Advertisement

Surgery Today

, Volume 47, Issue 3, pp 365–374 | Cite as

The development of an automatically produced cholangiography procedure using the reconstruction of portal-phase multidetector-row computed tomography images: preliminary experience

  • Tomoaki Hirose
  • Tsuyoshi IgamiEmail author
  • Kusuto Koga
  • Yuichiro Hayashi
  • Tomoki Ebata
  • Yukihiro Yokoyama
  • Gen Sugawara
  • Takashi Mizuno
  • Junpei Yamaguchi
  • Kensaku Mori
  • Masato Nagino
Original Article
  • 213 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Fusion angiography using reconstructed multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) images, and cholangiography using reconstructed images from MDCT with a cholangiographic agent include an anatomical gap due to the different periods of MDCT scanning. To conquer such gaps, we attempted to develop a cholangiography procedure that automatically reconstructs a cholangiogram from portal-phase MDCT images.

Methods

The automatically produced cholangiography procedure utilized an original software program that was developed by the Graduate School of Information Science, Nagoya University. This program structured 5 candidate biliary tracts, and automatically selected one as the candidate for cholangiography. The clinical value of the automatically produced cholangiography procedure was estimated based on a comparison with manually produced cholangiography.

Results

Automatically produced cholangiograms were reconstructed for 20 patients who underwent MDCT scanning before biliary drainage for distal biliary obstruction. The procedure showed the ability to extract the 5 main biliary branches and the 21 subsegmental biliary branches in 55 and 25 % of the cases, respectively. The extent of aberrant connections and aberrant extractions outside the biliary tract was acceptable. Among all of the cholangiograms, 5 were clinically applied with no correction, 8 were applied with modest improvements, and 3 produced a correct cholangiography before automatic selection.

Conclusions

Although our procedure requires further improvement based on the analysis of additional patient data, it may represent an alternative to direct cholangiography in the future.

Keywords

Cholangiography Portal-phase images Multidetector-row computed tomography Automatically produced cholangiography 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest in association with this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Uchida M, Ishibashi M, Tomita N, Shinagawa M, Hayabuchi N, Okuda K. Hilar and suprapancreatic cholangiocarcinoma: value of 3D angiography and multiphase fusion images using MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:1572–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akamatsu N, Sugawara Y, Osada H, Okada T, Itoyama S, Komagome M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multidetector-row computed tomography for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;25:731–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sugiura T, Nishio H, Nagino M, Senda Y, Ebata T, Yokoyama Y, et al. Value of multidetector-row computed tomography in diagnosis of portal invasion by perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. World J Surg. 2008;32:1478–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Senda Y, Nishio H, Oda K, Yokoyama Y, Ebata T, Igami T, et al. Value of multidetector row CT in the assessment of longitudinal extension of cholangiocarcinoma—correlation between MDCT and microscopic findings. World J Surg. 2009;33:1459–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fukami Y, Ebata T, Yokoyama Y, Igami T, Sugawara G, Takahashi Y, et al. Diagnostic ability of MDCT to assess right hepatic artery invasion by perihilar cholangiocarcinoma with left-sided predominance. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2012;19:179–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schroeder T, Malago M, Debatin JF, Testa G, Nadalin S, Broelsch CE, et al. Multidetector computed tomographic cholangiography in the evaluation of potential living liver donors. Transplantation. 2002;27:1972–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen JS, Yeh BM, Wang ZJ, Roberts JP, Breiman RS, Qayyum A, et al. Concordance of second-order portal venous and biliary tract anatomies on MDCT angiography and MDCT cholangiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:70–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nanashima A, Abo T, Sakamoto I, Hayashi H, Fukuda T, Tobinaga SA, et al. Three-dimensional fusion images of hepatic vasculature and bile duct used for preoperative simulation before hepatic surgery. Hepatogastroenterology. 2012;59(118):1748–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen HW, Pan AZ, Zhen ZJ, Su SY, Wng JH, Yu SC, et al. Preoperative evaluation of resectability of Klaskin tumor with 16-MDCT angiography and cholangiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:1580–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sasaki R, Kondo T, Oda T, Murata S, Wakabayashi G, Ohkohchi N. Impact of three-dimensional analysis of multidetector row computed tomography cholangioportography in operative planning for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Am J Surg. 2011;202:441–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Artioli D, Tagliabue M, Aseni P, Sironi S, Vanzulli A. Detection of biliary and vascular anatomy in living liver donors: value of gadobenate dimeglumine enhanced MR and MDCT angiography. Eur J Radiol. 2010;76:e1–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Soga K, Ochiai J, Kassai K, Miyajima T, Itani K, Yagi N, et al. Development of a novel fusion imaging technique in the diagnosis of hepatobiliary-pancreatic lesions. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2013;57:306–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    DICOM homepage. http://dicom.nema.org/.
  14. 14.
    Koga K, Hayashi Y, Hirose T, Oda T, Kitasaka T, Igami T, et al. Development of automated extraction method of biliary tract from abdominal CT volumes based on local intensity structure analysis. SPIE Medical Imaging 2014; Proceeding. doi: 10.1117/12.2043347.
  15. 15.
    Sato Y, Westin C, Bhalerao A, Nakajima S, Shiraga N, Tamura S, et al. Tissue classification based on 3D local intensity structures for volume rendering. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graphics. 2000;6:16–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Frangi AF, Niessen WJ, Hoogeveen RM, Van Walsum T, Viergever MA. Model-based quantitation of 3-D magnetic resonance angiographic images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1999;18:946–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nimura Y, Deguchi D, Kitasaka T, Mori K, Suenaga Y. PLUTO: a common platform for computer-aided diagnosis. Med Imaging Technol. 2008;26:187–91 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nanashim A, Nagayasu T. Development and clinical usefulness of the liver hanging maneuver in various anatomical hepatectomy procedures. Surg Today. 2016;46:398–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shinozaki K, Ajiki T, Matsumoto T, Yoshida Y, Murakami S, Okazaki T, et al. Anatomical variations of liver blood supply in patients with pancreaticobiliary maljunction. Surg Today. 2016;46:169–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Katayama H, Kurokawa Y, Nakamura K, Ito H, Kanemitsu Y, Masuda N, et al. Extended Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: Japan Clinical Oncology Group postoperative complications criteria. Surg Today. 2016;46:668–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tomoaki Hirose
    • 1
  • Tsuyoshi Igami
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kusuto Koga
    • 2
  • Yuichiro Hayashi
    • 3
  • Tomoki Ebata
    • 1
  • Yukihiro Yokoyama
    • 1
  • Gen Sugawara
    • 1
  • Takashi Mizuno
    • 1
  • Junpei Yamaguchi
    • 1
  • Kensaku Mori
    • 2
    • 3
  • Masato Nagino
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of SurgeryNagoya University Graduate School of MedicineNagoyaJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Information ScienceNagoya UniversityNagoyaJapan
  3. 3.Information Strategy Office, Information and CommunicationsNagoya UniversityNagoyaJapan

Personalised recommendations