Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) dysfunction: quantitative assessment of flow and perfusion changes using 2D-perfusion angiography following shunt revision.

Abdominal Radiology 2018 October
PURPOSE: To analyze the feasibility of 2D-perfusion angiography (2D-PA) to quantify flow and perfusion changes pre- and post-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) revision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen consecutive patients (54 ± 14 years, seven men and eight women) scheduled for TIPS revision were included in this study. To quantify flow and perfusion changes caused by TIPS revision, digital subtraction angiography (DSA) series acquired during the revision were post-processed using a dedicated software. Reference region-of-interest (ROI) in the main portal vein (input function) and target ROIs in the TIPS lumen, the liver parenchyma and in the right atrium were placed in corresponding areas on DSA pre- and post-TIPS revision. 2D-PA evaluation included time to peak (TTP), peak density (PD), and the area under the curve (AUC) assessment. The ratios of reference ROI to target ROIs pre- and post-TIPS revision were calculated (TTPparenchyma /TTPinflow , PDparenchyma /PDinflow , AUCparenchyma /AUCinflow , TTPTIPS /TTPinflow , PDTIPS /PDinflow , AUCTIPS /AUCinflow , TTPatrium /TTPinflow , PDatrium /PDinflow , and AUCatrium /AUCinflow ). Pressure measurements pre- and post-TIPS revision were performed and correlated to the 2D-PA parameters. Reproducibility of 2D-PA was assessed by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS: The portosystemic pressure gradient was significantly reduced following TIPS revision (17.1 ± 6.3 vs. 8.9 ± 4.3 mmHg; p < 0.0001). PDTIPS /PDinflow (0.22 vs. 0.35; p = 0.0014) and AUCTIPS /AUCinflow (0.24 vs. 0.39; p = 0.0012) increased significantly. Likewise, PDatrium /PDinflow (0.32 vs. 0.78; p = 0.0004) and AUCatrium /AUCinflow (0.3 vs. 0.79; p < 0.0001) increased, whereas PDparenchyma /PDinflow decreased significantly (0.14 vs. 0.1; p = 0.0084). Pressure gradient changes correlated significantly with the increase in PDatrium /PDinflow (r = - 0.77, p = 0.0012) and AUCatrium /AUCinflow (r = - 0.76, p = 0.0018). ICC of the 2D-PA parameters was in the range of 0.88-0.99.

CONCLUSION: 2D-PA offers a feasible approach to quantify flow and perfusion changes during TIPS revision. Therefore, 2D-PA may be a valuable amendment to mere pressure measurements.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app