彩超及多层螺旋CT诊断主动脉夹层动脉瘤价值比较

Comparative Studies on the Clinical Value of bedside CDFI and MSCT in Diagnosing Aortic Dissection Aneurysm

目的:通过与MSCT的影像学表现比较,探讨彩色多普勒超声在主动脉夹层动脉瘤(AD)诊断中的作用,明确彩色多普勒诊断AD的优势和劣势,为临床选择合理的检查手段,尽早明确诊断及治疗提供帮助。方法:选择本院2010年8月至2011年8月35例经手术证实的AD患者,与手术结果进行对照,比较彩色多普勒超声和MSCT在AD确诊率及破口检出率等差异。结果:本组患者MSCT及床旁彩色多普勒超声均检出AD,MSCT诊断准确率100%,超声诊断准确率为82.9%(29/35),MSCT准确率高于彩色多普勒超声(P<0.05)。主动脉夹层破口检出率的比较,MSCT检出率为48.6%(17/35),彩色多普勒超声检出率42.9%(15/35),差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:2种检查方法对AD均有较高的诊断价值,MSCT可为首选检查方法,若病情危重则以床旁彩色多普勒超声为最佳检查方法。二者在临床急诊AD的诊断中应为互补关系。

Objective This paper discussed the role of Bedside CDFI in the diagnosis of aortic dissection,and clarified the advantages and disadvantages of bedside CDFI in the diagnosis of aortic dissection compared the image findings of CDFI with that of MSCT so that the rational diagnostic approach was selected for the AD diagnosis and treatment.Methods Thirty-five AD patients had been confirmed in the period from August in 2010 to August in 2011 in our hospital.The results of CDFI and MSCT were compared with surgery results to identify the difference in diagnosis rate and break detection rate of the two methods.Results Both bebside CDFI and MSCT were used for diagnosis of AD in the sample group.The diagnosis rate of MSCT was higher than that of Bedside CDFI(P<0.05) with a diagnosis rate of 100% for MSCT and 82.9%(29/35) for CDFI.The break detection rate was 48.6%(17/35)for MSCT and 42.9%(15/35) for CDFI.The difference was not statistically significant on the diagnosis of AD(P>0.05).Conclusion Both bedside CDFI and MSCT have their value in the AD diagnosis.Normally MSCT is preferred in diagnosis of AD and bedside CDFI is the best tool for patients in critical condition.There is a complementary relation among the two diagnostic tools.