Graft type for superior mesenteric and portal vein reconstruction in pancreatic surgery - A systematic review.


Journal

HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association
ISSN: 1477-2574
Titre abrégé: HPB (Oxford)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100900921

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 2021
Historique:
received: 20 08 2020
revised: 27 10 2020
accepted: 02 11 2020
pubmed: 9 12 2020
medline: 27 1 2022
entrez: 8 12 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

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. 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. 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. 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.

Sections du résumé

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.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33288403
pii: S1365-182X(20)31245-4
doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.11.008
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

483-494

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Knut J Labori (KJ)

Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: uxknab@ous-hf.no.

Dyre Kleive (D)

Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.

Ammar Khan (A)

Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Ingvild Farnes (I)

Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Bjarte Fosby (B)

Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.

Pål-Dag Line (PD)

Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH