Abstract
Enteric drainage is currently the preferred method of pancreatic transplantation. This technique results in long-term good control of diabetes. In this report we discuss the postoperative radiologic anatomy and complications.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Imaging of enteric drainage during pancreatic transplantation
Pancreatic transplantation is the single most effective method of obtaining euglycemic status in diabetic patients. This procedure has been shown to stabilize or reverse complications of diabetes mellitus [1]. The allograft previously was anastomosed to the urinary bladder to allow urinary excretion of exocrine juices. This procedure had frequent and multiple metabolic and urologic complications, including infection, calculi, fistulas, and urethral rupture [2–4]. Enteric drainage of allograft secretion is currently considered the gold standard of pancreatic transplantation [3]. There has been recent interest in the imaging findings of enteric drainage pancreatic transplants [5–7]. In this pictorial review, we present the postoperative anatomy and complications observed in 60 patients who underwent enteric drainage pancreatic transplantation, including several postoperative findings that have hitherto not been reported.
Enteric drainage pancreatic transplantation
The entire cadaver pancreas is transplanted in the lower abdomen through an intraperitoneal approach. In our institution, the portal vein of the pancreatic allograft is anastomosed end-to-side to the recipient right common iliac vein. This technique is termed systemic enteric drainage (Fig. 1). In other institutions, portal enteric drainage is performed, i.e., the donor portal vein is anastomosed to the recipient portal vein [8, 9].
The donor Y graft is anastomosed end-to-side to the recipient right external or common iliac artery. The first to third parts of the donor duodenum is anastomosed side-to-side to the proximal native jejunum.
Because most pancreatic transplants are performed in older diabetic patients, a simultaneous renal transplant is performed. Occasionally a pancreas-after-kidney transplant is attempted. Rarely an isolated pancreatic transplant is undertaken, such as in patients with cystic fibrosis or young diabetic patients without renal disease.
Postoperative ultrasound findings
Gray-scale and Doppler ultrasound (US) examination of renal and pancreatic transplants are routinely performed at least once in the first 3 postoperative days. In our experience, the pancreatic allograft is not visualized on the initial US scan in about 20% of cases. Given its intraperitoneal location, the allograft may be obscured by bowel. The transplant has homogeneous echotexture, unless there is severe pancreatitis. The echogenicity of the transplant is higher than that of the cortex of the adjacent renal transplant but is lower than that of the native pancreas (Fig. 2). This may be due fatty change in the native organ and the presence of edema in transplants for the first few postoperative days. Velocities and resistive indices of pancreatic vessels are routinely measured. Allograft (portal) vein velocities range from 10 to 60 cm/s.
Arterial velocities up to 400 cm/s at the anastomotic site immediately after surgery do not necessarily indicate hemodynamically significant vessel stenosis and often improve on follow-up studies (Fig. 3). Such velocities may be due to anastomotic edema or kinking. In the few patients who had anastomotic stenosis that required angioplasty, the velocity of the donor Y graft at the anastomotic site was faster than 400 cm/s initially or remained faster than 300 cm/s on follow-up studies. Resistive indices of intrapancreatic arteries are typically higher than those in renal transplants and may even be as high as 0.90. The reason for this is not clear but may be related to the almost universal presence of subclinical pancreatitis. Studies on bladder drainage allografts have shown that resistive indices are not specific in determining the presence of acute rejection [10, 11]. Resistive indices also vary through the gland and are generally higher in the tail than in the head.
Postoperative computed tomographic and magnetic resonance imaging findings
Computed tomographic (CT) examinations are requested postoperatively for unexplained fever, abdominal tenderness, or pain. Many of the immediate postoperative examinations are performed with oral but without intravenous contrast, especially in cases of simultaneous renal transplantation. When intravenous contrast is used, we prefer an iso-osmolar agent such as iodixanol (Visipaque, Amersham, Princeton, NJ, USA). If intravenous contrast is required, such as in cases of suspected pancreatic necrosis or vascular occlusion, we use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with fat-saturated three-dimensional volumetric dynamic postgadolinium T1-weighted sequence. In other centers, intravenous contrast-enhanced CT may be used more often for assessing postoperative complications.
