Merits of and Technical Tips for Supra-Mesenteric Aortic Cross Clamping

Reliable kidney size determination by magnetic resonance imaging in pathophysiological settings

AIM

Kidney diseases constitute a major health challenge, which requires noninvasive imaging to complement conventional approaches to diagnosis and monitoring. Several renal pathologies are associated with changes in kidney size, offering an opportunity for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) biomarkers of disease. This work uses dynamic MRI and an automated bean-shaped model (ABSM) for longitudinal quantification of pathophysiologically relevant changes in kidney size.

METHODS

A geometry-based ABSM was developed for kidney size measurements in rats using parametric MRI (T₂ , T₂ * mapping). The ABSM approach was applied to longitudinal renal size quantification using occlusion of the (a) suprarenal aorta or (b) the renal vein, (c) increase in renal pelvis and intratubular pressure and (d) injection of an X-ray contrast medium into the thoracic aorta to induce pathophysiologically relevant changes in kidney size.

RESULTS

The ABSM yielded renal size measurements with accuracy and precision equivalent to the manual segmentation, with >70-fold time savings. The automated method could detect a ~7% reduction (aortic occlusion) and a ~5%, a ~2% and a ~6% increase in kidney size (venous occlusion, pelvis and intratubular pressure increase and injection of X-ray contrast medium, respectively). These measurements were not affected by reduced image quality following administration of ferumoxytol.

CONCLUSION

Dynamic MRI in conjunction with renal segmentation using an ABSM supports longitudinal quantification of changes in kidney size in pathophysiologically relevant experimental setups mimicking realistic clinical scenarios. This can potentially be instrumental for developing MRI-based diagnostic tools for various kidney disorders and for gaining new insight into mechanisms of renal pathophysiology.

Aortoduodenal fistulas after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair and open aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

In the present study, we have reported and compared aortoduodenal fistulas (ADFs) after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) vs after open aortic repair (OAR).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data from patients treated for ADFs from January 2015 to May 2020 in our hospital. The clinical data, diagnostic procedures, and surgical options were evaluated. The primary endpoints of the present study were 30-day and 1-year mortality. The secondary endpoints were major postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients (20 men; median age, 69 years; range, 53-82 years) were admitted with ADFs after EVAR (n = 9) or OAR (n = 15). These patients accounted for ∼4.3% of all abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs in our hospital. The median interval from the initial aortic repair and the diagnosis of ADF was 68 months (range, 6-83 months) for the ADF-EVAR group and 80 months (range, 1-479 months) for the ADF-OAR group. Three patients in the ADF-EVAR group had refused surgical treatment owing to their high surgical risk. One patient in the ADF-OAR group had undergone removal of the aortic prosthesis without replacement. Of the remaining 20 patients, 12 (ADF-EVAR group, n = 4; ADF-OAR group, n = 8) had undergone in situ replacement of the aorta and 8 (ADF-EVAR group, n = 2; ADF-OAR group, n = 6) had undergone extra-anatomic reconstruction with aortic ligation. After a mean follow-up of 26 months, no patient had experienced early limb loss. However, one case of rupture of the venous graft (ADF-EVAR), one case of aortic stump blowout (ADF-OAR), and one case of a ureteroarterial fistula with a homograft (ADF-OAR) had occurred. Overall, the incidence of postoperative complications was significantly greater after ADF-OAR (93% vs 33%; P = .036). The most frequent bacteria involved in the blood cultures were Escherichia coli (25% of patients), and Candida spp. (61%) were the predominant pathogens found on intra-abdominal smears. The in-hospital mortality rates for the ADF-EVAR and ADF-OAR group were 22% and 13%, respectively. The corresponding 1 -year mortality rates were 22% and 33%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with ADFs after EVAR or OAR have limited overall survival. In addition to the similar therapeutic approaches, we found no significant differences in postoperative mortality between these two uncommon pathologic entities. In our study, the overall postoperative morbidity seemed greater for the ADF-OAR group.