THE MODERN POSSIBILITIES OF COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN THE VISUALIZATION OF ACUTE PANCREATITIS
https://doi.org/10.20862/0042-4676-2018-99-3-164-170
Abstract
Computed tomography (CT) with bolus contrast enhancement is the main method of objectifying pancreatic pathology in pancreatic necrosis. This is due to sufficiently high diagnostic accuracy, good accessibility of the method, fast scanning time, simple interpretation of the resulting images. At the present stage, perfusion CT of the pancreas, threedimensional modeling of digital images, determination of anisotropy of pancreatic tissue allow improving the diagnostic efficiency of CT in patients with acute pancreatitis.
About the Authors
A. A. Litvin
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
ul. A. Nevskogo, 14, Kaliningrad, 236016, Russian Federation
Dr. Med. Sc., Professor of Chair of Surgical Disciplines
E. G. Knyazeva
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
ul. A. Nevskogo, 14, Kaliningrad, 236016, Russian Federation
Leading Manager
A. A. Filatov
Gomel Regional Clinical Hospital
Belarus
Belarus
ul. Brat’ev Lizyukovykh, 5, Gomel, 246029, Republic of Belarus
Surgeon
References
1. Ермолов А.С., Иванов П.А., Благовестнов Д.А., Гришин А.А. Диагностика и лечение острого панкреатита. М.: ВИДАР; 2013. [Ermolov A.S., Ivanov P.A., Blagovestnov D.A., Grishin A.A. Diagnosis and treatment of acute pancreatitis. Moscow: VIDAR; 2013 (in Russ.).]
2. Beger H.G., Buchler M. Acute pancreatitis: research and clinical management. Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.
3. Acute Pancreatitis Classification Working Group. Revision of the Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis. April 2008. Available at: http://pancreasclub.com/wpcontent/uploads/2011/11/AtlantaClassification.pdf (accessed April 30, 2017).
4. Banks P.A., Bollen T.L., Dervenis C., Gooszen H.G., Johnson C.D., Sarr M.G. et al. Acute Pancreatitis Classification Working Group. Classification of acute pancreatitis – 2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus. Gut. 2013; 62 (1): 102–11. DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302779
5. Busireddy K.K., Al Obaidy M., Ramalho M., Kalubowila J., Baodong L., Santagostino I. et al. Pancreatitisimaging approach. World J. Gastrointest. Pathophysiol. 2014; 5 (3): 252–70. DOI: 10.4291/wjgp.v5.i3.252
6. Thoeni R.F. The revised Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis: its importance for the radiologist and its effect on treatment. Radiology. 2012; 262 (3): 751–64. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.11110947
7. Касаткина Е.А., Klauss M., Kauczor H.-U., Ридэн Т.В., Hackert T., Синицын В.Е., Grenacher L. Возможности компьютерной томографии в оценке полиморфных изменений при деструктивных панкреатитах. Вестник рентгенологии и радиологии. 2014; 5: 34–9. DOI: 10.20862/0042-4676-2014-0-5-34-39
8. [Kasatkina E.A., Klauss M., Kauczor H.-U., Riden T.V., Hackert T., Sinitsyn V.E., Grenacher L. Capabilities of computed tomography to evaluate polymorphic changes in destructive pancreatitis. Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. 2014; 5: 34–9. DOI: 10.20862/0042-4676-2014-0-5-34-39 (in Russ.).]
9. Megibow A.J., Ralls P.W., Balfe D.M., Bree R.L., DiSantis D.J., Glick S.N. et al. Acute pancreatitis. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria. Radiology. 2000; 215 (Suppl.): S203–7.
10. Johnson C.D. Pancreatic disease: protocols and clinical research. N.Y.: CWI-S; 2009.
11. Working Group IAP/APA Acute Pancreatitis Guidelines. IAP/APA evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2013; 13 (4, Suppl. 2): S1–15. DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2013.07.063
12. Spitzer A.L., Thoeni R.F., Barcia A.M., Schell M.T., Harris H.W. Early nonenhanced abdominal computed tomography can predict mortality in severe acute pancreatitis. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2005; 9 (7): 928–33.
13. Kim D.H., Pickhardt P.J. Radiologic assessment of acute and chronic pancreatitis. Surg. Clin. North Am. 2007; 87 (6): 1341–58.
14. Morgan D.E. Imaging of acute pancreatitis and its complications. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2008; 6 (10): 1077–85. DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh. 2008.07.012
15. Scaglione M., Casciani E., Pinto A., Andreoli C., De Vargas M., Gualdi G.F. Imaging assessment of acute pancreatitis: a review. Semin. Ultrasound CT MR. 2008; 29 (5): 322–40.
16. Каган И.И., Железнов Л.М. Поджелудочная железа: микрохирургическая и компьютерно-томографическая анатомия. М.: Медицина; 2004. [Kagan I.I., Zheleznov L.M. Pancreas: microsurgical and computer tomography anatomy. Moscow: Meditsina; 2004 (in Russ.).]
17. Banks P.A., Freeman M.L. Practice parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Practice guidelines in acute pancreatitis. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2006; 101 (10): 2379–400.
18. Arvanitakis M., Koustiani G., Gantzarou A., Grollios G., Tsitouridis I., Haritandi-Kouridou A. et al. Staging of severity and prognosis of acute pancreatitis by computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging – a comparative study. Dig. Liver Dis. 2007; 39 (5): 473–82.
