Abstract
ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes of the transhepatic hilar approach and conventional approach for surgical treatment of Bismuth types III and IV perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 82 patients who underwent surgical resection of Bismuth types III and IV perihilar cholangiocarcinoma from 2008 to 2016. The transhepatic hilar approach and conventional approach was used in 36 (43.9%) and 46 (56.1%) patients, respectively. Postoperative complications and overall survival were compared between the two approaches.ResultsSimilar clinical features were observed between the patients treated by the conventional approach and those treated by the transhepatic hilar approach. The transhepatic hilar approach was associated with less intraoperative bleeding and a lower percentage of Clavien grade 0 to II complications than the conventional approach. However, the transhepatic hilar approach was associated with a higher R0 resection rate and better overall survival. Multivariate analysis showed that using the transhepatic hilar approach, the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center classification, and R0 resection were independent risk factors for patient survival.ConclusionThe transhepatic hilar approach might be the better choice for surgical resection of Bismuth types III and IV perihilar cholangiocarcinoma because it is associated with lower mortality and improved survival.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.