分享:
分享到微信朋友圈
X
临床研究
3D BH-GRASE序列MRCP对肝外胆系结石诊断价值的初步研究
许逸超 尹李俊 徐正道 黄秋亚 朱辰杰 陈建新 胡翼江

Cite this article as: XU Y C, YIN L J, XU Z D, et al. Preliminary study on the diagnosis of 3D BH-GRASE sequence MRCP in extrahepatic cholelithiasis[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2023, 14(11): 62-67, 83.本文引用格式:许逸超, 尹李俊, 徐正道, 等. 3D BH-GRASE序列MRCP对肝外胆系结石诊断价值的初步研究[J]. 磁共振成像, 2023, 14(11): 62-67, 83. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.11.011.


[摘要] 目的 对比基于三维呼吸触发快速自旋回波(three dimensional respiratory-triggered turbo spin-echo, 3D RT-TSE)序列与三维屏气梯度-自旋回波(three dimensional breath-hold gradient and spin-echo, 3D BH-GRASE)序列的磁共振胰胆管成像(magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, MRCP)诊断肝外胆道系统结石的临床价值。材料与方法 回顾性分析2017年11月至2022年11月苏州大学附属张家港医院74名因临床怀疑有胆结石而行MRCP检查的患者病例。所有患者均采用3D RT-TSE与3D BH-GRASE两种序列进行MRCP检查。由三名分别具有3年、6年及9年腹部MRI诊断经验的医师对所得图像进行整体图像质量评价,并对适合诊断的图像进行诊断评价。采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验,比较两种序列整体图像质量。采用McNemar检验,比较两种成像方法对肝外胆道系统结石的诊断结果。结果 基于3D BH-GRASE序列的MRCP图像整体质量评分优于基于3D RT-TSE序列(Z=-7.286, P<0.001)。在诊断胆囊结石时,基于3D BH-GRASE序列的MRCP敏感度为92.3%,特异度为89.7%,准确度为91.2%;而基于3D RT-TSE序列的MRCP敏感度为66.7%,特异度为86.2%,准确度为75.0%;二者敏感度和准确度差异具有统计学意义(P≤0.002),特异度差异无统计学意义(P=0.317)。在诊断肝外胆管结石时,基于3D BH-GRASE序列的MRCP敏感度为72.7%,特异度为91.3%,准确度为85.3%;基于3D RT-TSE序列的MRCP敏感度为68.2%,特异度为91.3%,准确度为83.3%;二者差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 基于3D BH-GRASE序列的MRCP对肝外胆道系统结石的检测能力优于基于3D RT-TSE序列,合理应用MRCP检查序列可有效提高检查效率和诊断效能。
[Abstract] Objective To compare clinical value of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) using three-dimensional respiratory-triggered turbo spin-echo (3D RT-TSE) sequence and three-dimensional breath-hold gradient and spin-echo (3D BH-GRASE) sequence in the diagnosis of extrahepatic cholelithiasis.Materials and Methods A retrospective analysis was made on 74 patients who underwent MRCP due to clinical suspicion of cholelithiasis at the Affiliated Zhangjiagang Hospital of Soochow University from November 2017 to November 2022. Both 3D RT-TSE and 3D BH-GRASE sequences were employed for MRCP. Images of the two sequences were evaluated by three radiologists with 3, 6 and 9 years of experience in abdominal MRI, respectively. Three radiologists independently evaluated the overall image quality of the acquired images and assessed the diagnostic quality of images suitable for diagnosis. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was utilized to compare the overall image quality of the two sequences. The McNemar's test was employed to assess the differences in results obtained by the readers using the two imaging methods.Results The overall quality scores of 3D BH-GRASE MRCP images were superior to those of 3D RT-TSE MRCP images (Z=-7.286, P<0.001). In the diagnosis of gallbladder stones, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 3D BH-GRASE MRCP were 92.3%, 89.7% and 91.2%, respectively, while for 3D RT-TSE MRCP, these values were 66.7%, 86.2% and 75.0%, respectively. The difference of sensitivity, and accuracy between the two groups was statistically significant (P≤0.002), but the difference of specificity was statistically insignificant (P=0.317). In the diagnosis of extrahepatic bile duct stones, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 3D BH-GRASE MRCP were 72.7%, 91.3% and 85.3% respectively, whereas for 3D RT-TSE MRCP, these values were 68.2%, 91.3% and 83.3%, respectively. There was no significant difference between them (P>0.05).Conclusions 3D BH-GRASE MRCP is superior to 3D RT-TSE MRCP in the detection of extrahepatic cholelithiasis. Reasonable optimization of MRCP sequence could enhance the efficiency of examination and diagnostic efficacy.
[关键词] 胆道结石;磁共振成像;磁共振胰胆管成像;诊断
[Keywords] cholelithiasis;magnetic resonance imaging;magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography;diagnosis

