학술논문

European Society of Pediatric Radiology survey of perioperative imaging in pediatric liver transplantation: (2) intraoperative imaging.
Document Type
Article
Source
Pediatric Radiology. Feb2024, Vol. 54 Issue 2, p269-275. 7p.
Subject
*LIVER transplantation
*PEDIATRIC radiology
*SURGICAL complications
Language
ISSN
0301-0449
Abstract
Background: Liver transplantation is the state-of-the-art curative treatment for end-stage liver disease. Imaging is a key element in the detection of intraoperative and postoperative complications. So far, only limited data regarding the best radiological approach to monitor children during liver transplantation is available. Objective: To harmonize the imaging of pediatric liver transplantation, the European Society of Pediatric Radiology Abdominal Taskforce initiated a survey addressing the current status of imaging including the pre-, intra- and postoperative phase. This paper reports the responses related to intraoperative imaging. Materials and methods: An online survey, initiated in 2021, asked European centers performing pediatric liver transplantation 48 questions about their imaging approach. In total, 26 centers were contacted, and 22 institutions from 11 countries returned the survey. Results: Intraoperative ultrasound (US) is used by all sites to assess the quality of the vascular anastomosis in order to ensure optimal perfusion of the liver transplant. Vessel depiction is commonly achieved using color Doppler (95.3%). Additional US-based techniques are employed by fewer centers (power angio mode, 28.6%; B-flow, 19%; contrast-enhanced US, 14.3%). Most centers prefer a collaborative approach, with surgeons responsible for probe handling, while radiologists operate the US machine (47.6%). Less commonly, the intraoperative US is performed by the surgeon alone (28.6%) or by the radiologist alone (23.8%). Timing of US, imaging frequency, and documentation practices vary among centers. Conclusion: Intraoperative US is consistently utilized across all sites during pediatric liver transplantation. However, considerable variations were observed in terms of the US setup, technique preferences, timing of controls, and documentation practices. These differences provide valuable insights for future optimization and harmonization studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]