切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华医学超声杂志(电子版) ›› 2017, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (07) : 538 -543. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2017.07.011

所属专题: 文献

腹部超声影像学

胆囊息肉样病变超声造影动脉期血管增强模式与息肉性质及大小的相关性
费翔1, 罗渝昆1,(), 焦子育1, 刘博2, 李杰3   
  1. 1. 100853 北京,解放军总医院超声科
    2. 100853 北京,解放军总医院肝胆外科
    3. 100853 北京,解放军总医院病理科
  • 收稿日期:2016-08-18 出版日期:2017-07-01
  • 通信作者: 罗渝昆

The correlation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound vascular mode with gallbladder polyp nature and size

Xiang Fei1, Yukun Luo1,(), Ziyu Jiao1, Bo Liu2, Jie Li3   

  1. 1. Department of Ultrasound, PLA general, Beijing 100853, China
    2. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, PLA general, Beijing 100853, China
    3. Department of Pathology, PLA general, Beijing 100853, China
  • Received:2016-08-18 Published:2017-07-01
  • Corresponding author: Yukun Luo
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Luo Yukun, Email:
引用本文:

费翔, 罗渝昆, 焦子育, 刘博, 李杰. 胆囊息肉样病变超声造影动脉期血管增强模式与息肉性质及大小的相关性[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2017, 14(07): 538-543.

Xiang Fei, Yukun Luo, Ziyu Jiao, Bo Liu, Jie Li. The correlation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound vascular mode with gallbladder polyp nature and size[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2017, 14(07): 538-543.

目的

探讨胆囊息肉样变(大小≥1.0 cm)超声造影动脉期血管增强模式与息肉性质及息肉大小的相关性。

方法

选取2014年12月至2016年5月到解放军总医院就诊的胆囊息肉样病变患者103例,选择息肉大小≥1.0 cm的患者纳入研究。患者于术前行胆囊息肉超声造影检查,记录造影动态图像。造影图像分析由2位医师独立完成。根据手术病理结果将研究对象分为腺瘤性息肉组(21例)与胆固醇性息肉组(82例)。采用t检验及χ2检验分析2组间常规超声特征与超声造影动脉期息肉血管增强模式的差异,采用Logistic回归方法统计分析与腺瘤性息肉相关的危险因素,采用Bivariate双变量相关分析法息肉血管增强模式与息肉大小的相关关系。

结果

腺瘤性息肉组与胆固醇性息肉组患者息肉大小及有无彩色血流比较(1.26±0.24 vs 1.72±0.53,27/82 vs 14/21),差异均有统计学意义(t=-5.97,χ2=7.94,P均<0.05)。2组患者在点状、分支状及不规则造影血管增强模式比较(39/82 vs 2/21,23/82 vs 13/21,0 vs 3/21),差异均有统计学意义(χ2=10.09、8.43,P<0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析结果表明,息肉大小、分支型血管增强模式是诊断腺瘤性息肉的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。相关分析表明腺瘤性息肉组与胆固醇性息肉组造影血管增强模式与息肉大小呈弱正相关(r=0.188、0.397,P<0.05)。

结论

胆囊息肉样病变超声造影增强模式不仅反应息肉性质同时也与息肉大小有关,胆囊息肉大小及造影动脉期分支状血管增强模式对于鉴别胆固醇息肉与腺瘤性息肉有重要临床价值。

Objective

To evaluate the correlation between enhancement vascular mode and gallbladder polyp nature and size with contrast-enhance ultrasound (CEUS).

Methods

From December 2014 to May 2016, patients with gallbladder polyp lesions (GPL) larger than 1.0 cm were enrolled in this study. Before cholecystectomy, every patient underwent ultrasound (US) and CEUS examination. All features of US and CEUS were analyzed by two doctors who were blind to the patient clinical data. According to the pathological findings, GPL were divided into cholesterol polyp group and gallbladder adenoma group. The US features and enhancement vascular mode were analyzed statistically by t test and χ2 test. The independent risk factors were analyzed by Logistic regression. The relationship between enhancement vascular mod and size of GPL were determined by bivariate correlation analysis.