许逸超    尹李俊    徐正道    黄秋亚    朱辰杰    陈建新    胡翼江 *  

苏州大学附属张家港医院影像科,苏州 215600

通信作者:胡翼江,E-mail:yijiang_hu@aliyun.com

作者贡献声明:胡翼江设计本研究的方案,对稿件重要内容进行修改;许逸超起草和撰写稿件,分析数据,并获得了张家港市科学技术局社会发展技术创新研究项目基金资助;尹李俊、徐正道获取、分析并解释数据,参与撰写稿件;黄秋亚、朱辰杰、陈建新获取、分析并解释数据,对重要内容进行修改;全体作者都同意发表最后的修改稿,同意对本研究的所有方面负责,确保本研究的准确性和诚信。


基金项目: 张家港市科学技术局社会发展技术创新研究项目 ZKS2142
收稿日期:2023-04-14
接受日期:2023-10-27
中图分类号:R445.2  R657.42 
文献标识码:A
DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.11.011
本文引用格式:许逸超, 尹李俊, 徐正道, 等. 3D BH-GRASE序列MRCP对肝外胆系结石诊断价值的初步研究[J]. 磁共振成像, 2023, 14(11): 62-67, 83. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.11.011.

0 前言

       胆石症是临床常见疾病之一,随着我国人民生活水平的不断提高,人们的饮食结构发生变化,胆石症的发病率呈逐年上升趋势[1]。胆石症的临床症状主要包括上腹部的急/慢性疼痛、发热、黄疸等[2],其症状的轻重程度与胆道结石发生部位,是否引起胆道梗阻、梗阻的严重程度以及是否合并胆道感染等情况有关[3, 4]。病情严重的胆石症患者甚至可出现感染性休克。因此,胆石症的早期诊断与病情严重程度的评估具有重要临床意义。

       磁共振胰胆管成像(magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, MRCP)因其无辐射性、无创性、图像高信噪比、可三维(three dimensional, 3D)成像多角度观察胆道系统结构等优点,已成为胰胆管疾病的重要影像学检查方法之一[5, 6, 7, 8]。目前,3D MRCP扫描方式主要包括自由呼吸与屏气两种扫描方式。以呼吸触发(respiratory triggered, RT)或导航方式进行3D MRCP扫描是临床上常用的图像采集方法[9, 10]。在我国,胆石症主要好发于中老年[11],检查中患者常常因疼痛不耐受、扫描时间较长等出现呼吸节律不齐,从而产生呼吸、运动伪影,影响MRCP图像质量,干扰阅片者对病变的判断。3D MRCP屏气扫描可采用平衡稳态自由进动(balanced steady-state free precession, B-SSFP)、快速恢复快速自旋回波(fast-recovery fast spin-echo, FRTSE)、屏气梯度-自旋回波(breath-hold gradient and spin-echo, BH-GRASE)、压缩感知(compressed sensing, CS)等序列完成。B-SSFP和FRTSE序列由于空间分辨率低、屏气时间长、容易产生伪影等缺点,均未能在临床工作中得到广泛应用[12, 13, 14, 15]。近来的一些研究[16, 17, 18]证明,CS技术在MRCP的应用不仅能明显缩短扫描时间,还可获得优良的图像质量。但CS技术需要较高要求的硬件及软件支持[19, 20],这限制了3D CS-MRCP临床的广泛运用。GRASE序列是快速自旋回波(turbo spin echo, TSE)和回波平面成像(echo-planar imaging, EPI)技术的杂合序列。该序列将EPI采集方式引入TSE序列的2个180°脉冲之间,通过获得多个梯度回波在较短的重复时间内实现极高的回波采集率。与TSE序列相比,GRASE序列的时间分辨率大幅提高[8]。过去的研究已经证明GRASE序列可以大大缩短扫描时间,并可提供符合临床诊断要求的图像[21]。随着不断研究探索,GRASE序列不仅在人体各部位的T2WI得以有效运用,而且在功能成像中展现出一定的临床应用价值[22, 23]。与CS序列相比,GRASE序列现可在大部分磁共振机型上实现设置与运用,具有广泛运用于临床工作的潜能与价值。

       目前,3D BH-GRASE MRCP对胆道系统结石诊断价值的研究已有一定报道,但尚无对肝外胆道系统结石诊断效能的研究。靳珍怡等[24]对比分析了3D GRASE MRCP与二维TSE MRCP对胆道结石的诊断价值。在由一名具有8年腹部影像诊断经验的主治医师回顾性分析96例疑诊胰腺或胆道疾病的研究中[25],研究者讨论了3D BH-GRASE MRCP对胆囊部、胆囊管部、肝内胆管部及胆总管部结石的检出情况,但此项研究仅探讨了3D BH-GRASE MRCP对胆道结石的检出率,并未分析敏感度、特异度等诊断效能指标。而本研究将肝外胆道系统分为胆囊部和肝外胆管部进行评价,并由三名不同年资阅片者通过对比分析3D BH-GRASE MRCP和3D RT-TSE MRCP对胆囊部和肝外胆管部结石的敏感度、特异度及准确度,探讨3D BH-GRASE MRCP对肝外胆道系统结石的诊断价值。

