SPLENIC SIZE RELATION TO THE PORTAL VEIN DOPPLER ANALYSIS IN SUDANESE LIVER TRANSPLANTS

Ashraf Mustafa Mohammed Osman; Mohammed Al Fadil Gar al naby; Maha Esmeal Ahmed; Babiker Abd Elwahab Awad alla

doi:10.29121/granthaalayah.v7.i2.2019.1022

Authors

Ashraf Mustafa Mohammed Osman Sahiroon specialized Hospital [MBBSc, MSc]
Professor. Dr. Mohammed Al Fadil Gar al naby Professor of radiology in Sudan University [MSc, PhD]
Dr. Maha Esmeal Ahmed Associate Professor in Diagnostic Radiology National University-Sudan, [MSc, PhD]
Dr. Babiker Abd Elwahab Awad alla Assistant Professor in college of medical radiological sciences, Sudan University of science and technology [B.Sc., COMRS, PhD]

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v7.i2.2019.1022

Keywords:

Spleen, Portal Vein, Liver Transplants, Doppler Ultrasonography

Abstract [English]

The purpose of this study was to identify the specific Doppler criteria for the portal vein as well as the spleen length or volume in liver transplants. A relative study was done after performing venous Doppler sonographic studies in 45 liver transplant cases (4 whole liver, 41 lobar) with no known vascular complications. The ultrasonic Doppler study were targeted to the portal vein flow direction, flow velocity in Doppler level and the caliber in gray scale level. Average gray scale and color flow mapping appearances as well as normal monophasic wave character was found. The following Doppler parameters were evaluated: for the portal veins, venous pulsatility index. There were no cases of portal vein obstruction found in our sample (neither stenosis, nor occlusion). Mean portal vein velocity was (less than 55 cm /s), the splenic length was (13.7±1.5). The relation between the portal venous index, and the splenic length was built. Both are useful parameters for diagnosing liver transplants complications.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

American Journal of Roentgenology. 2007;188: W515-W521. 10.2214/AJR.06.1262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.06.1262

Amitrano L, Guardascione MA, Brancaccio V, et al. Risk factors and clinical presentation of portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis. J Hepatol 2004;40(5):736–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2004.01.001

Buell JF, Funaki B, Cronin DC, Yoshida A, Perlman MK, Lorenz J, et al. Long-term venous complications after full-size and segmental pediatric liver transplantation. Ann Surg. 2002; 236:658–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200211000-00017

Duffy JP, Hong JC, Farmer DG, Ghobrial RM, Yersiz H, Hiatt JR, et al. Vascular complications of orthotopic liver transplantation: Experience in more than 4,200 patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2009; 209:896–904. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.12.032

Funaki B, Rosenblum JD, Leef JA, Zaleski GX, Farrell T, Lorenz J, et al. Percutaneous treatment of portal venous stenosis in children and adolescents with segmental hepatic transplants: Long-term results. Radiology. 2000; 215:147–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.215.1.r00ap38147

Hidajat N, Stobbe H, Griesshaber V, et al. Imaging and radiological interventions of portal vein thrombosis. Acta Radiol 2005;46(4):336–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02841850510021157

Ko EY, Kim TK, Kim PN, Kim AY, Ha HK, Lee MG. Hepatic vein stenosis after living donor liver transplantation: Evaluation with Doppler US. Radiology. 2003:806–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2293020700

Mhanna T, Bernard P, Pilleul F, et al. Portal vein aneurysm report of two cases. Hepatogastroenterology 2004;51(58): 1162–4.

Nghiem HV, Tran K, Winter TC, 3rd, Schmiedl UP, Althaus SJ, Patel NH, et al. Imaging of complications in liver transplantation. Radiographics. 1996; 16:825–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiographics.16.4.8835974

Ponziani FR, Zocco MA, Campanale C, et al. Portal vein thrombosis: insight into physiopathology, diagnosis, and treatment. World J Gastroenterol 2010;16(2):143–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v16.i2.143

Pozniak MA, Baus KM. Hepatofugal arterial signal in the main portal vein: an indicator of intravascular tumor spread. Radiology 1991;180(3):663–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.180.3.1651525

Raby N, Meire HB. Duplex Doppler ultrasound in the diagnosis of cavernous transformation of the portal vein. Br J Radiol 1988;61(727):586–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-61-727-586

Saad WE. Portal interventions in liver transplant recipients. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2012; 29:99–104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1312570

Sorrentino P, D’Angelo S, Tarantino L, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography versus biopsy for the differential diagnosis of thrombosis in hepatocellular carcinoma patients.World J Gastroenterol 2009;15(18):2245–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.15.2245

Tamsel S, Demirpolat G, Killi R, Aydin U, Kilic M, Zeytunlu M, et al. Vascular complications after liver transplantation: Evaluation with Doppler US. Abdom Imaging. 2007; 32:339–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-006-9041-z

Wozney P, Zajko AB, Bron KM, Point S, Starzl TE. Vascular complications after liver transplantation: A 5-year experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1986; 147:657–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.147.4.657

Woo DH, Laberge JM, Gordon RL, Wilson MW, Kerlan RK., Jr Management of portal venous complications after liver transplantation. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2007; 10:233–9., DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.tvir.2007.09.017