切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2020, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (03) : 329 -334. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2020.03.011

所属专题: 文献

论著

注射用六氟化硫微泡造影剂剂量与机械指数对孕鼠胎盘超声造影成像的影响
盛常睿1, 陈赛君1,(), 严利明1, 胡晶晶1, 洪芳芳1, 贲志飞1   
  1. 1. 中国科学院大学宁波华美医院超声科,浙江 315010
  • 收稿日期:2019-09-12 修回日期:2020-05-20 出版日期:2020-06-01
  • 通信作者: 陈赛君

Influence of different doses of sulphur hexafluoride microbubbles and mechanical indexes setting on imaging quality of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in placenta of pregnant rats

Changrui Sheng1, Saijun Chen1,(), Liming Yan1, Jingjing Hu1, Fangfang Hong1, Zhifei Ben1   

  1. 1. Department of Ultrasound, Hwa Mei Hospital, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Ningbo 315010, Zhejiang Province, China
  • Received:2019-09-12 Revised:2020-05-20 Published:2020-06-01
  • Corresponding author: Saijun Chen
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Chen Saijun, Email:
  • Supported by:
    Project of Zhejiang Provincial Health and Family Planning Commission(2019RC077)
引用本文:

盛常睿, 陈赛君, 严利明, 胡晶晶, 洪芳芳, 贲志飞. 注射用六氟化硫微泡造影剂剂量与机械指数对孕鼠胎盘超声造影成像的影响[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(03): 329-334.

Changrui Sheng, Saijun Chen, Liming Yan, Jingjing Hu, Fangfang Hong, Zhifei Ben. Influence of different doses of sulphur hexafluoride microbubbles and mechanical indexes setting on imaging quality of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in placenta of pregnant rats[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2020, 16(03): 329-334.

目的

探讨经胎鼠脐静脉注射不同剂量六氟化硫微泡造影剂(SHM),进行超声造影(CEUS)时设置不同机械指数(MI)值,对晚孕期SD大鼠胎盘胎儿面CEUS成像效果的影响。

方法

选择40只晚孕期SD大鼠为研究对象,采用随机数字表法,将其分为A、B、C、D组,每组各10只。对孕鼠进行CEUS时,A、B、C、D组经胎鼠脐静脉注射SHM剂量分别为0.03、0.06、0.09、0.12 mL/kg;采用对比脉冲序列(CPS)成像技术,设置的MI值分别为0.10、0.15、0.20、0.25及0.30。采用时间-强度曲线(TIC)法对CEUS成像效果进行定量分析,本研究观察的3项TIC测量指标包括注射SHM后的到达时间(AT)、达峰时间(TTP)及峰值强度(PI)。采用单因素方差分析及最小显著性差异法(LSD)-t检验,对调整SHM不同剂量及设置不同MI值时,上述3项指标进行总体比较及两两比较。

结果

①对C组孕鼠胎盘胎儿面进行CEUS的结果显示:将MI值从0.10上调至0.30时,AT及TTP均无显著变化(P>0.05);将MI值从0.10上调至0.20时,PI随MI值增加而增加(P<0.05),设置MI值为0.20时,PI达最大值;而MI值从0.20上调至0.30时,PI则无显著变化(P>0.05)。②设置MI值为0.20时,4组孕鼠胎盘胎儿面CEUS的结果显示:C组AT、TTP、PI分别为(0.95±0.45) s、(7.9±3.0) s、(30.6±4.2) dB,与A组的(1.67±0.83) s、(12.5±2.8) s、(25.5±4.8) dB比较,差异均有统计学意义(P=0.004、0.001、0.004);C组这3项指标与B、D组比较,差异则均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。B组AT、TTP与D组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);而B组的3项指标与A组比较,以及PI与D组比较,差异则均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。D组的3项指标与A组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。随造影剂剂量增加,AT和TTP缩短,PI则增加。

结论

对晚孕期SD大鼠胎盘胎儿面进行CEUS,成像效果最佳的SHM剂量为0.09 mL/kg、MI值为0.20。

Objective

To investigate influence of different contrast agent injection doses of sulphur hexafluoride microbubbles (SHM) through fetal rats′ umbilical veins and different mechanical indexes (MI) setting on imaging quality of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in placental fetal surface of SD rats in late pregnancy.

Methods

Forty SD rats in late pregnancy were selected as study subjects. According to random number table method, they were divided into A, B, C and D groups each group with 10 rats, and doses of SHM were 0.03, 0.06, 0.09 and 0.12 mL/kg, respectively during CEUS. Meanwhile, contrast pulse sequence (CPS) imaging technology was used and MI were set as 0.10, 0.15, 0.20, 0.25 and 0.30 in each group. The quantitative analysis was conducted by time-intensity curve (TIC) method for CEUS imaging quality, and 3 indexes measured by TIC for this study included arrival time (AT), time to peak (TTP) and peak intensity (PI) after SHM was injected. One-way ANOVA and least significant difference (LSD)-t test were used for overall comparison and further comparison between each two groups of above 3 indexes when adjusted different SHM doses and set different MI.

Results

① Results of CEUS in placental fetal surface of pregnant rats in C group: when MI setting increased from 0.10 to 0.30, there were no significant differences in AT and TTP (P>0.05). When MI setting increased from 0.10 to 0.20, PI increased with increased of MI (P<0.05), and PI reached the maximum when MI setting was 0.20. When MI setting increased from 0.20 to 0.30, PI showed no significant difference (P>0.05). ② CEUS results of placental fetal surface of pregnant rats in 4 groups when MI setting was 0.20: AT, TTP and PI of C group were (0.95±0.45) s, (7.9±3.0) s and (30.6±4.2) dB, which were significantly different from (1.67±0.83) s, (12.5±2.8) s and (25.5±4.8) dB of those in A group, and the differences were statistically significant (P=0.004, 0.001, 0.004). There were no significant differences between C group and B group, also between C group and D group in those 3 indexes (P>0.05). There were significant differences between B group and D group in AT and TTP (P<0.05); However, there were no significant differences between B group and A group in those 3 indexes, and between B group and D group in PI (P>0.05). There were significant differences between D group and A group in those 3 indexes (P<0.05). With contrast agent dose increased, AT and TTP shorten, while PI increased.

Conclusions

When CEUS was performed on the placental fetal surface of SD rats in late pregnancy, SHM dose was 0.09 mL/kg and MI setting was 0.20 that CEUS may had best imaging quality.

图1 孕龄28 d的SD孕鼠经胎鼠脐静脉团注造影剂(黄色箭头所示为脐静脉)
表1 设置不同MI值,C组10只孕鼠胎盘胎儿面进行CEUS(经胎鼠脐静脉注射SHM剂量为0.09 mL/kg)的TIC 3项指标比较(±s)
表2 经胎鼠脐静脉注射不同剂量SHM时,4组孕鼠胎盘胎儿面进行CEUS(MI值为0.20)的TIC 3项指标比较(±s)
[1]
陈佩文,陈欣林,赵胜,等. 声诺维超声造影观察晚孕孕鼠胎盘超微结构改变的初步研究[J/CD]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2009, 6(1): 19-24. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-6448.2009.01.005.
[2]
Stride E, Tang MX, Eckersley RJ. Physical phenomena affecting quantitative imaging of ultrasound contrast agents[J]. Appl Acoust, 2009, 70(10): 1352-1362. DOI: 10.1016/j.apacoust.2008.10.003.
[3]
李杰,董宝玮,于晓玲,等. 肝灰阶超声造影剂量与效果关系的实验研究[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志,2004, 13(7): 547-550. DOI: 10.3760/j.issn:1004-4477.2004.07.018.
[4]
李云华,常才. 超声微泡造影剂在高强度聚焦超声增效领域的研究进展[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志,2015, 24(8): 732-735. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1004-4477.2015.08.031.
[5]
董倩,游小钧,邓琼珍. 微泡造影剂介导的声空效应对胶质瘤大鼠血脑屏障通透性及替莫唑胺疗效的影响[J]. 解放军医学杂志,2017, 42(5): 389-393. DOI: 10.11855/j.issn.0577-7402.2017.05.06.
[6]
郭辉,刘隆忠,郑玮,等. 高频条件不同机械指数下SonoVue与Sonazoid对兔肝超声造影效能的比较[J/CD]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2011, 8(5): 958-967. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2011.05.006.
[7]
Barnett SB, Duck F, Ziskin M. Recommendations on the safe use of ultrasound contrast agents[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2007, 33(2): 173-174. DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2006.07.002.
[8]
李硕阳,尹庭辉,李景果,等. 载siRNA微泡实现肿瘤治疗与疗效评估一体化的可行性分析[J]. 南方医科大学学报,2015, (6): 874-878. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-4254.2015.06.019.
[9]
王潇,周青,陈茜,等. 超声破坏SonoVue微泡介导Ang-1基因的体外体内转染[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志,2012, 21(1): 65-70. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1004-4477.2012.01.023.
[10]
崔晶晶,周青,曹省,等. 超声靶向破坏微泡联合核定位信号肽增强基因转染治疗犬心肌梗死的实验研究[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志,2017, 26(2): 159-164. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1004-4477.2017.02.018.
[11]
Vancraeynest D, Havaux X, Pasquet A, et al. Myocardial injury induced by ultrasound-targeted microbubble destruction: evidence for the contribution of myocardial ischemia[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2009, 35(4): 672-679. DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2008.10.005.
[12]
许杨青,陈欣林,谢明星,等. 大鼠胎盘超声造影灌注特征和生物效应的初步研究[J]. 中国医学影像技术,2008, 24(1): 5-8. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1003-3289.2008.01.002.
[13]
Yasui K, Lee J, Tuziuti T, et al. Influence of the bubble-bubble interaction on destruction of encapsulated microbubbles under ultrasound[J]. J Acoust Soc Am, 2009, 126(3): 973-982. DOI: 10.1121/1.3179677.
[14]
郭辉,李安华,刘隆忠,等. 高频条件下(7MHz) SonoVue与Sonazoid剂量变化对兔肝造影效能的比较[J/CD]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2011, 8(3): 482-489. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2011.03.005.
[15]
杨琛,彭婵娟. 超声造影定量评价体系及其影响因素分析[J]. 中国肿瘤,2016, 25(3): 212-218. DOI: 10.11735/j.issn.1004-0242.2016.03.A012.
[1] 章建全, 程杰, 陈红琼, 闫磊. 采用ACR-TIRADS评估甲状腺消融区的调查研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(10): 966-971.
[2] 罗辉, 方晔. 品管圈在提高甲状腺结节细针穿刺检出率中的应用[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(10): 972-977.
[3] 杨忠, 时敬业, 邓学东, 姜纬, 殷林亮, 潘琦, 梁泓, 马建芳, 王珍奇, 张俊, 董姗姗. 产前超声在胎儿22q11.2 微缺失综合征中的应用价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 852-858.
[4] 孙佳丽, 金琳, 沈崔琴, 陈晴晴, 林艳萍, 李朝军, 徐栋. 机器人辅助超声引导下经皮穿刺的体外实验研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 884-889.
[5] 宋勇, 李东炫, 王翔, 李锐. 基于数据挖掘法分析3 种超声造影剂不良反应信号[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 890-898.
[6] 史学兵, 谢迎东, 谢霓, 徐超丽, 杨斌, 孙帼. 声辐射力弹性成像对不可切除肝细胞癌门静脉癌栓患者放射治疗效果的评价[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(08): 778-784.
[7] 李钱梅, 何冠南, 赵婧, 陈曦, 唐玉英, 马丽琼, 梁蓉, 袁桃, 李明星. 早孕期低危妊娠和高危妊娠胎盘微血流成像特征及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 726-732.
[8] 李洋, 蔡金玉, 党晓智, 常婉英, 巨艳, 高毅, 宋宏萍. 基于深度学习的乳腺超声应变弹性图像生成模型的应用研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(06): 563-570.
[9] 洪玮, 叶细容, 刘枝红, 杨银凤, 吕志红. 超声影像组学联合临床病理特征预测乳腺癌新辅助化疗完全病理缓解的价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(06): 571-579.
[10] 项文静, 徐燕, 茹彤, 郑明明, 顾燕, 戴晨燕, 朱湘玉, 严陈晨. 神经学超声检查在产前诊断胼胝体异常中的应用价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 470-476.
[11] 胡可, 鲁蓉. 基于多参数超声特征的中老年女性压力性尿失禁诊断模型研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 477-483.
[12] 张妍, 原韶玲, 史泽洪, 郭馨阳, 牛菁华. 小肾肿瘤超声漏诊原因分析新思路[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 500-504.
[13] 席芬, 张培培, 孝梦甦, 刘真真, 张一休, 张璟, 朱庆莉, 孟华. 乳腺错构瘤的临床与超声影像学特征分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 505-510.
[14] 陈意志. 核磁共振钆造影剂导致的肾源性系统性纤维化[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 358-358.
[15] 张琛, 秦鸣, 董娟, 陈玉龙. 超声检查对儿童肠扭转缺血性改变的诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 565-568.
阅读次数
全文


摘要