CAJ | 학술논문

目的：通过与3D-Slicer软件测量结果比较，研究多田公式计算脑出血后血肿体积的准确性和可靠性。方法收集184例自发性脑出血患者的头颅CT数据资料，分别采用多田公式和3D-Slicer软件测量血肿体积。将血肿按3D-Slicer测得体积分为：一组<30mL(n=55)，二组30～60mL(n=68)，三组>60mL(n=61)；按形状分组：规则组(n=59)，不规则组(n=107)和分叶状组(n=18)。分别根据血肿大小和形状对两种方法测量结果进行分析比较。结果多田公式法血肿平均体积（58.85±37.38）mL，3D-Slicer软件法血肿平均体积(50.08±31.10)mL，差异有统计学意义(t=8.254，P<0.01)，多田公式平均测量误差8.77mL，误差率17.23%。按血肿大小分组，多田公式法测量误差：一组2.90mL(16.22%)，二组5.89mL(13.55%)，三组17.27mL(18.76%)；按血肿形状分组，多田公式测量误差：规则组3.46mL(8.76%)，不规则组7.99mL(17.26%)，分叶状组30.81mL(38.26%)。结论多田公式是一种粗略的血肿体积计算方法，结果存在较明显误差，误差大小主要取决于血肿形状。
목적：통과여3D-Slicer연건측량결과비교，연구다전공식계산뇌출혈후혈종체적적준학성화가고성。방법수집184례자발성뇌출혈환자적두로CT수거자료，분별채용다전공식화3D-Slicer연건측량혈종체적。장혈종안3D-Slicer측득체적분위：일조<30mL(n=55)，이조30～60mL(n=68)，삼조>60mL(n=61)；안형상분조：규칙조(n=59)，불규칙조(n=107)화분협상조(n=18)。분별근거혈종대소화형상대량충방법측량결과진행분석비교。결과다전공식법혈종평균체적（58.85±37.38）mL，3D-Slicer연건법혈종평균체적(50.08±31.10)mL，차이유통계학의의(t=8.254，P<0.01)，다전공식평균측량오차8.77mL，오차솔17.23%。안혈종대소분조，다전공식법측량오차：일조2.90mL(16.22%)，이조5.89mL(13.55%)，삼조17.27mL(18.76%)；안혈종형상분조，다전공식측량오차：규칙조3.46mL(8.76%)，불규칙조7.99mL(17.26%)，분협상조30.81mL(38.26%)。결론다전공식시일충조략적혈종체적계산방법，결과존재교명현오차，오차대소주요취결우혈종형상。
Objective To investigate the accuracy and reliability of the ABC/2 formula for measurement of intrace?rebral hematoma (ICH) volume by comparing it with software 3D-Slicer. Methods Computed tomographic image data of 184 patients with spontaneous ICH were collected. Hematoma volumes were estimated by using the ABC/2 formula and 3D-Slicer. Based on the volume calculated by 3D-Slicer, patients were further divided into three groups. Group 1 con?tained 55 patients with volume less than 30 ml, group 2 contained 68 patients with volume of 30-60 ml, and group 3 con?tained 61 patients with volume larger than 60 mL. Shape of the ICH was divided into regular (59 cases), irregular with frayed margins (107 cases) and multilobular (18 cases). Results of these two methods were compared according to hemato?ma size and shape. Results The estimated hematoma volume was (58.85 ± 37.38) mL in the ABC/2 formula and (50.08 ± 31.10) mL in 3D Slicer. The ABC/2 formula produced a mean overestimation of 8.77 mL and the mean percent deviation was 17.23%. The mean estimation errors were 2.90 mL (16.22%), 5.89 mL (13.55%), and 17.27 mL (18.76%) in groups 1, 2, and 3 when patients were grouped by hematoma size. The estimation errors were 3.46mL (8.76%), 7.99 mL (17.26%), and 30.81 mL (38.26%) in regular, irregular and multilobular hematomas when patients were grouped by shape. Conclusions The ABC/2 formula is a rough method for volume assessment of intracerebral hematoma and produc?es significant estimation errors. The size of estimation errors largely depends on hematoma shape.