi- cal procedure, esophagogastric devascularization without splenectomy （EDWS）, with the widely used modified esopha- gogastric devascularization （MED） with splenectomy for the treatment of portal hypertension.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and splenectomy are more effective than endoscopic therapy for recurrent variceal bleeding in patients with idiopathic noncirrhotic portal hypertension

BACKGROUND Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt(TIPS),splenectomy plus esophagogastric devascularization(SED)and endoscopic therapy+non-selectiveβ-blockers(ET+NSBB)are widely applied in secondary prevention of recurrent gastroesophageal variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis.These different treatments,however,have not been compared in patients with idiopathic noncirrhotic portal hypertension(INCPH).AIM To compare the outcomes of TIPS,SED and ET+NSBB in the control of variceal rebleeding in patients with INCPH.METHODS This retrospective study recruited patients from six centers across China.Demographic characteristics,baseline profiles and follow-up clinical outcomes were collected.Post-procedural clinical outcomes,including incidence of rebleeding,hepatic encephalopathy(HE),portal vein thrombosis(PVT)and mortality rates,were compared in the different groups.RESULTS In total,81 patients were recruited,with 28 receiving TIPS,26 SED,and 27 ET+NSBB.No significant differences in demographic and baseline characteristics were found among these three groups before the procedures.After treatment,blood ammonia was significantly higher in the TIPS group;hemoglobin level and platelet count were significantly higher in the SED group(P<0.01).Rebleeding rate was significantly higher in the ET+NSBB group(P<0.01).Mortality was 3.6%,3.8%and 14.8%in the TIPS,SED and ET+NSBB groups,respectively,with no significant differences(P=0.082).Logistic regression analysis showed that mortality was significantly correlated with rebleeding,HE,portal thrombosis and superior mesenteric vein thrombosis(P<0.05).CONCLUSION In patients with INCPH,TIPS and SED were more effective in controlling rebleeding than ET+NSBB,but survival rates were not significantly different among the three groups.Mortality was significantly correlated with rebleeding,HE and PVT.

促抗凝失平衡与肝硬化门静脉高压症脾切断流术后门静脉血栓形成的关系

目的分析促抗凝失平衡与肝硬化门静脉高压症(PHT)行脾切除及贲门周围血管离断术后门静脉血栓(PVT)形成的相关性。方法回顾性分析2018年1月至2020年12月南京市第二医院因肝硬化PHT行脾切断流术的76例患者的临床资料,根据术后第7天超声检查门静脉是否发生血栓,分为血栓组(n=23)和非血栓组(n=53),对可能导致PVT形成的相关因素进行Logistic单因素和多因素分析。结果术后第7天血栓组与非血栓组凝血相关指标中蛋白S、内皮细胞蛋白C受体、血栓调节蛋白、血管假血友病因子差异无统计学意义,两组蛋白C(PC)[(4.96±1.94)µg/mL vs(6.17±1.55)µg/mL,t=-2.895,P=0.005]、凝血因子Ⅷ(FⅧ)[(127.45±12.09)ng/mL vs(120.69±9.74)ng/mL,t=2.581,P=0.012]及FⅧ/PC[(29.80±12.08)vs(20.86±5.75),t=4.387,P<0.001]差异均有统计学意义。多因素分析显示,术后第7天FⅧ/PC是PVT形成的独立危险因素(HR 1.296,95%CI 1.002~1.676,P=0.048)。结论对于肝硬化门静脉高压症的患者,FⅧ/PC是行脾切除及贲门周围血管离断术后PVT形成的独立危险因素。

内镜下精准断流术与传统内镜序贯治疗在食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血中的疗效比较

目的:探讨内镜下精准断流术在食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血中的应用效果。方法:按随机数字表法将2021年1月-2022年3月宜春市人民医院收治的60例肝硬化合并食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血患者分为两组,每组30例。对照组行传统内镜序贯治疗,观察组采用内镜下精准断流术治疗。观察比较治疗后1个月两组治疗效果、止血成功率、再出血率、术后并发症发生情况、静脉曲张消失率及3个月内内镜治疗次数。结果:观察组治疗总有效率为93.3%,高于对照组的66.7%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组与对照组成功止血率均为100.0%;术后3个月观察组再出血率为16.7%,低于对照组的40.0%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组术后并发症总发生率为23.3%,对照组为30.0%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组静脉曲张消失率为53.3%,高于对照组的23.3%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);3个月内观察组内镜治疗(1.20±0.48)次,少于对照组的(1.37±0.67)次,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血患者行内镜下食管胃底静脉曲张精准断流术治疗效果显著,利于减少复发及再出血风险,且不增加治疗次数及并发症的发生,值得临床推广应用。

