Pilot clinical study on predicting nature of gallbladder polyp by measuring sizes in different directions, stalk width with gray scale ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2018.01.005

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To evaluate clinical application of measuring the sizes in different directions and stalk width of gallbladder polyp lesions (GPL) ≥1.0 cm for differentiation diagnosis between cholesterol polyp and adenoma by both gray scale ultrasound (US) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS).

Methods

From January to September 2016, a total of 81 patients with GPL≥1.0 cm received cholecystectomy in our hospital were enrolled in this study. All participations underwent US and CEUS scanning before cholecystecomy. Patient′s clinical data, sizes in different directions, stalk width and features of US images were recorded. According to pathological findings, patients were divided into cholesterol polyp group and adenoma group. All of the clinical data, sizes, stalk width and features of US images were statistically analyzed. Patient′s age, size in vertical and parallel sizes, stalk width of GPL, ratio of vertical size to stalk width, ratio of parallel size to stalk width and ratio of vertical size to parallel size were compared with t-test. Genda, number and location of GPL, echoic level and blood flow signal were compared with the χ² test. Bivariate was used for relation analysis.

Results

There were difference in patient′s age, vasularity of GPL, size in vertical direction, size in parallel direction, stalk width, ratio of vertical size to stalk width, ratio of parallel size to stalk width [9(15.8%) vs 9(37.5%), (37.02±10.14) years old vs (52.25±13.85) years old, (0.94±0.33)cm vs (1.27±0.79)cm, 1.10±0.37 vs 1.71±0.50, (0.26±0.10)cm vs (0.58±0.51)cm, 3.82±1.87 vs 2.92±1.61], the differences were statistically significant (χ²=2.675, t=5.303, 2.675, 5.855, 4.566, -2.536, all P<0.05), but no difference in ration of vertical size to parallel size between two groups (all P>0.05). Bivariate realtion analysis proved that size in vertical direction, size in parallel direction, stalk width and ratio of vertical size to stalk width were related with the nature of GPL≥1.0 cm (r=0.375, 0.571, 0.586, -0.342, all P<0.05).

Conclusion

Sizes in different directions and stalk width were important factors for predicting the nature of GPL ≥1.0 cm.

Key words: Gallbladder diseases, Adenomatous polyps, Ultrasonography

Xiang Fei, Yukun Luo, Jie Tang, Yanmi Li, Ziyu Jiao, Bo Liu, Jie Li. Pilot clinical study on predicting nature of gallbladder polyp by measuring sizes in different directions, stalk width with gray scale ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2018, 15(01): 19-24.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://chaosheng.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2018.01.005

https://chaosheng.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2018/V15/I01/19

Figures/Tables 5

References 18

1	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(7):2216-2222.
2	Sarkut P, Kilicturgay S, Ozer A, et al. Gallbladder polyps: Factors affecting surgical decision [J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2013, 19(28):4526-4530.
3	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.
4	Wiles R, Thoeni RF, Barbu ST, et al. Management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps: Joint guidelines between the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), European Association for Endoscopic Surgery and other Interventional Techniques (EAES), International Society of Digestive Surgery - European Federation (EFISDS) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) [J]. Eur Radiol, 2017, 27(9):3856-3866.
5	Yuan HX, Cao JY, Kong WT, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in diagnosis of gallbladder adenoma [J]. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int, 2015, 14(2):201-207.
6	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.
7	Inui K, Yoshino J, Miyoshi H. Diagnosis of gallbladder tumors [J]. Intern Med, 2011, 50(11):1133-1136.
8	Lee KF, Wong J, Li JC, et al. Polypoid lesions of the gallbladder [J]. Am J Surg, 2004, 188(2):186-190.
9	Xu HX. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the biliary system: Potential uses and indications [J]. World J Radiol, 2009, 1(1):37-44.
10	Gallahan WC, Conway JD. Diagnosis and management of gallbladder polyps [J]. Gastroenterol Clin North Am, 2010, 39(2):359-367.
11	Park HY, Oh SH, Lee KH, et al. Is cholecystectomy a reasonable treatment option for simple gallbladder polyps larger than 10 mm? [J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2015, 12(14):4248-4254.
12	French DG, Allen PH, EIIsmere J. The diagnostic accuracy of transabdominal ultrasonography needs to be considered when managing gallbladder polyps [J]. Surg Endosc, 2013, 27(11):4021-4025.
13	Sarkut P, Kilicturgay S, Ozer A, et al. Gallbladder polyps: factors affecting surgical decision [J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2013, 19(28):4526-4530.
14	Andrén-Sandberg A. Diagnosis and management of gallbladder polyps [J]. N Am J Med Sci, 2012, 4(5):203-211.
15	Maciejewski P, Strzelczyk J. Is gall-bladder polyp equivalent to cancer? An analysis of material from 1196 cholecystectomies--acomparison of the ultrasound and histopathological results [J]. Pol Przegl Chir, 2014, 85(5):218-222.
16	Boulton RA, Adams DH. Gallbladder polyps: when to wait and when to act [J]. Lancet, 1997, 349(9055):817.
17	European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL). EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of gallstones [J]. J Hepatol, 2016, 65(1):146-181.
18	Bhatt NR, Gillis A, Smoothey CO, et al. Evidence based management of polyps of the gall bladder: A systematic review of the risk factors of malignancy [J]. Surgeon, 2016, 14(5):278-286.

