分享:
分享到微信朋友圈
X
临床研究
全身磁共振成像对乳腺癌术后偶发病变的诊断价值
方芳 张丹丹 孙玉 雷露 史河水 吕雪飞

本文引用格式:方芳, 张丹丹, 孙玉, 等. 全身磁共振成像对乳腺癌术后偶发病变的诊断价值[J]. 磁共振成像, 2025, 16(12): 87-94. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2025.12.013.


[摘要] 目的 探讨全身磁共振成像(whole-body MRI, WB-MRI)技术对乳腺癌术后偶发病变的诊断价值。材料与方法 回顾性分析2022年1月至2025年2月武汉市红十字会医院收治的222例乳腺癌术后患者的WB-MRI影像资料,基于国际指南,将所有的偶发病变分为显著与非显著两组,以病理或随访结果为金标准,对比WB-MRI与常规影像检查(CT平扫和超声)的诊断效能,并分析年龄、术后时间与病变数量的关系。结果 经WB-MRI检查,222 例患者中共检出736个偶发病变,检出率为98.20%(218/222),其中显著病变132个(17.93%),主要分布于胸部(16.67%)、肝脏(12.12%)、胰腺(9.85%)、子宫附件(10.61%)及骨骼(10.61%)。对肺部病变的检测,WB-MRI的敏感度低于CT平扫(63.64% vs. 95.45%),差异具有统计学意义(P=0.009),且两者特异度均偏低;对腹部实质性脏器病变的检测,WB-MRI的敏感度高于CT和超声(91.18% vs. 55.88%/41.18%),差异具有统计学意义(均P<0.001),其特异度(66.7%)亦优于超声(33.3%);对子宫附件病变的检测,WB-MRI与超声的敏感度差异无统计学意义(84.3% vs. 92.2%,P=0.354),特异度相等(均为50%);对骨骼病变的检测,WB-MRI的敏感度高于CT(97.1% vs. 67.4%),差异具有统计学意义(P=0.004),特异度也优于CT;患者年龄与术后时间均与显著性病变占比无显著相关性(年龄:P=0.121;术后时间:P>0.05)。结论 WB-MRI对乳腺癌患者术后偶发病变的检出能力较强,尤其是腹部、盆腔及骨骼病变,可作为有效的全身初筛工具,建议与CT等检查联合应用,为临床提供更准确的诊断信息。
[Abstract] Objective To explore the diagnostic value of whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) in postoperative incidental lesions of breast cancer.Materials and Methods The WB-MRI images of 222 patients with breast cancer after operation in Wuhan Red Cross Hospital from January 2022 to February 2025 were retrospectively analyzed. Based on international guidelines, all incidental lesions were divided into significant and non-significant groups. The diagnostic efficacy of WB-MRI was compared with conventional imaging examinations (CT plain scan and ultrasound) with pathological or follow-up results as the gold standard, and the relationship between age, postoperative time and the number of lesions was analyzed.Results A total of 736 incidental lesions were detected in 222 patients by WB-MRI, and the detection rate was 98.20% (218/222), among which 132 were significant lesions (17.93%). These were mainly distributed in chest (16.67%), liver (12.12%), pancreas (9.85%), uterine adnexa (10.61%) and skeleton (10.61%). For the detection of pulmonary lesions, the sensitivity of WB-MRI was lower than that of CT plain scan (63.64% vs. 95.45%), with a statistically significant difference (P = 0.009), and the specificity of both was low. For the detection of abdominal solid organ lesions. The sensitivity of WB-MRI was higher than that of CT and ultrasound (91.18% vs. 55.88%/41.18%), with statistically significant differences (both P < 0.001), its specificity (66.7%) was also better than that of ultrasound (33.3%). For the detection of uterine adnexal lesions. There was no significant difference in sensitivity between WB-MRI and ultrasound (84.3% vs. 92.2%, P = 0.354), but the specificity was equal (both were 50%). The sensitivity of WB-MRI in detecting bone lesions was significantly higher than that of CT (97.1% vs. 67.4%), and the difference was statistically significant (P = 0.004), and the specificity was also better than that of CT. There was no significant correlation between patients' age and postoperative time and the proportion of significant lesions (Age: P = 0.121; Postoperative time: P > 0.05).Conclusions WB-MRI has strong ability to detect postoperative incidental lesions of breast cancer patients, especially abdominal, pelvic and bone lesions, and can be used as an effective tool for systemic screening. It is suggested that it should be combined with CT and other examinations to provide more accurate diagnostic information for clinic.
[关键词] 乳腺癌;偶发病变;全身磁共振成像;诊断价值;术后随访;磁共振成像
[Keywords] breast cancer;incidental lesions;whole-body magnetic resonance imaging;diagnostic value;postoperative follow-up;magnetic resonance imaging

方芳 1   张丹丹 1   孙玉 1   雷露 1   史河水 2   吕雪飞 1*  

1 武汉市红十字会医院放射科,武汉 430015

2 华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院放射科,武汉 430022

通信作者:吕雪飞,E-mail:33491584@qq.com

作者贡献声明:吕雪飞构思和设计本研究方案,起草稿件;方芳获取、分析和解释本研究的数据,起草和撰写稿件,对稿件重要内容进行了修改;张丹丹、孙玉、雷露获取、分析和解释本研究的数据,起草稿件;史河水获取、分析和解释本研究的数据,对稿件重要内容进行了修改;方芳、吕雪飞获得了武汉市卫生健康委科研项目的资助;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: 武汉市卫生健康委科研项目 WX23B18,WX20A04
收稿日期:2025-05-12
接受日期:2025-12-07
中图分类号:R445.2  R737.9 
文献标识码:A
DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2025.12.013
本文引用格式:方芳, 张丹丹, 孙玉, 等. 全身磁共振成像对乳腺癌术后偶发病变的诊断价值[J]. 磁共振成像, 2025, 16(12): 87-94. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2025.12.013.

