胰腺导管腺癌和肿块型胰腺炎影像形态学特征的回顾性分析及其水脂比例分析.pdfVIP

statistically significance with it of MFP (P=0.68). There is statistically significance between patients with poorly differentiated PDAC and those with moderately differentiated PDAC (P = 0.001) and the same result between poorly and well differentiated (P = 0.036). Conclusion: The ways of enhancement and the vascular invasion of PDAC and MFP have no obvious difference. To some certain the ways of enhancement shows the differentiation of PDAC, and so with the vascular invasion. Part Ⅱ: Water/Fat Content Analysis of Normal Pancreas by IDEAL Sequence of 3.0 T Magnetic Resonance Objective: Analysis the range of water fat content of normal pancreas and the difference of water fat content of head and body of normal pancreas. Methord: 20 healthy volunteers between October 2010 to December 2010(age range 23~55years, mean age 43years, including 8 males and 12 females) scaned by GE 3.0 T MR IDEAL sequence. Measure the signal strength of outcome images, carry on the water fat content analysis. Two kinds of formula, the fist is WF1=SW/SF,, the other is WF2=(SIP+SOP)/ （SIP-SOP ）. SW is the signal strength of water, SF is the signal strength of fat, SIP is the signal strength of in-phase, SOP is the signal strength of opposite phase. Result: Use the fist formula reward results: the head of pancreas WF1=7.97 ±0.95，the body and tail of pancreas WF1=8.04 ±0.81; Use the second formula reward results: the head of pancreas WF1=11.51 ±1.62，the body and tail of pancreas WF1=11.35 ±1.52. There is no statistical significance of different age, different parts of pancreas. The results through formula 2 are greater than that of using formula 1,and it is statistically different. Conclusion: There is no difference of the water fat percentage of different parts of normal pancreas. There is no difference of water fat percentage between the age of 23~55. Part Ⅲ: Water/Fat Content Analysis of PDAC and MFP by IDEAL