分享:
分享到微信朋友圈
X
技术研究
T1-Vibe-FS与T1-Flash-SPAIR动态增强序列联合钆剂瘘管造影在肛瘘诊断中的应用价值
姜阳 刘莹莹 王军大 张德川 彭聪 余万军 陈玉洪

Cite this article as: Jiang Y, Liu YY, Wang JD, et al. The value of T1-Vibe-FS and T1-Flash-SPAIR dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences combined with gadolinium fistulography in the diagnosis of anal fistula[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2021, 12(8): 65-70.引用本文:姜阳, 刘莹莹, 王军大, 等. T1-Vibe-FS与T1-Flash-SPAIR动态增强序列联合钆剂瘘管造影在肛瘘诊断中的应用价值[J]. 磁共振成像, 2021, 12(8): 65-70. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.08.013.


[摘要] 目的 探讨T1-Vibe-FS与T1-Flash-SPAIR动态增强序列联合钆剂瘘管造影在肛瘘诊断中的应用价值。材料与方法 使用Siemens Avanto 1.5 T超导磁共振成像系统,80例经手术证实均为肛瘘的患者术前均行MRI扫描。先行矢状位、冠状位和横断位扫描,后随机行T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn、T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影、T1-Vibe-FS-dyn、T1-Vibe-FS-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影 (依次记为S1、S2、S3、S4组)动态增强扫描。测量并计算信噪比(signal-to-noise ratio,SNR)和对比噪声比(contrast-to-ratio,CNR),对比4种扫描方法的SNR、CNR和内口截石位点分布差异;对内口位置、肛瘘原发瘘管数量、分支瘘管数量、脓肿以及Parks分型进行分析,比较不同扫描序列的影像诊断结果与手术结果的符合率。结果 T1-Vibe-FS-dyn序列比T1-Flash-SPAIR序列可以获得较高的SNR和CNR,4种扫描方法的SNR (P<0.05)和CNR (P<0.05)差异有统计学意义,内口截石位点分布有差异(P<0.05);4种扫描方法对内口位置(P=0.676)、原发瘘管数量(P=1.000)、分支瘘管数量(P=0.377)、脓肿(P=0.230)和Parks分型(P=0.712)的影像诊断与手术结果符合率差异无统计学意义,但扫描方法对Parks诊断分型有特异性(P<0.05)。结论 对有外漏口的患者采用方法S4可以获得较高的SNR和CNR,对无外漏口的患者采用方法S3可以获得较高的SNR和CNR;方法S1可更好地诊断Parks分型为未定型,方法S2可更好地诊断Parks分型为括约肌上型,方法S3、S4可更好地诊断Parks分型为括约肌外型。
[Abstract] Objective To evaluate the value of T1-Vibe-FS and T1-Flash-SPAIR dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences combined with gadolinium fistulography in the diagnosis of anal fistula. Materials andMethods Siemens Avanto 1.5 T superconducting MRI system was used. Eighty patients with anal fistula confirmed by operation were scanned by MRI before operation. Sagittal, coronal and transverse scans were performed at first, followed by dynamic enhanced scans of T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn, T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn (combined gadolinium fistulography), T1-Vibe-FS-dyn and T1-Vibe-FS-dyn (combined gadolinium fistulography) (S1, S2, S3, S4). The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-ratio (CNR) were measured and calculated, and the differences of SNR, CNR and internal orifice lithotomy sites were compared among the four scanning methods. The location of internal orifice, the number of primary anal fistula, the number of branch fistula, abscess and Parks classification were analyzed. In addition, the coincidence rate of imaging diagnosis results of different scanning sequences with surgical results was compared.Results Compared with T1-Flash-SPAIR sequence, T1-Vibe-FS-dyn sequence could obtain higher SNR and CNR. There were statistical differences in SNR (P<0.05) and CNR (P<0.05) of the four scanning methods. In addition, there was significant difference in the distribution of lithotomy sites in internal mouth (P<0.05). There was no difference in the coincidence rate between the four scanning methods in the diagnosis of internal orifice position (P=0.676), the number of primary fistula (P=1.000), the number of branch fistula (P=0.377), abscess (P=0.230) and Parks classification (P=0.712). However, the scanning method was specific for Parks diagnosis (P<0.05).Conclusions Higher SNR and CNR can be obtained in patients with external leakage by method S4. Higher SNR and CNR can be obtained by method S3 in patients without external leakage. Method S1 can better diagnose Parks classification as undefined, method S2 can better diagnose Parks classification as suprasphincter type, method S3 and S4 can better diagnose sphincter appearance of Parks classification.
[关键词] 肛瘘;磁共振成像;瘘管造影;动态增强;钆
[Keywords] anal fistula;magnetic resonance imaging;fistula angiography;dynamic enhancement;Gd-DTPA

