Suppr超能文献

CT 血管造影和多普勒超声检查对颈动脉狭窄分级的比较:所应用的统计方法如何影响结果。

COMPARISON OF CAROTID STENOSIS GRADING BY CT ANGIOGRAPHY AND DOPPLER ULTRASONOGRAPHY: HOW THE STATISTICAL METHODS APPLIED INFLUENCE THE RESULTS.

机构信息

1Department of Radiology, Karlovac General Hospital, Karlovac, Croatia; 2Department of Vascular Surgery, Karlovac General Hospital, Karlovac, Croatia; 3Department of Neurology, Karlovac General Hospital, Karlovac, Croatia.

出版信息

Acta Clin Croat. 2022 Feb;60(3):457-466. doi: 10.20471/acc.2021.60.03.17.

Abstract

In this study, we compared the measurement of carotid stenosis by computed tomography angiography (CTA) based on the narrowest diameter cross sectional area (CSA) with the measurement by color Doppler ultrasonography (CDUS) as a reference standard, and analyzed how the application of different statistical methods affected the result. On 113 carotid arteries with ≥50% stenosis, we quantified the level of correlation among the three measurements, sensitivity, specificity, and differences in the estimated stenosis level. Correlation between both CTA measurements was good with Pearson's ρ between 0.87 and 0.91 (p<0.001). Correlation between CDUS and CTA measurements was only modest with Pearson's ρ between 0.2 (p=0.075) and 0.4 (p=0,007) for CDUS CTA (CSA), and between 0.23 (p=0.062) and 0.39 (p=0.008) for CDUS CTA (diameter). Differences in stenosis between CTA (CSA) and CDUS were centered around 0%, and between CTA (diameter) and CDUS around 20%. Sensitivity and specificity for CTA (CSA) method were 81% and 77%, and for CTA (diameter) 23% and 100%, respectively. A good correlation between CSA and diameter measurement just means that these are two related features of stenosis, it does not mean good agreement. CTA (CSA) method better detected surgical stenoses, whereas CTA (diameter) systematically underestimated stenosis level. The study of differences between the measurements indicated agreement better than the calculation of correlation coefficients.

摘要

在这项研究中,我们比较了基于最窄横截面积(CSA)的计算机断层血管造影(CTA)测量与彩色多普勒超声(CDUS)作为参考标准的颈动脉狭窄测量,并分析了不同统计方法的应用如何影响结果。在 113 条≥50%狭窄的颈动脉中,我们量化了三种测量方法之间的相关性、敏感性、特异性和估计狭窄程度的差异。两种 CTA 测量之间的相关性良好,Pearson ρ 值在 0.87 到 0.91 之间(p<0.001)。CDUS 与 CTA 测量之间的相关性仅为中度,CDUS 与 CTA(CSA)之间的 Pearson ρ 值在 0.2(p=0.075)和 0.4(p=0.007)之间,CDUS 与 CTA(直径)之间的 Pearson ρ 值在 0.23(p=0.062)和 0.39(p=0.008)之间。CTA(CSA)和 CDUS 之间的狭窄差异集中在 0%左右,CTA(直径)和 CDUS 之间的狭窄差异集中在 20%左右。CTA(CSA)方法的敏感性和特异性分别为 81%和 77%,CTA(直径)方法的敏感性和特异性分别为 23%和 100%。CSA 和直径测量之间的良好相关性仅意味着这些是狭窄的两个相关特征,并不意味着良好的一致性。CTA(CSA)方法更好地检测到手术狭窄,而 CTA(直径)系统地低估了狭窄程度。测量之间差异的研究表明,与计算相关系数相比,一致性更好。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/55ec/8907959/dbb71784b80d/acc-60-457-f1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验