术前CT与MRI检查评估壶腹周围癌相邻器官侵犯的临床应用价值

李斌1; 王均庆1; 陆风旗1; 陈昉铭1; 倪建明1; 吴文娟1; 张追阳1; 金慧涵2; 唐威3

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-9752.2020.03.021

术前CT与MRI检查评估壶腹周围癌相邻器官侵犯的临床应用价值

Clinical application value of CT and MRI examination in preoperative evaluation of adjacent organ invasion for periampullary carcinomas

摘要

摘要: 目的:探讨术前X线计算机体层摄影术(CT)与磁共振成像(MRI)检查评估壶腹周围癌(PACs)相邻器官侵犯的临床应用价值。
方法:采用回顾性描述性研究方法。收集2013年9月至2019年6月南京医科大学附属无锡第二医院收治的81例PACs患者的临床病理资料；男52例，女29例；平均年龄为62岁，年龄范围为41～80岁。观察指标：(1)手术和病理学检查情况。(2)CT与MRI检查评估PACs相邻器官侵犯情况。(3)CT与MRI检查对PACs相邻器官侵犯的一致性评价。(4)PACs相邻器官侵犯辅助及特征影像征象。(5)CT与MRI检查评估PACs相邻器官侵犯的比较。偏态分布的计量资料以M(范围)表示。计数资料以绝对数或百分比表示。组间比较采用Mann-Whitney U检验。采用受试者工作特征曲线及其曲线下面积检验CT与MRI检查评估PACs相邻器官侵犯的准确性。一致性比较采用κ检验。结果(1)手术和病理学检查情况：81例患者中，76例行胰十二指肠切除术，5例行姑息性胃空肠吻合或胆道引流联合病灶活组织病理学检查，包括胰腺、十二指肠、淋巴结等。81例患者中，胰头癌35例，其中26例有十二指肠侵犯，9例无十二指肠侵犯。23例壶腹癌患者，其中17例有十二指肠侵犯，4例有十二指肠和胰腺侵犯，2例无十二指肠和胰腺侵犯。17例远端胆管癌患者(乳头型4例、管壁浸润型13例)，其中8例有胰腺侵犯，1例有十二指肠和胰腺侵犯，8例无十二指肠和胰腺侵犯。8例有胰腺侵犯及1例有十二指肠和胰腺侵犯患者肿瘤病理学类型均为管壁浸润型。6例十二指肠癌患者，其中4例有胰腺侵犯，2例无胰腺侵犯。(2)CT与MRI检查评估PACs相邻器官侵犯情况：81例患者，35例胰头癌CT和MRI检查评估有十二指肠侵犯25例，无十二指肠侵犯10例。23例壶腹癌CT检查评估有十二指肠侵犯17例，有胰腺侵犯1例，有十二指肠和胰腺侵犯4例，无十二指肠和胰腺侵犯1例；MRI检查评估有十二指肠侵犯15例，有胰腺侵犯2例，有十二指肠和胰腺侵犯4例，无十二指肠和胰腺侵犯2例。17例远端胆管癌CT检查评估有胰腺侵犯8例，有十二指肠和胰腺侵犯1例，无十二指肠和胰腺侵犯8例；MRI检查评估有胰腺侵犯9例，有十二指肠和胰腺侵犯1例，无十二指肠和胰腺侵犯7例。6例十二指肠癌CT与MRI检查评估各有胰腺侵犯3例，无胰腺侵犯3例。(3)CT与MRI检查对PACs相邻器官侵犯的一致性评价：2位阅片者对胰头癌、壶腹癌、远端胆管癌相邻器官侵犯CT检查结果的一致性评价均为好(κ=0.868，0.701，0.881，P<0.05)；对十二指肠癌相邻器官侵犯CT检查结果的一致性评价为差(κ=0.333，P>0.05)。2位阅片者对胰头癌、壶腹癌、远端胆管癌相邻器官侵犯MRI检查结果的一致性评价为好、好、一般(κ=0.860，0.747，0.643，P<0.05)；对十二指肠癌相邻器官侵犯MRI检查
结果:的一致性评价为差(κ=0.333，P>0.05)。(4)PACs相邻器官侵犯辅助及特征影像征象：25例CT与MRI检查有十二指肠侵犯的胰头癌患者中，在充盈良好的十二指肠背景下，12例于阴性对比CT胰胆管成像中可见局部管腔形态改变或肠皱襞模糊、消失；14例于T2加权成像或MRCP检查可见与阴性对比CT胰胆管成像类似征象。17例远端胆管癌患者中，CT与MRI检查有胰腺侵犯的患者均为管壁浸润型，表现为胆管壁局限增厚并显著强化伴管腔缩窄，且与胰腺分界不清晰，胰腺实质内出现类似病灶的高密度或高信号影，似肿瘤“透壁”征象。1例有十二指肠和胰腺侵犯患者，CT与MRI检查均呈现局部肠管壁出现异常增厚、强化。4例无十二指肠和胰腺侵犯乳头型远端胆管癌病灶呈管腔内生长，CT与MRI检查均可见病灶与周围胰腺组织分界清晰且强化弱于浸润型。(5)CT与MRI检查评估PACs相邻器官侵犯的比较：CT检查评估胰头癌、壶腹癌、远端胆管癌、十二指肠癌相邻器官侵犯的灵敏度分别为92.3%、90.5%、88.9%、75.0%，特异度分别为88.9%、50.0%、87.5%、100.0%，准确度分别为0.906、0.702、0.882、0.875。MRI检查评价胰头癌、壶腹癌、远端胆管癌、十二指肠癌相邻器官侵犯的灵敏度分别为88.5%、85.7%、88.9%、75.0%，特异度分别为77.8%、50.0%、75.0%、100.0%，准确度分别为0.831、0.679、0.819、0.875。胰头癌、远端胆管癌、十二指肠癌相邻器官侵犯的CT与MRI检查结果灵敏度比较，差异均无统计学意义(x²=3.140，0.141，0.444，P>0.05)；壶腹癌相邻器官侵犯的CT与MRI检查结果灵敏度比较，差异有统计学意义(x²=13.263，P<0.05)。胰头癌、壶腹癌、远端胆管癌相邻器官侵犯的CT与MRI检查结果特异度比较，差异均无统计学意义(x²=0.321，2.000，3.429，P>0.05)；胰头癌、壶腹癌、远端胆管癌、十二指肠癌相邻器官侵犯的CT与MRI检查结果准确度比较，差异均无统计学意义(Z=0.967，0.273，0.559，0.000，P>0.05)。
结论:CT与MRI检查均可用于术前评估PACs相邻器官侵犯，两者特异度与准确度相当，但CT检查评估壶腹癌相邻器官侵犯灵敏度更高。

