期刊文献+

三维数字减影血管造影对比剂注射速率与图像对比度的关联研究

在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:探讨三维数字减影血管造影(3D-DSA)对比剂注射速率与图像质量和对比度的关联研究。方法:回顾性分析2021年4月—2022年10月我院影像科行3D-DSA检查的疑似颅内血管病变患者93例临床资料,对比剂为碘海醇注射液,根据对比剂注射速率分为<3.0mL/s(26例)、3.0~4.0mL/s(48例)、>4.0mL/s(19例),对比3种对比剂注射速率下的容积数字减影图像、容积再现(VR)及最大密度投影成像(MIP)的主观图像质量;比较3种对比剂注射速率下大脑前动脉水平段(A1)、大脑前动脉垂直段(A2)、大脑中动脉水平段(M1)、大脑中动脉脑岛段(M2)数字减影图像的CT值。结果:<3.0mL/s、3.0~4.0mL/s、>4.0mL/s对比剂注射速率下的数字减影图像、VR及MIP图像评分均无统计学差异(P>0.05);A1、M1段数字减影图像CT值在<3.0mL/s、3.0~4.0mL/s、>4.0mL/s对比剂注射速率下均存在显著的统计学差异(P<0.05);A2段的CT值在<3.0mL/s与>4.0mL/s对比剂注射速率下存在显著统计学差异(P<0.05),而M2段CT值随对比剂注射速率上升,但差异不显著(P>0.05);A1、A2、M1段增强显影效果与对比剂注射速率有显著的正相关性(r=0.625、0.286、0.527,均P<0.05);线性回归显示:A1、A2、M1段增强显影效果与对比剂注射速率呈显著线性特征(R^(2)=0.545、0.197、0.428,均P<0.05)。结论:3D-DSA检查中,1.80~4.68mL/s碘海醇注射液注射速率下,A1、A2、M1段脑动脉数字减影图像客观对比度随对比剂注射速率上升呈现显著增强,但M2段数字减影图像客观对比度与对比剂注射速率无显著增强关联。鉴于3D-DSA检查中,对于管腔较小的脑动脉显影,需谨慎采用提升对比剂注射速率策略。
出处 《医学理论与实践》 2024年第17期2981-2983,共3页 The Journal of Medical Theory and Practice
基金 2021年度佛山市卫生健康局医学科研课题立项(20210389)。
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献42

  • 1Angeretti M G, Lumia D, Canl A, et al. Non-enhanced MR angiography of renal arteries: comparison with contrast-enhanced MR angiography [J]. Acta Radiol, 2013,54(7) : 749-- 756.
  • 2Morelli J N, Ai F, Runge V M,et al. Time-resolved MR angiography of renal artery stenosis in a swine model at 3 Tesla using gadobutrol with digital subtraction angiography correlation[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2012,36 (3) :704--713.
  • 3Hay J W, Lawler E,Yucel K,et al. Cost impact of diagnostic imaging for lower extremity peripheral vascular occlusive disease[J]. Value Heahh,2009,12(2) :262--266.
  • 4Parienty I,Rostoker G,Jouniaux F,et al. Renal artery stenosis evaluation in chronic kidney disease patients: nonenhanced time-spatial labeling inversion-pulse three dimensional MR angiography with regulated breathing versus DSA[J]. Radiology,2011,259(2) :592--601.
  • 5Platzek I,Sieron D,Wiggermann P, et al. Carotid artery stenosis: comparison of 3D time-of-flight MR angiography and contrast-en-hanced MR angiography at 3T[J]. Radiol Res Pract, 2014,2014: 508715.
  • 6Matsumura T, Hayakawa M, Shimada F, et al. Safety of gadopentetate dimeglumine after 120 million administrations over 25 years of clinical use[J]. Magn Reson Meal,2013,12(4) :297--304.
  • 7Morelli J N, Runge V M, Ai F, et al. Magnetic resonance evaluation of renal artery stenosis in a swine model: performance of low-dose gadobutrol versus gadoterate rneglumine in comparison with digital subtraction intra-arterial catheter angiography[J]. Invest Radiol, 2012,47 (6) : 376 -- 382.
  • 8Gaddikeri S, Mitsumori L, Vaidya S, et al. Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced computed tomographic angiography and gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography for the assessment of hemodynamically significant transplant renal artery stenosis[J]. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol,2014,43(4) : 162-- 168.
  • 9Soulez G, Pasowicz M, Benea G, et al. Renal artery stenosis evaluation: diagnostic performance of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MR angiography-comparison with DSA[J]. Radiology, 2008,247 ( 1 ) : 273 --285.
  • 10Kramer U, Fenchel M, Laub G, et al. Low-dose, time-resolved, contrast-enhanced 313 MR angiography in the assessment of the abdominal aorta and its major branches at 3 Tesla [J]. Acad Radi0i, 2010,17(5) :564--576.

共引文献19

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部