Martínez-Duncker C, Estorch M, Berná L, Trilla E, Serra-Grima R, Martínez-Duncker D, Carrió I
Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona.
Rev Esp Cardiol. 1990 Mar;43(3):171-6.
Two methods of analysis for perfusion myocardial studies with thallium are compared: the conventional visual analysis, and a quantitative method which shows results as circumferential profiles. Three hundred and ninety myocardial segments in 65 patients were studied. Visual analysis showed abnormalities in 44/65 (68%) patients, the quantitative method did it in 53/65 (81%). When localization and/or extension discrepancy between the two methods was found, angiography was always concordant with circumferential profiles findings. Total agreement between the two methods was present in 20/65 (31%) patients. The quantitative method is more sensitive than the visual analysis. It is also more precise in defining localization and extension of thallium defects.
传统的视觉分析和一种以圆周轮廓显示结果的定量方法。对65例患者的390个心肌节段进行了研究。视觉分析显示44/65（68%）的患者存在异常，定量方法显示53/65（81%）的患者存在异常。当发现两种方法之间存在定位和/或范围差异时，血管造影总是与圆周轮廓结果一致。两种方法完全一致的情况出现在20/65（31%）的患者中。定量方法比视觉分析更敏感。在定义铊缺损的定位和范围方面也更精确。
