AJR Not a Member? Click to Join ARRS!
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Todo, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Todo, S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 161, 969-974, Copyright © 1993 by American Roentgen Ray Society


ARTICLES

Contrast examination of the small bowel in patients with small-bowel transplants: findings in 16 patients

WL Campbell, K Abu-Elmagd, MP Federle, FL Thaete, H Furukawa, AG Tzakis and S Todo
Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Presbyterian University Hospital, PA 15213.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to describe the findings on contrast examinations of the gastrointestinal tract in patients with small-intestinal transplants. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Sixteen consecutive adult transplant recipients received a total of 17 allografts: eight isolated small-bowel, six small-bowel and liver, and three multivisceral (stomach, duodenum, pancreas, small-bowel, liver). Grafts included the entire mesenteric small bowel. Gastrointestinal contrast studies were done in asymptomatic patients according to protocol and in patients having clinical indications for examination. Median time from transplantation to examination was 78 days (range, 5-768 days). Seventy- five gastrointestinal contrast examinations were performed: 53 upper gastrointestinal and small-intestinal series, 12 upper gastrointestinal series, eight enteroclyses, and two water-soluble contrast enemas. Radiographs were analyzed for postsurgical anatomy, integrity of anastomoses, allograft radiologic appearance, small-bowel transit time, and rate of gastric emptying. RESULTS. Usual postsurgical anatomy included native-to-donor duodenojejunal, jejunojejunal, and gastrogastric anastomoses and donor-to-native ileocolonic and ileoileal anastomoses. No anastomotic complications were found. Leaks at native duodenal and colonic stumps resulted in a duodenocutaneous fistula and an abscess, respectively. Moderate to marked thickening of mucosal folds consistent with edema was present in nine allografts (53%) and 11 (17%) of 66 upper gastrointestinal and small-intestinal examinations, primarily in the early postoperative period. Chronic loss of allograft mucosal folds developed in four grafts in three patients; pathologic diagnoses included acute and chronic rejection and enteric infection; a jejunocutaneous fistula developed in one such patient. Transit times of barium through the small intestine ranged from 0.2 to 17.8 hr (median, 2 hr). Self-limited delayed gastric emptying was present in 14 patients (88%) and 32 (60%) of 54 upper gastrointestinal and small-intestinal examinations. CONCLUSION. Gastrointestinal contrast examinations in recipients of small-bowel transplants are useful for assessing graft anatomy, enteric anastomoses, and gastrointestinal motor function. Most intestinal grafts showed normal caliber and mucosal pattern and exhibited active peristalsis. Abnormal findings included self-limited postoperative edema of graft mucosal folds, chronic loss of the mucosal folds due to rejection and/or enteric infection, delayed gastric emptying that improved with time, leaks from native duodenal and colon stumps, and a jejunocutaneous fistula in a failing graft. Small- intestinal transit times were similar to those observed in patients not receiving transplants, although there was wide variation.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
K. M. Unsinn, A. Koenigsrainer, M. Rieger, B. V. Czermak, H. Ellemunter, R. Margreiter, W. R. Jaschke, and M. C. Freund
Spectrum of Imaging Findings After Intestinal, Liver-Intestinal, or Multivisceral Transplantation: Part 1, Posttransplantation Anatomy
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2004; 183(5): 1275 - 1283.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
K. M. Unsinn, A. Koenigsrainer, M. Rieger, B. V. Czermak, H. Ellemunter, R. Margreiter, W. R. Jaschke, and M. C. Freund
Spectrum of Imaging Findings After Intestinal, Liver-Intestinal, or Multivisceral Transplantation: Part 2, Posttransplantation Complications
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2004; 183(5): 1285 - 1291.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.