中华放射医学与防护杂志
中華放射醫學與防護雜誌
중화방사의학여방호잡지
Chinese Journal of Radiological Medicine and Protection
2012年
6期
656-659
,共4页
夏巍%吴晶涛%尹肖睿%吴海涛
夏巍%吳晶濤%尹肖睿%吳海濤
하외%오정도%윤초예%오해도
辐射剂量%数字化断层融合技术%数字X射线摄影%电子计算机X射线断层扫描技术%骨骼系统
輻射劑量%數字化斷層融閤技術%數字X射線攝影%電子計算機X射線斷層掃描技術%骨骼繫統
복사제량%수자화단층융합기술%수자X사선섭영%전자계산궤X사선단층소묘기술%골격계통
Radiation dose%DTS%DR%CT%Skeletal system
目的 对比数字化断层融合技术(DTS)与数字X射线摄影(DR)、电子计算机X射线断层扫描技术(CT)在骨骼系统影像学诊断中X射线辐射剂量的差异,分析3种检查方法在骨骼系统影像学诊断中的敏感性、特异性.方法 回顾性分析2010年2月至2012年3月间在本院同时行DR、DTS、CT骨骼系统检查的100名患者资料,对比DR、DTS、CT之间的X射线辐射剂量,以临床诊断结果为金标准,由2名专家评价3种检查方法的图像,对评价结果进行受试者操作特性曲线(ROC)分析.结果 DR、DTS、CT组的吸收剂量与有效剂量平均值分别为[(1.9±1.8)mGy、(0.03±0.03) mSv)]、[(3.5±1.5)mGy、(0.05±0.02) mSv)]、[(397.7±106.0)mGy·cm、(5.60±1.50) mSv].3种检查方法的吸收剂量和有效剂量差异有统计学意义(F=1377、1377,P＜0.05).采用LSD检验分析CT与DR、DTS的辐射剂量,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).阅片者A、B对DR、DTS、CT检出病灶可信度评价的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.870±0.035、0.966±0.018、0.974±0.015和0.852±0.038、0.951±0.021、0.959±0.019,对其进行Z检验,DR与DTS的差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)；DR与CT的差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).CT与DR敏感性差异有统计学意义(x2 =4.833,P＜0.05).结论 DTS的辐射剂量只有CT的1％左右,其在骨骼系统的图像质量可以与CT相当.如有DR检查诊断不明确或有疑似病变的患者,推荐首选DTS进一步检查,减少不必要的辐射剂量.
目的 對比數字化斷層融閤技術(DTS)與數字X射線攝影(DR)、電子計算機X射線斷層掃描技術(CT)在骨骼繫統影像學診斷中X射線輻射劑量的差異,分析3種檢查方法在骨骼繫統影像學診斷中的敏感性、特異性.方法 迴顧性分析2010年2月至2012年3月間在本院同時行DR、DTS、CT骨骼繫統檢查的100名患者資料,對比DR、DTS、CT之間的X射線輻射劑量,以臨床診斷結果為金標準,由2名專傢評價3種檢查方法的圖像,對評價結果進行受試者操作特性麯線(ROC)分析.結果 DR、DTS、CT組的吸收劑量與有效劑量平均值分彆為[(1.9±1.8)mGy、(0.03±0.03) mSv)]、[(3.5±1.5)mGy、(0.05±0.02) mSv)]、[(397.7±106.0)mGy·cm、(5.60±1.50) mSv].3種檢查方法的吸收劑量和有效劑量差異有統計學意義(F=1377、1377,P＜0.05).採用LSD檢驗分析CT與DR、DTS的輻射劑量,差異有統計學意義(P＜0.05).閱片者A、B對DR、DTS、CT檢齣病竈可信度評價的ROC麯線下麵積分彆為0.870±0.035、0.966±0.018、0.974±0.015和0.852±0.038、0.951±0.021、0.959±0.019,對其進行Z檢驗,DR與DTS的差異有統計學意義(P＜0.05)；DR與CT的差異有統計學意義(P＜0.05).CT與DR敏感性差異有統計學意義(x2 =4.833,P＜0.05).結論 DTS的輻射劑量隻有CT的1％左右,其在骨骼繫統的圖像質量可以與CT相噹.如有DR檢查診斷不明確或有疑似病變的患者,推薦首選DTS進一步檢查,減少不必要的輻射劑量.
