| Literature DB >> 34745510 |
Lan Zang1.
Abstract
Objective: This study was aimed to explore the accuracy of multi-slice spiral computed tomography (CT) scan in preoperative staging diagnosis of bladder cancer based on hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm, so as to provide a more reasonable supporting basis for guiding clinical work in the future.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34745510 PMCID: PMC8566054 DOI: 10.1155/2021/7733654
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Algorithm principle of hybrid iteration.
CT staging of bladder cancer.
| Stages | Imaging features | |
|---|---|---|
| T1 | Lump in the bladder cavity and smooth bladder wall without thickening. | |
| T2 | T2a | The bladder wall was thickened, but there was no local stiffness. |
| T2b | The bladder wall was thickened and stiff, but the outer margin was smooth. | |
| T3 | Bladder wall was thickened and irregular, with blurred boundaries, and there was soft tissue density shadow in the surrounding fat layer. | |
| T4 | Tumor invaded adjacent organs. When the tumor invaded the seminal vesicle, the angle of the bladder seminal vesicle disappeared. When the tumor invaded the prostate, the boundary of the prostate was not clear and the density was uneven. | |
Figure 2Scanning process and parameters.
Pathological staging of bladder cancer using the 7th edition of TNM staging method, 2009.
| T (primary tumor) | Tx | The primary tumor could not be evaluated. | |
| To | No evidence of primary tumor. | ||
| Ta | Non-invasive papillary carcinoma. | ||
| Tis | Carcinoma in situ (“squamous carcinoma”). | ||
| T1 | Tumor invasion of subepithelial connective tissue. | ||
| T2 (muscular layer invasion) | T2a | Tumor invasion of superficial muscularis (medial half). | |
| T2b | Tumor invasion of the deep muscle layer (lateral half). | ||
| T3 (surrounding tissue invasion) | T3a | The tumor invaded the tissues around the bladder under the microscope. | |
| T3b | The tumor can be seen to invade the tissues around the bladder (extra-bladder mass). | ||
| T4 (other organ or tissue invasion) | T4a | The tumor invaded the prostate, uterus, or vagina. | |
| T4b | Tumor invaded the pelvic or abdominal wall. | ||
|
| |||
| N (regional lymph nodes) | Nx | Regional lymph nodes could not be evaluated. | |
| No | No regional lymph node metastasis. | ||
| N1 | Single lymph node metastasis from the true pelvic region (internal iliac, obturator, external iliac, or anterior sacral). | ||
| N2 | Multiple lymph nodes in the true pelvis (internal iliac, obturator foramen, external iliac, or anterior sacral). | ||
| N3 | Common iliac lymph node metastasis. | ||
|
| |||
| M (distant metastasis) | Mx | Distant metastases could not be assessed. | |
| M0 | No distant metastasis. | ||
| M1 | There were distant metastases. | ||
Figure 3Comparison of abdominal images under FBP algorithm and hybrid iterative algorithm. (a) FBP. (b) Mixed iteration.
Figure 4Comparison of brain images under FBP algorithm and hybrid iterative algorithm. (a) FBP. (b) Mixed iteration.
Figure 5Comparison of chest images under FBP algorithm and hybrid iterative algorithm. (a) FBP. (b) Mixed iteration.
Figure 6Age distribution.
Figure 7Diameter distribution.
Figure 8Pathological stages.
Figure 9Diameter distribution of the three sets of results.
The staging results of different groups.
| Group | Pathological staging (pieces) | Total (pieces) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |||
| Observation group (cases) | T1 | 92 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 95 |
| T2 | 9 | 26 | 1 | 0 | 36 | |
| T3 | 6 | 0 | 16 | 1 | 23 | |
| T4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 9 | |
| Total (cases) | 107 | 29 | 18 | 9 | 163 | |
|
| ||||||
| Control group (cases) | T1 | 61 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 71 |
| T2 | 36 | 14 | 1 | 1 | 50 | |
| T3 | 12 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 30 | |
| T4 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 4 | 12 | |
| Total (cases) | 107 | 29 | 18 | 9 | 164 | |
Figure 10Comparison of the accuracy of the staging results of the two groups. ∗indicated that the comparison is statistically significant, P < 0.05.
Figure 11Comparison of the consistency of the staging results of the two groups. ∗indicated that the comparison is statistically significant, P < 0.05.