Suppr超能文献

基于M型超声技术对腹主动脉内膜中层厚度的测量是否存在低估?

Is there an underestimation of intima-media thickness based on M-mode ultrasound technique in the abdominal aorta?

作者信息

Dahlén Elsa M, Andreasson Thomas, Cinthio Magnus, Nystrom Fredrik H, Östgren Carl Johan, Länne Toste

机构信息

Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.

出版信息

Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2012 Jan;32(1):1-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-097X.2011.01045.x. Epub 2011 Aug 11.

Abstract

Measuring intima-media thickness (IMT) in the common carotid artery (CCA) is a valuable resource for the evaluation of subclinical atherosclerosis. The main objective of this study was to explore whether a B-mode ultrasound technique, Philips ATL, and an M-mode ultrasound technique, Wall Track System (WTS), show interchangeable results when measured in CCA and the abdominal aorta (AA). A total of 24 healthy, young subjects were examined. IMT and lumen diameter (LD) of the AA and the CCA were measured twice by two skilled ultrasonographers with two different ultrasound equipment B-mode: (Philips, ATL and M-mode: WTS).The intra-observer variability of IMT in CCA and AA using B-mode showed a coefficient of variation 8% and 9%, and with M-mode 11% and 15%, respectively. Interobserver variability of IMT in CCA and AA using B-mode was 6% and 12%, and with M-mode 11% and 18%, respectively. CCA IMT was 0·53 ± 0·07 and 0·53 ± 0·09 mm using B-mode and M-mode, respectively. However, in AA, IMT was 0·61 ± 0·05 and 0·54 ± 0·10 mm using B-mode and M-mode, respectively. Thus, AA IMT was 11·5% thicker using B-mode (P < 0·01). We received adequate IMT readings from the carotid artery as well as the AA using two commonly used B-mode and M-mode techniques. B-mode technique seems to show less variability, especially in the AA. More importantly, the two techniques measured different IMT thickness in the aorta, emphasizing the importance of using similar technique when comparing the impact of absolute values of IMT on cardiovascular disease.

摘要

测量颈总动脉(CCA)的内膜中层厚度(IMT)是评估亚临床动脉粥样硬化的一项重要手段。本研究的主要目的是探讨B型超声技术(飞利浦ATL)和M型超声技术(Wall Track System,WTS)在测量CCA和腹主动脉(AA)时的结果是否具有互换性。共有24名健康的年轻受试者接受了检查。两名技术熟练的超声检查人员使用两种不同的超声设备(B型:飞利浦ATL和M型:WTS)对AA和CCA的IMT及管腔直径(LD)进行了两次测量。使用B型超声测量CCA和AA的IMT时,观察者内变异系数分别为8%和9%,使用M型超声时分别为11%和15%。使用B型超声测量CCA和AA的IMT时,观察者间变异分别为6%和12%,使用M型超声时分别为11%和18%。使用B型和M型超声测量时,CCA的IMT分别为0.53±0.07和0.53±0.09毫米。然而,在AA中,使用B型和M型超声测量时,IMT分别为0.61±0.05和0.54±0.10毫米。因此,使用B型超声时AA的IMT厚11.5%(P<0.01)。我们使用两种常用的B型和M型技术从颈动脉和AA获得了足够的IMT读数。B型技术似乎变异较小,尤其是在AA中。更重要的是,两种技术测量的主动脉IMT厚度不同,这强调了在比较IMT绝对值对心血管疾病的影响时使用相似技术的重要性。

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