Results

There were 103 patients with GPL larger than 1.0 cm. Eighty-two cases were cholesterol polyp and 21 cases were gallbladder adenoma. There were differences in size and color Doppler blood flow between two groups (t=-5.97 and 7.94, P<0.05). Dotted, branched vascular mod and irregular vascular mode were statistical different between two groups (χ2=10.09 and 8.43, P<0.05). Regression analysis data proved that the size and branch vascular mod were the independent risk factors related with adenoma (P<0.05). In both cholesterol polyp group and adenoma group, there were weak positive correlation between enhancement vascular mode and size of GPL (r=0.188, 0.397, P<0.05).

Conclusions

Branch vascular mod and size of GPL were help to distinguish gallbladder adenoma from cholesterol polyp. Comprehensive analysis of GPL′s size and vascular mode could offer important guidance for differentiation diagnosis.

图1~4 胆囊息肉造影动脉期血管增密模式示意图。图1为点状血管增强模式;图2为单支状血管增强模式;图3为分支状血管增强模式;图4为不规则状血管增强模式
表1 胆固醇性息肉与腺瘤性息肉组患者一般资料及常规超声特征
表2 胆固醇性息肉组与腺瘤性息肉组患者造影动脉期息肉增强模式
表3 胆固醇性息肉组患者不同息肉大小的造影增强模式不同造影表现比较
表4 腺瘤性息肉组患者不同息肉大小的造影增强模式不同造影表现比较
图7,8 胆囊腺瘤性息肉造影动脉期分支状血管增强模式。图7为二维灰阶超声图像中胆囊体部息肉样病变,大小1.6 cm;图8为查收造影动脉期息肉内可见分支状血管增强(箭头所示)
表5 胆固醇性息肉与腺瘤性息肉组常规超声及造影特征多变量回归分析
[1]
Kim JS, Lee JK, Kim Y, et al. US characteristics for the prediction of neoplasm in gallbladder polyps 10 mm or larger [J]. Eur Radiol, 2016, 26(4):1134-1140.
[2]
Teber MA, Tan S, Dönmez U, et al. The use of real-time elastography in the assessment of gallbladder polyps: preliminary observations [J]. Med Ultrason, 2014, 16(4):304-308.
[3]
Persley KM. Gallbladder polyps [J]. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol, 2005, 8(2):105-108.
[4]
Fei X, Lu WP, Luo YK, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound may distinguish gallbladder adenoma from cholesterol polyps: a prospective case-control study [J]. Abdom Imaging, 2015, 40(7):2355-2363.
[5]
Yuan HX, Cao JY, Kong WT, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in diagnosis of gallbladder adenoma [J]. Hpatobiliary pancreat Dis Int, 2015, 14(2):201-207.
[6]
Gerstenmaier JF, Hoang KN, Gibson RN. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in gallbladder disease: a pictorial review [J]. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2016, 41(8):1640-1652.
[7]
Park CH, Chung MJ, Oh TG, et al. Different diagnosis between gallbladder adenoma and cholesterol polyps on contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography [J]. Surg Endosc, 2013, 27(4):1414-1421.
[8]
Tsuji S, Sofuni A, Moriyasu F, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of gallbladder disease [J]. Hepatogastroenterology, 2012, 59(114):336-340.
[9]
Hattori M, Inui K, Yoshino J, et al. Usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the differential diagnosis of polypoid gallbladder lesions [J]. Nihon Shokakibyo Gakkai Zasshi, 2017, 104(6):790-798.
[10]