姜阳    刘莹莹    王军大    张德川 *   彭聪    余万军    陈玉洪   

重庆市中医院放射科,重庆 400021

张德川,E-mail:cqggzdc@163.com

全体作者均声明无利益冲突。


基金项目: 成都中医药大学2019年度“杏林学者”医院专项 YYZX2019082 重庆科卫联合医学科研重点项目 2019ZDXM022
收稿日期:2021-02-05
接受日期:2021-04-19
DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.08.013
引用本文:姜阳, 刘莹莹, 王军大, 等. T1-Vibe-FS与T1-Flash-SPAIR动态增强序列联合钆剂瘘管造影在肛瘘诊断中的应用价值[J]. 磁共振成像, 2021, 12(8): 65-70. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.08.013.

       肛瘘是常见的肛周疾病之一,是肛管与会阴部及肛门周围皮肤之间的异常窦道,由瘘管、内口、外口三部分组成,常需要手术治疗,且术后复发率高[1]。成年男性多发[2],其治疗目标是尽可能减少括约肌损伤,消除肛瘘内口和任何与之相通的上皮化瘘管[3],由于病灶复杂,一直以来其内外科治疗都面临着严峻挑战[4, 5]。肛瘘的常用影像学检查方法有超声检查、CT检查和MRI检查。超声检查的准确性主要与操作者直接相关,并在分辨瘘管与括约肌的关系方面略显不足;CT增强扫描虽然可以了解肛周解剖结构,联合三维重建技术可提高诊断的准确性,但有辐射损伤[6];MRI具有多参数、多方位、多序列以及对软组织分辨率较高、无辐射损伤、信号敏感度高等临床优点,对肛瘘的瘘管细节、相关脓肿、支管和多发瘘管及其肛周肌肉、韧带筋膜等组织器官的关系能够清楚显示,并具有优良的解剖细节显示[7]。因此,MRI已经成为临床对肛周疾病评估与分类的首选影像学检查方法[8],2016版美国指南和2018版英国指南均对MRI作为术前检查的1级推荐(strong recommendation)[9],对复杂性肛瘘,2016版美国结直肠外科医师学会(American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons,ASCRS)指南建议可选瘘管造影检查[3],因此,本研究利用钆剂行瘘管造影,探讨T1-Vibe-FS与T1-Flash-SPAIR动态增强序列在肛瘘诊断中的应用价值。

1 材料与方法

1.1 研究对象

       收集2016年1月至2020年4月,经我院临床诊断均为肛瘘的80例患者,其中,男性68例,女性12例,年龄20~72 (38.05±12.3)岁。所有病例经磁共振扫描后均于1周内在肛肠科进行手术治疗。纳入标准:(1)经临床诊断为肛瘘患者;(2)术前盆腔MRI检查资料完整;(3) MRI和手术间隔不超过8 d;(4)体内无禁忌性植入物,无心、肾功能不全病史,配合度好。排除标准:(1)有肛门切除术或吻合术史;(2)肛门直肠肿瘤;(3)人类免疫缺陷病毒感染者,恶性肿瘤患者,严重的心脑血管疾病患者,各种精神疾患者;(4)肝肾功能不全疾患者,钆剂过敏患者;(5)影像结果不明确者。

       所有入组患者临床症状主要包括:腹痛、腹泻、肛周肿痛、局部发热潮湿、瘙痒、血便,有外瘘口患者还伴有反复间断性破溃、流脓、臭味。将80例病例分为4组,T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn组20例,男性17例,女性3例,年龄(36.1±10.6)岁;T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影组20例,男性17例,女性3例,年龄(38.5±16.7)岁;T1-Vibe-FS-dyn组20例,男性16例,女性4例,年龄(39.5±10.6)岁;T1-Vibe-FS-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影组20例,男性16例,女性4例,年龄(38.2±11.3)岁。组间患者的性别构成和年龄构成经检验差异均无统计学意义(χ2=0.346,P=0.951;H=1.967,P=0.579)。所有患者检查前均签署钆剂增强同意书,本研究经过本单位医学伦理委员会批准(批准文号:2020-ky-ks-ZDC),免除受试者知情同意。

