Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 77514

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : July | Volume : 16 | Issue : 7 | Page : PC04 - PC09 Full Version

Predictive Factors for Preoperative Diagnosis and Management of Cystic Liver Lesions: A Six Years Single Centre Experience


Published: July 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/51612.16598
Tathagata Karan, Afroz I Bagwan, Arun Kasi, Prabhakaran Raju, Sugumar Chidambaranathan, OL Naganath Babu

1. Resident, Institute of Surgical Gastroenterology, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 2. Resident, Institute of Surgical Gastroenterology, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 3. Assistant Professor, Institute of Surgical Gastroenterology, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 4. Associate Professor, Institute of Surgical Gastroenterology, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 5. Professor, Institute of Surgical Gastroenterology, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 6. Professor and Director, Institute of Surgical Gastroenterology, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. OL Naganath Babu,
Karaneeswarar Koil St, Suriyampet, Saidapet, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail : naganathbabu@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Surgical management differs for different cystic lesions of liver. Various clinical, biochemical and radiological features are specific to a particular cystic liver lesion pathology and it’s associated complications. Preoperative diagnosis helps to select appropriate surgical approach and tailoring appropriate management.

Aim: To evaluate the clinical, biochemical, radiological predictive factors to differentiate between hydatid diseases, simple cyst of liver and biliary cystadenoma. Also to evaluate appropriate management for hydatid disease with cystobiliary communication.

Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted at Institute of Surgical Gastroenterology, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. Data were collected from 65 patients including 44 patients of hydatid disease, 13 patients of simple cyst, and 8 patients of biliary cystadenoma using a maintained database from January 2014 to December 2019 with a follow-up period up to December 2020 (mean follow-up of 47.06±24.37 months). Various parameters like presence of cholangitis, deranged liver function test, number of cystic lesion, presence of calcification, presence of septation with or without enhancement were assessed. Data were statistically analysed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Chi-square test.

Results: There were 44 (67.69%) females and 21 (32.31%) males in this study with mean age of 50.44±12.23 years. Though multiseptation was associated with 27 (61.36%) of hydatid cysts and 1 (7.69%) of atypical simple cyst, it was more specifically present in biliary cystadenoma 8 (100%). Presence of daughter cyst (n=24, 54.55%) in hydatid disease and multilobulated appearance (n=5, 62.5%) in biliary cystadenoma were strong predictors of diagnosis. Radical surgery was associated with significantly less postoperative bile leak than conservative surgery in patients of hydatid disease with cystobiliary communication.

Conclusion: Predictive factors can help to make preoperative diagnosis correctly. Radical surgery reduces postoperative bile leak in patients of hydatid disease with cystobiliary communication.

Keywords

Biliary cystadenoma, Cystobiliary communication, Hydatid cyst, Simple cyst

Incidence of cystic disease of liver has risen up from 5-18% due to advancement of imaging modalities (1). Commonly encountered cystic lesions which pose a diagnostic challenges are hydatid disease, simple cyst and polycystic liver disease, and intrahepatic biliary cystadenoma. Symptomatic simple cyst can be managed with deroofing of cyst (2), but biliary cystadenoma due to its premalignant condition (3) need to be excised completely. One of the most common complication of hydatid cyst is cystobiliary communication (4). Both radical and conservative surgeries have been described for hydatid disease with cystobiliary communication. As the management is different, it is of utmost importance to predict the preoperative diagnosis correctly (5).

Calcification of cyst, presence of multiseptation, enhancement of cyst wall, multilobulated appearance, multiple cystic lesions are among the few radiological features present in various cystic lesions of liver. Hydatid cyst with cystobiliary communication patient can present with cholangitis with altered Liver Function Test (LFT) (6). Seo JK et al., in their study had taken into account these various criteria of cystic liver lesions as well as presenting symptoms to differentiate between atypical simple cyst and biliary cystadenoma. Unlike them, in this study, along with the above two, more commonly found hydatid cyst disease was also included (6).

While laparoscopic liver resection for biliary cystadenoma needs expertise (7), laparoscopic deroofing for simple liver cyst is a common approach (1). Though there are literature evidences which suggest that hydatid cyst can be managed laparoscopically, chances of peritoneal spillage is more with laparoscopic approach (8). So, correct preoperative diagnosis is required to select an appropriate surgical approach with either laparoscopy or open procedure and tailoring management plan according to the pathology and their complications.