Many findings are commonly seen after transplantation without adverse outcome on follow-up. The pancreatic transplant often enhances to a lesser degree than the adjacent renal transplant (Fig. 4). Fluid collections are commonly seen around the transplant in the first post-transplant month adjacent to the allograft. The donor duodenum often does not fill with oral contrast. It may be thick walled and simulate a peripancreatic abscess (Fig. 5). Partial or complete occlusion of the donor superior mesenteric artery, distal to its pancreatic branches, is seen in nearly all contrast-enhanced postoperative CT examinations (Figs. 6, 7). This alarming finding did not correlate with subsequent transplant viability and was an expected finding because this artery did not supply the small bowel. Dilation of the main pancreatic duct is often seen and did not correlate with subsequent pancreatitis or rejection (Fig. 8). The dome of the urinary bladder is frequently thick walled for up to 4 weeks and should not be confused for cystitis (Fig. 8). This appearance may be due to irritation of the dome by fluid rich in pancreatic enzymes.
Complications
Complications are of allograft, bowel, infective, or vascular etiology. Major complications that require surgical intervention are infrequent and seen in about 5% to 10% of cases.
Allograft complications
Early allograft complications include pancreatitis, necrosis, rejection, and fistula. Clinically severe pancreatitis is found in about 10% of allografts [12]. Unless there is necrosis (Fig. 9), seen in about 2% to 4% of allografts, conservative therapy including percutaneous drainage of collections is sufficient. Transplant necrosis can occur not only from pancreatitis but also from primary vascular occlusion. US findings of pancreatic necrosis include lack of arterial and venous flow (Fig. 10) and increased echogenicity that may suggest the presence of gas within transplant. In two cases of transplant necrosis that were encountered, the first US sign was absent venous flow. Gadolinium-enhanced MRI is useful to confirm pancreatic necrosis (Fig. 11).
Pancreatic fistula is commonly seen after several types of pancreatic surgery in which the gland is directly handled. It is less common after transplantation and we have seen only three cases of fistula; the incidence may be low because the allograft is not directly handled during surgery but is positioned by maneuvering the attached donor spleen, which is subsequently removed.
Acute rejection is much less common in pancreatic transplantation that in renal transplantation. The diagnosis is made clinically and by surgical biopsy. Percutaneous biopsy is possible but may be difficult because of the location of the transplant. Occasionally there is concern that the graft failure is due to technical factors, such as vascular occlusion, instead of rejection or pancreatic necrosis. In these circumstances, contrast-enhanced gadolinium dynamic MRI is useful.
Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) is a rare long-term complication of transplantation. The predominant radiologic finding of PTLD in pancreatic transplant recipients is diffuse allograft enlargement, an appearance that may be indistinguishable from that of acute pancreatitis or transplant rejection [13]. However, failure of response to immunosuppressive therapy, presence of focal masses in or around the graft, or organomegaly may point toward the diagnosis of PTLD. The reported incidence of PTLD after pancreatic transplants is about 3% to 12% [14, 15]. However, we have not seen this complication in 12 to 24 months of follow-up of 60 patients. This difference may be explained by the type of immunosuppressant regime employed.
Bowel complications
Bowel complications after any abdominal surgery include small bowel obstruction and leak. There are several causes of postoperative small bowel obstruction including adhesions, internal and external hernia, anastomotic stenosis, intussusception, marginal ulcers, and obturation. In our experience, adhesions and internal hernia (Fig. 12) are the commonest causes of post-transplant obstruction, being seen in three and two of 60 patients, respectively. Conventional CT or CT enteroclysis is used to diagnose the site, cause, and degree of small bowel obstruction and complications such as strangulation.
Anastomotic leaks are better assessed with CT enteroclysis than with conventional CT. Extravasation of orally introduced contrast is diagnostic.
Vascular complications
Anastomotic stenosis and pseudoaneurysm are infrequent complications of transplantation. Vascular stenosis may be shown by CT or MR arteriography. Pseudoaneurysm is a rare complication of pancreatic transplantations and may be related to surgical technique, infection (mycotic aneurysm), severe pancreatitis (Fig. 13), or allograft biopsy. Most reported pseudoaneurysms originate from the site of the vascular anastomosis. Postoperative hemorrhage is a potential complication that can be diagnosed by CT or MRI. Fistula between the arterial graft and donor duodenum has been reported to be a source of major gastrointestinal bleeding that can be successfully treated with coil embolization [16].
Infective complications
Abscess may complicate a pseudocyst or an anastomotic leak. These are usually treated by antibiotics and percutaneous drainage. Generalized peritonitis is less common and requires surgical intervention (Fig. 14). Pseudomembranous or cytomegaloviral colitis is occasionally seen after transplantation and the diagnosis of colitis may sometimes be initially made on CT.
Conclusion
The enteric drainage technique is the preferred surgical approach for pancreatic transplantation. The transplant surgeon relies on imaging to diagnose potentially serious complications. The radiologist must be aware of the postoperative anatomy and expected CT or US findings to avoid misinterpreting these for postoperative complications. Increasingly MRI is used to diagnose pancreatissssc and vascular complications, although CT remains the imaging procedure of choice for assessing infective and bowel-related complications.
References
Robertson RP, Davis C, Larsen J, et al. (2000) Pancreas and islet transplantation for patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care 23:112–116
Dumas MD, Bude RO, Sonda PL III, et al. (1996) Urethral disruption with urinary extravasation: a delayed complication of pancreatic transplantation. Radiology 201:761–765
Sollinger HW, Odorico JS, Knechtle SJ, et al. (1998) Experience with 500 simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants. Ann Surg 228:284–296
Hickey DP, Bakthavatsalam R, Bannon CA, et al. (1997) Urological complications of pancreatic transplantation. J Urol 157:2042–2048
Dachman AH, Newmark GM, Thistlethwaite JR Jr, et al. (1998) Imaging of pancreatic transplantation using portal venous and enteric exocrine drainage. AJR 171:157–163
Freund MC, Steurer W, Gassner EM, et al. (2004) Spectrum of imaging findings after pancreas transplantation with enteric exocrine drainage: part 2, posttransplantation complications. AJR 182:919–925
Neri E, Cappelli C, Boggi U, et al. (2004) Multirow CT in the follow-up of pancreas transplantation. Transplant Proc 36:597–600
Heyneman LE, Keogan MT, Tuttle-Newhall JE, et al. (1999) Pancreatic transplantation using portal venous and enteric drainage: the postoperative appearance of a new surgical procedure. J Comput Assist Tomogr 23:283–290
Petruzzo P, Da Silva M, Feitosa LC, et al. (2000) Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation: portal versus systemic venous drainage of the pancreas allografts. Clin Transplant 14:287–291
Aideyan OA, Foshager MC, Benedetti E, et al. (1997) Correlation of the arterial resistive index in pancreas transplants of patients with transplant rejection. AJR 168:1445–1447
Nelson NL, Largen PS, Stratta RJ, et al. (1996) Pancreas allograft rejection: correlation of transduodenal core biopsy with Doppler resistive index. Radiology 200:91–94
Fernandez-Cruz L, Sabater L, Gilabert R, et al. (1993) Native and graft pancreatitis following combined pancreas-renal transplantation. Br J Surg 80:1429–1432
Meador TL, Krebs TL, Cheong JJ, et al. (2000) Imaging features of posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder in pancreas transplant recipients. AJR 174:121–124
Lumbreras C, Fernandez I, Velosa J, et al. (1995) Infectious complications following pancreatic transplantation: incidence, microbiological and clinical characteristics, and outcome. Clin Infect Dis 20:514–520
Martinenghi S, Dell’Antonio G, Secchi A, et al. (1997) Cancer arising after pancreas and/or kidney transplantation in a series of 99 diabetic patients. Diabetes Care 20:272–275
Lopez NM, Jeon H, Ranjan D, Johnston TD (2004) Atypical etiology of massive gastrointestinal bleeding: arterio-enteric fistula following enteric drained pancreas transplant. Am Surg 70:529–532
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sandrasegaran, K., Lall, C., Berry, W.A. et al. Enteric drainage pancreatic transplantation. Abdom Imaging 31, 588–595 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-005-0076-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-005-0076-3