Venous Deprivation Research Articles

A new method to enhance liver regeneration: double venous deprivation of the liver

A májdaganatok reszekálhatóságának feltétele a műtét után megmaradó, megfelelő májműködést biztosítani képes elégséges májszövetmennyiség. Ennek mérete a műtét előtt különböző eljárásokkal növelhető meg. A vena (v.) portae occlusiós technikákkal lassabb és csekélyebb növekedés érhető el, kis rizikójú intervenció során. Amennyiben a hypertrophia nem elegendő, illetve ha felmerül a gyors tumorpogresszió lehetősége, úgy alkalmazható a v. portae egyoldali elzárása és a májállomány kettéválasztása, ami rövid idő alatt a legjelentősebb indukált hypertrophiát biztosítja. A kombinált műtét morbiditása azonban viszonylag jelentős. A fenti technikák előnyeit hivatott ötvözni a máj kettős vénás elsorvasztása, melynek során az azonos oldali v. portae és v. hepatica occlusiója történik. Ezzel gyors, az utóbbi módszert megközelítő mértékű ellenoldali lebeny-hypertrophia érhető el biztonságosan. Esetünkön keresztül ezt a májhipertrofizáló technikát mutatjuk be. A 75 éves nőbeteg bizonytalan hasi panaszai miatt indult kivizsgálása során a máj jobb lebenyében, a középső szektort is érintő, nagy méretű intrahepaticus cholangiocellularis tumor igazolódott. Tekintettel a lokalizációra, a tumor csak jobb oldali trisegmentectomiával volt eltávolítható. Májvolumetriát végeztünk, mely alapján a megmaradó máj volumene (S1-2-3) 35% alattinak bizonyult. Kettős vénás depriváció mellett döntöttünk. A jobb v. portae és v. hepatica dextra occlusióját követő 7. napon jelentős hypertrophiát (41%) igazoltunk. A tervezett műtétet sikeresen elvégeztük. A posztoperatív szakban enyhe ascites csorgását konzervatívan kezeltük, egyéb szövődmény nem jelentkezett, a 8. posztoperatív napon emittáltuk a beteget. Amennyiben a tervezett májreszekció kapcsán a megmaradó máj várható térfogata nem elégséges, májregenerációs technikák alkalmazására van szükség. Az elérhető technikák közül a legújabb, alacsony szövődményrizikóval kecsegető megoldás a kettős vénás depriváció, mely során az azonos oldali v. portae és v. hepatica elzárására kerül sor. A fenti eset bizonyítja, hogy a módszertől gyors és hatékony májregeneráció várható minimális megterheléssel, ami lehetővé teszi a biztonságos kiterjesztett májreszekciók elvégzését. Orv Hetil. 2024; 165(36): 1433–1439.

Comprehensive Review of Future Liver Remnant (FLR) Assessment and Hypertrophy Techniques Before Major Hepatectomy: How to Assess and Manage the FLR.

The regenerative capacities of the liver and improvements in surgical techniques have expanded the possibilities of resectability. Liver resection is often the only curative treatment for primary and secondary malignancies, despite the risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). This serious complication (with a 50% mortality rate) can be avoided by better assessment of liver volume and function of the future liver remnant (FLR). The aim of this review was to understand and assess clinical, biological, and imaging predictors of PHLF risk, as well as the various hypertrophy techniques, to achieve an adequate FLR before hepatectomy. We reviewed the state of the art in liver regeneration and FLR hypertrophy techniques. The use of new biological scores (such as the aspartate aminotransferase/platelet ratio index + albumin-bilirubin [APRI+ALBI] score), concurrent utilization of 99mTc-mebrofenin scintigraphy (HBS), or dynamic hepatocyte contrast-enhanced MRI (DHCE-MRI) for liver volumetry helps predict the risk of PHLF. Besides portal vein embolization, there are other FLR optimization techniques that have their indications in case of risk of failure (e.g., associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy, liver venous deprivation) or in specific situations (transarterial radioembolization). There is a need to standardize volumetry and function measurement techniques, as well as FLR hypertrophy techniques, to limit the risk of PHLF.

Cornerstones and divergencies in the implementation and use of liver hypertrophy techniques: results from a nationwide survey for the set-up of the prospective registry.

The aim of this national survey on liver hypertrophy techniques was to track the trends of their use and implementation in Italy and to detect analogies and heterogeneities among centers. In December 2022, Italian centers with liver resection activity were specifically contacted and asked to fill an online questionnaire composed of 6 sections including a total of 51 questions. 46 Italian centers filled the questionnaire. The proportion of major/total number of liver resections was 27% and the use of hypertrophy techniques was required in 6,2% of cases. The most frequent reason of drop out was disease progression in 58.5% of cases. Most frequently used techniques were PVE and ALPPS with an increasing use of hepatic venous deprivation (HVD). Heterogeneous answers were provided regarding the cutoff values to indicate the need for hypertrophy techniques. Criteria to allocate a patient to different hypertrophy techniques are not standardized. The use of hypertrophy techniques is deep-rooted in Italy, documenting the established value of their role in improving resectability rate. While an evolution of techniques is detectable, still significant heterogeneity is perceived in terms of cutoff values, indications and managing protocols.

Invited Commentary on "CIRSE Standards of Practice on Portal Vein Embolization and Double Vein Embolization/Liver Venous Deprivation".

Invited Commentary on "CIRSE Standards of Practice on Portal Vein Embolization and Double Vein Embolization/Liver Venous Deprivation".

CIRSE Standards of Practice on Portal Vein Embolization and Double Vein Embolization/Liver Venous Deprivation

This CIRSE Standards of Practice document is aimed at interventional radiologists and provides best practices for performing liver regeneration therapies prior to major hepatectomies, including portal vein embolization, double vein embolization and liver venous deprivation. It has been developed by an expert writing group under the guidance of the CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee. It encompasses all clinical and technical details required to perform liver regeneration therapies, revising the indications, contra-indications, outcome measures assessed, technique and expected outcomes.

Liver venous deprivation in the prevention of post-resection hepatic failure

The paper presents a clinical observation of successful X-ray endovascular intervention performed in a patient with colorectal cancer metastases in the liver in order to prevent post-resection hepatic failure. Traditional embolization of the right branch of the portal vein was supplemented by occlusion of the right hepatic vein. Venous deprivation enabled a rapid growth of the future liver remnant to be achieved as indicated by CT volumetry results and SPECT-CT data that showed a significant increase in hepatic clearance. The first results demonstrate that liver venous deprivation is to be investigated further in clinical practice.

Assessment of Segmentary Hypertrophy of Future Remnant Liver after Liver Venous Deprivation: A Single-Center Study.

Background: Liver venous deprivation (LVD) is a recent radiological technique that has shown promising results on Future Remnant Liver (FRL) hypertrophy. The aim of this retrospective study is to compare the segmentary hypertrophy of the FRL after LVD and after portal vein embolization (PVE). Methods: Patients undergoing PVE or LVD between April 2015 and April 2020 were included. The segmentary volumes (seg 4, seg2+3 and seg1) were assessed before and after the radiological procedure. Results: Forty-four patients were included: 26 undergoing PVE, 10 LVD and 8 eLVD. Volume gain of both segment 1 and segments 2+3 was significantly higher after LVD and eLVD than after PVE (segment 1: 27.33 ± 35.37 after PVE vs. 38.73% ± 13.47 after LVD and 79.13% ± 41.23 after eLVD, p = 0.0080; segments 2+3: 40.73% ± 40.53 after PVE vs. 45.02% ± 21.53 after LVD and 85.49% ± 45.51 after eLVD, p = 0.0137), while this was not true for segment 4. FRL hypertrophy was confirmed to be higher after LVD and eLVD than after PVE (33.53% ± 21.22 vs. 68.63% ± 42.03 vs. 28.11% ± 28.33, respectively, p = 0.0280). Conclusions: LVD and eLVD may induce greater hypertrophy of segment 1 and segments 2+3 when compared to PVE.

