Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¸»ÃÊÇü ´ã°ü¼¼Æ÷¾Ï: ÃÊÀ½ÆÄ»óÀÇ Hypoechoic HaloÀÇ Áø´ÜÀûÀÎ ÀÇÀÇ Peripheral Cholangiocarcinoma: Radiologic Significance of Hypoechoic Halo Sign on Sonography

´ëÇѹæ»ç¼±ÀÇÇÐȸÁö 2001³â 45±Ç 6È£ p.605 ~ 609
ÀÌÁ¾¼®, È«¼øÂù, ±èÁøÆò, Àü½Ã¿µ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
ÀÌÁ¾¼® (  ) 
°æ»ó´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ Áø´Ü¹æ»ç¼±°úÇб³½Ç

È«¼øÂù (  ) 
°æ»ó´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ Áø´Ü¹æ»ç¼±°úÇб³½Ç
±èÁøÆò (  ) 
°æ»ó´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ Áø´Ü¹æ»ç¼±°úÇб³½Ç
Àü½Ã¿µ (  ) 
°æ»ó´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ Áø´Ü¹æ»ç¼±°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract

¸ñÀû:¸»ÃÊÇü ´ã°ü¼¼Æ÷¾ÏÀÇ ÃÊÀ½ÆÄ ¼Ò°ß Áß Àú¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®ÀÇ ºóµµ¿Í Ư¼ºÀ» ¾Ë¾Æº¸°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
´ë»ó°ú ¹æ¹ý:°£ Á¶Á÷ »ý°Ë(n=16)ȤÀº ¼ö¼ú(n=1)·Î½á ¸»ÃÊÇü ´ã°ü¼¼Æ÷¾ÏÀ¸·Î Áø´ÜµÇ°í ÃÊÀ½
Æĸ¦ ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿´´ø 17¸íÀÇ È¯ÀÚ¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ÇÏ¿´´Ù.Á¾¾çÀÇ Å©±â,°æ°è,±ÕÁú¼º(homogeneity)¹×
³»ºÎ¿¡ÄÚ ±×¸®°í,µ¿¹ÝµÈ Á¾¾ç ÁÖÀ§ ´ãµµ È®Àå ¹× Á¾¾ç ³»ºÎÀÇ ¼®È¸È­ À¯¹«¸¦ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´°í,Àú
¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®ÀÇ À¯¹«,µÎ²² ¹× ÇüŸ¦ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù.Àú¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®¸¦ º¸ÀÏ °æ¿ì Å׵θ®ÀÇ µÎ²²¸¦
ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿© 3 mm ¹Ì¸¸ÀÇ µÎ²²¸¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â °æ¿ì´Â ¾ãÀº Å׵θ®,3 mm ÀÌ»óÀÇ µÎ²²¸¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â °æ
¿ì´Â µÎ²¨¿î Å׵θ®·Î ÀÓÀÇ·Î ºÐ·ùÇÏ¿´´Ù.Àú¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®ÀÇ ÇüÅ´ Á¾¾ç ³»ºÎÇü(intratumoral)
Å׵θ®,Á¾¾ç ¿ÜºÎÇü(extratumoral)Å׵θ® ¹× È¥ÇÕÇü(mixed)Å׵θ®·Î ºÐ·ùÇÏ¿´´Ù.
°á°ú:Á¾¾çÀÇ Å©±â´Â 4 cm¿¡¼­ 13.5 cmÀ¸·Î Æò±Õ 7.3 cmÀ̾ú°í,°æ°è´Â ÆòÈ° °æ°è 2¿¹,ºÐ¿±
°æ°è 13¿¹·Î °æ°è°¡ ºÐ¸íÇÑ °æ¿ì°¡ 15¿¹À̾ú°í,2¿¹¿¡¼­´Â ºÒ±ÔÄ¢ÇÏ°í ºÒºÐ¸íÇÑ °æ°è¸¦ º¸¿´
´Ù.Á¾¾çÀº °æ¹ÌÇÑ ºÒ±ÕÁú¼ºÀ» º¸ÀÌ´Â ¿¹°¡ 11¿¹,½ÉÇÑ ºÒ±ÕÁú¼ºÀ» º¸ÀÌ´Â ¿¹°¡ 3¿¹À̾ú°í,±Õ
ÁúÇÑ ¿¹°¡ 3¿¹À̾ú´Ù.Á¾¾çÀÇ ³»ºÎ¿¡ÄÚ ÇüÅ´ °í¿¡ÄÚ°¡ 8¿¹,µ¿µî¿¡ÄÚ°¡ 7¿¹À̾ú°í,Àú¿¡ÄÚ°¡
2¿¹À̾ú´Ù.¶Ñ·ÇÇÑ Àú¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®¸¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â °æ¿ì´Â Àú¿¡ÄÚÀÇ ³»ºÎ¿¡ÄÚ ÇüŸ¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â 2¿¹¸¦ Á¦
¿ÜÇÑ 15¿¹ Áß 10¿¹(67%)À̾ú°í,ÀÌ 10¿¹ ¸ðµÎ¿¡¼­ 3 mm ÀÌ»ó(4-13 mm;Æò±Õ 8.3 mm)ÀÇ
µÎ²¨¿î Å׵θ®¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù.2¿¹¿¡¼­´Â Àú¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®°¡ ¸ðÈ£ÇÏ¿´°í,3¿¹¿¡¼­´Â Àú¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®¸¦
º¸ÀÌÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù.¶Ñ·ÇÇÑ Àú¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®¸¦ º¸ÀÎ 10¿¹ Áß 8¿¹¿¡¼­ È¥ÇÕÇüÀÇ Å׵θ® ÇüŸ¦,2¿¹
¿¡¼­ Á¾¾ç ³»ºÎÇü Å׵θ®¸¦ º¸¿´À¸¸ç,Á¾¾ç ¿ÜºÎÇü Å׵θ®¸¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â ¿¹´Â °üÂûµÇÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù.Á¾
¾ç ÁÖÀ§ÀÇ ´ãµµ È®ÀåÀ» º¸ÀÌ´Â °æ¿ì´Â 4¿¹(24%)À̾ú°í,Á¾¾ç ³»ºÎ ¼®È¸È­´Â °üÂûµÇÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù.
°á·Ð:¸»ÃÊÇü ´ã°ü¼¼Æ÷¾ÏÀº ´ëºÎºÐ °æ°è°¡ ÁÁÀº °í¿¡ÄÚ(47%)ȤÀº µ¿µî¿¡ÄÚ(41%)ÀÇ Á¾±«·Î
°üÂûµÇ¸ç ´ëºÎºÐ °æ¹ÌÇÑ ºÒ±ÕÁú ¿¡ÄÚ(64%)¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù.°í¿¡ÄÚ È¤Àº µ¿µî¿¡ÄÚ¸¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â Á¾±«ÀÇ
67%¿¡¼­ Àú¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®°¡ °üÂûµÇ¾ú°í ´ëºÎºÐÀÌ(80%)µÎ²¨¿î È¥ÇÕÇü Å׵θ®¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù.µ¿µî
¿¡ÄÚ¸¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â Á¾¾çÀÇ °æ¿ì¿¡´Â Àú¿¡ÄÚ Å׵θ®°¡ Á¾¾çÀÇ ¹ß°ß¿¡ µµ¿òÀÌ µÇ¸ç,°í¿¡ÄÚ¸¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â
Á¾¾çÀÇ °æ¿ì °¡Àå ÈçÇÑ °í¿¡ÄÚ¼º ¾ç¼º Á¾¾çÀÎ Ç÷°üÁ¾°úÀÇ °¨º°¿¡ À¯¿ëÇÒ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ý°¢µÈ´Ù.

