Lu R, Xiao Y
Department of Gynecology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410008, China.
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2017 Jul 18;97(27):2111-2115. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2017.27.007.
To evaluate the clinical value of ultrasonic elastography and ultrasonography comprehensive scoring method in the diagnosis of cervical lesions. A total of 116 patients were selected from the Department of Gynecology of the first hospital affiliated with Central South University from March 2014 to September 2015.All of the lesions were preoperatively examined by Doppler Ultrasound and elastography.The elasticity score was determined by a 5-point scoring method. Calculation of the strain ratio was based on a comparison of the average strain measured in the lesion with the adjacent tissue of the same depth, size, and shape.All these ultrasonic parameters were quantified, added, and arrived at ultrasonography comprehensive scores.To use surgical pathology as the gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy of Doppler Ultrasound, elasticity score and strain ratio methods and ultrasonography comprehensive scoring method were comparatively analyzed. (1) The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of Doppler Ultrasound in diagnosing cervical lesions were 82.89% (63/76), 85.0% (34/40), and 83.62% (97/116), respectively.(2) The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the elasticity score method were 77.63% (59/76), 82.5% (33/40), and 79.31% (92/116), respectively; the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the strain ratio measure method were 84.21% (64/76), 87.5% (35/40), and 85.34% (99/116), respectively.(3) The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of ultrasonography comprehensive scoring method were 90.79% (69/76), 92.5% (37/40), and 91.38% (106/116), respectively. (1) It was obvious that ultrasonic elastography had certain diagnostic value in cervical lesions. Strain ratio measurement can be more objective than elasticity score method.(2) The combined application of ultrasonography comprehensive scoring method, ultrasonic elastography and conventional sonography was more accurate than single parameter.
评估超声弹性成像及超声综合评分法在宫颈病变诊断中的临床价值。选取2014年3月至2015年9月中南大学附属第一医院妇科的116例患者。所有病变术前均行多普勒超声及弹性成像检查。弹性评分采用5分制评分法。应变率的计算基于病变与相同深度、大小及形状的相邻组织所测平均应变的比较。所有这些超声参数进行量化、相加,得出超声综合评分。以手术病理为金标准,对多普勒超声、弹性评分法、应变率测量法及超声综合评分法的灵敏度、特异度、准确度进行比较分析。(1)多普勒超声诊断宫颈病变的灵敏度、特异度、准确度分别为82.89%(63/76)、85.0%(34/40)、83.62%(97/116)。(2)弹性评分法的灵敏度、特异度、准确度分别为77.63%(59/76)、82.5%(33/40)、79.31%(92/116);应变率测量法的灵敏度、特异度、准确度分别为84.21%(64/76)、87.5%(35/40)、85.34%(99/116)。(3)超声综合评分法的灵敏度、特异度、准确度分别为90.79%(69/76)、92.5%(37/40)、91.38%(106/116)。(1)超声弹性成像对宫颈病变有一定诊断价值。应变率测量比弹性评分法更客观。(2)超声综合评分法、超声弹性成像与传统超声联合应用比单一参数更准确。