Endoscopic ultrasound drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst: a prospective comparison with conventional endoscopic drainage.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Pancreatic pseudocysts are a complication in up to 20% of patients with pancreatitis. Endoscopic management of pseudocysts by a conventional transenteric technique, i. e. conventional transmural drainage (CTD), or by endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUD), is well described. Our aim was to prospectively compare the short-term and long-term results of CTD and EUD in the management of pseudocysts. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 99 consecutive patients underwent endoscopic management of pancreatic pseudocysts according to this predetermined treatment algorithm: patients with bulging lesions without obvious portal hypertension underwent CTD; all remaining patients underwent EUD. Patients were followed prospectively, with cross-sectional imaging during clinic visits. We compared short-term and long-term results (effectiveness and complications) at 1 and 6 months post procedure. RESULTS: 46 patients (37 men) underwent EUD and 53 patients (39 men) had CTD. The mean age of the entire group was 50 +/- 13 years. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding short-term success (93% vs. 94%) or long-term success (84% vs. 91%); 68 of the 99 patients completed 6 months of follow-up. Complications occurred in 19% of EUD vs. 18% of CTD patients, and consisted of bleeding in three, infection of the collection in eight, stent migration into the pseudocyst in three, and pneumoperitoneum in five. All complications but one could be managed conservatively. CONCLUSIONS: No clear differences in efficacy or safety were observed between conventional and EUS-guided cystenterostomy. The choice of technique is likely best predicated by individual patient presentation and local expertise.

Right lobe living donor liver transplantation: preoperative evaluation of the donor with MR imaging.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report our experience in preoperative evaluation of right hepatic lobe donors with a comprehensive MR examination and to compare abdominal MR images, MR cholangiograms, and MR angiograms with findings at surgery, intraoperative cholangiography, and digital subtraction angiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight right hepatic lobe donors underwent preoperative evaluation with MR imaging, MR cholangiography, and MR angiography. Two abdominal radiologists independently and randomly reviewed these studies. Points of assessment included focal and diffuse liver disease, calculation of right lobe volumes, depiction of the biliary tract and ductal anomalies, and depiction of the liver vasculature and vascular anomalies. Comparison was made with intraoperative cholangiograms (n = 20) and digital subtraction angiograms (n = 28). RESULTS: MR imaging revealed and characterized focal liver lesions in eight of 28 patients. Calculated right lobe volumes agreed with surgically determined volumes within 7% for reviewer 1 and within 15% for reviewer 2. Intrahepatic bile ducts were depicted completely with MR cholangiography in 25 of 28 patients and with intraoperative cholangiography in nine of 20 patients. MR cholangiography revealed ductal anomalies in six patients. MR imaging and MR angiography depicted the portal veins more completely than digital subtraction angiography. MR imaging and MR angiography correctly excluded portal venous anomalies in all patients and revealed surgically confirmed accessory hepatic veins in six of 28 patients. Angiographically confirmed arterial anomalies were correctly detected in three of 28 patients by at least one reviewer on MR imaging and MR angiography. CONCLUSION: MR imaging, MR cholangiography, and MR angiography provide a comprehensive, accurate means of evaluating donors for factors that may preclude or complicate right hepatic lobe donation.

Use of imaging for living donor liver transplantation.

Living donor liver transplantation is emerging as an alternative to cadaveric liver transplantation. The authors present multimodality images obtained in 44 cases of living donor liver transplantation. The images in this article were derived from the pre-, intra-, and postoperative imaging protocol for their institutional transplantation program. Preoperative magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the donor allows detection of focal liver lesions and accurate determination of liver volume. The latter is crucial to ensure adequate postoperative liver function for donors and recipients. MR cholangiography depicts donor biliary anatomy. MR angiography and digital subtraction arteriography are performed to assess vascular anatomy. Intraoperative ultrasonography (US) helps determine the resection plane during donor hepatectomy. Postoperative MR imaging documents liver regrowth. MR imaging, US, and computed tomography help assess complications in donors and recipients.

Effect of dose and schedule on cefoperazone pharmacodynamics in an in vitro model of infection in a neutropenic host.

Previous studies have shown that cefoperazone given in frequent, large doses is effective in the treatment of infection in patients with cancer. The pharmacodynamics of 2- and 4-g doses of cefoperazone administered either as a single dose or at 12-hour intervals were studied in an in vitro model that simulates infection in a neutropenic patient. One strain each of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (minimal inhibitory concentration [MIC] = 2 micrograms/ml), Staphylococcus aureus (MIC = 1 microgram/ml), Escherichia coli (MIC = 0.06 micrograms/ml), and Klebsiella pneumoniae (MIC = 0.25 micrograms/ml) was studied. The initial dose reduced the inoculum by approximately 3 logs for the Pseudomonas and the staphylococci and 3 to 5 logs for the other organisms. No significant differences in killing were found between the 2- and 4-g doses. Regrowth of Pseudomonas and staphylococci occurred with the single dose but not with the every-12-hour regimen. These data support the clinical use of cefoperazone in doses every 12 hours.