| Literature DB >> 27588094 |
Jiashou Hu1, Zhongwei Li2, Yanyan Qu3, Jinfeng Sun4, Guowei Zhang2, Guanghui Zhang5.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the characteristics and value of 3D dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance pulmonary angiography (3D-DCE-MRPA) for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE). Among patients suspected with PE, 30 cases were scheduled for 3D-DCE-MRPA [magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) group], and 30 cases were examined using multislice computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (msCTPA) [computed tomography (CT) group]. Direct signs including location, number, morphology of emboli, and indirect signs such as pulmonary infarction, pneumonia and pleural effusion, were analyzed. Pulmonary artery enhancement was observed. Image quality was contrasted, branches of the pulmonary artery revealed, and differences in sensitivity, specificity and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were compared. The number and morphology of emboli in the two groups were compared, and there were no significant differences (P>0.05). In the MRI group, significantly more emboli were located in segmental and subsegmental bronchi (P<0.05). The indirect signs in the two groups were compared and the differences were not statistically significant (P>0.05). The difference in image quality between the two groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05). Levels 5 and 6 of the pulmonary artery branch were more evident in the MRI group compared to the CT group. The SNR and carrier-to-noise ratio in the MRI group were significantly higher than those in the CT group (P<0.05). Twenty-six cases of PE were diagnosed in the CT group, with a sensitivity of 90.5% and specificity of 86.7%. Twenty-five cases were diagnosed in the MRI group, with a sensitivity of 92.3% and specificity of 84.2%. In conclusion, 3D-DCE-MRPA surpassed msCTPA in revealing segmental and subsegmental pulmonary artery PE.Entities:
Keywords: 3D dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance pulmonary angiography; direct signs; image quality; indirect signs; multislice computed tomographic pulmonary angiography; pulmonary embolism; sensitivity; signal-to-noise ratio; specificity
Year: 2016 PMID: 27588094 PMCID: PMC4998033 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2016.3539
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Exp Ther Med ISSN: 1792-0981 Impact factor: 2.447
MRI sequence scanning parameter settings.
| Sequence | TR (msec) | TE (msec) | TI (msec) | FA (degree) | FOV (cm) | Matrix | Collection time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1WI | 583 | 15 | 90/180 | 42×42 | 224×256 | 2 | |
| FSE, T2WI | 3,000 | 100 | 90/160 | 18×18 | 192×256 | 2 | |
| 3D FFE | 9 | 3 | 100 | 20 | 40×40 | 128×256 | 1 |
MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; FSE, fast spin echo; FFE, fast field echo.
Comparison of direct and indirect signs [cases (%)].
| Location of embolus | Formation | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Groups | Cases | Subsegment artery | Segmental artery | Interlobar artery | Left, right and trunk of artery | Numbers | Central | Intraluminal | Totally obstructive | |
| CT | 30 | 5 (16.7) | 8 (26.7) | 16 (53.3) | 1 (3.3) | 1.5±0.2 | 8 (26.7) | 15 (50.0) | 7 (23.3) | |
| MRI | 30 | 10 (33.3) | 13 (43.3) | 6 (20.0) | 1 (3.3) | 1.6±0.3 | 8 (26.7) | 13 (43.3) | 9 (30.0) | |
| t (χ2)-test | 7.024[ | 0.627 | 0.393 | |||||||
| P-value | 0.030 | 0.849 | 0.822 | |||||||
Analysis was conducted after data from the interlobar and pulmonary arteries (left, right and trunk) were combined. CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.
Comparison of indirect signs [cases (%)].
| Groups | Cases | Infarction | Pneumonia | Hydrothorax | Enlargement of pulmonary artery |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT | 30 | 4 (13.3) | 16 (53.3) | 3 (10.0) | 7 (23.3) |
| MRI | 30 | 3 (10.0) | 15 (50.0) | 2 (6.7) | 10 (33.3) |
| χ2 | 0.909 | ||||
| P-value | 0.823 |
CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.
Comparison of image quality, pulmonary artery branches and SNR [cases (%)].
| Image quality | Branch of pulmonary artery | SNR | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Groups | Cases | I | II | III | IV | Level 1–3 | Level 4 | Level 5 and 6 | SNR | CNR |
| CT | 30 | 3 (10.0) | 8 (26.7) | 13 (43.3) | 6 (20.0) | 3 (10.0) | 20 (50.0) | 7 (23.3) | 41.3±7.6 | 32.5±5.9 |
| MRI | 30 | 2 (6.7) | 6 (20.0) | 14 (46.7) | 8 (26.7) | 4 (13.3) | 10 (33.3) | 16 (53.3) | 45.6±8.2 | 36.7±6.0 |
| t (χ2)-test | 0.812 | 7.159 | 5.632 | 5.487 | ||||||
| P-value | 0.847 | 0.028 | 0.030 | 0.033 | ||||||
SNR, signal-to-noise ratio; CNR, carrier-to-noise ratio; CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.