Zhuang Zhiquan, Ma Jingqin, Ju Shuai, Gu Guoqiang, Zhang Wen, Yang Minjie, Zhang Zihan, Ma Li, Yan Zhiping, Luo Jianjun
Shanghai Institute of Medical Imaging, Shanghai, PR China.
Department of Interventional Radiology, Zhongshan Hospital, 12478Fudan University, Shanghai, PR China.
Acta Radiol. 2023 Feb;64(2):868-873. doi: 10.1177/02841851221086963. Epub 2022 Mar 21.
Portal vein puncture (PVP) is a critical step during transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and correlates to several complications. Techniques guiding PVP are needed.
To evaluate the safety, feasibility, and efficiency of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) overlay reference during TIPS creation and compare it with transhepatic portal vein (THPV) guiding.
The clinical records of 185 patients at three medical centers who underwent TIPS placement were reviewed. Portal vein access was guided by THPV guiding in 120 cases and DSA overlay reference in 60 cases. The number of punctures, portal vein entry time, procedural adverse events, technical and hemodynamic success rate were analyzed to compare the safety, feasibility, and efficiency of the two methods.
The median numbers of punctures in group 1 and group 2 were 2 (1-4) and 2 (1-5), respectively ( = 0.094). There was no statistical difference between two groups in needle passes. The median portal vein entry time of group 1 was 12 min (8-16 min) and 13 min (8-16 min) in group 2. No significant difference was found in the PVP time ( = 0.802). Arterioportal fistula formation occurred in 15 patients in group 1; two patients in group 2 had hepatic artery injury. The patients in group 2 had lower rates of procedural adverse events ( = 0.047). Median dose area product of G1 was lower than G2 statistically (<0.001). There was no significant difference in total fluoroscopy time ( = 0.856).
DSA overlay reference has lower procedural adverse events rates compared with THPV guiding TIPS. It seems to be a safe and effective method for guiding PVP.
门静脉穿刺(PVP)是经颈静脉肝内门体分流术(TIPS)中的关键步骤,且与多种并发症相关。因此需要指导PVP的技术。
评估在TIPS创建过程中数字减影血管造影(DSA)叠加参考的安全性、可行性和效率,并将其与经肝门静脉(THPV)引导进行比较。
回顾了三个医疗中心185例行TIPS置入术患者的临床记录。120例患者采用THPV引导门静脉穿刺,60例患者采用DSA叠加参考引导。分析穿刺次数、门静脉进入时间、手术不良事件、技术成功率和血流动力学成功率,以比较两种方法的安全性、可行性和效率。
第1组和第2组的穿刺次数中位数分别为2次(1 - 4次)和2次(1 - 5次)(P = 0.094)。两组在穿刺次数上无统计学差异。第1组门静脉进入时间中位数为12分钟(8 - 16分钟),第2组为13分钟(8 - 16分钟)。PVP时间无显著差异(P = 0.802)。第1组有15例患者发生动门脉瘘形成;第2组有2例患者发生肝动脉损伤。第2组患者的手术不良事件发生率较低(P = 0.047)。G1组的剂量面积乘积中位数在统计学上低于G2组(P < 0.001)。总透视时间无显著差异(P = 0.856)。
与THPV引导TIPS相比,DSA叠加参考的手术不良事件发生率较低。它似乎是一种安全有效的PVP引导方法。