Zhonghua yi xue za zhi · 2007
[The role of multi-detector row CT in the diagnosis and hemodynamic studies of gastric varices in portal hypertension].
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Zhu Kang-Shun, Meng Xiao-Chun, Zhang Jian-Sheng, Guan Shou-Hai, Li Zheng-Ran, He Ke-Ke, Pang Peng-Fei, Jiang Zai-Bo, Huang Ming-Sheng, Shan Hong
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the value of multi-detector row CT (MDCT) in the diagnosis and hemodynamic studies of gastric varices (GV) in portal hypertension by comparison with endoscopy and DSA direct portography.
METHODS: Thirty-six consecutive cirrhotic patients with GV confirmed by endoscopy underwent tri-phase contrast-enhanced CT scans and CT portography (CTP) within 2 weeks after endoscopy examination. Three independent experienced radiologists, who were blinded to the patients' clinical data, analyzed the CT images, including the size and location of GV as well as afferent and efferent veins of GV, separately. Interobserver agreement among the 3 radiologists with regard to the diagnosis of submucosal and perigastric GV was determined by Kappa (k) values. The findings of endoscopy were used as standards.
RESULTS: Sub mucosal GV was diagnosed in 34 of the 36 patients (94.4%) and perigastric GV in all 36 patients (100%) by the observation of the 3 radiologists. MDCT showed an excellent interobserver reliability with regard to the diagnosis of submucosal GV (kappa = 0.85) and perigastric GV (kappa = 1.0). Agreement between MDCT and endoscopy with regard to the opacification of variceal size and location were 86.1% and 88.9% respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive predictive value of CTP in the opacification of afferent and efferent veins of GV were all more than 80%. The frequencies of participation of posterior gastric vein and short gastric vein in blood supply to gastric fundal varices in the isolated gastric varices and gastroesophageal varices type 2 (GEV2) were 94.1% and 70.6% respectively, both significantly higher than those in the gastroesophageal varices type 1 (GEV1, 52.6% and 31.6%, respectively, both P < 0.05). The main blood drainage route of GEV1 was via azygous system into the super vena cava (100%), whereas in the gastric fundal varices the main blood drainage route was via the gastrorenal shunts into the inferior vena cava (82.4%).
CONCLUSION: MDCT can be used as an important tool for detecting submucosal and perigastric GV, and can clearly reveal the size, location, and hemodynamics of GV.
METHODS: Thirty-six consecutive cirrhotic patients with GV confirmed by endoscopy underwent tri-phase contrast-enhanced CT scans and CT portography (CTP) within 2 weeks after endoscopy examination. Three independent experienced radiologists, who were blinded to the patients' clinical data, analyzed the CT images, including the size and location of GV as well as afferent and efferent veins of GV, separately. Interobserver agreement among the 3 radiologists with regard to the diagnosis of submucosal and perigastric GV was determined by Kappa (k) values. The findings of endoscopy were used as standards.
RESULTS: Sub mucosal GV was diagnosed in 34 of the 36 patients (94.4%) and perigastric GV in all 36 patients (100%) by the observation of the 3 radiologists. MDCT showed an excellent interobserver reliability with regard to the diagnosis of submucosal GV (kappa = 0.85) and perigastric GV (kappa = 1.0). Agreement between MDCT and endoscopy with regard to the opacification of variceal size and location were 86.1% and 88.9% respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive predictive value of CTP in the opacification of afferent and efferent veins of GV were all more than 80%. The frequencies of participation of posterior gastric vein and short gastric vein in blood supply to gastric fundal varices in the isolated gastric varices and gastroesophageal varices type 2 (GEV2) were 94.1% and 70.6% respectively, both significantly higher than those in the gastroesophageal varices type 1 (GEV1, 52.6% and 31.6%, respectively, both P < 0.05). The main blood drainage route of GEV1 was via azygous system into the super vena cava (100%), whereas in the gastric fundal varices the main blood drainage route was via the gastrorenal shunts into the inferior vena cava (82.4%).
CONCLUSION: MDCT can be used as an important tool for detecting submucosal and perigastric GV, and can clearly reveal the size, location, and hemodynamics of GV.