0 引言

       乳腺癌在国内女性群体中发病率高[1],术后随访周期长,其间可能出现乳腺外偶发病变,如治疗相关改变或第二原发癌[2],亟需一些方法对其进行检测。目前,影像学随访主要依赖X线、超声、胸部CT及骨扫描等组合模式[3, 4],然而,CT检查存在电离辐射,超声受操作者经验和气体干扰,对骨骼病变的评估也有局限。而全身磁共振成像(whole-body MRI, WB-MRI)作为一种无电离辐射、无需对比剂的一站式全身成像技术,在肿瘤筛查、分期和随访中展现巨大的潜力[5, 6, 7],因其具有高软组织分辨率和弥散加权成像(diffusion-weighted imaging, DWI)功能,能够敏感地检测多系统病变,对于肿瘤随访患者具有重要意义[8, 9],无辐射特性也适用于年轻患者及需反复检查的人群,同时可全面评估乳腺外脏器(如肝脏、骨骼、盆腔等)的偶发病变,弥补常规影像检查的不足。近年,已有学者将其应用于乳腺癌术后管理[10, 11],但研究多集中于评估其对转移灶的诊断效能,缺乏对常规随访中偶然发现病变的系统性分析。为此,本文回顾性分析一组乳腺癌术后WB-MRI检查中偶发病变的初步结果,并与CT、超声等常规影像方法进行对比,探究WB-MRI在不同解剖部位(如胸、腹、盆、骨骼)的诊断效能优劣,以期为建立更优化的乳腺癌术后随访策略提供依据。

1 材料与方法

1.1 研究对象

       回顾性收集2022年1月至2025年2月在武汉市红十字会医院接受WB-MRI检查的女性乳腺癌术后患者。纳入标准:(1)经组织病理学确诊的原发乳腺癌女性患者;(2)术后首次行WB-MRI检查,影像资料完整;(3)后期有≥6个月的影像随访记录或病理结果。排除标准:(1)呼吸伪影、金属植入物严重干扰导致关键部位(如头、胸、腹部、盆腔)无法评估(伪影覆盖超过30%感兴趣区解剖结构);(2)临床病历资料缺失,无法获取随访结果者。本研究遵守《赫尔辛基宣言》,经武汉市红十字会医院伦理委员会批准,免除受试者知情同意,批准文号:2024003。

1.2 样本量估算

       本研究为回顾性观察性研究,主要评估乳腺癌术后WB-MRI中显著偶发病变的总体比例。基于文献[12]报道的显著病变比例=15%,设定容许误差d=5%、置信水平95%,采用总体率估计公式见式(1)

       最终应纳入样本量最少为216例,实际纳入样本量为222例,可满足研究要求。

1.3 检查方法

       所有患者均使用1.5 T磁共振检查仪(Ingenia XD,Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands),应用16通道头颈联合线圈和相控阵体部表面线圈及无线矢量呼吸门控,仰卧位、头先进,分段式检查,成像范围为头顶至膝关节上方,扫描时间20~25 min,视野330 mm×500 mm,T1WI为三维mDixon-XD快速场回波序列,翻转角为15°,层厚3 mm,重复时间5.5 ms,回波时间1.7 ms,体素大小为1 mm×1 mm×3 mm;T2WI为单激发快速自旋回波序列及短时反转恢复脂肪抑制技术,层厚6 mm,重复时间7500 ms,回波时间70 ms,体素大小为1 mm×1 mm×6 mm;DWI选取b值为0和800 s/mm2,层厚6 mm,重复时间4600 ms,回波时间75 ms,体素大小为2 mm×2 mm×6 mm。所有原始图像通过飞利浦独立工作站(Philips Intellispace Portal)进行无缝拼接,其中,全身DWI通过最大密度投影(maximum intensity projection, MIP)生成2D投影图像。

       其他常规影像检查设备与参数如下:超声检查使用韩国麦迪逊SonoAce x8超声诊断仪,配备高频线阵探头(频率5~12 MHz)与凸阵探头(频率3~5 MHz);CT检查分别使用德国Siemens SOMATOM go.Top、Siemens SOMATOM perspective CT扫描仪器,扫描管电压为120 kV,采用自动管电流技术,重建层厚为5 mm,层间距5 mm。CT对比剂为碘海醇(碘浓度400 mgI/mL,扬子江药业集团有限公司,中国),肘静脉团注,剂量1.5 mL/kg,流速3.5 mL/s,MRI对比剂采用钆贝葡胺(上海博莱科信谊药业),肘静脉推注或团注,剂量0.1 mmol/kg,流速2.5 mL/s。

