Journal de radiologie · 2008
[Splanchnic vein aneurysms: a report of 13 cases].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Weber G, Milot L, Kamaoui I, Pilleul F
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Splanchnic vein aneurysms are a rare and poorly known entity. From a review of 13 cases and reports from the literature, we have defined the imaging features and modalities for their diagnosis and management.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of 13 patients (7 females, 6 males, mean age of 53.5 years) who presented between 1993 and 2005 with splanchnic vein aneurysms. All patient charts were reviewed to collect and analyze epidemiological data, underlying etiologies, imaging work-up for diagnosis and management. Aneurysms were defined as fusiform or saccular enlargement of the portal venous vein or its branches, superior mesenteric vein and splenic vein.
RESULTS: A total of 16 splanchnic vein aneurysms were identified. Four patients had portal venous hypertension. The imaging work-up was variable and included mainly non-invasive modalities (US: 8 patients; CTA: 8 patients and MRA: 9 patients) and conventional angiography in 2 patients. Eight aneurysms involved the portal vein (50%), 5 the splenic vein (31.3%), and 3 the superior mesenteric vein (18.7%). None of the patients underwent surgical or endovascular management. Imaging follow-up was performed in 12 patients, with no interval change over time with up to 10 years follow-up.
CONCLUSION: In our series, the portal vein was most frequently involved. Diagnosis was exclusively based on imaging and management was limited to follow-up.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of 13 patients (7 females, 6 males, mean age of 53.5 years) who presented between 1993 and 2005 with splanchnic vein aneurysms. All patient charts were reviewed to collect and analyze epidemiological data, underlying etiologies, imaging work-up for diagnosis and management. Aneurysms were defined as fusiform or saccular enlargement of the portal venous vein or its branches, superior mesenteric vein and splenic vein.
RESULTS: A total of 16 splanchnic vein aneurysms were identified. Four patients had portal venous hypertension. The imaging work-up was variable and included mainly non-invasive modalities (US: 8 patients; CTA: 8 patients and MRA: 9 patients) and conventional angiography in 2 patients. Eight aneurysms involved the portal vein (50%), 5 the splenic vein (31.3%), and 3 the superior mesenteric vein (18.7%). None of the patients underwent surgical or endovascular management. Imaging follow-up was performed in 12 patients, with no interval change over time with up to 10 years follow-up.
CONCLUSION: In our series, the portal vein was most frequently involved. Diagnosis was exclusively based on imaging and management was limited to follow-up.