| Literature DB >> 29404939 |
Cornelis Klop1,2, Laura N Deden3, Edo O Aarts3, Ignace M C Janssen3, Milan E J Pijl4, Anneline van den Ende4, Bart P L Witteman3, Gabie M de Jong3, Theo J Aufenacker3, Cornelis H Slump5, Frits J Berends3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purposes of the study are to outline the complexity of diagnosing internal herniation after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgery and to investigate the added value of computed tomography angiography (CTA) for diagnosing internal herniation.Entities:
Keywords: Angiography; Cadaver study; Closure; Complication; Computed tomography; Internal herniation; Literature overview; Mesenteric defect; Petersen’s space; Roux-en-Y gastric bypass
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29404939 PMCID: PMC6107799 DOI: 10.1007/s11695-018-3121-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Obes Surg ISSN: 0960-8923 Impact factor: 4.129
Fig. 1Schematic representations of all 12 theoretically possible internal hernias when a single mesenteric defect and intestinal limb are involved. L-R indicates a left-to-right hernia, R-L a right-to-left hernia
Imaging protocols
| Arterial CTA | Venous CT | |
|---|---|---|
| Delay (s)a | 15 | 65 |
| Reconstruction algorithm | IMR level 2 | iDose level 3 |
| X-ray tube kV peakb | 102 [100–120] | 104 [100–120] |
| X-ray tube mAsb | 196 [117–301] | 164 [104–259] |
| IV contrast volume (mL) @ injection rate (mL/s) | ||
| Body weight (kg) | ||
| < 60 | 90 @ 3.5 | |
| 60–80 | 110 @ 4.0 | |
| < 80 | 125 @ 4.5 | |
| Acquisition FOV | Diaphragm dome to lesser trochanter | |
| Pixel size (mm × mm)b | 0.70 × 0.70 [0.63 × 0.63–0.79 × 0.79] | |
| Slice thickness (mm) | 0.90 | |
| Reconstruction matrix | 512 × 512 | |
CTA computed tomography angiography, CT computed tomography, IMR iterative model reconstruction, IV intravenous, FOV field of view
aPost-threshold delay in aorta at diaphragm level
bAverage values, range between brackets
Fig. 2During cadaveric analysis, both potential hernia sites were clearly identifiable (a). Petersen’s defect (P) and the enteroenterostomy defect (E) are indicated. The SMA was recognized, along with the arterial arcade (b), emphasized by black and white arrows, respectively
Fig. 3Simulations of two commonly diagnosed internal hernia types on a cadaver; biliopancreatic limb through Petersen’s defect from left to right (a) and common channel through enteroenterostomy defect from right to left (b). These images can be compared to the illustrations in Fig. 1
Fig. 4Relevant anatomical structures on control 3D CTA studies have been identified (a) and characteristics are displayed schematically (b). Both images employ an anterior view
Patient demographics and clinical characteristics
| Study subjecta | 1 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 9 | 10 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | Mean |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | F | M | F | F | F | F | F | F | M | F | 80% F |
| Age (year) | 49 | 35 | 51 | 62 | 53 | 50 | 54 | 37 | 72 | 43 | 51 |
| Pre-operative weight (kg)b | 115 | 146 | 125 | 104 | 115 | 106 | 131 | 135 | 119 | 97 | 119 |
| Pre-operative BMI (kg/m2)b | 42 | 42 | 40 | 42 | 37 | 35 | 44 | 41 | 42 | 40 | 41 |
| Weight at time of CT (kg) | 58 | 88 | 105 | 77 | 70 | 72 | 96 | 99 | 102 | 52 | 82 |
| BMI at time of CT (kg/m2) | 21 | 25 | 34 | 31 | 23 | 24 | 32 | 31 | 37 | 21 | 28 |
| Clinical presentation | |||||||||||
| Intermittent abdominal pain | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | 100% |
| Postprandial abdominal pain | – | – | + | + | + | – | – | + | + | + | 60% |
| Nausea | – | – | + | – | + | + | – | – | + | + | 50% |
| Vomiting | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | + | + | 20% |
| Inclusion via | OC | OC | OC | OC | OC | OC | OC | OC | ED | OC | 90% OC |
| Time from primary surgery to CT (weeks) | 112 | 54 | 289 | 53 | 262 | 120 | 92 | 159 | 297 | 67 | 151 |
| Time from CT to DL (weeks) | 16 | 1 | 11 | 10 | 6 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 7 |
BMI body mass index, CT computed tomography, OC outpatient clinic, ED emergency department, DL diagnostic laparoscopy
aData of study subjects who were not subjected to diagnostic laparoscopy is not included
bPrior to primary RYGB surgery
Scan and surgical characteristics
| Study subjecta | 1 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 9 | 10 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abdominal complaints at time of CT | + | + | + | + | + | – | – | – | + | + |
| IH diagnosed on CTb | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | + | – |
| Potential hernia sites primarily closed | + | + | – | + | + | + | + | + | – | + |
| Potential hernia sites closed upon DLc | – | + | + | – | – | + | – | – | – | – |
| Involved defect (size (cm)) | ED (5) | PD (5) | PD (5) | PD (3) | PD (1) | PD (5) | PD (N/A) | |||
| AD (5)d | ED (6) | ED (5) | ED (10) | ED (N/A) | ||||||
| Active IH upon DL | + | – | – | + | – | – | – | – | + | – |
| Involved defect | ED | PD | ED | |||||||
| Involved intestinal limb | CC | BL | AL + ES |
CT computed tomography, DL diagnostic laparoscopy, IH internal herniation, ED enteroenterostomy defect, PD Petersen’s defect, CC common channel, BL biliopancreatic limb, AL alimentary limb, ES enteroenterostomy, N/A not available
aData of study subjects who were not subjected to diagnostic laparoscopy is not included
bAs clinically assessed by a radiologist
cUpon initial inspection, before surgical closure
dAD = aberrant defect; at the enteroenterostomy, an additional potential hernia site had been formed
Fig. 5Anterior view of 3D CTA studies with presumed active internal hernias. Three hernia types were identified; common channel through enteroenterostomy defect (a), biliopancreatic limb through Petersen’s defect (b), and alimentary limb with enteroenterostomy through enteroenterostomy defect (c). Remarkable SMA branch configurations and enteroenterostomy staple line arrangements are indicated by an arrow(head) and an asterisk, respectively