期刊文献+

超声造影与彩色多普勒超声诊断剖宫产切口瘢痕妊娠的对比研究 被引量:15

Comparative Study on the Diagnosis of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy(CSP) by Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound(CEUS) with Color Doppler Flow Imaging(CDFI)
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨超声造影与彩色多普勒超声在诊断剖宫产术后切口疤痕妊娠中的应用价值。方法对二维超声显示孕囊位于子宫峡部的44例患者进行超声造影与彩色多普勒超声检查,对比分析超声造影与彩色多普勒超声诊断疤痕妊娠的准确性。结果 44例患者,手术证实40例为瘢痕妊娠,4例为宫内孕难免流产。超声造影准确诊断瘢痕妊娠39例,漏诊1例,瘢痕妊娠的超声造影表现可分为孕囊型与不均质团块型。孕囊型表现为"面包圈样"增强,不均质团块型表现为不均匀增强。超声造影诊断瘢痕妊娠的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为97.5%、75.0%和95.3%。彩色多普勒超声准确诊断切口妊娠33例,漏诊7例,彩色多普勒超声诊断瘢痕妊娠的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为82.5%、50.0%和79.5%。结论超声造影诊断瘢痕妊娠的准确性高于彩色多普勒超声,具有较好的临床应用价值。 Objective To compare the value of CEUS with CDFI for the diagnosis of CSP .Methods A total of 44 cases with gestational sac lying on the uterine isthmus underwent CEUS and CDFI to analysize the accuracy of the two methods in the diagnosis of CSP comparatively .Results Of the 44 cases , 40 cases were comfirmed CSP , 4 cases were comfirmed inevitable abortion , 39 cases were diagnosed CSP and one case were misdiagnosed by CEUS.CSP type showed as embryo sac and heterogeneous by CEUS .Type of embryo sac displayed donut sign which showed a rim -like homogeneous enhancement of the mass and the inside region without en -hancement .The heterogeneous type showed uneven enhancement .CSP were diagnosed by CEUS with a sensitivity of 97.5%, a speci-ficity of 75.0%and an accuracy of 95.3%., while CSP were diagnosed by CDFI with a sensitivity of 82.5%, a specificity of 50.0%and an accuracy of 79.5%.Conclusion CEUS has a higher accuracy for the diagnosis of CSP than CDFI and has a perfect clinical value.
出处 《牡丹江医学院学报》 2015年第2期42-44,共3页 Journal of Mudanjiang Medical University
关键词 超声检查 彩色多普勒 微气泡 瘢痕妊娠 Ultrasonography CDFI Contrast media Cesarean scar pregnancy
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

二级参考文献46

共引文献287

同被引文献123

  • 1吕群星.阴道超声联合超声造影在剖宫产后疤痕妊娠中的应用分析[J].现代医用影像学,2020(5):921-923. 被引量:5
  • 2罗卓琼,周平,高峰,李瑞珍.腔内彩超诊断剖宫产术后子宫下段早期瘢痕妊娠的临床价值[J].中国超声医学杂志,2008,24(1):65-67. 被引量:154
  • 3Matyszkiewicz A, Jach R, Nocu~, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy [J]. Ginekol Pol,2015,86(10) : 791-798.
  • 4Li YR, Xiao SS, Wan YJ, et al. Analysis of the efficacy of three treatment options for cesarean sear pregnancy management [ J ]. J Obstet Gynaecol Res,2014, 40( 11 ): 2146-2151.
  • 5Rotas MA, Haberman S, Levgur M. Cesarean sear ectopic pregnan- cies : etiology, diagnosis, and management [ J ]. Obstet Gyneeol, 2006, 107(6): 1373-1381.
  • 6Mahajan D, Kang M, Sandhu MS, et al. Rare complications of ce- sarean scar[J]. Indian J Radiol Imaging, 2013, 23(3) : 258-261.
  • 7Cignini P, Giorlandino M, Caserta L, et al. The importance of early diagnosis in cesarean scar pregnancy [ J ]. J Prenat Med, 2007, 1 (2) : 29-31.
  • 8Ouyang Y, Li X, Yi Y, et al. First-trimester diagnosis and manage- ment of Cesarean scar pregnancies after in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: a retrospective clinical analysis of 12 cases[ J]. Reprod Bi- ol Endoerinol, 2015, 13: 126.
  • 9Moschos E, Sreenarasimhalah S, Twickler DM. First-trimester diag- nosis of cesarean sear ectopic pregnancy [ J ]. J Clin Ultrasound, 2008, 36(8) : 504-511.
  • 10Roberts H, Kohlenber C, Lanzarone V,et al. Ectopic pregnancy in lower segment uterine scar[J]. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol, 1998, 38(1) : 114-116.

引证文献15

二级引证文献100

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