SMI和CDFI检测联合GI-RADS对卵巢肿瘤良恶性评估的研究

陈兰 闫磊 张慧颖 张晓亮 王君

陈兰, 闫磊, 张慧颖, 张晓亮, 王君. SMI和CDFI检测联合GI-RADS对卵巢肿瘤良恶性评估的研究[J]. 中国肿瘤临床, 2022, 49(22): 1170-1174. doi: 10.12354/j.issn.1000-8179.2022.20220704
引用本文: 陈兰, 闫磊, 张慧颖, 张晓亮, 王君. SMI和CDFI检测联合GI-RADS对卵巢肿瘤良恶性评估的研究[J]. 中国肿瘤临床, 2022, 49(22): 1170-1174. doi: 10.12354/j.issn.1000-8179.2022.20220704
Lan Chen, Lei Yan, Huiying Zhang, Xiaoliang Zhang, Jun Wang. Evaluation of benign and malignant ovarian tumors via super micro-vascular imaging and color Doppler flow imaging combined with the use of gynecologic imaging reporting and data system[J]. CHINESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2022, 49(22): 1170-1174. doi: 10.12354/j.issn.1000-8179.2022.20220704
Citation: Lan Chen, Lei Yan, Huiying Zhang, Xiaoliang Zhang, Jun Wang. Evaluation of benign and malignant ovarian tumors via super micro-vascular imaging and color Doppler flow imaging combined with the use of gynecologic imaging reporting and data system[J]. CHINESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2022, 49(22): 1170-1174. doi: 10.12354/j.issn.1000-8179.2022.20220704

SMI和CDFI检测联合GI-RADS对卵巢肿瘤良恶性评估的研究

doi: 10.12354/j.issn.1000-8179.2022.20220704
基金项目: 本文课题受廊坊市科技支撑计划项目(编号:2019013149)资助
详细信息
    作者简介:

    陈兰:专业方向为SMI结合GI-RADS对卵巢肿物良恶性评估的研究

    通讯作者:

    闫磊 272587202@qq.com

Evaluation of benign and malignant ovarian tumors via super micro-vascular imaging and color Doppler flow imaging combined with the use of gynecologic imaging reporting and data system

Funds: This work was supported by Langfang Science and Technology Support Plan Project (No. 2019013149)
More Information
  • 摘要:   目的  探讨超微血管成像(super micro-vascular imaging,SMI)和彩色多普勒超声血流显像(color Doppler flow imaging,CDFI)联合妇科影像报告和数据系统(gynecologic imaging reporting and data system,GI-RADS)对卵巢肿瘤良恶性的评估价值。  方法  选取2019年9月至2021年3月于河北省廊坊市人民医院诊治的168例卵巢肿瘤患者的临床资料,分为恶性组56例、良性组112例,采用SMI和CDFI分别观察同一肿瘤中血流情况,并联合GI-RADS分别预测肿瘤良恶性,结果以术后病理组织诊断为金标准。  结果  恶性组中SMI检测血流的丰富程度显著高于CDFI检测(P<0.05),良性组中SMI和CDFI检测血流的丰富程度进行比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。采用CDFI联合GI-RADS和SMI联合GI-RADS诊断恶性的分别为53例和55例,敏感度分别为94.6%和98.2%、特异度分别为93.8%和95.5%、准确率分别为94.0%和96.4%,均与病理结果的一致性较好(κ=0.868和κ=0.921)。  结论  SMI联合GI-RADS对卵巢肿瘤的良恶性具有较好的鉴别诊断效能,较CDFI联合GI-RADS诊断时敏感度、特异度更高。

     

  • 图  1  42岁右侧卵巢纤维瘤患者的超声二维图像及血流图像

    A:GI-RADS分类;B:CDFI图;C:SMI图

    图  2  57岁左侧卵巢高级别浆液性囊腺癌患者的超声二维图像及血流图像

    A:GI-RADS分类;B:CDFI图;C:SMI图

    图  3  SMI联合GI-RADS 和CDFI联合GI-RADS 预测卵巢肿瘤恶性的ROC曲线

    表  1  SMI和CDFI检测卵巢良恶性肿瘤的Adler分级比较

    组别例数(例)SMI检测CDFI检测χ2P
    0级1级2级3级0级1级2级3级
    恶性组561(1.79)10(17.86)15(26.78)30(53.57)11(19.64)15(26.79)16(28.57)14(25.00)15.1840.002
    良性组11245(40.18)53(47.32)10(8.93)4(3.57)56(50.00)48(42.86)8(7.14)0(0)5.6680.129
    ()内单位为%
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  2  SMI和CDFI检测两组的血管条数比较($\bar {\boldsymbol{x}}$±s)

