Young, Scott W.

ObjectivesTo determine whether renal transplant diagnoses substantially change when 2 biopsy sites are chosen and whether contrast‐enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has value for targeting the second site.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 40 patients undergoing ultrasound‐guided renal transplant biopsy within 2 years of transplant: 20, surveillance; and 20, for cause. A CEUS examination was performed to identify cortical regions with subjectively altered flow. One biopsy was performed at the operator‐preferred (primary) site regardless of CEUS findings. Another biopsy was done at a second location, either targeted to an area in which CEUS perfusion findings differed from the primary site (targeted) or at a random location (secondary) if no other area differed. Specimens were randomly labeled A or B; pathologists were blinded to the CEUS result and biopsy location. Location‐specific CEUS assessments were recorded. Pathologic results were compared, including acute and chronic Banff scores and any new findings from the targeted or secondary biopsy.ResultsForty patients were enrolled between January 2016 and December 2018. No location‐specific pathologic differences correlated with differences in CEUS assessments. The second biopsy provided additional information that changed management in 4 of 40 patients (10.0% [95% confidence interval, 2.8%–23.7%]). Major bleeding complications occurred in 3 of 40 (7.5%) patients.ConclusionsContrast‐enhanced ultrasound targeting was not useful. Major bleeding complications were higher than expected, possibly due to the additional biopsy away from the operator‐preferred location. Obtaining a second renal transplant biopsy from a substantially different area than the initial operator‐preferred location provided additional clinically useful information in 10% of patients.

ObjectivesThe study aim was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the uterine sliding sign in predicting deeply infiltrating endometriosis in the setting of non‐physician sonographers performing but not interpreting the maneuver. The impact of uterine sliding sign has not been previously demonstrated in this practice setting.MethodsPhysicians' remote interpretations of transvaginal ultrasound examinations in 2016, before uterine sliding sign, were compared to examinations in 2019 after addition of uterine sliding sign to determine the diagnostic rates. Surgical and histopathological results were reviewed to determine sensitivity and specificity of the respective exam techniques.ResultsTwo hundred eighty‐five transvaginal ultrasounds were performed in 2016 and 390 sliding sign ultrasounds in 2019. The number of deeply infiltrating endometriosis cases identified increased significantly from 2% to 6% during the study period (chi‐square, Fisher's exact test p = .012). The sensitivity and specificity of routine pelvic sonography for detecting deeply infiltrating endometriosis improved from 36%/94% to 68%/98%.ConclusionsUterine sliding sign videos should be included in the standard sonographic protocol for patients presenting with chronic pelvic pain, endometriosis history, or sonographic evidence of endometriosis in the setting of physicians interpreting sonographic images obtained by non‐physicians.

Intraoperative Transesophageal Echocardiography (TEE) during orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) is used to gather real-time information on cardiovascular function and intravascular volume status. We report a case where nonstandard TEE views were used to inspect the hepatic vasculature after allograft implantation. A 29-year-old male with secondary biliary cirrhosis with a MELD score of 20 underwent OLT using a liver from a 21-year-old brain-dead donor. Postreperfusion TEE, using the modified hepatic vein views, confirmed the presence of an inferior vena cava (IVC) suprahepatic anastomotic stenosis and hepatic vein and IVC thrombus resulting in hepatic venous outflow obstruction, allograft congestion, and hemodynamic instability. These nonstandard TEE images established the extent of suprahepatic caval outflow obstruction, in which intraoperative ultrasound was unable to definitively demonstrate. This guided real-time surgical decision-making in the postimplantation phase of the operation—ultimately leading to hepatic vein and IVC thrombectomy and revision of suprahepatic caval anastomosis.