4.8 Review

Transjugular liver biopsy - Indications, adequacy, quality of specimens, and complications - A systematic review

Journal

JOURNAL OF HEPATOLOGY
Volume 47, Issue 2, Pages 284-294

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2007.05.001

Keywords

transjugular liver biopsy; menghini; Tru-cut; indications; quality; fragmentation; complications

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Transjugular liver biopsy (TJLB) is considered an inferior biopsy, used when percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB) is contraindicated. According to recent literature, specimens with >=, 6 complete portal tracts (CPTs) are needed for histological diagnosis of chronic liver disease but >=, 11 CPTs to reliably stage and grade. Mean CPT number in PLB series is 7.5; more passes increase complications. Sixty-four series reporting 7649 TJLBs were evaluated for quality of specimen and safety. Major indications were coagulation disorders and/or ascites. Success rate was 96.8%. Fragmentation rate was 34.3%, not correlating with length or diagnostic adequacy. With a mean of 2.7 passes, mean CPT number was 6.8. Histological diagnosis was achieved in 96.1% of TJLBs, correlating with length (p = 0.007) and CPT number (p = 0.04). Tru-Cut specimens had a mean CPT number of 7.5 and, compared to Menghini specimens, were longer (p < 0.008), less fragmented (p < 0.001) and more diagnostic (p < 0.001). Thinner needles (> 16-G) provided significantly longer and less fragmented specimens. Minor and major complication rates were 6.5% and 0.56%, respectively, and increased in children, but not with additional passes. In adults, mortality was 0.09% (haemorrhage 0.06%); ventricular arrhythmia 0.03%). TJLB is safe, providing specimens qualitatively comparable to PLB, and may improve further using >=, 18-G Tru-Cut needle and > 3 passes. (C) 2007 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. 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

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available