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

Users Online : 70157

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
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,
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,
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
(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)
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.
On April 2011

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
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2021 | Month : August | Volume : 15 | Issue : 8 | Page : TC04 - TC09 Full Version

A Study of Anatomical Pattern of Inferior Phrenic Artery using Multidetector CT

Published: August 1, 2021 | DOI:
Anil Kumar Singh, Archna Gupta, Zafar Neyaz, Prabhakar Mishra

1. Assistant Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. 2. Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. 3. Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. 4. Associate Professor, Department of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Anil Kumar Singh,
Assistant Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate
Institute of Medical Sciences, Raebareli Road, Lucknow-226014, Uttar Pradesh, India.


Introduction: Inferior Phrenic Artery (IPA), though a small artery, is important from several points of view. Apart from being arterial supply to normal structures, it is also involved in many pathological conditions such as tumours, haemoptysis, gastroesophageal bleeding and traumatic conditions where interventional radiology or surgery play an important role in management. A preprocedure idea about variations in its anatomical pattern may help better treatment planning and minimise morbidity.

Aim: To study variations in anatomical pattern of IPA in terms of vessel of origin, vertebral level of origin and diameter of IPA using Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT).

Materials and Methods: The present study was a cross-sectional study conducted in Department of Radiodiagnosis, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. A retrospective analysis of CT angiography or Triple phase CT abdomen studies of 200 adult patients (M:F 119:81) performed during December 2020 to April 2021 was done to look for anatomical pattern variations in IPA. Vessel of origin and level of origin were recorded. Diameters of IPAs were also recorded and statistical analysis was done.

Results: Common Inferior Phrenic Artery (CIPA) was seen in 23% cases, with independent Right and Left Inferior Phrenic artery (RIPA and LIPA) in remaining 77%. Vessels of origin for CIPA were aorta (n=27; 58.7%), celiac trunk (n=16; 34.8%) and right Main Renal Artery (right MRA) (n=3; 6.5%); for RIPA, celiac trunk (n=69; 44.8%), aorta (n=57; 37.01%), right MRA (n=23;14.94%), Left Gastric Artery (LGA) (n=5; 3.25%), and for LIPA, celiac trunk (n=97; 63%), aorta (n=53; 34.4%), left MRA (n=2; 1.3%) and LGA (n=2; 1.3%), respectively. Level of origin from aorta for RIPA was L1>T12>T12/L1 disc>others; LIPA, T12>T12/L1>L1>others; celiac trunk, T12>L1>T12/L1 disc>others. Mean diameters of apparently normal RIPA and LIPA were 1.75 mm and 1.76 mm, respectively.

Conclusion: The most common vessels of origin for CIPA, RIPA and LIPA were abdominal aorta (58.7%), celiac trunk (44.8%) and celiac trunk (63%), respectively. The predominant vertebral levels of origin for CIPA, RIPA and LIPA arising from aorta were T12, L1, and T12 respectively, and for celiac trunk T12. The mean diameter of IPA was found to be greatest in cirrhotic group followed by chronic pancreatitis and apparently normal IPA group, but not statistically significant. These can be efficiently and readily demonstrated by CT angiography or arterial phase of multiphasic CT study.


Abdominal aorta, Celiac trunk, CT angiography, Left gastric artery, Main renal artery, Multiphasic computed tomography

