Proximal splenic artery embolization for treatment of refractory ascites, a single-center experience.

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Abdul Rehman Mustafa, Raneem Atta, Russell P Goodman, Vincent Wu, Zubin Irani, Omar Zurkiya, Emily D Bethea, Kei Yamada, Eric P Wehrenberg-Klee
{"title":"Proximal splenic artery embolization for treatment of refractory ascites, a single-center experience.","authors":"Abdul Rehman Mustafa, Raneem Atta, Russell P Goodman, Vincent Wu, Zubin Irani, Omar Zurkiya, Emily D Bethea, Kei Yamada, Eric P Wehrenberg-Klee","doi":"10.1111/hepr.14116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Refractory ascites from portal hypertension can be managed with regular large-volume paracentesis (LVP) or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Large-volume paracentesis is clinically unsatisfactory and many patients are ineligible or relatively contraindicated for TIPS or Denver shunt. Proximal splenic artery embolization (PSAE) using coils or plugs reduces but does not completely stop splenic arterial inflow, differing from distal splenic artery embolization techniques. By reducing splenic arterial inflow, splenic vein outflow is also decreased, lowering portal pressure and thus treating refractory ascites.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this institutional review board-approved single-center retrospective study, electronic medical records were reviewed to obtain demographics and baseline clinical and laboratory data, paracentesis data before and after PSAE, PSAE procedural details, and follow-up imaging up to 12 months post-PSAE. Mixed-effects models were used for statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten patients with LVP-dependent ascites meeting inclusion criteria underwent PSAE for refractory ascites from 2017 to 2024. Prior to PSAE, four patients had TIPS, three had liver transplants, and the remaining three were neither TIPS nor transplant candidates. In the month before PSAE, patients averaged 3.8 ± 1.7 paracentesis sessions, draining a total of 20.84 ± 10.39 L of fluid monthly. Post-PSAE, the number of paracentesis sessions decreased to 2.1 ± 2.7, 1.0 ± 1.7, 0.4 ± 1.1, and 0.0 ± 0.0 at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively (p = 0.03). Corresponding ascitic volume drained decreased to 8.7 ± 10.3, 2.7 ± 6.4, 2.0 ± 5.4, and 0.0 ± 0.0 L (p = 0.01). Over the 12-month follow-up period, 6 of 10 patients became LVP-independent.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Proximal splenic artery embolization can improve refractory ascites in certain patients with portal hypertension, thus providing safe and effective treatment as an alternative to TIPS.</p>","PeriodicalId":12987,"journal":{"name":"Hepatology Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hepatology Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/hepr.14116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Refractory ascites from portal hypertension can be managed with regular large-volume paracentesis (LVP) or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Large-volume paracentesis is clinically unsatisfactory and many patients are ineligible or relatively contraindicated for TIPS or Denver shunt. Proximal splenic artery embolization (PSAE) using coils or plugs reduces but does not completely stop splenic arterial inflow, differing from distal splenic artery embolization techniques. By reducing splenic arterial inflow, splenic vein outflow is also decreased, lowering portal pressure and thus treating refractory ascites.

Methods: In this institutional review board-approved single-center retrospective study, electronic medical records were reviewed to obtain demographics and baseline clinical and laboratory data, paracentesis data before and after PSAE, PSAE procedural details, and follow-up imaging up to 12 months post-PSAE. Mixed-effects models were used for statistical analysis.

Results: Ten patients with LVP-dependent ascites meeting inclusion criteria underwent PSAE for refractory ascites from 2017 to 2024. Prior to PSAE, four patients had TIPS, three had liver transplants, and the remaining three were neither TIPS nor transplant candidates. In the month before PSAE, patients averaged 3.8 ± 1.7 paracentesis sessions, draining a total of 20.84 ± 10.39 L of fluid monthly. Post-PSAE, the number of paracentesis sessions decreased to 2.1 ± 2.7, 1.0 ± 1.7, 0.4 ± 1.1, and 0.0 ± 0.0 at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively (p = 0.03). Corresponding ascitic volume drained decreased to 8.7 ± 10.3, 2.7 ± 6.4, 2.0 ± 5.4, and 0.0 ± 0.0 L (p = 0.01). Over the 12-month follow-up period, 6 of 10 patients became LVP-independent.

Conclusion: Proximal splenic artery embolization can improve refractory ascites in certain patients with portal hypertension, thus providing safe and effective treatment as an alternative to TIPS.

近端脾动脉栓塞治疗难治性腹水,单中心经验。
目的:门静脉高压引起的难治性腹水可通过常规大容量腹腔穿刺术(LVP)或经颈静脉肝内门体分流术(TIPS)来治疗。大容量腹腔穿刺术的临床效果并不理想,许多患者不适合或相对禁忌 TIPS 或丹佛分流术。使用线圈或塞子的近端脾动脉栓塞(PSAE)可减少但不能完全阻止脾动脉流入,这与远端脾动脉栓塞技术不同。通过减少脾动脉流入,脾静脉流出也会减少,从而降低门脉压力,进而治疗难治性腹水:在这项经机构审查委员会批准的单中心回顾性研究中,研究人员查阅了电子病历,以获得人口统计学、基线临床和实验室数据、PSAE前后的腹腔穿刺数据、PSAE手术细节以及PSAE术后12个月的随访影像学资料。统计分析采用混合效应模型:2017年至2024年,10名符合纳入标准的LVP依赖性腹水患者因难治性腹水接受了PSAE治疗。在PSAE之前,4名患者进行了TIPS,3名患者进行了肝移植,其余3名患者既非TIPS也非移植候选者。在 PSAE 之前的一个月中,患者平均进行了 3.8 ± 1.7 次腹腔穿刺,每月共排出 20.84 ± 10.39 升液体。PSAE 后,1、3、6 和 12 个月的腹腔穿刺次数分别降至 2.1 ± 2.7、1.0 ± 1.7、0.4 ± 1.1 和 0.0 ± 0.0(p = 0.03)。相应的腹水排出量分别降至 8.7 ± 10.3、2.7 ± 6.4、2.0 ± 5.4 和 0.0 ± 0.0 L(p = 0.01)。在 12 个月的随访期间,10 位患者中有 6 位实现了 LVP 独立:结论:近端脾动脉栓塞术可改善某些门脉高压症患者的难治性腹水,从而提供安全有效的治疗,作为 TIPS 的替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hepatology Research
Hepatology Research 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
124
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Hepatology Research (formerly International Hepatology Communications) is the official journal of the Japan Society of Hepatology, and publishes original articles, reviews and short comunications dealing with hepatology. Reviews or mini-reviews are especially welcomed from those areas within hepatology undergoing rapid changes. Short communications should contain concise definitive information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信