叶思婷,曾旭文,梁治平.MRI与MR关节造影诊断肩袖不同程度撕裂准确性的Meta分析[J].中国医学影像技术,2016,32(10):1576~1581
MRI与MR关节造影诊断肩袖不同程度撕裂准确性的Meta分析
MRI and MR arthrography in detecting rotator cuff tear with different degrees: Meta-analysis
投稿时间:2016-03-17  修订日期:2016-08-03
DOI:10.13929/j.1003-3289.2016.10.027
中文关键词:  磁共振成像  关节造影术    Meta分析
英文关键词:Magnetic resonance imaging  Arthrography  Shoulder  Meta-analysis
基金项目:国家自然科学基金(30973067)、广州市医药卫生科技项目(2014A011020)
作者单位E-mail
叶思婷 广州市红十字会医院 暨南大学医学院附属广州红十字会医院放射科, 广东 广州 510220  
曾旭文 广州市红十字会医院 暨南大学医学院附属广州红十字会医院放射科, 广东 广州 510220 13926190802@163.com 
梁治平 广州市红十字会医院 暨南大学医学院附属广州红十字会医院放射科, 广东 广州 510220  
摘要点击次数: 1566
全文下载次数: 841
中文摘要:
      目的 通过Meta分析评价MRI和MR关节造影(MRA)对肩袖不同程度撕裂的诊断价值。方法 检索Cochrane图书馆、Embase、PubMed、万方、维普及CNKI等数据库,收集符合纳入标准的文献,并对文献进行评价和筛选。应用Metadisc及STATA软件对纳入的试验结果进行分析。结果 共获取符合纳入标准的文献36篇,其中包含全层撕裂文献33组数据、部分撕裂文献25组数据。各研究间存在异质性。MRI及MRA诊断肩袖全层撕裂的汇总加权敏感度、特异度、SROC曲线下面积(AUC)分别为[95%CI(0.85,0.90)]、0.95[95%CI(0.93,0.96)]、0.973 3、0.93[95%CI(0.91,0.95)]、0.96[95%CI(0.93,0.97)]、0.981 4。MRI及MRA诊断肩袖部分撕裂的汇总加权敏感度、特异度、SROC曲线下面积分别为0.70[95%CI(0.64,0.76)]、0.92[95%CI(0.89,0.94)]、0.824 3、0.82[95%CI(0.77,0.86)]、0.94[95%CI(0.92,0.95)]、0.937 6。两种检查手段对诊断肩袖不同程度撕裂的AUC差异无统计学意义。结论 虽然MRA诊断肩袖撕裂的准确率高于MRI,但两者无显著差异。常规MRI诊断肩袖撕裂不明确时,可考虑采用MRA进一步检查。
英文摘要:
      Objective To evaluate MRI and MR arthrography (MRA) in diagnosing rotator cuff (RC) tear with different degrees by Meta-analysis.Methods The articles were searched in the databases such as Cochrane Library, Embase and PubMed, Wanfang, VIP, CNKI. The characteristics of the included articles were appraised and extracted. Data were analyzed with Metadisc and STATA software.Results Totally 36 articles met the inclusion criteria, 33 were including full thickness tears and 25 were including partial-thickness. The subjects and methods of the articles were different and existed heterogeneity.The summary sensitivity, specificity and area under curve (AUC) of MRI and MRA for diagnosing RC full thickness tears were (95%CI[0.85,0.90]),0.95(95%CI[0.93,0.96]),0.973 3,0.93(95%CI[0.91,0.95]),0.96(95%CI[0.93,0.97]),0.981 4.For diagnosing RC partial-thickness tears were 0.70(95%CI[0.64,0.76]),0.92(95%CI[0.89,0.94]),0.824 3,0.82(95%CI[0.77,0.86]),0.94(95%CI[0.92,0.95]), 0.937 6. No significant differences were found in the AUC between the two groups.Conclusion The accuracy of RC tear avulsion for MRA are higher than that for MRI, but the differences without significance.When there is unclear of RC avulsion using MRI, MRA can be used for diagnosis.
查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器