首页> 外文期刊>British Journal of Radiology >Neutral vs positive oral contrast in diagnosing acute appendicitis with contrast-enhanced CT: sensitivity, specificity, reader confidence and interpretation time.
【24h】

Neutral vs positive oral contrast in diagnosing acute appendicitis with contrast-enhanced CT: sensitivity, specificity, reader confidence and interpretation time.

机译:对比增强CT诊断急性阑尾炎的口腔中性对比阳性对比:敏感性,特异性,读者信心和解读时间。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: The study compared the sensitivity, specificity, confidence and interpretation time of readers of differing experience in diagnosing acute appendicitis with contrast-enhanced CT using neutral vs positive oral contrast agents. METHODS: Contrast-enhanced CT for right lower quadrant or right flank pain was performed in 200 patients with neutral and 200 with positive oral contrast including 199 with proven acute appendicitis and 201 with other diagnoses. Test set disease prevalence was 50%. Two experienced gastrointestinal radiologists, one fellow and two first-year residents blindly assessed all studies for appendicitis (2000 readings) and assigned confidence scores (1=poor to 4=excellent). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated. Total interpretation time was recorded. Each reader's interpretation with the two agents was compared using standard statistical methods. RESULTS: Average reader sensitivity was found to be 96% (range 91-99%) with positive and 95% (89-98%) with neutral oral contrast; specificity was 96% (92-98%) and 94% (90-97%). For each reader, no statistically significant difference was found between the two agents (sensitivities p-values >0.6; specificities p-values>0.08), in the area under the ROC curve (range 0.95-0.99) or in average interpretation times. In cases without appendicitis, positive oral contrast demonstrated improved appendix identification (average 90% vs 78%) and higher confidence scores for three readers. Average interpretation times showed no statistically significant differences between the agents. CONCLUSION: Neutral vs positive oral contrast does not affect the accuracy of contrast-enhanced CT for diagnosing acute appendicitis. Although positive oral contrast might help to identify normal appendices, we continue to use neutral oral contrast given its other potential benefits.
机译:目的:本研究比较了不同经验的读者在使用中性和阳性口服造影剂对比增强CT诊断急性阑尾炎时的敏感性,特异性,置信度和解释时间。方法:对200例中性和200例口服造影剂阳性的患者进行了右下腹或右胁的对比增强CT检查,其中包括199例已证实的急性阑尾炎和201例其他诊断。测试组疾病患病率为50%。两名经验丰富的胃肠放射科医生,一名研究员和两名第一年住院医师盲目评估了所有关于阑尾炎的研究(2000读数)并分配了置信度得分(1 =差至4 =极好)。生成了接收器工作特性(ROC)曲线。记录了总的口译时间。使用标准统计方法比较每个读者对两种试剂的解释。结果:发现阳性读者的平均阅读器灵敏度为96%(范围91-99%),中性口服造影剂的读者平均灵敏度为95%(89-98%)。特异性为96%(92-98%)和94%(90-97%)。对于每个阅读器,在ROC曲线下的区域(范围为0.95-0.99)或平均解释时间中,两种试剂之间均未发现统计学上的显着差异(灵敏度p值> 0.6;特异性p值> 0.08)。在没有阑尾炎的情况下,积极的口头对比表现出更好的阑尾鉴别率(平均90%比78%)和三个读者的置信度更高。平均解释时间显示代理之间没有统计学上的显着差异。结论:口服中性对比剂阳性与阳性对比剂不影响增强CT诊断急性阑尾炎的准确性。尽管积极的口头对比可能有助于识别正常的阑尾,但鉴于其其他潜在的优势,我们将继续使用中性口头对比。

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