经腹超声和计算机断层扫描诊断慢性胰腺炎的准确性:头部与头部的比较。

IF 1.3 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Ultrasound International Open Pub Date : 2021-04-01 Epub Date: 2021-08-24 DOI:10.1055/a-1542-9146
Ingrid Kvåle Nordaas, Trond Engjom, Odd Helge Gilja, Roald Flesland Havre, Dag André Sangnes, Ingfrid S Haldorsen, Georg Dimcevski
{"title":"经腹超声和计算机断层扫描诊断慢性胰腺炎的准确性:头部与头部的比较。","authors":"Ingrid Kvåle Nordaas,&nbsp;Trond Engjom,&nbsp;Odd Helge Gilja,&nbsp;Roald Flesland Havre,&nbsp;Dag André Sangnes,&nbsp;Ingfrid S Haldorsen,&nbsp;Georg Dimcevski","doi":"10.1055/a-1542-9146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose</b> Computed tomography (CT) is the most used imaging modality for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis (CP), but advances in transabdominal ultrasound (US) technology have given US a position as a viable alternative. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal CT and pancreatic US compared to the reference standard, a modified Mayo score. <b>Materials and Methods</b> CT, US, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) were performed in patients referred due to suspected CP. The modified Mayo score included EUS results, clinical presentation, and results from exocrine and endocrine pancreatic function tests. We scored CT findings according to the modified Cambridge classification and US findings according to the Rosemont classification. <b>Results</b> In total, 73 patients were included. 53 patients (73%) were categorized as CP and 20 (27%) as non-CP. CT and US yielded similar sensitivities (68% and 64%, respectively) and specificities (75 and 85%, respectively) and similar areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnosing CP. We found no significant differences between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for CT (AUROC 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.87) and US (AUROC 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91). <b>Conclusion</b> We conclude that CT and US had comparable, moderate accuracy in diagnosing CP. Neither modality had high enough sensitivity to exclude the diagnosis as a standalone method.</p>","PeriodicalId":44852,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound International Open","volume":"7 1","pages":"E35-E44"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0f/5c/10-1055-a-1542-9146.PMC8384479.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Head-to-Head Comparison.\",\"authors\":\"Ingrid Kvåle Nordaas,&nbsp;Trond Engjom,&nbsp;Odd Helge Gilja,&nbsp;Roald Flesland Havre,&nbsp;Dag André Sangnes,&nbsp;Ingfrid S Haldorsen,&nbsp;Georg Dimcevski\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-1542-9146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose</b> Computed tomography (CT) is the most used imaging modality for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis (CP), but advances in transabdominal ultrasound (US) technology have given US a position as a viable alternative. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal CT and pancreatic US compared to the reference standard, a modified Mayo score. <b>Materials and Methods</b> CT, US, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) were performed in patients referred due to suspected CP. The modified Mayo score included EUS results, clinical presentation, and results from exocrine and endocrine pancreatic function tests. We scored CT findings according to the modified Cambridge classification and US findings according to the Rosemont classification. <b>Results</b> In total, 73 patients were included. 53 patients (73%) were categorized as CP and 20 (27%) as non-CP. CT and US yielded similar sensitivities (68% and 64%, respectively) and specificities (75 and 85%, respectively) and similar areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnosing CP. We found no significant differences between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for CT (AUROC 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.87) and US (AUROC 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91). <b>Conclusion</b> We conclude that CT and US had comparable, moderate accuracy in diagnosing CP. Neither modality had high enough sensitivity to exclude the diagnosis as a standalone method.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ultrasound International Open\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"E35-E44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0f/5c/10-1055-a-1542-9146.PMC8384479.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ultrasound International Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1542-9146\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/8/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1542-9146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/8/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的计算机断层扫描(CT)是诊断慢性胰腺炎(CP)最常用的成像方式,但经腹超声(US)技术的进步使US成为一种可行的替代方法。我们的目的是评估腹部CT和胰腺US与参考标准(改良的Mayo评分)的诊断准确性。材料与方法对疑似CP的患者行CT、US和内镜超声(EUS)检查。改良Mayo评分包括EUS结果、临床表现、外分泌和内分泌胰腺功能检查结果。CT表现按照改良的Cambridge分级进行评分,US表现按照Rosemont分级进行评分。结果共纳入73例患者。53例(73%)为CP, 20例(27%)为非CP。CT和US对诊断CP的敏感性(分别为68%和64%)和特异性(分别为75%和85%)以及受者工作特征曲线下的相似区域相似。我们发现CT (AUROC 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.87)和US (AUROC 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91)受者工作特征曲线下的区域之间无显著差异。结论CT和US在诊断CP方面具有相当的、中等的准确性。两种方法的灵敏度都不够高,不能作为单独的诊断方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Head-to-Head Comparison.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Head-to-Head Comparison.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Head-to-Head Comparison.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Head-to-Head Comparison.

Purpose Computed tomography (CT) is the most used imaging modality for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis (CP), but advances in transabdominal ultrasound (US) technology have given US a position as a viable alternative. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal CT and pancreatic US compared to the reference standard, a modified Mayo score. Materials and Methods CT, US, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) were performed in patients referred due to suspected CP. The modified Mayo score included EUS results, clinical presentation, and results from exocrine and endocrine pancreatic function tests. We scored CT findings according to the modified Cambridge classification and US findings according to the Rosemont classification. Results In total, 73 patients were included. 53 patients (73%) were categorized as CP and 20 (27%) as non-CP. CT and US yielded similar sensitivities (68% and 64%, respectively) and specificities (75 and 85%, respectively) and similar areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnosing CP. We found no significant differences between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for CT (AUROC 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.87) and US (AUROC 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91). Conclusion We conclude that CT and US had comparable, moderate accuracy in diagnosing CP. Neither modality had high enough sensitivity to exclude the diagnosis as a standalone method.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ultrasound International Open
Ultrasound International Open RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信