1.4 偶发病变影像学定义及分类

       根据临床意义将偶发病变分为两组[13]:非显著病变指不需要进一步评估、影像学随访或临床处理的病灶,显著病变指需要进一步评估、影像学检查或临床干预的病灶,且均与检查目的无关。本研究偶发病变的筛选与分类流程见图1,参考国际公认的指南与分级系统,并结合MRI的影像特点,具体标准见表1。鉴于肺部质子密度低、心肺运动干扰,磁场不均匀[14],b值选择无统一标准[15],对于WB-MRI上显示的肺内异常信号或肿块,判定为“显著偶发病变”。

图1  偶发病变筛选与分类流程图。
Fig. 1  Flow chart of screening and classification of incidental lesions.
表1  乳腺癌术后WB-MRI偶发病变的分类标准
Tab. 1  Classification criteria of WB-MRI incidental lesions after breast cancer surgery

1.5 WB-MRI与常规影像检查诊断效能对比

       在正式阅片前,两名高年资(分别具有9年和10年经验)磁共振主治医师通过讨论20例非本研究队列的WB-MRI图像,在细微征象(如Bosniak分级中的囊壁增厚、Node-RADS中淋巴结的大小和形态)的判读中达成共识,然后正式独立阅片,记录研究组偶发病变的解剖部位,进行显著性分类。当两名医师对分类意见不一致时,共同复核图像并协商达成一致,若仍然存在分歧,邀请具有19年工作经验的副主任医师裁定。同时收集在WB-MRI检查两周内针对病变所在部位或器官的常规影像学检查结果,以病理或长期随访(≥6个月)结果为金标准,对比各检查的诊断效能指标:敏感度、特异度及约登指数。

1.6 统计学分析

       统计学分析采用SPSS 26.0软件,符合正态分布的计量资料用x¯±s表示,非正态分布的计量资料用MP25,P75)表示,计数资料以例数(构成比)表示。符合正态分布的两组计量资料采用独立样本t检验,非正态分布的两组计量资料采用Mann-Whitney U检验;多组间计量资料比较,符合正态分布且方差齐时采用单因素方差分析,否则采用Kruskal-Wallis H检验,分类变量的组间比较采用卡方检验。采用配对McNemar检验比较WB-MRI与常规影像检查(CT、超声)检测病变的敏感度、特异度和约登指数是否一致,并计算95%置信区间。采用Kappa系数值评估两名医师观察结果的一致性,标准如下:0.40~0.60为中度,>0.60~0.80为良好,>0.80为极好。为进行亚组分析,根据年龄将患者分为>60岁组与≥60岁组,并根据首次WB-MRI检查距手术的时间间隔分为早期(≤1年)、中期(1~5年)与长期(>5年)组。本研究所有统计检验均为双侧检验,检验水准α=0.05,以P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 一般资料

       共收集243例患者资料,因图像质量不合格,21例被排除(12例严重呼吸伪影,6例金属植入物伪影,3例两者皆有),最终纳入222例患者,年龄33~83(57.80±10.84)岁。纳入组与排除组在年龄和术后间隔时间上的差异均无统计学意义(P=0.511、P=0.676)。乳腺癌术后病理类型:浸润性癌197例(88.74%)、非浸润性癌25(11.26%)。根据病理、影像及随访证实存在乳腺癌复发、远处转移(胸壁、肝脏、肺部、骨骼、淋巴结)的患者6例,年龄分别为55岁、61岁、61岁、65岁、68岁、72岁,首次检查距手术时间分别为41天、365天、693天、722天、1121天、2686天,此6例乳腺癌患者已明确的复发与转移灶未计入偶发病变。

       所有患者均接受了术后相关治疗。通过调阅本院电子病历系统,获取了自患者手术起至本次WB-MRI检查期间所有的相关治疗记录,具体治疗方式与分布见表2

表2  乳腺癌术后患者的治疗方式分布(n=222)
Tab. 2  Distribution of treatment modalities in postoperative breast cancer patients(n=222)

2.2 各部位偶发病变分布

       222例患者中,共218例(98.20%)736个偶发病变(3.38个/例),其中,107例患者存在132个(占736个偶发病变的17.93%)显著性病变,不同部位显著性病变分布及占比见表3。显著性病变的分布以胸部(占总显著病变的16.67%)、肝脏(12.12%)、胰腺(9.85%)、子宫附件(10.61%)及骨骼(10.61%)为主。从总体病变的器官分布来看,肝脏(19.70%)、肾脏(15.76%)、子宫附件(21.06%)及骨骼(11.14%)是最常检出偶发病变的部位。此外,术后伴复发转移的6例乳腺癌患者偶发病变负荷较高(5.3个/例)。

表3  偶发病变分布与占比
Tab. 3  Distribution and proportion of incidental lesions

2.3 WB-MRI与常规检查(CT平扫/增强、超声)诊断效能对比

       最终搜集了共151个有相应常规检查的偶发病变。对25例肺部病变,CT平扫的敏感度显著高于WB-MRI(95.5% vs. 63.6%),差异有统计学意义(P=0.009),但WB-MRI与CT平扫的特异度均较低(分别为33.3%、66.7%);对37例腹部实质性脏器病变,WB-MRI的敏感度高于CT与超声(91.2% vs. 55.9%/41.2%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.001),特异度与CT相当(66.7%),优于超声(33.3%);在53例子宫附件病变检测中,WB-MRI与超声敏感度的差异无统计学意义(84.3% vs. 92.2%,P=0.354),两者特异度均为50.0%;对36例骨骼病变,WB-MRI的敏感度高于CT(97.1% vs. 67.4%),差异有统计学意义(P=0.004),WB-MRI的特异度为60.0%,略优于CT(37.5%)。WB-MRI诊断腹部实质性脏器、子宫附件和骨骼病变的约登指数较高(57.9%、34.3%、57.1%),对肺部病变诊断的约登指数较低(-3.1%),见表4。两名磁共振医师对所有病变评估的一致性极好(Kappa值均>0.80)。

