...
首页> 外文期刊>Abdominal radiology. >Contrast- vs. non-contrast enhanced MR data sets for characterization of perianal fistulas
【24h】

Contrast- vs. non-contrast enhanced MR data sets for characterization of perianal fistulas

机译:对比与非对比度增强MR数据集,用于表征Perianal Fustulas

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy between pre-and post-contrast MRI sequences in perianal fistulas using intra-operative findings as the gold standard. Materials and methods: Retrospective analysis of 50 patients with a history of perianal fistula and MRI performed between January 2006 and January 2018 was performed. The inclusion criteria were patients who underwent MRI prior to surgery and had a detailed surgical report available. Pre- and post-contrast MR data sets were evaluated by two radiologists at two-week-intervals, assessed fistula type, internal/external opening, presence of abscess/secondary tracts, and confidence scores. The area under the curve (AUC) was used for comparison the diagnostic ability. The sensitivity and specificity were compared using the McNemar's test. Results: The confidence scores in detecting perianal fistulas were significantly higher in the post-contrast MR data set (p < 0.003). The post-contrast MR data set had similar ability to classify perianal fistulas as combined T2-DWI and isolated T2 data sets in 49/50 cases. For internal/external opening, the post-contrast MR, combined T2-DWI, and isolated T2 data sets had 100% concordance with intra-operative reports. For perianal abscess, there was no significant difference in sensitivity or AUC value between the isolated T2 or combined T2-DWI data sets and post-contrast MR data set (p > 0.05). All MR data sets correctly identified secondary tracts in all 50 cases. Conclusions: Although contrast-enhanced MR studies can improve a radiologist's confidence, non-contrast MR studies had similar diagnostic efficacy in identifying perianal fistulas and their complications. Therefore, a non-contrast study may suffice in selected patients such as those with renal impairment.
机译:目的:评估使用术中术中的结果作为黄金标准的肛周瘘管前对比度MRI序列之间的诊断疗效。材料与方法:对50例肛周瘘史和2018年1月至2018年1月的MRI历史的回顾性分析。纳入标准是在手术前接受MRI的患者,并提供详细的手术报告。对比度和对比度后MR数据集由两周间隔,评估瘘型,内部/外部开口,脓肿/二次束的存在和置信度分数的两周间隔。曲线(AUC)下的区域用于比较诊断能力。使用McNemar的测试进行比较灵敏度和特异性。结果:在对比度MR数据集中检测肛周瘘管的置信度得分显着高(P <0.003)。后对比度MR数据集具有类似的能力,将围架瘘管分类为T2-DWI和49/50例中的分离的T2数据集。对于内部/外部开口,对比后MR,组合T2-DWI和分离的T2数据集与术语帧内报告有100%的一致性。对于肛周脓肿,隔离T2或组合T2-DWI数据集和与对比度MR数据集之间没有显着差异或AUC值差异(P> 0.05)。所有MR数据集在所有50个案例中都有正确识别的二次派。结论:尽管对比增强的MR研究可以提高放射科医师的信心,但非对比的MR研究在鉴定肛周瘘管及其并发症中具有相似的诊断疗效。因此,非对比度研究可能在选定的患者中足够就足够,例如肾脏损伤的患者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号