Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2022
Filter-Assisted Shunt Embolization of Large Portosystemic Shunts: Technical Feasibility, Safety, and Outcomes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ramalingam Vijay, Weinstein Jeff, Sarwar Ammar, Gimenez Juan, Ahmed Muneeb
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To describe the feasibility and outcomes of filter-assisted shunt embolization in patients with acquired large portosystemic shunts.
METHODS: Two-center HIPAA compliant retrospective study of all patients who underwent filter-assisted shunt embolization between 03/2015-03/2021. Initial clinical evaluation, including demographic information, shunt sizing, and procedural details, was reviewed. Technical success was defined as successful occlusion of the targeted shunt.
RESULTS: Eight patients (55 ± 10 years/88% male) had a large acquired portosystemic shunt which was suitable for filter-assisted shunt embolization. Indications for the procedure: 3 = pre-transplantation optimization, 2 = overt hepatic encephalopathy (HE), 1 = post-transplant thrombosis, 1 = portal vein thrombosis and encephalopathy, 1 = encephalopathy and variceal bleeding. Portosystemic shunts occurred between splenic and renal veins, inferior mesenteric and gonadal veins, and coronary veins. Mean shunt diameter was 27 ± 5 mm. The technical success of the procedure was 8/8 (100%). In 7 patients, a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) was also placed at the time of the shunt embolization due to either pre-transplant indication or sluggish portal flow. There were no intraprocedural complications from filter placement.
OUTCOMES: 3 = currently listed for transplant, 2 = resolution of HE, 1 = made CMO, 1 patient with patent post-transplant vasculature. 1 = died as a complication related to TIPS placement (SIR Class F Complication).
CONCLUSION: Filter-assisted shunt embolization is a technically feasible and safe technique to reduce or embolize large portosystemic shunts.
METHODS: Two-center HIPAA compliant retrospective study of all patients who underwent filter-assisted shunt embolization between 03/2015-03/2021. Initial clinical evaluation, including demographic information, shunt sizing, and procedural details, was reviewed. Technical success was defined as successful occlusion of the targeted shunt.
RESULTS: Eight patients (55 ± 10 years/88% male) had a large acquired portosystemic shunt which was suitable for filter-assisted shunt embolization. Indications for the procedure: 3 = pre-transplantation optimization, 2 = overt hepatic encephalopathy (HE), 1 = post-transplant thrombosis, 1 = portal vein thrombosis and encephalopathy, 1 = encephalopathy and variceal bleeding. Portosystemic shunts occurred between splenic and renal veins, inferior mesenteric and gonadal veins, and coronary veins. Mean shunt diameter was 27 ± 5 mm. The technical success of the procedure was 8/8 (100%). In 7 patients, a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) was also placed at the time of the shunt embolization due to either pre-transplant indication or sluggish portal flow. There were no intraprocedural complications from filter placement.
OUTCOMES: 3 = currently listed for transplant, 2 = resolution of HE, 1 = made CMO, 1 patient with patent post-transplant vasculature. 1 = died as a complication related to TIPS placement (SIR Class F Complication).
CONCLUSION: Filter-assisted shunt embolization is a technically feasible and safe technique to reduce or embolize large portosystemic shunts.