期刊文献+

造影前后彩色多普勒超声诊断血管疾病的对照研究 被引量:2

The Contrast Study of the Unenhanced and Enhanced Color Doppler Sonography in the Diagnosis of Vascular Diseases
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:评价彩色多普勒超声造影对血管疾病的诊断价值。方法:不同部位血管疾病患者22例。应用美国Acuson 128-XP10型超声诊断仪及超声造影剂SonoVue。所有患者均接受常规及造影后的彩色多普勒超声检查,诊断结果与DSA、手术结果及CT、MRI等相对照。记录注射造影剂后彩色血流信号的增强时间。结果:造影前诊断明确的比例为72.7%(16/22),造影后为100%(22/22)。常规彩超诊断的敏感性为92.3%,特异性22.2%,阳性预测值63.2%,阴性预测值66.7%。造影后诊断的敏感性为93.3%,特异性100%,阳性预测值100%,阴性预测值87.5%。经外周静脉缓慢推注造影剂(速度约1ml.min-1),总的增强时间约10min。结论:超声造影剂的应用提高了检查者的诊断信心及诊断能力,特别表现在常规彩超检查有困难的部位。 Objective: To investigate the value of enhanced color Doppler sonography in the diagnosis of peripheral vascular dis eases. Methods:Twenty-two patients were imaged with unenhanced and enhanced color Doppler uhrasonography (US) with Acuson 128 - XP10 duplex system and ultrasound contrast agent SonoVue. The results were compared with those of angiography ,surgery investigation,CT and MRI. Diagnostic confidence and agreement were obtained before and after the administration of contrast agents. Contrast enhancement duration was noted. Results:The confidence of diagnosis increased from 72.7 % (16/ 22) to 100%(22/22). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of unenhanced color Doppler US were 92.3%,22.2%,63.2% and 66.7%, respectively. Those of enhanced color Doppler US were 93.3%,100%, 100% and 87.5%, respectively. The overall contrast enhancement duration was about 10min after the intravenous administration of uhrasacnd contrast agent with the infusion rate about 1 ml·min^-1. Conclusion: Enhanced color duplex scanning may improve the confidence and ability of diagnosis, especially in patients in whom conventional duplex scanning is difficult.
出处 《中国临床医学》 北大核心 2007年第5期731-733,共3页 Chinese Journal of Clinical Medicine
关键词 血管疾病 超声造影 造影剂 多普勒超声 Vascular diseases Contrast-enhanced uhrasonography Contrast media Color Doppler uhrasonography
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

  • 1Correas JM, Bridal L, Lesavre A, et al. Ultrasound contrast agents: properties, principles of action, tolerance, and artifacts [J]. Eur Radiol,2001,11(8): 1316-1328.
  • 2Berland LL, Koslin DB, Routh WD, et al. Renal artery stenosis: prospective evaluation of diagnosis with color duplex US compared with angiography[J]. Radiology,1990, 174(2) : 421-423.
  • 3Desberg AL, Paushter DM, Lammert GK, et al. Renal artery stenosis: evaluation with color Doppler flow imaging[J]. Radiology,1990, 177(3): 749-753.
  • 4Miralles M, Cairols M, Cotillas J, et al. Value of Doppler parameters in the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis[J]. J Vasc Surg,1996, 23(3): 428-435.
  • 5Missouris CG, Allen CM, Bellen FG, et al. Non-invasive screening for renal artery stenosis with ultrasound contrast enhancement[J]. Journal of Hypertension,1996, 14(3): 519-520.
  • 6Vogt KC, Jensen F, Schroeder TV. Does Doppler signal enhancement with Levovist(r) improve the diagnostic confidence of duplex canning of the iliac arteries? (A pilot study with correlation to intravascular ultrasound) [J]. Eur J Ultrasound, 1998, 7(3) :159-165.
  • 7Grassbaugh JA, Nelson PR, Rzucidlo EM, et al. Blinded comparison of preoperative duplex ultrasound scanning and contrast arteriography for planning revascularization at the level of the tibia[J]. J Vasc Surg,2003, 37(6): 1186-1190.
  • 8Albrecht T, Urbank A, Mahler M, et al. Prolongation and optimization of Dopplr enhancement with a microbubble US contrast agent by using continuous infusion: preliminary experience [J]. Radiology,1998, 207 (2): 339-347.

同被引文献36

引证文献2

二级引证文献4

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部