The Interplay Between Biliary Occlusion and Liver Regeneration: Repeated Regeneration Stimuli Restore Biliary Drainage by Promoting Hepatobiliary Remodeling in a Rat Model.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Richter B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9081651 | biostudies-literature | 2022
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The Interplay Between Biliary Occlusion and Liver Regeneration: Repeated Regeneration Stimuli Restore Biliary Drainage by Promoting Hepatobiliary Remodeling in a Rat Model.
Richter Beate B Sänger Constanze C Mussbach Franziska F Scheuerlein Hubert H Settmacher Utz U Dahmen Uta U
Frontiers in surgery 20220425
<h4>Background and aims</h4>Patients with malignant biliary obstruction do not seem to benefit from "two-stage hepatectomy" due to an impairment of liver regeneration. We designed a novel model of "repeated regeneration stimuli" in rats mimicking a "two-stage hepatectomy" with selective or complete biliary occlusion mimicking Klatskin tumors III° or IV°. Using this new model, we wanted to investigate (1) the impact of preexistent cholestasis of different extent on the time course of liver regene ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6030706 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC2808633 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Under chronic or severe liver injury, liver progenitor cells (LPCs) of biliary origin are known to expand and contribute to the regeneration of hepatocytes and cholangiocytes. This regeneration process is called ductular reaction (DR), which is accompanied by dynamic remodeling of biliary tissue. Although the DR shows apparently distinct mode of biliary extension depending on the type of liver injury, the key regulatory mechanism remains poorly understood. Here, we show that Lutheran (Lu)/Basal cell adhesion molecule (BCAM) regulates the morphogenesis of DR depending on liver disease models. Lu+ and Lu- biliary cells isolated from injured liver exhibit opposite phenotypes in cell motility and duct formation capacities in vitro. By overexpression of Lu, Lu- biliary cells acquire the phenotype of Lu+ biliary cells. Lu-deficient mice showed severe defects in DR. Our findings reveal a critical role of Lu in the control of phenotypic heterogeneity of DR in distinct liver disease models.
| S-EPMC6107333 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aimsPreoperative biliary drainage is often initiated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with potentially resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC), but additional percutaneous transhepatic catheter (PTC) drainage is frequently required. This study aimed to develop and validate a prediction model to identify patients with a high risk of inadequate ERCP drainage.Patients and methodsPatients with potentially resectable PHC and (attempted) preoperative ERCP drainage were included from two specialty center cohorts between 2001 and 2013. Indications for additional PTC drainage were failure to place an endoscopic stent, failure to relieve jaundice, cholangitis, or insufficient drainage of the future liver remnant. A prediction model was derived from the European cohort and externally validated in the USA cohort.ResultsOf the 288 patients, 108 (38%) required additional preoperative PTC drainage after inadequate ERCP drainage. Independent risk factors for additional PTC drainage were proximal biliary obstruction on preoperative imaging (Bismuth 3 or 4) and predrainage total bilirubin level. The prediction model identified three subgroups: patients with low risk (7%), moderate risk (40%), and high risk (62%). The high-risk group consisted of patients with a total bilirubin level above 150 µmol/L and Bismuth 3a or 4 tumors, who typically require preoperative drainage of the angulated left bile ducts. The prediction model had good discrimination (area under the curve 0.74) and adequate calibration in the external validation cohort.ConclusionsSelected patients with potentially resectable PHC have a high risk (62%) of inadequate preoperative ERCP drainage requiring additional PTC drainage. These patients might do better with initial PTC drainage instead of ERCP.
