A comparison of lymphatic embolization and sclerotherapy in the management of iatrogenic abdominopelvic lymphoceles following oncological surgery

PURPOSETo compare the safety and efficacy of sclerotherapy and lymphatic embolization (LE) in the treatment of symptomatic iatrogenic lymphoceles following the placement of a percutaneous drainage catheter.METHODSThis is a retrospective study of 46 patients who underwent sclerotherapy (17 patients) or LE (29 patients) for the management of symptomatic iatrogenic lymphoceles following percutaneous drain placement between January 2017 and December 2021. The demographic characteristics, time between surgery and lymphatic intervention, clinical presentation, number of procedures, drain output pre- and post-intervention, time from intervention to drain removal, and adverse events were collected and compared for both groups. The clinical success rate, defined as the successful removal of the drain after one procedure, was calculated. Adverse events were reported according to the Society of Interventional Radiology classification. A statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS, and the P value for statistical significance was set at 0.05. The Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare differences in the scale variables, and Fisher’s exact test was used to compare the categorical and ordinal variables between both groups.RESULTSA total of 46 patients with 49 lymphoceles met the inclusion criteria of the study. Of these patients, 17 patients (19 lymphoceles) underwent sclerotherapy, and 29 patients (30 lymphoceles) underwent LE as their initial procedures. The clinical success after one procedure was significantly higher (83% vs. 47%, P = 0.011), and the median time between the first intervention and drain removal was significantly shorter in the LE group (median duration of 6 vs. 13 days, P = 0.018) compared with the sclerotherapy group. No statistically significant difference in adverse events was noted between both groups (0.26 vs. 0.10, P = 0.11).CONCLUSIONThis study found that LE had a higher clinical success rate after the first procedure and a shorter time to drain removal compared with sclerotherapy. There was no difference in the rate of adverse events between both groups. Although LE is a safe and promising technique, a prospective study is needed to further compare the efficacy of both treatment modalities

Trans biliary proximal and distal coil embolization of an arteriobiliary fistula: report of a case and review of literature

Abstract Background Hepatic arterial injury is an uncommon complication of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage interventions that commonly presents with hemobilia and peri catheter hemorrhage. It is classically managed with antegrade trans arterial embolization. However, this approach may not be possible due to altered anatomy and alternative techniques need to be considered. We report a case of an arteriobiliary fistula which was successfully coil embolized both distal and proximal to the lesion using a trans biliary approach. This is the first report of such method and interventionalists should be aware of this option. The literature is reviewed. Case presentation We report a case of a 49-year-old male with advanced colorectal cancer presented with cholangitis. His duodenal anatomy precludes endoscopic intervention, so he underwent percutaneous biliary drainage complicated by intractable hemobilia and pericatheter bleeding. Hepatic arterial anatomy evaluated by two catheter angiographies was shown to be isolated at multiple levels by tumors and prohibited antegrade access of bleeding artery for embolization. Sheath cholangiography revealed an arteriobiliary fistula involving left hepatic arterial branches. The arterial injury was successfully treated by coil embolization distal and proximal to the lesion via a retrograde trans biliary approach, with complete resolution of hemobilia. Conclusion Trans biliary proximal and distal coil embolization is a newly reported approach for treating biliary hemorrhage when traditional antegrade arterial embolization is not feasible due to preclusive anatomic factors. Interventionalists should be familiar with this management option