ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To assess the performance of contrast-enhanced three-dimensional(3-D) magnetic resonance venography (MRV) of the pelvis and lower extremities in patients with varicose veins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ascending and MR venography were performed in seven legs of seven patients, and duplex Doppler sonography and MR venography in 15 legs of 12 patients, all referred for evaluation of varicose veins. For analysis, the venous system as revealed by ascending and MR venographic images was divided into 13 segments. For detection of reflux to the great saphenous vein, duplex Doppler sonography and MRV were performed. RESULTS: In ascending venography and MRV, 91 venous segments were potentially visible; both modalities depicted 78 of these, but failed to detect four. Ascending venography and MRV detected 17 and 19 varices, respectively. When two tourniquets were placed around the ankle and knee using the Valsalva maneuver, MRV and duplex Doppler sonography detected reflux in 8 of 11 and 13 of 15 legs, respectively. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced 3-D MRV comprehensively displays the venous system of the lower extremities and permits assessment of varicose veins. MRV using the Valsalva maneuver allows assessment of reflux to the great saphenous vein.
Subject(s)
Humans , Ankle , Knee , Leg , Lower Extremity , Pelvis , Phlebography , Saphenous Vein , Tourniquets , Valsalva Maneuver , Varicose VeinsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To investigate the usefulness of evaluating liver cirrhosis through the measurement of liver volume. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a control group(20 normal subjects) and 20 cirrhotic patients, variations in liver volume before and after a meal were obtained. A case-control study was conducted between the two groups. RESULTS: In the control group, the range of increased liver volume after the meal was 67-186ml. Mean increased liver volume was 119.3ml, the range of percentage increase was 6-12% and the mean percentage increase was 9.89%. In cirrhotic patients, the range of increased liver volume after the meal was 1-20ml. Mean increased liver volume was 6.9ml, the range of percentage increase was 0-1.9% and the mean percentage increase was 0.65%. Compared with the control group, cirrhotic patients showed a much smaller increase in liver volume (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: Difference in variation of liver volume between a control group and cirrhotic patients before and after a meal can be used for the evaluation of liver cirrhosis.