表4  WB-MRI 与CT平扫、超声诊断效能比较
Tab. 4  Comparison of diagnostic efficiency between WB-MRI and CT plain scan and ultrasound

2.4 偶发病变数量与年龄、时间相关性分析

       <60岁组与≥60岁组患者的显著偶发病变占比分别为15.78%(59/374)与20.17%(73/362),组间差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.409,df=1,P=0.121),效应量Cramer's V=0.057。首次检查与手术间隔时间范围为15~5844日(约16年),平均551.00(131.00,1 619.75)天,偶发及显著偶发病变数量在术后各阶段(早期、中期、长期)的差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05),见表5

表5  乳腺癌术后各阶段患者偶发病变数量比较
Tab. 5  Comparison of the number of incidental lesions in patients with breast cancer at different stages after operation

2.5 显著偶发病变随访结果

       对有随访结果的116个显著病变的临床管理路径及最终结局进行归纳。极少部分病变(4/116,3.45%)因临床症状明显或影像提示恶性,最终接受了穿刺活检或手术切除:脑胶质瘤1例、脑膜瘤2例、肾透明细胞癌1例(图2)。但绝大多数(112/116,96.55%)通过常规影像学检查或随访被证实为良性或稳定性病变[如纵隔结节、肝脏海绵状血管瘤、脾脏血管瘤、胆系扩张、胰腺IPMN、肾脏错构瘤、子宫腺肌症、附件巧克力囊肿、骨岛、内生软骨瘤(图3)、臂丛神经水肿(图4)等]。

图2  女,66岁,右侧乳腺浸润性癌术后10年。2A~2C:WB-MRI图像;2A:T2WI-STIR序列显示右肾轮廓异常(箭);2B:DWI序列显示右肾下极弥散受限小肿块(箭);2C:ADC图对应区域明显低信号;提示该病变为显著偶发病变,恶性不排除;2D:该右肾病变CT平扫呈等密度(箭);2E~2G:CT增强扫描,皮质期及髓质期病灶不均匀强化(箭),延迟期呈稍低密度(箭);2H:超声未探及此病灶,仅见病灶旁囊肿(箭);2I:病理(HE ×100),巢状及腺泡状结构,核仁突出,为肾透明细胞癌。WB-MRI:全身磁共振成像;T2WI-STIR:短时反转恢复技术的T2加权成像;DWI:扩散加权成像;ADC:表观扩散系数。
Fig. 2  Female, 66-year-old, ten years postoperatively for right invasive breast cancer. 2A to 2C: WB-MRI image. 2A: T2WI-STIR sequence shows abnormal contour of right kidney (arrow). 2B: DWI sequence shows a small mass with limited diffusion in the lower pole of the right kidney (arrow). 2C: The corresponding area on the ADC map is obviously low signal. It is suggested that the lesion is a significant incidental lesion, and malignancy cannot be ruled out. 2D: The plain CT scan of the right kidney showed equal density (arrow). 2E to 2G: On enhanced CT scan, the lesions in cortical phase and medullary phase are unevenly enhanced (arrow), and the delayed phase showed slightly low density (arrow). 2H: The focus is not detected by ultrasound, only the cyst beside the focus is found (arrow). 2I: Pathology (HE ×100), nested and acinar structure, prominent nucleolus, clear cell carcinoma of kidney. WB-MRI: whole-body magnetic resonance imaging; T2WI-STIR: T2-weighted imaging with short-time inversion recovery technique; DWI: diffusion-weighted imaging; ADC: apparent diffusion coefficient.
图3  女,52岁,左乳浸润性导管癌根治术后2年。3A~3C:WB-MRI图像。3A:T2WI-STIR序列显示左侧股骨卵圆形不均匀高信号影(箭);3B:DWI序列显示病灶呈高信号;3C:对应ADC图为高信号,无弥散受限,为显著偶发病变。3D:CT冠状位重建图像显示左股骨病灶内特征性“爆米花”样钙化(箭),诊断为内生软骨瘤,WB-MRI随访2年无变化。WB-MRI:全身磁共振成像;T2WI-STIR:短时反转恢复技术的T2加权成像;DWI:扩散加权成像;ADC:表观扩散系数。
Fig. 3  Female, 52-year-old, with invasive ductal carcinoma of the left breast 2 years after radical operation. 3A to 3C: WB-MRI image. 3A: T2WI-STIR sequence shows the oval heterogeneous high signal shadow of the left femur (arrow). 3B: DWI sequence shows that the lesion is hyperintense. 3C: The corresponding ADC diagram is high signal, without diffusion limitation, and it is a significant incidental lesion. 3D: CT coronal reconstruction images show the characteristic "popcorn" calcification (arrow) in the left femoral lesion, which is diagnosed as endogenous chondroma. WB-MRI follow-up shows no change for 2 years. WB-MRI: whole-body magnetic resonance imaging; T2WI-STIR: T2-weighted imaging with short-time inversion recovery technique; DWI: diffusion-weighted imaging; ADC: apparent diffusion coefficient.
图4  女,65岁,左乳浸润性癌根治术后6个月。4A:WB-MRI的DWI序列MIP图显示左侧臂丛神经增粗肿胀(箭);4B:T2WI-STIR序列显示左颈部轻度软组织水肿(箭),为显著偶发病变,结合临床考虑为放疗后改变。WB-MRI:全身磁共振成像;DWI:扩散加权成像;MIP:最大密度投影;T2WI-STIR:短时反转恢复技术的T2加权成像。
Fig. 4  Female, 65-year-old, with invasive carcinoma of the left breast underwent radical surgery for 6 months. 4A: DWI sequence MIP map of WB-MRI showed thickening and swelling of the left brachial plexus (arrow); 4B: T2WI-STIR sequence shows mild soft tissue edema in the left neck (arrow), which is a significant incidental lesion, and it is a change after radiotherapy in combination with clinical considerations. WB-MRI: whole-body magnetic resonance imaging; DWI: diffusion-weighted imaging; MIP: maximum density projection; T2WI-STIR: T2-weighted imaging with short-time inversion recovery technique.