Hence, present study was planned to analyse the clinical, biochemical, radiological predictive factors of hydatid diseases, simple cyst of liver, biliary cystadenoma to reach a preoperative diagnosis and select an appropriate surgical management.

Material and Methods

This retrospective study was conducted at Institute of Surgical Gastroenterology, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. This study was planned in January 2021 and all cystic liver disease patients operated between January 2014 to December 2019 were analysed. As it is a retrospective study, Ethical Committee clearance was not taken.

Inclusion criteria: All the patients who presented with symptoms of cystic lesion of liver such as pain, jaundice or presence of cholangitis, who were operated within the study period, were included in this study.

Exclusion criteria: Asymptomatic patients with incidental findings of liver cyst who had not been operated, were not included in this study.
A total of 65 patients were included, who presented within the study duration. Data were collected from the institute maintained database from January 2014 to December 2019 and followed-up upto December 2020 (mean follow-up period 47.06±24.37 months). Data were analysed in terms of age, sex, associated symptoms, altered LFT (such as increase total bilirubin and liver enzymes), radiological findings (such as presence of calcification, septation, contrast enhancement of the septa, biliary radicals dilatation etc), operative findings (such as duration, blood loss, morbidity, mortality) and histopathology of excised cyst and postoperative follow-up till December 2020 for recurrence.

Study Procedure

In all patients final diagnosis was confirmed by pathological analysis. Cystic lesions in Ultrasonography (USG) were further characterised with contrast enhanced Computed Tomography (CT) scan and sometimes also with Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Patients with jaundice as presentation and sometimes atypical feature of cyst like non enhancing thickened cyst wall were better evaluated with MRI.

Patients with hydatid cyst were classified according to Gharbi classification (9). (type I- pure cystic fluid collection, type II- fluid collection with membrane detachment, type III- multiseptated, type IV- heterogenous, type V- thick calcified wall) and given atleast one week of Albendazole (400 mg twice a day) therapy to reduce cyst viability (10). Patients presented with features of severe cholangitis were managed with preoperative ERCP (Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography) sphincterotomy (11).

Intraoperatively, aspiration of cyst was done in 61 cases to reduce the intracystic pressure in controlled way. Four cases with strong preoperative clinical suspicion and imaging criteria suggestive of biliary cystadenoma were left out (in fear of tumour spillage from biliary cystadenocarcinoma). Both conservative surgery and radical surgery (5) were used in management of hydatid cyst. Radical surgery (Table/Fig 1) was used only in patients with cystobiliary communication (12). Intraoperatively normal saline cholangiography was done through exploration of CBD (Common Bile Duct) or cannulation through cystic duct after cholecystectyomy. Postoperative complications like bile leak were managed conservatively if bile leak was <50 mL for three days. Plan to ERCP or re-exploration was decided when conservative management failed (12). Patient selection and management plan is given in (Table/Fig 2).

According to Gigot’s classification (type I- limited number large cyst, type II- multiple medium size cyst with remaining large non cystic liver, type III-diffuse involvement of whole liver)- only type 1 and type 2 polycystic liver disease patients were taken up for the study (13). Simple cystic disease and polycystic disease patients become symptomatic with abdominal pain mainly due to intracystic haemorrhage, or hepatomegaly due to cyst enlargement. In both diseases, cysts were unilocular and have thin septa lined by cuboidal or columnar epithelium. In few cases simple liver cyst patients also had multiple small cysts.

Both patients of symptomatic simple cyst and polycystic liver disease were managed with laparoscopic cystic deroofing (14). With all above mentioned similar features of cystic lesion and similar management technique, both simple cyst and polycystic liver disease was counted and analysed as a single entity of simple cyst. All biliary cystadenoma patients were managed with open hepatic resection or enucleation (15) (Table/Fig 2).

No serum or intracystic fluid CA 19-9 analysis has been done routinely as they provided no significant difference between biliary cystadenoma and simple cyst (6). Total bilirubin >2 mg/dL and Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP) value >130 IU/L were considered as raised values. Cyst located near hilum (seg 4),(seg 5) and left lobe of liver (seg 2),seg 3),(seg 4) were also counted and analysed as a whole for statistical analysis (16).

