title: Randomized comparison of ultrasonic vs clamp transection of the liver.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Hepatic parenchymal transection is a technical priority in liver surgery. The use of an ultrasonic dissector for hepatectomy may result in less blood loss than conventional clamp crushing.
  
  
  METHODS
  Randomized controlled trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  University teaching hospital.
  
  
  METHODS
  The 132 patients scheduled to undergo partial hepatectomies were randomly assigned to receive hepatic transection by ultrasonic dissector or by clamp crushing (66 patients by each method).
  
  
  METHODS
  All resections were performed with inflow occlusion and were guided ultrasonographically. Hepatectomies were graded according to a predefined system based on 6 criteria (blood loss, transection time, technical error, surgical margin, landmark appearance, and postoperative morbidity), each with 3 scores (lower scores indicating higher quality).
  
  
  METHODS
  Blood loss and hepatectomy grade.
  
  
  RESULTS
  No difference was found between the ultrasonic and clamp groups in median blood loss (515 mL [range, 15-2527 mL] vs 452 mL [range, 17-1912 mL]; P =.63), transection time (61 minutes [range, 16-177 minutes] vs 54 minutes [range, 7-205 minutes]; P =.58), or transection speed (1.1 cm(2)/min [range, 0.4-4.0 cm(2)/min] vs 1.0 cm(2)/min [range, 0.4-3.0 cm(2)/min]; P =.90). Ultrasonic dissection caused more frequent histologically proven tumor exposure at the surgical margin (9 vs 3 patients; P =.09), incomplete appearance of landmark hepatic veins on the cut surface after anatomical resection (12 vs 4 patients; P =.03), and postoperative morbidity (20 vs 14 patients; P =.32) than did clamp crushing. The hepatectomies with clamp crushing had significantly higher grades than those with ultrasonic dissection (P =.05), as indicated by the lower median sum score (4.0 [range, 0-12] vs 5.0 [range, 0-19]; 95% confidence interval for difference, -2.0 to 0; P =.03). The transection method independently influenced hepatectomy grade (adjusted odds ratio = 3.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-6.92; P =.01).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Ultrasonic dissection offers no reduction in blood loss compared with clamp crushing for transection of the liver. Clamp crushing results in a higher quality of hepatectomy and is therefore the option of choice.
authors.affiliation: Division of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic and Transplantation Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Takayama
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Makuuchi
authors.forename: K
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Kubota
authors.forename: Y
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Harihara
authors.forename: A M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Hui
authors.forename: K
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Sano
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Ijichi
authors.forename: K
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Hasegawa
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D016063:Blood Loss, Surgical / Q000517:prevention & control*; D005260:Female; D006498:Hepatectomy / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D008099:Liver / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000601:surgery; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D013525:Surgical Instruments; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014463:Ultrasonography