Objectives: This study aimed to determine whether errors in vascular measurements would affect device selection in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) by comparing measurements obtained using non-contrast computed tomog...Objectives: This study aimed to determine whether errors in vascular measurements would affect device selection in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) by comparing measurements obtained using non-contrast computed tomography (NCT) with those obtained using contrast-enhanced CT (CECT). Materials and Methods: This single-center, retrospective study included 25 patients who underwent EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm at our institution. A 1-mm horizontal cross-sectional slice of NCT and CECT from each patient was retrospectively reviewed. The area from the abdominal aorta to the common iliac artery was divided into four zones. A centerline was created using the NCT by manually plotting the center points. Subsequently, the centerlines were automatically extracted and manually corrected during the arterial phase of CECT. The diameter and length of each zone were measured for each modality. The mean diameters and lengths of the target vessels were compared between NCT and CECT. Results: The measurements obtained using both methods were reproducible and demonstrated good agreement. The mean differences in vessel length and diameter measurements for each segment between NCT and CECT were not statistically significant, indicating good consistency. Conclusion: NCT may be useful for preoperative EVAR evaluation in patients with renal dysfunction or allergies to contrast agents.展开更多
目的观察肝硬化(HC)合并原发性肝癌(PLC)患者CT动态增强扫描变化,分析其诊断价值。方法回顾性分析2020年4月—2022年7月我院125例HC患者资料,所有受试者均行病理组织学检测及CT动态增强扫描,统计所有患者病灶大小及分布情况,CT动态增强...目的观察肝硬化(HC)合并原发性肝癌(PLC)患者CT动态增强扫描变化,分析其诊断价值。方法回顾性分析2020年4月—2022年7月我院125例HC患者资料,所有受试者均行病理组织学检测及CT动态增强扫描,统计所有患者病灶大小及分布情况,CT动态增强扫描动脉期、静脉期、延迟期病灶检出情况,以病理检查为金标准,分析CT动态增强扫描对HC患者PLC的诊断价值、HC患者与HC并PLC患者血流灌注参数大小及不同肝功能CTP分级下血流灌注参数变化。结果125例HC患者共检出161个病灶,其中直径<1 cm 8个,1~3 cm 53个,4~5 cm 63个,>5 cm 37个,肝右前叶、肝右后叶者居多,分别为45及69个;CT动态增强扫描动脉期检出病灶149个,检出率92.55%;门脉期检出病灶134个,检出率83.23%;延迟期检出病灶142个,检出率88.20%;125例HC患者中病理学检查显示75例PLC阳性,50例PLC阴性,CT动态增强扫检测HC并PLC的敏感度为94.67%,特异度为94.00%,准确率为94.40%,阳性预测值为95.95%,阴性预测值为92.16%,Kappa值为0.884,具有较高的一致性;HC组HAP、HPI值均显著低于HC并PLC组,PVP、TLP值均显著高于HC并PLC组(P<0.05);125例HC并PLC患者中CTP A级41例,CTP B级46例,CTP C级38例,CTP A级HAP、HPI值显著低于CTP B、C级(P<0.05),PVP、TLP值均显著高于CTP B、C级(P<0.05),CTP B级HPI值与CTP C级比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论CT动态增强扫描可多方位多角度显示HC病灶情况,且对PLC具有较好的诊断价值,其中肝脏血流灌注参数具有一定的特征性,可为PLC诊断和肝功能分级提供参考。展开更多
文摘Objectives: This study aimed to determine whether errors in vascular measurements would affect device selection in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) by comparing measurements obtained using non-contrast computed tomography (NCT) with those obtained using contrast-enhanced CT (CECT). Materials and Methods: This single-center, retrospective study included 25 patients who underwent EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm at our institution. A 1-mm horizontal cross-sectional slice of NCT and CECT from each patient was retrospectively reviewed. The area from the abdominal aorta to the common iliac artery was divided into four zones. A centerline was created using the NCT by manually plotting the center points. Subsequently, the centerlines were automatically extracted and manually corrected during the arterial phase of CECT. The diameter and length of each zone were measured for each modality. The mean diameters and lengths of the target vessels were compared between NCT and CECT. Results: The measurements obtained using both methods were reproducible and demonstrated good agreement. The mean differences in vessel length and diameter measurements for each segment between NCT and CECT were not statistically significant, indicating good consistency. Conclusion: NCT may be useful for preoperative EVAR evaluation in patients with renal dysfunction or allergies to contrast agents.
文摘目的观察肝硬化(HC)合并原发性肝癌(PLC)患者CT动态增强扫描变化,分析其诊断价值。方法回顾性分析2020年4月—2022年7月我院125例HC患者资料,所有受试者均行病理组织学检测及CT动态增强扫描,统计所有患者病灶大小及分布情况,CT动态增强扫描动脉期、静脉期、延迟期病灶检出情况,以病理检查为金标准,分析CT动态增强扫描对HC患者PLC的诊断价值、HC患者与HC并PLC患者血流灌注参数大小及不同肝功能CTP分级下血流灌注参数变化。结果125例HC患者共检出161个病灶,其中直径<1 cm 8个,1~3 cm 53个,4~5 cm 63个,>5 cm 37个,肝右前叶、肝右后叶者居多,分别为45及69个;CT动态增强扫描动脉期检出病灶149个,检出率92.55%;门脉期检出病灶134个,检出率83.23%;延迟期检出病灶142个,检出率88.20%;125例HC患者中病理学检查显示75例PLC阳性,50例PLC阴性,CT动态增强扫检测HC并PLC的敏感度为94.67%,特异度为94.00%,准确率为94.40%,阳性预测值为95.95%,阴性预测值为92.16%,Kappa值为0.884,具有较高的一致性;HC组HAP、HPI值均显著低于HC并PLC组,PVP、TLP值均显著高于HC并PLC组(P<0.05);125例HC并PLC患者中CTP A级41例,CTP B级46例,CTP C级38例,CTP A级HAP、HPI值显著低于CTP B、C级(P<0.05),PVP、TLP值均显著高于CTP B、C级(P<0.05),CTP B级HPI值与CTP C级比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论CT动态增强扫描可多方位多角度显示HC病灶情况,且对PLC具有较好的诊断价值,其中肝脏血流灌注参数具有一定的特征性,可为PLC诊断和肝功能分级提供参考。