목적 대비수자화단층융합기술(DTS)여수자X사선섭영(DR)、전자계산궤X사선단층소묘기술(CT)재골격계통영상학진단중X사선복사제량적차이,분석3충검사방법재골격계통영상학진단중적민감성、특이성.방법 회고성분석2010년2월지2012년3월간재본원동시행DR、DTS、CT골격계통검사적100명환자자료,대비DR、DTS、CT지간적X사선복사제량,이림상진단결과위금표준,유2명전가평개3충검사방법적도상,대평개결과진행수시자조작특성곡선(ROC)분석.결과 DR、DTS、CT조적흡수제량여유효제량평균치분별위[(1.9±1.8)mGy、(0.03±0.03) mSv)]、[(3.5±1.5)mGy、(0.05±0.02) mSv)]、[(397.7±106.0)mGy·cm、(5.60±1.50) mSv].3충검사방법적흡수제량화유효제량차이유통계학의의(F=1377、1377,P＜0.05).채용LSD검험분석CT여DR、DTS적복사제량,차이유통계학의의(P＜0.05).열편자A、B대DR、DTS、CT검출병조가신도평개적ROC곡선하면적분별위0.870±0.035、0.966±0.018、0.974±0.015화0.852±0.038、0.951±0.021、0.959±0.019,대기진행Z검험,DR여DTS적차이유통계학의의(P＜0.05)；DR여CT적차이유통계학의의(P＜0.05).CT여DR민감성차이유통계학의의(x2 =4.833,P＜0.05).결론 DTS적복사제량지유CT적1％좌우,기재골격계통적도상질량가이여CT상당.여유DR검사진단불명학혹유의사병변적환자,추천수선DTS진일보검사,감소불필요적복사제량.
Objective To investigate the radiation dose differences of DTS,DR and CT in diagnostic imaging of the skeletal system and analyze the sensitivity and specificity of each modality in skeletal disease diagnosis.Methods 100 relevant patients with skeletal diseases were randomly selected,who were performed with DR,DTS and CT from Feb 2010 to Mar 2012.They were divided into three groups,respectively as the DR group,the DTS group and the CT group.The complete information including DR,DTS,CT data and the final clinical diagnosis were collected and the statistical analysis after comparing radiation dose of DR,DTS and CT examination.Two experienced experts evaluated the image of three examinations and made judgments.ROC curves of reader A and B were made by using the final clinical diagnosis as gold standard.Results The average absorbed dose and effective dose of DR,DTS,CT group were [(1.9±1.8)mGy,(0.03±0.03) mSv)],[(3.5±1.5)mGy,(0.05±0.02) mSv)],[(397.7 ± 106.0) mGy· cm、(5.60 ± 1.50) mSy] respectively.The difference among the three groups was analyzed by one-way ANOVA test(F =1377,P ＜ 0.05) and had statistically significant(P ＜ 0.05).ROC curve was drawn through analyzing lesion detection credibility of three groups.The Az values of reader A and B was (0.870 ± 0.035,0.966 ± 0.018,0.974 ± 0.015) and (0.852 ± 0.038,0.951 ± 0.021,0.959 ±0.019)respectively.Do the Z-test to these examinations' area under ROC curve of lesion detection credibility.Between DR and DTS or DR and CT,there was statistically significant(P ＜ 0.05).While for CT and DTS,there was not statistically significant.The two readers' sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing skeletal lesion with DR,DTS and CT were investigated using the x2 test:CT and DTS were no statistical significance,CT and DR were statistically significant (x2 =4.833,P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions Radiation dose of DTS only accounts for about 1％ of CT examination.While its sensitivity and specificity can meet the requirements for clinical diagnosis as CT.If the DR diagnosis is unclear or suspected,DTS should be the first recommended modality used for skeletal diagnosis with lower radiation dose.
