Serial measurement of Doppler hepatic hemodynamic parameters for the diagnosis of acute rejection after live donor liver transplantation

To elucidate the role of Doppler hepatic hemodynamic parameters as surrogate markers of acute rejection (AR) after live donor liver transplantation (LDLT), serial Doppler measurements were prospectively performed during the first 2 weeks after LDLT to compare the longitudinal hepatic hemodynamic changes between patients with histologically proven AR and patients without histologically proven AR. Forty‐six patients that had undergone adult‐to‐adult LDLT using a right lobe graft were enrolled in this study. The portal venous maximum velocity (PVV; cm/second), portal venous flow volume, hepatic arterial peak systolic velocity, hepatic arterial pulsatility index, hepatic venous maximum velocity, hepatic venous pulsatility index, and splenic arterial pulsatility index were measured. Fourteen patients were diagnosed by biopsy to have clinically relevant AR. Markedly increased PVV was seen soon after surgery and gradually decreased in both patients with clinically relevant AR and patients without clinically relevant AR. This serial change of decreasing PVV was significantly greater in patients with clinically relevant AR (P < 0.0001). After postoperative day 6, the PVV in patients with clinically relevant AR was significantly lower than that in patients without clinically relevant AR (PVV on postoperative day 6: 35.6 ± 21.3 versus 58.3 ± 27.1 cm/second, respectively, P = 0.0080). A PVV cutoff value of 20.2 cm/second demonstrated the best accuracy for predicting clinically relevant AR. The sensitivity and specificity for predicting clinically relevant AR were 92.9% and 87.1%, respectively. The area under the curve was 0.94. In conclusion, serial Doppler measurement of hepatic parameters in LDLT is useful for the diagnosis of clinically relevant AR. Clinically relevant AR should therefore be suspected when a marked unexpected decrease in the PVV is observed. Liver Transpl 15:1119–1125, 2009. © 2009 AASLD.

[1]  M. Rugge,et al.  Acute liver rejection: accuracy and predictive values of doppler US measurements--initial experience. , 2005, Radiology.

[2]  H. Sugimoto,et al.  Critical progressive small-graft injury caused by intrasinusoidal pressure elevation following living donor liver transplantation. , 2004, Transplantation proceedings.

[3]  J. McCall,et al.  The natural history of acute histologic rejection without biochemical graft dysfunction in orthotopic liver transplantation: A systematic review , 2002, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[4]  H. Sugimoto,et al.  Qualitative and quantitative analysis of portal Doppler waveform and a novel factor of portal pulsatility: Systolic spike wave , 2002, Journal of Medical Ultrasonics.

[5]  H. Sugimoto,et al.  The use of quantitative Doppler ultrasonography to predict posthepatectomy complications on the basis of hepatic hemodynamic parameters. , 2002, Surgery.

[6]  H. Sugimoto,et al.  Simultaneous Doppler measurement of portal venous peak velocity, hepatic arterial peak velocity, and splenic arterial pulsatility index for assessment of hepatic circulation. , 2002, Hepato-gastroenterology.

[7]  H. Sugimoto,et al.  Reversal of portal flow after acute rejection in living-donor liver transplantation. , 2001, Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery.

[8]  K. Kowdley,et al.  Infection complicating percutaneous liver biopsy in liver transplant recipients , 1997, Hepatology.

[9]  M. Zoli,et al.  Interobserver and interequipment variability of hepatic, splenic, and renal arterial Doppler resistance indices in normal subjects and patients with cirrhosis. , 1997, Journal of hepatology.

[10]  Randall G. Lee,et al.  Banff schema for grading liver allograft rejection: An international consensus document , 1997, Hepatology.

[11]  T. Kok,et al.  Changes in portal hemodynamics and acute rejection in the first 2 weeks after orthotopic liver transplantation. A prospective Doppler ultrasound study. , 1996, Investigative radiology.

[12]  G. Gerken,et al.  Duplex ultrasound in diagnosis and monitoring of liver transplant rejection , 1995, The Lancet.

[13]  R. Pichlmayr,et al.  Postoperative liver allograft dysfunction: the use of quantitative duplex Doppler signal analysis in adult liver transplant patients. , 1995, Bildgebung = Imaging.

[14]  G. Ferraioli,et al.  Interobserver and interquipment variability of echo‐doppler examination of the portal vein: Effect of a cooperative training program , 1995, Hepatology.

[15]  R. Merion,et al.  Biochemical and histopathological correlation in liver transplant: The first 180 days , 1992, Hepatology.

[16]  R. Wiesner,et al.  Complications of liver biopsy in liver transplant patients: Increased sepsis associated with choledochojejunostomy , 1991, Hepatology.

[17]  D. Wright,et al.  Preliminary report: hepatic vein doppler in the early diagnosis of acute liver transplant rejection , 1990, The Lancet.

[18]  H. Sugimoto,et al.  Normal hepatic hemodynamics during early postoperative period in recipients with adult live donor liver transplantation. , 2007, Transplantation proceedings.

[19]  D. Belli,et al.  Orthotopic liver transplants in children: change in hepatic venous Doppler wave pattern as an indicator of acute rejection. , 2003, Radiology.

[20]  M. Lucey,et al.  Acute cellular rejection after liver transplantation: variability, morbidity, and mortality. , 1995, Liver transplantation and surgery : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.