Quaia Emilio, Bertolotto Michele, Forgács Balázs, Rimondini Alessandra, Locatelli Martina, Mucelli Roberto Pozzi
Department of Radiology, Cattinara Hospital, University of Trieste, Strada di Fiume 447, 34149 Trieste, Italy.
Eur Radiol. 2003 Mar;13(3):475-83. doi: 10.1007/s00330-002-1670-1. Epub 2002 Sep 26.
The aim of this study was to evaluate capabilities of pulse inversion harmonic imaging (PIHI) with Levovist in detection of liver metastases compared with conventional ultrasound (US) and helical CT (HCT). One hundred sixty consecutive patients with known malignancies were evaluated by conventional US, PIHI 2 min (40 patients) or 4 min (120 patients) after Levovist injection and HCT. Conspicuity and number of the identified metastatic lesions were evaluated and assessed by statistical analysis (significance p<0.05). Mean diameter of the smallest identified metastases was computed for conventional US, PIHI and HCT. In cases where PIHI revealed more lesions suspicious for metastases than HCT, intraopertive US with surgical biopsy or 3-6-month US follow-up were performed to confirm diagnosis. Images were stored on magneto-optical disk and evaluated off-line by a dedicated software. Metastases conspicuity was significantly improved on PIHI if compared with conventional US ( p<0.05). In 49 patients all the employed imaging techniques did not reveal any lesion, whereas in the remaining 111 patients, 28 patients revealed more than five metastatic lesions and 83 patients presented from one to five metastatic lesions. In comparison with conventional US, PIHI revealed more metastases in 39/83 (47%), the same number in 44/83 (53%) and a lower number in 0/83 (0%) patients. In comparison with HCT, PIHI revealed more metastases in 10/83 (12%), the same number in 61/83 (74%) and a lower number in 12/83 (14%) patients. Average number +/- SD (standard deviation) of confirmed metastases for patients was 2.21+/-1.6 for conventional US, 3.1+/-2.44 for PIHI and 3.05+/-2.41 for HCT. The difference between PIHI and conventional US was statistically significant ( p<0.0001), whereas the difference between PIHI and HCT was not significant ( p=0.9). The smallest identified metastases presented 3-mm mean diameter on PIHI, 5-mm on HCT and 7-mm on conventional US. PIHI with Levovist is a reliable technique in metastases detection.
本研究旨在评估与传统超声(US)及螺旋CT(HCT)相比,使用声诺维的脉冲反转谐波成像(PIHI)检测肝转移瘤的能力。对160例已知患有恶性肿瘤的连续患者进行了传统超声、注射声诺维后2分钟(40例患者)或4分钟(120例患者)的PIHI以及HCT检查。通过统计分析(显著性p<0.05)对所识别转移瘤灶的清晰度及数量进行评估和分析。计算传统超声、PIHI及HCT检查所识别出的最小转移瘤灶的平均直径。若PIHI显示出比HCT更多可疑转移瘤灶,则进行术中超声联合手术活检或3至6个月的超声随访以确诊。图像存储于磁光盘上,并通过专用软件进行离线评估。与传统超声相比,PIHI检查时转移瘤灶的清晰度显著提高(p<0.05)。49例患者所有使用的成像技术均未显示任何病灶,而在其余111例患者中,28例患者显示出超过5个转移瘤灶,83例患者有1至5个转移瘤灶。与传统超声相比,PIHI在83例患者中的39例(47%)显示出更多转移瘤灶,44例(53%)显示的转移瘤灶数量相同,0例(0%)显示的转移瘤灶数量更少。与HCT相比,PIHI在83例患者中的10例(12%)显示出更多转移瘤灶,61例(74%)显示的转移瘤灶数量相同,12例(14%)显示的转移瘤灶数量更少。患者确诊转移瘤灶的平均数量±标准差(SD),传统超声为2.21±1.6,PIHI为3.1±2.44,HCT为3.05±2.41。PIHI与传统超声之间的差异具有统计学意义(p<0.0001),而PIHI与HCT之间的差异无统计学意义(p = 0.9)。PIHI检查所识别出的最小转移瘤灶平均直径为3毫米,HCT为5毫米,传统超声为7毫米。使用声诺维的PIHI是一种可靠的转移瘤检测技术。