Mengmeng Zhang, Hailong Yu, Di Zhao, Wen Shen, Xu Bai, Meng Zheng, Jiachen Ji, Rui Li, Jianming Cai, Jinghui Dong, Changchun Liu
{"title":"健康志愿者和慢性肝病患者门静脉血液动力学的 4D 流量 MRI。","authors":"Mengmeng Zhang, Hailong Yu, Di Zhao, Wen Shen, Xu Bai, Meng Zheng, Jiachen Ji, Rui Li, Jianming Cai, Jinghui Dong, Changchun Liu","doi":"10.2174/0115734056269300231127052836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify age-matched healthy volunteers, non-cirrhotic chronic liver disease (CLD) and cirrhotic patients based on portal hemodynamic parameters using 4D flow MRI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 10 age-matched healthy volunteers and 69 CLD patients were enrolled and underwent 4D flow MRI prospectively. 4D flow MR images were processed by an MD in biomedical engineering working on the GTFlow platform. Portal hemodynamic parameters include net flow (mL/cycle), flow volume per second through the lumen (mL/sec), average flow velocity (cm/sec), and maximum flow velocity (cm/sec). The difference in portal hemodynamic parameters of 4D flow MRI was compared among healthy volunteers, non-cirrhotic CLD patients and patients with cirrhosis by one-way ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test and post hoc tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>10 CLD patients without cirrhosis and 56 patients with cirrhosis were eventually included, along with 10 healthy volunteers who were divided into three groups. 3 patients with cirrhosis whose image quality did not meet the requirements were excluded. There were no significant differences in portal hemodynamic parameters among the three groups except portal average velocity (P > 0.05). There was no statistical difference in all portal hemodynamic parameters of 4D flow MRI between healthy volunteers and patients with cirrhosis (P > 0.05). There were significant differences in portal average velocity between non-cirrhotic CLD patients, healthy volunteers and patients with cirrhosis, respectively (11.44±3.93 vs 8.10±2.66, P=0.013; 11.44±3.93 vs 8.60±2.22, P=0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Portal average velocity obtained by 4D flow MRI can be an auxiliary means to identify cirrhosis in patients with CLD.</p>","PeriodicalId":54215,"journal":{"name":"Current Medical Imaging Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"e15734056269300"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"4D Flow MRI of Portal Vein Hemodynamics in Healthy Volunteers and Patients with Chronic Liver Disease.\",\"authors\":\"Mengmeng Zhang, Hailong Yu, Di Zhao, Wen Shen, Xu Bai, Meng Zheng, Jiachen Ji, Rui Li, Jianming Cai, Jinghui Dong, Changchun Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/0115734056269300231127052836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify age-matched healthy volunteers, non-cirrhotic chronic liver disease (CLD) and cirrhotic patients based on portal hemodynamic parameters using 4D flow MRI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 10 age-matched healthy volunteers and 69 CLD patients were enrolled and underwent 4D flow MRI prospectively. 4D flow MR images were processed by an MD in biomedical engineering working on the GTFlow platform. Portal hemodynamic parameters include net flow (mL/cycle), flow volume per second through the lumen (mL/sec), average flow velocity (cm/sec), and maximum flow velocity (cm/sec). The difference in portal hemodynamic parameters of 4D flow MRI was compared among healthy volunteers, non-cirrhotic CLD patients and patients with cirrhosis by one-way ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test and post hoc tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>10 CLD patients without cirrhosis and 56 patients with cirrhosis were eventually included, along with 10 healthy volunteers who were divided into three groups. 3 patients with cirrhosis whose image quality did not meet the requirements were excluded. There were no significant differences in portal hemodynamic parameters among the three groups except portal average velocity (P > 0.05). There was no statistical difference in all portal hemodynamic parameters of 4D flow MRI between healthy volunteers and patients with cirrhosis (P > 0.05). There were significant differences in portal average velocity between non-cirrhotic CLD patients, healthy volunteers and patients with cirrhosis, respectively (11.44±3.93 vs 8.10±2.66, P=0.013; 11.44±3.93 vs 8.60±2.22, P=0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Portal average velocity obtained by 4D flow MRI can be an auxiliary means to identify cirrhosis in patients with CLD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54215,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Medical Imaging Reviews\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e15734056269300\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Medical Imaging Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/0115734056269300231127052836\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Medical Imaging Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0115734056269300231127052836","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
4D Flow MRI of Portal Vein Hemodynamics in Healthy Volunteers and Patients with Chronic Liver Disease.
Aim: To identify age-matched healthy volunteers, non-cirrhotic chronic liver disease (CLD) and cirrhotic patients based on portal hemodynamic parameters using 4D flow MRI.
Methods: A total of 10 age-matched healthy volunteers and 69 CLD patients were enrolled and underwent 4D flow MRI prospectively. 4D flow MR images were processed by an MD in biomedical engineering working on the GTFlow platform. Portal hemodynamic parameters include net flow (mL/cycle), flow volume per second through the lumen (mL/sec), average flow velocity (cm/sec), and maximum flow velocity (cm/sec). The difference in portal hemodynamic parameters of 4D flow MRI was compared among healthy volunteers, non-cirrhotic CLD patients and patients with cirrhosis by one-way ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test and post hoc tests.
Results: 10 CLD patients without cirrhosis and 56 patients with cirrhosis were eventually included, along with 10 healthy volunteers who were divided into three groups. 3 patients with cirrhosis whose image quality did not meet the requirements were excluded. There were no significant differences in portal hemodynamic parameters among the three groups except portal average velocity (P > 0.05). There was no statistical difference in all portal hemodynamic parameters of 4D flow MRI between healthy volunteers and patients with cirrhosis (P > 0.05). There were significant differences in portal average velocity between non-cirrhotic CLD patients, healthy volunteers and patients with cirrhosis, respectively (11.44±3.93 vs 8.10±2.66, P=0.013; 11.44±3.93 vs 8.60±2.22, P=0.007).
Conclusion: Portal average velocity obtained by 4D flow MRI can be an auxiliary means to identify cirrhosis in patients with CLD.
期刊介绍:
Current Medical Imaging Reviews publishes frontier review articles, original research articles, drug clinical trial studies and guest edited thematic issues on all the latest advances on medical imaging dedicated to clinical research. All relevant areas are covered by the journal, including advances in the diagnosis, instrumentation and therapeutic applications related to all modern medical imaging techniques.
The journal is essential reading for all clinicians and researchers involved in medical imaging and diagnosis.