http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Dahn Byun*,이슬기,Hyeyoung Kim,Yunghun You,정재학,Je Ho Jang,Moon-Soo Lee,김창남,Byung Sun Cho,Yoon-Jung Kang 대한외과학회 2022 Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research(ASRT) Vol.103 No.5
Purpose: Although protein-induced vitamin K absence or antagonist II (PIVKA-II) has been used as a diagnostic tool for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), its prognostic value remains unclear. Methods: This was a nationwide multicenter study using the database of the Korean Liver Cancer Association. Patients with hepatitis B-related HCC who underwent liver resection as the first treatment after initial diagnosis (2008–2014) were selected randomly. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed for comparative analysis between those with low and high preoperative PIVKA-II. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression were used to identify prognostic factors for HCC-specific survival. Results: Among 6,770 patients, 956 patients were included in this study. After propensity score matching, the 2 groups (n = 245, each) were well balanced. The HCC-specific 5-year survival rate was 80.9% in the low PIVKA-II group and 78.7% in the high PIVKA-II group (P = 0.605). In univariable analysis, high PIVKA-II (>106.0 mAU/mL) was not a significant predictor for worse HCC-specific survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.183; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76–1.85; P = 0.461). In multivariable analysis, hyponatremia of <135 mEq/L (HR, 4.855; 95% CI, 1.67–14.12; P = 0.004), preoperative ascites (HR, 4.072; 95% CI, 1.59–10.43; P = 0.003), microvascular invasion (HR, 3.112; 95% CI, 1.69–5.74; P < 0.001), and largest tumor size of ≥5.0 cm (HR, 2.665; 95% CI, 1.65–4.31; P < 0.001), but not preoperative high PIVKA-II, were independent predictors for worse HCC- specific survival. Conclusion: Preoperative PIVKA-II is not an independent prognostic factor for HCC-specific survival after liver resection for hepatitis B-related HCC.
Sang Hyun Shin,Woo-hyoung Kang,In Woong Han,Yunghun You,Huisong Lee,Hongbeom Kim,Woohyun Jung,Yong Chan Shin,Jin Seok Heo 한국간담췌외과학회 2020 Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery Vol.24 No.4
Backgrounds/Aims: The purpose of this study was to investigate attitudes regarding the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol of hepato-biliary-pancreatic (HBP) surgeons in Korea and the extent to which they use the protocol for perioperative management. Methods: An online survey was conducted among members of the Korean Association of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery (KAHBPS) for eight weeks beginning on August 2019. The questionnaire, which was written in Korean, was based on the latest ERAS guidelines. Total responses were collected from 127 surgeons. Results: Of the 127 total respondents, the largest proportion (44.9%) were working in Seoul. In terms of established in-hospital clinical pathways (CP), 19.7% of the participating surgeons had and followed a CP in pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and 21.3% in hepatectomy. Regarding the ERAS protocol for each surgery, four items (18.2%) regarding PD and seven items (35.0%) related to hepatectomy were followed by more than 50% of respondents. Conclusions: ERAS guidelines are one of the consensuses for better recovery in perioperative management of patients undergoing major surgeries and encompass the overall process of patient recovery including patient education, pain control, physiologic balance, and perioperative nutrition. A novel project is needed to successfully implement an evidence-based enhanced recovery strategy.
The impact of portal vein resection on outcome of hilar cholangiocarcinoma
Ki Beom Kim,Dong Wook Choi,Jin Seok Heo,In Woong Han,Sang Hyun Shin,Yunghun You,Dae Joon Park 한국간담췌외과학회 2021 Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery Vol.25 No.2
Backgrounds/Aims: Portal vein resection (PVR) with major hepatic resection can increase the rate of curative resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HC). However, the oncologic role and safety of PVR is still debatable. This study aims to analyze PVR in terms of safety and therapeutic effectiveness. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 235 patients who had undergone major hepatic resection for HC with curative intent, including patients with PVR (PVR, n=35) consisting of PV invasion (PVR-A, n=9), No PV invasion (PVR-B, n=26); and patients without PVR (No PVR, n=200). Results: There was no significant difference in the 30-day mortality or postoperative morbidity between PVR and No PVR (2.9% vs. 1.0%; p=0.394 and 34.3% vs. 35.0%; p=0.875). The rate of advanced HC (T3: 40% vs. 12%; p<0.001 and nodal metastasis: 60% vs. 28%; p<0.001) was higher in PVR compared to No PVR. There was no significant difference in the 5-year overall survival rates and disease-free survival between PVR-A vs. PVR-B vs. No PVR. In multivariate analysis, estimated blood loss >600 ml (p=0.010), T3 diseases (p=0.001), nodal metastasis (p=0.001) and poor differentiation (p=0.002) were identified as independent risk factors for survival. Conclusions: PVR does not increase postoperative mortality or morbidity. It showed a similar oncologic outcome, despite a more advanced disease state in patients with HC. Given these findings, PVR should be actively performed if necessary, after careful patient selection.