Portal vein stent placement after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery

Stent placement for main portal vein occlusion to eradicate ectopic varices after pancreatoduodenectomy

Ectopic varices bleeding around the choledochojejunostomy site, potentially caused by portal vein occlusion, is a rare complication following pancreatoduodenectomy. In this report, we present a case of ectopic varices around the choledochojejunostomy site after pancreatoduodenectomy. A 55-year-old man who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy with portal vein reconstruction for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma suffered from hematochezia. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography revealed total occlusion of the main portal vein and ectopic varices around the choledochojejunostomy anastomosis site. An attempt at endoscopic hemostasis using clipping was unsuccessful. Consequently, a main portal vein stent was inserted to eliminate the varices. We successfully restored blood flow in the portal vein and eradicated the varices. Additionally, endoscopic changes were directly visualized using double-balloon endoscopy. Therefore, portal vein stent placement may be an effective treatment option for ectopic variceal bleeding around the choledochojejunostomy site following pancreatoduodenectomy.

Rapid deterioration of steatotic liver disease due to portal vein stenosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy

Steatotic liver disease after pancreatoduodenectomy occurs due to various factors, such as exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, impaired intestinal absorption, and malnutrition. The mechanism of steatogenesis differs to that of conventional steatotic liver disease associated with obesity and insulin resistance. We experienced a rare case of rapidly progressive steatotic liver disease accompanied by portal vein stenosis in the early postoperative period after subtotal stomach-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy for distal cholangiocarcinoma. Although there was a complication due to postoperative drain infection, the patient was discharged from hospital with no nutritional problems. Two months postoperatively, the patient presented to the emergency room with dyspnea. CT showed a markedly steatotic liver, ascites, and portal vein stenosis. A portal vein stent was inserted transhepatically and the steatotic liver disease gradually improved. During the postoperative course, there were no problems indicated by nutritional markers; although the patient had diarrhea associated with postoperative pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, the symptoms were mild and improved after administration of oral pancrelipase. Before the intervention, the patient had intestinal edema, exacerbation of diarrhea, and a low serum zinc concentration, suggesting that impaired absorption caused by intestinal blood stasis and gut barrier dysfunction contributed to the development of steatotic liver disease.

Current approaches to the management of jejunal variceal bleeding at the site of hepaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy

Jejunal variceal bleeding at the site of hepaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy due to portal hypertension caused by extrahepatic portal vein obstruction is a life-threatening complication and is very difficult to treat. Pharmacotherapy, endoscopic methods, transcatheter embolization of veins supplying the jejunal afferent loop, portal venous stenting, and surgical procedures can be used for the treatment of jejunal variceal bleeding. Nevertheless, the optimal management strategy has not yet been established, which is due to the lack of randomized controlled trials involving a large cohort of patients necessary for their development.

Comparison of patency rates and complications with or without antithrombotic therapy following portal vein stent placement after pancreatic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein stent placement is used for portal vein stenosis. However, reports on postpancreatic surgery cases are rare. Whether antithrombotic therapy should be administered remains controversial. In this paper, the authors reviewed current data to evaluate the influence of antithrombosis on stent patency after pancreatic surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared studies in which patients did or did not receive antithrombotic therapy after portal vein stent placement. The authors compared patency after stent placement and complication rate.

RESULTS

There were 22 ( n =207) studies in which patients received antithrombotic therapy and 8 ( n =61) in which patients did not receive therapy. Antithrombotic agents, such as aspirin, clopidogrel, heparin, and warfarin, were used. The overall patency rates were similar between the groups (79.2% in the antithrombosis group vs. 88.0% in the nonantithrombosis group). Subgroup analyses included those for the etiology of stenosis, types of antithrombotic agents, acute or chronic stenosis, and causes of stent stenosis. None revealed a significant difference between the patency rates in the antithrombosis and nonantithrombosis groups. However, bleeding complications only occurred in patients who received antithrombotic therapy.

CONCLUSION

There is no significant benefit of antithrombotic therapy after portal vein stent placement following pancreatic surgery. Antithrombotic therapy should be performed with caution because it may cause complications, such as bleeding.

