Suppr超能文献

胸腔积液与实质浸润的鉴别:床边胸部 X 线摄影的准确性。

Differentiation of pleural effusions from parenchymal opacities: accuracy of bedside chest radiography.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 19104, USA.

出版信息

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Feb;194(2):407-12. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.2950.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine, with CT as the reference standard, the ability of radiologists to detect pleural effusions on bedside chest radiographs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Images of 200 hemithoraces in 100 ICU patients undergoing chest radiography and CT within 24 hours were reviewed. Four readers with varying levels of experience reviewed the chest radiographs and predicted the likelihood of the presence of an effusion or parenchymal opacity on independent 5-point scales. The results were compared with the CT findings.

RESULTS

All readers regardless of experience had similar accuracy in detecting pleural effusions. Among 117 pleural effusions, 66% were detected on chest radiographs (53%, 71%, and 92% of small, moderate, and large effusions) with 89% specificity. Similarly, 65% of all parenchymal opacities were detected on chest radiographs, also with 89% specificity. Most (93%) of the misdiagnosed pulmonary opacities were simply not seen. Meniscus, apical cap, lateral band, and subpulmonic opacity were highly specific findings but had low individual sensitivity for effusions. The finding of homogeneous opacity, including both layering and gradient opacities, was the most sensitive sign of effusion. Atelectasis can occasionally mimic the pleural veil sign of effusion, accounting for most false-positive findings.

CONCLUSION

Radiologists interpreting bedside chest radiographs of ICU patients detect large pleural effusions 92% of the time and can exclude large effusions with high confidence. However, small and medium effusions often are misdiagnosed as parenchymal opacities (45%) or are not seen (55%). Pulmonary opacities often are missed (34%) but are rarely misdiagnosed as pleural effusions (7%).

摘要

目的

本研究旨在通过 CT 作为参考标准,确定放射科医生在床边胸部 X 线片上检测胸腔积液的能力。

材料与方法

对 100 例 ICU 患者的 200 个半胸部进行回顾性分析,这些患者均在 24 小时内行胸部 X 线摄影和 CT 检查。4 名具有不同经验水平的读者分别对胸部 X 线片进行了独立的 5 分制评分,以预测胸腔积液或实质混浊的存在可能性。结果与 CT 结果进行了比较。

结果

无论经验水平如何,所有读者在检测胸腔积液方面的准确性均相似。在 117 例胸腔积液中,胸部 X 线片上有 66%的胸腔积液被检出(小、中、大量胸腔积液的检出率分别为 53%、71%和 92%),特异性为 89%。同样,胸部 X 线片上也能检测到 65%的所有实质混浊,特异性也为 89%。大多数(93%)误诊的肺部混浊实际上并未出现。新月形、尖顶帽、侧带和肺下区混浊是高度特异的发现,但对胸腔积液的敏感性较低。均匀混浊(包括分层和渐变混浊)是胸腔积液最敏感的征象。偶尔,肺不张可模拟胸腔积液的胸膜面纱征,导致大多数假阳性发现。

结论

解读 ICU 患者床边胸部 X 线片的放射科医生 92%的时间能检测到大胸腔积液,并且能高度自信地排除大胸腔积液。然而,小到中等量胸腔积液常常被误诊为实质混浊(45%)或未被发现(55%)。肺部混浊经常被遗漏(34%),但很少被误诊为胸腔积液(7%)。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验