CAJ | 학술논문

目的利用灌注CT血容量图(BV)评价兔VX2脑瘤模型大体靶体积(GTV)、临床靶体积(CTV),并设增强CT(CECT)作为对照.方法对20只成功建模兔VX2脑瘤模型行灌注CT检查,测量脑瘤兴趣层面在增强CT、血容量(BV)图像上长、短径,并与其同层病理学GTV、CTV结果比较.结果 20例GTVBV长、短径平均值分别为(11.98±3.29)、(7.03±1.82)mm,GTVCECT的分别为(6.36±3.85)、(3.17±1.93)mm,同层病理学GTV的分别为(8.19±2.29)、(4.83±1.31)mm,CTV的分别为(12.87±3.74)、(7.71±2.15)mm.GTVBv与GTV病理长、短径均不同(t=7.17,P=0.000和t=8.37,P=0.000).GTVCECT与GTV病理、CTV病理长、短径也均不同(t=-3.18,P=0.005和t=-4.24,P=0.000;t=-11.59,P=0.000和t=-9.39,P=0.000).GTVBv与CTV病理长、短径相似(t=-1.95,P=0.067和t=-2.06,P=0.054).采用CECT评价CTV病理的长、短径外放比例平均值分别为81.83%±40.33%、276.73%±131.46%,利用GTVBV评价脑瘤CTV的长、短径外放比例平均值分别为7.93%±17.84%、12.52%±27.83%(t=-7.36,P=0.000和t=-8.78,P=0.000).结论灌注CT的BV图较传统CECT能更好评价脑瘤的解剖学靶区.
목적 이용관주CT혈용량도(BV)평개토VX2뇌류모형대체파체적(GTV)、림상파체적(CTV),병설증강CT(CECT)작위대조.방법 대20지성공건모토VX2뇌류모형행관주CT검사,측량뇌류흥취층면재증강CT、혈용량(BV)도상상장、단경,병여기동층병이학GTV、CTV결과비교.결과 20례GTVBV장、단경평균치분별위(11.98±3.29)、(7.03±1.82)mm,GTVCECT적분별위(6.36±3.85)、(3.17±1.93)mm,동층병이학GTV적분별위(8.19±2.29)、(4.83±1.31)mm,CTV적분별위(12.87±3.74)、(7.71±2.15)mm.GTVBv여GTV병리장、단경균불동(t=7.17,P=0.000화t=8.37,P=0.000).GTVCECT여GTV병리、CTV병리장、단경야균불동(t=-3.18,P=0.005화t=-4.24,P=0.000;t=-11.59,P=0.000화t=-9.39,P=0.000).GTVBv여CTV병리장、단경상사(t=-1.95,P=0.067화t=-2.06,P=0.054).채용CECT평개CTV병리적장、단경외방비례평균치분별위81.83%±40.33%、276.73%±131.46%,이용GTVBV평개뇌류CTV적장、단경외방비례평균치분별위7.93%±17.84%、12.52%±27.83%(t=-7.36,P=0.000화t=-8.78,P=0.000).결론 관주CT적BV도교전통CECT능경호평개뇌류적해부학파구.
Objective To compare the accuracy of blood volume perfusion imaging (perfusion CT)with contrast enhanced 64-slice spiral computed tomography (CECT) in the evaluation of gross tumor volume (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV) using rabbits with VX2 brain tumor. Methods Perfusion CT and CECT were performed in 20 rabbits with VX2 brain tumor. The GTV and CTV calculated with the maximal and minimal diameter of each tumor in the blood volume (BV) maps and CECT were measured and compared to those in pathological specimens. Results The mean value of the maximal and minimal diameter of GTV was (8.19 ± 2. 29) mm and (4.83 ± 1.31) mm in pathological specimens, (11.98 ±3.29) mmand (7.03±1.82) mm in BV maps, while (6.36±3.85) mm and (3.17±1.93) mm in CECT images, which were significantly different (pathological specimen vs. BV map, t = 7. 17,P =0. 000;pathological specimen vs. CECT, t = 8.37, P = 0. 000, respectively). The mean value of the maximal and minimal diameter of CTV in pathologic specimens was (12.87 ± 3.74) mm and (7.71 ± 2. 15) mm, which was significantly different from that of GTV and CTV in CECT (t = - 3. 18, P = 0. 005 and t = - 4. 24, P =0. 000;t= -11.59,P=0.000 and t= -9.39,P=0.000), while similar with that of GTV in BV maps (t = - 1.95,P = 0. 067; t = - 2. 06, P = 0. 054). For CECT, the margin from GTV to CTV was 81.83% ±40.33% for the maximal diameter and 276.73% ± 131.46% for the minimal. While for BV maps, the margin was 7.93% ± 17. 84% and 12.52% ± 27. 83%, which was significant different from that for CECT images (t=7.36,P=0. 000 and t= -8.78,P=0.000). Conclusions Compared with CECT, the BV map from 64-slice spiral CT peffusion imaging might have higher accuracy in target volume delineation for brain tumor.