Purpose: To determine the prevalence and characteristics of the hypoechoic halo sign in peripheral cholangio-carcinoma.
Materials and Methods: Seventeen sonograms of 17 patients with peripheral cholangiocarcinoma histologically
proven by either percutaneous needle biopsy (n=16) or surgical biopsy (n=1) were retrospectively reviewed.
The size, margin, homogeneity and internal echogenicity of the masses as well as their peritumoral ductal di-latation
and intratumoral calcification were ascertained, and the presence of a hypoechoic halo, and if present,
its thickness and type, were also determined. We arbitrarily defined a ¡®thin¡¯ and ¡®thick¡¯ halo respectively, as
one with a thickness less than of less than 3 mm, and 3 mm or more, and classified halos as ¡®intratumoral¡¯,
¡®extratumoral¡¯, or ¡®mixed¡¯.
Results: Tumor diameter ranged from 4 to 13.5 (mean, 7.3) cm, and the margin was well-defined in 15 cases
(smooth: n=2; lobulated: n=13) and irregular in two. Echogenicity was slightly heterogeneous in 11 cases, se-verely
heterogeneous in three, and homogeneous in three, while the central portion was hyperechoic in eight
cases, isoechoic in seven, and hypoechoic in only two. A hypoechoic halo was detected in 10 of 15 tumors
(67%) with isoechoic centers. In evaluating the halo, two cases in which the mass was hypoechoic were ex-cluded.
All ten hypoechoic halos were at least 3 (range, 4 -13; mean, 8.3) mm thick; in two cases the presence
of a halo was equivocal, and in three there was no halo. Eight of ten halos were the mixed type, two were in-tratumoral,
and none were extratumoral. Peritumoral ductal dilatation was seen in four cases (24%), but no in-ternal
calcification was observed.
Conclusion: US showed that the margins of peripheral cholangiocarcinomas were mostly well-defined and
smooth (12%) or lobulated (76%), and that masses were mainly heterogeneous (64%). A hypoechoic halo,
which in all cases was thick and in 80% of cases was mixed, was noted in 67% of tumors with a hyper (47%) or
isoechoic (41%) center. A halo of this kind may be useful in isoechoic mass detection and also in the differenti-ation
of hyperechoic peripheral cholangiocarcinoma from hepatic hemangioma, the most common hypere-choic
benign tumor.

Å°¿öµå

Liver; US; Liver; neoplasms; Bile ducts; neoplasms;

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KoreaMed
KAMS