期刊文献+

磁共振成像和阴道超声诊断剖宫产后瘢痕妊娠的特点及比较 被引量:18

Comparison of characteristics and diagnostic accuracy between magnetic resonance imaging and transvaginal ultrasound in cesarean scar pregnancy
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的比较剖宫产后瘢痕妊娠(CSP)的磁共振成像(MRI)和阴道超声特点及二者诊断准确率。方法 2016年3月至2017年3月,对眉山市人民医院56例剖宫产后瘢痕妊娠的产妇进行回顾性分析,对其进行MRI和阴道超声检查,并对结果进行对比。结果 56例产妇中经MRI检出54例,诊断符合率为96.43%,其中20例不均质包块型均检出,单纯孕囊型检出34例,漏诊2例;而43例经阴道超声检查出,诊断符合率为76.79%,其中19例为不均质包块型,24例为单纯孕囊型,误诊13例,其中误诊为宫内妊娠8例,误诊为宫颈妊娠5例。统计结果显示,MRI对剖宫产后瘢痕妊娠的总体诊断准确率明显高于阴道超声(χ2=6.98,P<0.05),且MRI检出单纯孕囊型的准确率高于阴道超声检查(χ2=7.68,P<0.05),而不均质包块型检出率对比,并无明显差异(χ2=0.96,P>0.05)。结论 MRI对剖宫产后瘢痕妊娠诊断准确率较阴道超声检查高,可作为临床诊断的重要方法。 Objective To compare the characteristics and diagnostic accuracy between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transvaginal ultrasound in cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP). Methods Retrospective analysis was conducted among 56 cases of CSP selected in People Hospital of Meishan City during March 2016 and March 2017, and they accepted MRI and transvaginal uhrasonography for analysis. Results Fifty four cases were detected by MRI with diagnostic accordance rate of 96.43%, including 20 cases of heterogeneous mass type, 34 cases of simple gestational sac type. Two cases were missed diagnosed. There were 43 cases detected by transvaginai ultrasound, with diagnostic accordance rate of 76.79%, including 19 cases of heterogeneous mass type, 24 cases of simple gestational sac type. Thirteen eases were misdiagnosed, including 8 cases misdiagnosed as intrauterine pregnancy and 5 cases misdiagnosed as cervical pregnancy. The statistical results showed that the overall accurate rate of MRI in diagnosis of CSP was significantly higher than that of transvaginal ultrasound (χ2 = 6.98,P〈0.05), and the accuracy rate of MRI in detecting simple gestational sac was higher than that of transvaginal uhrasound (χ2 =7.68,P〈0.05). There was no significant difference between two methods in detection rate of heterogeneous mass (χ2 = 0.96, P〉0.05). Conclusion The accuracy of MRI in diagnosis of CSP is higher than that of transvaginal ultrasonnd, and MRI can be used as an important method for clinical diagnosis.
作者 汪小舟 徐仲明 周军 WANG Xiao-zhou;XU Zhong-ming;ZHOU Jun(Department of Radiology, People Hospital of Meishan City, Sichuan Meishan 620010, China)
出处 《中国妇幼健康研究》 2018年第5期645-648,共4页 Chinese Journal of Woman and Child Health Research
关键词 剖宫产 瘢痕妊娠 磁共振成像 阴道超声 cesarean section cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) transvaginal ultrasound
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献19

  • 1刘晞,刘芳荪,刘东.腔内彩色多普勒超声在剖宫产术后子宫下段切口妊娠诊断中的应用[J].上海交通大学学报(医学版),2011,31(8):1208-1211. 被引量:26
  • 2严英榴 杨秀雄 沈理.产前超声诊断学[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2002.332-336.
  • 3常才.经阴道超声诊断学[M].2版.北京:科学出版社,2007.365-368
  • 4谢幸,苟文丽.妇产科学[M].8版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2013:118-119.
  • 5Rosati M, Vigone A, Capobianco F. Long-term outcome of hyst- eroscopic endometrial ablation without endometrial preparation [J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Bio1,2008,138 (2) :222-225.
  • 6Bashiri A, Burstein E,Rosen S, et al. Clinical significance ofuterine scar dehiscence in women with previous cesarean deliv-ery:prevalence and independent risk factors [j].j Reprod Med,2008,53(1):8-14.
  • 7Jurkovic D, Hillaby K, Woelfer B, et al. First- trimester diagno-sis and management of pregnancies implanted into the loweruterine segment cesarean section scar [J]. Ultrasound ObstetGynecol, 2003, 21(3): 220- 227.
  • 8Hassan I,Lower A, Overton C. Ectopic pregnancy within a ce-sarean section scar [j ]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2007, 27(4):475-476.
  • 9Rotas MA,Haberman S,Levgur M. Cesarean scar ectopic preg-nancies:etiology, diagnosis and management [J]. Obstet Gyne-col, 2006,107: 1373-1377.
  • 10Yang Q, Piao SH, Wang GW, et al. Hysteroscopit' surgery forectopic pregnancy in the cesarean scar[j]. J Minim Invas Gyne-col, 2009, 16(4):432-436.

共引文献45

同被引文献115

引证文献18

二级引证文献58

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