双源CT虚拟平扫技术在动脉瘤破裂急性期出血与钙化鉴别中的临床价值
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

南阳市第一人民医院CT

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

基金项目:


Clinical value of dual-source CT virtual plain scan technology in the differentiation of acute phase hemorrhage and calcification in ruptured aneurysms
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
    摘要:

    目的:探讨双源CT虚拟平扫(Virtual non-contrast, VNC)技术在动脉瘤破裂急性期蛛网膜下腔出血(Subarachnoid hemorrhage, SAH)与动脉瘤壁钙化(Aneurysmal wall calcification, AWC)鉴别诊断中的准确性及临床实用性。方法:前瞻性纳入2022年9月—2025年7月我院收治的急性蛛网膜下腔出血患者100例,行双源CT常规平扫(True non-contrast, TNC)及双能量CTA扫描,经后处理生成VNC图像。以手术/随访结果为金标准,比较TNC与VNC对出血灶和钙化灶的检出率、面积、CT值差异,并计算两种技术的敏感度、特异度及Kappa一致性。结果:TNC出血灶检出率为80.00%,VNC出血灶检出率为88.00%,VNC出血灶检出率高于TNC,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);VNC累及脑池数、最大面积均多于TNC,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);AWC检出率、最大厚度组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);VNC检查CT值低于TNC,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);钙化灶检查CT值在TNC与VNC无差异(P<0.05);VNC区分出血与钙化的AUC为0.953(95%CI0.912–0.994),高于TNC的0.887(95%CI0.815–0.958)(P<0.05)。最佳截断值VNC73HU(敏感度96.3%,特异度89.7%);VNC检查CTDIvol、DLP水平低于TNC,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),VNC检查图像质量中解剖结构显示、病变边界清晰度、伪影程度、总体满意度等评分高于TNC,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:双源CT-VNC可在不增加额外扫描的情况下,通过一次双能量CTA检查实现对动脉瘤破裂急性期出血与钙化的精准鉴别,减少患者辐射剂量,具有重要临床推广应用价值。

    Abstract:

    Objective: To investigate the accuracy and clinical utility of dual-source CT virtual non-contrast (VNC) imaging in the differential diagnosis between aneurysmal rupture with acute subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) and aneurysmal wall calcification (AWC) in the acute phase. Methods: A prospective study was conducted, including 100 patients with acute SAH in our hospital between September 2022 and July 2025. These patients underwent conventional non-contrast (TNC) and dual-energy CTA scans, and VNC images were generated through post-processing. Using surgical/follow-up results as the gold standard, we compared the detection rate, area, and CT value differences between TNC and VNC for hemorrhagic and calcified lesions. The sensitivity, specificity, and Kappa consistency of the two techniques were calculated. Results: The detection rate of hemorrhagic lesions in TNC was 80.00%, while that in VNC was 88.00%, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). VNC showed a greater involvement of cisterns and a larger maximum area compared to TNC, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the detection rate and maximum thickness of AWC between the two techniques (P > 0.05). The CT value of calcified lesions in VNC was lower than that in TNC, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). There was no difference in CT value between TNC and VNC for calcified lesions (P < 0.05). The area under the curve (AUC) for distinguishing hemorrhage from calcification in VNC was 0.953 (95% CI 0.912–0.994), which was higher than that in TNC (0.887, 95% CI 0.815–0.958) (P<0.05). The optimal cutoff value for VNC was 73 HU (sensitivity 96.3%, specificity 89.7%); the CTDIvol and DLP levels in VNC were lower than those in TNC, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). In terms of image quality, VNC scored higher than TNC in anatomical structure display, lesion boundary clarity, degree of artifacts, and overall satisfaction, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Dual-source CT-VNC can accurately differentiate between acute bleeding and calcification in ruptured aneurysms through a single dual-energy CTA examination without additional scanning, reducing patient radiation dose and possessing significant clinical application value.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2025-09-05
  • 最后修改日期:2025-10-16
  • 录用日期:2025-11-14
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: