摘要
目的:探讨TOF-MRA与3D CE-MRA成像技术的异同点以及对脑卒中患者的临床诊断价值。方法:选取2012年1月至2012年3月某院临床诊断为脑卒中的115名患者行磁共振常规检查、TOF-MRA及CE-MRA检查,采用血管原始图像、最大密度投影(MIP)、容积再现(VR)等后处理方法进行图像分析。结果:115例患者均行TOF-MRA检查、CE-MRA检查,其中5例病例由于严重伪影无法进行图像质量的评价;在正常血管显示方面2种成像方法无显著性差异(P>0.05);2种方法综合评价优于单一成像方法的应用(P<0.05),与TOF-MRA相比,CE-MRA与综合评价方法具有更好的一致性,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。其中11例患者大脑中动脉M1段闭塞、9例患者大脑后动脉P1段闭塞,在显示血管闭塞及侧支血管方面,CE-MRA方法比TOF-MRA成像方法具有明显优势;与TOF-MRA相比,CE-MRA成像方法还可以显示颅外段的动脉血管。结论:TOF-MRA与3D CE-MRA 2种成像方法各有优势,在脑卒中患者的血管显示方面有着重要的临床价值,2种方法的综合应用更有利于血管病变的显示。
Objective To evaluate the differences between time-of-flight magnetic resonance （TOF-MRA） and 3- dimensional contrast-enhanced MRA（3D CE-MRA） and their values for the diagnosis of stroke. Methods There were 115 patients diagnosed as stroke from January to March in 2012 underwent routine MRI, TOF-MRA and CE-MRA. Several post-processing techniques were involved in such as primary slice, maximum intensity projection（MIP） and volume reproduces（VR）. Results Of the 115 patients, 5 ones showed strong artifacts and could not be evaluated for image quality. There was no significant difference between the two methods for displaying normal vessels, with P〉0.05. The combined TOF-MRA and CE-MRA was significantly better than any single method, with P〈0.05. CE-MRA and the combined method behaved nonsignificantly better than TOF-MRA in the consistency, with P〉0.05. Eleven patients were found with occlusion at the M1 section of middle cerebral artery, and nine ones at the P1 section. When compared with TOF-MRA, CE-MRA took more advantages in displaying vascular occlusions, collateral vessels and extracranial arteries. Conclusion TOF-MRA or 3D CE-MRA both has its advantages in displaying the vessels for stroke patients, which can be combined for the diagnosis of the vascular diseases.
出处
《医疗卫生装备》
CAS
2013年第4期56-59,共4页
Chinese Medical Equipment Journal
关键词
脑卒中
磁共振成像
时间飞跃法
对比增强血管成像
stroke
magnetic resonance imaging
contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography
time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography
