Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A · 2017
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Direct Portal Pressure Measurement Using a Digital Pressure Wire with Real-Time Remote Display: A Survival Study.
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.
Schulman Allison R, Thompson Christopher C, Ryou Marvin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension is necessary for the development of most clinical complications of cirrhosis. We recently reported a novel, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided technique for direct portal pressure measurements using a digital pressure wire.
AIMS: The aims of this study were to (1) evaluate safety in an animal survival model and (2) compare direct portal vein (PV) versus transhepatic access of a first-order venule.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Yorkshire pigs, weighing 40-55 kg. Procedures were performed under general anesthesia. PV was identified using a linear array echoendoscope and accessed with a 22-G fine needle aspiration needle preloaded with a digital pressure wire. Access was confirmed by portal venography. Mean digital pressure measurements were recorded over 30 seconds, and again after accessing a first-order portal venule in a transhepatic manner. Procedure times and video logs were maintained throughout. Animals were survived for 2 weeks. Repeat portal pressure measurements were performed before euthanasia and necropsy.
RESULTS: EUS-guided portal pressure measurements ranged from 3 to 11 mm Hg (mean 6.1) and were performed in a mean time of 214 seconds. There was no difference in measurement between the PV and first-order venule, or between baseline and 2-week follow-up. Five of 5 animals survived without incident. On necropsy, there was no evidence of thrombus or hemorrhage.
CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first survival study after EUS-guided direct portal pressure measurements using a digital pressure wire. This method appears safe, straightforward, and precise. Measurements of the PV and a first-order portal venule appear equivalent, and serial measurement seems feasible.
AIMS: The aims of this study were to (1) evaluate safety in an animal survival model and (2) compare direct portal vein (PV) versus transhepatic access of a first-order venule.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Yorkshire pigs, weighing 40-55 kg. Procedures were performed under general anesthesia. PV was identified using a linear array echoendoscope and accessed with a 22-G fine needle aspiration needle preloaded with a digital pressure wire. Access was confirmed by portal venography. Mean digital pressure measurements were recorded over 30 seconds, and again after accessing a first-order portal venule in a transhepatic manner. Procedure times and video logs were maintained throughout. Animals were survived for 2 weeks. Repeat portal pressure measurements were performed before euthanasia and necropsy.
RESULTS: EUS-guided portal pressure measurements ranged from 3 to 11 mm Hg (mean 6.1) and were performed in a mean time of 214 seconds. There was no difference in measurement between the PV and first-order venule, or between baseline and 2-week follow-up. Five of 5 animals survived without incident. On necropsy, there was no evidence of thrombus or hemorrhage.
CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first survival study after EUS-guided direct portal pressure measurements using a digital pressure wire. This method appears safe, straightforward, and precise. Measurements of the PV and a first-order portal venule appear equivalent, and serial measurement seems feasible.