参数		胆固醇息肉组（57例）	胆囊腺瘤组（24例）	统计值	P值
年龄（岁，±s）		37.02±10.14	52.25±13.82	t=5.303	<0.001
性别（例）		?	?	χ²=0.457	0.49
?	男性	17	9	?	?
?	女性	40	15	?	?
息肉数量（例）		?	?	χ²=3.806	0.05
?	单发	41	22	?	?
?	多发	16	2	?	?
息肉部位（例）		?	?	χ²=5.047	0.08
?	底部	13	2	?	?
?	体部	30	19	?	?
?	颈部	14	3	?	?
灰阶回声强度（例）		?	?	χ²=0.990	0.32
?	高回声	24	13	?	?
?	非高回声	33	24	?	?
彩色血流（例）		?	?	χ²=4.606	0.03
?	有	9	9	?	?
?	无	48	15	?	?

参数		胆固醇息肉组（57例）	胆囊腺瘤组（24例）	统计值	P值
年龄（岁，±s）		37.02±10.14	52.25±13.82	t=5.303	<0.001
性别（例）		?	?	χ²=0.457	0.49
?	男性	17	9	?	?
?	女性	40	15	?	?
息肉数量（例）		?	?	χ²=3.806	0.05
?	单发	41	22	?	?
?	多发	16	2	?	?
息肉部位（例）		?	?	χ²=5.047	0.08
?	底部	13	2	?	?
?	体部	30	19	?	?
?	颈部	14	3	?	?
灰阶回声强度（例）		?	?	χ²=0.990	0.32
?	高回声	24	13	?	?
?	非高回声	33	24	?	?
彩色血流（例）		?	?	χ²=4.606	0.03
?	有	9	9	?	?
?	无	48	15	?	?

组别	例数	垂直径大小（cm）	平行径大小（cm）	垂/平	基底部宽度（cm）	垂/基	平/基
胆固醇息肉组	57	0.94±0.33	1.10±0.37	1.05±0.77	0.26±0.10	3.82±1.87	4.59±1.74
胆囊腺瘤组	24	1.27±0.79	1.71±0.50	0.73±0.26	0.58±0.51	2.92±1.61	3.96±1.81
t值	?	2.675	5.855	-1.972	4.566	-2.536	-1.464
P值	?	0.009	<0.001	0.052	<0.001	0.013	0.147

组别	例数	垂直径大小（cm）	平行径大小（cm）	垂/平	基底部宽度（cm）	垂/基	平/基
胆固醇息肉组	57	0.94±0.33	1.10±0.37	1.05±0.77	0.26±0.10	3.82±1.87	4.59±1.74
胆囊腺瘤组	24	1.27±0.79	1.71±0.50	0.73±0.26	0.58±0.51	2.92±1.61	3.96±1.81
t值	?	2.675	5.855	-1.972	4.566	-2.536	-1.464
P值	?	0.009	<0.001	0.052	<0.001	0.013	0.147

[1]	Shujie Wei, Pinjing Hui, Yafang Ding, Bai Zhang, Yanhong Yan, Peng Zhou, Yabo Huang. Evaluation of cerebral hemodynamics in patients with unilateral internal carotid artery occlusion undergoing superficial temporal artery-middle cerebral artery bypass [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(10): 1046-1055.
[2]	Xuan Zhang, Yutong Ma, Yuqian Miao, Yun Zhang, Shiwen Wu, Xiaochu Dang, Yingying Chen, Zhaoming Zhong, Xuejuan Wang, Miao Hu, Yanfeng Sun, Xiuzhu Ma, Faqin Lyu, Haiyan Kou. Ultrasound assessment of diaphragm function in pediatric patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(10): 1068-1073.
[3]	Lianhua Zhu, Xiang Fei, Peng Han, Bo Jiang, Nan Li, Yukun Luo. Value of high frame rate contrast-enhanced ultrasound in differential diagnosis of gallbladder polyp lesions [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(09): 904-910.
[4]	Meifang Zhang, Ying Tan, Qiaozhen Zhu, Xin Wen, Ying Yuan, Yue Qin, Hongbo Guo, Lingxiu Hou, Wenlan Huang, Guiyan Peng, Shengli Li. Artificial intelligence-based quality control of mid-sagittal plane ultrasound images for first trimester fetal crown-rump length [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(09): 945-950.
[5]	Ruina Zhao, Yuxin Jiang, Tao Chen, Li Zhang, Cheng Chen, Siqi Jin, Xueqi Chen, Xiao Yang, Jianchu Li. Present status and reform demands of continuing medical education for ultrasonic physicians in Beijing [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(09): 966-973.
[6]	Yuhan Zhou, Huan Xiao, Chunjiang Yang, Juan Zhou, Lirong Zhu, Juan Xu, Fangting Mou. Diagnostic value of ultrasound in children with temporary hip synovitis [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(08): 795-800.
[7]	Huanyan Liu, Yang Hua, Lingyun Jia, Xinyu Zhao, Beibei Liu. Lumen structure and hemodynamic characteristics of occluded internal carotid artery [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(08): 809-815.
[8]	Lianlian Zhang, Pinjing Hui, Yafang Ding. Clinical value of carotid Doppler ultrasonography in assessing vulnerability of atherosclerotic plaques [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(08): 816-821.
[9]	Yaping Jia, Shu'e Zeng. Ultrasound and pathological characteristics of breast metaplastic carcinoma containing squamous cell carcinoma components [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(08): 844-848.
[10]	Gang Luo, Silin Pan, Taotao Chen, Qian Xu, Zhixian Ji, Sibao Wang, Lingyu Sun. Application of echocardiography in fetal cardiac intervention of pulmonary atresia with intact ventricular septum [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(06): 605-609.
[11]	Jia Huang, Hua Shi, Yuguo Zhang, Jiaqi Hu, Qian Chen. Ultrasonographic features of normal and abnormal fetal left brachiocephalic vein and their clinical significance [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(06): 610-617.
[12]	Mei Liao, Hongjun Zhang, Jieyang Jin, Yan Lyu, Jie Ren. Diagnostic value of bedside contrast-enhanced ultrasound for early hepatic artery thrombosis after liver transplantation [J]. Chinese Journal of Hepatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 12(06): 630-634.
[13]	Tianchi Yang, Wei Han, Feng Qiu, Jiahui Qi. Evaluation of pancreatic texture by intraoperative ultrasonic elastography [J]. Chinese Journal of Hepatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 12(06): 646-650.
[14]	Fengyun Wu, Xin Teng, Lianjuan Liu. Diagnostic value of high-frequency ultrasonography and enhanced magnetic resonance for primary hyperdifferentiated hepatocellular carcinoma of different diameters [J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2023, 13(06): 404-408.
[15]	Xinxin Sun, Jun Liu, Chaowu Chen, Chao Sun. Application of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration in pancreatic space-occupying lesions [J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2023, 13(06): 418-421.

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export