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:杨晓风 郭顺林[1] 何秀超[1,2] 刘海峰[1,2] 史小男[1] 辛文龙 李云和 雷军强[1] YANG Xiaofeng;GUO Shunlin;HE Xiuchao;LIU Haifeng;SHI Xiaonan;XIN Wenlong;LI Yunhe;LEI Junqiang(Department of Radiology,the First Hospital of Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,China;the First Clinical Medical College,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,China)
机构地区:[1]兰州大学第一医院放射科,甘肃兰州730000 [2]兰州大学第一临床医学院,甘肃兰州730000
出 处:《实用放射学杂志》2018年第9期1363-1367,1389,共6页Journal of Practical Radiology
摘 要:目的 通过Meta分析方法间接比较CT血管成像(CTA)和增强磁共振血管成像(CE-MRA)诊断糖尿病下肢动脉狭窄的价值。方法 计算机检索PubMed、Embase、the Cochrane Library、Web of Science、中国知网、中国生物医学文献数据库、中文科技期刊数据库和万方数据库中CTA或CE-MRA诊断糖尿病下肢动脉狭窄的研究,检索时间均从建库至2017年10月。由2位分别从事影像学及循证医学的研究人员按照纳入和排除标准严格进行文献筛选、资料提取并用QUADAS-2条目评价纳入研究的质量,采用Stata 12.0软件进行Meta分析,汇总合并敏感度(SEN)、特异度(SPE)、诊断比值比(DOR),绘制综合受试者工作特征曲线(SROC曲线)并计算曲线下面积(AUC)。结果 共纳入15篇研究,包括7 124段血管节段。Meta分析结果:CTA诊断糖尿病下肢动脉狭窄的SEN、SPE、DOR、AUC分别为0.97(95%CI 0.95~0.98)、0.97(95%CI 0.94~0.99)、1 178.14(95%CI 288.65~4 808.70)、0.99(95%CI 0.98~1.00);CE-MRA诊断糖尿病下肢动脉狭窄的SEN=0.93(95%CI 0.86~0.96),SPE=0.90(95%CI 0.80~0.95),DOR=116.32(95%CI 41.40~329.22),AUC=0.97(95%CI 0.95~0.98)。间接比较结果提示CTA与CE-MRA诊断糖尿病下肢动脉狭窄的相对诊断比值比(RDOR)=10.13 (95%CI 1.76~58.13)。结论 CTA和CE-MRA均对糖尿病下肢动脉狭窄的诊断具有较高的价值,但相比较于CE-MRA,CTA的诊断价值更高。Objective To compare the diagnostic value of CT angiography ( CTA) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) in detecting peripheral arteries disease (PAD) in diabetic patients.Methods PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang data, CBM and VIP were searched until October 2017 for retrieving eligible studies that CTA and/ or CE-MRA was used as a diagnostic test for PAD in diabetic patients. Study inclusion,data extraction and risk bias assessment were conducted by two researchers independently.Pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated to assess the diagnostic value.Results 15 studies with a total of 7 124 assessable segments were included. The pooled results of CTA diagnosing PAD in diabetic patients were : SEN 0.97 ( 95 % CI 0.95 - 0.98 ), SPE 0.97 ( 95% CI 0.94 - 0.99 ), DOR 1 178.14(95%CI 288.65-4 808.70) and AUC 0.99(95%CI 0.98-1.00).The pooled SEN,SPE,DOR and AUC of CE-MRA for diagnosing PAD in diabetic patients were 0.93(95%CI 0.86-0.96) ,0.90(95%CI 0.80-0.95) ,116.32(95% CI 41.40-329.22) ,0.97 (95 %CI 0.95-0.98). Indirect comparisons showed that the relative diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR) for diagnosing PAD in diabetic patients between CTA and CE-MRA were 10.13(95% CI 1.76--58.13).Conclusion Both CTA and CE-MRA have excellent diagnostic value for diagnosing, but CTA performed better in diagnosing PAD in diabetic patients compared to CE-MRA.
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:216.73.216.30