中华生物医学工程杂志
中華生物醫學工程雜誌
중화생물의학공정잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
2011年
3期
273-276
,共4页
便血%诊断技术和方法%结肠镜检查%胃镜检查%回顾性研究
便血%診斷技術和方法%結腸鏡檢查%胃鏡檢查%迴顧性研究
편혈%진단기술화방법%결장경검사%위경검사%회고성연구
Hemafecia%Diagnostic techniques and procedures%Colonoscopy%Gastroscope%Retrospective studies
分析5种不同检查方法对急诊便血患者病因诊断的有效性。方法 回顾性分析2007年1月至2011年2月在本院急诊科以便血就诊而住院治疗的183例患者的临床资料,分析单用或者联合使用结肠镜、胃镜、胶囊内镜、双气囊小肠镜、CT 5种检查方法对便血病因诊断的阳性率。结果 结肠镜是最主要的和最基本的检查手段,能明确绝大部分便血病因。接受单纯结肠镜检查的169例患者中,其诊断阳性率为84.62％(143/169)。结肠镜+胃镜+胶囊内镜的诊断阳性率为89.39％(160/179),结肠镜+胃镜+双气囊小肠镜的诊断阳性率为94.41％(169/179),结肠镜+胃镜+胶囊内镜+双气囊小肠镜的诊断阳性率为96.65％(173/179),5种检查手段联合的诊断阳性率为96.72％ (177/183),与单纯结肠镜检查的诊断阳性率比较,差异均具有统计学意义(均P＜0.01)。结论 结肠镜是便血病因最主要、最基本的检查手段。对于结肠镜仍未能明确诊断者,多种检查手段的综合利用有助于提高诊断阳性率。
分析5種不同檢查方法對急診便血患者病因診斷的有效性。方法 迴顧性分析2007年1月至2011年2月在本院急診科以便血就診而住院治療的183例患者的臨床資料,分析單用或者聯閤使用結腸鏡、胃鏡、膠囊內鏡、雙氣囊小腸鏡、CT 5種檢查方法對便血病因診斷的暘性率。結果 結腸鏡是最主要的和最基本的檢查手段,能明確絕大部分便血病因。接受單純結腸鏡檢查的169例患者中,其診斷暘性率為84.62％(143/169)。結腸鏡+胃鏡+膠囊內鏡的診斷暘性率為89.39％(160/179),結腸鏡+胃鏡+雙氣囊小腸鏡的診斷暘性率為94.41％(169/179),結腸鏡+胃鏡+膠囊內鏡+雙氣囊小腸鏡的診斷暘性率為96.65％(173/179),5種檢查手段聯閤的診斷暘性率為96.72％ (177/183),與單純結腸鏡檢查的診斷暘性率比較,差異均具有統計學意義(均P＜0.01)。結論 結腸鏡是便血病因最主要、最基本的檢查手段。對于結腸鏡仍未能明確診斷者,多種檢查手段的綜閤利用有助于提高診斷暘性率。
분석5충불동검사방법대급진편혈환자병인진단적유효성。방법 회고성분석2007년1월지2011년2월재본원급진과이편혈취진이주원치료적183례환자적림상자료,분석단용혹자연합사용결장경、위경、효낭내경、쌍기낭소장경、CT 5충검사방법대편혈병인진단적양성솔。결과 결장경시최주요적화최기본적검사수단,능명학절대부분편혈병인。접수단순결장경검사적169례환자중,기진단양성솔위84.62％(143/169)。결장경+위경+효낭내경적진단양성솔위89.39％(160/179),결장경+위경+쌍기낭소장경적진단양성솔위94.41％(169/179),결장경+위경+효낭내경+쌍기낭소장경적진단양성솔위96.65％(173/179),5충검사수단연합적진단양성솔위96.72％ (177/183),여단순결장경검사적진단양성솔비교,차이균구유통계학의의(균P＜0.01)。결론 결장경시편혈병인최주요、최기본적검사수단。대우결장경잉미능명학진단자,다충검사수단적종합이용유조우제고진단양성솔。
Objective To evaluate the efficiency of 5 diagnostic modalities for hematochezia in emergency. Methods Data of patients who visited our Department of Emergency due to hematochezia between January 2007 and February 2011 were reviewed. The rates of positive findings as detected with single or combination of colonoscopy, gastroscopy, capsule endoscopy, double-balloon enteroscopy and computerized tomography were calculated and compared. Results Among these patients, colonoscopy was the important and common modality that definitely led to identification of etiology in most of the time. The rate of positive findings was 84.62％ in 169 patients who underwent colonoscopy alone, 89.39％ (160/179) in those who underwent colonoscopy, gastroscopy and capsule endoscopy, 94.41％ (169/179) who underwent colonoscopy, gastroscopy and double balloon enteroscopy, 96.65％ (173/179) in those who underwent colonoscopy, gastroscopy, capsule endoscopy and double balloon enteroscopy, and 96.72％ (177/183) in those who underwent all of the 5 diagnostic modalities. The rate of detection with multi-modality diagnosis was significantly different as compared with use of colonoscopy alone (all P＜0.01). Conclusions Colonoscopy is the important and common modality for etiological diagnosis of hematochezia. In patients with causes unexplained by colonoscopy, combined use of multi-modality diagnosis may help improve the rate of positive detection.