Preliminary Results from the International Registry on Liver Venous Deprivation (EuroLVD)

Abstract Background Liver venous deprivation (LVD) is a recently developed method to reach maximal liver hypertrophy before major hepatectomy. LVD combines simultaneous portal and ipsilateral hepatic vein embolization. An international registry was created in 2021. Aims This study aimed to describe the outcomes after LVD of patients included in the registry. Methods Since its creation, 7 international expert HPB centers participated to the registry. Preoperative characteristics, data on liver regeneration after LVD, and postoperative results after hepatectomy were collected. Future liver remnant (FLR) and standardized FLR ratios were defined as FLR/total functional liver volume and FLR/total estimated liver volume. Results A total of 191 patients were included (71 women). Median age was 63 (IQR 53-69) and body-mass index 24.8 kg/m2 (IQR 22.3-28.7). Fifty-three patients were ASA III/IV. Main surgical indication was colorectal metastases (n=116). Median FLR and standardized FLR ratios before LVD were 33% (IQR 26-47) and 32% (IQR 23-39). Median time for the LVD procedure was 122 minutes (IQR 99-164). In one patient right hepatic vein embolization failed. Complications after LVD occurred in 14 patients (7%), including 7 hemorrhages/hematomas. After LVD, median FLR and standardized FLR ratios significantly increased to 46% (IQR 39-59, p<0.001) and 44% (IQR 35-50, p<0.001), corresponding to a median kinetic growth rate of 3.2%/week (IQR 1.6-5.3). Hepatectomy was performed in 142 patients (69 extended hepatectomies), while 49 dropped out (7 for insufficient hypertrophy (4%), 27 for tumor progression (14%), and 15 for other reasons (8%)). Seventy-one patients had postoperative complications (50%), and only 2 developed postoperative liver failure (1%). Median Comprehensive Complication Index was 20.9 (IQR 0-30.8) and 10 patients were reoperated (7%). Conclusion The preliminary data of this international registry showed that LVD had a high technical success rate (190/191) with few post-procedural complications and significant kinetic growth. Major hepatectomy after LVD appeared to be safe.

Full robotic versus open ALPPS: a bi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes

BackgroundIn primarily unresectable liver tumors, ALPPS (Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy) may offer curative two-stage hepatectomy trough a fast and extensive hypertrophy. However, concerns have been raised about the invasiveness of the procedure. Full robotic ALPPS has the potential to reduce the postoperative morbidity trough a less invasive access. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of open and full robotic ALPPS.MethodsThe bicentric study included open ALPPS cases from the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland and robotic ALPPS cases from the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy from 01/2015 to 07/2022. Main outcomes were intraoperative parameters and overall complications.ResultsOpen and full robotic ALPPS were performed in 36 and 7 cases. Robotic ALPPS was associated with less blood loss after both stages (418 ± 237 ml vs. 319 ± 197 ml; P = 0.04 and 631 ± 354 ml vs. 258 ± 53 ml; P = 0.01) as well as a higher rate of interstage discharge (86% vs. 37%; P = 0.02). OT was longer with robotic ALPPS after both stages (371 ± 70 min vs. 449 ± 81 min; P = 0.01 and 282 ± 87 min vs. 373 ± 90 min; P = 0.02). After ALPPS stage 2, there was no difference for overall complications (86% vs. 86%; P = 1.00) and major complications (43% vs. 39%; P = 0.86). The total length of hospital stay was similar (23 ± 17 days vs. 26 ± 13; P = 0.56).ConclusionRobotic ALPPS was safely implemented and showed potential for improved perioperative outcomes compared to open ALPPS in an experienced robotic center. The robotic approach might bring the perioperative risk profile of ALPPS closer to interventional techniques of portal vein embolization/liver venous deprivation.

Rates of completion surgery following venous deprivation procedures (PVE or DVE)

Rates of completion surgery following venous deprivation procedures (PVE or DVE)

Correlation between the liver transection line localization and future liver remnant hypertrophy in associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy.

Colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) represent the most prevalent form of secondary liver tumors, and insufficient future liver remnant (FLR) often leads to unresectability. To tackle this challenge, various methods for stimulating liver hypertrophy have been developed including portal vein embolization (PVE), associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) and the newest one, liver venous deprivation (LVD). ALPPS was thoroughly studied over the last decade and it has been shown to induce rapid and intensive FLR hypertrophy. The objective of this study was to assess whether the localization of the liver transection line during the initial stage of ALPPS correlates with the degree of FLR hypertrophy. A retrospective, multicentric study was conducted, and we analyzed all consecutive patients with CRLMs who underwent ALPPS over the eight-year period. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the type of resection-right trisectionectomy (ERH) or right hemihepatectomy (RH) respectively. The degree of hypertrophy (DH), its correlation with FLR and postoperative outcomes were assessed. The cohort consisted of 136 patients (72 in the ERH group and 64 in the RH group). Baseline characteristics, hypertrophy interval, and total liver volume showed no significant differences between the groups. DH was greater in the ERH group (83.2% vs. 62.5%, p = 0.025). A strong negative correlation was observed between FLR volume and DH in both groups. Postoperative outcomes and one-year survival were comparable between the groups. FLR hypertrophy is influenced by the localization of the liver transection line in ALPPS. Furthermore, correlation analysis indicated that a smaller estimated FLR is associated with greater DH. No statistical difference in outcomes was noted between the groups.

Single-Center Retrospective Study Comparing Double Vein Embolization via a Trans-Jugular Approach with Liver Venous Deprivation via a Trans-Hepatic Approach.

To compare safety, technical and clinical outcomes of double vein embolization (DVE) via a trans-jugular approach with liver venous deprivation (LVD) via a trans-hepatic approach. A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing simultaneous portal and hepatic veins embolization in view of a major hepatectomy (June 2019-November 2022). Hepatic vein embolization was performed either by transjugular plug (DVE) or by transhepatic plug followed by glue injection (LVD). Inclusion criteria were availability of pre-procedural CT scan, and availability of CT scans acquired 10days and 25days post-procedure. Comparative data included complication rate, fluoroscopy time, dose area product (DAP), Future Liver Remnant volume and function increase (FLR-V and FLR-F increase, respectively) and clinical outcomes. Thirty-six patients (n = 14 DVE; n = 22 LVD) were included. No baseline significant differences were observed among the two groups. One grade-3 complication (2.8%) was observed in the LVD group; one case of technical failure (2.8%) was observed in the DVE group. Fluoroscopy time and DAP were similar between DVE and LVD (29 ± 17.7 vs. 25 ± 8.2min, p = 0.97; 105.1 ± 63.5 vs. 143.4 ± 79.5Gy·cm2, p = 0.15). No differences arose at either time-point in FLR-V increase (46.7 ± 23.1% vs. 48.2 ± 28.2%, 52.9 ± 30.9% vs. 53.2 ± 29%, respectively, p = 0.9). FLR-F increase also did not differ significantly (62.8 ± 55.2 vs. 67.4 ± 57.5, p = 0.9). No differences in drop-out rate from surgery were observed. (28.6% vs. 27.3%, p = 0.93). One case of grade-B post-hepatectomy liver failure (2.8%) was observed in the LVD group. LVD via transhepatic approach and DVE via transjugular approach seem equally safe and effective. Level of Evidence Level 3, Retrospective Cohort Study.

Comparing Liver Venous Deprivation and Portal Vein Embolization for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: Is It Time to Shift the Focus to Hepatic Functional Reserve Rather than Hypertrophy?

Purpose: Among liver hypertrophy technics, liver venous deprivation (LVD) has been recently introduced as an effective procedure to combine simultaneous portal inflow and hepatic outflow abrogation, raising growing clinical interest. The aim of this study is to investigate the role of LVD for preoperative optimization of future liver remnant (FLR) in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC), especially when compared with portal vein embolization (PVE). Methods: Between January 2013 and July 2022, all patients diagnosed with PHC and scheduled for preoperative optimization of FTR, through radiological hypertrophy techniques, prior to liver resection, were included. FTR volumetric assessment was evaluated at two distinct timepoints to track the progression of both early (T1, 10 days post-procedural) and late (T2, 21 days post-procedural) efficacy indicators. Post-procedural outcomes, including functional and volumetric analyses, were compared between the LVD and the PVE cohorts. Results: A total of 12 patients underwent LVD while 19 underwent PVE. No significant differences in either post-procedural or post-operative complications were found. Post-procedural FLR function, calculated with (99m) Tc-Mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy, and kinetic growth rate, at both timepoints, were greater in the LVD cohort (3.12 ± 0.55%/min/m2 vs. 2.46 ± 0.64%/min/m2, p = 0.041; 27.32 ± 16.86%/week (T1) vs. 15.71 ± 9.82%/week (T1) p < 0.001; 17.19 ± 9.88%/week (T2) vs. 9.89 ± 14.62%/week (T2) p = 0.034) when compared with the PVE cohort. Post-procedural FTR volumes were similar for both hypertrophy techniques. Conclusions: LVD is an effective procedure to effectively optimize FLR before liver resection for PHC. The faster growth rate combined with the improved FLR function, when compared to PVE alone, could maximize surgical outcomes by lowering post-hepatectomy liver failure rates.