The IPA though small branch of Abdominal Aorta (AA) or its branches, is important from several points of view. It serves as main arterial supply to diaphragm. It also gives branches to oesophagus, stomach, liver, adrenals and retroperitoneum (1). In recent times, there has been special focus on its role as feeding artery in patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) and implications in management of this tumour (trans-arterial chemoembolisation, TACE) (2),(3),(4),(5). IPA may also supply other tumours in adjoining thoraco-abdominal regions (6),(7). It is also one of the commonly hypertrophied arteries in patients with lung diseases who present with haemoptysis, especially those with lower lobe lung diseases such as tuberculosis and bronchiectasis (8),(9). Both in cases of haemoptysis and tumours where IPA is involved, endovascular embolisation therapy is important tool in management. Its anatomy is also important from surgical point of view. Variations are noted in different aspects of anatomical pattern of IPA i.e. vessel of origin, vertebral level of origin and diameter. A beforehand knowledge of these variations facilitates the surgical explorations or interventional radiological procedures. Aslaner R et al., conducted a research on variations in the origin of IPA and their relationship to celiac axis (3). Szewczyk B et al., described types of IPA depending on their origin pattern (10). Many other studies have been published regarding these variations, but majority of these focus on vessel of origin for IPA (1),(4),(5),(11),(12),(13),(14). Literature on vertebral level of origin and diameter of IPA is very sparse. As the scope of treatment options employing IPA as target or conduit (especially interventional radiological procedures) is increasing, a composite knowledge of all these aspects of anatomy of IPA allows better exploration of artery or endovascular intervention via it. The aim of the present study was to study variations in all these aspects of anatomical pattern of IPA using CT angiography or multiphasic CT studies done on MDCT scanner.

Material and Methods

The present study was a retrospective cross-sectional study which was conducted in Department of Radiodiagnosis, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India, the study was conducted after obtaining Ethical Committee approval with Letter number-PGI/BE/1430/2021. The study focused at studying different origin patterns of IPA and diameter of this artery. Patient population included 200 adult patients (M: 119, F:81) in age range of 18-88 years (mean 45.88 years).

Inclusion criteria: CT angiography or Multiphasic CT abdomen studies of patients aged 18 years or more were included.

Exclusion criteria:

• Significant aortic atherosclerosis limiting visualisation ostium,
• Motion artifacts leading to suboptimal evaluation,
• For diameter evaluation, cases with IPA seen as tumour feeding vessel or ambiguity regarding this status were excluded.

Study Procedure

A retrospective analysis of 200 CT angiography/Multiphasic CT abdomen studies was done by two radiologists having total work experience of >9 years and >15 years. Analysed cases included studies done for varying abdominal indications, between December 2020 to April 2021 and data was analysed in the month of May 2021. All these included cases were performed on a 64-slice MDCT scanner (Brilliance CT, Philips Medical Systems, Cleveland, OH) or 128 slice MDCT scanner (Ingenuity CT, Philips Medical Systems, Cleveland, OH). In all cases non ionic water soluble iodinated contrast was used, administered intravenously using pressure injector.

Arterial phase CT images were analysed in axial, coronal, sagittal and oblique reformatted planes as required using Multiplanar Reformats (MPRs) as well as Maximum Intensity Projection (MIP) viewing modes. Three dimensional (3D) volume rendered reformats (VRT images) were also made in some cases. Origin pattern and diameters of IPA were recorded. Origin was described as from AA, celiac trunk, right or left main renal artery (MRA), LGA and other if any. Level of origin was defined in terms of vertebral level (upper, mid, lower vertebral body level e.g. L1-U, L1-M, L1-L or disc level eg. T12/L1). Level of origin was described for IPA itself if it was originating directly from aorta, or for aortic branch giving off IPA. IPA take off from aorta was described as anterior/midline, Anterolateral Quadrant (ALQ), lateral, and Posterolateral Quadrant (PLQ) along aortic circumference.

Cases were categorised into three groups: 1) Where IPA was clearly non tumoural vessel, or lesion was in unrelated location, or study was normal; 2) Those with cirrhotic liver; 3) Those with chronic pancreatitis. Chronic pancreatitis subgroup was made keeping in mind chronic retroperitoneal inflammatory changes.

