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:尹玲 秦小棠 Yin Ling;Qin Xiaotang(Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,Chengdu No.11 People's Hospital,Chengdu,Sichuan 610000,China)
机构地区:[1]成都市第十一人民医院妇产科,四川成都610000
出 处:《医药前沿》2019年第32期36-37,共2页Journal of Frontiers of Medicine
摘 要:目的:探讨宫颈特殊染色法在宫颈疾病筛查中的运用.方法:选择2017年1月—2018年12月在我科门诊行宫颈疾病筛查的患者220例,同时采用宫颈特殊染色检查及宫颈液基细胞学检查,将两种筛查结果进行对比,评估宫颈特殊染色法结果与液基细胞学检查结果是否存在差异.结果:宫颈特殊染色法阴性检测率(93.2%)与宫颈液基细胞学检测阴性检测率(95.9%)相比一致性较好(Kappa=0.649,P<0.05)且差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论:宫颈特殊染色法与宫颈液基细胞学检查在宫颈疾病筛查中无显著差异,且宫颈特殊染色法操作简单,结果快速,可常规用于宫颈疾病初步筛查.Objective To explore the application of cervical special staining(FRD)in cervical lesions screening.Methods From January 2017 to December 2018,220 cases of cervical lesions screening were examined both by FRD and liquid based cervical cytology(TCT)in our outpatient department.To compare and evaluate whether there was any difference between the results of FRD and TCT.Results The negative rate of FRD(93.2%)was better than that of TCT(95.9%)(Kappa=0.649,P<0.05),and the difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05).Conclusion There was no statistically significant difference between FRD and TCT,and the FRD is faster and easier,which is worthy in the preliminary screening of cervical lesions.
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:216.73.216.38