1 材料与方法

1.1 研究对象

       本研究遵守《赫尔辛基宣言》,经苏州大学附属张家港医院伦理委员会批准,免除受试者知情同意,批准文号:ZJJYYLL-2023-03-001。回顾性分析2017年11月至2022年11月期间本院符合以下标准的患者病例。纳入标准:(1)临床资料怀疑有胆道系统结石;(2)完成MRCP检查。排除标准:(1)既往有腹部及胰胆管疾病手术史;(2)存在大量腹水影响MRCP图像观察与分析;(3)未能完成3D RT-TSE序列和3D BH-GRASE序列MRCP检查。本研究中行胆结石手术的患者以手术结果为金标准,未行手术的患者在初次行MRI后的6个月内,经超声成像、CT、MRI中的一种及以上的诊断结果为判断标准[26, 27]

1.2 检查方法

       所有患者扫描前均禁食、禁水6 h。磁共振技术员在检查前科学指导患者进行适应性的呼吸训练及屏气训练。患者头先进、仰卧位,采用3.0 T超导磁共振扫描仪(Philips Achieva TX, Philips Healthcare, Netherlands),16通道Torsor线圈进行成像,所有患者均顺利完成3D BH-GRASE和3D RT-TSE序列MRCP扫描。3D BH-GRASE及3D RT-TSE MRCP均采用如下相同的扫描参数:冠状位扫描,视野250 mm×250 mm,矩阵180×175,层厚1.4 mm,扫描层数60,相位编码为左右方向,常规施加抗卷褶,并行采集加速因子为2。其余扫描参数如下:(1)3D BH-GRASE,重复时间(repetition time, TR)277 ms,回波时间(echo time, TE)84 ms,翻转角90°,扫描时间16.4 s;(2)3D RT-TSE,TR 1993 ms,TE 780 ms,翻转角90°,采用RT扫描方式,扫描时间186-358 s。

1.3 图像分析

       将两组3D MRCP序列图像传输至Philips工作站进行图像后处理与图像分析。由三名分别具有3年、6年及9年腹部MRI诊断经验的影像科医师(职称分别为住院医师、主治医师、副主任医师)在不知晓患者全部信息及图像序列参数的情况下使用4级评分法对两种方法所得最大密度投影图像及原始图像独立进行整体图像质量评分,并对适合诊断的图像独立进行诊断评价。当三名医师诊断评价结果不一致时,经协商后按少数服从多数原则达成一致。

       整体图像质量评分标准:4分,图像质量优,胆管边缘锐利,无伪影;3分,图像质量良好,胆管边缘稍模糊,轻度伪影;2分,图像质量较差,胆管边缘模糊,中度伪影;1分,图像质量差,胆管边缘重度模糊,严重伪影。将4分和3分图像判定为适合诊断的图像,将2分和1分图像判定为不适合诊断的图像。

1.4 统计学分析

       数据采用IBM SPSS Statistics 23.0软件(IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, USA)进行统计学分析。采用Shapiro-Wilk检验判断计量资料是否符合正态分布。符合正态分布的计量资料用平均数±标准差表示,不符合正态分布的计量资料用中位数(上、下四分位数)表示。计数资料用例数及百分比表示,计数资料的比较使用卡方检验。等级资料以中位数(上、下四分位数)表示。采用Kendall's W检验对三名阅片者主观判断进行一致性评价,根据Kendall's W系数(<0.20为较差,0.20~<0.40为一般,0.40~<0.60为中等,0.60~<0.80为较好,0.80~1.00为好)判断一致性强度。采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验比较两种序列整体图像质量,采用McNemar检验比较两种序列图像诊断肝外胆道结石的诊断效能。P<0.05被认为差异具有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 一般资料

       共74例患者病例纳入研究。经手术证实为肝外胆道系统结石的共49例,其中胆囊结石26例,肝外胆管结石6例,肝外胆管结石合并胆囊结石17例。未行手术初诊MRI检查及随访结果均诊断为无肝外胆道系统结石的有25例。入组病例的临床特征见表1

表1  74名入组患者的临床特征
Tab. 1  Clinical characteristics of 74 participants

2.2 两种序列图像整体质量主观评价

       三名阅片者在3D RT-TSE序列和3D BH-GRASE序列图像整体质量主观评分中的一致性均为较好(Kendall's W系数分别为0.800、0.743, P<0.001)。3D BH-GRASE序列图像整体质量评分高于3D RT-TSE序列(表2)。

表2  两种序列的整体质量主观评价
Tab. 2  Subjective evaluation of the overall quality of the two sequences

2.3 两种序列对肝外胆道系统结石的诊断评价

       在剔除6例图像整体质量评分小于3分的病例后,对68例患者的图像进行诊断评价。正常的胆道系统结构在MRCP图像上呈连续且均匀的高信号影,肝外胆道系统结石表现为高信号结构内单发或多发的圆形、类圆形低信号结节影[24]。两种序列成像情况见图1, 2

2.3.1 不同阅片者判断肝外胆道系统结石一致性评价

       三名阅片者在3D RT-TSE序列和3D BH-GRASE序列判断肝外胆道系统有无结石的一致性为较好或好(Kendall's W系数0.783-0.873, P<0.001),详见表3

表3  阅片者之间对不同序列判断肝外胆道系统结石的一致性分析
Tab. 3  The inter-observer agreement of different sequences in diagnosis of extrahepatic cholelithiasis

