The value of T1-Vibe-FS and T1-Flash-SPAIR dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences combined with gadolinium fistulography in the diagnosis of anal fistula

Share this content in WeChat

• Technical Article •

JIANG Yang LIU Yingying WANG Junda ZHANG Dechuan PENG Cong YU Wanjun CHEN Yuhong

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. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.08.013.

Abstract

[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.

[Keywords] anal fistula；magnetic resonance imaging；fistula angiography；dynamic enhancement；Gd-DTPA

Contributor Information

JIANG Yang LIU Yingying WANG Junda ZHANG Dechuan^* PENG Cong YU Wanjun CHEN Yuhong

Department of Radiology, Chongqing Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Chongqing 400021, China

Zhang DC, E-mail: cqggzdc@163.com

Conflicts of interest None.

Publication Information

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was part of Xinglin Scholar Research Premotion Project of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (No. YYZX2019082); Chongqing Science and Health Joint Medical Research Key Project (No. 2019ZDXM022).

Received 2021-02-05

Accepted 2021-04-19

DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.08.013

Text

References

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

PREV The value of modified silent MRA based on hybrid ASL in cerebrovascular imaging

NEXT Value of MRI and cerebrospinal fluid examination in evaluating the curative effect of intracranial tuberculosis

LINK

Tel & Fax: +8610-67113815 E-mail: editor@cjmri.cn