线性探头超声诊断眶下缘骨折的准确性。

IF 3.4 Q2 Medicine
Chatchai Pruksapong, Nuttadon Wongprakob, Minth Panphichet
{"title":"线性探头超声诊断眶下缘骨折的准确性。","authors":"Chatchai Pruksapong,&nbsp;Nuttadon Wongprakob,&nbsp;Minth Panphichet","doi":"10.1186/s13089-022-00298-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Maxillofacial fractures are a common cause of visits to emergency department, accounting for more than 400,000 annual visits in the United States. Gold standard diagnostic tool is conventional computerized tomography (CT) or 3DCT reconstruction. However, the disadvantages of CT are radiation exposure, unavailable in some hospital and expensiveness. Whereas the bony structures overlap is a problem in diagnostic when using plain film X-ray. The objective of this study is to show the accuracy of a linear-probe ultrasound compared to computed tomography and plain film X-ray in diagnosis of infraorbital rim fracture.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients clinically suspected of an inferior orbital rim fracture underwent linear-probe ultrasonographic investigation, plain film X-ray and CT. CT was used as gold standard in this diagnostic study. A radiologist and senior resident of plastic surgery were the examiner and interobserver for comparison.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>A total of 34 patients with suspected infraorbital rim fractures were investigated. Sensitivity of the linear-probe ultrasonography versus CT in the detection of infraorbital rim fracture was 92.9% (95% CI 66.1-99.8), specificity was 90.0% (95% CI 68.3-98.8), positive predictive value was 86.7% (95% CI 59.5-98.3), negative predictive value was 94.7% ( 95% CI 74.0-99.9), accuracy 91%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Linear probe ultrasonography is a good diagnostic tool and has better reliability than the plain film X-ray and can be used as alternative to CT in inferior orbital rim fracture.</p>","PeriodicalId":36911,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9918656/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of linear-probe ultrasonography in diagnosis of infraorbital rim fractures.\",\"authors\":\"Chatchai Pruksapong,&nbsp;Nuttadon Wongprakob,&nbsp;Minth Panphichet\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13089-022-00298-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Maxillofacial fractures are a common cause of visits to emergency department, accounting for more than 400,000 annual visits in the United States. Gold standard diagnostic tool is conventional computerized tomography (CT) or 3DCT reconstruction. However, the disadvantages of CT are radiation exposure, unavailable in some hospital and expensiveness. Whereas the bony structures overlap is a problem in diagnostic when using plain film X-ray. The objective of this study is to show the accuracy of a linear-probe ultrasound compared to computed tomography and plain film X-ray in diagnosis of infraorbital rim fracture.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients clinically suspected of an inferior orbital rim fracture underwent linear-probe ultrasonographic investigation, plain film X-ray and CT. CT was used as gold standard in this diagnostic study. A radiologist and senior resident of plastic surgery were the examiner and interobserver for comparison.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>A total of 34 patients with suspected infraorbital rim fractures were investigated. Sensitivity of the linear-probe ultrasonography versus CT in the detection of infraorbital rim fracture was 92.9% (95% CI 66.1-99.8), specificity was 90.0% (95% CI 68.3-98.8), positive predictive value was 86.7% (95% CI 59.5-98.3), negative predictive value was 94.7% ( 95% CI 74.0-99.9), accuracy 91%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Linear probe ultrasonography is a good diagnostic tool and has better reliability than the plain film X-ray and can be used as alternative to CT in inferior orbital rim fracture.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ultrasound Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9918656/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ultrasound Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-022-00298-y\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-022-00298-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:颌面部骨折是急诊科就诊的常见原因,在美国每年有超过40万人次就诊。金标准诊断工具是传统的计算机断层扫描(CT)或3DCT重建。然而,CT的缺点是有辐射,一些医院没有,而且价格昂贵。而x线平片诊断时,骨结构重叠是一个问题。本研究的目的是显示线性探针超声诊断眶下缘骨折的准确性,与计算机断层扫描和x光平片相比。方法:对临床怀疑眶下缘骨折的患者行线性探头超声、x线平片及CT检查。CT作为本诊断研究的金标准。一名放射科医师和一名整形外科资深住院医师作为审查员和相互观察者进行比较。结果:对34例疑似眶下缘骨折患者进行了调查。线性探头超声与CT检测眶下缘骨折的敏感性为92.9% (95% CI 66.1-99.8),特异性为90.0% (95% CI 68.3-98.8),阳性预测值为86.7% (95% CI 59.5-98.3),阴性预测值为94.7% (95% CI 74.0-99.9),准确率为91%。结论:线性探头超声是一种较好的诊断工具,可靠性优于x线平片,可替代CT诊断下眶缘骨折。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Accuracy of linear-probe ultrasonography in diagnosis of infraorbital rim fractures.

Accuracy of linear-probe ultrasonography in diagnosis of infraorbital rim fractures.

Accuracy of linear-probe ultrasonography in diagnosis of infraorbital rim fractures.

Accuracy of linear-probe ultrasonography in diagnosis of infraorbital rim fractures.

Background: Maxillofacial fractures are a common cause of visits to emergency department, accounting for more than 400,000 annual visits in the United States. Gold standard diagnostic tool is conventional computerized tomography (CT) or 3DCT reconstruction. However, the disadvantages of CT are radiation exposure, unavailable in some hospital and expensiveness. Whereas the bony structures overlap is a problem in diagnostic when using plain film X-ray. The objective of this study is to show the accuracy of a linear-probe ultrasound compared to computed tomography and plain film X-ray in diagnosis of infraorbital rim fracture.

Methods: Patients clinically suspected of an inferior orbital rim fracture underwent linear-probe ultrasonographic investigation, plain film X-ray and CT. CT was used as gold standard in this diagnostic study. A radiologist and senior resident of plastic surgery were the examiner and interobserver for comparison.

Result: A total of 34 patients with suspected infraorbital rim fractures were investigated. Sensitivity of the linear-probe ultrasonography versus CT in the detection of infraorbital rim fracture was 92.9% (95% CI 66.1-99.8), specificity was 90.0% (95% CI 68.3-98.8), positive predictive value was 86.7% (95% CI 59.5-98.3), negative predictive value was 94.7% ( 95% CI 74.0-99.9), accuracy 91%.

Conclusion: Linear probe ultrasonography is a good diagnostic tool and has better reliability than the plain film X-ray and can be used as alternative to CT in inferior orbital rim fracture.

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 Journal
Ultrasound Journal Health Professions-Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
2.90%
发文量
45
审稿时长
22 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