Suppr超能文献

通过直肠指检采集的粪便潜血试验特异性较低。

Lower specificity of occult-blood test on stool collected by digital rectal examination.

作者信息

Zhang Bing, Nakama Hidenori, Fattah A S M Abdul, Kamijo Noboru

机构信息

Department of Public Health, Shinshu University School of Medicine, Asahi 3-1-1, Matsumoto, 390-8621, Japan.

出版信息

Hepatogastroenterology. 2002 Jan-Feb;49(43):165-7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of an immunochemical fecal occult-blood test for colorectal cancer between the stool specimens obtained during the routine screening and those during the digital rectal examination.

METHODOLOGY

One hundred and fourteen patients with colorectal cancer and 228 healthy controls served as subjects of the study. Fecal occult-blood was tested by both of two methods; by the routine screening and by the digital rectal examination, and the sensitivity and specificity of an immunochemical fecal occult-blood test were determined in these two methods.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and specificity were 79.8% and 96.5% in the routine screening method, and 86.0% and 79.8% in the digital rectal examination method, respectively, showing a significant difference in the specificity (P < 0.01) between these two stool collection methods. There was no significant difference in the sensitivity between these two stool collection methods.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that the stool specimens collected at the time of the digital rectal examination is not suitable for testing of fecal occult-blood.

摘要

背景/目的:比较在常规筛查和直肠指检期间获取的粪便标本中,免疫化学粪便潜血试验对结直肠癌的诊断准确性。

方法

114例结直肠癌患者和228例健康对照作为研究对象。采用两种方法检测粪便潜血;通过常规筛查和直肠指检,并在这两种方法中确定免疫化学粪便潜血试验的敏感性和特异性。

结果

常规筛查方法的敏感性和特异性分别为79.8%和96.5%,直肠指检方法的敏感性和特异性分别为86.0%和79.8%,这两种粪便采集方法在特异性方面存在显著差异(P < 0.01)。这两种粪便采集方法在敏感性方面无显著差异。

结论

这些发现表明,直肠指检时采集的粪便标本不适合用于粪便潜血检测。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验