1.2 扫描方法

       检查前禁饮食4 h以上,无需肠道清洁准备。患者取仰卧位,平静呼吸,扫描范围从髂前上棘水平至股骨上水平,以耻骨联合为中心扫描定位像。使用Siemens Avanto 1.5 T超导磁共振成像系统,采用16通道体部相控线圈。先行矢状位T2-tse扫描,参数为:TR 4200 ms,TE 65 ms,FOV 300 mm×300 mm,层厚 4 mm,层间距 0.8 mm,翻转角150°;再沿肛管长轴行冠状位T2-tirm扫描,参数为:TR 3520 ms,TE 32 ms,FOV 300 mm×300 mm,层厚 4 mm,层间距 0.8 mm,翻转角150°;垂直于肛管长轴行T1-tse和T2-se-fs横断位扫描,参数分别为:T1:TR 760 ms,TE 11 ms,FOV 300 mm×300 mm,层厚 4 mm,层间距 0.8 mm,翻转角 180°;T2:TR 4750 ms,TE 84 ms,FOV 300 mm×300 mm,层厚 4 mm,层间距 0.8 mm,翻转角150°。80例患者的10期动态增强扫描序列分为4组扫描方案,每组20例,S1=T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn,参数为:TR 3.5 ms,TE 4.8 ms,FOV 300 mm×300 mm,层厚3.5 mm,层间距0.7 mm,翻转角12°;S2=T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影,参数同S1;S3=T1-Vibe-FS-dyn,参数为:TR 1.64 ms,TE 2 ms,FOV 300 mm×300 mm,层厚 3.5 mm,层间距 0.7 mm,翻转角15°;S4=T1-Vibe-FS-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影,参数同S3。无外瘘口患者随机进入S1、S3,行动态增强扫描;有外瘘口患者在外瘘口注入经稀释的2~3 mL钆剂(用生理盐水按照1∶1稀释),随机进入S2、S4,重新定位行动态增强扫描。增强扫描时,使用高压注射器经右侧肘静脉推注Gd-DTPA对比剂(生产厂家:江苏恒瑞医药股份有限公司,规格:15 mL,5.654 g),注射流速为4.0 mL/s,用量为0.1 mmol/kg,总量不超过15 mL。

1.3 图像分析及评价

       磁共振图像分析采用截石位,遵循双盲法原则:首先由两名5年以上具有临床经验的高年资影像科主治医师分别在图像存档和通信系统(picture archiving and communication systems,PACS)上分析各病例肛瘘分型,测量统计原发瘘管数量、分支瘘管数量、内口位置,若一致,则取其数值;不一致时由第三位高级别医师独立阅片,后由3位医师会诊得出最终结果,以上结果均与手术结果进行比较。采用重复测量方差分析,以瘘管及内口显示最好层面为目标测量图像,分别测瘘管及同一层面外括约肌平均信号强度、背景噪声及标准差(standard deviation,SD),圆形ROI (http://123.124.255.30/sapprft)面积控制在2~5 mm2。计算信噪比(signal-to-noise ratio,SNR)和对比噪声比(contrast-to-ratio,CNR):SNR=SI/SD空气;CNR=(SNR瘘管-SNR外括约肌)/SD空气。其中SI为瘘管或外括约肌的平均信号强度值,SD空气为测量图像后方中央区域空气标准差。为了保证科学性,ROI的选取比例为0.60~0.75[10]

       瘘管定义为具有内部肠道与肛门周围皮肤相通的感染性管状结构;分支定义为具有相同黏膜开口的多个通道,外口有无均可[11];脓肿定义为长T2的液体聚集,直径>3 mm,增强后脓液无强化,脓肿壁强化[12];按照瘘管走行与内外括约肌的位置关系,根据Parks分型将肛瘘分为括约肌间型、括约肌外型、经括约肌型、括约肌上型、不属于上述4种类型的定为未定型[13]

1.4 统计学方法

       统计分析采用IBM SPSS Statistics 23.0。采用Shapiro-Wilk方法进行正态性检验,Levene's法进行方差齐性检验;对SNR差异采用Welch方差分析,组间的两两比较采用Games-Howell检验;对CNR差异及内口截石位点分布差异采用Kruskal-Wallis H检验;对内口位置、原发瘘管数量、分支瘘管数量、Parks分型和脓肿的影像诊断结果与手术结果的符合率均采用Fisher精确检验(2×C)进行差异分析,组间的两两比较采用Bonferroni法。P<0.05表示差异有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 4种扫描方法获取的图像(图1)

