双能减影和常规DR对肺结节或肿块检出能力的比较  

Comparative Study between Dual Energy Subtraction and Conventional Digital Radiography for Detecting Pulmonary Nodules or Masses

作　　者：黄锐[1] 冯敢生[1] 杨炼[1] 刘宇[2] 李林[3] 叶遐玲 

机构地区：[1]华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院放射科,武汉430022 [2]湖北省中医院放射科,武汉430061 [3]黄陂区人民医院放射科,武汉432200 [4]大冶市人民医院放射科,湖北435000

出　　处：《放射学实践》2008年第8期877-880,共4页Radiologic Practice

摘　　要：目的:比较双能减影和常规DR对肺结节或肿块检出的能力。方法:对经CT证实的50例患者共104个肺结节或肿块(PNM)行双能减影(DES)和常规数字X线减影(CDR)检查。评价DES和CDR对PNM的检出能力,并用配对卡方检验进行差异显著性分析。结果:对于CT证实全部PNM,DES和CDR的检出率分别为67.3%(70/104)和52.9%(55/104),两者差异有极显著性意义(χ2=9.33,P<0.01)。对于最大径>1 cm的PNM,DES和CDR的检出率分别为91.5%(43/47)和89.4%(42/47),两者差异无显著性意义(χ2=1,P>0.05)。对于最大径≤1 cm的PNM,DES和CDR的检出率分别为47.4%(27/57)和22.8%(13/57),两者差异有极显著性意义(χ2=8.45,P<0.01)。结论:DES对PNM的检出能力优于CDR。Objective：To compare the detectability of dual energy subtraction and conventional digital radiography in detecting pulmonary nodules or masses （PNM）. Methods： 104 PNM of 50 patients which were demonstrated by CT were examined by DES and CDR, The detectability of dual energy subtraction and conventional digital radiography was estimated respectively. Results ： For the overall PNM, the detectability of DES was 67. 3% （70/104） and that of CDR was 52. 9% （55/104） ,there was significant difference between the two methods （χ^2 =9.33 ,P〈0.01）. For those PNM whose maximal diameters were larger than lcm, DES and CDR found 91.5% （43/47）and 89.4% （42/47） respectively, there was no significant difference between the two methods （χ^2 = 1 ,P〉0.05）. For those PNM whose maximal diameters were lcm or less,the detectability of DES and CDR were 47.4% （27/57） and 22.8% （13/57） respectively,there was significant difference between the two methods （χ^2= 8.45,P〈0.01）. Conclusion：The performance of DES was superior to that of CDR in detecting PNM.

关 键 词：减影技术 对比研究 放射摄影术 

分 类 号：R816.4[医药卫生—放射医学]