3 讨论

       本研究通过回顾性分析222例乳腺癌术后患者的WB-MRI资料,评估其对偶发病变的诊断价值。结果显示,WB-MRI对偶发病变检出率为98.20%,需临床干预的显著病变占比17.93%,WB-MRI在检测腹部实质脏器、子宫附件及骨骼病变方面具有优势,但对肺部病变的检出能力有限,需要结合CT检查,后续的随访也明确了绝大多数(96.55%)显著病变为良性,更确保了关键病变(如第二原发癌)的早期发现与干预。因此,WB-MRI在乳腺癌术后随访中对偶发病变的检测具有重要的临床应用价值。

3.1 乳腺癌术后偶发病变的WB-MRI特征及其诊断效能

       WB-MRI作为无辐射的一站式成像技术,对乳腺癌分期、疗效评估及复发监测具有明确价值[27, 28],在该技术的普及过程中,所检出的偶发病变已成为临床管理的新挑战,但目前仅限于对偶发病变的描述性统计的报道[29]。本研究发现,乳腺癌患者WB-MRI偶发病变分布与国外其他人群的研究存在差异,例如,与KUMASAKA等[30]在前列腺癌的研究相比,本研究的显著病变更多集中于胸部、腹部实质脏器、子宫附件及骨骼,而非前者以心脑血管为主,同时,检出率也高于SCHMIDT等[31]在普通人群中的报告。主要原因可能与乳腺癌患者均为女性,以及接受多种辅助治疗(放疗、化疗及内分泌治疗等)有关,放疗可能导致放射性肺炎或纤维化[32],化疗药物可能导致骨代谢异常及骨量减少[33]。因此,在影像学评估中,结合患者的治疗史及Bone-RADS分级系统对于准确诊断至关重要。此外,女性群体中胰腺囊性肿瘤有一定的好发倾向[34],随访中应重视胰腺区域的影像学评估。内分泌治疗造成孕激素和雌激素水平变化明显,与子宫内膜增生、卵巢囊肿形成存在明确关联[35]。并且,本研究中6例复发转移患者的偶发病变负荷较高,推测与接受了更多治疗导致的影像学改变有关,提示对于复发转移的患者,WB-MRI同样能够提供额外的诊断信息。

       不同影像学方法各具优势。本研究观察到WB-MRI的局限性,肺实质作为含气器官,其氢质子密度远低于肝、脑等实质脏器,固有的信噪比偏低,肺-气交界处存在显著的磁敏感伪影[36],在DWI序列更加明显,易掩盖微小病灶,同时,呼吸运动和心脏大血管搏动干扰[37],即便采用呼吸门控技术,扫描速度也远不如CT,因此,需补充CT检查。WB-MRI在腹部实质性脏器病变检测上,敏感度优于CT平扫和超声,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.001),可作为有效筛查手段,以往的研究也表明,与CT相比,WB-MRI对发现内脏病变具有较高的敏感性[38],但良性特征不典型的病灶仍需增强影像检查定性。在子宫附件评估中,WB-MRI与超声诊断效能相当,可在全身成像的同时完成该区域的有效筛查,也能弥补操作者经验不足并减少病灶深度的影响。对于骨骼病变,WB-MRI的检测敏感度高于CT,差异有统计学意义(P=0.004),与既往研究结论一致——CT在准确识别进展性骨病方面存在局限[39],其原因在于,DWI序列可反映组织细胞密度和细胞活性,与WB-MRI联合应用时可准确识别可疑病变[40]。此外,WB-MRI的中低水平特异度可能源于真阴性病例数过少,也提示其在筛查中能够有效地发现异常,但在鉴别病变良恶性时仍面临挑战,应结合临床与其他影像信息综合判断,防止过度诊疗。

       本研究在评估WB-MRI诊断效能的基础上,进一步追踪了116个显著病变的临床转归。对于极少数需干预的病变(4/116,3.45%),通过WB-MRI的检测得到了诊断,对于第二原发癌,WB-MRI的发现可直接引导手术切除,实现了早期干预。同时,绝大多数病变(112/116,96.55%)通过后续影像随访被证实为良性或稳定性病变,避免了穿刺活检或不必要的治疗,同时也能有效评估治疗相关并发症,表明WB-MRI作为筛查工具具有一定价值。特别在中国年轻乳腺癌的发病率逐年增长的情况下[41],WB-MRI的无电离辐射优势,对于需要反复影像学检查的年轻患者,优势更为突出。