Statistical Analysis

Continuous variable were expressed as mean±SD. The ANOVA tests, Pearson’s Chi-square test were used wherever appropriate. The p-value <0.05 was considered to be significant. Logistic regression model was used to calculate the odds ratio. Statistical analysis was performed in EPI INFOTM version 7.2.3.0.

Results

There were 44 patients of hydatid cyst, 13 patients of simple cyst (both simple cyst and polycystic disease patients were counted as a single entity), 8 patients of biliary cystadenoma were included in this study. Mean age of patients was 50.44±12.23 years. Total 26 (59.09%) patients of hydatid disease, 10 (76.92%) patients of simple cyst and all biliary cystadenoma 8 (100%) patients were female (p=0.193). Pain abdomen was present in almost all patients (n=64). Fever (n=19, 43.18%) and jaundice (n=9, 20.45%) was present in patients of hydatid disease only. Only 30.23% hydatid disease patients were having altered LFT with mean total bilirubin 1.67±2.77 mg/dL (p=0.317), and ALP 159.06±145.43 IU/L (p=0.08) (Table/Fig 3).

After USG, 95.38% (n=62) and 43.08% patients were further evaluated with contrast enhanced CT and MRI respectively. Mean cyst size was 10.78±4.65 cm for hydatid cyst, 15.22±5.21 cm for simple cyst, 12.12±5.81 cm for biliary cystadenoma (p=0.0212). Most of the hydatid cyst 27 (61.36%) and simple cyst 8 (61.54%) patients involved right lobe of liver while all of biliary cystadenoma 8 (100%) were present in left lobe of liver. There was single cystic lesion in all biliary cystadenoma patients (p=0.01). Some imaging characteristics appeared to be highly specific to a specific diagnosis and were not found in others, like daughter cyst (n=24, 54.55%), capsule breach (n=7, 15.91%) and intracystic floating membrane (n=19, 43.18%) in hydatid disease. Similarly multilobulated appearance (Table/Fig 4) of cyst was present only in biliary cystadenoma patients (n=5, 62.5%). Common features among the pathologies were multiseptation, presence of calcification; enhancement in contrast; IHBRD (Intrahepatic Biliary Radical Dilatation), internal debris and thick septa (Table/Fig 5).

Common imaging features which were statistically significant in initial Chi-square test were analysed with univariate and multivariate logistic regression model. Some features were completely absent or present in all cases of a specific pathology, were not included in regression analysis. With this analysis it was found that increase in total bilirubin {Odds Ratio (OR)-26.02)} and calcification (OR-3.61) in imaging studies were strongly associated with hydatid cyst, whereas most of simple cyst patients had symptoms of early satiety (OR- 8.05) and multiple cystic lesion (OR- 6.57) in imaging studies. Thick septa (OR-10.723) and contrast enhancement (OR-10.72) were found to be strong features of biliary cystadenoma (Table/Fig 6).

Intraoperatively, presence of bile staining of cyst content (n=17, 38.63%) or turbid, whitish colour fluid (n=22, 50%) was strongly suggestive of hydatid cyst (p≤0.01). Conservative management (cyst deroofing and omentoplasty) was done in 35 patients of hydatid disease. All patients of simple cyst were managed with cystic deroofing. Cystopericystectomy was done for three patients of hydatid disease, while hepatic resection was carried out in six patients. Three patients of biliary cystadenoma were managed with enucleation of cyst (15) and hepatic resection was done for another five patients. Intraoperatively bile leakage was present from excise cyst wall margin in one patient of simple cyst, which was suture ligated. Postoperatively 11 (25%) patients of hydatid cyst and one patient of biliary cystadenoma developed bile leak. Four patients were managed conservatively, while ERCP was done for five patients (four patients of hydatid disease, one patients of biliary cystadenoma). Re-exploration was done for three patients of hydatid cyst- with fistulojejunostomy for one patient, CBD exploration and T tube drainage for one patient and external drainage for one patient. Blood loss (518.75±196.28 mL), duration of surgery (227.5±55.22 mins) and length of stay (9.75±1.75 days) was significantly more in biliary cystadenoma group (p≤0.01). Two patients of hydatid disease with pre existing chronic liver disease and one hydatid disease patient with cholangitis died in postoperative period. One patient of biliary cystadenoma died due to postoperative pulmonary complications (Table/Fig 7).

