We compared conventional ultrasonography and tissue harmonic imaging (THI)
to evaluate the utility of THI in the study of patients who have undergone
cholecystectomy. We consecutively examined 76 cholecystectomised patients
(53 females, 23 males, mean age 56.9 (14.5, age range 20-81 years); 71% of
the patients had undergone laparotomic surgery and 20% laparoscopic surgery.
All the patients were examined after fasting for at least eight hours. The
patients were first examined with conventional US and then with THI. Imaging
was performed with a commercially available vectorial 2V4 transducer and a
512 Sequoia ultrasound unit (Acuson, Mountain View, California).
TABLE I. - Classification criteria.
The modality of evaluation of the common
bile duct is illustrated. |
- Visualisation or non visualisation of the distal portion of CBD
- Non visualisation = INSUFFICIENT
- visualisation = SUFFICIENT
- Confidence in evaluation of CBD content (W/O stones)
- < Confidence = SUFFICIENT
- > Confidence = GOOD
- > Detail resolution = EXCELLENT
- Confidence in evaluation of CBD content (with stones)
- Presence of stones = SUFFICIENT
- Number of stones = GOOD
- Thickness and caliber of CBD distal third, relations with adjacent
pancreatic and vascular structures = EXCELLENT
| INSUFFICIENT
= 1 |
| SUFFICIENT =
2 |
| GOOD = 3 |
| EXCELLENT =
4 |
|
For each examination the operator optimised the scanning parameters for
the two methods taking care to use the same focussing area. The harmonic images
were acquired at a transmission frequency of 2 MHz and a reception frequency
of 4 MHz. The conventional US image was obtained at a mean frequency of 3.35
MHz. Both the conventional and harmonic imaging examinations were recorded
as clips on magneto-optical disks to allow blinded evaluation by the operator
performing the examination and two other radiologists. Images were evaluated
based on identification of the distal third of the common bile duct, better
evaluation of choledocus content; resolution of anatomical detail to establish
relationships between the choledocus, head of the pancreas, adjacent vascular
structures and duodenal wall and, in the presence of bile duct lithiasis,
the ability to identify the site, size and number of stones within the choledocus
(table I). For each criterion a score from 1 to 4 was assigned depending on
the degree of diagnostic confidence and conspicuity of the different structures.
The results obtained by the three operators were analysed using the Wilcoxon
sign rank tests. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using the weighted
Kappa test: Cohen’s Kw [20-22].