麻广宇,邵明哲,陈云爽,徐白萱,陈英茂,田嘉禾,孙雪峰.肾脏深度对SPECT测定肾小球滤过率的影响[J].中国医学影像技术,2013,29(5):800~804 |
肾脏深度对SPECT测定肾小球滤过率的影响 |
Impact of kidney depth on the measurement of glomerular filtration rate with SPECT |
投稿时间:2012-10-17 修订日期:2012-12-09 |
DOI: |
中文关键词: 肾脏深度 肾小球滤过率 放射性核素显像 |
英文关键词:Kidney depth Glomerular filtration rate Radionuclide imaging |
基金项目:科技部国际科技合作项目(2009DFA32960)。 |
|
摘要点击次数: 3846 |
全文下载次数: 1557 |
中文摘要: |
目的 评估6种肾脏深度估算公式对99mTc-DTPA肾动态显像测定肾小球滤过率(GFR)的影响。 方法 以232名北京地区健康居民为研究对象,分别采用双血浆法和99mTc-DTPA肾动态显像法测定GFR(GFRdt和GFRGates)。分析6种肾脏深度估算公式所得GFRGates与GFRdt间的相关性及一致性。 结果 公式1和5所得肾脏深度显著低于其他公式,公式3和6所得GFRGates与GFRdt的相关性最好(r=0.81)。公式1和5所得GFRGates与GFRdt一致性最差,差值均值分别为(-23.62±18.60)ml/(min·1.73 m2)、(-20.66±18.00)ml/(min·1.73 m2);公式3和4所得GFRGates与GFRdt一致性最好,差值均值分别为(-5.80±16.76)ml/(min·1.73 m2)和(-3.81±17.87)ml/(min·1.73 m2)。 结论 肾脏深度估算公式1、2、5准确性较差,其他公式结果差异较小;公式3、4和6均可用于临床,但公式3和4更优。 |
英文摘要: |
Objective To explore the impact of kidney depth obtained with 6 different estimation formulas on measurement of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) with 99mTc-DTPA renal dynamic imaging. Methods Totally 232 Beijing community health residents were selected as the research subjects. Two-sample method and 99mTc-DTPA dynamic renal imaging were used for determination of GFR (GFRdt and GFRGates, respectively). Six estimation formulas were used to obtain kidney depth applying for calculating GFRGates and GFRdt. Correlation and consistency of GFRGates and GFRdt were analyzed. Results The kidney depths derived from formula 1 and 5 were significantly lower than that of other 4 formulas. GFRdt and GFRGates derived from formula 3 and 6 had the best correlation (r=0.81). The consistency between GFRGates derived from formula 1 and 5 and GFRdt was the worst, with the mean difference of (-23.62±18.60)ml/(min·1.73 m2) and (-20.66±18.00)ml/(min·1.73 m2), respectively. The consistency between formula 3 and 4 derived GFRGates was the best with the mean difference of (-5.80±16.76)ml/(min·1.73 m2) and (-3.81±17.87)ml/(min·1.73 m2), respectively. Conclusion The accuracy of kidney depth estimation formula 1, 2, 5 are poor, while there are smaller differences among other formulas. Formula 3, 4 and 6 can be used clinically, whereas formula 3 and 4 are better. |
查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
|
|