肝硬化门脉高压症急症与择期手术治疗的病理比较及门脉高压症机制的探讨

目的比较研究肝硬化门脉高压症(PTH)急症与择期贲门周围血管离断术(EED)治疗患者围术期肝功能、并发症及肝脏病理改变的差异,并探讨肝硬化PTH肝内微循环改变的细胞生物学机制。方法128例临床病理资料完整的肝硬化PTH行EED病例,其中28例因食管胃贲门、底部静脉破裂大出血行急症EED,100例作择期EED治疗。对急症组与择期组的围术期肝功能、影像学资料、术中活检肝组织病理改变作比较。采用免疫组织化学方法检测肝组织中肝星状细胞(HSC)表达α平滑肌肌动蛋白(αSMA)、微管蛋白α、β以及肝组织内皮素1(ET1)的表达变化与肝硬化PTH间的关系。结果急症EED组术前(1周内)门静脉内径和大出血率及术后围术期并发症发生率明显高于择期EED组(分别P<0.05,P<0.01),而术后4周肝功能指标比较,除急症EED组ALT、AST高于择期EED组外,两组间白蛋白、球蛋白、总胆红素等指标无明显差异;急症EED组85.7%为活动期肝硬化,明显高于择期EED组的21.00%(P<0.01),两组肝组织内均存在门静脉分支及窦周纤维化,肝动脉及门静脉不同程度弹力纤维断裂,血管基底膜非均匀性增厚;与正常对照及CHB肝组织比较,两组肝组织内αSMA强阳性HSC数量均明显增多,HSC及部分肝细胞内微管蛋白α和微管蛋白β表达明显上调,ET1主要见于HSC。

急诊内镜静脉断流术治疗上消化道静脉曲张破裂出血的临床疗效

目的探讨急诊内镜静脉断流术(ESVD)治疗上消化道静脉曲张破裂出血的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2016年1月-2017年9月在大连大学附属中山医院消化内科接受急诊ESVD治疗的45例肝硬化食管胃静脉曲张破裂出血患者,统计分析ESVD治疗次数,术前及术后临床指标变化,术后复查内镜和随访情况,分析其有效性、安全性及相关性。结果 45例患者均成功完成急诊ESVD治疗,ESVD治疗次数73次,急诊内镜治疗的成功率97.8%(44/45),ESVD治疗后静脉曲张有效率97.8%(44/45)。术后随访期间5例患者术后迟发性出血,再出血的发生率11.1%(5/45),2例患者术后出现肺内感染,呼吸衰竭导致死亡,死亡率4.4%(2/45)。结论急诊ESVD可以作为一种安全有效的上消化道静脉曲张破裂出血的临床方法。

肝硬化门静脉高压症232例手术治疗的临床与病理研究

目的 评估贲门周围血管离断术(EED)加脾切除对肝硬化门静脉高压症 (PH)并脾功能亢进的疗效及影响因素 ,并探讨慢性淤血性脾肿大 (CCS)的脾纤维化机制。方法 分析 2 32例肝硬化PH并脾功能亢进实施EED加脾切除术治疗病例的临床资料 ,并采用组织病理观察、抗波形蛋白(Vm)、α 平滑肌肌动蛋白 (α SMA)及CD6 8免疫组织化学方法研究CCS脾纤维化改变。结果 2 32例术后 (出院时)外周血PLT、WBC、PTA及血清Alb指标较术前均明显改善 (P<0 0 1或P <0 0 5 ) ,仅 2 5 9%患者发生术后并发症 ,经处理后均痊愈出院。切除脾脏体积 14 2 3 6 7± 738 6 9cm3 ,CCS脾组织内Vm阳性成纤维细胞、α SMA阳性肌纤维母细胞明显增多 ,CD6 8阳性巨噬细胞比例增加。结论 EED加脾切除术是解除肝硬化患者脾功能亢进、缓解PH、减少食管胃底静脉曲张出血的有效治疗手段之一 ;注重围手术期及术中护理是保证手术效果的重要环节 ;巨噬细胞系统的活化 ,成纤维细胞。

完全腹腔镜脾切除加门奇静脉断流术治疗门静脉高压症

目的：探讨完全腹腔镜脾切除加门奇静脉断流术治疗门静脉高压症的可行性、安全性和优缺点。方法：回顾分析我院2005年1月至2007年12月收治的12例肝硬化门静脉高压症合并脾功能亢进、上消化道出血（呕血或黑便史）患者的临床资料,12例均施行完全腹腔镜脾切除加门奇静脉断流术。结果：12例患者均在腹腔镜下完成手术,平均手术时间210min,术中平均出血340ml,平均住院12d,术后随访3-36个月。无一例发生再出血。结论：完全腹腔镜脾切除加门奇静脉断流术安全可行,疗效确切,是值得临床推广的治疗门静脉高压症的微创手术方式。