| S-EPMC4745253 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We posed six clinical questions (CQ) on preoperative biliary drainage and organized all pertinent evidence regarding these questions. CQ 1. Is preoperative biliary drainage necessary for patients with jaundice? The indications for preoperative drainage for jaundiced patients are changing greatly. Many reports state that, excluding conditions such as cholangitis and liver dysfunction, biliary drainage is not necessary before pancreatoduodenectomy or less invasive surgery. However, the morbidity and mortality of extended hepatectomy for biliary cancer is still high, and the most common cause of death is hepatic failure; therefore, preoperative biliary drainage is desirable in patients who are to undergo extended hepatectomy. CQ 2. What procedures are appropriate for preoperative biliary drainage? There are three methods of biliary drainage: percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD), endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) or endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD), and surgical drainage. ERBD is an internal drainage method, and PTBD and ENBD are external methods. However, there are no reports of comparisons of preoperative biliary drainage methods using randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Thus, at this point, a method should be used that can be safely performed with the equipment and techniques available at each facility. CQ 3. Which is better, unilateral or bilateral biliary drainage, in malignant hilar obstruction? Unilateral biliary drainage of the future remnant hepatic lobe is usually enough even when intrahepatic bile ducts are separated into multiple units due to hilar malignancy. Bilateral biliary drainage should be considered in the following cases: those in which the operative procedure is difficult to determine before biliary drainage; those in which cholangitis has developed after unilateral drainage; and those in which the decrease in serum bilirubin after unilateral drainage is very slow. CQ 4. What is the best treatment for post-drainage fever? The most likely cause of high fever in patients with biliary drainage is cholangitis due to problems with the existing drainage catheter or segmental cholangitis if an undrained segment is left. In the latter case, urgent drainage is required. CQ 5. Is bile culture necessary in patients with biliary drainage who are to undergo surgery? Monitoring of bile cultures is necessary for patients with biliary drainage to determine the appropriate use of antibiotics during the perioperative period. CQ 6. Is bile replacement useful for patients with external biliary drainage? Maintenance of the enterohepatic bile circulation is vitally important. Thus, preoperative bile replacement in patients with external biliary drainage is very likely to be effective when highly invasive surgery (e.g., extended hepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma) is planned.
| S-EPMC2794354 | biostudies-other
Project description:Biliary drainage for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma (PCCA) can be performed either by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage (PTBD). To date there is no consensus about which method is preferred. Taking that into account, the aim of this study is to compare Endoscopic Biliary Drainage (EBD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma through a systematic review and metanalysis. A comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases was performed. Evaluated outcomes included technical success, clinical success, post drainage complications (cholangitis, pancreatitis, bleeding, and major complications), crossover, hospital length stay, and seeding metastases. Data extracted from the studies were used to calculate Mean Differences (MD). Seventeen studies were included, with a total of 2284 patients (EBD = 1239, PTBD = 1045). Considering resectable PCCA, the PTBD group demonstrated lower rates of crossover (RD = 0.29; 95% CI 0.07‒0.51; p = 0.009 I² = 90%), post-drainage complications (RD = 0.20; 95% CI 0.06‒0.33; p < 0.0001; I² = 78%), and post-drainage pancreatitis (RD = 0.10; 95% CI 0.05‒0.16; p < 0.0001; I² = 64%). The EBD group presented reduced length of hospital stay (RD = -2.89; 95% CI -3.35 ‒ -2,43; p < 0.00001; I² = 42%). Considering palliative PCCA, the PTBD group demonstrated a higher clinical success (RD = -0.19; 95% CI -0.27 ‒ -0.11; p < 0.00001; I² = 0%) and less post-drainage cholangitis (RD = 0.08; 95% CI 0.01‒0.15; p = 0.02; I² = 48%) when compared to the EBD group. There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding: technical success, post-drainage bleeding, major post-drainage complications, and seeding metastases.
| S-EPMC10757298 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10660186 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are still many controversies about biliary drainage in MBO, and we aimed to summarize and evaluate the evidence associated with biliary drainage.MethodsWe conducted an umbrella review of SRoMAs based on RCTs. Through July 28, 2022, Embase, PubMed, WOS, and Cochrane Database were searched. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and appraised the methodological quality of the included studies. GRADE was used to evaluate the quality of the evidence.Results36 SRoMAs were identified. After excluding 24 overlapping studies, 12 SRoMAs, including 76 RCTs, and 124 clinical outcomes for biliary drainage in MBO were included. Of the 124 pieces of evidence evaluated, 13 were rated "High" quality, 38 were rated "Moderate", and the rest were rated "Low" or "Very low". For patients with MBO, 125I seeds+stent can reduce the risk of stent occlusion, RFA+stent can improve the prognosis; compared with PC, SEMS can increase the risk of tumor ingrowth and reduce the occurrence of sludge formation, and the incidence of tumor ingrowth in C-SEMS/PC-SEMS was significantly lower than that in U-SEMS. There was no difference in the success rate of drainage between EUS-BD and ERCP-BD, but the use of EUS-BD can reduce the incidence of stent dysfunction. For patients with obstructive jaundice, PBD does not affect postoperative mortality compared to direct surgery. The use of MS in patients with periampullary cancer during PBD can reduce the risk of re-intervention and stent occlusion compared to PC. In addition, we included four RCTs that showed that when performing EUS-BD on MBO, hepaticogastrostomy has higher technical success rates than choledochoduodenostomy. Patients who received Bilateral-ENBD had a lower additional drainage rate than those who received Unilateral-ENBD.ConclusionsOur study summarizes a large amount of evidence related to biliary drainage, which helps to reduce the uncertainty in the selection of biliary drainage strategies for MBO patients under different circumstances.