Abstract: Objective:To investigate the clinical application value of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination in preoperative evaluation of adjacent organ invasion for periampullary carcinomas (PACs).
Methods:The retrospective and descriptive study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 81 patients with PACs who were admitted to the Affiliated Wuxi No.2 People′s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from September 2013 to June 2019 were collected. There were 52 males and 29 females, aged from 41 to 80 years, with an average age of 62 years. Observation indicators: (1) surgical and pathological outcomes; (2) evaluation of adjacent organ invasion on CT and MRI examination for PACs; (3) comparison of diagnostic accuracy between CT and MRI examination in assessing adjacent organ invasion for PACs; (4) auxiliary and feature images of adjacent organ invasion for PACs; (5) comparison between CT and MRI examination in assessing adjacent organ invasion for PACs. Measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M (range), and count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages. Comparison between groups was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test.The receiver operating characteristic curve and area under curve were used to evaluate diagnostic accuracy between CT and MRI examination in assessing adjacent organ invasion for PACs. Consistency was compared using the κ test.
Results:(1) Surgical and pathological outcomes: of the 81 patients, 76 underwent pancreatoduodenectomy, 5 underwent palliative gastrojejunostomy or biliary drainage combined with biopsy, including the pancreas, duodenum, or lymph nodes. Of the 81 patients, 35 had pancreatic head carcinoma including 26 with duodenal invasion and 9 without duodenal invasion; 23 had ampullary carcinoma including 17 with duodenal invasion, 4 with both duodenal invasion and pancreatic invasion, and 2 without duodenal invasion or pancreatic invasion; 17 had distal bile duct carcinoma (including papillary type in 4 patients and periductal infiltrative type in 13 patients), of which 8 had duodenal invasion, 1 had duodenal invasion and pancreatic invasion (pathological classification of the 9 patients was periductal infiltrative type), 8 had neither duodenal invasion nor pancreatic invasion; 6 had duodenal carcinoma including 4 with pancreatic invasion and 2 without pancreatic invasion. (2) Evaluation of adjacent organ invasion on CT and MRI examination for PACs: of the 35 patients with pancreatic head carcinoma, duodenal invasion was identified in 25 patients and no duodenal invasion in 10 patients on both CT and MRI examination. Of the 23 patients with ampullary carcinoma,duodenal invasion, pancreatic invasion, both duodenal invasion and pancreatic invasion, and neither duodenal invasion nor pancreatic invasion were identified in 17, 1, 4, and 1 patients on CT examination,respectively; the above indicators were identified in 15, 2, 4, and 2 patients on MRI examination. Of the 17 patients with distal bile duct carcinoma, pancreatic invasion, both duodenal invasion and pancreatic invasion, and neither duodenal invasion nor pancreatic invasion were identified in 8, 1, and 8 patients on CT examination,respectively; the above indicators were identified in 9, 1, and 7 patients on MRI examination. Of the 6 patients with duodenal carcinoma, pancreatic invasion and no pancreatic invasion were identified in 3 and 3 patients on both CT and MRI examination.