Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Invited Critique |

Safety and Effectiveness of Splenic Vein to Inferior Mesenteric Vein Anastomosis During Pancreaticoduodenectomy  Comment on “Splenic Vein–Inferior Mesenteric Vein Anastomosis to Lessen Left-Sided Portal Hypertension After Pancreaticoduodenectomy With Concomitant Vascular Resection”

Dean Arnaoutakis, MD; Frederic Eckhauser, MD
Arch Surg. 2011;146(12):1381-1382. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2011.1020.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


Radical resection is currently regarded as the standard operation for pancreatic cancer. Unfortunately, in 10% to 20% of patients, extension beyond the pancreas to involve contiguous major vascular structures limits respectability and possible cure. Extending the scope of the operation to include segments of the PV and/or SMV has proved to be safe, and immediate reconstruction is feasible using well-established vascular surgical techniques. In some instances, resection of the SV–mesenteric vein confluence including the IMV is necessary to achieve an R0 resection. If the SV-IMV confluence remains intact, venous outflow from the spleen is preserved, thereby avoiding the potential development of left-sided portal hypertension and hypertensive gastropathy and/or gastric variceal hemorrhage. Ferreira et al1 have nicely demonstrated that if preservation of the SV-IMV confluence is not possible, direct anastomosis between the remaining SV and IMV segments is both feasible and safe. Furthermore, they have demonstrated short-term anastomotic patency using clinical observation of gastric venous congestion as well as color Doppler ultrasonography. The main limitations of the study are the short observation and the use of surrogate markers (platelet count and spleen volume) to assess gastric venous hypertension. While the validity of these surrogate markers of portal hypertension has been documented in patients with chemotherapy-induced hepatic sinusoidal injury and generalized portal hypertension, it is not clear whether they are equally applicable or reliable in the setting of pure left-sided portal hypertension. Other areas of concern involve the indications for and the success of such extended venous resections. Two-thirds of their patients who underwent venous resection had pathological venous involvement, and tumor involved the deeper aspects (tunica media and/or intima) of the vein wall in 60% of these patients. It has been shown elsewhere that deep invasion of the vein wall carries the same dismal prognosis as noncurative resection. Moreover, despite the extended scope of resection, an R0 resection was not achieved in 35% of patients. Ferreira and colleagues have clearly demonstrated the feasibility and safety of direct SV-IMV anastomosis when it is necessary to achieve an R0 resection for pancreatic carcinoma. However, it is our opinion that the indications for and long-term outcomes resulting from such extended venous resections will require further study and elucidation.

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

4 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Original Article: Does This Patient Have Bacterial Peritonitis or Portal Hypertension? How Do I Perform a Paracentesis and Analyze the Results?

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Quick Reference