图1  4种扫描方法获得的图像。A:男,34岁,肛旁肿痛4 d,行T1-Vibe-FS-dyn扫描,显示有1条瘘管(白箭),瘘管行走于括约肌间,未穿破外括约肌,瘘管显示清晰,提示为低位复杂性肛瘘,无外瘘口;B:男,35岁,肛旁硬结肿痛伴破溃流脓1年,经外瘘口注入稀释的2~3 mL钆剂,行T1-Vibe-FS-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影扫描,显示外瘘口开口位置(白箭),瘘管行走于臀部皮下间隙,外瘘口显示清晰,提示高位复杂性肛瘘;C:女,35岁,肛旁疼痛进行性加重1周,行T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn扫描,脓肿(白箭)、瘘管(红箭)显示清楚,脓肿位于括约肌间,与外括约肌局部分界欠清,最终诊断为高位括约肌间型肛瘘伴直肠周围脓肿,无外瘘口;D:女,24岁,肛周脓肿术后3年,肛周皮肤潮湿、瘙痒不适3月,经外瘘口注入稀释的2~3 mL钆剂,行T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影,2条瘘管及开口显示清楚(白箭),瘘管局部穿破外括约肌,提示高位复杂性肛瘘
Fig.1  Images obtained by four scanning methods. A: Male, 34 years old, with perianal swelling and pain for four days, T1-Vibe-FS-dyn scan was performed, showing a fistula (white arrow). The fistula walked between the sphincter without penetrating the external sphincter. The fistula was clearly displayed, suggesting low complex anal fistula without external fistula; B: Male, 35 years old, para-anal induration, swelling and pain accompanied by rupture and discharge for 1 year, diluted 2—3 mL gadolinium was injected through the external fistula, and T1-Vibe-FS-dyn (combined gadolinium fistulography) scan was performed, showing the opening position of the external fistula (white arrow). The fistula walked in the subcutaneous space of the buttocks, and the external fistula was clearly displayed, suggesting high and complex anal fistula; C: Female, 35 years old, with progressive exacerbation of perianal pain for 1 week, T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn scan was performed, and the abscess (white arrow) and fistula (red arrow) were clearly shown. The abscess was located between the sphincter, and the local boundary with the external sphincter was unclear; D: Female, 24 years old, 3 years after the operation of perianal abscess surgery, perianal skin moist, pruritus and discomfort for 3 months, diluted 2—3 mL gadolinium was injected through the external fistula, and T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn (combined gadolinium fistulography) scan was performed. Two fistulas and openings were clearly shown (white arrow), and the fistula was partially penetrated into the external sphincter, suggesting a high and complex anal fistula.

2.2 4种扫描方法图像的SNR和CNR

       正态性检测结果显示,4种扫描方法的SNR结果服从正态分布,扫描方法S1、S2、S3的CNR服从正态分布,扫描方法S4的CNR不服从正态分布,其箱式图见图2表1给出4种扫描方法CNR的统计结果,包括不同组间的例数、平均值、标准差和置信区间。方差分析结果显示,不同扫描方法的SNR差异有统计学意义(Welch F=54.735,P<0.001)。组间两两比较结果显示,S1和S2、S1和S3、S1和S4、S2和S3、S2和S4 SNR的差异有统计学意义(P<0.001),S3和S4的SNR值的差异没有统计学意义。检验结果显示4种扫描方式的CNR的分布不全相同,差异具有统计学意义(H=63.926,P<0.001)。两两比较发现,CNR在S1和S3、S1和S4、S2和S3、S2和S4的差异有统计学意义(调整后P<0.001),其他组之间的差异无统计学意义。

图2  4种扫描方法的SNR和CNR的箱式图。1=S1,T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn;2=S2,T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影;3=S3,T1-Vibe-FS-dyn;4=S4,T1-Vibe-FS-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影 图3 4种扫描方法获得的内口分布箱图
Fig. 2  A box diagram of SNR and CNR of four scanning methods. 1=S1, T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn; 2=S2, T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn) (combined gadolinium fistulography); 3=S3, T1-Vibe-FS-dyn; 4=S4, T1-Vibe-FS-dyn (combined gadolinium fistulography). Fig. 3 The inner port distribution box diagram obtained by four scanning methods.
表1  4种扫描方法的SNR、CNR比较
Tab. 1  SNR and CNR comparison of four scanning methods

2.3 4种扫描方法对脓肿的影像诊断与手术诊断的符合率比较

       4种扫描方法对脓肿的影像诊断与手术诊断的符合率达100%,其差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。4种扫描方法对内口位置、原发瘘管数量、分支瘘管数量和Parks分型的影像诊断与手术结果的符合率采用精确检验进行差异分析,其结果差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),见表2

表2  4种扫描方法对内口位置、原发瘘管数量、分支瘘管数量和Parks分型的影像诊断结果与手术结果符合率比较
Tab. 2  Comparison of the diagnostic results of internal orifice position, the number of primary fistula, the number of branch fistula and Parks classification with surgical results by four scanning methods

2.4 内口截石位点分布情况

       内口截石位点分布不符合正态分布,其箱图见图3,检验结果显示4种扫描方式的内口截石位点的分布不全相同,差异具有统计学意义(H=7.979,P=0.046<0.05)。4种扫描方法间两两比较发现,只有方法S2与S3的内口截石位点分布(调整后的P<0.05)的差异有统计学意义,其他扫描方法间的差异无统计学意义。

