OBJECTIVE: We examined the usefulness of imaging portosystemic collaterals accompanying liver cirrhosis by magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), which facilitates imaging of the vascular system without contrast medium. METHODS: MRA was performed in 30 patients with liver cirrhosis. Of the 30 patients, percutaneous transhepatic portography (PTP) was performed in 10 patients, and conventional arterial portography (CAP) was performed in 20 patients. The three-dimensional (3D) phase contrast method was used for MRA. Study 1: The ability to image portosystemic collaterals was compared between PTP or CAP and MRA. Study 2: The usefulness of MRA for evaluating the effect of treatment on gastric and esophageal varices was examined. RESULTS: Study 1: In comparing PTP and MRA (n = 10), the left gastric vein (n = 10), splenorenal (gastrorenal) shunt (n = 5), and paraumbilical vein (n = 2) were imaged similarly. However, MRA did not reveal any esophageal varices (n = 10). In comparing CAP and MRA (n = 20), the left gastric vein (n = 17), splenorenal (gastrorenal) shunt (n = 10), and paraumbilical vein (n = 4) were imaged similarly. Whereas CAP revealed esophageal varices (n = 4) in four patients, MRA revealed esophageal varices in only one patient. Study 2: When the effect of treatment for varices was evaluated, MRA 3 wk after embolization therapy for gastric varices (n = 4) confirmed the disappearance of gastrorenal shunt. However, it was impossible to evaluate esophageal varices by MRA. CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to image portosystemic collaterals accompanying liver cirrhosis by MRA. MRA was useful as a routine examination. Furthermore, it was useful for evaluating the effect of embolization therapy on gastric varices.
OBJECTIVE: We examined the usefulness of imaging portosystemic collaterals accompanying liver cirrhosis by magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), which facilitates imaging of the vascular system without contrast medium. METHODS: MRA was performed in 30 patients with liver cirrhosis. Of the 30 patients, percutaneous transhepatic portography (PTP) was performed in 10 patients, and conventional arterial portography (CAP) was performed in 20 patients. The three-dimensional (3D) phase contrast method was used for MRA. Study 1: The ability to image portosystemic collaterals was compared between PTP or CAP and MRA. Study 2: The usefulness of MRA for evaluating the effect of treatment on gastric and esophageal varices was examined. RESULTS: Study 1: In comparing PTP and MRA (n = 10), the left gastric vein (n = 10), splenorenal (gastrorenal) shunt (n = 5), and paraumbilical vein (n = 2) were imaged similarly. However, MRA did not reveal any esophageal varices (n = 10). In comparing CAP and MRA (n = 20), the left gastric vein (n = 17), splenorenal (gastrorenal) shunt (n = 10), and paraumbilical vein (n = 4) were imaged similarly. Whereas CAP revealed esophageal varices (n = 4) in four patients, MRA revealed esophageal varices in only one patient. Study 2: When the effect of treatment for varices was evaluated, MRA 3 wk after embolization therapy for gastric varices (n = 4) confirmed the disappearance of gastrorenal shunt. However, it was impossible to evaluate esophageal varices by MRA. CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to image portosystemic collaterals accompanying liver cirrhosis by MRA. MRA was useful as a routine examination. Furthermore, it was useful for evaluating the effect of embolization therapy on gastric varices.