Endovascular resolution of post-surgical complications in the portal vein: Report of two cases

Stenosis of the portal vein is one of the main complications after hepatobiliar and pancreatic surgery, with a reported incidence of 19.6% after pancreaticoduodenectomy and 3% after liver transplant. It is associated with the intraoperative resection of the portal vein, local recurrence of the primary tumor and radiotherapy. The portal lesion secondary to bile drainage catheter insertion is extremely rare or unusual, with few cases described in the literature. This article describes 2 cases: the first of a male patients 49 years old post-operative to liver transplant with partial portal thrombosis and stenosis of the mesoportal joint, and the second a female patient 50 years old with history of cholecystectomy, exploration of the bile duct and placement of Kehr "T" tube with secondary portal lesion. The 2 cases were successfully treated through minimally invasive procedures by an interventionist radiologist.

Percutaneous transhepatic stenting for acute superior mesenteric vein stenosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy with portal vein reconstruction: A case report

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transhepatic stent placement has become a common strategy for the postoperative treatment of portal vein (PV)/superior mesenteric veins (SMV) stenosis/occlusion. It has been widely used after liver transplantation surgery; however, reports on stent placement for acute PV/SMV stenosis after pancreatic surgery within postoperative 3 d are rare.

CASE SUMMARY

Herein, we reported a case of intestinal edema and SMV stenosis 2 d after pancreatic surgery. The patient was successfully treated using stent grafts. Although the stenosis resolved after stent placement, complications, including bleeding, pancreatic fistula, bile leakage, and infection, made the treatment highly challenging. The use of anticoagulants was adjusted multiple times to prevent venous thromboembolism and the risk of bleeding. After careful treatment, the patient stabilized, and stent placement effectively managed postoperative PV/SMV stenosis.

CONCLUSION

Stent placement is effective and feasible for treating acute PV/SMV stenosis after pancreatic surgery even within postoperative 3 d.

Metallic Stents for Hepatic Venous Outflow Obstruction After Living-Donor Liver Transplantation and their Therapeutic Effects

BACKGROUND

Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is established as a standard therapy for end-stage liver disease; however, vessel reconstruction is more demanding due to the short length and small size of the available structures compared with deceased-donor whole liver transplantation. Interventional radiology (IR) has become the first-line treatment for vascular complications after LDLT. Hepatic venous outflow obstruction (HVOO) is a life-threatening complication after LDLT. The aim of this study of 592 adult-to-adult LDLT cases was to investigate the safety and efficacy of stent implantation for HVOO after LDLT.

METHODS

Records of patients who developed HVOO requiring any treatment were collected with special reference to the metallic stent implantation. There were 232 left-side grafts and 360 right-side grafts. Sixteen cases developed HVOO after LDLT with an incidence rate of 2.7%, 5 with a left liver graft (2%), and 11 with a right-side graft (3%). The IR was attempted for 14 cases; among those, 8 cases were treated by stent implantation.

RESULTS

The technical success rate of the initial stent implantation was 100%. The pressure gradient at the stenotic site significantly improved from 12.2 (range, 10.9-20.4 cm H2O) to 3.9 cm H2O (range, 1.4-8.2 cm H2O; P = .03). The volume of the congested graft liver decreased significantly from 1448 (range, 788-2170 mL) to 1265 mL (range, 748-1665 mL; P = .01), and the serum albumin level improved significantly from 3.3 (range, 1.7-3.7 g/dL) to 3.7 g/dL (range, 2.9-4.1 g/dL; P = .02). No procedure-related complication was noted, and the long-term stent patency was 100%.

CONCLUSION

Metallic stent implantation for stenotic venous anastomosis after LDLT is a safe and effective treatment.

Ectopic Variceal Bleeding from the Hepaticojejunostomy due to Extrahepatic Portal Vein Occlusion: How to Treat?

