The fatal risk in hepatic artery embolization for hemostasis after pancreatic and hepatic surgery: importance of collateral arterial pathways.

PURPOSE: To assess retrospectively the cause of hepatic failure related to hepatic arterial embolization (HAE) for hemostasis after pancreaticoduodenectomy or hepatic lobectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between June 1993 and March 2006, Twenty HAEs in 17 patients (15 men, two women; mean age, 64 years) were performed. Angiographic findings, including portal vein stenosis, collateral arterial pathways after HAE, and the difference of embolic materials, were recorded. The morbidity (hepatic failure and abscess) and mortality were detailed according to collateral arterial pathways, portal vein stenosis, and embolic material used. RESULTS: Bleeding was controlled in all patients, although two patients required repeat embolization. Hepatic failure (n = 8) and abscess (n = 2) arose in nine of 20 HAEs. Death occurred after six of eight HAEs complicated by hepatic failure. The morbidity and mortality rates of HAE were 45% and 30%, respectively. Hepatic complication was eight times more likely to occur (P = .005) in cases with no hepatic collaterals involving hepatic, replaced, or accessory hepatic arteries. Death was observed only in the cases without hepatic collaterals (P = .011). The correlation between the embolization outcome and the presence of portal vein stenosis or the difference of embolic materials was not significant (P > .61). CONCLUSIONS: HAE can be used to successfully control bleeding secondary to hepatic arterial rupture. In the absence of hepatic collaterals, collateral circulation distal to the occlusion from nonhepatic sources may be inadequate and lead to hepatic failure after HAE.

FDG-PET for the diagnosis of fever of unknown origin: a Japanese multi-center study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical value of 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D: -glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for the diagnosis of fever of unknown origin (FUO), we performed a Japanese multi-center retrospective survey. METHODS: A total of 81 consecutive patients with FUO who underwent FDG-PET at 6 institutions between July 2006 and December 2007 were retrospectively evaluated. FDG uptake was visually evaluated using a 4-grade scale. The efficacy of FDG-PET for the evaluation of FUO, the provision of additional diagnostic information, the clinical impact on therapeutic decisions (4-grade scale), and the diagnostic performance compared with the final diagnosis were evaluated. RESULTS: The diagnostic results were analyzed according to 4 groups of final diagnoses: infection, arthritis/vasculitis/autoimmune/collagen disease (A/V), tumor/granuloma (T/G), and other/unknown (O/U). Sensitivity was highest in T/G, followed by infection, A/V and O/U [100%(7/7), 89%(24/27), 65%(11/17), 0%(0/1) respectively]. Clinical impact and mean FDG score showed the same tendency. Additional information was highest in infection followed by T/G, A/V, and O/U [76%(22/29), 75%(6/8), 43%(9/21), 23%(5/22), respectively]. The O/U group showed a high specificity (84%, 16/19) and accurately excluded active focal inflammatory diseases and malignancy. The use of steroids for the treatment of fever seemed to mask the lesions and modified the results, especially in the A/V group (4 false negatives in 8 steroid users out of 21 A/V patients). The prevalence of each disease in each hospital significantly affected the effectiveness of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of FUO. The mean FDG uptake score and additional information (70%, 31/44 vs. 30%, 11/37, respectively) in national hospital (NH) was significantly higher than in university hospitals (UH). A Grade 3 clinical impact, in which the FDG PET results changed the clinical decision, was seen in 50% (22/44) of the patients in the NH group and 13.5% (5/37) of the patients in the UH group. The sensitivity (91%, 30/33; 63%, 12/19) and specificity (60%, 6/10; 86%, 12/14) of the results in the NH and UH groups differed. The total sensitivity was 81% (42/52), specificity was 75% (18/24). The NH group included a large number of cases with infectious diseases (50%, 23/44), while the UH group included a large number of A/V cases (38%, 14/37) and O/U cases (41%, 15/37). CONCLUSION: FDG-PET for the diagnosis of FUO provided additional diagnostic information and had a high clinical impact, especially among patients with infectious diseases. It was also helpful in cases with unknown or other miscellaneous diseases by allowing the exclusion of focally active diseases. The prevalence of diseases in hospitals significantly affected the effectiveness of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of FUO. FDG-PET is a useful examination providing various degrees of clinical impact for the management of FUO, depending on the characteristics of the patient and the hospital.