3.2 WB-MRI检查偶发病变相关因素

       本研究未发现患者年龄与术后时间对偶发病变数量存在显著影响,这与前列腺癌患者WB-MRI的研究[30]有所不同,后者年龄组分界点更高,心脑血管疾病高发提高了偶发病变的发生率,造成了年龄段之间的差异。乳腺癌患者术后长期接受辅助性治疗,不因患者年龄而有差别,而且其对全身多系统也会产生持续的影响。再者,乳腺癌患者规范的术后随访可能使不同年龄与术后时长的患者处于稳定的身体状态,削弱了时间因素对病变检出的影响。因此,本研究结果推测,患者年龄与术后时间并非决定WB-MRI检查时机的关键因素。

3.3 本研究的局限性

       本研究存在以下不足:(1)扫描方案没有横断面及增强扫描,可能影响病灶定性,也存在过度诊疗风险;(2)回顾性研究导致部分临床数据不全,且未根据治疗方案、分子分型及病灶大小进行系统性分析;(3)诊断的“金标准”大部分依赖影像随访,可能存在误判;(4)排除了图像质量不佳的病例,限制了该研究结论在更广泛人群中的适用性。

4 结论

       综上,WB-MRI在腹部、盆腔及骨骼病变的检测中优势较为突出,作为一种无辐射的全身成像技术,对于全面筛查乳腺外偶发病变(特别是腹部、盆腔及骨骼病变)具有重要价值,可作为现有影像检查(如CT、超声)的有益补充。后续研究计划将治疗方案和分子分型等纳入分析,开展多中心、大样本的前瞻性研究,同时采用快速成像技术和抗伪影序列提高图像质量,并评估医疗成本和患者的预后,希望能为临床提供参考。