Hydatid cyst with cystobiliary communication was diagnosed in 27 patients. Two patients presented with cholangitis and underwent ERCP. In ERCP it was found to have communication with cystic cavity. (Table/Fig 8) Seventeen (62.96%) patients were detected to have cystobiliary communication intraoperatively with the findings of bile staining of content, or bile or saline leakage in normal saline cholangiogram. Among the 11 patients of hydatid cyst with postoperative bile leakage, eight patients were not having any preoperative or intraoperative findings of communication and only detected to have cystobiliary communication postoperatively. Most of the patients of hydatid cyst with cystobiliary communications were female (n=15, 55.55%) and presented with fever (59.26%) and altered liver function test results. On radiological imaging mean size was12.30±4.59 cm. Most of the cyst belonged to Gharbi type 3 class and there were significant presence of dilated common bile duct (n=7), atrophy hypertrophy complex of liver (n=13) and capsular breach of cyst wall (n=7) (Table/Fig 9).

Eighteen patients were managed by conservative surgery including suture ligation of cystobiliary communication and among those 18 patients, associated T-tube drainage of CBD were done in 15 patients. Postoperative bile leak was significantly less with radical surgery (p=0.04) but blood loss (550±277.26 mL) and operative duration (255.55±57.90 mins) were significantly more. Although hospital stays and mortality rate, recurrence rate were not significantly different (Table/Fig 10).

Discussion

Incidence of symptomatic simple cyst is uncommon before 40 years. Adults more than 50 years present with larger cysts and are more symptomatic than the younger ones. Also incidence of symptomatic or complicated simple cyst is more in females (9:1) (17). Biliary cystadenoma were generally observed in women of above 40 years (3). This neoplasm is slowly progressing, so it gradually increases in size and becomes symptomatic with abdominal distension and pain (18). In this study also, 100% of biliary cystadenoma and 76.92% of simple cyst patients were females in their late 40s age with a mean size of more than 12 cm.

Abdominal pain was associated with all patients who presented with hydatid disease in a study done by Mansy W et al., which was similar to present study (8). Patients with simple cyst are usually asymptomatic in nature and may present with abdominal pain (80%) due to intracystic haemorrhage (Fong ZV et al.,) (19), hepatomegaly and early satiety (Everson GT) (20). In this study both hepatomegaly (p=0.007), abdominal distension (p=0.008) and early satiety (multivariate OR- 4.26) were significantly associated with simple cyst. Though presence of fever and jaundice could be seen with simple cyst or biliary cystadenoma (6), we have not found any. In our study, patients of hydatid disease who had presented with fever, increased total bilirubin and ALP values, hepatomegaly, serology positivity, cyst size >12 cm, and presence of atrophy- hypertrophy complex were significantly associated with cystobiliary communication, which was similar to the findings described by Saylam B et al., (21).

Hydatid cyst or simple cyst can present as single or multiple cysts in both lobes but biliary cystadenoma patients almost exclusively present as a single cyst in left lobe. Presence of daughter cysts or intracystic floating membrane was highly suggestive of hydatid cyst. Though most of the simple cyst can be clearly identified in USG, atypical simple cyst/ intracystic haemorrhage can present as multiseptated, thick wall, mural nodule, intra cystic debris due to clotted blood, and enhancement in contrast studies (22). These features were found to be present in all three pathologies and with univariate logistic regression analysis multiseptation (OR-2.11) and calcification (OR-13.84), and in multivariate analysis, only presence of calcification (OR-3.01) was found to be strongly associated with hydatid cyst. Multilobulated appearance (62.5%) and multiseptation (100%) were very specific to biliary cystadenoma. In multivariate regression analysis, contrast enhancement, thick septa was found to be associated with biliary cystadenoma. We have not found any association of presence of IHBRD with biliary cystadenoma unlike Seo JK et al., (6).

