AIM:To introduce computed tomography during percutaneous splenoportography (CTSP), a new method for determining hepatic diseases. METHODS: Ten hybrid dogs and 20 patients with primary hepatic cancer (PHC) were included in the study. Each dog was examined by CT, CTAP (computed tomography during arterial portography) and CTSP to compare the enhanced degrees of the liver. The 20 PHC patients were examined by CTSP and the appearance of PHC was compared with their pathological results to evaluate the diagnostic significance of CTSP. RESULTS: The animal experiments showed that both CTAP and CTSP could obviously enhance the liver (P < 0.01), but there was no significant difference in the enhanced results between the two methods (P >0.05). On the CTSP images in the 20 patients, the density of the livers was increased to 168-192Hu, whereas the density of the cancers remained as low as that on the images of CT scans (< 58Hu). The CTSP findings were consistent with the surgical ones from spaceoccupying lesions. Its diagnostic value was obviously superior to that of general enhanced CT and ultrasonic examination. However, it was difficult for CTSP to show nodules less than 1cm in size located on the surface of the liver or the hepatic portal zone. CONCLUSION: Like CTAP, CTSP is also a sensitive method for showing occupants in the liver. But the equipments and the procedures for CTSP are simpler than for CTAP. Therefore, it is an alternative procedure in clinical practice.
AIM:To introduce computed tomography during percutaneous splenoportography (CTSP), a new method for determining hepatic diseases. METHODS: Ten hybrid dogs and 20 patients with primary hepatic cancer (PHC) were included in the study. Each dog was examined by CT, CTAP (computed tomography during arterial portography) and CTSP to compare the enhanced degrees of the liver. The 20 PHC patients were examined by CTSP and the appearance of PHC was compared with their pathological results to evaluate the diagnostic significance of CTSP. RESULTS: The animal experiments showed that both CTAP and CTSP could obviously enhance the liver (P < 0.01), but there was no significant difference in the enhanced results between the two methods (P >0.05). On the CTSP images in the 20 patients, the density of the livers was increased to 168-192Hu, whereas the density of the cancers remained as low as that on the images of CT scans (< 58Hu). The CTSP findings were consistent with the surgical ones from spaceoccupying lesions. Its diagnostic value was obviously superior to that of general enhanced CT and ultrasonic examination. However, it was difficult for CTSP to show nodules less than 1cm in size located on the surface of the liver or the hepatic portal zone. CONCLUSION: Like CTAP, CTSP is also a sensitive method for showing occupants in the liver. But the equipments and the procedures for CTSP are simpler than for CTAP. Therefore, it is an alternative procedure in clinical practice.
Authors: O Matsui; T Takashima; M Kadoya; M Suzuki; J Hirose; T Kameyama; S Choto; H Konishi; M Ida; A Yamaguchi Journal: Radiology Date: 1987-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: O Matsui; T Takashima; M Kadoya; M Ida; M Suzuki; K Kitagawa; R Kamimura; K Inoue; H Konishi; H Itoh Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 1985 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: K Takayasu; N Moriyama; Y Muramatsu; M Makuuchi; H Hasegawa; N Okazaki; S Hirohashi Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 1990-07 Impact factor: 3.959