贲门周围血管离断优先策略在腹腔镜断流术治疗门静脉高压症的应用评价

目的探讨先离断贲门周围血管后切除脾脏的腹腔镜断流术治疗门静脉高压症(portal hypertension,PHT)的效果。方法选择2013年1月~2018年12月151例腹腔镜脾切除贲门周围血管离断术(laparoscopic splenectomy and pericardial devascularization,LSPD),以2015年8月调整腹腔镜断流术手术策略为界,分为2组:A组70例,腹腔镜下先切脾后断流手术;B组81例,腹腔镜下先断流后切脾手术。比较2组资料近期临床疗效和住院费用。结果151例均顺利完成手术,无中转开腹手术。所有患者术后均发热,对症处理后均消失。无胃肠漏、胰漏、大出血并发症发生。2组住院期间各1例死亡:A组1例术后第6天猝死,考虑为肺栓塞所致;B组1例术中胃内大出血,术后第3天多器官衰竭死亡。与A组相比,B组手术时间明显缩短[(261.4±46.1)min vs.(180.8±61.4)min,t=2.558,P=0.019],术中出血量明显减少[中位数:480(120~2000)ml vs.200(80~400)ml,Z=-5.376,P=0.000]。2组患者总住院时间、术后住院时间、引流时间、住院总费用差异无显著性(P>0.05)。随访术后1年,2组各有1例发生便血,门静脉系统血栓发生率差异无显著性[A组28.9%(20/69),B组23.8%(19/80),χ^2=0.526,P=0.468]。结论贲门周围血管离断优先的腹腔镜断流术治疗PHT疗效满意。

CT门静脉成像指导内镜治疗胃底静脉曲张疗效

背景目前内镜治疗已成为治疗食管胃静脉曲张(gastroesophageal variceal,GOV)的重要手段,尤其是内镜下精准食管胃静脉曲张断流术(endoscopic selective varices devascularition,ESVD)在临床中得到较广泛应用.该技术要求术前精准判断GOV的来源及去路血管,内镜治疗术中精准封堵靶血管,要求最大程度地止血并预防术后出血.但是如何术前寻找封堵的GOV的来源血管即靶血管,目前尚缺乏临床指南指导也没有统一的标准,对于内镜医生是个需要解决的难题.目的观察CT门静脉成像(CT portography,CTP)指导内镜胃底曲张静脉组织胶血管内注射治疗,精准断流的临床疗效.方法单中心回顾性分析68例肝硬化食管胃底静脉曲张患者,其中38例病人内镜治疗前进行了CTP,为CTP指导治疗组;同期治疗前未行CTP的对照组病人30例.比较2组治疗后的改善率,用胶量,以及再出血率.结果38例CTP指导治疗组患者和对照组患者治疗前后肝功能均无差异;CTP指导治疗组患者治疗前后Child-Pugh分级无差异,对照组治疗前后Child-Pugh有显著差异(P<0.001);CTP组用胶量1.2 mL±0.4 mL较对照组2.0±0.6 mL明显减少(P<0.001);CTP组套扎环数7.2±2.7环比对照组8.7±2.7环减少(P<0.05);CTP组3 mo内再出血率5.3%(2/38)较对照组23.3%(7/30)减少(P<0.05);CPT组改善率65.8%(25/38),优于对照组为53.3%(16/30)(P<0.001).结论CTP指导内镜胃底曲张静脉组织胶血管内注射治疗胃底静脉曲张疗效及安全性较好,有较好的指导作用.

安全施行门奇断流术治疗107例门脉高压合并脾亢的初步体会

目的探讨安全施行门奇断流术合理的围术期管理方法以及术中的技术要点。方法回顾性分析我中心2010年7月至2011年6月收治的107例肝硬化门静脉高压患者围术期管理及其效果。结果术中失血量平均为(251.40±179.95)ml,其中肝功Child B级者失血量为(209.89±109.6)ml,Child C级者失血量为(487.50±294.68)ml,两组分布比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);平均输血量为(545.45±311.01)ml,其中Child B级组3例,输血率为3.30%,Child C级组8例,输血率为50%,两组输血率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后6例发生肝性脑病;术后2例继发肝肾综合征。结论术前积极改善肝功能,术中有效控制出血,保护性利尿,以及术后早期营养支持等综合措施是提高手术成功率和降低并发症发生率的有效方法。

