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) ›› 2021, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (11) : 1061 -1066. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2021.11.009

所属专题: 妇产科超声影像学

妇产科超声影像学

超声检查评估胎儿肝强回声的价值及预后分析
韩利1, 吴青青2,()   
  1. 1. 100026 首都医科大学附属北京妇产医院/北京妇幼保健院超声科;101149 首都医科大学附属北京潞河医院超声科
    2. 100026 首都医科大学附属北京妇产医院/北京妇幼保健院超声科
  • 收稿日期:2020-11-21 出版日期:2021-11-01
  • 通信作者: 吴青青

Value of ultrasonography in evaluating fetal liver strong echo and prognostic analysis

Li Han1, Qingqing Wu2,()   

  1. 1. Department of Ultrasound, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University; Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Beijing 100026 China; Department of ultrasound, Beijing Luhe Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing 101149, China
    2. Department of Ultrasound, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University; Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Beijing 100026 China
  • Received:2020-11-21 Published:2021-11-01
  • Corresponding author: Qingqing Wu
引用本文:

韩利, 吴青青. 超声检查评估胎儿肝强回声的价值及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2021, 18(11): 1061-1066.

Li Han, Qingqing Wu. Value of ultrasonography in evaluating fetal liver strong echo and prognostic analysis[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2021, 18(11): 1061-1066.

目的

探讨胎儿肝强回声变化规律和病因,为临床咨询提供帮助。

方法

采用回顾性研究方法,收集自2016年1月1日至2019年12月31日在首都医科大学附属北京妇产医院和首都医科大学附属北京潞河医院产前超声检查发现胎儿肝存在强回声灶的单胎孕妇63例。记录孕妇基本信息,胎儿大小测值,强回声病灶的大小、位置、数量,是否合并胎儿其他结构异常,胎盘、羊水、脐带、胎儿脐动脉血流等情况。随访入组病例的染色体检查结果及母体病毒系列(TORCH)检查结果及胎儿强回声灶随孕周的变化及妊娠结局。所有活产婴儿都详细记录新生儿出生信息,出生后生长发育及肝超声复查情况。总结、整理产前产后资料,探讨肝强回声变化特征和病因。采用秩和检验比较出生后回声消失与否2组病例的出生前病灶长径的差异。

结果

63例胎儿中合并胎儿其他结构异常者17例(27%,17/63),孤立性肝强回声灶46例(73%,4/63);染色体异常2例(3%,2/63),均为21-三体;母体病毒感染3例(5%,3/63);胎粪性腹膜炎1例(2%,1/63)。17例合并胎儿其他结构异常的病例中有2例终止妊娠,1例新生儿死亡,2例生后接受手术治疗。共随访到52例生后信息:27例出生时强回声灶仍存在,出生前病灶平均长径为0.70 cm,中位数为0.60(0.60,0.80)cm,25例出生时已消失,出生前病灶平均长径为0.47 cm,中位数为0.50(0.40,0.60)cm,二者差异具有统计学意义(Z=3.54,P<0.001)。所有活产病例结局均良好。

结论

胎儿肝强回声灶并不罕见,部分胎儿肝强回声灶(长径较小)可自发消失。孤立性病灶病例占比比既往文献高,且预后良好。母体病毒感染主要为巨细胞病毒感染。当合并胎儿其他结构异常时,建议通过无创DNA或羊水穿刺进行胎儿染色体检查,必要时还需进行染色体微阵列分析。

Objective

To explore the pattern of the changes and etiology of fetal liver strong echo by analyzing the ultrasonographic features, in order to provide help for clinical consultation.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted on 63 singleton pregnant women who were found to have strong echo in fetal liver on ultrasound examination at Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University and Beijing Luhe Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019. The basic information of pregnant women, fetal measurement results, the size, shape, location, and number of fetal liver strong echoes, whether there were other fetal structural abnormalities, placenta, amniotic fluid, umbilical cord, and fetal umbilical artery blood flow were recorded. The results of chromosome examination and maternal virus series (TORCH) examination, the changes of fetal strong echo during pregnancy, and the pregnancy outcome of the included cases were followed. Neonatal birth information, post-birth growth, and strong echo reexamination of the liver were recorded in all live births. The etiology and pattern of changes of strong echo in fetal liver were explored by summarizing prenatal and postnatal data. The rank sum test was used to compare the difference in the length of prenatal lesions between the two groups with or without strong echo after birth.