2.3.2 两种序列判断肝外胆道系统结石的差异性分析

       在判断有无胆囊结石时,三名阅片者使用上述两种成像方法的结果差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。在判断有无肝外胆管结石时,三名阅片者使用两种成像方法判断的结果差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),详见表4

表4  3D RT-TSE和3D BH-GRASE序列MRCP诊断肝外胆道系统结石的差异性
Tab. 4  Difference between 3D RT-TSE and 3D BH-GRASE MRCP in the diagnosis of extrahepatic cholelithiasis

2.3.3 两种序列对肝外胆道系统结石的诊断评价

       在胆囊结石的诊断中,三名阅片者使用3D RT-TSE序列准确诊断有结石的病例26例,无结石的病例25例,漏诊13例,误诊4例;使用3D BH-GRASE序列时,准确诊断有结石的病例36例,无结石的病例26例,漏诊3例,误诊3例。在诊断胆囊结石时,两种序列的敏感度和准确度差异具有统计学意义(P≤0.002),而特异度差异无统计学意义(P=0.317)。在肝外胆管结石的诊断中,三名医生使用3D RT-TSE序列准确诊断有结石的病例15例,无结石的病例42例,漏诊7例,误诊4例;使用3D BH-GRASE序列时,准确诊断有结石的病例16例,无结石的病例42例,漏诊6例,误诊4例。在诊断肝外胆管结石时,两种序列的敏感度、特异度与准确度差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两种序列成像方法对肝外胆道系统结石的诊断效能情况见表5

表5  3D RT-TSE和3D BH-GRASE序列MRCP诊断肝外胆道系统结石的诊断效能比较
Tab. 5  Comparison of the efficacy of 3D RT-TSE and 3D BH-GRASE MRCP in diagnosis of extrahepatic cholelithiasis
图1  女,46岁,经手术证实为多发性胆囊结石和胆囊炎。1A:三维呼吸触发快速自旋回波(three-dimensional respiratory-triggered turbo spin-echo, 3D RT-TSE)序列磁共振胰胆管成像(magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, MRCP)原始图像,无法识别胆囊结构和病变;1B:3D RT-TSE MRCP的最大信号强度投影(maximum intensity projection, MIP)图像,部分肝管和胆总管显示清晰,胆囊结构显示不清;1C:三维屏气梯度-自旋回波(three-dimensional breath-hold gradient and spin-echo, 3D BH-GRASE)序列MRCP原始图像,胆囊腔内多发低信号小结石显示清晰;1D:3D BH-GRASE MRCP的MIP图像,胆道系统结构显示清晰,胆囊内可见局灶性充盈缺损。
图2  男,72岁,经手术证实为胆总管结石。2A:3D RT-TSE MRCP原始图像,胆总管显示欠佳,胆总管下段结石略显模糊;2B:3D RT-TSE MRCP的MIP图像,胆道结构显示良好,具有轻度伪影,胆管下段结石较容易辨认;2C:3D BH-GRASE MRCP原始图像,胆总管及胆总管下段结石显示清晰;2D:3D BH-GRASE MRCP的MIP图像,胆道系统结构及胆总管下段结石显示清晰。
Fig. 1  Female, 46-year-old, surgical confirmation of multiple gallstones and cholecystitis. 1A: Original image from the three-dimensional respiratory-triggered turbo spin-echo sequence magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (3D RT-TSE MRCP), where the gallbladder structure and lesions can not be identified; 1B: Maximum intensity projection (MIP) image from the 3D RT-TSE MRCP, showing partial clarity of the hepatic ducts and whole clarity of common bile duct, with unclear visualization of the gallbladder structure; 1C: Original image from the 3D BH-GRASE MRCP, revealing multiple low-signal small stones within the gallbladder cavity clearly; 1D: MIP image from the 3D BH-GRASE MRCP, providing an overall clear visualization of the biliary structures, with focal filling defects observe within the gallbladder.
Fig. 2  Male, 72-year-old, surgical confirmation of common bile duct stones. 2A: Original image from the 3D RT-TSE MRCP, showing suboptimal visualization of the common bile duct, with lower segment stones appearing somewhat blurry; 2B: MIP image from the 3D RT-TSE MRCP, presenting a generally acceptable depiction of the biliary structures, with minor artifacts, and relatively recognizable stones in lower segment of common bile duct; 2C: Original image from the 3D BH-GRASE MRCP, demonstrating clear visualization of the common bile duct and the lower segment stones; 2D: MIP image from the 3D BH-GRASE MRCP, offering clear visualization of the overall biliary structures, as well as the lower segment stones.

