Scholarlink

Background <p>In pediatric chronic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) may provide suboptimal visualization of intrahepatic portal vein (PV) branches and may therefore underestimate suitability for recanalization. Percutaneous portal venography (PVG) may provide more complete intrahepatic detail.</p> Purpose <p>To compare CECT and PVG for visualization of intrahepatic portal branches relevant to recanalization in children with chronic EHPVO and to explore whether a CECT “beak sign” is associated with technical success.</p> Materials and methods <p>This single-center retrospective study (2018–2024) included children with non-cirrhotic, non-malignant chronic EHPVO who underwent preprocedural CECT and percutaneous PVG during attempted PV recanalization. Right/left PV and segmental branches (2/3 combined, 4, and 5–8) were scored visible/not visible. The beak sign was defined as a sharply tapered extrahepatic PV stump ending at the occlusion site. Technical success was restoration of hepatopetal portal flow after crossing the occlusion and balloon angioplasty.</p> Results <p>Eighteen of 51 screened patients were included (median age, 7 years); technical success was achieved in 14/18 (77.8%). PVG visualized intrahepatic portal branches more frequently than CECT across segments; segment-level paired comparisons were considered exploratory given the small cohort and limited discordant pairs. The beak sign was present in 10/18 (55.6%) and was not significantly associated with technical success.</p> Conclusion <p>PVG may provide more complete delineation of intrahepatic portal venous branches than CECT in pediatric chronic EHPVO; therefore, absent intrahepatic visualization on CECT alone should not preclude referral for recanalization evaluation. The beak sign is hypothesis-generating and warrants validation in larger cohorts.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparison of computed tomography and portal venography in children with chronic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月1日

查看全文
  • Mert Bayramoglu,
  • Evrim Ozmen,
  • Enes Muhammed Canturk,
  • Vugar Samadli,
  • Levent Oguzkurt

摘要

Background

In pediatric chronic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) may provide suboptimal visualization of intrahepatic portal vein (PV) branches and may therefore underestimate suitability for recanalization. Percutaneous portal venography (PVG) may provide more complete intrahepatic detail.

Purpose

To compare CECT and PVG for visualization of intrahepatic portal branches relevant to recanalization in children with chronic EHPVO and to explore whether a CECT “beak sign” is associated with technical success.

Materials and methods

This single-center retrospective study (2018–2024) included children with non-cirrhotic, non-malignant chronic EHPVO who underwent preprocedural CECT and percutaneous PVG during attempted PV recanalization. Right/left PV and segmental branches (2/3 combined, 4, and 5–8) were scored visible/not visible. The beak sign was defined as a sharply tapered extrahepatic PV stump ending at the occlusion site. Technical success was restoration of hepatopetal portal flow after crossing the occlusion and balloon angioplasty.

Results

Eighteen of 51 screened patients were included (median age, 7 years); technical success was achieved in 14/18 (77.8%). PVG visualized intrahepatic portal branches more frequently than CECT across segments; segment-level paired comparisons were considered exploratory given the small cohort and limited discordant pairs. The beak sign was present in 10/18 (55.6%) and was not significantly associated with technical success.

Conclusion

PVG may provide more complete delineation of intrahepatic portal venous branches than CECT in pediatric chronic EHPVO; therefore, absent intrahepatic visualization on CECT alone should not preclude referral for recanalization evaluation. The beak sign is hypothesis-generating and warrants validation in larger cohorts.