AIM: To determine the risk factors of biliary intervention using magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 196 patients who underwent right lobe LDLT between 2006 and 2010 at a single liver transplantation center. Direct duct-to-duct biliary anastomosis was performed in all 196 patients. MRCP images routinely taken 1 mo after LDLT were analyzed to identify risk factors for biliary intervention during follow-up, such as retrograde cholangiopancreatography or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Two experienced radiologists evaluated the MRCP findings, including the anastomosis site angle on three-dimensional images, the length of the filling defect on maximum intensity projection, bile duct dilatation, biliary stricture, and leakage. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients underwent biliary intervention during follow-up. The anastomosis site angle [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.30-0.75, P < 0.001], a filling defect in the anastomosis site (HR = 2.18, 95%CI: 1.41-3.38, P = 0.001), and biliary leakage (HR = 2.52, 95%CI: 1.02-6.20, P = 0.048) on MRCP were identified in the multivariate analysis as significant risk factors for biliary intervention during follow-up. Moreover, a narrower anastomosis site angle (i.e., below the median angle of 113.3°) was associated with earlier biliary intervention (38.5 ± 4.2 mo vs 62. 1 ± 4.1 mo, P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis comparing biliary intervention-free survival according to the anastomosis site angle revealed that lower survival was associated with a narrower anastomosis site angle (36.3% vs 62.0%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The biliary anastomosis site angle in MRCP after LDLT may be associated with the need for biliary intervention.
AIM: To determine the risk factors of biliary intervention using magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 196 patients who underwent right lobe LDLT between 2006 and 2010 at a single liver transplantation center. Direct duct-to-duct biliary anastomosis was performed in all 196 patients. MRCP images routinely taken 1 mo after LDLT were analyzed to identify risk factors for biliary intervention during follow-up, such as retrograde cholangiopancreatography or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Two experienced radiologists evaluated the MRCP findings, including the anastomosis site angle on three-dimensional images, the length of the filling defect on maximum intensity projection, bile duct dilatation, biliary stricture, and leakage. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients underwent biliary intervention during follow-up. The anastomosis site angle [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.30-0.75, P < 0.001], a filling defect in the anastomosis site (HR = 2.18, 95%CI: 1.41-3.38, P = 0.001), and biliary leakage (HR = 2.52, 95%CI: 1.02-6.20, P = 0.048) on MRCP were identified in the multivariate analysis as significant risk factors for biliary intervention during follow-up. Moreover, a narrower anastomosis site angle (i.e., below the median angle of 113.3°) was associated with earlier biliary intervention (38.5 ± 4.2 mo vs 62. 1 ± 4.1 mo, P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis comparing biliary intervention-free survival according to the anastomosis site angle revealed that lower survival was associated with a narrower anastomosis site angle (36.3% vs 62.0%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The biliary anastomosis site angle in MRCP after LDLT may be associated with the need for biliary intervention.
Entities:
Keywords:
Biliary intervention; Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; Liver transplantation; Living donor; Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography; Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage
Authors: Georgios C Sotiropoulos; George Sgourakis; Arnold Radtke; Ernesto P Molmenti; Konstantinos Goumas; Sofia Mylona; Ioannis Fouzas; Constantine Karaliotas; Hauke Lang Journal: Transplantation Date: 2009-06-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: S Mizuno; H Inoue; A Tanemura; Y Murata; N Kuriyama; Y Azumi; M Kishiwada; M Usui; H Sakurai; M Tabata; R Yamada; N Yamamoto; K Sugimoto; K Shiraki; Y Takei; S Isaji Journal: Transplant Proc Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 1.066
Authors: Yong Eun Chung; Myeong-Jin Kim; Mi-Suk Park; Jin Young Choi; Hoguen Kim; Sang Kyum Kim; Myungsu Lee; Hee Jin Kim; Jin-Sub Choi; Si Young Song; Ki Whang Kim Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-09-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: M E Wachs; T E Bak; F M Karrer; G T Everson; R Shrestha; T E Trouillot; M S Mandell; T G Steinberg; I Kam Journal: Transplantation Date: 1998-11-27 Impact factor: 4.939