Results

Among the 63 fetuses, 17 (27%, 17/63) were associated with other fetal abnormalities, and 46 (73%, 46/63) had isolated fetal liver strong echo. Chromosome abnormality was found in two cases (3%, 2/63), and both had trisomy 21. Three pregnant women had viral infections (5%, 3/63). Meconium peritonitis occurred in one case (2%, 1/63). Among the 17 cases associated with other fetal abnormalities, two terminated pregnancy, one had neonatal death, and two received surgical treatment after birth. The postnatal information of 52 cases was followed, of which 27 still had strong echo at birth, the mean lesion length was 0.70 cm, and the median was 0.60 (0.60, 0.80) cm. The strong echo had disappeared at birth in the remaining 25 cases, the mean lesion length was 0.47 cm, and the median was 0.50 (0.40, 0.60) cm; the difference was statistically significant between the two groups (Z=3.54, P<0.001). All live births had good outcomes.

Conclusion

Fetal liver strong echo are not uncommon, and some fetal liver strong echoes (smaller in length) may disappear spontaneously. The proportion of cases with isolated foci is higher than that reported in the previous literature, and the prognosis is good. Cytomegalovirus infection is the main infection. When there are other abnormalities in the fetus, it is recommended to conduct fetal chromosome examination through non-invasive DNA or amniocentesis, and to conduct chromosome microarray analysis if necessary.

