Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2016
Subtypes and clinical significance of common bile duct varices in portal vein thrombosis: diagnosis and follow-up by Doppler US and EUS.
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.
Grgurevic Ivica, Kujundzic Milan, Banic Marko, Kusec Rajko, Bokun Tomislav, Vukelic-Markovic Mirjana, Bogdanovic Zoran, Lukic Anita, Tsochatzis Emmanouil, Brkljacic Boris
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To investigate (1) diagnostic performance of transabdominal color doppler ultrasound (US) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for detection and sub-classification of common bile duct varices (CBDV) in patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT), and (2) clinical significance and natural history of CBDV subtypes.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: During a 4-year period, 56 patients with PVT underwent US and EUS for the presence and subtypes of CBDV. Natural history was analyzed for patients who attended control visits.
RESULTS: CBDV were diagnosed in 57 and 59 % of patients with US and EUS, respectively. In 19 % of patients, EUS revealed different CBDV subtypes than previously seen by US. The most common were paracholedochal (PCV), while the least common were epicholedochal (ECV) and Submucosal varices (SMV). Nine patients had obstructive jaundice and underwent ERCP which was complicated by hemobilia in two patients with SMV. Among eight patients who underwent control EUS (median follow-up 60 months), the form of CBDV remained unchanged. Two patients bled from esophageal varices, both with ECV.
CONCLUSION: While abdominal US and EUS are equally sensitive for detection of CBDV, EUS allows more precise determination of CBDV subtype. Patients with SMV might be at increased risk of bleeding upon ERCP.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: During a 4-year period, 56 patients with PVT underwent US and EUS for the presence and subtypes of CBDV. Natural history was analyzed for patients who attended control visits.
RESULTS: CBDV were diagnosed in 57 and 59 % of patients with US and EUS, respectively. In 19 % of patients, EUS revealed different CBDV subtypes than previously seen by US. The most common were paracholedochal (PCV), while the least common were epicholedochal (ECV) and Submucosal varices (SMV). Nine patients had obstructive jaundice and underwent ERCP which was complicated by hemobilia in two patients with SMV. Among eight patients who underwent control EUS (median follow-up 60 months), the form of CBDV remained unchanged. Two patients bled from esophageal varices, both with ECV.
CONCLUSION: While abdominal US and EUS are equally sensitive for detection of CBDV, EUS allows more precise determination of CBDV subtype. Patients with SMV might be at increased risk of bleeding upon ERCP.