Premium
Living related small bowel transplantation in children: 3‐dimensional computed tomography donor evaluation
Author(s) -
Panaro Fabrizio,
Testa Giuliano,
Balakrishnan Nikhil,
Rao Bhaskara,
Bogetti Diego,
Jarzembowski Tomasz,
Sammartino Cinzia,
Sankary Howard,
Benedetti Enrico
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
pediatric transplantation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.457
H-Index - 69
eISSN - 1399-3046
pISSN - 1397-3142
DOI - 10.1046/j.1397-3142.2003.00134.x
Subject(s) - medicine , angiography , computed tomography angiography , radiology , vein , catheter , adverse effect , transplantation , nuclear medicine , surgery
The evaluation of the small bowel vascular anatomy of living small bowel donors (LSBD) is usually performed with conventional angiography (CA). Recently, angio computed tomography (CT) has become a valid study of the vascular anatomy for kidney and liver living donors. We studied the applicability of angio CT with 3‐D reconstruction (3‐D‐ACT) in the evaluation of LSBD. Potential LSBDs for pediatric transplant underwent both CA and 3‐D‐ACT to evaluate the anatomy of the distal branches of the superior mesenteric artery and vein. Angio‐CT was performed with General Electric Lightspeed Scanner. The 3‐D reconstruction was performed on the TeraRecon workstation. Adverse reactions, contrast dosage, test duration, invasiveness, hospital‐stay, patient discomforts and accuracy were evaluated. Four potential donors (four female; mean age: 30.5 yr; mean BMI: 28.4) underwent both tests. Adverse reactions correlated to contrast agent used (90 mL CA, 150 mL 3‐D‐ACT) were not reported. CA required a hospitalization of 6 h as opposed to immediate discharge after the 3‐D‐ACT. The CA required the placement of transfemoral catheter and therefore greater patient discomfort than with 3‐D‐ACT. The 3‐D‐ACT arterial images were rated as equivalent to CA, however, 3‐D‐ACT venous images were rated better than the CA in all cases. CT‐angiography with 3‐D reconstruction is an acceptable method for vascular evaluation. When compared with routine angiography, it is less invasive, better tolerated and faster, but does require a significantly greater volume of venous contrast. 3‐D‐ACT also offers a better evaluation of the venous phase, and thus may become the test of choice to evaluate the vascular anatomies of LSBD candidates.