Clinical impact of a celiac axis stenosis in patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery.
Celiac axis
Hepatectomy
Hepatobiliary surgery
Postoperative complication
Stenosis
Journal
Langenbeck's archives of surgery
ISSN: 1435-2451
Titre abrégé: Langenbecks Arch Surg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9808285
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Jul 2023
16 Jul 2023
Historique:
received:
03
10
2022
accepted:
26
06
2023
medline:
18
7
2023
pubmed:
16
7
2023
entrez:
16
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Celiac axis stenosis (CAS) often is an incidental finding in terms of diagnostic for hepatobiliary surgery since most cases remain asymptomatic. It remains unclear whether CAS is a risk factor for postoperative complications after hepatobiliary surgery. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of an asymptomatic CAS on the postoperative morbidity and survival of patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery. We retrospectively analyzed CT scans and clinicopathological data of 250 consecutive patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery between 2011 and 2018 in our tertiary center. We compared the postoperative course between patients with and without an incidental CAS as well as their overall survival. CAS was caused by atherosclerotic stenosis in 16 (64%) patients, by ligamentous stenosis in 4 (16%) and by combined conditions in 5 cases (20%). Mean age of patients in the CAS group was significantly higher in comparison to patients of the non-CAS group (71.0 vs. 59.1 years, p < 0.001). Major hepatectomy was conducted in 40% of the CAS patients and 19.6% of non-CAS patients, respectively (p = 0.036). Interestingly, no statistically significant differences in postoperative morbidity (40 vs. 46.2%, p = 0.673) or in overall survival between the groups (41.3 vs. 51.9 months, p = 0.611) were observed. Our analysis found no correlation between an asymptomatic celiac axis stenosis and postoperative complications or overall survival after hepatobiliary surgery. Which impact the incidental CAS may have in highly complex cases remains unclear. Further studies are needed to identify patients who benefit from CAS treatment before hepatobiliary surgery.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Celiac axis stenosis (CAS) often is an incidental finding in terms of diagnostic for hepatobiliary surgery since most cases remain asymptomatic. It remains unclear whether CAS is a risk factor for postoperative complications after hepatobiliary surgery. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of an asymptomatic CAS on the postoperative morbidity and survival of patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery.
METHODS
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed CT scans and clinicopathological data of 250 consecutive patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery between 2011 and 2018 in our tertiary center. We compared the postoperative course between patients with and without an incidental CAS as well as their overall survival.
RESULTS
RESULTS
CAS was caused by atherosclerotic stenosis in 16 (64%) patients, by ligamentous stenosis in 4 (16%) and by combined conditions in 5 cases (20%). Mean age of patients in the CAS group was significantly higher in comparison to patients of the non-CAS group (71.0 vs. 59.1 years, p < 0.001). Major hepatectomy was conducted in 40% of the CAS patients and 19.6% of non-CAS patients, respectively (p = 0.036). Interestingly, no statistically significant differences in postoperative morbidity (40 vs. 46.2%, p = 0.673) or in overall survival between the groups (41.3 vs. 51.9 months, p = 0.611) were observed.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Our analysis found no correlation between an asymptomatic celiac axis stenosis and postoperative complications or overall survival after hepatobiliary surgery. Which impact the incidental CAS may have in highly complex cases remains unclear. Further studies are needed to identify patients who benefit from CAS treatment before hepatobiliary surgery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37454337
doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-03003-2
pii: 10.1007/s00423-023-03003-2
pmc: PMC10350437
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
279Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
CA Cancer J Clin. 2004 Nov-Dec;54(6):295-308
pubmed: 15537574
Ann Hepatol. 2011 Jan-Mar;10(1):88-92
pubmed: 21301017
Br J Surg. 2017 Sep;104(10):1346-1354
pubmed: 28493483
Pancreatology. 2018 Jul;18(5):592-600
pubmed: 29776725
Ann Surg. 2009 Jan;249(1):111-7
pubmed: 19106685
Fr Med. 1956 May;19(5):5-12
pubmed: 13344728
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Ann Surg. 2019 Dec;270(6):1018-1027
pubmed: 30829704
Rofo. 2013 Jul;185(7):628-34
pubmed: 23740311
J Clin Med. 2019 Apr 23;8(4):
pubmed: 31018577
World J Surg. 2005 Jul;29(7):885-9
pubmed: 15951921
Int J Surg. 2018 Jan;49:62-67
pubmed: 29258887
Eur J Radiol. 2010 Oct;76(1):42-7
pubmed: 19464837
World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 1995;854:1-452
pubmed: 8594834
JAMA Surg. 2016 May 1;151(5):471-7
pubmed: 26934394
Ann Surg. 2007 Jun;245(6):909-22
pubmed: 17522517
Transplant Proc. 2001 Feb-Mar;33(1-2):1438-9
pubmed: 11267363
Ann Surg. 2023 Apr 1;277(4):e885-e892
pubmed: 35129468
JOP. 2009 Sep 04;10(5):547-9
pubmed: 19734635
Radiographics. 2002 Jul-Aug;22(4):881-93
pubmed: 12110717
Surgery. 2011 May;149(5):713-24
pubmed: 21236455
Surgery. 2012 Apr;151(4):543-9
pubmed: 22001637
J Visc Surg. 2021 Apr;158(2):133-144
pubmed: 33191149
Transplant Proc. 2008 Dec;40(10):3532-5
pubmed: 19100431
Ann Vasc Surg. 2019 Oct;60:128-146
pubmed: 31200053