CAJ | 학술논문

目的：通过比较脑血管造影与血管超声诊断颈动脉狭窄的敏感性，评价血管超声诊断颈动脉狭窄的应用价值。方法颈动脉狭窄患者83例，其中中度狭窄27例，重度狭窄29例，颈动脉闭塞27例，均采用脑血管造影以及血管超声诊断，比较两种诊断方法的敏感率。结果脑血管造影与血管超声诊断颈动脉狭窄的敏感率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)，诊断颈动脉闭塞的敏感率差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论利用血管超声来诊断颈动脉狭窄，在一般情况下可替代脑血管造影，但对于颈动脉闭塞的患者来说，血管超声诊断方法在敏感性方面还存在着较大的不足。
목적：통과비교뇌혈관조영여혈관초성진단경동맥협착적민감성，평개혈관초성진단경동맥협착적응용개치。방법경동맥협착환자83례，기중중도협착27례，중도협착29례，경동맥폐새27례，균채용뇌혈관조영이급혈관초성진단，비교량충진단방법적민감솔。결과뇌혈관조영여혈관초성진단경동맥협착적민감솔차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)，진단경동맥폐새적민감솔차이구유통계학의의(P<0.05)。결론이용혈관초성래진단경동맥협착，재일반정황하가체대뇌혈관조영，단대우경동맥폐새적환자래설，혈관초성진단방법재민감성방면환존재착교대적불족。
Objective To evaluate the application value of vascular ultrasound in the diagnosis of carotid stenosis, through comparing the sensitivity of cerebral angiogram and vascular ultrasound. Methods A total of 83 cases with carotid stenosis were diagnosed by cerebral angiogram and vascular ultrasound. Among them, there were 27 cases of moderate stenosis, 29 cases of severe stenosis, and 27 cases of carotid occlusion. The sensitivity of the two methods was compared. Results There were no statistically significant difference of sensitivity between cerebral angiogram and vascular ultrasound in the diagnosis of carotid stenosis (P>0.05). The difference of the sensitivity in the diagnosis of carotid occlusion between the two methods had statistical significance (P<0.05). Conclusion Application of vascular ultrasound in the diagnosis of carotid stenosis can replace cerebral angiogram in general conditions. However, the sensitivity of vascular ultrasound still has disadvantage in the diagnosis of patients with carotid occlusion.