Diameter of RIPA and LIPA was measured in proximal 2.0 cm segment. If there was any common trunk of origin (CIPA) leading to right and left branch, it was recorded. Vessel of origin along with length and diameter of CIPA was also recorded. Accessory IPA, if any, or IPA giving off any accessory artery was documented.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was done for all three variables ie. vessel of origin, level of origin and diameter of IPA. Chi-square test, independent sample t-test and Fischer exact test were used. The p-value <0.05 was taken as statistically significant.


It was possible to visualise IPA in all cases. Of total 200 cases, in 46 cases (23%) there was CIPA which gave off RIPA and LIPA. In remaining 154 cases (77%), RIPA and LIPA were found to arise independently without CIPA. Vessels of origin for CIPA, LIPA and RIPA ie. AA, celiac trunk, MRA and LGA, are given in (Table/Fig 1). Comparison was also done for male and female groups (Table/Fig 2).

In (Table/Fig 3), vessel of origin for IPA has been shown as per cases (n=200). In 84 cases RIPA was arising directly from aorta or via CIPA from aorta; this pattern was noted in 80 cases for LIPA. (Table/Fig 4)a-d, (Table/Fig 5)a,b. For IPA arising directly from aorta, location of origin along aortic circumference is given in (Table/Fig 6). Most common circumferential location was ALQ (52.55%), followed by anterior-midline (30.65%), lateral (14.6%), and PLQ (2.2%). For RIPA and LIPA, locations were anterior-midline to ipsilateral side. For 27 CIPAs arising directly from aorta, locations were anterior-midline (48.15%), right ALQ (18.5%), left ALQ (29.6%) and left lateral (3.7%).

For RIPA arising from celiac trunk (n=85), directly or via CIPA, pattern of origin was as a branch of CIPA (16), one of two branches (58) or single one side branch (11); whereas this pattern for LIPA (n=113) was as a branch of CIPA (16), one of two branches (58) or single one side branch (39). Overall, total 124 celiac trunks were giving off IPA (celiac trunks giving off CIPA or both RIPA and LIPA counted once, along with celiac trunks giving off only RIPA or LIPA). In four cases, celiac trunk was giving off LGA which gave off IPA (2 RIPA, 2 LIPA) (Table/Fig 5)b, (Table/Fig 7)a-f.

In 26 cases, right MRA was giving off RIPA as single branch (23) or one of two branches via a CIPA (3). On left side, IPA was found to be one of two branches of CIPA from right MRA in three cases, and directly from left MRA in two cases (Table/Fig 8)a,b. LGA was vessel of origin for RIPA in five cases (in three LGA arising from aorta, and in two from celiac trunk) and LIPA in 2 cases (LGA arising from celiac trunk in both) (Table/Fig 9)a-c.

Vertebral level of origin for IPAs arising directly from abdominal aorta and for aortic branches giving off IPAs is shown in (Table/Fig 10). Among all cases of IPAs arising directly from aorta at T12 level, T12 sublevel was 49.06% at T12-M (mid-vertebral), 32.07% at T12-L (lower vertebral body), and 18.87% at T12-U (upper vertebral body). Similarly, for celiac trunks arising at T12 level, T12 sublevel was T12-M (44.44%), T12 -L (38.88%) & T12-U (16.68%). Diameters of IPA in different subgroups i.e. apparently normal IPA, IPA in patients with cirrhosis and chronic pancreatitis, are given in (Table/Fig 11).

In apparently normal IPA subgroup (n=157), mean diameters of RIPA and LIPA (also including RIPA and LIPA arising from CIPA) were 1.8 and 1.81 mm in males (n=90), and 1.67 and 1.8 mm in females (n=67), respectively with differences being statistically significant (p<0.05).

Mean diameter of apparently normal CIPA was 2.12 mm (range 1.4-2.9 mm). Differences between CIPA and RIPA, and CIPA and LIPA were statistically significant (Table/Fig 12). In four cases with cirrhosis and four cases with chronic pancreatitis mean CIPA diameters were 2.05 mm (range 1.6-2.5 mm) and 2.13 mm (range 1.8-2.3 mm) respectively.

