Behrens Victoria, Modabber Ali, Loberg Christina, Herrler Andreas, Prescher Andreas, Ghassemi Alireza
Dentist, Private Dental Office, Viersen, Germany.
Consultant, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital, RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Jul;76(7):1587-1593. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2018.01.025. Epub 2018 Feb 26.
Computed tomographic angiography (CTA) is reported to give insight into patient-specific anatomy of the flap pedicle preoperatively. We compared information available from standard CTA (s-CTA) with that gained by modifying the conventional CTA technique (modified CTA [m-CTA]). Dissected cadavers served as the control group.
We evaluated 16 s-CTA scans (32 deep circumflex iliac arteries [DCIAs]) and 12 m-CTA scans (17 DCIAs) using 3-dimensional software (Vesalius; ps-medtech, Amsterdam, The Netherlands). We dissected 17 cadavers (n = 34 DCIAs) to serve as the control group. The positions of 4 landmarks (anterior superior iliac spine, origin of DCIA, origin of ascending branch, and crossing of horizontal branch and iliac crest) were defined in a 3-dimensional coordinate system.
We found significant differences concerning the distances from the origin of the DCIA to the femoral bifurcation (P < .05) and the anterior superior iliac spine to the crossing point of the horizontal branch with the iliac crest (P < .05) between CTA scans and cadaveric studies. The imaging quality of the m-CTA scans was shown to be more consistent than and superior to that of the s-CTA scans. The visible length of the DCIA was longer on m-CTA scans (mean, 134.32 mm) than on s-CTA scans (mean, 73.62 mm). We could evaluate the branching off of perforators and the relation of the pedicle to the surrounding bone and soft tissue in more detail on m-CTA scans. Standard CTA allowed the bilateral evaluation of the pedicle, whereas m-CTA allowed the evaluation of the injected side only.
The quality and quantity of information available from CTA could be improved by modifying the s-CTA examination by injection as close as possible to the target vessel. Standard CTA delivered information about both sides, whereas m-CTA may need an additional injection for contralateral-side imaging.
据报道,计算机断层血管造影(CTA)能够在术前深入了解皮瓣蒂部的个体特异性解剖结构。我们将标准CTA(s-CTA)获取的信息与通过改良传统CTA技术(改良CTA [m-CTA])获得的信息进行了比较。解剖后的尸体作为对照组。
我们使用三维软件(Vesalius;ps-medtech,荷兰阿姆斯特丹)评估了16次s-CTA扫描(32条旋髂深动脉 [DCIA])和12次m-CTA扫描(17条DCIA)。我们解剖了17具尸体(n = 34条DCIA)作为对照组。在三维坐标系中定义了4个标志点(髂前上棘、DCIA起点、升支起点以及水平支与髂嵴的交叉点)的位置。
我们发现CTA扫描与尸体研究之间在DCIA起点至股动脉分叉处的距离(P <.05)以及髂前上棘至水平支与髂嵴交叉点的距离(P <.05)方面存在显著差异。结果显示,m-CTA扫描的成像质量比s-CTA扫描更一致且更优。m-CTA扫描上DCIA的可见长度(平均134.32 mm)比s-CTA扫描上的(平均73.62 mm)更长。在m-CTA扫描上,我们能够更详细地评估穿支的分支情况以及蒂部与周围骨骼和软组织的关系。标准CTA可对蒂部进行双侧评估,而m-CTA仅能对注射侧进行评估。
通过尽可能靠近目标血管注射来改良s-CTA检查,可以提高CTA可获取信息的质量和数量。标准CTA能提供双侧信息,而m-CTA可能需要额外注射以进行对侧成像。