腹腔镜脾切断流术治疗门静脉高压消化道出血的临床疗效及手术入路研究

目的总结腹腔镜脾切断流术(laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization,LSED)治疗门静脉高压消化道出血的诊治经验及手术入路。方法选取2018年1月至2020年4月首都医科大学附属北京佑安医院收治的因门静脉高压导致顽固性消化道出血接受LSED治疗的24例患者,分析其临床疗效及手术入路。结果24例患者中有22例(91.7%)应用腹膜后优先解剖入路,术中平均出血量为402.1 ml,术后复查WBC和PLT较术前显著回升(P<0.05),最常见的并发症为腹水(8/24,33.3%)和一过性胰漏(5/24,20.8%),均对症处理痊愈,无二次手术及死亡病例。术后早期、3个月及1年的门静脉血栓形成率分别为4.2%、41.7%和33.3%,术后1年内消化道出血复发率为4.2%。结论LSED治疗门静脉高压消化道出血安全有效,腹膜后优先解剖手术入路可以提供清晰的安全边界,有助于LSED的成功实施。

腹腔镜下脾切除术联合贲门周围血管离断术治疗肝硬化门静脉高压的效果观察

目的探讨腹腔镜下脾切除术（LS）联合贲门周围血管离断术（ED）治疗食管胃底静脉曲张出血及重度脾功能亢进的有效性和安全性。方法回顾性分析2012年6月-2013年6月于汉中市中心医院就诊的肝硬化门静脉高压患者68例,分为LS＋ED组和开腹脾切除术（OS）＋ED组各34例。对比两组患者临床指标、并发症、手术前后胃底静脉曲张程度及肝功能Child-Pugh评分变化。计量资料组间比较采用t检验,计数资料组间比较采用χ~2检验或Fisher确切概率法。结果在术中出血量、术后引流量、术后住院时间和术后肛门排气时间方面,LS＋ED组明显少于OS＋ED组（t值分别为-3.144、-2.536、-4.151、-2.671,P值分别为0.003、0.015、0.001、0.002）,在食管胃底静脉曲张程度及肝功能Child-Pugh评分改善方面二者差异均无统计学意义（P值均〉0.05）。结论 LS＋ED可以明显降低患者术中出血量、术后引流量、术后肛门排气时间和术后住院天数等,是一种安全、可行、有效的门静脉高压症的治疗方法。

脾切除贲周血管离断术对肝硬化患者术后血清MMP-1、TIMP-1及肝纤维化指标的影响

目的：探讨脾切除贲周血管离断术对慢性乙型肝炎肝硬化门静脉高压症患者肝纤维化指标及肝硬化病程的影响和可能机制。方法选择20例HBsAg（＋）、HBV-DNA（-）门静脉高压症患者，其中肝功能Child-Pugh A级14例，Child-Pugh B级6例。分别于脾切除贲周血管离断术前后，采用酶联免疫吸附试验（ELISA）法测定血清基质金属蛋白酶-1（MMP-1）和基质金属蛋白酶组织抑制因子-1（TIMP-1）；化学发光免疫法测定透明质酸（HA）、三型前胶原N端肽（PC-Ⅲ）、四型胶原（IV-C）、层粘连蛋白（LN）。结果（1）血清TIMP-1及肝纤4项指标较术前明显下降（p〈0.05），MMP-1较术前缓慢升高（ p〈0.05）。（2）TIMP-1与肝纤四项指标的变化成正相关关系（ r=0.458∽0.783，p 〈0.01/0.05），MMP-1与肝纤4项指标的变化呈负相关关系（ r =-0.545∽-0.873，p〈0.01/0.05）。结论脾切除贲周血管离断术可使肝纤维化血清学指标和TIMP-1含量下降、MMP-1含量缓慢升高，有利于减缓肝硬化患者的病情进展。

改良Sugiura术治疗门静脉高压70例分析

目的探讨改良Sugiura术治疗门静脉高压症引起的食管下端胃底曲张静脉破裂出血的安全性和有效性。方法对我院2004年1月至2010年8月治疗的70例门静脉高压症并出血的病例进行回顾性总结分析。结果术前自由门静脉压力为（38．71±7．71）cmH2O，断流术后为（32．33±7．61）cmH2O，二者相比差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。10例急诊手术，止血率达90％。围手术期死亡3例，30例少量腹水，胸腔积液20例，门静脉血栓8例。术后消化道再出血7例，其中1例为急诊手术患者。结论改良Sugiura术是治疗门静脉高压症引起的食管下端胃底曲张静脉破裂出血的是一种安全、有效的方法。