Jajamovich Guido H, Huang Wei, Besa Cecilia, Li Xin, Afzal Aneela, Dyvorne Hadrien A, Taouli Bachir
Department of Radiology and Translational and Molecular Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1470 Madison Avenue, New York, NY, 10029, USA.
Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
MAGMA. 2016 Feb;29(1):49-58. doi: 10.1007/s10334-015-0513-4. Epub 2015 Dec 8.
To quantify hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) perfusion and flow with the fast exchange regime-allowed Shutter-Speed model (SSM) compared to the Tofts model (TM).
In this prospective study, 25 patients with HCC underwent DCE-MRI. ROIs were placed in liver parenchyma, portal vein, aorta and HCC lesions. Signal intensities were analyzed employing dual-input TM and SSM models. ART (arterial fraction), K (trans) (contrast agent transfer rate constant from plasma to extravascular extracellular space), ve (extravascular extracellular volume fraction), kep (contrast agent intravasation rate constant), and τi (mean intracellular water molecule lifetime) were compared between liver parenchyma and HCC, and ART, K (trans), v e and k ep were compared between models using Wilcoxon tests and limits of agreement. Test-retest reproducibility was assessed in 10 patients.
ART and v e obtained with TM; ART, ve, ke and τi obtained with SSM were significantly different between liver parenchyma and HCC (p < 0.04). Parameters showed variable reproducibility (CV range 14.7-66.5% for both models). Liver K (trans) and ve; HCC ve and kep were significantly different when estimated with the two models (p < 0.03).
Our results show differences when computed between the TM and the SSM. However, these differences are smaller than parameter reproducibilities and may be of limited clinical significance.
与Tofts模型(TM)相比,使用允许快速交换机制的快门速度模型(SSM)对肝细胞癌(HCC)的灌注和血流进行定量分析。
在这项前瞻性研究中,25例HCC患者接受了动态对比增强磁共振成像(DCE-MRI)检查。在肝实质、门静脉、主动脉和HCC病变处放置感兴趣区(ROIs)。采用双输入TM模型和SSM模型分析信号强度。比较肝实质和HCC之间的动脉分数(ART)、转运常数K(trans)(造影剂从血浆到血管外细胞外间隙的转运速率常数)、血管外细胞外容积分数(ve)、造影剂内渗速率常数(kep)和平均细胞内水分子寿命(τi),并使用Wilcoxon检验和一致性界限比较两种模型之间的ART、K(trans)、ve和kep。对10例患者进行了重测重复性评估。
肝实质和HCC之间,TM模型得到的ART和ve;SSM模型得到的ART、ve、kep和τi存在显著差异(p < 0.04)。参数显示出不同的重复性(两种模型的变异系数范围均为14.7 - 66.5%)。用两种模型估算时,肝脏的K(trans)和ve;HCC的ve和kep存在显著差异(p < 0.03)。
我们的结果显示,TM模型和SSM模型计算结果存在差异。然而,这些差异小于参数的重复性,临床意义可能有限。