Of 46 cases with CIPA, mean length of CIPA was 10.15 mm (range 1.8-60 mm); 25 of these having length <5 mm.

Branching pattern of IPA which could be visualised in majority of cases was branching of RIPA into medial and lateral divisions along upper part of right diaphragmatic crus (n=188; 94%), and that of LIPA along left diaphragmatic surface into anterior and posterior branch or multiple branches (n=174; 87%) (Table/Fig 13)a-e. Smaller branches were not readily visible and a detailed analysis was not done as part of this study. In some cases, adrenal branches could be visualised. In one case, LIPA was giving off accessory splenic artery to upper pole of spleen.

In three cases, there were two LIPAs in each (anterior and posterior LIPA). Anterior and posterior LIPA were arising respectively from aorta and RIPA, LGA and celiac trunk, and celiac trunk and abdominal aorta. Dominant one with larger calibre was taken for statistical analysis. In all these cases, posterior LIPA was of smaller calibre (Table/Fig 9)b,c, (Table/Fig 13)c. Among 200 cases, there were seven cases of HCC. One case with large right lobe HCC was having RIPA as feeding vessel, in addition to supply by right hepatic artery (RHA) (Table/Fig 14)a,b.


Literature on anatomical pattern of IPA is sparse. Most of the literature works focus on vessel of origin of IPA, with data on vertebral level of origin and diameter of IPAs being even more sparse. Present study attempts to discuss all these three points.

Many studies have described aorta and celiac trunk as vessels commonly giving off IPAs which can arise as CIPA or independent RIPA and LIPA. Less commonly, IPAs also arise from MRA, LGA, hepatic artery and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) (1),(2),(3),(4).

Szewczyk B et al., in their study described six types of origin of IPA. Type 1-RIPA and LIPA originating from AA. Type 2-RIPA and the LIPA from the celiac trunk. Type 3-RIPA and the LIPA from left gastric artery. Type 4-4A: LIPA from AA, and RIPA from celiac trunk; 4B: RIPA from the AA and LIPA from celiac trunk. Type 5-LIPA from AA and RIPA from the accessory hepatic artery. Type 6-RIPA and LIPA forming a common trunk which originates from the AA. (10). In their study, type-1 was most common followed by type-2 and other types. In present study, type 2 was seen as most common pattern followed by type 1 and others. In classification proposed by Szewczyk et al., type-3 was mentioned as IPA arising from LGA with no visualisation of celiac trunk. In present study there were cases with IPA arising from LGA but celiac trunk was visualised in all these cases. In present study, CIPA was noted in 23% cases, while they reported it in 6.24% cases (in all CIPA arising from AA, and classified as type-VI). They have also mentioned. IPA arising from MRA or CIPA arising from vessels other than AA.

In present study, IPA could be visualised in all cases. Similar results were noted in study by Kulkarni CB et al., (11). Ito K et al., in their study on depiction of IPA on 3D contrast enhanced dynamic MRI, reported RIPA and LIPA visible in 84% and 73% of the normal subjects, respectively, with depiction of RIPA being more in cirrhotic patients; no significant difference for depiction of LIPA in two subgroups (12).

Authors found CIPA in 23% cases and independent RIPA and LIPA in 77%. Comparable results were seen in study by Kulkarni CB et al., (11). In article authored by Kahn PC, CIPA was reported to be in 31% cases (1). Aslaner R et al., reported frequency of CIPA to be 29.5% (3). In cadaveric study by Gurses IA et al., it was found to be 19.22 % (5).

