Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online before print March 15, 2005, 10.1148/radiol.2352040506
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2352040506v1
235/2/651    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bolognesi, M.
Right arrow Articles by Gatta, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bolognesi, M.
Right arrow Articles by Gatta, A.
(Radiology 2005;235:651-658.)
© RSNA, 2005


Ultrasonography

Acute Liver Rejection: Accuracy and Predictive Values of Doppler US Measurements—Initial Experience1

Massimo Bolognesi, MD, PhD, David Sacerdoti, MD, Claudia Mescoli, MD, Valeria Nava, MD, Giancarlo Bombonato, MD, Carlo Merkel, MD, Roberto Merenda, MD, Paolo Angeli, MD, PhD, Massimo Rugge, MD and Angelo Gatta, MD

1 From the Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine (M.B., D.S., V.N., G.B., C. Merkel, P.A., A.G.), Department of Oncology and Surgical Sciences (C. Mescoli, M.R.), and Institute of General Surgery (R.M.), Clinica Medica 5, Dipartimento di Medicina Clinica e Sperimentale, Policlinico Universitario, University of Padova, Via Giustiniani 2, 35128 Padova, Italy. Received March 17, 2004; revision requested May 25; revision received June 8; accepted July 20. Address correspondence to M.B. (e-mail: massimo.bolognesi@unipd.it).

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate accuracy and predictive values of Doppler ultrasonographic (US) measurement of portal blood velocity (PBV) and splenic pulsatility index (SPI) in diagnosis of clinically relevant acute rejection in patients with clinicobiochemical hepatic dysfunction after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study was approved by the institutional review board, and protocol conformed to ethical guidelines of Declaration of Helsinki. Patient informed consent was obtained. In 27 patients with OLT (23 men, four women; mean age, 48 years; range, 27–64 years), PBV and SPI were measured at Doppler US within 48 hours before or after liver biopsy for clinically suspected acute rejection. Biopsy specimens were assigned scores according to Banff method, and rejection activity index (RAI) was calculated. RAI score of 4 or greater was considered clinically relevant acute rejection. Doppler US parameters were analyzed as absolute values and as percentage point changes with respect to values obtained at last examination before rejection was suspected. Information from two Doppler US parameters was combined; Doppler US composite index was calculated. Statistical tests were conducted to assess accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of Doppler US parameters in diagnosis of graft rejection.

RESULTS: Clinically relevant acute rejection was diagnosed in nine patients. Median time from OLT until histologic diagnosis of acute rejection was 8 days (range, 5–20 days). Rejection was associated with a marked reduction in mean PBV (–43% ± 5 [standard error of the mean]) and a slight increase in SPI (+12% ± 16). The calculated Doppler US composite index was strictly related to severity of rejection (P < .001). When applied retrospectively, this index had good accuracy (88%) for prediction of rejection (specificity, 89%; sensitivity, 86%; negative predictive value, 94%).

CONCLUSION: During the first weeks after OLT, a marked decrease in PBV associated with increased SPI supports suspicion of clinically relevant acute rejection.

© RSNA, 2005







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2005 by the Radiological Society of North America.