Article

HIDA, percutaneous transhepatic cholecysto-cholangiography and liver biopsy in infants with persistent jaundice: can a combination of PTCC and liver biopsy reduce unnecessary laparotomy?

Department of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Children's Hospital of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Pediatric Radiology (Impact Factor: 1.65). 07/2011; 42(1):32-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00247-011-2202-4
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Historically, HIDA is the initial diagnostic test in the evaluation of biliary atresia (BA). Non-excreting HIDA scans can yield false-positive results leading to negative laparotomy.
Cholestatic infants must be evaluated promptly to exclude biliary atresia (BA) and other treatable hepatic conditions. Intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) is the gold standard for diagnosing BA, but requires surgical intervention. Percutaneous transhepatic cholecysto-cholangiography (PTCC) and liver biopsy are less invasive and have been described in small case series. We hypothesized that PTCC and liver biopsy effectively exclude BA, thus avoiding unnecessary IOC.
Retrospective review of cholestatic infants who underwent PTCC, biopsy or cholescintigraphy at a tertiary children's hospital from August 1998 to January 2009. Group differences were evaluated and the receiver operator curve and safety of PTCC determined.
One-hundred twenty-eight cholestatic infants were reviewed. Forty-six (36%) underwent PTCC. Forty-one out of 46 (89%) had simultaneous PTCC and liver biopsy. PTCC was completed successfully in 19/23 (83%) children despite a small or absent GB on initial US. Negative laparotomy rate was 1/6 (17%) for simultaneous PTCC/liver biopsy. Complications occurred in 4/46 including bleeding (n=2), fever with elevated transaminases (n=1) and oxygen desaturations (n=1).
PTCC, particularly when performed in combination with simultaneous liver biopsy, effectively excludes BA in cholestatic infants with acceptable morbidity. PTCC can frequently be performed when a contracted gallbladder is seen on initial US exam. Negative laparotomy rate is lowest when PTCC is coupled with simultaneous liver biopsy.

1 Follower
 · 
90 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neonates with cholestasis may undergo many tests before biliary atresia (BA) or an alternative diagnosis is reached, and delayed intervention may worsen outcomes. An optimal diagnostic approach to reduce risk, cost, and delay has yet to be defined. The purpose of this study was to develop an algorithm that rapidly and accurately excludes BA for infants with cholestatic jaundice. A single-center retrospective comparison of diagnostic workup was made between cholestatic infants with BA, and those without BA who underwent hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid (HIDA) scan during admission. Patients were born between 2000 and 2010 and those older than 100days at assessment were excluded. Sensitivity and specificity analysis of predictive variables was performed and an algorithm constructed. There were 45 BA and 167 non-BA patients. Some variables were 100% sensitive for the exclusion of BA: conjugated bilirubin <2.5mg/dL, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase <150U/L, excretion on HIDA, or a normal percutaneous cholangiogram. Clinical variables and ultrasound were less useful as screening tests owing to low specificity and sensitivity, respectively. Liver biopsy was 98% sensitive and 84% specific in the diagnosis of BA. An algorithm was constructed that rules out BA with a negative laparotomy rate of 3-22%. We propose a screening algorithm for infants with conjugated hyperbilirubinemia that permits efficient exclusion of BA with minimal invasive testing and with a low risk of negative laparotomy. This algorithm now requires prospective evaluation to determine its diagnostic accuracy and its ability to reduce hospital costs, patient morbidity, and time to Kasai portoenterostomy in patients with BA. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Journal of Pediatric Surgery 03/2015; 50(3):363-70. DOI:10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.08.014 · 1.31 Impact Factor