In present study, for CIPA (n=46) most common vessel of origin was aorta (58.7%) followed by celiac trunk (34.78%) and MRA (6.52%). For independent RIPA and LIPA most common vessel of origin was celiac trunk (44.8%), aorta (37.01%), MRA (14.94%), LGA (3.25%) and celiac trunk (63.0%), aorta (34.4%), MRA (1.3%), LGA (1.3%) respectively. In study by, Aslaner R et al., similar pattern was noted for CIPA, RIPA and LIPA (3). Loukas M et al., also reported comparable pattern reported for RIPA and LIPA origin (4). In a meta-analysis by Whitley A et al, origin pattern for CIPA was similar, however RIPA and LIPA origin from aorta (49.6% and 46.8% respectively) was more frequent than origin from celiac trunk (35.7% and 46.1%) (13). In study by Kulkarni CB et al., RIPA was found to arise most frequently from abdominal aorta (37.5%) and LIPA from celiac artery (46.3%), and for CIPA from abdominal aorta (68/128) (11). In present study, there was no case showing origin of IPA from hepatic artery or SMA. Literature search shows many case reports with IPA originating from celiac trunk described as uncommon or rare variation. However, present study and other studies cited under discussion (3),(4),(11),(13) show that origin of IPA from celiac trunk is not uncommon or rare.

Level of origin from aorta has been described for IPA originating from AA, and other visceral arteries arising from aorta and giving off IPA. IPA usually originates between the middle of the T12 and L2 vertebra (2). In present study, for IPA directly arising from AA most common level of origin was T12 (38.68%) followed by L1 (29.2%), T12/L1 disc (24.09%), T11/T12 (4.38%), L1/L2 disc (2.19%), T11 (0.73%) and L2(0.73%). When analysed separately, most common level of origin for RIPA, LIPA and CIPA was L1 (40.35%), T12 (45.28%) and T12 (44.44%) respectively. In study by Kahn PC, most common vertebral level of origin for IPA was upper L1 followed by other levels: for RIPA, upper L1>lower L1=Lower T12>others; for LIPA, upper L1>lower L2>upper T12>others; for CIPA, upper L1>lower T12>upper L2>others. (1) Authors also categorised two most common vertebral level of origin of IPA from aorta i.e. T12 (n=53) and L1 (n=40) into sublevels- upper (U), mid (M) and lower (L) vertebral body levels. At T12 level, sublevels were T12-M (49.06%)>T12-L (32.07%)>T12-U (18.87%). At L1 level, sublevels were L1-U (50%)>L1-M (45%)>L1-U (5%).

Level of origin of celiac trunk from aorta was T12 (39.06%) followed by L1 (29.69%), T12/L1 disc (25.0%), L1/L2 disc (4.69%), T11/T12 (0.78%) and L2 (0.78%). Sehgal G et al., reported level of celiac trunk as junction of T12-L1 (45.8%), T12 (29.17%), L1 (22.92%) and T11-T12 (08%) (14). Pinal-Garcia DF et al., reported it as T12 (47.9%) followed by L1 (28.6%), T12/L1 (13.6%), T11 (5.6%), T11/T12 (3.6%), and T10 (0.7%) (15).

In study by Ozkan U et al., level of origin of right MRA was L1 (43%), L2 (23%) and L1/L2 disc level (32%), while for left MRA it was L2 (38%), L1(37%) and L1/L2 (22%) (16). In present study, for right MRA, most common level of origin was L1 followed by L1/L2 disc and L2. Two cases where LIPA was originating from left MRA, level of origin was L1.

In present study, most common circumferential location of IPA take off from AA was anterolateral quadrant (52.55%), followed by anterior-midline (30.65%), lateral (14.6%), and posterolateral quadrant (2.2%). Kahn PC in their study found RIPA coming most frequently off the right wall of the aorta, while LIPA and CIPA most frequently from the left; other less common locations being anterior and contralateral side of aortic wall (1).

