Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2018
The role of dynamic post-contrast T1-w MRI sequence to characterize lipid-rich and lipid-poor adrenal adenomas in comparison to non-adenoma lesions: preliminary results.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Romeo Valeria, Maurea Simone, Guarino Salvatore, Mainenti Pier Paolo, Liuzzi Raffaele, Petretta Mario, Cozzolino Immacolata, Klain Michele, Brunetti Arturo
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose of the article is to compare the features of wash-out (WO) parameters between lipid-rich and lipid-poor adrenal adenomas as well as with a group of non-adenoma adrenal lesions.
METHODS: 46 patients (36 F and 10 M, median age 58 years) with unilateral adrenal lesions (35 adenomas, 7 pheochromocytomas, 1 carcinoma, and 3 metastases) were prospectively evaluated; adrenal lesions were divided into adenomas (Group 1) and non-adenomas (Group 2). MR imaging was performed with a 3-Tesla scanner using pre- and post-contrast dedicated sequences. On the basis of the evaluation of qualitative chemical-shift (CS) signal intensity (SI) loss, adrenal adenomas were, respectively, divided in Group 1A (n = 25) as lipid-rich and Group 1B (n = 10) as lipid-poor; non-adenoma adrenal lesions were grouped in Group 2 (n = 11). The following parameters were evaluated: size (mm), CS SI index (%), early (5 min), and delayed (10 min) Relative (R) and Absolute (A) WO values (%).
RESULTS: The comparison of AWO and RWO showed significant (p ≤ 0.05) differences between Group 1A and Groups 1B and 2, both using 5- and 10-min images for calculation; conversely, no differences in these dynamic parameters were found between Group 1B and 2; AWO and RWO values were significantly lower in adrenal lesions of Groups 1B and 2 compared to Group 1A, both using 5- and 10-min images for calculation.
CONCLUSIONS: The quantitative evaluation of WO parameters could not be used to characterize lipid-poor adrenal adenomas for which alternative imaging modalities are required.
METHODS: 46 patients (36 F and 10 M, median age 58 years) with unilateral adrenal lesions (35 adenomas, 7 pheochromocytomas, 1 carcinoma, and 3 metastases) were prospectively evaluated; adrenal lesions were divided into adenomas (Group 1) and non-adenomas (Group 2). MR imaging was performed with a 3-Tesla scanner using pre- and post-contrast dedicated sequences. On the basis of the evaluation of qualitative chemical-shift (CS) signal intensity (SI) loss, adrenal adenomas were, respectively, divided in Group 1A (n = 25) as lipid-rich and Group 1B (n = 10) as lipid-poor; non-adenoma adrenal lesions were grouped in Group 2 (n = 11). The following parameters were evaluated: size (mm), CS SI index (%), early (5 min), and delayed (10 min) Relative (R) and Absolute (A) WO values (%).
RESULTS: The comparison of AWO and RWO showed significant (p ≤ 0.05) differences between Group 1A and Groups 1B and 2, both using 5- and 10-min images for calculation; conversely, no differences in these dynamic parameters were found between Group 1B and 2; AWO and RWO values were significantly lower in adrenal lesions of Groups 1B and 2 compared to Group 1A, both using 5- and 10-min images for calculation.
CONCLUSIONS: The quantitative evaluation of WO parameters could not be used to characterize lipid-poor adrenal adenomas for which alternative imaging modalities are required.