    组别SMI检测CDFI检测tP
    恶性组6.19±2.343.34±1.3415.198<0.001
    良性组2.26±1.011.34±0.6712.916<0.001
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  3  SMI联合GI-RADS和CDFI联合GI-RADS预测卵巢恶性肿瘤的ROC分析

    检测方法AUCSE95%CI血管数cut-off值
    (条)
    敏感度(%)特异度(%)P
    SMI检测0.9680.0110.946~0.9903.20094.688.4<0.001
    CDFI检测0.8900.0310.828~0.9511.90085.789.3<0.001
    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1] 魏矿荣,梁智恒,李柱明.2003-2013年广东省中山市主要癌症净生存率分析[J].中国肿瘤,2020,29(2):103-107. doi: 10.11735/j.issn.1004-0242.2020.02.A004
    [2] Sha R, Badhulika S. Recent advancements in fabrication of nanomaterial based biosensors for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: a comprehensive review[J]. Mikrochim Acta, 2020, 187(3):181. doi: 10.1007/s00604-020-4152-8
    [3] Jaiswal E. Evaluation of risk of malignancy index for preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2020, 56(S1):331.
    [4] García-Jiménez R, Arroyo E, Borrero C, et al. Evaluation of placental micro-vascularization by superb micro-vascular imaging Doppler in cases of intra-uterine growth restriction: a first step[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2021, 47(6):1631-1636. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.01.029
    [5] 褚鑫,安晓夏,严剑波,等.彩色超声剪切波弹性成像及超微血管显像在乳腺良性与恶性肿瘤中的应用研究[J].影像科学与光化学,2020,38(6):1000-1004. doi: 10.7517/issn.1674-0475.200324
    [6] 刘艳丽,张志坤.超微血管成像技术在早期宫颈癌及癌前病变中的应用[J].西北国防医学杂志,2020,41(5):307-311. doi: 10.16021/j.cnki.1007-8622.2020.05.010
    [7] Adler DD, Carson PL, Rubin JM, et al. Doppler ultrasound color flow imaging in the study of breast cancer: preliminary findings[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 1990, 16(6):553-559. doi: 10.1016/0301-5629(90)90020-D
    [8] 陈秋月,吕国荣.GI-RADS分类在妇科附件肿块诊断中的应用[J].中国超声医学杂志,2013,29(6):527-530. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-0101.2013.06.018
    [9] Abdulrahman GO, Das N, Lutchman Singh K. The predictive role of thrombocytosis in benign, borderline and malignant ovarian tumors[J]. Platelets, 2020, 31(6):795-800. doi: 10.1080/09537104.2019.1686755
    [10] Yang L, Lv GR, Chen HE, et al. Diagnostic efficiency of gynecologic imaging reporting and data system combined with 3-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound scoring system in evaluating ovarian tumor[J]. Ultrasound Q, 2020, 36(4):375-381. doi: 10.1097/RUQ.0000000000000524
    [11] 陆芳,彭梅,王丽华.超声GI-RADS分类结合血清HE4与CA125检测对卵巢单房囊实性肿瘤的诊断价值[J].重庆医学,2019,48(1):143-145. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-8348.2019.01.037
    [12] 李文凯.超声GI-RADS分类法对卵巢良恶性肿瘤的诊断价值[J].实用癌症杂志,2018,33(5):756-759. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5930.2018.05.018
    [13] Lee EJ, Chang YW. Combination of quantitative parameters of shear wave elastography and superb microvascular imaging to evaluate breast masses[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2020, 21(9):1045-1054. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2019.0765
    [14] Zhong L, Wang C. Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound superb microvascular imaging for breast tumor: a meta-analysis[J]. Med Ultrason, 2020, 22(3):313-318. doi: 10.11152/mu-2460
    [15] 肖露,褚雯,王华.超微血管成像技术对乳腺肿瘤血管形态分布特征及其诊断效能的初步分析[J].中华超声影像学杂志,2018,27(11):973-976. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1004-4477.2018.11.012
  • 加载中
图(3) / 表(3)
计量
  • 文章访问数:  123
  • HTML全文浏览量:  27
  • PDF下载量:  24
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2022-05-09
  • 录用日期:  2022-09-15
  • 修回日期:  2022-08-24

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回