Endoscopic ultrasound · 2014
True and false splenic artery aneurysm on endoscopic ultrasonography: Two-case analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Silina T, Butkevich Ð, Shpitonkov A, Brovkin A, Nalivaiskyi A, Filatov A, Kutuzov T, Lukyanov A, Mostovoy I, Koshelev M, Gordeev S, Ostretsov R
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The etiology of true and false splenic artery aneurysm is different, but the differential X-ray contrast diagnosis could be difficult. Purpose - to detect endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) diagnostic capability for false and true splenic artery aneurysm by considering two clinical cases: With suspected stomach and pancreatic lesions.
FIRST CASE: Patient, female, 50-year-old with suspected stomach lesion, complicated by gastric bleeding. Endoscopy - acute gastric ulcer. X-ray - submucosal gastric tumor. The patient was sent to the EUS with fine-needle aspiration.
SECOND CASE: Patient, male, 73-year-old with suspected pancreatic neoplasm. Ultrasound - pancreatic cysts. Computed tomography (CT) - neoplasm of the pancreas body. Celiacography - splenic artery aneurysm. The patient was sent to the EUS to clarify the diagnosis.
RESULTS: First patient EUS - anechoic rounded lesion with thick wall close to the stomach. Stomach wall layers were not differentiated above the lesion. Doppler - turbulent blood flow. EUS excluded submucosal lesion and proved the presence of aneurysm. CT confirmed the aneurysm. Post-operative histology - splenic artery pseudoaneurysm, destruction of the stomach wall and pancreatic parenchyma. Second patient EUS - ovoid solid-cystic lesion with thin hyperechoic "capsule." Doppler in cystic part - arterial blood flow. EUS suspected saccular splenic artery aneurysm with the neck and the residual lumen. Post-operative histology - true splenic artery aneurysm with thrombotic masses near the wall, pancreatic parenchyma was intact.
CONCLUSION: EUS can reliably differentiate splenic artery aneurysm from gastric submucosal lesion and differentiate true and false aneurysm with high probability.
FIRST CASE: Patient, female, 50-year-old with suspected stomach lesion, complicated by gastric bleeding. Endoscopy - acute gastric ulcer. X-ray - submucosal gastric tumor. The patient was sent to the EUS with fine-needle aspiration.
SECOND CASE: Patient, male, 73-year-old with suspected pancreatic neoplasm. Ultrasound - pancreatic cysts. Computed tomography (CT) - neoplasm of the pancreas body. Celiacography - splenic artery aneurysm. The patient was sent to the EUS to clarify the diagnosis.
RESULTS: First patient EUS - anechoic rounded lesion with thick wall close to the stomach. Stomach wall layers were not differentiated above the lesion. Doppler - turbulent blood flow. EUS excluded submucosal lesion and proved the presence of aneurysm. CT confirmed the aneurysm. Post-operative histology - splenic artery pseudoaneurysm, destruction of the stomach wall and pancreatic parenchyma. Second patient EUS - ovoid solid-cystic lesion with thin hyperechoic "capsule." Doppler in cystic part - arterial blood flow. EUS suspected saccular splenic artery aneurysm with the neck and the residual lumen. Post-operative histology - true splenic artery aneurysm with thrombotic masses near the wall, pancreatic parenchyma was intact.
CONCLUSION: EUS can reliably differentiate splenic artery aneurysm from gastric submucosal lesion and differentiate true and false aneurysm with high probability.