期刊文献+

钆塞酸二钠增强MRI在小儿亲体肝移植供体一站式评估中的可行性研究 被引量:1

Feasibility study of gadoxetic acid disodium enhanced MRI in preoperative one-stop-shop evaluation for parent liver donors
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨钆塞酸二钠(Gd-EOB-DTPA)增强MRI在小儿亲体肝移植供体一站式评估中的可行性及临床应用价值。方法前瞻性收集拟行小儿亲体肝移植的40例供体,均行一站式上腹部MRI平扫及Gd-EOB-DTPA增强扫描。由2名放射科医师分别记录肝动脉、门静脉、肝静脉、胆管的解剖分型及满足胆管分型需要的最短延迟时间,进行图像质量评分,并测量移植肝体积。由1名移植科医师术中记录肝血管及胆管分型,并测量移植肝体积。分析术前影像和术中解剖分型结果的符合率。采用组内相关系数(ICC)评价2名放射科医师术前在影像上测量移植肝体积的一致性,采用Pearson相关分析评价术前影像测量移植肝体积与术中测量体积间的相关性,采用Kappa检验评价2名放射科医师间图像质量评分的一致性。结果32例行肝移植手术,影像评估肝动脉、门静脉、肝左静脉与肝中静脉共干、胆管解剖与术中结果完全一致,符合率为100%(32/32)。术前2名放射科医师测量的移植肝体积分别为(249.89±39.93)、(242.76±39.04)cm^3,一致性高(ICC=0.983)。术中测量的移植肝体积为(219.95±46.11)cm^3,和术前测量结果具有高度相关性(r值分别为0.820、0.850,P均〈0.01)。2名医师对肝动脉和胆管的图像质量评分均为1~3分,门静脉及肝静脉图像质量评分均为2、3分,均可满足临床诊断要求,对肝动脉、门静脉、肝静脉评分的一致性好(Kappa值分别为0.841、1.000、1.000),对胆管评分的一致性一般(Kappa值为0.658)。40例肝胆期延迟15min图像均能满足胆管分型需求(100%,40/40)。结论Gd-EOB—DTPA增强MRI能够有效地对小儿亲体肝移植供体进行一站式术前评估,且用于胆管分型的延迟时间可缩短至15min。 Objective To explore the feasibility and clinical application of gadoxetie-acid-disodium (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI in preoperative one-stop-shop evaluation for parent liver donors. Methods Forty parent liver donors were included in this prospective study. They all underwent Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI for preoperative one-stop-shop evaluation, Two radiologists evaluated the anatomical variations of hepatic vessels, bile ducts, the shortest timing for bile ducts, image quality and graft liver volume. One transplantation surgeon recorded the intraoperative anatomy of hepatic vessels and bile ducts, and measured the transplanted liver volume. The consistency between imaging results and intraoperative findings was calculated. Interohserver agreements measuring the graft volume was assessed by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Pearson correlation coefficients were measured between MRI-derived graft volume and actual graft volume. Interobserver agreements regarding the image quality were determined by calculating Kappa values. Results Thirty-two parent donors proceeded to liver donation. All anatomical findings of hepatic vessels and bile ducts accurately confirmed by intraoperative findings (32/32, 100%). MRI-derived graft volume measured by the two radiologists were (249.89 ±39.93)cm^3, (242.76 ± 39.04) cm^3, respectively and there was a high interobserver consistency (ICC=0.983). The intraoperative graft volume was (219.95±46.1l) cm^3 and correlated with actual graft volume moderately in both reviewers (r=0.820, 0.850, P〈0.O1). The image quality score were from 1 to 3 for hepatic arteries and bile duets, 2 or 3 for portal and hepatic veins, which all met the clinical diagnostic requirements. The interobserver agreement was good for evaluating hepatic vessels (Kappa values were 0.841, 1.000, 1.000) and moderate for bile ducts (Kappa value was 0.658). Fifteen minutes delay in hepatoboliary phase can meet the demand of bile duets classification in all donors. Conelttsion One-stop-shop Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhaneed MRI can be used in preoperative evaluation of parent donors effectively, and 15 minutes delay scanning is enough for eholangiography.
出处 《中华放射学杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2016年第8期604-608,共5页 Chinese Journal of Radiology
关键词 肝移植 造影剂 磁共振成像 Liver transplantation Contrast media Magnetic resonance imaging
  • 相关文献

参考文献20

  • 1Ansaldi-Balocco N, Cimadamore N, Barbera C. Liver transplant in children. I [J]. Pediatr Med Chlr, 1989, 11(4): 379-383.
  • 2Lee H, Vacanti JP. Liver transplantation and its long-term management in children[J]. Pediatr Clin North Am, 1996, 43(1): 99-124.
  • 3郑珊,王歧宏,肖现民,陆国平,董岿然,樊嘉,周俭,邱双健,吴志全.婴幼儿亲体部分肝移植[J].中华小儿外科杂志,2006,27(5):244-247. 被引量:13
  • 4Hamm B, Staks T, Mtihler A, et al. Phase I clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA as a hepatobiliary MR contrast agent: safety, pharmacokinetics, and MR imaging[J]. Radiology, 1995, 195(3): 785-792. DOI: 10.1148/radiology. 195.3.7754011.
  • 5Michels NA. Newer anatomy of the liver and its variant blood supply and collateral circulation[J]. Am J Surg, 1966, 112(3): 337-347.
  • 6Atri M, Bret PM, Fraser-Hill MA. Intrahepatic portal venous variations: prevalence with US[J]. Radiology, 1992, 184(1): 157-158. DOI: 10.1148/radiology. 184.1.1609075.
  • 7Choi JW, Kim TK, Kim KW, et al. Anatomic variation in intrahepatic bile ducts: an analysis of intraoperative cholangiograms in 300 consecutive donors for living donor liver transplantation[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2003, 4(2): 85-90.
  • 8Gonz61ez-Chamorro A, Loinaz Segurola C, Moreno Gonz61ez E, et al. Graft mass and volume calculation in living related donors for liver transplantation[J]. Hepatogastroenterology, 1998, 45(20): 510-513.
  • 9Schroeder T, Nadalin S, Stattaus J, et al. Potential living liver donors: evaluation with an all-in-one protocol with multi-detector row CT[J]. Radiology, 2002, 224(2): 586-591. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2242011340.
  • 10Bassignani M J, Fulcher AS, Szucs RA, et al. Use of imaging for living donor liver transplantation[J]. Radiographies, 2001,21 (1): 39-52. DOI: 10.1148/radiographics.21.1.g01ja0739.

二级参考文献43

共引文献38

同被引文献13

引证文献1

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部