4.2 Article

The morphological and histopathological assessment of Alagille syndrome with extrahepatic bile duct obstruction: the importance of the differential diagnosis with subgroup o biliary atresia

Journal

PEDIATRIC SURGERY INTERNATIONAL
Volume 37, Issue 9, Pages 1167-1174

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00383-021-04932-z

Keywords

Alagille syndrome; Biliary atresia; Subgroup o; Extrahepatic bile duct obstruction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

By validating the morphological and histopathological features in detail, it may help differentiate between Alagille syndrome with extrahepatic bile duct obstruction and biliary atresia.
Purpose The differential diagnosis between Alagille syndrome (AGS) with extrahepatic bile duct obstruction (EHBDO) and biliary atresia (BA) is difficult. We report a case series of AGS with EHBDO with detailed validation of the morphological and histopathological features for the differential diagnosis of BA. Methods Six liver transplantations (LTs) were performed for AGS with EHBDO. All patients were diagnosed with BA at the referring institution and the diagnosis of AGS was then confirmed based on a genetic analysis before LT. We verified the morphological and histopathological findings of the porta hepatis and liver at the diagnosis of BA and at LT. Results All patients had acholic stool in the neonatal period and were diagnosed with BA by cholangiography. The gross liver findings included a smooth and soft surface, without any cirrhosis. The gross findings of the porta hepatis included aplasia of the proximal hepatic duct, or subgroup o, in five patients. The histopathological examination of the EHBD also revealed obstruction/absence of the hepatic duct. There were no patients with aplasia of the common bile duct. Conclusions Aplasia of the hepatic duct and the macroscopic liver findings may help in to differentiate between AGS with EHBDO and BA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available