Kalinowski Marc, Heverhagen Johannes T, Rehberg Elisabeth, Klose Klaus Jochen, Wagner Hans-Joachim
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Philipps University Hospital, Baldingerstrasse, 35033 Marburg, Germany.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2002 Oct;23(9):1485-92.
MR sialography has become an alternative imaging technique for ductal salivary gland diseases. We compared the diagnostic accuracies of MR sialography and digital subtraction sialography in patients with successful completion of both examinations and benign salivary gland disorders.
In a prospective study, we attempted to examine salivary glands in 80 patients with clinically suspected diagnoses of sialadenitis and/or sialolithiasis. Each patient underwent digital subtraction sialography and MR sialography. MR sialography was obtained with a T2-weighted single-shot turbo spin-echo sequence (TR/TE 2800/1100 msec, acquisition time 7 seconds), with use of a quadrature head coil. Final diagnoses were confirmed by clinical follow-up and results of biopsy (n = 9) or surgery (n = 19).
Failure rate was 5% (four of 80) for MR sialography and 14% (11 of 80) for digital subtraction sialography. Eighty-one salivary glands (48 parotid, 33 submandibular) in 65 patients were successfully visualized with both modalities. MR sialography depicted the main ductal system and first- and second-order branches, whereas digital subtraction sialography was able to depict third-order branches. Sensitivity and specificity to diagnose chronic sialadenitis were 70% and 98% with MR and 96% and 100% with digital subtraction sialography. MR sialography enabled diagnosis of sialolithiasis with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 98% versus 90% and 98% for each with digital subtraction sialography.
MR sialography with a heavily T2-weighted sequence is highly successful in the noninvasive visualization of the ductal system of major salivary glands. It is useful for diagnosing sialolithiasis and sialadenitis. Digital subtraction sialography, an invasive technique, had a substantial procedural failure rate, particularly for the submandibular duct. However, because of its higher spatial resolution, successfully completed digital subtraction sialography achieved superior diagnostic information compared with that of MR sialography.
磁共振涎管造影已成为涎腺导管疾病的一种替代性成像技术。我们比较了磁共振涎管造影和数字减影涎管造影在两项检查均成功完成且患有涎腺良性疾病患者中的诊断准确性。
在一项前瞻性研究中,我们试图对80例临床疑似涎腺炎和/或涎石病的患者的涎腺进行检查。每位患者均接受数字减影涎管造影和磁共振涎管造影。磁共振涎管造影采用T2加权单次激发快速自旋回波序列(TR/TE 2800/1100毫秒,采集时间7秒),使用正交头线圈。最终诊断通过临床随访以及活检(n = 9)或手术(n = 19)结果得以证实。
磁共振涎管造影的失败率为5%(80例中的4例),数字减影涎管造影的失败率为14%(80例中的11例)。65例患者中的81个涎腺(48个腮腺,33个下颌下腺)通过两种方式均成功显影。磁共振涎管造影可显示主导管系统以及一级和二级分支,而数字减影涎管造影能够显示三级分支。磁共振诊断慢性涎腺炎的敏感性和特异性分别为70%和98%,数字减影涎管造影的分别为96%和100%。磁共振涎管造影诊断涎石病的敏感性为80%,特异性为98%,数字减影涎管造影诊断涎石病的敏感性和特异性分别为90%和98%。
采用重T2加权序列的磁共振涎管造影在无创显示大涎腺导管系统方面非常成功。它有助于诊断涎石病和涎腺炎。数字减影涎管造影作为一种侵入性技术,有相当高的操作失败率,尤其是对于下颌下腺导管。然而,由于其更高的空间分辨率,成功完成的数字减影涎管造影与磁共振涎管造影相比可获得更优的诊断信息。