[1]
王红霞, 殷咏梅, 胡夕春. 中国乳腺癌患者BRCA1/2基因检测与临床应用专家共识(2025年版)[J]. 中国癌症杂志, 2025, 35(7): 710-734. DOI: 10.19401/j.cnki.1007-3639.2025.07.010.
WANG H X, YIN Y M, HU X C. Expert consensus on BRCA1/2 gene testing and clinical application in Chinese breast cancer patients(2025 edition)[J]. China Oncol, 2025, 35(7): 710-734. DOI: 10.19401/j.cnki.1007-3639.2025.07.010.
[2]
HUNG M H, LIU C J, TENG C J, et al. Risk of second non-breast primary cancer in male and female breast cancer patients: a population-based cohort study[J/OL]. PLoS One, 2016, 11(2): e0148597 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26894298/. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148597.
[3]
中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会, 中华医学会肿瘤学分会乳腺肿瘤学组. 中国抗癌协会乳腺癌诊治指南与规范(2024年版)[J]. 中国癌症杂志, 2023, 33(12): 1092-1187. DOI: 10.19401/j.cnki.1007-3639.2023.12.004.
The Society of Breast Cancer China AntiCancer Association, Breast Oncology Group of the Oncology Branch of the Chinese Medical Association. Guidelines for breast cancer diagnosis and treatment by China Anti-cancer Association(2024 edition)[J]. China Oncol, 2023, 33(12): 1092-1187. DOI: 10.19401/j.cnki.1007-3639.2023.12.004.
[4]
国家卫生健康委员会医政医管局. 乳腺癌诊疗指南(2022年版)[J]. 中华肿瘤杂志, 2023(10): 803-833. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112152-20230706-00281.
National Health and Wellness Committee Medical Administration Hospital Authority. Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer (2022 Edition)[J]. Chin J Oncol, 2023, 45(10): 803-833. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112152-20230706-00281.
[5]
ALBANO D, STECCO A, MICCI G, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) in oncology: an Italian survey[J]. Radiol Med, 2021, 126(2): 299-305. DOI: 10.1007/s11547-020-01242-7.
[6]
RASHID R J, TAHIR S H, KAKAMAD F H, et al. Whole-body MRI for metastatic workup in patients diagnosed with cancer[J/OL]. Mol Clin Oncol, 2023, 18(4): 33 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36925744/. DOI: 10.3892/mco.2023.2629.
[7]
TRAN E, JOE B N. Use of whole-body MRI in metastatic breast cancer[J/OL]. Radiol Imaging Cancer, 2022, 4(6): e229023 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36367448/. DOI: 10.1148/rycan.229023.
[8]
高雨菡, 王勤, 张路, 等. 全身MRI技术的临床应用进展[J]. 中华放射学杂志, 2023, 57(4): 438-440. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112149-20230131-00059.
GAO Y H, WANG Q, ZHANG L, et al. Clinical application update of whole-body MRI[J]. Chin J Radiol, 2023, 57(4): 438-440. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112149-20230131-00059.
[9]
刘华琼, 高文鑫, 巴成慧, 等. 全身磁共振成像在部分常见肿瘤临床应用及高危人群筛查中的进展[J]. 磁共振成像, 2022, 13(6): 164-167. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2022.06.035.
LIU H Q, GAO W X, BA C H, et al. Application progress of whole body-magnetic resonance imaging in common tumors and screening progress in high-risk groups[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imag, 2022, 13(6): 164-167. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2022.06.035.
[10]
王燕彬, 刘有云, 畅旭东. WB-DWI对于乳腺癌患者术后临床评价[J]. 影像技术, 2024, 36(1): 53-57. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0270.2024.01.11.
WANG Y B, LIU Y Y, CHANG X D. WB-DWI for the postoperative clinical evaluation of breast cancer patients[J]. Image Technol, 2024, 36(1): 53-57. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0270.2024.01.11.
[11]
DOLEK B A, CILIZ D S, OZDEMIR N, et al. Comparative analysis of whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging and PET/CT in metastasis detection: a prospective study[J/OL]. Cureus, 2024, 16(11): e74756 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39735112/. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.74756.
[12]
PREEZ H D, LASKER I, RAJAKULASINGAM R, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging: Incidental findings in paediatric and adult populations[J/OL]. Eur J Radiol, 2020, 130: 109156 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32645680/. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109156.
[13]
YEE J, KUMAR N N, GODARA S, et al. Extracolonic abnormalities discovered incidentally at CT colonography in a male population[J]. Radiology, 2005, 236(2): 519-526. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2362040166.
[14]
尹猛, 秦文恒, 孙占国. MRI影像组学在肺癌中的研究进展[J]. 磁共振成像, 2023, 14(6): 129-132, 150. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.06.023.
YIN M, QIN W H, SUN Z G. Research progress of MRI radiomics in lung cancer[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imag, 2023, 14(6): 129-132, 150. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.06.023.
[15]
董子妍, 李雨轩, 石欣莹, 等. 磁共振扩散加权成像技术在肺癌诊疗中的研究进展[J]. 磁共振成像, 2025, 16(8): 215-220. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2025.08.032.
DONG Z Y, LI Y X, SHI X Y, et al. Research progress of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging technology in the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imag, 2025, 16(8): 215-220. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2025.08.032.
[16]
TAKASHIMA K, TAKIMOTO Y, NAKAZAWA E, et al. Discovery and informing research participants of incidental findings detected in brain magnetic resonance imaging studies: Review and multi-institutional study[J/OL]. Brain Behav, 2017, 7(5): e00676 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28523219/. DOI: 10.1002/brb3.676.
[17]
MUNDEN R F, BLACK W C, HARTMAN T E, et al. Managing incidental findings on thoracic CT: lung findings. a white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee[J]. J Am Coll Radiol, 2021, 18(9): 1267-1279. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2021.04.014.
[18]
居胜红, 宋彬, 张惠茅, 等. 美国放射学院(ACR)偶发病变委员会白皮书简介[J]. 放射学实践, 2018, 33(2): 113-114. DOI: 10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2018.02.004.
JU S H, SONG B, ZHANG H M, et al. Brief introduction of the white paper of accidental lesions committee of American radiological college (ACR)[J]. Radiol Pract, 2018, 33(2): 113-114. DOI: 10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2018.02.004.
[19]
SEBASTIAN S, ARAUJO C, NEITLICH J D, et al. Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, Part 4: white paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee II on gallbladder and biliary findings[J]. J Am Coll Radiol, 2013, 10(12): 953-956. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2013.05.022.
[20]
HELLER M T, HARISINGHANI M, NEITLICH J D, et al. Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 3: white paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee II on splenic and nodal findings[J]. J Am Coll Radiol, 2013, 10(11): 833-839. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2013.05.020.
[21]