(3) Comparison of diagnostic accuracy between CT and MRI examination in assessing adjacent organ invasion for PACs: two reviewers had good agreement in assessing adjacent organ invasion on CT examination for pancreatic head carcinoma, ampullary carcinoma, and distal bile duct carcinoma (κ=0.868, 0.701, 0.881, P<0.05), but they had poor agreement for duodenal carcinoma (κ=0.333, P>0.05). Meanwhile, two reviewers had good agreement in assessing adjacent organ invasion on MRI examination for pancreatic head carcinoma and ampullary carcinoma(κ=0.860, 0.747, P<0.05), and moderate agreement for distal bile duct carcinoma (κ=0.643, P<0.05), but they had poor agreement for duodenal carcinoma (κ=0.333, P>0.05).(4) Auxiliary and feature images of adjacent organ invasion for PACs: for the 25 patients who had pancreatic head carcinoma with duodenal invasion on CT and MRI examination, based on well filling in duodenum, 12 patients showed locally morphological change of lumen and flattened or disappeared duodenal mucosal folds on negative contrast CT cholangiopancreatography; 14 patients showed similar signs on T2 weighted imaging or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. The 17 patients who had distal bile duct carcinoma with pancreatic invasion on CT and MRI examination were periductal infiltrative type. Pancreatic invasion manifested as local thickenness of ductal wall with marked enhancement and narrowed ductal lumen, which was indistinguishable from the pancreas, and the pancreatic parenchyma showed hyperdense or hyperintense signs similar with the lesion, like a “transmural” sign. One patient with both duodenal invasion and pancreatic invasion showed locally thickened and enhanced duodenal wall on both CT and MRI examination. Four patients, who had papillary type distal bile duct carcinoma with neither duodenal invasion nor pancreatic invasion, showed intraductal growing mass which had a discernible boundary to the pancreas and slighter enhancement than infiltrative type on both CT and MRI examination. (5) Comparison between CT and MRI examination in assessing adjacent organ invasion for PACs: CT examination evaluating adjacent organ invasion for pancreatic head carcinoma, ampullary carcinoma, distal bile duct carcinoma, and duodenal carcinoma had a sensibility of 92.3%, 90.5%, 88.9%, 75.0%, a specificity of 88.9%, 50.0%, 87.5%, 100.0%, an accuracy of 0.906, 0.702, 0.882, 0.875, respectively. MRI examination evaluating adjacent organ invasion for pancreatic head carcinoma, ampullary carcinoma, distal bile duct carcinoma, and duodenal carcinoma had a sensibility of 88.5%, 85.7%, 88.9%, 75.0%, a specificity of 77.8%, 50.0%, 75.0%, 100.0%, an accuracy of 0.831, 0.679, 0.819, 0.875. There was no significant difference in sensibility for pancreatic head carcinoma, distal bile duct carcinoma, or duodenal carcinoma between CT and MRI examination(x²=3.140, 0.141, 0.444, P>0.05), while there was a significant difference in sensibility for ampullary carcinoma (x²=13.263, P<0.05). There was no significant difference in specificity for pancreatic head carcinoma, ampullary carcinoma, or distal bile duct carcinoma between CT and MRI examination(x²=0.321, 2.000, 3.429, P>0.05). There was no significant difference in accuracy for pancreatic head carcinoma, ampullary carcinoma, distal bile duct carcinoma, or duodenal carcinoma between CT and MRI examination(Z=0.967, 0.273, 0.559, 0.000, P>0.05).
Conclusion:CT and MRI examination can be used for preoperative evaluation of adjacent organ invasion for periampullary carcinoma, with similar performance in specificity and accuracy, however, CT examination has a higher sensibility for ampullary carcinoma.

HTML全文

参考文献(0)

施引文献

资源附件(0)