Search Results (3)

Purpose: This study evaluates a deep learning-based denoising algorithm to improve the trade-off between radiation dose, image noise, and motion artifacts in TIPSS procedures, aiming for shorter acquisition times and reduced radiation with maintained diagnostic quality. Methods: In this retrospective study, TIPSS patients were divided based on CBCT acquisition times of 6 s and 3 s. Traditional weighted filtered back projection (Original) and an AI denoising algorithm (AID) were used for image reconstructions. Objective assessments of image quality included contrast, noise levels, and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) through place-consistent region-of-interest (ROI) measurements across various critical areas pertinent to the TIPSS procedure. Subjective assessments were conducted by two blinded radiologists who evaluated the overall image quality, sharpness, contrast, and motion artifacts for each dataset combination. Statistical significance was determined using a mixed-effects model (p ≤ 0.05). Results: From an initial cohort of 60 TIPSS patients, 44 were selected and paired. The mean dose-area product (DAP) for the 6 s acquisitions was 5138.50 ± 1325.57 µGy·m², significantly higher than the 2514.06 ± 691.59 µGym² obtained for the 3 s series. CNR was highest in the 6 s-AID series (p < 0.05). Both denoised and original series showed consistent contrast for 6 s and 3 s acquisitions, with no significant noise differences between the 6 s Original and 3 s AID images (p > 0.9). Subjective assessments indicated superior quality in 6 s-AID images, with no significant overall quality difference between the 6 s-Original and 3 s-AID series (p > 0.9). Conclusions: The AI denoising algorithm enhances CBCT image quality in TIPSS procedures, allowing for shorter scans that reduce radiation exposure and minimize motion artifacts. Full article

Transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt (TIPSS) is an interventional radiology procedure whose aim is to create artificial communication between the portal and the hepatic blood flow in order to reduce the pressure gradient in portal hypertension. The indications to perform a TIPSS procedure can be framed in an elective or emergency setting: refractory ascites to diuretic therapy and secondary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage are the most frequent reasons for executing a TIPSS in an election context, while acute uncontrolled variceal bleeding is the principal indication that a TIPSS needs to be performed in an emergency setting. In recent years, the role of the TIPSS has been redefined for several conditions, such as ectopic varices, portal vein thrombosis, Budd–Chiari syndrome, hepatic veno-occlusive disease, and many others. This review aims to perform a deep analysis of when and why a TIPSS procedure should be carried out in an emergency, pointing out the related most common technical difficulties and complications. Full article

Background: In patients with liver cirrhosis, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is considered a standardized treatment of refractory ascites or variceal bleeding. TIPS thrombosis (TT) and/or portal vein thrombosis (PVT) are possible complications during/after TIPS placement. Previous studies suggested increased clotting activity in portal circulation (PORC). This pilot study aimed to evaluate alterations and differences of coagulation function in PORC and in peripheral circulation (PERC) via rotational thromboelastometry during TIPS. Methods: Blood samples were collected from cirrhotic patients (n = 13; median Model of End Stage Liver Disease, MELD Score: 12; median age: 60 years) undergoing TIPS (10/13 TIPSs were elective procedures due to refractory ascites) as follows: median cubital vein (MCV; PERC)—confluence of the three hepatic veins to the inferior cava vein (HV/ICV; PORC)—portal vein (PV; PORC)—TIPS (PORC). This research utilized four variables of the extrinsic test EXTEM, i.e., clotting time (CT), clot formation time (CFT), maximum clot firmness (MCF), and maximum lysis (ML). Results: EXTEM results [mean, M (range) ± standard deviation, SD (range)] showed no significant differences for CT [M (70–73) ± SD (9–13); p = 0.93] or CFT [M (137–155) ± SD (75–112); p = 0.97] or MCF [M (51–54) ± SD (9–10); p = 0.90] or ML [M (9–10) ± SD (4–5); p = 0.89] between the compartments, i.e., MCV vs. HV/ICV vs. PV vs. TIPS. Overall, we detected no differences in coagulation function between PERC and PORC. Conclusion: These results are in contrast to previous reports suggesting increased clotting activity in PORC vs. PERC in association with liver cirrhosis. Rotational thromboelastometry-based evaluation of coagulation function in PERC appears to reliably reflect coagulation function in PORC with respect to risk estimation for TT and/or PVT in cirrhotic patients undergoing TIPS. Full article