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
机构地区:[1]广东省惠州市中心人民医院超声科,广东惠州516001
出 处:《中国中西医结合影像学杂志》2016年第3期269-271,277,共4页Chinese Imaging Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine
摘 要:目的 :比较超声造影(contrast-enhanced ultrasound,CEUS)与MRI增强扫描(contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imagmg,CEMRI)对肝脏局灶性病变(focal liver lesion,FLL)的诊断价值。方法 :回顾性分析189例FLL患者共220个病灶的CEUS及CEMRI图像,比较2种方法诊断FLL的准确性。结果 :CEUS诊断FLL的准确率为89.55%(197/220),MRI为93.18%(205/220),两者比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 :CEUS对诊断常见FLL有重要价值,与CEMRI价值相当。Objective:To compare the diagnostic values of contrast-enhanced ultrasound(CEUS) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging(CEMRI) for focal liver lesion. Methods:The contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging images were retrospectively analyzed in 189 patients with 220 focal liver lesions,and were compared their accuracies for the diagnosis of focal liver lesion. Results:The diagnostic accuracy rate of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging were 89.54% vs. 93.18%,and there was no statistic difference between them(P〉0.05).Conclusions:Contrast-enhanced ultrasound has a great value in the diagnosis of focal liver lesion,as valuable as contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.
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:3.142.53.191