Intraoperatively, before proceeding with excision, cyst fluid aspiration helps in diagnosis. Presence of turbid or whitish fluid is suggestive of hydatid disease. Bilious and pus aspiration indicate cystobiliary communication (23). Generally simple cyst contains clear fluid which can be brownish in colour due to intracystic haemorrhage (19). The CT scan can detect major cystobiliary communication, but miss minor communications. The ERCP is ineffective to detect cystobiliary communication because of high intracystic pressure, (23) though the authors found in two cases.

Laparoscopic approach of cystic deroofing for simple cyst is standard and simple, though for posteriorly situated cyst (seg 6,7), open approach is better due to technical difficulties. The authors had also followed the same for one patient with posteriorly located cyst. As the biliary radicals are compressed at the periphery by the enlarged cyst, chances of bile leak is present after partial excision of cyst wall. Careful inspection of cyst wall and suture ligation should be done if any bile leak is found. Hepatic resection as well as enucleation(15) is adequate for biliary cystadenoma to remove the cyst completely. According to Jerraya H et al., (24) laparoscopic approach in hydatid cyst was associated with cyst rupture and increased recurrence. Contradictory to that, Palanivelu C et al., (25) showed successful laparoscopic management of hydatid cyst without any spillage or recurrence. Three cases of hydatid cyst in our study were also managed laparoscopically and there was no recurrence.

As described by Akbulut et al., the authors have also specified the criteria for liver resection in hydatid disease (5). Hydatid cyst with cystobiliary communication, large cyst replaced 2-3 segments of liver, cyst present in left lateral segment, presence of atrophy hypertrophy complex, and patients without co-morbidities were taken for liver resection. Though radical surgery was associated with more intraoperative blood loss and operative duration than conservative surgery, it was associated with significantly less postoperative bile leak (5). We did not find any significant differences in hospital stay and recurrence between these two.

Limitation(s)

There was less number of patients in simple cyst and biliary cystadenoma group. With more number of patients, radiological imaging features correlation between three groups would have been better. Also longer follow-up period would reveal more recurrence.

Conclusion

Patients presenting with fever, high total bilirubin, presence of daughter cyst, intracystic floating membrane, and calcification in imaging studies were found to be highly specific for hydatid disease. Presence of multiseptation, multilobulated appearance, thick septa and enhancement in contrast studies can accurately distinguish biliary cystadenoma from atypical simple cyst of liver. Multiple cystic lesions are most commonly associated with simple cyst and polycystic liver disease. Large cyst >12 cm, altered LFT, presence of cholangitis, latex agglutination seropositivity, presence of dilated CBD and atrophy-hypertrophy complex in imaging features signify presence of cystobiliary communication in hydatid cyst. Radical surgery significantly reduced incidence of postoperative bile leak at the cost of increased operative morbidity.

