Advertisement

La radiologia medica

, Volume 123, Issue 10, pp 799–807 | Cite as

Endovascular treatment for hepatic vein-type Budd–Chiari syndrome: effectiveness and long-term outcome

  • Zhong-Ke Chen
  • Jing Fan
  • Chi Cao
  • Yu Li
VASCULAR AND INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY
  • 66 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the clinical effectiveness and long-term outcomes of endovascular treatment for hepatic vein (HV)-type Budd–Chiari syndrome (BCS).

Materials and methods

From June 2011 to August 2016, 68 consecutive patients with symptomatic HV-type BCS underwent endovascular treatment in our center. Data on the baseline characteristics, technical success, clinical success, and long-term outcomes were collected and analyzed retrospectively.

Results

The technical success rate of endovascular treatment was 100%. Fifty patients underwent HV recanalization, and 18 underwent accessory HV (AHV) recanalization. The clinical success rate was 95.6% (65/68). During a mean follow-up period of 29.4 ± 13.6 months, 19 patients experienced re-obstruction of either the HV (n = 18) or the AHV (n = 1). The cumulative 1-, 2-, and 5-year primary patency rates were 80.0, 72.8, and 67.9%, respectively. The cumulative 1-, 2-, and 5-year secondary patency rates were 93.8, 90.3, and 82.9%, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that the independent predictor of a prolonged primary patency duration was recanalization of the AHV. Five patients died 1–28 months (median, 15 months) after treatment. The cumulative 1-, 2-, and 5-year survival rates were 96.9, 93.4, and 91.2%, respectively. There was no significant difference in survival between the HV and AHV recanalization groups.

Conclusion

Endovascular treatment is effective for patients with HV-type BCS. It can result in excellent long-term patency and survival rates. If it is applicable, AHV recanalization should be considered prior to treatment in order to achieve a longer patency.

Keywords

Endovascular treatment Budd–Chiari syndrome Hepatic vein Accessory hepatic vein 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical statement

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Han G, Qi X, Zhang W et al (2013) Percutaneous recanalization for Budd–Chiari syndrome: an 11-year retrospective study on patency and survival in 177 Chinese patients from a single center. Radiology 266:657–667CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fu YF, Xu H, Wu Q et al (2015) Combined thrombus aspiration and recanalization in treating Budd–Chiari syndrome with inferior vena cava thrombosis. Radiol Med 120:1094–1099CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Qi XS, Ren WR, Fan DM et al (2014) Selection of treatment modalities for Budd–Chiari Syndrome in China: a preliminary survey of published literature. World J Gastroenterol 20:10628–10636CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fu YF, Li Y, Cui YF et al (2015) Percutaneous recanalization for combined-type Budd–Chiari syndrome: strategy and long-term outcome. Abdom Imaging 40:3240–3247CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sang HF, Li XQ (2014) Endovascular treatment of Budd–Chiari syndrome with hepatic vein obstruction in China. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 24:846–851CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cui YF, Fu YF, Li DC et al (2016) Percutaneous recanalization for hepatic vein-type Budd–Chiari syndrome: long-term patency and survival. Hepatol Int 10:363–369CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tripathi D, Sunderraj L, Vemala V et al (2017) Long-term outcomes following percutaneous hepatic vein recanalization for Budd–Chiari syndrome. Liver Int 37:111–120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ding PX, Zhang SJ, Li Z et al (2016) Long-term safety and outcome of percutaneous transhepatic venous balloon angioplasty for Budd–Chiari syndrome. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 31:222–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tripathi D, Macnicholas R, Kothari C et al (2014) Good clinical outcomes following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent-shunts in Budd–Chiari syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 39:864–872CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zahn A, Gotthardt D, Weiss KH et al (2010) Budd–Chiari Syndrome: long term success via hepatic decompression using transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt. BMC Gastroenterol 10:25CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Qi X, Guo W, He C et al (2014) Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for Budd–Chiari syndrome: techniques, indications and results on 51 Chinese patients from a single centre. Liver Int 34:1164–1175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hayek G, Ronot M, Plessier A et al (2017) Long-term outcome and analysis of dysfunction of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement in chronic primary Budd–chiari syndrome. Radiology 283:280–292CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fitsiori K, Tsitskari M, Kelekis A et al (2014) Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for the treatment of Budd–Chiari syndrome patients: results from a single center. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 37:691–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    He F, Zhao H, Dai S et al (2016) Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for Budd–Chiari syndrome with diffuse occlusion of hepatic veins. Sci Rep 6:36380CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rosenqvist K, Sheikhi R, Eriksson LG et al (2016) Endovascular treatment of symptomatic Budd–Chiari syndrome–in favour of early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 28:656–660CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Seijo S, Plessier A, Hoekstra J et al (2013) Good long-term outcome of Budd–Chiari syndrome with a step-wise management. Hepatology 57:1962–1968CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fu YF, Wei N, Wu Q et al (2015) Use of accessory hepatic vein intervention in the treatment of Budd–Chiari syndrome. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 38:1508–1514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fu YF, Xu H, Zhang K et al (2015) Accessory hepatic vein recanalization for treatment of Budd–Chiari syndrome due to long-segment obstruction of the hepatic vein: initial clinical experience. Diagn Interv Radiol 21:148–153CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mammen T, Keshava S, Eapen CE et al (2010) Intrahepatic collateral recanalization in symptomatic Budd–Chiari syndrome: a single-center experience. J Vasc Interv Radiol 21:1119–1124CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gao X, Gui E, Lu Z et al (2015) Risk factors of recurrence among 471 Chinese patients with Budd–Chiari syndrome. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol 39:620–626CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhang CQ, Fu LN, Xu L et al (2003) Long-term effect of stent placement in 115 patients with Budd–Chiari syndrome. World J Gastroenterol 9:2587–2591CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Italian Society of Medical Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Interventional RadiologyPingliang People’s HospitalPingliangChina
  2. 2.Department of Interventional RadiologyXuzhou Central HospitalXuzhouChina
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyXuzhou Central HospitalXuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations