Cited by 14Organ Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesLiver Disease and TransplantationHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis

Portal flow modulation by splenic artery ligation to prevent posthepatectomy liver failure: A randomized controlled trial

Junrungsee, Sunhawit, Vipudhamorn, Witcha, Lapisatepun, Worakitti, Thepbunchonchai, Asara, Chotirosniramit, Anon, Lapisatepun, Warangkana, Ko-iam, Wasana·2025·Surgery

Abstract

Background Posthepatectomy liver failure is a serious clinical issue with high mortality, similar in pathophysiology to small-for-size syndrome seen in liver transplantation. This study evaluates the efficacy of splenic artery ligation in reducing posthepatectomy liver failure in patients with portal venous pressure >15 mm Hg after hepatectomy. Methods This single-center, randomized controlled trial was conducted from May 2019 to November 2023. Eligible participants were patients scheduled for open hepatectomy for any indication. Patients with a portal venous pressure >15 mm Hg were randomized into splenic artery ligation and control groups in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcomes were posthepatectomy liver failure grades B and C (International Study group of Liver Surgery criteria), and secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality, comprehensive complication index, and ascites volume. Results The study was terminated early, before reaching the calculated sample size, because the primary outcome in the intervention group demonstrated statistically significant results. Of the 92 patients, 36 had elevated portal venous pressure, which was associated with greater rates of posthepatectomy liver failure grades B and C (41.67% vs 3.57%, P Conclusion Splenic artery ligation is effective in reducing posthepatectomy liver failure in patients with high portal venous pressure after hepatectomy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.surg.2025.109351

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Junrungsee et al demonstrated that modulating portal flow via splenic artery ligation reduced post-hepatectomy liver failure from 22% to 7%.

    “Similarly, Junrungsee et al[23] demonstrated that modulating portal flow via splenic artery ligation reduced post-hepatectomy liver failure from 22% to 7%.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Junrungsee, S., Vipudhamorn, W., Lapisatepun, W., Thepbunchonchai, A., Chotirosniramit, A., Lapisatepun, W., & Ko-iam, W.
Affiliations
Chiang Mai University (TH)
Corresponding author
Junrungsee, Sunhawit
Venue
Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-09
Volume
185
Pages
109351
ISSN
0039-6060 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4409309549
Cited by
13
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7
FWCI
12.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Chiang Mai University Faculty of Medicine
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Liver Disease and Transplantation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Keywords
splenic artery ligation, post-hepatectomy liver failure, hepatectomy, portal pressure, portal hypertension, ascites, Comprehensive Complication Index, small-for-size syndrome
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Hepatectomy, Humans, Ligation, Male, Middle Aged, Portal Vein, Postoperative Complications, Splenic Artery, Treatment Outcome, Portal Pressure, Liver Failure

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review