全氟显的超声造影成像效果及定量参数

摘要

目的：比较国产超声造影剂全氟显与声诺维的成像效果，并定量分析两者的差异。方法建立裸鼠结肠癌CT26肝区皮下移植瘤的动物模型，随机应用声诺维和全氟显2种超声造影剂分别进行超声造影检查，观察2种超声造影剂的成像特征，并应用SonoLiver软件定量分析2种造影剂造影成像效果及定量结果的差异。结果与肿瘤周围正常肝实质相比，肝区皮下肿瘤的超声造影表现为快进快退，整体低增强，两者超声造影剂成像效果肉眼观察无显著差异。2种造影剂间超声造影定量参数比较，达峰强度、上升时间、达峰时间、峰值减半时间、上升支斜率、下降支斜率、上升支曲线下面积、下降支曲线下面积、曲线下面积、上升支曲线下面积比、下降支曲线下面积比（49.53%±24.38%vs 45.04%±17.03%，11.68 s±3.07 s vs 13.76 s±2.92 s，12.76 s±4.12 s vs 15.26 s±3.74 s，50.57 s±28.32 s vs 48.75 s±9.85 s，4.48±2.82 vs 3.18±1.49，0.67±0.34 vs 0.60±0.20，3032.78%±1343.12% vs 3258.77%±1369.84%，11647.38%±6183.10% vs 10439.04%±4604.65%，14680.17%±7469.85%vs 13697.81%±5831.99%，264.25±146.93 vs 222.24±92.16，241.67±119.97 vs 231.97±100.34）差异无统计学意义（P均＞0.05）。裸鼠耐受性好，存活率100%。结论超声造影剂全氟显与声诺维成像效果肉眼观察无统计学差异，超声造影定量参数亦无统计学差异，成像效果相似。%Objective To explore the difference of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) image and quantitative parameters between two different contrast agents Fluorocarbon and SonoVue. Methods The tumor model of colorectal carcinoma in nude mice was established by injecting CT26 cells into the subcutaneous space in hepatic area of 15 nude mice. CEUS was performed with Fluorocarbon and SonoVue on the 14th day after establishment. SonoLiver software was used to analyze the dynamic image quantitatively. The difference of the CEUS image and quantitative parameters between the two contrast agents was analyzed. Results Compared with normal liver parenchyma around the tumor, the tumor ultrasound contrast performance was fast forward and rewind with low enhancement. There was no signiifcant difference between the two kinds of microbubbles not only for CEUS image but also for quantitative parameters [maximum intensity (Imax):49.53%±24.38%vs 45.04%±17.03%, rise time (RT):11.68 s±3.07 s vs 13.76 s±2.92 s, time to peak (TTP):12.76 s±4.12 s vs 15.26 s±3.74 s, T1/2:50.57 s±28.32 s vs 48.75 s±9.85 s, Imax/TTP(V1):4.48±2.82 vs 3.18±1.49, (Imax-INT60)/(60-TTP)(V2):0.67±0.34 vs 0.60±0.20, AUC1:3032.78%±1343.12%vs 3258.77%±1369.84%, AUC2:11647.38%±6183.10%vs 10439.04%±4604.65%, AUC:14680.17%±7469.85%vs 13697.81%±5831.99%, Rate of AUC1:264.25±146.93 vs 222.24±92.16, Rate of AUC2:241.67±119.97 vs 231.97±100.34, all P>0.05). No mouse was dead during the CEUS examination. Conclusion Fluorocarbon had similar CEUS imaging effect and quantitative information compared with SonoVue.