19. Takahashi N., Papachristou G.I., Schmit G.D., Chahal P., LeRoy A.J., Sarr M.G. et al. CT findings of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN): differentiation from pseudocyst and prediction of outcome after endoscopic therapy. Eur. Radiol. 2008; 18 (11): 2522–9. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-1039-1
20. Mujica V.R., Barkin J.S., Go V.L. Acute pancreatitis secondary to pancreatic carcinoma. Study Group Participants. Pancreas. 2000; 21 (4): 329–32.
21. Bollen T.L., Singh V.K., Maurer R., Repas K., van Es H.W., Banks P.A. et al. Comparative evaluation of the modified CT severity index and CT severity index in assessing severity of acute pancreatitis. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2011; 197 (2): 386–92. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.4025
22. De Waele J.J., Delrue L., Hoste E.A., De Vos M., Duyck P., Colardyn F.A. Extrapancreatic inflammation on abdominal computed tomography as an early predictor of disease severity in acute pancreatitis: evaluation of a new scoring system. Pancreas. 2007; 34 (2): 185–90.
23. Delrue L., Blanckaert P., Mertens D., Van Meerbeeck S., Ceelen W., Duyck P. Tissue perfusion in pathologies of the pancreas: assessment using 128-slice computed tomography. Abdom. Imaging. 2012; 37 (4): 595–601. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-011-9783-0
24. Tsuji Y., Hamaguchi K., Watanabe Y., Okumura A., Isoda H., Yamamoto N. et al. Perfusion CT is superior to angiography in predicting pancreatic necrosis in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. J. Gastroenterol. 2010; 45 (11): 1155–62. DOI: 10.1007/s00535-010-0267-8
25. Pieńkowska J., Gwoździewicz K., Skrobisz-Balandowska K., Marek I., Kostro J., Szurowska E. et al. Perfusion-CT – can we predict acute pancreatitis outcome within the first 24 hours from the onset of symptoms? PLoS One. 2016; 11 (1): e0146965. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146965
26. Litvin A.A., Khokha D.V., Naser H., Filatov A.A. Value of three-dimensional reconstructions in pancreatic necrosis using contrast-enhanced CT data: initial results. Pancreatology. 2011; 11: 130.
27. Beger H.G., Warshaw A.L., Büchler M.W., Kozarek R.A., Lerch M.M., Neoptolemos J.P. et al. The pancreas: an integrated textbook of basic science, medicine, and surgery. John Wiley and Sons Ltd.; 2009.
28. Sureka B., Bansal K., Patidar Y., Arora A. Imaging lexicon for acute pancreatitis: 2012 Atlanta Classification revisited. Gastroenterol. Rep. (Oxf). 2016; 4 (1): 16–23. DOI: 10.1093/gastro/gov036
29. Литвин А.А., Сурунович А.В., Юргель А.В. Использование трехмерной реконструкции КТ-данных для выбора хирургической тактики при инфицированном панкреонекрозе. Медицинская визуализация. 2008; 4: 127–32. [Litvin A.A., Surunovich A.V., Yurgel’ A.V. Using a three-dimensional reconstruction of CT data to select surgical tactics for infected pancreatic necrosis. Meditsinskaya Vizualizatsiya (Medical Imaging, Russian journal). 2008; 4: 127–32 (in Russ.).]
30. Litvin A., Filatov A., Khokha D., Litvin V. Three-dimensional reconstructions in pancreatic necrosis using CT data. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 2013; 8 (Suppl. 1): S360–61.
31. Ковалев В.А. Анализ текстуры трехмерных медицинских изображений. Минск: Белорусская наука; 2008. [Kovalev V.A. Analysis of the texture of three-dimensional medical images. Minsk: Belorusskaya Nauka; 2008 (in Russ.).]
32. Литвин А.А., Жариков О.Г., Филатов А.А., Ковалев В.А. Оценка анизотропии КТ- изображений в диагностике инфицированного панкреонекроза. Вестник новых медицинских технологий. 2013; 20 (3): 22–6. [Litvin A.A., Zharikov O.G., Filatov A.A., Kovalev V.A. Evaluation of anisotropy of CT images in the diagnosis of infected pancreatic necrosis. Vestnik Novykh Meditsinskikh Tekhnologiy (Bulletin of New Medical Technologies, Russian journal). 2013; 20 (3): 22–6 (in Russ.).]
33. Foster B.R., Jensen K.K., Bakis G., Shaaban A.M., Coakley F.V. Revised Atlanta Classification for Acute Pancreatitis: a pictorial essay. Radiographics. 2016; 36 (3): 675–87. DOI: 10.1148/rg.2016150097
34. Murphy K.P., O'Connor O.J., Maher M.M. Updated imaging nomenclature for acute pancreatitis. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2014; 203 (5): 464–9. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.13.12222
Review
For citations:
Litvin A.A., Knyazeva E.G., Filatov A.A. THE MODERN POSSIBILITIES OF COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN THE VISUALIZATION OF ACUTE PANCREATITIS. Journal of radiology and nuclear medicine. 2018;99(3):164-170. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20862/0042-4676-2018-99-3-164-170
Views:
2204
Email this article 