Clinical Application of Liver MR Imaging in Wilson's Disease

Objective: To determine whether there is a correlation between liver MR findings and the clinical manifestations and severity of liver dysfunction in patients with Wilson`s disease. Materials and Methods: Two radiologists retrospectively evaluated MR images of the liver in 50 patients with Wilson`s disease. The Institutional Review Board approved this retrospective study and informed consent was waived. MR images were evaluated with a focus on hepatic contour abnormalities and the presence of intrahepatic nodules. By using Fisher`s exact test, MR findings were compared with clinical presentations (neurological and non-neurological) and hepatic dysfunction, which was categorized by the Child-Pugh classification system (A, B and C). Follow-up MR images were available for 17 patients. Results: Contour abnormalities of the liver and intrahepatic nodules were observed in 31 patients (62%) and 25 patients (50%), respectively. Each MR finding showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) among the three groups of Child-Pugh classifications (A, n = 36; B, n = 5; C, n = 9), except for splenomegaly (p = 0.243). The mean age of the patients with positive MR findings was higher than that of patients with negative MR findings. For patients with Child-Pugh class A (n = 36) with neurological presentation, intrahepatic nodules, surface nodularity, and gallbladder fossa widening were more common. Intrahepatic nodules were improved (n = 8, 47%), stationary (n = 5, 29%), or aggravated (n = 4, 24%) on follow-up MR images. Conclusion: MR imaging demonstrates the contour abnormalities and parenchymal nodules of the liver in more than half of the patients with Wilson`s disease, which correlates with the severity of hepatic dysfunction and clinical manifestations.Cope-Yokoyama S, 2010, WORLD J GASTROENTERO, V16, P1487, DOI 10.3748/wjg.v16.i12.1487Akhan O, 2009, EUR J RADIOL, V69, P147, DOI 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.09.029Taly AB, 2007, MEDICINE, V86, P112, DOI 10.1097/MD.0b013e318045a00eMerle U, 2007, GUT, V56, P115, DOI 10.1136/gut.2005.087262Akpinar E, 2007, EUR J RADIOL, V61, P25, DOI 10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.11.006Kozic D, 2006, ACTA RADIOL, V47, P624, DOI 10.1080/02841850600702176Kim TJ, 2006, AM J NEURORADIOL, V27, P1373SEO JK, 2006, KOREAN J HEPATOL, V12, P333Panagiotakaki E, 2004, AM J MED GENET A, V131A, P168, DOI 10.1002/ajmg.a.30345Chu WCW, 2004, AM J ROENTGENOL, V183, P1339ALA A, 2004, CLIN LIVER DIS, V8, P787Gitlin JD, 2003, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V125, P1868, DOI 10.1053/S0016-5085(03)01512-9Ferenci P, 2003, LIVER INT, V23, P139Akhan O, 2002, EUR RADIOL, V12, pS66, DOI 10.1007/s00330-002-1589-6Awaya H, 2002, RADIOLOGY, V224, P769, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2243011495Ito K, 1999, RADIOLOGY, V211, P723Ko SF, 1998, ABDOM IMAGING, V23, P56MERGO PJ, 1994, RADIOGRAPHICS, V14, P1291BULL PC, 1993, NAT GENET, V5, P327TANZI RE, 1993, NAT GENET, V5, P344DAVIES SE, 1989, HISTOPATHOLOGY, V15, P385CANCADO EL, 1987, ARQ NEURO-PSIQUIAT, V45, P131CHILD CG, 1964, LIVER PORTAL HYPERTE, P50

Normal kidney size and its influencing factors - a 64-slice MDCT study of 1.040 asymptomatic patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Normal ultrasound values for pole-to-pole kidney length (LPP) are well established for children, but very little is known about normal kidney size and its influencing factors in adults. The objectives of this study were thus to establish normal CT values for kidney dimensions from a group of unselected patients, identify potential influencing factors, and to estimate their significance.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In multiphase thin-slice MDCTs of 2.068 kidneys in 1.040 adults, the kidney length pole to pole (LPP), parenchymal (PW) and cortical width (CW), position and rotation status of the kidneys, number of renal arteries, pyelon width and possible influencing factors that can be visualized, were recorded from a volume data set. For length measurements, axes were adjusted individually in double oblique planes using a 3D-software. Analyses of distribution, T-tests, ANOVA, correlation and multivariate regression analyses were performed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>LPP was 108.5 ± 12.2 mm for the right, and 111.3 ± 12.6 mm for the left kidney (p < 0.0001 each). PW on the right side was 15.4 ± 2.8 mm, slightly less than 15.9 ± 2.7 mm on the left side (p < 0.0001), the CW was the same (6.6 ± 1.9 mm). The most significant independent predictors for LPP, CW, and PW were body size, BMI, age, and gender (p < 0.001 each). In men, the LPP increases up to the fifth decade of life (p < 0.01). It is also influenced by the position of the kidneys, stenoses and number of renal arteries (SRA/NRA), infarctions suffered, parapelvic cysts, and absence of the contralateral kidney; CW is influenced by age, position, parapelvic cysts, NRA and SRA, and the PW is influenced in addition by rotation status (p < 0.05 each). Depending on the most important factors, gender-specific normal values were indicated for these dimensions, the length and width in cross section, width of the renal pelvis, and parenchyma-renal pyelon ratio.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Due to the complex influences on kidney size, assessment should be made individually. The most important influencing factors are BMI, height, gender, age, position of the kidneys, stenoses and number of renal arteries.</p