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
shu
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
shu

SMI和CDFI检测联合GI-RADS对卵巢肿瘤良恶性评估的研究

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

    摘要
  • 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。

     

    Abstract:
      Objective  To explore the utility of super micro-vascular imaging (SMI) and color Doppler flow imaging (CDFI), in combination with the use of gynecologic imaging reporting and data system (GI-RADS), in evaluating benign and malignant ovarian tumors.
      Methods  A total of 168 patients with ovarian tumors in Langfang People’s Hospital, between September 2019 and March 2021, were included in the study. Fifty-six were included in the malignant group, and 112 were included in the benign group. Tumor blood flow was observed via SMI and CDFI. SMI with GI-RADS and CDFI with GI-RADS were used to predict the tumor nature. The postoperative pathological diagnosis was considered gold standard.
      Results  In the malignant group, blood flow abundance detected using SMI was significantly higher than that detected using CDFI (P<0.05). However, no significant difference in blood flow abundance was observed between SMI and CDFI in the benign group (P>0.05). The number of malignant ovarian tumors diagnosed using CDFI with GI-RADS and SMI with GI-RADS was 53 and 55, respectively. Both methods had a sensitivity rate of 94.6% and 98.2%, specificity of 93.8% and 95.5%, and accuracy of 94.0% and 96.4%, respectively. The results were consistent with the pathological results (κ=0.868 and κ=0.921).
      Conclusions  SMI with GI-RADS provided a better differential diagnostic efficacy for benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Moreover, this method provides higher sensitivity and specificity than CDFI with GI-RADS.

     

    • HTML全文
    • 参考文献(15)
    • 相关文章
    • 施引文献
  • 资源附件(0)

/

返回文章
返回