3 讨论

       既往对于3D BH-GRASE MRCP的研究通常关注图像整体质量以及胰胆管精细结构显示程度的分析评价[28, 29, 30, 31],使用该序列对病种进行诊断评价的研究较少[24, 25, 32]。目前,国内的研究仅分析了3D BH-GRASE MRCP对胆道结石的检出率,并且国内外的研究尚无有关对比分析3D BH-GRASE MRCP与3D RT-TSE MRCP对肝外胆道系统结石诊断效能的报道。本研究发现,与3D RT-TSE MRCP相比,3D BH-GRASE MRCP在诊断胆囊结石时具有更高的敏感度和准确度;而在诊断肝外胆管结石时,3D BH-GRASE MRCP的敏感度、特异度和准确度与3D RT-TSE MRCP相当。

3.1 3D BH-GRASE MRCP序列优化与检查前准备

       本研究中,3D RT-TSE MRCP与3D BH-GRASE MRCP整体图像质量的主观评价均较为满意,并且3D BH-GRASE MRCP的图像质量更佳。这与我们之前的研究结果相一致[33]。与3D RT-TSE序列相比,3D BH-GRASE序列融合了TSE和EPI序列的优点,具有极短的扫描时间和较高的图像稳定性[34]。在MRCP序列图像中胆道系统信号的强弱受胆汁内水含量的影响,浓缩的胆汁或血性胆汁会降低胆囊及胆囊管的显示[28, 35]。ITATANI等[36]发现在需行腹腔镜胆囊切除术的患者中,约有49%的患者存在胆汁浓缩的情况,并认为这可能是导致TSE序列MRCP对胆囊和胆囊管可视性降低的原因。本研究在3D BH-GRASE序列的基础上联合使用可加速纵向弛豫恢复的驱动平衡脉冲,以此来减少胆汁内水含量对图像的影响,从而获得较高质量的胆道系统结构图像[33]。3D RT-TSE MRCP序列的图像质量易受患者自身呼吸节律的影响,虽然在检查前MRI技师会常规对患者进行呼吸训练,但在较长时间的检查过程中,患者的情况仍难以把控。屏气序列的图像质量主要取决于患者的屏气情况。在本项研究中,患者在检查前均进行时长约16 s的屏气训练,并顺利完成图像扫描。因此,对于可以进行屏气配合的患者,本研究建议可以通过检查前屏气训练来进一步提高3D BH-GRASE MRCP图像的稳定性。过去的研究显示,虽然3D BH-GRASE序列的背景抑制效果不如3D RT-TSE序列,但并不影响阅片者对于胆道系统的观察[21, 37]

3.2 3D BH-GRASE序列对肝外胆道系统结石的诊断价值

       在诊断胆囊结石时,与3D RT-TSE MRCP相比,3D BH-GRASE MRCP具有更高的敏感度和准确度。这可能与胆囊结石在3D BH-GRASE MRCP更容易观察有关。胆囊形态较为多样复杂,可受到周围脏器组织的压迫而产生形变,也会受到来自肝脏、消化道的信号干扰,影响阅片者对胆囊的观察。与3D RT-TSE MRCP相比,3D BH-GRASE MRCP无呼吸伪影干扰,图像稳定性更高,并且胆汁浓度、成分因素对3D BH-GRASE MRCP的影响较小,结石与胆汁的信号对比明显。艾革等[38]认为,将BH-GRASE序列中的TE设置为100 ms左右时可以区分正常胆汁、浓缩胆汁与结石。本研究的3D BH-GRASE序列采用更短的TE(值为84 ms),有助于在有胆汁浓缩的情况下判断有无结石。MRCP对仰卧位的患者通常采用冠状位扫描方式,故在图像上胆囊腔内背侧沉积排列的泥沙样结石或小结石易与同为低信号的周围背景混淆,从而影响阅片者做出准确诊断[4]。由于短TE的原因[39],3D BH-GRASE序列背景抑制效果不如3D RT-TSE序列,低信号的结石在3D BH-GRASE序列相对较高的背景信号下更容易辨认。在诊断肝外胆管结石时,阅片者使用3D RT-TSE和3D BH-GRASE序列的诊断效能差异无统计学意义。这可能是因为肝外胆管位置较为固定,周围背景抑制较好,在MRCP图像上能直观、清晰地进行观察。而呼吸伪影、胆汁浓度及成分等因素对肝外胆管及病变的显示存在一定的干扰。

       靳珍怡等[24]的研究显示3D GRASE MRCP在胆道结石的检出率优于二维TSE MRCP,并认为3D GRASE MRCP有助于胆道结石的明确诊断。魏志民等[25]在对比分析3D GRASE MRCP与3D TSE MRCP的研究中指出,3D GRASE MRCP对检出胆道系统结石的能力不弱于3D TSE MRCP,并能更清晰地显示胆囊和胆囊管结石的形态及位置。MORIMOTO-ISHIKAWA等[35]认为,对于在T1WI上胆汁呈高信号的患者,3D BH-GRASE MRCP的图像质量优于3D BH-CS MRCP;虽然GRASE序列与CS序列MRCP对胆道结石的检出率差异无统计学意义,但是GRASE序列具有较高的胆道结石检出率。上述研究虽然方法各有不同,但能从一定程度上说明3D GRASE MRCP对胆道结石诊断具有一定优势。也有学者指出,对于胆石症患者,尤其是需行内镜逆行胰胆管造影和腹腔镜下胆囊切除术的患者,使用3D BH-GRASE序列对胆道系统进行术前评估可以使手术者更清晰、全面地了解胆道结构,发现病变,从而避免医源性胆管损伤的发生[40, 41]。然而,HE等[21]在研究中发现,对于胆道相关疾病和胆道解剖变异的诊断,GRASE MRCP、CS MRCP和呼吸导航MRCP之间的差异均无统计学意义。这与该研究中胆道相关疾病及胆道解剖变异的样本量过少,且未对胆道系统进行细化评价有关。故该研究不能准确地说明GRASE MRCP在胆道相关疾病和胆道解剖变异的临床应用价值。

