Liver Vein Deprivation versus Portal Vein Embolization: Retrospective Review of Safety and Effectiveness

Abstract

PurposeTo compare the safety and effectiveness of liver vein deprivation (LVD) and portal vein embolization (PVE) in patients scheduled to undergo liver resection. Materials and MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included 59 patients who underwent either PVE (n = 28) or LVD (n = 31) in preparation for liver resection. The primary outcome was percent change in future liver remnant volume (FLRV). The secondary endpoints were degree of hypertrophy (DH) and kinetic growth rate (KGR). ResultsLow baseline FLRV and time interval in days between the procedure and follow-up imaging (Ti) positively impacted the primary and secondary endpoints in both groups. Percent change in FLRV was higher in the LVD group (52.8% ± 5.3) than in the PVE group (22.3% ± 3.0, P < .001). DH was also higher in the LVD group (15.4% ± 1.7) than in the PVE group (6.4% ± 0.9, P < .001). KGR did not differ significantly between groups (LVD, 0.54%/d ± 0.06; PVE, 0.35%/d ± 0.1; P = .239). When patients with a baseline standardized FLRV of >35% were excluded from the analysis, the LVD group demonstrated higher values than the PVE group in KGR (0.57%/d ± 0.06 vs 0.29%/d ± 0.05, P < .001), percent change in FLRV (64.2% ± 6.0 vs 25.9% ± 4.3, P < .001), and DH (15.4% ± 1.4 vs 6.6% ± 1.0, P < .001). No adverse events were noted in either group. ConclusionsLVD appears to be safe and may be superior to PVE in inducing hypertrophy of future liver remnant in patients scheduled to undergo surgical resection.