图1 胎儿肝强回声超声图像。图a为肝内强回声灶,图b、c为肝周强回声灶,图d、e为多发强回声灶
表1 63例肝强回声灶形态、数量及分布情况
表2 文献中关于胎儿肝钙化灶与感染、胎儿其他结构异常及染色体异常的研究情况
1
Nguyen DL, Leonard JC. Ischemic hepatic necrosis: a cause of fetal liver calcification [J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1986, 147(3): 596-597.
2
Hawass ND, El Badawi MG, Fatani JA, et al. Foetal hepatic calcification [J]. Pediatr Radiol, 1990, 20(7): 528-535.
3
Bronshtein M, Blazer S. Prenatal diagnosis of liver calcifications [J]. Obstet Gynecol, 1995, 86(5): 739-743.
4
Achiron R, Seidman DS, Afek A, et al. Prenatal ultrasonographic diagnosis of fetal hepatic hyperechogenicities: clinical significance and implications for management [J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 1996, 7(4): 251-255.
5
Kraudel K, Williams CH. Ultrasound case report of hepatic teratoma in newborn [J]. J Clin Ultrasound, 1984, 12(2): 98-101.
6
Wax JR, Blackstone J, Pinette MG, et al. Hepatic vascular calcification: an early second trimester sonographic feature of idiopathic infantile arterial calcinosis [J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2001, 185(5): 1267-1268.
7
Pata O, Gunduz NM, Unlu C. Isolated fetal liver calcifications [J]. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc, 2012, 13(1): 67-69.
8
Kidron D, Sharony R. Fetal liver calcifications: an autopsy study [J]. Virchows Arch, 2012, 460(4): 399-406.
9
Carroll SG, Maxwell DJ. The significance of echogenic areas in the fetal abdomen [J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 1996, 7(4): 293-298.
10
李胜利, 罗国阳. 胎儿畸形产前超声诊断学 [M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2017: 607-609.
11
蔡少雨. 胎儿肝内钙化灶的超声表现1例 [J]. 临床超声医学杂志, 2008, 10(4): 241.
12
覃仕强. 超声诊断胎儿肝内钙化灶1例 [J]. 医学理论与实, 2009, 22(11): 1343.
13
王新惠. 产前超声检出肝内钙化灶胎儿3例追踪观察 [J]. 中国计划生育学, 2014, 22(9): 626-627.
14
Shackelford GD, Kirks DR. Neonatal hepatic calcification secondary to transplacental infection [J]. Radiology, 1977, 122(3): 753-757.
15
Stein B, Bromley B, Michlewitz H, et al. Fetal liver calcifications: sonographic appearance and postnataloutcome [J]. Radiology, 1995, 197(2): 489-492.
16
Mitra AG, O'Malley DP, Banks PM, et al. Myocardial calcification in a fetus: a distinctive presentation of in utero herpessimplex virus type Ⅱ infection [J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2004, 23(10): 1385-1390.
17
Simchen MJ, Toi A, Bona M, et al. Fetal hepatic calcifications: prenatal diagnosis and outcome [J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2002, 187(6): 1617-1622.
18
Maisonneuve E, Debain L, Garel C, et al. Prenatal diagnosis and postnatal outcome of isolated intra-abdominal calcifications: a 10-year experience from a referral fetal medicine center [J]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol, 2019, 47(9): 643-649.
19
黄冬花, 邓书敏, 李海文, 等. 妊娠期多病原体感染胎儿产前超声的临床诊断分析 [J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2016, 26(2): 421-423.
20
孙玲玲, 邓学东, 梁泓, 等. 产前超声在妊娠期多病原体感染胎儿诊断中的应用 [J/CD].中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2014, 11(7): 571-576.
21
Sahlin E, Sirotkina M, Marnerides A, et al. Fetal calcifications are associated with chromosomal abnormalities [J]. PLoS One, 2015, 10(4): e0123343.
22
Olaya CS, Aldana MS, Maya GM, et al. Hepatic calcifications in fetal population studied by autopsies in Bogota, Colombia [J]. J Dev Orig Health Dis, 2017, 8(5): 613-617.
23
麻妙艳, 陈珂, 周妮, 等. 产前超声不同部位强回声胎儿82例临床分析 [J] .中华实用诊断与治疗杂志, 2018, 32(11): 1111-1114.
24
Pathak S, Grosu L. Case series of prenatal diagnosis of fetal intrahepaticlesions and postnatal outcome [J]. Ultrasound, 2019, 27(2): 127-130.
[1] 农云洁, 黄小桂, 黄裕兰, 农恒荣. 超声在多重肺部感染诊断中的临床应用价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 872-876.
[2] 李小飞, 刘洪莉, 石丘玲, 田静, 李莉, 漆洪波, 罗欣. 自然分娩产妇低强度聚焦超声子宫复旧治疗防治产后出血的前瞻性随机对照研究[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 534-539.
[3] 姜珊, 李湘燕, 田硕涵, 温冰, 何睿, 齐心. 采用优化抗感染治疗模式改善糖尿病足感染预后的临床观察[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2024, 19(05): 398-403.
[4] 刘欢, 邢皓, 常正奇, 张记. 机械敏感性离子通道蛋白Piezo1在感染相关疾病中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 263-269.
[5] 黄鸿初, 黄美容, 温丽红. 血液系统恶性肿瘤患者化疗后粒细胞缺乏感染的危险因素和风险预测模型[J/OL]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 285-292.
[6] 许月芳, 刘旺, 曾妙甜, 郭宇姝. 多粘菌素B和多粘菌素E治疗外科多重耐药菌感染临床疗效及安全性分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 700-703.
[7] 梁孟杰, 朱欢欢, 王行舟, 江航, 艾世超, 孙锋, 宋鹏, 王萌, 刘颂, 夏雪峰, 杜峻峰, 傅双, 陆晓峰, 沈晓菲, 管文贤. 联合免疫治疗的胃癌转化治疗患者预后及术后并发症分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 619-623.
[8] 皮尔地瓦斯·麦麦提玉素甫, 李慧灵, 艾克拜尔·艾力, 李赞林, 王志, 克力木·阿不都热依木. 生物补片修补巨大复发性腹壁切口疝临床疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 624-628.
[9] 顾熙, 徐子宇, 周澍, 张吴楼, 张业鹏, 林昊, 刘宗航, 嵇振岭, 郑立锋. 腹股沟疝腹膜前间隙无张力修补术后补片感染10 例报道[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 665-669.
[10] 臧宇, 姚胜, 朱新勇, 戎世捧, 田智超. 低温等离子射频消融治疗腹壁疝术后补片感染的临床效果[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 687-692.
[11] 杨闯, 马雪. 腹壁疝术后感染的危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 693-696.
[12] 中华医学会器官移植学分会. 肝移植术后缺血性胆道病变诊断与治疗中国实践指南[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 739-748.
[13] 丛黎, 马林, 陈旭, 李文文, 张亮亮, 周华亭. 改良CT严重指数联合炎症指标在重症急性胰腺炎患者胰腺感染预测及预后评估中的研究[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(05): 432-436.
[14] 贾玲玲, 滕飞, 常键, 黄福, 刘剑萍. 心肺康复在各种疾病中应用的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(09): 859-862.
[15] 颜世锐, 熊辉. 感染性心内膜炎合并急性肾损伤患者的危险因素探索及死亡风险预测[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(07): 618-624.
阅读次数
全文


摘要