论文部分内容阅读
目的：比较门静脉和肝静脉系统３ＤＤＣＥＭＲＡ成像时，用快速法和慢速法注射造影剂所获图像质量和显示血管的差异。材料与方法：实验分两部分。第一部分做了１０例肝脏横断面动态增强ＭＲＩ，分为两组，分别用快速和慢速法注射造影剂，测定ＰＶ、ＨＶ和ＩＶＣ达信号峰值的不同时间，以决定第二部分实验的延迟时间。第二部分做了１０例２０次ＤＣＥＭＲＡ，采用自身对照，分别用快速和慢速法注射造影剂，分析两种方法显示ＰＶ、ＨＶ和ＩＶＣ的效果，并比较ＭＩＰ和ＭＰＶＲ，以及肝硬化和无肝硬化者上述血管显影情况。结果：快速法和慢速法显示ＰＶ的差别无统计学意义（Ｐ＞０．０５），慢速法ＨＶ、ＩＶＣ显示优于快速法（Ｐ＜０．０１），ＭＰＶＲ好于ＭＩＰ（Ｐ＜０．０１），肝硬化者ＨＶ显示不如无肝硬化者（Ｐ＜０．０５）。结论：３ＤＤＣＥＭＲＡ能较好地同时显示ＰＶ、ＨＶ和ＩＶＣ。快速法和慢速法相比，两者显示ＰＶ均较满意，但后者能更好地显示ＨＶ和ＩＶＣ。两种重建方法中，ＭＰＶＲ优于ＭＩＰ。肝硬化时，ＨＶ显示欠佳
OBJECTIVE: To compare the image quality and blood vessel variability of fast and slow injection of contrast media in 3DDCEMRA imaging of the portal and hepatic venous systems. Materials and Methods: The experiment is divided into two parts. The first part of the 10 cases of liver enhanced dynamic MRI, divided into two groups, respectively, fast and slow injection of contrast medium, measured PV, HV and IVC reached the signal peak time to determine the second part of the experiment delay time. In the second part, 10 cases of 20 DCEMRA were performed. Self-contrast was used. Fast and slow injection of contrast agent was performed. The effects of PV, HV and IVC were compared by two methods. MIP and MPVR were compared with those without cirrhosis and cirrhosis Cirrhosis of the above blood vessels development situation. Results: There was no significant difference in PV between fast method and slow method (P> 0.05), HV and IVC of slow method were better than fast method (P <0.01), MPVR was better than MIP (P < 0.01). The HV of cirrhosis was not as good as that of cirrhosis (P <0.05). Conclusion: 3DDCEMRA shows PV, HV and IVC at the same time. Both the fast versus the slow one showed that the PV was more satisfactory, but the latter showed better HV and IVC. Among the two reconstruction methods, MPVR is superior to MIP. When cirrhosis, HV shows poor