2.5 Parks分型比较

       按Parks分型将肛瘘分为以下几种类型:括约肌间型、括约肌外型、经括约肌型、括约肌上型,不属于前面4种类型的定为未定型。本研究80例病例中,检出括约肌间型有51例,括约肌外型有2例,经括约肌型有24例,括约肌上型有2例,未定型有1例。经精确检验结果显示,4种扫描方法对Parks分型诊断差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),进一步对扫描方法与Parks分型的相关性进行分析,方法S1更倾向于诊断Parks分型为未定型,方法S2更倾向于诊断Parks分型为括约肌上型,方法S3和S4更倾向于诊断Parks分型为括约肌外型(见表3)。

表3  扫描方法对Parks分型的分布及差异(%)
Tab. 3  Distribution and difference of Parks typing by scanning methods (%)

3 讨论

       MRI对软组织分辨率高,能较准确显示肛门内外括约肌、肛提肌和耻骨直肠肌的解剖结构,在显示残余脓腔、瘘管及其与肛提肌、内外括约肌及肛门周围组织的解剖关系等方面具有明显优势,可协助进行肛瘘的诊断分类,对指导手术具有较高的价值[14]。因此,在保证患者安全的前提下,需要利用合理的扫描序列、检查手段,提高图像质量,提高病灶检出率。

3.1 Vibe序列和Flash序列

       Vibe序列和Flash序列均可用于盆腔扫描。本研究采用Vibe序列的S3和S4组图像的SNR和CNR平均值(SNR:S3,52.27±8.81;S4,57.38±7.31。CNR:S3,2.85±0.67;S4,3.25±0.49)均高于采用Flash序列的S1和S2组(SNR:S1,36.68±3.19;S2,41.06±3.61。CNR:S1,1.33±0.07;S2,1.45±0.09),两两比较有显著差异,这是因为Vibe序列为容积内插屏气扫描,属于扰相梯度回波,采用超短的TR、TE和小角度的射频脉冲进行成像,具有成像时间短,空间分辨率高等优点[15],Flash虽然也属于扰相梯度回波序列,同样采用较短的TR、TE和较小角度的射频脉冲进行成像,但由于在层面选择方向上施加了“扰相梯度”,使残留的质子横向磁矩在下次射频脉冲到来之前完全去相位,减少T2的权重,突出组织的T1弛豫(纵向弛豫)的差别[16]。张志国等[17]研究发现,C-vibe序列可实现层间重叠,无间距扫描,利于小病灶的显示,当层面扫描较薄时,有较高的信噪比。由于在肛周周围脂肪含量较多,西门子磁共振的抑脂序列类似频率预饱和反转恢复序列(spectral presaturaton with inversion recovery,SPIR)是针对脂肪的进动频率选择性地施加预饱和脉冲,翻转角为120°~140°,脂肪过零时间快,而频率选择反转恢复衰减序列(spectral attenuated inversion recovery,SPAIR)是采用的180°绝缘脉冲的脂肪抑制序列,对射频场的不均匀性不敏感,在一些偏中心的部位可能会压脂不均,导致Vibe-FS序列比Flash-SPAIR序列图像的组织平均信号强度高,背景噪声低。

3.2 瘘管造影

       目前,肛瘘外科手术疗效的关键在于术前对肛瘘内口和窦道的准确定位以及术中对内口和窦道的完全切除,这样才能避免肛瘘复发[18]。MRI对于肛瘘的分类及分级,最关键的就是确定肛瘘内口、主瘘管及其继发分支与肛门括约肌复合体的关系[19]。对于复杂性肛瘘,瘘管造影可以明确瘘管走向及其与括约肌的关系、有无残余脓腔及内口位置等,有利于指导手术方案的选择。瘘管X线造影虽然简单易行,但在临床实践中,瘘管X线造影的结果不太理想,无法准确显示瘘管与肛门括约肌之间的关系[20];造影CT三维成像在对肛瘘分类、分型及对肛瘘内口、支管和脓肿等方面术前诊断效果良好[21],但是该检查有辐射,且软组织分辨率不高;利用H2O2超声造影可以提高诊断肛瘘的准确性[22],但准确性与操作者的熟练程度有关。本研究80例病例中,共检出原发瘘管79例,支瘘管79例,检出率均为98.75%,使用瘘管造影的S2和S4组对原发瘘管和分支瘘管的检出率均为100%。江泊源等[23]使用西门子的6通道体部线圈+24通道脊柱线圈对原发瘘管和支瘘管的检出率分别为98.1%和94.3%,张莲等[14]使用增强T1WI FS对原发瘘管和分支瘘管的检出率分别为97.8%和95.7%,张志国等[17]使用西门子3.0 T MR采用C-vibe动态增强序列对瘘管的检出率为92.6%。可以发现,对有外瘘口的患者,由于在外瘘口的瘘管内注入对比剂,强化了瘘管,在T1加权上呈高信号,提高了病灶与周围组织的对比,因此,行MR瘘管造影对原发瘘管和支瘘管有很高的检出率。本研究对内口的平均检出率为87.5%,行MR瘘管造影的S2和S4组的平均检出率为90%,刘卫英等[24]使用Philips 1.5 T MR采用CE THRIVE_FS序列(类似于Vibe序列)对内口的检出率为70.9%,韦小梅等[25]使用Siemens 3.0 T采用6期动态T1WI增强序列对内口的检出率为92.2%,同样可以发现,对有外瘘口的患者,行MR瘘管造影对内口有很高的检出率。由于MR对脓肿有很高的特异性,本研究中所有扫描方法对脓肿的诊断符合率达100%,与赵雪等[26]的结果一致。

