World journal of gastroenterology · 2006
Adult-to-adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation: comparison of endoscopic retrograde cholangiography with standard T2-weighted magnetic resonance cholangiography for evaluation of donor biliary anatomy.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Wietzke-Braun Perdita, Braun Felix, Muller Dieter, Lorf Thomas, Ringe Burckhardt, Ramadori Giuliano
Аннотация
AIM: To compare the value of endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) and standard T2-weighted magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC) in the evaluation process as adult-to-adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation (LDLTx) demands a successful outcome, and exact knowledge of the biliary tree is implicated to avoid biliary complications, postoperatively.
METHODS: After starting the LDLTx program, 18 liver transplant candidates were selected for LDLTx by a stepwise evaluation process. ERC and standard T2-weighted MRC were performed to evaluate the biliary system of the donor liver. The anatomical findings of ERC and MRC mapping were compared using the Ohkubo classification.
RESULTS: ERC allowed mapping of the whole biliary system in 15/15 (100%) cases, including 14/15 (93.3%) with biliary variants while routine MRC was only accurate in 2/13 (15.4%) cases. MRC was limited in depicting the biliary system proximal of the hepatic bifurcation. Postoperative biliary complications occurred in 2 donors and 8 recipients. Biliary complications were associated with Ohkubo type C, E or G in 6/8 recipients, and 2/3 recipients with biliary leak received a graft with multiple (>=2) bile ducts.
CONCLUSION: Pretransplant ERC is safe and superior over standard MRC for detection of biliary variations that occur with a high frequency. However, precise knowledge of biliary variants did not reduce the incidence of postoperative biliary complications.
METHODS: After starting the LDLTx program, 18 liver transplant candidates were selected for LDLTx by a stepwise evaluation process. ERC and standard T2-weighted MRC were performed to evaluate the biliary system of the donor liver. The anatomical findings of ERC and MRC mapping were compared using the Ohkubo classification.
RESULTS: ERC allowed mapping of the whole biliary system in 15/15 (100%) cases, including 14/15 (93.3%) with biliary variants while routine MRC was only accurate in 2/13 (15.4%) cases. MRC was limited in depicting the biliary system proximal of the hepatic bifurcation. Postoperative biliary complications occurred in 2 donors and 8 recipients. Biliary complications were associated with Ohkubo type C, E or G in 6/8 recipients, and 2/3 recipients with biliary leak received a graft with multiple (>=2) bile ducts.
CONCLUSION: Pretransplant ERC is safe and superior over standard MRC for detection of biliary variations that occur with a high frequency. However, precise knowledge of biliary variants did not reduce the incidence of postoperative biliary complications.