Manfredi R, Brizi M G, Masselli G, Vecchioli A, Marano P
Istituto di Radiologia, Policlinico A. Gemelli, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Radiol Med. 2001 Jul-Aug;102(1-2):48-54.
To assess the diagnostic value of three-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC) versus direct cholangiography such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC) in malignant biliary stenosis.
Twenty-nine patients (15 female and 14 male) (mean age 62 years) with malignant biliary strictures underwent MRC and ERC. Breath-hold 3D steady state free precession MR cholangiography was performed on a 1.5-T imager in the patients before ERC. In 25 patients findings at ERC/PTC were considered the standard of reference: 19 patients underwent ERC, 5 PCT and 1 both ERC and PTC due to unsuccessful papilla cannulation during the endoscopic examination. In the 4 remaining patients the surgical specimen was considered the standard of reference. In the 29 patients studied, histology performed during direct cholangiography and the examination of the surgical specimens demonstrated that the malignant hilar stenoses were caused by hilar cholangiocarcinoma (n=7), cholangiocarcinoma of the distal VBP (n=1), gallbladder cancers (n=6), endometrial metastasis (n=2), ovary metastasis (n=1), colon metastasis (n=1), breast metastasis (n=1). The correct identification of biliary stenosis and extension of the tumor (according to the Bismuth classification) by MR cholangiography and ERC were independently assessed by two readers blinded to each other's report. The results were compared.
Identification of biliary stenosis and neoplastic extension were accurate in respectively 29/29 (100%) and 26/29 (89%) cases with MR cholangiography. The comparison of ERC/PTC and MRC images yielded the following results: Bismuth Type I (6 vs 6), Type II (5 vs 8), Type III (13 vs 10), Type IV (5 vs 5). Our results indicate that MR is less capable of identifying the extension of small lesions at the primary confluence of bile ducts than are ERC/PCT.
MR cholangiography is a non-invasive technique for biliary tract imaging. It does not require administration of contrast medium and allows complete visualisation of the biliary ducts. MR cholangiography allowed accurate diagnosis of malignant hilar stenosis providing equal information as direct cholangiography and may therefore obviate the need for ERC/PTC.
评估三维(3D)磁共振胆胰管造影(MRC)与直接胆管造影(如内镜逆行胆管造影(ERC)和经皮经肝胆管造影(PTC))在恶性胆管狭窄诊断中的价值。
29例(15例女性,14例男性)(平均年龄62岁)恶性胆管狭窄患者接受了MRC和ERC检查。在进行ERC之前,患者在1.5-T成像仪上接受屏气3D稳态自由进动磁共振胆胰管造影检查。25例患者的ERC/PTC检查结果被视为参考标准:19例患者接受了ERC检查,5例接受了PTC检查,1例因内镜检查时乳头插管失败同时接受了ERC和PTC检查。其余4例患者的手术标本被视为参考标准。在这29例研究患者中,直接胆管造影期间进行的组织学检查和手术标本检查表明,恶性肝门部狭窄由肝门部胆管癌(n = 7)、远端VBP胆管癌(n = 1)、胆囊癌(n = 6)、子宫内膜转移瘤(n = 2)、卵巢转移瘤(n = 1)、结肠转移瘤(n = 1)、乳腺转移瘤(n = 1)引起。由两位互不了解对方报告的阅片者独立评估磁共振胆胰管造影和ERC对胆管狭窄和肿瘤扩展(根据Bismuth分类)的正确识别情况。对结果进行比较。
磁共振胆胰管造影在29/29例(100%)和26/29例(89%)病例中分别准确识别了胆管狭窄和肿瘤扩展。ERC/PTC和MRC图像的比较结果如下:Bismuth I型(6例对6例)、II型(5例对8例)、III型(13例对10例)、IV型(5例对5例)。我们的结果表明,与ERC/PCT相比,磁共振在识别胆管一级汇合处小病变的扩展方面能力较弱。
磁共振胆胰管造影是一种用于胆道成像的非侵入性技术。它无需注射造影剂,可完整显示胆管。磁共振胆胰管造影能够准确诊断恶性肝门部狭窄,提供与直接胆管造影相同的信息,因此可能无需进行ERC/PTC检查。