3.3 Parks分型

       按照Parks[613]分型,本研究依据原发瘘管的位置与其肛门括约肌的关系将肛瘘分为5种类型,在80例病例中,共检出括约肌间型有51例(占63.75%),经括约肌型有24例(占30%),括约肌外型有2例(占2.5%),括约肌上型有2例(占2.5%),未定型有1例(1.25%),Parks分型的分布与Feng等[27]的研究大致一致。MRI增强对Parks分型的特异性较高[28],本研究对Parks分型的平均检出率为92.5%,与使用3.0 T高分辨率MRI的结果相当(检出率为92.65%)[25]。本研究中,组间的检出率差异虽然没有统计学意义,但是通过进一步对扫描方法与Parks分型的相关性进行分析发现,T1-Vibe-FS-dyn及T1-Vibe-FS-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影可更好地诊断括约肌外型,T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn可更好地诊断未定型,T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影可更好地诊断括约肌上型,这是以往少有报道的,对临床有较好的指导意义。

       本研究的不足之处在于纳入的样本较少,每组只有20例,另有研究者[29]认为对于复杂肛瘘Morris分型比Parks分型具有更好的指导意义,本研究采用Parks分型,也可能是本研究的另一不足之处。综上,4种扫描方法对肛瘘内口位置、原发瘘管数量、分支瘘管数量、脓肿以及Parks分型的诊断符合率没有差异,对内口截石位点分布有差异;对有外瘘口的患者采用方法T1-Vibe-FS-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影可以获得较高的SNR和CNR,对无外瘘口的患者采用方法T1-Vibe-FS-dyn可以获得较高的SNR和CNR;使用钆剂瘘管造影对原发瘘管、分支瘘管有较高的检出率;T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn扫描方法可更好地诊断未定型,T1-Flash-SPAIR-dyn+钆剂瘘管造影扫描方法可更好地诊断括约肌上型,T1-Vibe-FS-dyn和T1-Vibe-Flash-dyn (联合钆剂瘘管造影)扫描方法可更好地诊断括约肌外型。