References

1.
Antonacci N, Ricci C, Taffurelli G, Casadei R, Minni F. Systematic review of laparoscopic versus open surgery in the treatment of non-parasitic liver cysts. Updat Surg. 2014;66(4):231-38. [crossref][PubMed]
2.
Wahba R, Kleinert R, Prenzel K, Bangard C, Hölscher AH, Stippel DL. Laparoscopic deroofing of nonparasitic liver cysts with or without greater omentum flap. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2011;21(1):54-58. [crossref][PubMed]
3.
Soares KC, Arnaoutakis DJ, Kamel I. Cystic neoplasms of the liver: Biliary cystadenoma and cystadenocarcinoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218(1):119-28. [crossref][PubMed]
4.
Reddy AD Thota A. Cysto-biliary communication (CBC) in hepatic hydatidosis: Predictors, management and outcome. Int Surg J. 2019;6(1):61-65. [crossref]
5.
Akbulut S, Senol A, Sezgin A, Cakabay B, Dursun M, Satici O. Radical vs conservative surgery for hydatid liver cysts: Experience from single center. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16(8):953-59. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Seo JK, Kim SH, Lee SH. Appropriate diagnosis of biliary cystic tumors: Comparison with atypical hepatic simple cysts. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;22(8):989-96. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Ratti F, Ferla F, Paganelli M, Cipriani F, Aldrighetti L, Ferla G. Biliary cystadenoma: Short- and long-term outcome after radical hepatic resection. Updat Surg. 2012;64(1):13-18. [crossref][PubMed]
8.
Mansy W, Mohamed M, Saber S. Outcomes of radical surgical management in liver hydatid cysts: 7 years center experience. Mini-Invasive Surg [Internet]. 2018;2(36). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2574-1225.2018.48. [crossref]
9.
Gharbi HA, Hassine W, Brauner MW, Dupuch K. Ultrasound examination of the hydatic liver. Radiology. 1981;139(2):459-63. [crossref][PubMed]
10.
Arif SH, Shams-ul-Bari, Wani NA, Zargar SA, Wani MA, Tabassum R, et al. Albendazole as an adjuvant to the standard surgical management of hydatid cyst liver. Int J Surg. 2008;6(6):448-51. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Manouras A, Genetzakis M, Antonakis PT. Endoscopic management of a relapsing hepatic hydatid cyst with intrabiliary rupture: A case report and review of the literature. Can J Gastroenterol. 2007;21(4):249-53. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Agarwal S, Sikora SS, Kumar A, Saxena R, Kapoor VK. Bile leaks following surgery for hepatic hydatid disease. Indian J Gastroenterol. 2005;24(2):55-58. PMID:15879650.
13.
Macedo FI. Current management of noninfectious hepatic cystic lesions: A review of the literature. World J Hepatol. 2013;5(9):462. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Giuliante F, D’Acapito F, Vellone M, Giovannini I, Nuzzo G. Risk for laparoscopic fenestration of liver cysts. Surg Endosc. 2003;17(11):1735-38. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Thomas KT, Welch D, Trueblood A, Sulur P, Wise P, Gorden DL, et al. Effective Treatment of Biliary Cystadenoma. Ann Surg. 2005;241(5):769-75. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Kayaalp C, Bostanci B, Yol S, Akoglu M. Distribution of hydatid cysts into the liver with reference to cystobiliary communications and cavity-related complications. Am J Surg. 2003;185(2):175-79. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Blumgart’s Surgery of The Liver, Biliary Tract, and Pancreas 6 ed 2017 2 vols 2401 pag PDF | Doctor Of Medicine | Medicine. Scribd. [cited 2021 Jul 15]. Available from: https://www.scribd.com/document/386137786/Blumgart-s-Surgery-of-the-Liver-Biliary-Tract-and-Pancreas-6Ed-2017-2vols-2401pag-pdf.
18.
Akwari OE, Tucker A, Seigler HF, Itani KM. Hepatobiliary cystadenoma with mesenchymal stroma. Ann Surg. 1990;211(1):18-27. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Fong ZV, Wolf AM, Doria C, Berger AC, Rosato EL, Palazzo F. Hemorrhagic hepatic cyst: Report of a case and review of the literature with emphasis on clinical approach and management. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(9):1782-89. [crossref][PubMed]
20.
Everson GT. Polycystic liver disease. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;4(3):179-81.
21.
Saylam B, Cos¸ kun F, Demiriz B, Vural V, Çomçali B, Tez M. A new and simple score for predicting cystobiliary fistula in patients with hepatic hydatid cysts. Surgery. 2013;153(5):699-704. [crossref][PubMed]
22.
Mavilia MG, Pakala T, Molina M, Wu GY. Differentiating cystic liver lesions: A review of imaging modalities. Diagn Manag J Clin Transl Hepatol. 2018;6(2):208-16.[crossref][PubMed]
23.
Chopra N, Gupta V, Rahul. Liver hydatid cyst with cystobiliary communication: Laparoscopic surgery remains an effective option. J Minim Access Surg. 2018;14(3):230-35. [crossref][PubMed]
24.
Jerraya H, Khalfallah M, Osman SB, Nouira R, Dziri C. Predictive factors of recurrence after surgical treatment for liver hydatid cyst. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(1):86-93. [crossref][PubMed]
25.
Palanivelu C, Senthilkumar R, Jani K, Rajan PS, Sendhilkumar K, Parthasarthi R, et al. Palanivelu hydatid system for safe and efficacious laparoscopic management of hepatic hydatid disease. Surg Endosc. 2006;20(12):1909-13.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/51612.16598

Date of Submission: Jul 28, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Oct 25, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Apr 15, 2022
Date of Publishing: Jul 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? No
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jul 29, 2021
• Manual Googling: Apr 14, 2022
• iThenticate Software: May 16, 2022 (12%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com