| S-EPMC10508238 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) is an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) for cases with obstructive jaundice in which the bile duct obstruction is below the confluence of the cystic ducts. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of PTGBD and PTBD in patients with obstructive jaundice. We recruited patients who had undergone percutaneous biliary drainage for acute cholangitis and obstructive jaundice at two institutions between January 2017 and March 2024. In principle, PTBD was the first choice. PTGBD was selected for cases where the intrahepatic bile duct diameter was ≤ 5 mm or ≥ 6 mm with significant respiratory-related variability of the positioning of the bile ducts. In other cases, PTBD was chosen. Fifty-five patients were included in this analysis. However, patients with intrahepatic or hilar bile duct stenosis, post choledocholithiasis, complex cholecystitis, total bilirubin levels of < 2.0 mg/dL, and uncorrectable bleeding tendency and those who had undergone the procedure and later discontinued without puncture were excluded. The technical success rates, clinical success rates, and complication rates of the procedure were evaluated. The technical success rates were 96.3% (26/27) and 82.1% (23/28) in the PTGBD and PTBD groups, respectively. The clinical success rates were 85.2% (23/27) and 67.9% (19/28) in the PTGBD and PTBD groups, respectively. The complication rates were 18.5% (5/27) and 25.0% (7/28) in the PTGBD and PTBD groups, respectively. No serious complications were observed in either group. Hence, the two groups did not significantly differ in any of the endpoints. The outcomes of PTGBD were comparable to those of PTBD in patients with obstructive jaundice. Hence, PTGBD is a reasonable treatment option for cases of obstructive jaundice in which PTBD is not feasible.
| S-EPMC11849854 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims Preoperative biliary drainage of hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HC) is controversial. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical outcome and associated complications for types II, III, and IV HC managed by percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Patients and methods Between January 2011 and June 2017, a total of 180 patients with II, III, and IV HC were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. According to the drainage method, patients were divided into two groups: PTBD (n = 81) and ERCP (n = 99). This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03104582, and was completed. Results Compared with the PTBD group, the ERCP group had a higher incidence of post-procedural cholangitis (37 [37.37 %] vs. 18 [22.22 %], P = 0.028) and pancreatitis (17 [17.17 %] vs. 2 [2.47 %], P = 0.001); required more salvaged biliary drainage (18 [18.18 %] vs. 5 [6.17 %], P = 0.029), and incurred a higher cost ( P < 0.05). Patients with type III and IV HC in the ERCP group had more cholangitis than those in the PTBD group (26 [36.62 %] vs. 11 [18.03 %], P = 0.018). The rate of cholangitis in patients who received endoscopic bilateral biliary stents insertion was higher than patients with unilateral stenting (23 [50.00 %] vs. 9 [26.47 %], P = 0.034), and underwent PTBD internal-external drainage had a higher incidence of cholangitis than those with only external drainage (11 [34.36 %] vs. 7 [14.29 %], P = 0.034). No significant difference in the rate of cholangitis was observed between the endoscopic unilateral stenting group and the endoscopic nasobiliary drainage group (9 [26.47 %] vs. 5 [26.32 %], P = 0.990). Conclusion Compared to ERCP, PTBD reduced the rate of cholangitis, pancreatitis, salvage biliary drainage, and decreased hospitalization costs in patients with types II, III, and IV HC. Risk of cholangitis for patients with types III and IV was significantly lower in the PTBD group.
| S-EPMC6976325 | biostudies-literature