1
Emile SH, Khan SM, Adejumo A, et al. Ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) in treatment of anal fistula: An updated systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of the predictors of failure[J]. Surgery, 2019, 42(1): 21-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.sugr.2019.09.012.
2
Singh K, Singh N, Thukral C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation of perianal fistulae with surgical correlation[J]. J Clin Diagn Res, 2014, 8(6): RC01-04. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/7328.4417.
3
Vogel JD, Johnson EK, Morris AM, et al. Clinical practice guideline for the management of anorectal abscess, fistula-in-ano, and rectovaginal fistula[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2016, 59(12): 1117-1133. DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000733.
4
Gold SL, Cohen-Mekelburg S, Schneider Y, et al. Perianal fistulas in patients with Crohn's disease, part1:current medical management[J]. Gastroenterol & Hepatology, 2018, 14(8): 470-481.
5
王瑞华, 杨酷, 叶兆祥. MRI在高位肛瘘瘘管定位及术后复发预测中的价值[J]. 天津医科大学学报, 2017, 23(1): 35-37.
Wang RH, Yang K, Ye ZX. The value of MRI in the localization of high anal fistula and the prediction of postoperative recurrence[J]. J Tianjin Med Univ, 2017, 23(1): 35-37.
6
中国医师协会肛肠医师分会临床指南工作委员会. 肛瘘诊治中国专家共识(2020版)[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2020, 23(12): 1123-1130. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn.441530-20200925-00537.
Clinical Guidelines Committee, Colorectal Surgeons Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association. Consensus of Chinese experts on the diagnosis and treatment of anal fistula (2020)[J]. Chin J Gastrointest Surg, 2020, 23(12): 1123-1130. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn.441530-20200925-00537.
7
Baik J, Kim SH, Lee Y, et al. Comparison of T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging for evaluating perianal fistulas[J]. Clin imaging, 2017, 44: 16-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2017.03.019.
8
Konan A, Onur MR, Ozmen MN. The contribution of preoperative MRI to the surgical management of anal fistulas[J]. Diagn Interv Radiol, 2018, 24(6): 321-327. DOI: 10.5152/dir.2018.18340.
9
Williams G, Williams A, Tozer P, et al. The treatment of anal fistula: second ACPGBI position statement-2018[J]. Colorectal Dis, 2018, 20(Suppl 3): 5-31. DOI: 10.1111/codi.14054.
10
林迪逵, 倪萍, 陈冲. 关于MRI质量控制中ROI对信噪比检测影响的研究[J]. 中国医疗设备,2017, 32(4): 66-69. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-1633.2017.04.018.
Lin DK, Ni P, Chen C. Research on the effect of region of interest on signal to noise ratio evaluation in MRI quality control[J]. Chin Med Devices, 2017, 32(4): 66-69. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-1633.2017.04.018.
11
倪耿欢, 赵宏伟, 亓昌珍, 等. 克罗恩病肛瘘与非克罗恩病肛瘘的MRI特征对比分析[J]. 中华放射学杂志, 2019, 53(4): 305-309. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.10051201.2019.04.012.
Ni GH, Zhao HW, Qi CZ, et al. Comparative analysis of MR imaging findings of perianal fistulas in patients with and without Crohn disease[J]. Chin J Radiol, 2019, 53(4): 305-309. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.10051201.2019.04.012.
12
Villa C, Pompili G, Franceschelli G, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of the activity of perianal Crohn's disease[J]. Eur J Radiol, 2012, 81(4): 616622. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.046.
13
王军大, 张桢, 杨华, 等. 糖尿病患者肛管直肠周围感染的MRI影像表现[J]. 重庆医科大学学报, 2020, 45(3): 405-410. DOI: 10.13406/j.cnki.cyxb.001858.
Wang JD, Zhang Z, Yang H, et al. MRI findings of perianorectal infection in diabetic patients[J]. J Chongqing Med Univ, 2020, 45(3): 405-410. DOI: 10.13406/j.cnki.cyxb.001858.
14
张莲, 朱慧媛, 孙金芳, 等. 磁共振三种不同序列对肛瘘瘘管形态特征评价的比较研究[J]. 临床放射学杂志, 2018, 37(2): 289-293. DOI: 10.13437/J.CNKI.JCR.2018.02.026.
Zhang L, Zhu HY, Sun JF, et al. Comparative study of MR different sequence in evaluating the morphological features of anal fistula[J]. J Clin Radiol, 2018, 37(2): 289-293. DOI: 10.13437/J.CNKI.JCR.2018.02.026.
15
李武超, 刘远成, 杨艳, 等. 自由呼吸Star VIBE序列用于采集胸部T1W1[J]. 中国医学影像技术, 2020, 36(6): 923-927. DOI: 10.13929/j.issn.1003-3289.2020.06.030.
Li WC, Liu YC, Yang Y, et al. Free-breathing star volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination sequence for acquisition of chest T1W1[J]. Chin J Med Imaging Technol, 2020, 36(6): 923-927. DOI: 10.13929/j.issn.1003-3289.2020.06.030.
16
王彩云, 马贺骥. 3.0 T MRI 3D-FS-FLASH、T2-mapping较常规序列诊断膝关节软骨早期损伤优势分析[J]. 陕西医学杂志, 2020, 49(1): 40-43, 79. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7377.2020.01.011.
Wang CY, Ma HJ. Advantages of 3.0 T MRI 3D-FS-FLASH and T2-mapping in the early diagnosis of knee joint cartilage compared with conventional sequence[J]. Shaanxi Med J, 2020, 49(1): 40-43, 79. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7377.2020.01.011.
