欢迎访问《中国医学影像技术》网站。

设为首页 | 加入收藏 | 联系我们

2024-04-19 星期五
首页 | 本刊简介 | 编委会 | 收录情况 | 投稿须知 | 期刊订阅 | 科学家精神 | 科学数据银行 | 广告招商

张景忠,齐英杰,陈宇,丁晖,徐坚民.3D-CT和3D-MRI诊断肩关节关节盂骨缺损[J].中国医学影像技术,2020,36(1):130~133

3D-CT和3D-MRI诊断肩关节关节盂骨缺损

3D-CT and 3D-MRI in diagnosis of shoulder joint glenoid defect

投稿时间：2019-04-25 修订日期：2019-10-22

DOI：10.13929/j.issn.1003-3289.2020.01.036

中文关键词: 肩关节不稳定体层摄影术,X线计算机磁共振成像

英文关键词:shoulder joint, joint instability tomography, X-ray computed magnetic resonance imaging

基金项目:

作者	单位	E-mail
张景忠	深圳市人民医院暨南大学第二临床医学院放射科, 广东深圳 518020	zhangjingzhong328@163.com
齐英杰	深圳市人民医院暨南大学第二临床医学院放射科, 广东深圳 518020
陈宇	深圳市人民医院暨南大学第二临床医学院放射科, 广东深圳 518020
丁晖	深圳市人民医院暨南大学第二临床医学院放射科, 广东深圳 518020
徐坚民	深圳市人民医院暨南大学第二临床医学院放射科, 广东深圳 518020

摘要点击次数: 1886

全文下载次数: 771

中文摘要:

目的比较三维CT（3D-CT）和三维MRI（3D-MRI）诊断肩关节肩盂骨质缺损（GBL）的价值。方法对50例肩关节不稳定患者行3D-CT和3D-MR扫描，比较分析两者测得的关节盂面积、GBL面积及GBL程度；术中采用数字卡钳测量所有患者GBL程度，以之作为金标准，对3D-CT和3D-MRI结果进行一致性检验，判断其诊断性能。结果 3D-CT测量的最佳拟合圆表面积大于3D-MRI，但差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。3D-CT和3D-MRI测量GBL表面积和GBL程度差异均无统计学意义（P均>0.05）。线性回归分析结果显示，两者测得的最佳拟合圆表面积的回归系数为1.06（R²=0.78）；而GBL表面积之间的回归系数为1.05（R²=0.88）。3D-CT和3D-MRI测得的GBL程度与术中测量结果的一致性较好（Kappa=0.82、0.88，P均<0.05）。结论 3D-MRI和3D-CT诊断肩关节GBL效果相当；3D-MRI具有替代3D-CT于术前更全面、无辐射评估SI患者GBL情况的潜在可能。

英文摘要:

Objective To compare the value of three dimensional CT (3D-CT) and three-dimensional MRI (3D-MRI) in diagnosing shoulder glenoid bone loss (GBL). Methods Totally 50 patients with shoulder instability (SI) underwent 3D-CT and 3D-MR examinations. Glenoid surface area, GBL surface area and degree of GBL measured with 3D-CT and 3D-MRI were comparatively analyzed. Digital calipers was used to measure GBL of all patients during operation, and the data were analyzed with Kappa test to observe diagnostic performance of 3D-CT and 3D-MRI. Results The best fitting circle surface area with 3D-CT was larger than that with 3D-MRI, but there was no significant difference (P>0.05). There was no significant difference of GBL surface area nor degree of GBL acquired using two methods (both P>0.05). According to linear regression analysis, the regression coefficient of the best fitting circular surface area was 1.06 (R²=0.78) between 3D-CT and 3D-MRI, of GBL surface area was 1.05 (R²=0.88). GBL degree measured with 3D-CT and 3D-MRI was in good agreement with intraoperative measurement results (Kappa=0.82, P<0.05; Kappa=0.88, P<0.05). Conclusion 3D-CT and 3D-MRI have the same value in diagnosis of shoulder GBL. 3D-MRI has the potential to take place of 3D-CT for providing full and non-radiative pre-operative evaluation of GBL in SI patients.

查看全文查看/发表评论下载PDF阅读器