Low-volume hydrodynamic gene delivery to the rat liver via an isolated segment of the inferior vena cava: efficiency, cardiovascular response and intrahepatic vascular dynamics

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 540-550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greta J. Sawyer ◽  
Aidan Grehan ◽  
Xuebin Dong ◽  
Michael Whitehorne ◽  
Michael Seddon ◽  
...  
Gene Therapy ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 452-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
J W Fabre ◽  
A Grehan ◽  
M Whitehorne ◽  
G J Sawyer ◽  
X Dong ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Jaume Tur-Martínez ◽  
Èric Herrero-Fonollosa ◽  
María Isabel García-Domingo ◽  
Judith Camps-Lasa ◽  
Laura Sobrerroca-Porras ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaume Tur-Martínez ◽  
Èric Herrero-Fonollosa ◽  
María Isabel García-Domingo ◽  
Judith Camps-Lasa ◽  
Laura Sobrerroca-Porras ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction:Isolated segment 1 laparoscopic liver resection is a very challenging procedure. Very few references are available about this laparoscopic technique, so the aim of this article is to show the main technical aspects of laparoscopic caudal approach for segment 1.Material and Methods: A 64 years old woman with a past medical history of a breast cancer previously operated (pT1N0M0, with positive hormonal receptors). Adjuvant treatment was done with radiotherapy and hormone-therapy (Tamoxifen). After 12 months of follow-up, a 18 mm single liver metastasis was detected in the segment 1, suggestive of metastatic disease. A complementary study was done with Magnetic Resonance Image, Computed Tomography and Positron Emission Tomography, without other lesions proven. Result:A laparoscopic resection of isolated liver segment 1 is performed with a caudal approach of the inferior vena cava. All the steps are carefully described. The surgery time was 120 minutes and the blood loss was less than 100 ml. No postoperative complications were registered. The patient was discharged on the third postoperative day.Conclusion:Liver 1 segment resection by laparoscopy with a caudal approach of the inferior vena cava is a secure technique in selected patients and it should be performed in experienced liver surgery and advanced laparoscopy centers, because of its high complexity.


Vascular ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anand Brahmandam ◽  
Laura Skrip ◽  
Bauer Sumpio ◽  
Jeffrey Indes ◽  
Alan Dardik ◽  
...  

Objectives The placement of inferior vena cava filters (IVCF) continues to rise. Vascular specialists adopt different practices based on local expertise. This study was performed to assess the attitudes of vascular specialists towards the placement and retrieval of IVCF. Methods An online survey of 28 questions related to practice patterns regarding IVCF was administered to 1429 vascular specialists. Vascular specialists were categorized as low volume if they place less than three IVCF per month and high volume if they place at least three IVCF per month. The responses of high volume and low volume were compared using two-sample t-tests and Chi-square tests. Results A total of 259 vascular specialists completed the survey (18% response rate). There were 191 vascular surgeons (74%) and 68 interventional radiologists (26%). The majority of responders were in academic practice (67%) and worked in tertiary care centers (73%). The retrievable IVCF of choice was Celect (27%) followed by Denali (20%). Forty-two percent used a temporary IVCF and left it in situ instead of using a permanent IVCF. Eighty-two percent preferred placing the tip of the IVCF at or just below the lowest renal vein. Thirty-one percent obtained a venous duplex of the lower extremities prior to retrieval while 24% did not do any imaging. There were 132 (51%) low volume vascular specialists and 127 (49%) high volume vascular specialists. Compared to low volume vascular specialists, significantly more high volume vascular specialists reported procedural times of less than 30 min for IVCF retrieval (57% vs. 42%, P = 0.026). There was a trend for high volume to have fewer unsuccessful attempts at IVCF retrieval but that did not reach statistical significance ( P = .061). High volume were more likely to have attempted multiple times to retrieve an IVCF (66% vs. 33%, P < .001), and to have used bronchoscopy forceps (32% vs. 14%, P = .001) or a laser sheath (14% vs. 2%, P < .001) for IVCF retrieval. In general, vascular specialists were not comfortable using bronchoscopy forceps (65%) or a laser sheath (82%) for IVCF retrieval. Conclusions This study underscores significant variability in vascular specialists practice patterns regarding IVCF. More studies and societal guidelines are needed to define best practices.


2006 ◽  
Vol 175 (4S) ◽  
pp. 392-393
Author(s):  
Fernando P. Secin ◽  
Zohar A. Dotari ◽  
Bobby Shayegan ◽  
Semra Olgac ◽  
Bertrand Guillonneau ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document