17
张志国, 金艳, 陈欢欢, 等. 肛瘘MRI检查CAIPIRINHA-VIBE序列代替SE-T1W1序列的可行性分析[J]. 临床放射学杂志, 2018, 37(1): 99-102. DOI: 10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2018.01.027.
Zhang ZG, Jin Y, Chen HH, et al. The feasibility analysis of CAIPIRINHA-VIBE sequence replacing SE-T1WI sequence in the MR diagnosis of anal fistula[J]. J Clin Radiol, 2018, 37(1): 99-102. DOI: 10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2018.01.027.
18
Limura E, Giordano P. Modern management of anal fistula[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2015, 21(1): 12-20. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i1.12.
19
戚婉, 李德丽, 石荣, 等. 高分辨率磁共振联合质子密度成像对肛瘘分类及分级的研究价值[J].中国CT和MR杂志, 2020, 18(3): 55-58. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-5131.2020.03.018.
Qi W, Li DL, Shi R, et al. The value of HRMRI combined with PDWI in classification and grading of perianal fistulas[J]. Chin J CT & MRI, 2020, 18(3): 55-58. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-5131.2020.03.018.
20
Pomerri F, Dodi G, Pintacuda G, et al. Anal endosonography and fistulography for fistula-in-ano[J]. Radiol Med, 2010, 115(5): 771-783. DOI: 10.1007/s11547-010-0524-1.
21
袁泉良. 造影CT三维成像在肛瘘术前诊治中的应用价值[J]. 中国CT与MR杂志, 2019, 17(4): 123-125. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-5131.2019.04.038.
Yuan QL. Application of three-dimensional imaging of contrast CT in preoperative diagnosis and treatment of anal fistula[J]. Chin J CT & MRI, 2019, 17(4): 123-125. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-5131.2019.04.038.
22
高荣清, 王志民, 张辉, 等. H2O2造影下三维直肠腔内超声在复杂性肛瘘诊治中的应用[J]. 中国肛肠病杂志, 2019, 39(2): 15-17. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1174.2019.02.007.
Gao RQ, Wang ZM, Zhang H, et al. Application of three-dimensional anal canal intrarectal ultrasound in diagnosis and treatment of complex anal fistula under H2O2 radiography[J]. Chin J Coloproctol, 2019, 39(2): 15-17. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1174.2019.02.007.
23
江泊源, 李馨, 刘丽瑶, 等. MRI多序列成像在肛瘘术前诊断中的应用[J]. 实用放射学杂志, 2021, 37(2): 256-258. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1671.2021.02.020.
Jiang BY, Li X, Liu LY, et al. Application of MRI mult-i sequence imaging in preoperative diagnosis of anal fistula[J]. J Pract Radiol, 2021, 37(2): 256-258. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1671.2021.02.020.
24
刘卫英, 邵志红, 刘梦, 等. 磁共振成像诊断肛瘘误诊或漏诊分析[J]. 同济大学学报(医学版), 2020, 41(3): 309-313. DOI: 10.16118/j.1008-0392.2020.03.007.
Liu WY, Shao ZH, Liu M, et al. Misdiagnosis andmissed diagnosis of anal fistula by magnetic resonance imaging[J]. J Tongji Univ(Med Sci), 2020, 41(3): 309-313. DOI: 10.16118/j.1008-0392.2020.03.007.
25
韦小梅, 邓德茂, 梁玲艳, 等. 3.0 T高分辨率MRI在肛瘘分型与内口定位中的应用价值[J]. 磁共振成像, 2017, 8(5): 354-358. DOI: 10.1205/issn.1674-8034.2017.05.007.
Wei XM, Deng DM, Liang LY, et al. The value of 3.0 T high-spatial-resolution MRI in the fistula classification and internal opening location[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2017, 8(5): 354-358. DOI: 10.1205/issn.1674-8034.2017.05.007.
26
赵雪, 张明辉. 3.0 T磁共振多序列成像在肛周脓肿和肛瘘诊断分型中的应用价值[J]. 贵州医科大学学报, 2019, 44(1): 114-118. DOI: 10.19367/j.cnki.1000-2707.2019.01.023.
Zhao X, Zhang MH. The application of 3.0 T multi-sequence MRI in the diagnosis of perianal abscess and anal fistula[J]. J Guizhou Med Univ, 2019, 44(1): 114-118. DOI: 10.19367/j.cnki.1000-2707.2019.01.023.
27
Feng ST, Huang M, Dong Z, et al. MRI T2-weighted imaging and fat-suppressed T2-weighted imaging image fusion technology improves image discriminability for the evaluation of anal fistulas[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2019, 20(3): 429-437. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2018.0260.
28
刘得超, 李文儒, 王馨华, 等. 肛瘘磁共振成像分型[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2018, 21(12): 1391-1395. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2018.12.011.
Liu DC, Li WR, Wang XH, et al. Classification of anal fistulas based on magnetic resonance imaging[J]. Chin J Gastrointest Surg, 2018, 21(12): 1391-1395. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2018.12.011.
29
袁芬, 李泽然, 于淼淼, 等. MRI在复杂性肛瘘Parks分型与Morris分型的临床价值比较[J]. 临床放射学杂志, 2019, 38(4): 659-663. DOI: 10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2019.04.021.
Yuan F, Li ZR, Yu MM, et al. Compare the clinical applicability of MRI in the parks classification and morris classification in complex anal fistula[J]. J Clin Radiol, 2019, 38(4): 659-663. DOI: 10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2019.04.021.

上一篇 基于杂合型ASL改进静音MRA在脑血管成像中的价值初探
下一篇 MRI 与脑脊液检查在颅内结核疗效评估中的价值
  
诚聘英才 | 广告合作 | 免责声明 | 版权声明
联系电话:010-67113815
京ICP备19028836号-2