Ultrasound-guided portal vein access and percutaneous wire placement in the portal vein are associated with shorter procedure times and lower radiation doses during tips placement

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND. TIPS placement is an effective method for treating a number of complications of portal hypertension. Although this complex procedure has been firmly established in treatment algorithms, more data are needed to determine the most efficient and safest ways to perform the procedure. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of three different techniques of portal vein (PV) cannulation during TIPS placement on procedure efficiency. METHODS. The medical records of patients who underwent TIPS creation between 2005 and 2019 were reviewed. On the basis of the PV access technique used, patients were grouped as follows: Group 1 (G1) included patients who underwent a transabdominal ultrasound (US)-guided technique to obtain PV access, group 2 (G2) consisted of those who underwent fluoroscopically guided wedged hepatic portography, and group 3 (G3) included those who underwent percutaneous US-guided PV guidewire placement for fluoroscopic targeting. RESULTS. Of the 264 patients who underwent TIPS creation, 54 (20.5%) were in G1, 172 (65.1%) were in G2, and 38 (14.4%) were in G3. The mean (± SD) fluoroscopic time in G1 (34.8 ± 16.6 minutes) did not differ from that in either G2 (38.9 ± 20.8 minutes; p = .09) or G3 (29.5 ± 14.6 minutes; p = .06). However, G2 patients had significantly longer fluoroscopic times than G3 patients (p = .005). The mean total anesthesia time in G1 (190.2 ± 45.6 minutes) did not differ from that in G2 (199.7 ± 59.5 minutes; p = .15). However, G3 had a mean anesthesia time (162.6 ± 39.7 minutes) that was significantly shorter than that in both G1 (p = .003) and G2 (p < .001). The mean contrast volume was significantly lower in G1 than in G2 (67.9 ± 36.8 mL vs 87.1 ± 42.9 mL; p = .005). More intrahepatic needle passes were required in G2 (median, 4 passes; interquartile range [IQR], 1-7 passes) than in G1 (median, 2 passes; IQR, 1-4 passes; p = .004) and G3 (median, 2 passes; IQR, 1-7.25 passes; p = .04). When complications in G1 and G3 were pooled, this cohort had significantly fewer complications than G2 (p = .01). CONCLUSION. Ultrasound-guided PV access and percutaneous PV guidewire placement for fluoroscopic targeting during TIPS creation are associated with shorter procedure and fluoroscopic times and potentially decreased complications.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1291-1299
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume216
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2021

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 American Roentgen Ray Society. All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • Imaging guidance
  • Portal hypertension
  • Portal vein puncture
  • TIPS

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Ultrasound-guided portal vein access and percutaneous wire placement in the portal vein are associated with shorter procedure times and lower radiation doses during tips placement'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this