       此外,本研究的所有阅片者使用3D RT-TSE和3D BH-GRASE序列诊断胆囊结石的结果均存在差异,且不同年资的阅片者使用3D BH-GRASE MRCP诊断肝外胆道系统结石的一致性均表现为好。由此推断,3D BH-GRASE MRCP的应用可增强低年资医生诊断肝外胆道系统结石的信心。结合之前的研究结果[33],我们认为,对于临床上高度怀疑肝外胆道系统结石且能配合完成屏气的患者,3D BH-GRASE序列可作为MRCP的首选扫描方案。

3.3 本研究的局限性

       首先,本研究未对结石大小、数目及精细位置做出评价,只从大体解剖结构进行分析研究;其次,本研究为单中心的回顾性研究,病例较少,未行手术的患者以随访结果为判定标准,数据结果存在一定偏倚。多中心、扩大样本量的研究将是今后临床研究的目标方向,以证明本项研究结果的可靠性。

4 结论

       综上所述,3D BH-GRASE MRCP对肝外胆道系统结石的检测能力优于3D RT-TSE MRCP,合理应用MRCP扫描方案可有效提高检查效率和诊断效能。

[1]
蔡怀阳, 叶亮, 许雪清, 等. 胆管腔内超声、内镜逆行胰胆管造影、磁共振胰胆管成像与超声诊断胆总管结石的对比研究[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志, 2022, 30(10): 1035-1039. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5185.2022.10.012.
CAI H Y, YE L, XU X Q, et al. Intraductal ultrasonography, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, magnetic resonance cholangiography and ultrasonography in diagnosis of common bile duct stones: a comparative study[J]. Chin J Med Imag, 2022, 30(10): 1035-1039. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5185.2022.10.012.
[2]
JAGTAP N, KUMAR J K, CHAVAN R, et al. EUS versus MRCP to perform ERCP in patients with intermediate likelihood of choledocholithiasis: a randomised controlled trial[J/OL]. Gut, 2022: gutjnl-gu2021-325080 [2023-04-01]. https://gut.bmj.com/content/71/10/2005.long. DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-325080.
[3]
程檬, 牛志强, 陈宗坤, 等. 肠道菌群与胆石症病因的研究进展[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2022, 31(8): 1113-1120. DOI: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2022.08.014.
CHENG M, NIU Z Q, CHEN Z K, et al. Research progress of intestinal flora in etiology of cholelithiasis[J]. Chin J Gen Surg, 2022, 31(8): 1113-1120. DOI: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2022.08.014.
[4]
MATTILA A, PYNNÖNEN E, SIRONEN A, et al. Routine preoperative MRCP in screening choledocholithiasis in acute cholecystitis compared to selective approach: a population-based study[J]. Updates Surg, 2023, 75(3): 563-570. DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01390-7.
[5]
MAHALINGAM N, RALLI G P, TROUT A T, et al. Comparison of quantitative 3D magnetic resonance cholangiography measurements obtained using three different image acquisition methods[J]. Abdom Radiol, 2022, 47(1): 196-208. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-03330-2.
[6]
TRUNZ L M, GUGLIELMO F F, SELVARAJAN S K, et al. Biliary excretion of gadobenate dimeglumine causing degradation of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP)[J]. Abdom Radiol, 2021, 46(2): 562-569. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02686-1.
[7]
BREAKEY S, HARRIS A C. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in the setting of acute pancreaticobiliary disease: can certain clinical factors guide appropriate utilization?[J]. Can Assoc Radiol J, 2022, 73(1): 27-29. DOI: 10.1177/08465371211025527.
[8]
ZINS M. Breath-holding 3D MRCP: the time is now?[J]. Eur Radiol, 2018, 28(9): 3719-3720. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-018-5550-8.
[9]
KIM Y, LEE E S, PARK H J, et al. Comparison between conventional breath-hold and respiratory-triggered magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with and without compressed sensing: cross-sectional study[J]. Curr Med Imaging, 2023 [2023-04-01]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37018526/. DOI: 10.2174/1573405620666230328093206.
[10]
薛华丹, 何铭, 刘再毅. 磁共振胰胆管成像扫描技术及临床应用中国专家共识[J]. 磁共振成像, 2023, 14(4): 1-5, 21. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.04.001.
XUE H D, HE M, LIU Z Y. Chinese expert consensus of scanning protocol and clinical application of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imag, 2023, 14(4): 1-5, 21. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.04.001.
[11]
李军祥, 陈誩, 梁健. 胆石症中西医结合诊疗共识意见(2017年)[J]. 中国中西医结合消化杂志, 2018, 26(2): 132-138. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-038X.2018.02.04.
LI J X, CHEN J, LIANG J. Consensus opinion on diagnosis and treatment of cholelithiasis with integrated traditional Chinese and western medicine (2017)[J]. Chin J Integr Tradit West Med Dig, 2018, 26(2): 132-138. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-038X.2018.02.04.
[12]
GLOCKNER J F, LEE C U. Balanced steady state-free precession (b-SSFP) imaging for MRCP: techniques and applications[J]. Abdom Imaging, 2014, 39(6): 1309-1322. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-014-0153-6.
[13]
SODICKSON A, MORTELE K J, BARISH M A, et al. Three-dimensional fast-recovery fast spin-echo MRCP: comparison with two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo techniques[J]. Radiology, 2006, 238(2): 549-559. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2382032065.
[14]
