The inferior mesoiliacal shunt: A novel shunt for refractory rectal variceal bleeding due to splanchnic thrombosis.

Surgical shunt therapy may be required when pharmacologic, endoscopic, and radiologic treatment of chronic splanchnic vein thrombosis have failed. In this case report, we present a new interposition shunt for the treatment of refractory rectal variceal bleeding: the inferior mesoiliacal shunt between the inferior mesenteric vein and the left common iliac vein using a cryopreserved iliac venous graft. The postoperative course was complicated by shunt thrombosis at day 2, probably owing to inadvertent interruption of anticoagulation and a decrease in the shunt flow rate. Surgical thrombectomy was performed successfully. The patient presented no relapse of rectal bleeding and was asymptomatic and well at the 12-month follow-up.

Continuous and intermittent cardiac output measurement in hyperdynamic conditions: pulmonary artery catheter vs. lithium dilution technique.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the level of agreement of both intermittent cardiac output monitoring by the lithium dilution technique (CO(Li)) and continuous cardiac output monitoring (PulseCO(Li)) using the arterial pressure waveform with intermittent thermodilution using a pulmonary artery catheter (CO(PAC)). DESIGN: Prospective, single-center evaluation. SETTING: University Hospital Intensive Care Unit. PATIENTS: Patients (n=23) receiving liver transplantation. INTERVENTION: Pulmonary artery catheters were placed in all patients and CO(PAC) was determined using thermodilution. CO(Li) and PulseCO(Li) measurements were made using the LiDCO system. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data were collected after intensive care unit admission and every 8h until the 48th hour. A total of 151 CO(PAC), CO(Li) and PulseCO(Li) measurements were analysed. Bias and 95% limit of agreement were 0.11lmin(-1) and -1.84 to + 2.05 lmin(-1) for CO(PAC) vs. CO(Li) (r=0.88) resulting in an overall percentage error of 15.6%. Bias and 95% limit of agreement for CO(PAC) vs. PulseCO(Li) were 0.29 lmin(-1) and -1.87 to + 2.46 lmin(-1) (r=0.85) with a percentage error of 16.8%. Subgroup analysis revealed a percentage error of 15.7% for CO(PAC) vs. CO(Li) and 15.1% for CO(PAC) vs. PulseCO(Li) for data pairs less than 8 lmin(-1), and percentage errors of 15.5% and 18.5% respectively for data pairs higher than 8 lmin(-1). CONCLUSION: In patients with hyperdynamic circulation, intermittent and continuous CO values determined using the LiDCO system showed good agreement with those obtained by intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution.