论文部分内容阅读
目的 通过对非肝病患者及肝硬化患者模拟穿刺途径与门静脉右支及肝中、肝右静脉夹角的测量,以期为肝内门腔分流提供形态学资料.方法 选取上腹部64-MSCT扫描非肝病被检查组共40例;肝硬化组符合纳入标准14例.用智能追踪技术启动扫描.并将所得数据在GE ADW4.2工作站进行处理. 结果 无论正常组或肝硬化Child-Pugh A、B分级组,肝中、肝右静脉1、2、3 cm和门静脉右支1、2 cm间的模拟穿刺途径与肝静脉间夹角平均值呈减小趋势,而模拟穿刺途径与门静脉右支间夹角则依次增大.按照α=0.05标准认为正常组与肝硬化Child-Pugh A、B分级组模拟穿刺途径与肝中、肝右静脉和门静脉间夹角没有显著差异.结论 TIPSS模拟穿刺途径与肝中、肝右静脉和门静脉右支间夹角变化方向相反.在肝中静脉2 cm与门静脉2 cm间穿刺较为适合.“,”Objective To provide anatomic data for intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, by simulating puncture channel and measuring the angle between right branch of portal vein and intermediate hepatic veins or right hepatic veins. Methods 40 cases without liver diseases and 14 cases of cirrhosis underwent the upper abdomen 64-MSCT scan, which was initiated after the test of the celiac levels of abdominal aorta by the smart tracking technology (Smart Prep). The imaging data was processed on the GE ADW4.2 workstations. Results Despite of normal or cirrhosis Child-Pugh A, B grade group, the puncture channels of right hepatic vein or middle hepatic vein about 1cm, 2cm, 3cm and right branch of portal vein about 1cm and 2cm , and the average angle between the hepatic veins, showed a decreased tendency, however, the puncture channel between the right branch of portal vein showed a increased tendency. There was no significant difference for puncture channels and angles among normal group and liver cirrhosis Child-Pugh A, B grade group. Conclusions The angle between the intermediate hepatic veins and right hepatic veins or right branch of portal vein is the opposite direction, compared to the simulated puncture channel. It is suitable to puncture between intermediate hepatic veins 2cm and right branch of portal vein 2cm.