Sequential Y90 liver radioembolization and portal vein embolization: an additional strategy to downstage liver tumors and to enhance liver hypertrophy before major hepatectomies.

Yttrium (Y)90 liver radioembolization (TARE) induces both tumor downsizing and contralateral liver hypertrophy. In this study, we report the preliminary results of a sequential strategy combining Y90 radioembolization and portal vein embolization (PVE) before major right liver resections. We retrospectively reviewed clinical, radiological, and biological data of 5 consecutive patients undergoing Y90 TARE-PVE before major right liver resections. Comparison was made with patients undergoing PVE alone or liver venous deprivation (LVD) during the same period. Between January 2019 and September 2022, five patients underwent sequential TARE-PVE. Type of resection included the following: right hepatectomy (n = 1), right hepatectomy + 1 (n = 2), and right hepatectomy + 1 + 4 (n = 2) with no postoperative mortality. Volumetric data showed a mean hypertrophy ratio of 30.4% after TARE and an additional 37.4% after sequential PVE. Patients undergoing sequential TARE-PVE had higher hypertrophy ratio (p = 0.02; p = 0.004), hypertrophy degree (p = 0.02; p < 0.0001), shorter time to normalize bilirubin (p = 0.04), and prothrombin time (p = 0.003; p < 0.0001) compared with patients receiving LVD or PVE. Time from diagnosis to surgery was statistically significant longer in patients undergoing sequential TARE-PVE compared with LVD or PVE (293.4 ± 169.1 vs 54.18 ±18.26 vs 58.62±13.15; p = 0.0008; p = <0.0001). This preliminary report suggests that sequential PVE and TARE can represent a safe and an alternative strategy to downstage liver tumors and to enhance liver hypertrophy before major hepatectomies. When compared with PVE and LVD, sequential TARE/PVE takes longer times but achieves some advantages which warrant further evaluation in a larger setting.

Tc-99m mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy to assess future liver remnant function before major liver surgery.

Assessment of liver function is paramount before hepatectomy. This study aimed to assess future liver remnant function (FLR-F) using hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS) and to compare it to FLR volume (FLR-V) in the prediction of posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). The impact of volume and function gains were also assessed in patients undergoing portal vein embolization (PVE) or liver venous deprivation (LVD). All consecutive patients undergoing major hepatectomy between 02/2018 and 09/2021 with preoperative HBS were included. FLR-V was expressed as percentage of total liver volume and analyzed using preoperative computed tomography. FLR-V and FLR-F gains after embolization were expressed in percentage. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to compare both methods in predicting PHLF. Thirty-six patients were included. PVE and LVD were performed in 4 (11%) and 28 patients (78%), respectively. Overall, PHLF occurred in eight patients (22%). FLR-F gain after embolization showed significant ability to predict PHLF (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.789), with cut-off value of 150% showing a sensitivity of 1.00, a specificity of 0.42, and a negative predictive value of 1.00. Preoperative HBS shows a high sensitivity to predict PHLF when HBS is performed twice to measure the function gain after venous embolization.

A bibliometric and visualized analysis of preoperative future liver remnant augmentation techniques from 1997 to 2022.

