Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2015
Computed tomography arterial portography for assessment of portal vein injury after blunt hepatic trauma.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fu Chen Ju, Wong Yon Cheong, Tsang Yuk Ming, Wang Li Jen, Chen Huan Wu, Ku Yi Kang, Wu Cheng Hsien, Chen Huan Wen, Kang Shih Ching
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Intrahepatic portal vein injuries secondary to blunt abdominal trauma are difficult to diagnose and can result in insidious bleeding. We aimed to compare computed tomography arterial portography (CTAP), reperfusion CTAP (rCTAP), and conventional computed tomography (CT) for diagnosing portal vein injuries after blunt hepatic trauma.
METHODS: Patients with blunt hepatic trauma, who were eligible for nonoperative management, underwent CTAP, rCTAP, and CT. The number and size of perfusion defects observed using the three methods were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 13 patients (seven males/six females) with a mean age of 34.5±14.1 years were included in the study. A total of 36 hepatic segments had perfusion defects on rCTAP and CT, while there were 47 hepatic segments with perfusion defects on CTAP. The size of perfusion defects on CT (239 cm3; interquartile range [IQR]: 129.5, 309.5) and rCTAP (238 cm3; IQR: 129.5, 310.5) were significantly smaller compared with CTAP (291 cm3; IQR: 136, 371) (both, P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Perfusion defects measured by CTAP were significantly greater than those determined by either rCTAP or CT in cases of blunt hepatic trauma. This finding suggests that CTAP is superior to rCTAP and CT in evaluating portal vein injuries after blunt liver trauma.
METHODS: Patients with blunt hepatic trauma, who were eligible for nonoperative management, underwent CTAP, rCTAP, and CT. The number and size of perfusion defects observed using the three methods were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 13 patients (seven males/six females) with a mean age of 34.5±14.1 years were included in the study. A total of 36 hepatic segments had perfusion defects on rCTAP and CT, while there were 47 hepatic segments with perfusion defects on CTAP. The size of perfusion defects on CT (239 cm3; interquartile range [IQR]: 129.5, 309.5) and rCTAP (238 cm3; IQR: 129.5, 310.5) were significantly smaller compared with CTAP (291 cm3; IQR: 136, 371) (both, P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Perfusion defects measured by CTAP were significantly greater than those determined by either rCTAP or CT in cases of blunt hepatic trauma. This finding suggests that CTAP is superior to rCTAP and CT in evaluating portal vein injuries after blunt liver trauma.