GLOCKNER J F, SARANATHAN M, BAYRAM E, et al. Breath-held MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) using a 3D Dixon fat-water separated balanced steady state free precession sequence[J]. Magn Reson Imaging, 2013, 31(8): 1263-1270. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2013.06.008.
[15]
NAM J G, LEE J M, KANG H J, et al. GRASE Revisited: breath-hold three-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography using a Gradient and Spin Echo (GRASE) technique at 3T[J]. Eur Radiol, 2018, 28(9): 3721-3728. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-5275-0.
[16]
FURLAN A, BAYRAM E, THANGASAMY S, et al. Application of compressed sensing to 3D magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for the evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions[J]. Magn Reson Imaging, 2018, 52: 131-136. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2018.05.015.
[17]
王梦珂, 白岩, 孟楠, 等. 常规胰胆管成像与压缩感知胰胆管成像对胰胆系显示的对比[J]. 磁共振成像, 2021, 12(3): 30-33. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.03.007.
WANG M K, BAI Y, MENG N, et al. Comparison of conventional cholangiopancreatography and compressed sensing cholangiopancreatography in the display of biliary dilatation and pancreatic duct dilatation[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imag, 2021, 12(3): 30-33. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.03.007.
[18]
CHEN Z Y, SUN B, XUE Y J, et al. Comparing compressed sensing breath-hold 3D MR cholangiopancreatography with two parallel imaging MRCP strategies in main pancreatic duct and common bile duct[J/OL]. Eur J Radiol, 2021, 142: 109833 [2023-04-01]. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0720-048X(21)00314-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109833.
[19]
YOON J H, NICKEL M D, PEETERS J M, et al. Rapid imaging: recent advances in abdominal MRI for reducing acquisition time and its clinical applications[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2019, 20(12): 1597-1615. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2018.0931.
[20]
ZHANG Y, PENG W L, XIAO Y, et al. Rapid 3D breath-hold MR cholangiopancreatography using deep learning-constrained compressed sensing reconstruction[J]. Eur Radiol, 2023, 33(4): 2500-2509. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-09227-y.
[21]
HE M, XU J, SUN Z Y, et al. Comparison and evaluation of the efficacy of compressed SENSE (CS) and gradient- and spin-echo (GRASE) in breath-hold (BH) magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP)[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2020, 51(3): 824-832. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26863.
[22]
PARK S, TORRISI S, TOWNSEND J D, et al. Highly accelerated submillimeter resolution 3D GRASE with controlled T2 blurring in T2-weighted functional MRI at 7 Tesla: A feasibility study[J]. Magn Reson Med, 2021, 85(5): 2490-2506. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.28589.
[23]
CHU M L, CHIEN C P, WU W C, et al. Gradient- and spin-echo (GRASE) MR imaging: a long-existing technology that may find wide applications in modern era[J]. Quant Imaging Med Surg, 2019, 9(9): 1477-1484. DOI: 10.21037/qims.2019.09.13.
[24]
靳珍怡, 陈财忠, 孙伟. 3D梯度自旋回波序列在胰胆管成像中的应用价值[J]. 实用放射学杂志, 2022, 38(7): 1177-1180. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1671.2022.07.032.
JIN Z Y, CHEN C Z, SUN W. Application value of 3D gradient and spin echo sequence in cholangiopancreatography[J]. J Pract Radiol, 2022, 38(7): 1177-1180. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1671.2022.07.032.
[25]
魏志民, 宋玉坤, 韩海伟, 等. 对比分析屏气三维梯度-自旋回波与呼吸门控触发三维快速自旋回波MR胰胆管成像[J]. 中国医学影像技术, 2020, 36(8): 1234-1238. DOI: 10.13929/j.issn.1003-3289.2020.08.027.
WEI Z M, SONG Y K, HAN H W, et al. Comparison on three-dimensional MR cholangiopancreatography with breath-hold gradient-spin echo and respiratory gated triggering turbo-spin echo[J]. Chin J Med Imag Technol, 2020, 36(8): 1234-1238. DOI: 10.13929/j.issn.1003-3289.2020.08.027.
[26]
MEERALAM Y, AL-SHAMMARI K, YAGHOOBI M. Diagnostic accuracy of EUS compared with MRCP in detecting choledocholithiasis: a meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy in head-to-head studies[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 2017, 86(6): 986-993. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.06.009.
[27]
SONG J S, KIM S H, KUEHN B, et al. Optimized breath-hold compressed-sensing 3D MR cholangiopancreatography at 3T: image quality analysis and clinical feasibility assessment[J/OL]. Diagnostics, 2020, 10(6): 376 [2023-04-01]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7345120/. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics10060376.
[28]
YOSHIDA M, NAKAURA T, INOUE T, et al. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with GRASE sequence at 3.0T: does it improve image quality and acquisition time as compared with 3D TSE?[J]. Eur Radiol, 2018, 28(6): 2436-2443. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-5240-y.