The size and function of the future liver remnant (FLR) is an essential consideration for both eligibility for treatment and postoperative prognosis when planning surgical hepatectomy. Over time, a variety of preoperative FLR augmentation techniques have been investigated, from the earliest portal vein embolization (PVE) to the more recent Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) and liver venous deprivation (LVD) procedures. Despite numerous publications on this topic, no bibliometric analysis has yet been conducted. Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database was searched to identify studies related to preoperative FLR augmentation techniques published from 1997 to 2022. The analysis was performed using the CiteSpace [version 6.1.R6 (64-bit)] and VOSviewer [version 1.6.19]. A total of 973 academic studies were published by 4431 authors from 920 institutions in 51 countries/regions. The University of Zurich was the most published institution while Japan was the most productive country. Eduardo de Santibanes had the most published articles, and Masato Nagino was the most frequently co-cited author. The most frequently published journal was HPB, and the most cited journal was Ann Surg, with 8088 citations. The main aspects of preoperative FLR augmentation technique is to enhance surgical technology, expand clinical indications, prevent and treat postoperative complications, ensure long-term survival, and evaluate the growth rate of FLR. Recently, hot keywords in this field include ALPPS, LVD, and Hepatobiliary Scintigraphy. This bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive overview of preoperative FLR augmentation techniques, offering valuable insights and ideas for scholars in this field.

A Sticky Situation: Glue Migration during Hepatic Vein Embolization.

The addition of hepatic venous embolization to portal venous embolization to achieve ipsilateral liver venous deprivation before major hepatectomy has been suggested to increase the extent of hypertrophy of the future liver remnant. The presented case discusses a hepatic vein embolization procedure complicated by the unintended migration of a glue cast used to achieve hepatic venous occlusion and subsequent management with endovascular retrieval of the glue cast from the inferior vena cava. The emerging role of hepatic venous embolization and associated complications are also discussed.

Safety and Efficacy of Liver Venous Deprivation Following Transarterial Chemoembolization Before Major Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of liver venous deprivation (LVD) following transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Between January 2021 and December 2022, HCC patients indicated for hepatectomy with initial insufficient future liver remnant (FLR) underwent LVD after TACE to induce preoperative liver hypertrophy. Twenty-seven HCC patients with a median age of 55 years underwent LVD. No TACE or LVD procedure-associated complications occurred, except for 1 case presenting with grade A liver failure after LVD (then recovered after 7 days). The FLR volume was 29.3% (interquartile range [IQR] = 7.5) and 48.9% (IQR = 8.6) of the total liver volume before and after LVD, respectively (p < 0.001). The degree of hypertrophy and FLR hypertrophy rate were 14.8% (IQR = 8.4) and 55.2% (IQR = 36.7), respectively. All 27 patients demonstrated sufficient FLR after LVD (24 patients at three weeks post-LVD, one at six weeks, and two at ten weeks), but only 21 patients accepted surgery. Postoperative histopathology showed 16 patients with cirrhosis and five with mild fibrosis (F1, F2). One patient presented with severe intraoperative bleeding due to damage of left hepatic vein and developed grade C liver failure, then died on day 32 postoperation. LVD following TACE seems to be a safe, effective, and feasible method of inducing significant FLR regeneration in HCC, even in well-selected cirrhotic livers. Comparative studies with a large patient population and multicenter data are needed for further evaluation.

Optimizing the future liver remnant: Portal vein embolization, hepatic venous deprivation, and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy

Preservation of an adequate future liver remnant is paramount when planning any major liver resection and is of particular concern in the setting of bilateral colorectal liver metastases. Procedures including portal vein embolization and hepatic venous deprivation for one- or two-stage hepatectomy, and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy have been developed to enable curative-intent hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases in patients with an initially insufficient future liver remnant.

Liver Venous Deprivation Using Amplatzer Vascular Plug-Assisted N-Butyl Cyanoacrylate Embolization of the Portal and Hepatic Veins: How Do I Do it?

Liver resection can be curative in a select group of patients with primary and secondary hepatobiliary malignancies.[1] For these patients, the size and function of the future liver remnant (FLR) must be carefully considered to limit the potential for posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), a predominant cause of mortality.[1] [2] [3] [4] Preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) has been shown to increase the volume of the FLR, allowing more patients to become surgical candidates and improving postoperative outcomes.[1] [2] [5] [6] [7] PVE occludes the portal venous branches supplying the lobe of the liver to be resected and redirects blood flow toward the FLR, leading to compensatory hypertrophy.[2] [8]