Department of Ultrasound Diagnosis and Treatment, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, China (mainland).
Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China (mainland).
Med Sci Monit. 2020 Jun 8;26:e921813. doi: 10.12659/MSM.921813.
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical diagnostic value of superb microvascular imaging (SMI) in assessing vascular distribution, vascularity, and vessel morphology of parotid tumors (PTs). MATERIAL AND METHODS PT patients confirmed by postoperative histopathological detection and who underwent color Doppler flow imaging (CDFI), microvascular imaging (MVI), and SMI examination were recruited. PTs were classified into 3 groups: pleomorphic adenoma (PA), Warthin tumor (WT), and malignant PT (MT). The tumor vascular distribution, vascularity, and vessel morphology recorded by CDFI, MVI, and SMI were compared among PA, WT, and MT group. PT diagnosis was performed using histopathological detection. Fisher's exact test was used to compare the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and accuracy between SMI and MVI examination in PTs. RESULTS We enrolled 198 PTs consisting of 114 PAs, 56 WTs, and 28 MTs into our study. CDFI examination found no significant differences in vascular distribution and vascularity among the PA, WT, and WT groups. SMI examination found significant differences in vascular distribution and vascularity among the 3 groups. MVI found significant differences in vessel morphology, including uneven distribution of blood flow, arborization, and irregular blood flow among the PA, WT, and MT groups. SMI found significant differences in arborization and irregular blood flow, but none of the differences in uneven distribution of blood flow among the 3 groups were significant. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of SMI and MVI in PTs showed no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS SMI more accurately evaluated the vascular distribution and vascularity of PTs than CDFI. SMI might be a potential non-invasive diagnostic method for PTs in clinical practice.
本研究旨在评估超级微血管成像（SMI）在评估腮腺肿瘤（PT）血管分布、血管生成和血管形态方面的临床诊断价值。
招募经术后组织病理学检测证实的 PT 患者，并进行彩色多普勒血流成像（CDFI）、微血管成像（MVI）和 SMI 检查。PT 分为 3 组：多形性腺瘤（PA）、Warthin 瘤（WT）和恶性 PT（MT）。比较 CDFI、MVI 和 SMI 记录的肿瘤血管分布、血管生成和血管形态。PT 诊断采用组织病理学检测。Fisher 确切检验用于比较 SMI 和 MVI 检查在 PT 中的诊断灵敏度、特异性、阴性预测值（NPV）、阳性预测值（PPV）和准确性。
本研究共纳入 198 例 PT，包括 114 例 PA、56 例 WT 和 28 例 MT。CDFI 检查发现 PA、WT 和 WT 组之间血管分布和血管生成无显著差异。SMI 检查发现 3 组间血管分布和血管生成存在显著差异。MVI 发现血流分布不均匀、树枝状和血流不规则等血管形态存在显著差异，包括 PA、WT 和 MT 组之间。SMI 发现树枝状和不规则血流存在显著差异，但 3 组间血流分布不均匀的差异无统计学意义。SMI 和 MVI 对 PT 的诊断灵敏度、特异性和准确性无显著差异。
SMI 比 CDFI 更准确地评估了 PT 的血管分布和血管生成。SMI 可能是临床实践中评估 PT 的一种潜在的非侵入性诊断方法。
