...
首页> 外文期刊>European radiology >Comparison of the diagnostic value of MR imaging and ophthalmoscopy for the staging of retinoblastoma
【24h】

Comparison of the diagnostic value of MR imaging and ophthalmoscopy for the staging of retinoblastoma

机译:MR和眼底镜对视网膜母细胞瘤分期的诊断价值比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and ophthalmoscopy for staging of retinoblastoma. Methods: MR and ophthalmoscopic images of 36 patients who underwent enucleation were evaluated retrospectively following institutional review board approval. Histopathology being the standard of reference, the sensitivity and specificity of both diagnostic modalities were compared regarding growth pattern, iris neoangiogenesis, retinal detachment, vitreous seeds and optic nerve invasion. Data were analysed via McNemar's test. Results: Both investigations showed no significant difference in accuracy for the detection of different tumour growth patterns (P = 0.80). Vitreous seeding detection was superior by ophthalmoscopy (P < 0.001). For prelaminar optic nerve invasion, MR imaging showed similar sensitivity as ophthalmoscopy but increased specificity of 40 % (CI 0.12-0.74) vs. 20 % (0.03-0.56). MR detected optic nerve involvement past the lamina cribrosa with a sensitivity of 80 % (0.28-0.99) and a specificity of 74 % (0.55-0.88). The absence of optic nerve enhancement excluded histopathological infiltration, but the presence of optic nerve enhancement included a high number of false positives (22-24 %). Conclusions: Ophthalmoscopy remains the method of choice for determining extent within the globe while MR imaging is useful for evaluating extraocular tumour extension. Thus, both have their own strengths and contribute uniquely to the staging of retinoblastoma. Key Points: ? Ophthalmoscopy: method of choice for determining extent of retinoblastoma within the globe. ? MR imaging provides optimal evaluation of extrascleral and extraocular tumour extension. ? Positive enhancement of the optic nerve on MRI does not necessarily indicate involvement.
机译:目的:比较磁共振成像和检眼镜对视网膜母细胞瘤的诊断价值。方法:经机构审查委员会批准,对36例行摘除术的患者的MR和检眼镜图像进行回顾性评估。以组织病理学为参考标准,比较了两种诊断方式在生长方式,虹膜新血管生成,视网膜脱离,玻璃体种子和视神经侵犯方面的敏感性和特异性。数据通过McNemar的检验进行了分析。结果:两项研究均显示,检测不同肿瘤生长方式的准确性无显着差异(P = 0.80)。眼底镜检测玻璃体植入效果更好(P <0.001)。对于层状视神经侵犯,MR成像显示出与检眼镜相似的敏感性,但特异性增加了40%(CI 0.12-0.74)vs. 20%(0.03-0.56)。 MR检测到穿过筛板的视神经受累,灵敏度为80%(0.28-0.99),特异性为74%(0.55-0.88)。视神经增强的缺失排除了组织病理学浸润,但是视神经增强的存在包括大量假阳性(22-24%)。结论:眼底镜检查仍然是确定眼球范围的首选方法,而MR成像可用于评估眼外肿瘤的扩展。因此,两者都有自己的优势,并在成视网膜细胞瘤的分期中发挥独特作用。关键点: ?检眼镜:确定地球上视网膜母细胞瘤程度的选择方法。 ? MR成像可对巩膜外和眼外肿瘤扩展进行最佳评估。 ? MRI上视神经的阳性增强不一定表示受累。

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