Magnetic resonance imaging for simultaneous morphological and functional evaluation of esophageal motility disorders.

PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of esophageal functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) for the diagnosis of achalasia. METHODS: Eleven patients with suspected achalasia and three normal subjects underwent fMRI while swallowing clear liquid with original sequences; "T2-weighed single-shot fast spin-echo" and "Fast Imaging Employing Steady-state Acquisition". The fMRI-based diagnosis was compared with that based on manometry. The luminal fluctuation index (LFI) and Dd/Ds ratio were used for the objective evaluation of the esophageal peristalsis and relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). RESULTS: Functional MRI showed a dilated tortuous esophagus with no tumor, poor clearance, simultaneous waves, aperistalsis, and impaired LES relaxation in all but one case, allowing the diagnosis of achalasia with accuracy similar to that of manometry. The LFI (median 0.08, range 0.03-0.25) and Dd/Ds ratio (1.40, 1.0-2.3) of the patient group were significantly lower than those of the normal subjects [1.50, 2.32-4.05, and 2.59 (2.32-4.05)]. No severe adverse events directly related to fMRI were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Using our protocol, fMRI was considered to be safe and feasible for the diagnosis of achalasia. Given the widespread use of MRI, esophageal fMRI, which does not require exposure to radiation, could be a potentially useful diagnostic tool for patients with esophageal motility disorders.

Pathologic subgroups of nonspecific interstitial pneumonia: differential diagnosis from other idiopathic interstitial pneumonias on high-resolution computed tomography.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the subtypes of nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) could be differentiated from other idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIPs) on the basis of findings on high-resolution computed tomography (CT). METHODS: Two observers evaluated the high-resolution CT findings in 90 patients with IIPs. The patients included 36 with NSIP, 11 with usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP), 8 with cryptogenic organizing pneumonia (COP), 10 with acute interstitial pneumonia (AIP), 14 with desquamative interstitial pneumonia (DIP) or respiratory bronchiolitis-associated interstitial lung disease (RB-ILD), and 11 with lymphoid interstitial pneumonia (LIP). The NSIP cases were subdivided into group 1 NSIP (n = 6), group 2 NSIP (n = 15), and group 3 NSIP (n = 15). RESULTS: Observers made a correct diagnosis with a high level of confidence in 65% of NSIP cases, 91% of UIP cases, 44% of COP cases, 40% of AIP cases, 32% of DIP or RB-ILD cases, and 82% of LIP cases. Group 1 NSIP was misdiagnosed as AIP, DIP or RB-ILD, and LIP in 8.3% of patients, respectively. Group 2 NSIP was misdiagnosed as COP in 10% of patients, LIP in 6.7%, AIP in 3.3%, and DIP or RB-ILD in 3.3%. Group 3 NSIP was misdiagnosed as UIP in 6.7% of patients, COP in 6.7%, and DIP or RB-ILD in 3.3%. CONCLUSIONS: In most patients, NSIP can be distinguished from other IIPs based on the findings on high-resolution CT. Only a small percentage of patients with predominantly fibrotic NSIP (group 3 NSIP) show overlap with the high-resolution CT findings of UIP.