MEGIBOW A J, BAKER M E, MORGAN D E, et al. Management of incidental pancreatic cysts: a white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee[J]. J Am Coll Radiol, 2017, 14(7): 911-923. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.03.010.
[22]
KIRKPATRICK I D C, BRAHM G L, MNATZAKANIAN G N, et al. Recommendations for the management of the incidental renal mass in adults: endorsement and adaptation of the 2017 ACR incidental findings committee white paper by the Canadian association of radiologists incidental findings working group[J]. Can Assoc Radiol J, 2019, 70(2): 125-133. DOI: 10.1016/j.carj.2019.03.002.
[23]
PATEL M D, ASCHER S M, HORROW M M, et al. Management of incidental adnexal findings on CT and MRI: a white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee[J]. J Am Coll Radiol, 2020, 17(2): 248-254. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2019.10.008.
[24]
WANG P S, SCHOECK O G, HORROW M M. Benign-appearing incidental adnexal cysts at US, CT, and MRI: putting the ACR, O-RADS, and SRU guidelines all together[J]. Radiographics, 2022, 42(2): 609-624. DOI: 10.1148/rg.210091.
[25]
ELSHOLTZ F H J, ASBACH P, HAAS M, et al. Introducing the node reporting and data system 1.0 (node-RADS): a concept for standardized assessment of lymph nodes in cancer[J]. Eur Radiol, 2021, 31(8): 6116-6124. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07572-4.
[26]
CHANG C Y, GARNER H W, AHLAWAT S, et al. Society of Skeletal Radiology-white paper. Guidelines for the diagnostic management of incidental solitary bone lesions on CT and MRI in adults: bone reporting and data system (Bone-RADS)[J]. Skeletal Radiol, 2022, 51(9): 1743-1764. DOI: 10.1007/s00256-022-04022-8.
[27]
BHALUDIN B N, TUNARIU N, SENTHIVEL N, et al. Does the addition of whole-body MRI to routine imaging influence real-world treatment decisions in metastatic breast cancer?[J/OL]. Cancer Imaging, 2022, 22(1): 26 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35672838/. DOI: 10.1186/s40644-022-00464-4.
[28]
ELSALAM S M ABD, ELBADAWI M A, DIAB W A, et al. Diagnostic value of whole-body diffusion weighted imaging added to bone scan in early diagnosis of bone metastases in breast cancer patients[J/OL]. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med, 2023, 54(1): 102 [2025-05-11]. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s43055-023-01050-9. DOI: 10.1186/s43055-023-01050-9.
[29]
ZUGNI F, PADHANI A R, KOH D M, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) for cancer screening in asymptomatic subjects of the general population: review and recommendations[J/OL]. Cancer Imag, 2020, 20(1): 34 [2025-05-11]. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40644-020-00315-0. DOI: 10.1186/s40644-020-00315-0.
[30]
KUMASAKA S, MOTEGI S, KUMASAKA Y, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) with diffusion-weighted whole-body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS) in prostate cancer: Prevalence and clinical significance of incidental findings[J/OL]. Br J Radiol, 2022, 95(1131): 20210459 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34111963/. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20210459.
[31]
SCHMIDT C O, SIEROCINSKI E, HEGENSCHEID K, et al. Impact of whole-body MRI in a general population study[J]. Eur J Epidemiol, 2016, 31(1): 31-39. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-015-0101-y.
[32]
WANG S, XU D, XIAO L Y, et al. Radiation-induced lung injury: from mechanism to prognosis and drug therapy[J/OL]. Radiat Oncol, 2025, 20(1): 39 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40082925/. DOI: 10.1186/s13014-025-02617-8.
[33]
PENG B Q, WU J, TIAN S, et al. Effect of chemotherapy and different chemotherapy regimens on bone health among Chinese breast cancer women in different menstrual status: a self-control study[J/OL]. Support Care Cancer, 2023, 31(9): 540 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37642751/. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-07960-8.
[34]
中国医师协会胰腺病学专业委员会, 国家消化系统疾病临床医学研究中心(上海). 中国胰腺囊性肿瘤影像学诊断规范报告循证学指南[J].中华胰腺病杂志, 2024, 24(2): 114-124. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115667-20240226-00045.
Pancreatology Committee of Chinese Medical Association, National Center for ClinicalMedicine of Digestive System Diseases (Shanghai)Evidence-based guideline on the standardized diagnostic imaging report for pancreatic cystic neoplasms in China[J]. Chin J Pancreatol, 2024, 24(2): 114-124. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115667-20240226-00045.
[35]
ZHOU Y, FAN Y J, MA L, et al. Effect of toremifene on endometrium and neurocognitive function in patients with breast cancer based on resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging[J/OL]. World Neurosurg, 2021, 149: 436-443 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33217593/. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.11.051.
[36]
范丽, 夏艺, 刘士远. 肺部磁共振成像机遇与挑战: 中国十年来发展成果及展望[J]. 磁共振成像, 2022, 13(10): 61-65. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2022.10.008.
FAN L, XIA Y, LIU S Y. Opportunities and challenges of pulmonary magnetic resonance imaging: Achievements and prospects over the past decade in China[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imag, 2022, 13(10): 61-65. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2022.10.008.
[37]
AFAQ A, FAUL D, CHEBROLU V V, et al. Pitfalls on pet/mri[J]. Semin Nucl Med, 2021, 51(5): 529-539. DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2021.04.003.
[38]
JACOBS M A, MACURA K J, ZAHEER A, et al. Multiparametric whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging and ADC mapping for the identification of visceral and osseous metastases from solid tumors[J]. Acad Radiol, 2018, 25(11): 1405-1414. DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2018.02.010.
[39]
KOSMIN M, PADHANI A R, GOGBASHIAN A, et al. Comparison of whole-body MRI, CT, and bone scintigraphy for response evaluation of cancer therapeutics in metastatic breast cancer to bone[J]. Radiology, 2020, 297(3): 622-629. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020192683.
[40]
CRUZ I A N, FAYAD L M, AHLAWAT S, et al. Whole-body MRI in musculoskeletal oncology: a comprehensive review with recommendations[J/OL]. Radiol Imaging Cancer, 2023, 5(3): e220107 [2025-05-11]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37144975/. DOI: 10.1148/rycan.220107.
[41]
盛燕, 李晨阳, 高丽娜, 等. 1990—2021年中国年轻女性乳腺癌疾病负担及危险因素趋势分析[J]. 中华肿瘤防治杂志, 2025, 32(18): 1107-1113. DOI: 10.16073/j.cnki.cjcpt.2025.18.05.
SHENG Y, LI C Y, GAO L N, et al. Analysis on the trend of disease burden and risk factors of young breast cancer in China from 1990 to 2021[J]. Chin J Cancer Prev Treat, 2025, 32(18): 1107-1113. DOI: 10.16073/j.cnki.cjcpt.2025.18.05.

上一篇 基于磁共振定量参数与血清学指标联合模型对Graves眼病活动性的应用研究
下一篇 基于5.0 T超高场MRI SWI联合多回波T2<sup>*</sup> mapping在肝细胞癌微血管侵犯中的诊断价值
  
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