山东医药
山東醫藥
산동의약
SHANDONG MEDICAL JOURNAL
2014年
16期
19-21
,共3页
熊瑜琦%李镝%康宁%乔梁
熊瑜琦%李鏑%康寧%喬樑
웅유기%리적%강저%교량
肝肿瘤%小肝癌%肝硬化%3.0T磁共振%动态增强%64层螺旋CT%诊断价值
肝腫瘤%小肝癌%肝硬化%3.0T磁共振%動態增彊%64層螺鏇CT%診斷價值
간종류%소간암%간경화%3.0T자공진%동태증강%64층라선CT%진단개치
liver neoplasms%small hepatocellular carcinoma%liver cirrhosis%3.0 T magnetic resonance imaging%contrast-enhanced%64-multirow detector CT%diagnostic value
目的:比较3.0 T磁共振(MRI)动态增强与64层螺旋CT(64-MDCT)多期扫描对肝硬化背景下小肝癌的诊断价值。方法选择肝硬化合并小肝癌患者55例(66个癌性小结节),分别进行3.0 T MRI动态增强与64-MDCT多期扫描,由两位专家对检查结果进行判定,比较两种检查方法的诊断价值。结果两位观察者通过3.0 T MRI动态增强得到的ROC曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.893±0.013、0.859±0.027,通过64-MDCT得到的AUC分别为0.657±0.034、0.679±0.026;两位观察者对两种检查方法的诊断价值比较,P均<0.01。两位观察者采用3.0 T MRI动态增强诊断肝硬化背景下小肝癌的敏感度、特异度、阴性预测值均高于64-MDCT,P均<0.01。结论3.0 T MRI动态增强对肝硬化背景下小肝癌的诊断价值高于64-MDCT。
目的:比較3.0 T磁共振(MRI)動態增彊與64層螺鏇CT(64-MDCT)多期掃描對肝硬化揹景下小肝癌的診斷價值。方法選擇肝硬化閤併小肝癌患者55例(66箇癌性小結節),分彆進行3.0 T MRI動態增彊與64-MDCT多期掃描,由兩位專傢對檢查結果進行判定,比較兩種檢查方法的診斷價值。結果兩位觀察者通過3.0 T MRI動態增彊得到的ROC麯線下麵積(AUC)分彆為0.893±0.013、0.859±0.027,通過64-MDCT得到的AUC分彆為0.657±0.034、0.679±0.026;兩位觀察者對兩種檢查方法的診斷價值比較,P均<0.01。兩位觀察者採用3.0 T MRI動態增彊診斷肝硬化揹景下小肝癌的敏感度、特異度、陰性預測值均高于64-MDCT,P均<0.01。結論3.0 T MRI動態增彊對肝硬化揹景下小肝癌的診斷價值高于64-MDCT。
목적:비교3.0 T자공진(MRI)동태증강여64층라선CT(64-MDCT)다기소묘대간경화배경하소간암적진단개치。방법선택간경화합병소간암환자55례(66개암성소결절),분별진행3.0 T MRI동태증강여64-MDCT다기소묘,유량위전가대검사결과진행판정,비교량충검사방법적진단개치。결과량위관찰자통과3.0 T MRI동태증강득도적ROC곡선하면적(AUC)분별위0.893±0.013、0.859±0.027,통과64-MDCT득도적AUC분별위0.657±0.034、0.679±0.026;량위관찰자대량충검사방법적진단개치비교,P균<0.01。량위관찰자채용3.0 T MRI동태증강진단간경화배경하소간암적민감도、특이도、음성예측치균고우64-MDCT,P균<0.01。결론3.0 T MRI동태증강대간경화배경하소간암적진단개치고우64-MDCT。
Objective To evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced 3.0 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 64-multirow detector CT (64-MDCT) for small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with liver cirrho-sis.Methods Fifty-five cirrhotic patients with small HCCs (66 cancerous nodules ) were admitted to our hospital .All le-sions were quantitatively detected by contrast-enhanced 3.0 T MRI and 64-MDCT scanning.Two observers independently and randomly reviewed the 3.0 T MRI and 64-MDCT images on a lesion-by-lesion basis for the comparison of diagnostic value of the two methods.Results For each observer, the areas under the ROC curve were 0.893 ±0.013 and 0.859 ± 0.027 for 3.0 T MRI, respectively, as opposed to 0.657 ±0.034 and 0.679 ±0.026 for 64-MDCT, respectively.The differences between the two techniques were statistically significant for each observer (all P<0.01).The sensitivity, spe-cificity and negative predictive value of 3.0 T MRI for both observers were significantly higher than those of 64-MDCT ( all P<0.01).Conclusion The contrast-enhanced 3.0 T MRI shows a better diagnostic performance than that of 64-MDCT for the detection of small HCCs in patients with chronic liver disease .