4.4 Article

Impact of Liver Disease After the Fontan Operation

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 115, Issue 2, Pages 249-252

Publisher

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2014.10.032

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Liver disease is being reported with increased frequency in survivors of the Fontan operation. The clinical impact of structural hepatic abnormalities in these patients remains largely unknown. We sought to assess if, and how, cardiologists are screening for hepatic disease in these patients to evaluate for clinical or laboratory correlates of structural hepatic disease and determine the prevalence and clinical impact of such disease. Retrospective data analysis from tertiary institutions was performed. Hepatic imaging studies and serology performed over the last decade were reviewed and clinical and laboratory correlates of structural hepatic alterations on liver imaging or biopsy were sought. Outcomes were determined. In this cohort study, 53 of 60 adult survivors (88%) underwent hepatic imaging with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or ultrasound with a median number of 2 (0 to 10) studies over the past decade. The frequency of hepatic imaging varied widely with 70% of patients undergoing serial studies. Cirrhosis with or without abnormal hepatic nodules was seen in 29 of 53 patients (55%) at 18.4 +/- 5.6 years after the Fontan procedure. Adverse hepatic-related outcome occurred in 22% of the entire patient cohort and was unrelated to time from Fontan operation. In conclusion, there exists significant variability in the type and timing of testing for hepatic complications after the Fontan procedure. Structural hepatic alterations are common and can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Routine imaging, and serologic evaluation, is recommended in all Fontan survivors. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available