4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Effect of infrahepatic inferior vena cava partial clamping on central venous pressure and intraoperative blood loss during laparoscopic hepatectomy

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Classification of Surgical Complications

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Kidney dysfunction in the postoperative period.

            J Sear (2005)
            The development of perioperative acute renal failure is associated with a high incidence of morbidity and mortality. Although this incidence varies with different surgical procedures and with the definition used for renal failure, we now understand better the aetiology of the underlying problem. However, successful strategies to provide renal protection or strategies for 'rescue therapy' are either lacking, unsubstantiated by randomized clinical trials, or show no significant efficacy. The present review considers the physiology and pharmacology of the kidney; the characterization of tests of renal function; the cause of postoperative renal dysfunction; what is presently available for its prevention and treatment; and the effect of postoperative renal impairment on patient outcome.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Low central venous pressure reduces blood loss in hepatectomy.

              To investigate the effect of low central venous pressure (LCVP) on blood loss during hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). By the method of sealed envelope, 50 HCC patients were randomized into LCVP group (n=25) and control group (n=25). In LCVP group, CVP was maintained at 2-4 mmHg and systolic blood pressure (SBP) above 90 mmHg by manipulation of the patient's posture and administration of drugs during hepatectomy, while in control group hepatectomy was performed routinely without lowering CVP. The patients' preoperative conditions, volume of blood loss during hepatectomy, volume of blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, changes in hepatic and renal functions were compared between the two groups. There were no significant differences in patients' preoperative conditions, maximal tumor dimension, pattern of hepatectomy, duration of vascular occlusion, operation time, weight of resected liver tissues, incidence of post-operative complications, hepatic and renal functions between the two groups. LCVP group had a markedly lower volume of total intraoperative blood loss and blood loss during hepatectomy than the control group, being 903.9+/-180.8 mL vs 2 329.4+/-2 538.4 (W=495.5, P<0.01) and 672.4+/-429.9 mL vs 1 662.6+/-1 932.1 (W=543.5, P<0.01). There were no remarkable differences in the pre-resection and post-resection blood losses between the two groups. The length of hospital stay was significantly shortened in LCVP group as compared with the control group, being 16.3+/-6.8 d vs 21.5+/-8.6 d (W=532.5, P<0.05). LCVP is easily achievable in technique. Maintenance of CVP
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Surgical Endoscopy
                Surg Endosc
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                0930-2794
                1432-2218
                June 2021
                June 30 2020
                June 2021
                : 35
                : 6
                : 2773-2780
                Article
                10.1007/s00464-020-07709-y
                32607902
                dda509d8-a4bd-4f17-a11b-9d49ee80cd48
                © 2021

                https://www.springer.com/tdm

                https://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article