[29]
JANG W, SONG J S, KIM S H, et al. Comparison of compressed sensing and gradient and spin-echo in breath-hold 3D MR cholangiopancreatography: qualitative and quantitative analysis[J/OL]. Diagnostics, 2021, 11(4): 634 [2023-04-01]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33915832/. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11040634.
[30]
谭云, 何兰, 罗维, 等. 两种三维MR胰胆管成像技术的应用价值比较[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志, 2022, 30(12): 1296-1300. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5185.2022.12.019.
TAN Y, HE L, LUO W, et al. Application of two technologies of three-dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancrea-tography: a comparative study[J]. Chin J Med Imag, 2022, 30(12): 1296-1300. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5185.2022.12.019.
[31]
CHIEN, CHIU F M, SHEN Y C, et al. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3T in a single breath-hold: comparative effectiveness between three-dimensional (3D) gradient-and spin-echo and two-dimensional (2D) thick-slab fast spin-echo acquisitions[J]. Quant Imaging Med Surg, 2020, 10(6): 1265-1274. DOI: 10.21037/qims.2020.04.14.
[32]
YOEN H, LEE J M, LEE S M, et al. Comparisons between image quality and diagnostic performance of 2D-and breath-hold 3D magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3T[J]. Eur Radiol, 2021, 31(11): 8399-8407. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-07968-w.
[33]
许逸超, 徐正道, 张家会, 等. 三维屏气梯度-自旋回波序列在MR胰胆管成像中的应用[J]. 中华放射学杂志, 2021, 55(1): 64-69. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112149-20200215-00160.
XU Y C, XU Z D, ZHANG J H, et al. The application of three-dimensional breath-hold gradient and spin-echo sequence in the MR cholangiopancreatography[J]. Chin J Radiol, 2021, 55(1): 64-69. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112149-20200215-00160.
[34]
李馨, 朱寅虎, 金大永, 等. 单次屏气与呼吸触发三维可变反转角快速自旋回波序列在MR胰胆管成像中的应用比较[J]. 实用放射学杂志, 2021, 37(6): 1013-1016. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1671.2021.06.035.
LI X, ZHU Y H, JIN D Y, et al. Usefulness of breath hold 3D-SPACE sequence in MR cholangiopancreatography: comparison with breath triggered sequence[J]. J Pract Radiol, 2021, 37(6): 1013-1016. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1671.2021.06.035.
[35]
MORIMOTO-ISHIKAWA D, HYODO T, TAKENAKA M, et al. Comparison between gradient and spin-echo (GRASE) and compressed sensing sequences for single breath-hold three-dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients with T1 hyperintense bile[J/OL]. Eur J Radiol, 2022, 150: 110279 [2023-04-01]. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0720-048X(22)00129-2. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110279.
[36]
ITATANI R, NAMIMOTO T, KAJIHARA H, et al. Preoperative evaluation of the cystic duct for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: comparison of navigator-gated prospective acquisition correction- and conventional respiratory-triggered techniques at free-breathing 3D MR cholangiopancreatography[J]. Eur Radiol, 2013, 23(7): 1911-1918. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-2790-5.
[37]
李玮, 全硕, 张晓东, 等. 压缩感知及梯度自旋回波序列优化3D MR胰胆管成像图像质量的可行性[J]. 中国介入影像与治疗学, 2022, 19(11): 720-724. DOI: 10.13929/j.issn.1672-8475.2022.11.012.
LI W, QUAN S, ZHANG X D, et al. Feasibility of compressed sensing and gradient and spin echo sequence for optimizing image quality of 3D MR cholangiopancreatography[J]. Chin J Interv Imag Ther, 2022, 19(11): 720-724. DOI: 10.13929/j.issn.1672-8475.2022.11.012.
[38]
艾革, 彭婕. 2D-MRCP、NT-MRCP与BH-GraSE-MRCP的成像质量对比研究[J]. 影像研究与医学应用, 2021, 5(15): 20-21, 24. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-3807.2021.15.008.
AI G, PENG J. Study of imaging quality in 2D-MRCP, NT-MRCP and BH-GraSE-MRCP[J]. J Imag Res Med Appl, 2021, 5(15): 20-21, 24. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-3807.2021.15.008.
[39]
ITATANI R, NAMIMOTO T, TAKAOKA H, et al. Clinical impact of 3-dimensional balanced turbo-field-echo magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3 T: prospective intraindividual comparison with 3-dimensional turbo-spin-echo magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2015, 39(1): 19-24. DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000163.
[40]
WILLIAMS E, BECKINGHAM I, SAYED G E, et al. Updated guideline on the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS)[J]. Gut, 2017, 66(5): 765-782. DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2016-312317.
[41]
CONRAD C, WAKABAYASHI G, ASBUN H J, et al. IRCAD recommendation on safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2017, 24(11): 603-615. DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.491.

上一篇 基于磁共振扩散加权成像的虚拟弹性成像在肝脏局灶性病变中的应用价值
下一篇 基于临床表现及MRI特征的诺莫图早期预测急性胰腺炎胰周积聚的转归
  
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