These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Single-Center Experience With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Lymphangiography for Diagnosing Lymphatic Disorders and Guiding Percutaneous Embolization.
    Author: Ahn Y, Koo HJ, Choe J, Chu HH, Yang DH, Kang JW, Shin JH.
    Journal: J Korean Med Sci; 2024 Oct 14; 39(39):e260. PubMed ID: 39403749.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The pragmatic role of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance lymphangiography (DCMRL) needs to be evaluated and compared across distinct lymphatic disorders. We aimed to evaluate the performance of DCMRL for identifying the underlying causes of lymphatic disorders and to define the potential benefit of DCMRL for planning lymphatic interventions. METHODS: Patients who underwent DCMRL between August 2017 and July 2022 were included in this retrospective analysis. DCMRL was performed with intranodal injection of a gadolinium-based contrast medium through inguinal lymph nodes under local anesthesia. Technical success of DCMRL and feasibility of percutaneous embolization were assessed based on the lymphatic anatomy visualized by DCMRL. Based on the underlying causes, clinical outcomes were evaluated and compared. RESULTS: Seventy consecutive patients were included. The indications were traumatic chylothorax (n = 42), traumatic chylous ascites (n = 11), and nontraumatic lymphatic leak (n = 17). The technical success rate of DCMRL was the highest in association with nontraumatic lymphatic disorders (94.1% [16/17]), followed by traumatic chylothorax (92.9% [39/42]) and traumatic chylous ascites (81.8% [9/11]). Thirty-one (47.7%) patients among 65 patients who underwent technically successful DCMRL had feasible anatomy for intervention. Clinical success was achieved in 90.3% (28/31) of patients with feasible anatomy for radiologic intervention, while 62.5% (10/16) of patients with anatomical challenges showed improvement. Most patients with traumatic chylothorax showed improvement (92.9% [39/42]), whereas only 23.5% (4/17) of patients with nontraumatic lymphatic disorders showed clinical improvement. CONCLUSION: DCMRL can help identify the underlying causes of lymphatic disorders. The performance of DCMRL and clinical outcomes vary based on the underlying cause. The feasibility of lymphatic intervention can be determined using DCMRL, which can help in predicting clinical outcomes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]