期刊文献+

剖宫产术后瘢痕妊娠的MRI诊断应用价值 被引量:1

Comparative Study of MRI and Ultrasound in Diagnosing Cesarean Scar Pregnancy
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨MRI在诊断剖宫产术后瘢痕妊娠(CSP)的价值。方法回顾性分析28例经临床证实的剖宫产术后瘢痕妊娠患者的超声及MRI资料,比较超声和MRI的诊断效能。结果超声检出25例子宫下段瘢痕处囊性或囊实性病变,并提示瘢痕妊娠(25/28,准确率89.3%);误诊3例(宫内妊娠2例、宫颈妊娠1例)。28例同时行MRI检查,均在子宫切口瘢痕处发现孕囊或囊实性包块,考虑瘢痕妊娠(28/28,准确率100%)。结论超声是CSP影像学检查的首选;MRI检查具有一定的特征性,可联合超声进一步提高对CSP诊断的准确性,为临床进一步治疗选择提供影像学证据。 Objective To evaluate the value of MRI in the diagnosis of cesarean scar pregnancy(CSP).Methods The ultrasonic and MRI data of 28 patients with CSP confirmed by clinic were analyzed retrospectively,the diagnostic efficacy of transvaginal ultrasound and MRI were compared.Results 25 cases were diagnosed by transvaginal ultrasound,and 28 cases by MRI.Ultrasound diagnostic accuracy rate was 89.3%,MRI diagnostic accuracy rate was 100%.Conclusion Ultrasound is the first choice for diagnosing CSP,MRI which has certain characteristics in the diagnosis of CSP can be used as a further examination method.
作者 陈志欢 邱剑 杨倩 邓章基 林其健 林进添 CHEN Zhi-huan;QIU Jian;YANG Qian;DENG Zhang-ji;LIN Qi-jian;Lin Jin-tian(Department of Radiology and Ultrasonography,Tangxia Hospital,Dongguan532710 China)
出处 《内蒙古医学杂志》 2019年第11期1290-1292,1410,共3页 Inner Mongolia Medical Journal
基金 东莞市科技计划项目(编号:2016105101263)
关键词 剖宫产术瘢痕妊娠 超声 磁共振成像 cesarean pregnancy ultrasound magnetic resonance imaging
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献59

  • 1金力,范光升,郎景和.剖宫产术后瘢痕妊娠的早期诊断与治疗[J].生殖与避孕,2005,25(10):630-634. 被引量:243
  • 2Osser OV, Jokubkiene L, Valentin 1. High prevalence of defects in Cesarean section scars at transvaginal ultrasound examination[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 34[J]: 90-97.
  • 3Bij de Vaate AJ, Brolmann HA. van der Voet LF, et a1. Ultrasound evaluation of the Cesarean scar: relation between a niche and postmenstrual spotting[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2011, 37[J]: 93-99.
  • 4Zimmer EZ. Bardin R, Tamir A, et a1. Sonographic imaging of cervical scars after Cesarean section[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2004, 23(6): 594-598.
  • 5Naji 0, Abdallah Y, Bij De Vaate AJ, et a1. Standardized approach for imaging and measuring Cesarean section scars USing ultrasonography[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2012, 39(3): 252-259.
  • 6Roberge S, Boutin A, Chaillet N, et a1. Systematic review of cesarean scar assessment in the nonpregnant state: imaging techniques and uterine scar defect[J]. Am J Perinatol, 2012, 29(6): 465-471.
  • 7Monteagudo A, Carreno C, Timor-Tritsch IE. Saline infusion sonohysterography in nonpregnant women with previous cesarean delivery: the "niche" in the scar[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2001, 20(JO): ll05-11l5.
  • 8Wang CB, Chiu WW, Lee CY, et a1. Cesarean scar defect: correlation between Cesarean section number, defect size, clinical symptoms and uterine position[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 34(1): 85-89.
  • 9Osser OV, Jokubkiene L, Valentin 1. Cesarean section scar defects: agreement between transvaginal sonographic findings with and without saline contrast enhancement[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2010, 35[J]: 75-83.
  • 10Ofili- Yebovi D, Ben-Nagi J, Sawyer E, et a1. Deficient lower-segment Cesarean section scars: prevalence and risk factors[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2008, 31 (I): 72-77.

共引文献720

同被引文献11

引证文献1

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