Atypical variceal bleeding, which primarily stems from extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO), is a severe complication of pancreatic hepatobiliary surgery. This review provides insights into this condition's incidence, diagnosis, and management strategies. The treatment modalities for atypical variceal bleeding resulting from EHPVO range from endoscopic intervention to surgical procedures, including direct variceal ligation and shunt surgery. Here, we discuss the efficacy and potential limitations of each treatment approach. Additionally, we explored the utility and therapeutic advantages of the meso-Rex shunt, a particularly promising surgical technique for mitigating the hemodynamic and metabolic impacts of EHPVO.

Balloon angioplasty versus stent placement for the treatment of portal vein stenosis in children: a single center experience

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of percutaneous interventional treatment of portal vein stenosis in children.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all interventional treatments for portal vein stenosis in pediatric patients at a single institution from 2010 to 2021 was conducted. Platelet count, spleen size and portal vein flow velocity were assessed during the follow-up period. Primary and primary assisted patency time were determined.

RESULTS

A total of ten children (median age 28.5 months, interquartile range (IQR): 2.75-52.5 months) with portal vein stenosis after Mesorex-Shunt (n = 4), liver transplantation (n = 3) and other etiologies (n = 3) underwent 15 interventional procedures. There were five reinterventions and one discontinued intervention. The technical success rate was 93.3% (14/15) and clinical success of treated patients was 100% (14/14). Median follow-up was 18 months (IQR: 13.5-81 months). The median primary patency time for stent placement was 70 months (IQR: 13.5-127.25 months). For balloon angioplasty, the median primary patency time was 9 months (IQR 7.25-11.5 months), while the median assisted primary patency time was 14 months (IQR: 12 to 15 months). Platelet count, spleen size and portal vein flow velocity reliably corresponded to recurrence of portal vein stenosis in asymptomatic patients during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Interventional treatment is a safe and efficient method to treat portal vein stenosis with long patency times, regardless of etiology. Primary stent placement shows a higher primary patency time than balloon angioplasty. Implementation of stent placement as the primary interventional method may improve patency times and reduce the need for repeat reinterventions in pediatric patients.

Portal Vein Recanalization for Noncirrhotic Portal Vein Cavernous Transformation: Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation versus Portal Vein Stent Placement

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation versus portal vein stent placement (PVS) in patients with noncirrhotic cavernous transformation of the portal vein (CTPV).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, clinical data from patients with noncirrhotic CTPV who underwent TIPS creation or PVS were compared. A total of 54 patients (mean age, 43.8 years ± 15.8; 31 men and 23 women) were included from January 2013 to January 2021; 29 patients underwent TIPS creation, and 25 patients underwent PVS. Stent occlusion, variceal rebleeding, survival, and postprocedural complications were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 40.2 months ± 26.2 in the TIPS group and 35.3 months ± 21.1 in the PVS group. The stent occlusion rate in the PVS group (16%, 4 of 25) was significantly lower than that in the TIPS group (41.4%, 12 of 29) during the follow-up (P = .042). The cumulative variceal rebleeding rates in the TIPS group were significantly higher than those in the PVS group (28% vs 4%; P = .027). The procedural success rate was 69% in the TIPS group and 86% in the PVS group (P = .156). There was a higher number of severe adverse events after TIPS than after PVS (0% vs 24%; P = .012).

CONCLUSIONS

Portal vein recanalization with PVS may be a preferable alternative to TIPS creation in the treatment of noncirrhotic CTPV because of higher stent patency rates, lower risk of variceal rebleeding, and fewer adverse events.

Percutaneous radiological interventions of the portal vein: a comprehensive review

The portal vein is the largest vessel supplying the liver. A number of radiological interventions are performed through the portal vein, namely for primary pathologies of the portal vein, for inducing liver hypertrophy or to treat the sequelae of portal hypertension among others. The routes used include direct transhepatic, transjugular, and, uncommonly, trans-splenic and through subcutaneous varices. Portal vein embolization and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt are among the most common portal vein interventions that are performed to induce hypertrophy of the future liver remnant and to treat complications of portal hypertension, respectively. Other interventions include transhepatic obliteration of varices and shunts, portal vein thrombolysis, portal vein recanalization, pancreatic islet cell transplantation, and embolization of portal vein injuries. We present a detailed illustrative review of the various radiological portal vein interventions.

Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of jejunal varix of the afferent loop after pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Jejunal varix is a concerning late complication after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) due to the risk of recurrent and intractable bleeding. Our aim was to investigate the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of jejunal varix after PD.

METHODS

A total of 709 patients who underwent PD between 2007 and 2017 were included. Preoperative and postoperative CT images were reviewed to evaluate the development of portal vein (PV) stenosis (≥50%) and jejunal varices.

RESULTS

Jejunal varix developed in 83 (11.7%) patients at a median of 12 months after PD. Eighteen (21.7%) patients experienced variceal bleeding. PV stenosis (P < 0.001; odds ratio [OR] 33.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 15.6-66.7) and PV/superior mesenteric vein resection (P = 0.028; OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1-4.7) were independent risk factors for jejunal varix. Of the nine patients who underwent stent placement for PV stenosis before the formation of jejunal varices, none experienced variceal bleeding. By contrast, 18 (27.3%) of the 135 patients without PV stent placement experienced at least one episode of variceal bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of jejunal varix was substantial after PD. PV stenosis was a strong risk factor for jejunal varix. Early PV stent placement and maintaining stent patency could reduce the risk of variceal bleeding in patients with PV stenosis.

Gastroduodenal artery pseudoaneurysm and chronic superior mesenteric vein thrombosis treated with transcatheter embolization and stent dilatation, respectively: 7 year clinical and imaging follow-up

Pancreatic pseudocyst formation, arterial pseudoaneurysm, and splanchnic vein thrombosis are complications of chronic pancreatitis that account for significant morbidity and mortality in this patient population. While the short-term utility of timely endovascular intervention for treating the vascular complications of chronic pancreatitis have been relatively well documented, there is a paucity of longitudinal follow-up in this patient population, therefore making it difficult to predict the long-term efficacy of these interventions. This report details a case of a gastroduodenal artery pseudoaneurysm embolization followed by symptomatic superior mesenteric vein chronic thrombosis treated by stent dilatation in a patient with chronic pancreatitis, with 7 years clinical and imaging follow-up.

Effect of Stent Placement on Survival in Patients with Malignant Portal Vein Stenosis: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

Objective

Percutaneous portal vein (PV) stent placement can be an effective treatment for symptoms associated with portal hypertension. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of PV stenting on the overall survival (OS) in patients with malignant PV stenosis.

Materials and Methods

Two groups of patients with malignant PV stenosis were compared in this retrospective study involving two institutions. A total of 197 patients who underwent PV stenting between November 2016 and August 2019 were established as the stent group, whereas 29 patients with PV stenosis who were treated conservatively between July 2013 and October 2016 constituted the no-stent group. OS was compared between the two groups before and after propensity score matching (PSM). Risk factors associated with OS were evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model. Procedure-associated adverse events were also evaluated.

Results

The stent group finally included 100 patients (median age, 65 [interquartile range, 58–71] years; 64 male). The no-stent group included 22 patients (69 [61–75] years, 13 male). Stent placement was successful in 95% of attempted cases, and the 1- and 2-year stent occlusion–free survival rate was 56% (95% confidence interval, 45%–69%) and 44% (32%–60%), respectively. The median stent occlusion–free survival time was 176 (interquartile range, 70–440) days. OS was significantly longer in the stent group than in the no-stent group (median 294 vs. 87 days, p < 0.001 before PSM, p = 0.011 after PSM). The 1- and 3-year OS rates before PSM were 40% and 11%, respectively, in the stent group. The 1-year OS rate after PSM was 32% and 5% in the stent and no-stent groups, respectively. Anemia requiring transfusion (n = 2) and acute thrombosis necessitating re-stenting (n = 1) occurred in three patients in the stent group within 1 week.

Conclusion

Percutaneous placement of a PV stent may be effective in improving OS in patients with malignant PV stenosis.

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

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.