Inoue T, Kitano M, Kudo M, et al. Diagnosis of gallbladder diseases by contrast-enhanced phase-inversion harmonic ultrasonography [J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2007, 33(3):353-361.
[11]
Persley KM. Gallbladder polyps [J]. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol, 2005, 8(2):105-108.
[12]
Sheth S, Bedford A, Chopra S. Primary gallbladder cancer: recognition of risk factors and role of prophylactic cholecystectomy [J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 2000, 95(6):1402-1410.
[13]
Myers RP, Shaffer EA, Beck PL, et al. Gallbladder polyps: epidemiology, natural history and management [J]. Can J Gastroenterol, 2002, 16(3):187-194.
[14]
Numata K, Oka H, Morimoto M, et al. Differential diagnosis of gallbladder disease with contrast-enhanced harmonic gray scale ultrasonography [J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2007, 26(6):763-774.
[15]
Cha BH, Hwang JH, Lee SH, et al. Pre-operative factors that can predict neoplastic polypoid lesions of the gallbladder [J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2011, 17(17):2216-2222.
[1] 吕琦, 惠品晶, 丁亚芳, 颜燕红. 颈动脉斑块易损性的超声造影评估及与缺血性卒中的相关性研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1040-1045.
[2] 丁雷, 罗文, 杨晓, 庞丽娜, 张佩蒂, 刘海静, 袁佳妮, 刘瑾. 高帧频超声造影在评价C-TIRADS 4-5类甲状腺结节成像特征中的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 887-894.
[3] 张茜, 陈佳慧, 高雪萌, 赵傲雪, 黄瑛. 基于高帧频超声造影的影像组学特征鉴别诊断甲状腺结节良恶性的价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 895-903.
[4] 朱连华, 费翔, 韩鹏, 姜波, 李楠, 罗渝昆. 高帧频超声造影在胆囊息肉样病变中的鉴别诊断价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 904-910.
[5] 李淼, 朱连华, 韩鹏, 姜波, 费翔. 高帧频超声造影评价肝细胞癌血管形态与风险因素的研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 911-915.
[6] 张卫平, 王婧玲, 刘志兴, 陈莉, 谌芳群. 肾透明细胞癌高帧频超声造影时间-强度曲线特征分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 916-922.
[7] 丁建民, 秦正义, 张翔, 周燕, 周洪雨, 王彦冬, 经翔. 超声造影与普美显磁共振成像对具有高危因素的≤3 cm肝结节进行LI-RADS分类诊断的前瞻性研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 930-938.
[8] 韩丹, 王婷, 肖欢, 朱丽容, 陈镜宇, 唐毅. 超声造影与增强CT对儿童肝脏良恶性病变诊断价值的对比分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 939-944.
[9] 刘嘉嘉, 王承华, 陈绪娇, 刘瑗玲, 王善钰, 屈海花, 张莉. 经阴道子宫-输卵管实时三维超声造影中患者疼痛发生情况及其影响因素分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 959-965.
[10] 张旭, 徐建平, 苏冬明, 王彩芬, 王大力, 张文智. 男性乳腺肿块的超声造影特征[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 854-859.
[11] 邵华, 那子悦, 荆慧, 李博, 王秋程, 程文. 术前经皮超声造影对乳腺癌腋窝前哨淋巴结转移及负荷的诊断价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 849-853.
[12] 谢迎东, 孙帼, 徐超丽, 杨斌, 孙晖, 戴云. 超声造影定量评价不同生存期移植肾血流灌注的临床价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(07): 749-754.
[13] 王晗宇, 张司可, 张羽, 万欣, 贺秋霞, 李明明, 杨秀华. 超声造影在脑胶质瘤切除术术中的应用价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(07): 755-760.
[14] 蒋佳纯, 王晓冰, 陈培荣, 许世豪. 血清学指标联合常规超声及超声造影评分诊断原发性干燥综合征的临床价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(06): 622-630.
[15] 廖梅, 张红君, 金洁玚, 吕艳, 任杰. 床旁超声造影对肝移植术后早期肝动脉血栓的诊断价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 630-634.
阅读次数
全文


摘要