Authors also measured diameters of CIPA, RIPA and LIPA. Mean diameters of apparently normal RIPA and LIPA were 1.75 mm and 1.76 mm respectively, while these diameters in cirrhotic group (n=26) were 1.82 mm and 1.82 mm and in chronic pancreatitis group (n=12) 1.73 mm and 1.77 mm. The differences were not statistically significant. In study by Ito K et al., mean diameter of RIPA in the cirrhotic patients (1.7 mm) was significantly larger than that in the normal subjects (1.3 mm), and no significant difference for LIPA between normal and cirrhotic group (1.4 mm and 1.5 mm respectively). None of normal subjects had RIPA mean diameter >3.0 mm (12). Kahn PC reported mean diameters of RIPA and LIPA as 2.2 mm (range 1.4-3.2 mm) and 2.0 mm (range 1.4-2.8 mm), respectively (1). In cadaveric study by Szewczyk B et al., mean diameter of LIPA and RIPA were 2.46 mm and 2.59 mm for women, compared to 2.66 mm and 2.73 mm for men; differences being not statistically significant (10). These differences in different studies may be partly attributed to patient population being from different geographical areas (USA (1), Poland (10) as compared to this study from India) and differences in sample size. Authors found statistically significant differences in mean diameters of RIPA and LIPA in male and female groups.

The IPA as supply to HCC has been well described in literature and currently focus is more because of option of endovascular embolization therapy (TACE) (2),(3),(4),(5). Gwon DI et al., and Kimura S et al., published studies with large number of cases of HCC deriving supply from IPA and treated with TACE (2),(17). In study by Tanabe et al., blood supply from an IPA was noted in 11% cases of HCC (18). In 1 of 7 cases of HCC in present study, RIPA (3.2 mm in diameter) was seen as feeding vessel (in addition to RHA) supplying large HCC almost completely replacing right lobe of liver.

In present study, there were three cases with double LIPAs (anterior and posterior LIPA with separate origins). Gurses IA et al., in their study also reported separate origin of anterior and posterior divisions of LIPA in 6 out of 26 cadavers (23.07%) (5).

Loukas M et al., in their study found accessory splenic artery as one of branches of IPA (4). Authors found one case where LIPA was giving off accessory splenic artery to upper pole of spleen.


Main limitation of present study was regarding comparison of IPA diameter in different subgroups. A study focused on this aspect and with larger sample size will yield more information. In general, a larger sample size has potential to reveal few other uncommon or rarer variations in IPA anatomy. Analysis of interobserver variation was also not done.


Anatomical pattern of IPA shows a number of variations. The most common vessels of origin for CIPA, RIPA and LIPA were abdominal aorta (58.7%), celiac trunk (44.8%) and celiac trunk (63%), respectively, in this study. The predominant vertebral levels of origin for CIPA, RIPA and LIPA arising from aorta were T12, L1, and T12 respectively, and for celiac trunk T12. The mean diameter of IPA was found to be greatest in cirrhotic group followed by chronic pancreatitis and apparently normal IPA group, but not statistically significant. These variations can be efficiently and readily demonstrated by CT angiography or arterial phase of multiphasic CT study. A beforehand composite knowledge of variations in all these three aspects of anatomical pattern of IPA would allow clinician to be better prepared while dealing with surgical explorations or radiological interventions.


