| Literature DB >> 23865067 |
Guolin Ma1, Rongjie Bai, Huijie Jiang, Xuejia Hao, Zaisheng Ling, Kefeng Li.
Abstract
RATIONALE ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23865067 PMCID: PMC3705863 DOI: 10.1155/2013/813174
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Combinations of imaging conditions.
| Injection time (s) | Concentration (%) | Injection rate (mL/s) | Effects and analysis of perfusion imaging | Methods to improve image quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 19–76 | 0.3–0.5 | Low concentration, short duration, and no pseudo-color map | Extend the injection time |
| 1 | 76 | 0.5 | High concentration, slow injection rate, and no pseudo-color map | Unfeasible method |
| 2~3 | 76 | 0.3 | Short duration and no pseudo-color map | Extend the injection time |
| 2~3 | 19–57 | 0.3–0.5 | Low concentration, short duration, and no pseudo-color map | Extend the injection time |
| 2~3 | 76 | 0.5 | High concentration, slow injection, and no pseudo-color map | Unfeasible method |
| 4~5 | 76 | 0.3 | Short duration and no pseudo-color map | Extend the injection time |
| 4~5 | 19–38 | 0.3–0.5 | Low concentration, short duration, and no pseudo-color map | Extend the injection time |
| 4~5 | 57 | 0.5 | Poor quality of pseudo-color map | Extend the injection time |
| 4~5 | 76 | 0.5 | High concentration, slow injection, and no pseudo-color map | Unfeasible method |
| 6 | 76 | 0.3 | Poor quality of pseudo-color map | Decrease concentration |
| 6 | 19–38 | 0.3–0.5 | Low concentration and no pseudo-color map | Increase concentration |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 | 76 | 0.5 | High concentration, slow injection, and no pseudo-color map | Unfeasible method |
Bold: the optimal imaging protocol we used in this study.
Figure 1The TDCs obtained during perfusion imaging. (a) The TDC of the abdominal aorta showed a rapid increase and the time to peak was 7.2 ± 3.6 s. (b) The TDC of the portal vein showed a slow increase and the time to peak was 14.7 ± 4.2 s. (c) The TDC of the liver parenchyma showed a slow increase and the time to peak was 27.0 ± 4.5 s. (d) The hepatic arterial phase. The abdominal aorta showed obvious enhancement, while the portal vein was not clearly displayed. (e) The hepatic portal venous phase. The trunk of the portal vein and the left branch showed obvious enhancement. (f) The delayed phase. The liver parenchyma showed obvious homogeneous enhancement, while enhancement of the abdominal aorta and portal vein decreased.
Figure 2The pathological images of normal and cirrhotic rat livers. (a) Tissue from normal rat livers. (b)-(c) Images of normal tissue with a higher magnification. Images showed typical lobular architecture and uniform distribution of liver cells. (d) Specimen of liver sample with low-grade DN. The liver showed gray surface and many nodules with various sizes. (e) Low-grade DN in a cirrhotic liver. (f) Image of low-grade DN with a higher magnification. Images showed increased number of cells with higher nuclei-to-cytoplasm ratio (black arrows). (g) High-grade DN in a cirrhotic liver. (h)-(i) Image of high-grade DN with a higher magnification. The reticular structure of nodule was reduced. Steatosis (arrow head) and clustered Mallory bodies (white arrow in (h)) of various sizes are found in the nodules (white arrow). Isolated adenoid structure was also found (arrow in (i)). Arrows indicated the ROI regions. Scale bar = 100 μM in (a) to (c) and (e) to (i).
Figure 3The pseudo-colored perfusion images of HAF, HBV, and HBF of liver parenchyma. (a)–(c) Normal livers. (d)–(f) Low-grade DN in the cirrhotic liver. (g)–(i) High-grade DN in the cirrhotic liver. Measurement values from high to low were indicated from red to blue.
Values of CTP imaging in the normal and cirrhotic rat livers.
| ROI | Normal livers (80) | Precancerous livers (40) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| HAF (%) | 0.25 ± 0.09 | 0.63 ± 0.10* | 0.00001 |
| HBF (mL/min/100 mg) | 433.72 ± 225.32 | 354.99 ± 211.60 | 0.095 |
| HBV (mL/100 mg) | 40.09 ± 94.03 | 12.43 ± 6.30 | 0.073 |
| MTT (s) | 9.34 ± 16.99 | 2.27 ± 1.23* | 0.012 |
| PS (mL/min/100 mg) | 36.68 ± 31.34 | 45.36 ± 20.35 | 0.132 |
| HAP (mL/min/100 mg) | 107.12 ± 72.63 | 217.74 ± 124.32* | 0.00002 |
| HPP (mL/min/100 mg) | 326.60 ± 171.69 | 137.24 ± 101.61* | 0.00001 |
Notes: All parameters were measured three times. *P < 0.05 compared with the control group.