检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:周箴[1] 薄维娜[1] 王建华[1] 廖美琳[1] 徐扣凤[1]
出 处:《中国癌症杂志》2001年第2期159-161,共3页China Oncology
摘 要:目的 :研究纤维支气管镜联合固有荧光光谱检测在肺癌诊断上的意义。方法 :将 5 0例肺部阴影患者经纤维支气管镜的固有荧光光谱检测 (IFS 1固有荧光早癌诊断仪 )的结果与白光纤支镜诊断比较 ,及固有荧光光谱联合纤支镜诊断的结果与单纯白光纤支镜诊断比较。结果 :固有荧光光谱测试肺癌的准确率 88% ,与白光纤支镜检查的准确率相仿 (P >0 0 5 ) ,固有荧光光谱检测的灵敏度较纤支镜检查高 ,灵敏度为 93 2 % ,但两者无显著差异(P >0 0 5 ) ,固有荧光光谱检测联合纤支镜诊断灵敏度提高到 98 8% ,比白光纤支镜诊断高 ,二者有显著差异 (P <0 0 5 ) ,特别是对于粘膜下浸润的肺癌能明显提高诊断率 (P <0 0 5 )。结论 :经纤维支气管镜固有荧光光谱检测能辅助支气管镜检 ,能提高对中央型肺癌 ,尤其是粘膜下浸润的肺癌的诊断水平。Purpose:To study the diagnosis in lung cancer with the laser intrinsic fluorscence light spectrum endoscopes (LIFSE) and to find the difference between that with the white light bronchoscope (WLB). Methods:The study in 50 patients who had the lung disease was made using White light bronchoscope (WLB) and the laser intrinsic fluorescence light spectrum endoscope (LIFSE) from the Sep.1999 to Jan.2000. Results:44 patients were diagnosed as lung cancer with the intrinsic fluorescence endoscopes, the accuracy of LIFSE was 88% and the sensibility was 93.2%. There was no significant difference between the diagnosis, of lung cancer with FB with LIFSE ( P >0 05).If the diagnosis of lung cancer through the intrinsic fluorescence test combined the bronchoscope, the sensibility by the parallel test could be raised to 98.8%, the sensibility of the LIFSE combine with WLB was better than that of WLB alone ( P <0 05), especially in the diagnosis of lung cancer with mucosa memberance infultration.Conclusions:The LIFSE is a good methods to assist WLB improving lung cancer diagnosis level.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.49