Kahn PC. Selective angiography of the inferior phrenic arteries. Radiology. 1967;88(1):01-08. [crossref] [PubMed]
Gwon DI, Ko GY, Yoon HK, Sung KB, Lee JM, Ryu SJ, et al. Inferior phrenic artery: Anatomy, variations, pathologic conditions, and interventional management. Radiographics. 2007;27(3):687-705. [crossref] [PubMed]
Aslaner R, Pekcevik Y, Sahin H, Toka O. Variations in the origin of Inferior phrenic arteries and their relationship to celiac axis variations on CT angiography. Korean J Radiol. 2017;18(2):336-44. [crossref] [PubMed]
Loukas M, Hullett J, Wagner T. Clinical anatomy of the inferior phrenic artery. Clin Anat. 2005;18(5):357-65. [crossref] [PubMed]
Gürses İA, Gayretli Ö, Kale A, Öztürk A, Usta A, Sahinoğlu K. Inferior phrenic arteries and their branches, their anatomy and possible clinical importance: An experimental cadaver study. Balkan Med J. 2015;32(2):189-95. [crossref] [PubMed]
Zhu LZ, Yang RJ, Zhu X. Role of inferior phrenic artery in the interventional treatment of lung metastases tumor: A report of 11 cases. J Can Res Ther. 2018;14:61-67. [crossref] [PubMed]
Sakata S, Yoshida C, Saeki S, Hirosako S, Ichiyasu H, Kohrogi H. Primary diaphragmatic dedifferentiated liposarcoma in a young female patient after delivery. Case Rep Oncol Med. 2016;2016:4042719. [crossref] [PubMed]
Liu FY, Wang MQ, Fan QS, Duan F, Wang ZJ, Song P. Supplementary inferior phrenic artery embolization in the interventional treatment of hemoptysis. Chin Med J (Engl). 2009;122(5):514-20.
Chung MJ, Lee JH, Lee KS, Yoon YC, Kwon OJ, Kim TS. Bronchial and nonbronchial systemic arteries in patients with hemoptysis: Depiction on MDCT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186(3):649-55. [crossref] [PubMed]
Szewczyk B, Karauda P, Olewnik L, Podgórski M, Wasniewska A, Haladaj R, et al. Types of inferior phrenic arteries: A new point of view based on a cadaveric study. Folia Morphol (Warsz). 2020. Doi: 10.5603/FM.a2020.0079. [crossref] [PubMed]
Kulkarni CB, Pullara SK, Prabhu NK, Pillay M, Moorthy S. Variations in the origins of inferior phrenic Arteries-An evaluation with 256 slice multidetector computed tomography. J Clin Interv Radiol. 2020;4:73-82. [crossref]
Ito K, Kim MJ, Mitchell DG, Honjo K. Inferior phrenic arteries: Depiction with thin-section three-dimensional contrast-enhanced dynamic MR imaging with fat suppression. J MagnReson Imaging. 2001;13(2):201-06. 3.0.CO;2-L>[crossref]
Whitley A, Kreček J, Kachlík D. The inferior phrenic arteries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Anat. 2021;235:151679. [crossref] [PubMed]
Sehgal G, Srivastava AK, Sharma PK, Kumar N, Singh R, Parihar A, et al. Morphometry of the celiac trunk: A multidetector computed tomographic angiographic study. Journal of Anatomical Society of India. 2013;62(1):23-27. [crossref]
Pinal-Garcia DF, Nuno-Guzman CM, Gonzalez-Gonzalez ME, Ibarra-Hurtado TR. The Celiac Trunk and Its Anatomical Variations: A Cadaveric Study. J Clin Med Res. 2018;10(4):321-29. [crossref] [PubMed]
Ozkan U, Oğuzkurt L, Tercan F, Kizilkiliç O, Koç Z, Koca N. Renal artery origins and variations: Angiographic evaluation of 855 consecutive patients. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2006;12(4):183-86.
Kimura S, Okazaki M, Higashihara H, Nozaki Y, Haruno M, Urakawa H, et al. Analysis of the origin of the right inferior phrenic artery in 178 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated by chemoembolization via the right inferior phrenic artery. Acta Radiol. 2007;48(7):728-33. [crossref] [PubMed]
Tanabe N, Iwasaki T, Chida N, Suzuki S, Akahane T, Kobayashi N, et al. Hepatocellular carcinomas supplied by inferior phrenic arteries. Acta Radiologica. 1998;39(4):443-46. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others


Date of Submission: May 23, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Jun 17, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Jun 29, 2021
Date of Publishing: Aug 01, 2021

• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? NA
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

• Plagiarism X-checker: May 25, 2021
• Manual Googling: Jun 19, 2021
• iThenticate Software: Jun 22, 2021 (5%)

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)