基于未增强尸检计算机断层扫描鉴别心肌梗死破裂或主动脉夹层所致心包积血。

Differentiation of hemopericardium due to ruptured myocardial infarction or aortic dissection on unenhanced postmortem computed tomography.

作者信息

Ampanozi Garyfalia, Flach Patricia M, Ruder Thomas D, Filograna Laura, Schweitzer Wolf, Thali Michael J, Ebert Lars C

机构信息

Institute of Forensic Medicine, Department of Forensic Medicine and Imaging, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190/52, CH-8057, Zurich, Switzerland.

Institute of Diagnostic, Interventional, and Pediatric Radiology, University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, CH-3010, Bern, Switzerland.

出版信息

Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2017 Jun;13(2):170-176. doi: 10.1007/s12024-017-9854-9. Epub 2017 Mar 28.

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate unenhanced postmortem computed tomography (PMCT) in cases of non-traumatic hemopericardium by establishing the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of diagnostic criteria for the differentiation between aortic dissection and myocardial wall rupture due to infarction. Twenty six cases were identified as suitable for evaluation, of which ruptured aortic dissection could be identified as the underlying cause of hemopericardium in 50% of the cases, and myocardial wall rupture also in 50% of the cases. All cases underwent a PMCT and 24 of the cases also underwent one or more additional examinations: a subsequent autopsy, or a postmortem magnetic resonance (PMMR), or a PMCT angiography (PMCTA), or combinations of the above. Two radiologists evaluated the PMCT images and classified each case as "aortic dissection", "myocardial wall rupture" or "undetermined". Quantification of the pericardial blood was carried out using segmentation techniques. 17 of 26 cases were correctly identified, either as aortic dissections or myocardial ruptures, by both readers. 7 of 13 myocardial wall ruptures were identified by both readers, whereas both readers identified correctly 10 of 13 aortic dissection cases. Taking into account the responses of both readers, specificity was 100% for both causes of hemopericardium and sensitivity as well as accuracy was higher for aortic dissections than myocardial wall ruptures (72.7% and 87.5% vs 53.8% and 75% respectively). Pericardial blood volumes were constantly higher in the aortic dissection group, but a statistical significance of these differences could not be proven, since the small count of cases did not allow for statistical tests. This study showed that diagnostic criteria for the differentiation between ruptured aortic dissection and myocardial wall rupture due to infarction are highly specific and accurate.

摘要

本研究的目的是通过确定区分主动脉夹层与心肌梗死导致的心肌壁破裂的诊断标准的敏感性、特异性和准确性,来评估非创伤性心包积血病例中的非增强尸检计算机断层扫描(PMCT)。确定了26例适合评估的病例,其中50%的病例中可将破裂的主动脉夹层确定为心包积血的潜在原因,50%的病例中心肌壁破裂也为潜在原因。所有病例均接受了PMCT检查,其中24例还接受了一项或多项额外检查:后续尸检、尸检磁共振成像(PMMR)、PMCT血管造影(PMCTA)或上述检查的组合。两名放射科医生评估了PMCT图像,并将每个病例分类为“主动脉夹层”、“心肌壁破裂”或“未确定”。使用分割技术对心包内血液进行定量分析。26例病例中有17例被两位读者正确识别为主动脉夹层或心肌破裂。两位读者均识别出了13例心肌壁破裂中的7例,而两位读者均正确识别出了13例主动脉夹层病例中的10例。综合两位读者的判断,两种心包积血病因的特异性均为100%,主动脉夹层的敏感性和准确性高于心肌壁破裂(分别为72.7%和87.5%,而心肌壁破裂为53.8%和75%)。主动脉夹层组的心包血量一直较高,但由于病例数量较少,无法进行统计学检验,因此无法证实这些差异具有统计学意义。本研究表明,区分破裂的主动脉夹层与心肌梗死导致的心肌壁破裂的诊断标准具有高度特异性和准确性。

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