...
首页> 外文期刊>Nuclear Medicine Communications >Comparison of gastric emptying scintigraphy based on the geometric mean of the gastric proportion of the abdominal radioactivity or on the geometric mean of the intragastric radioactivity.
【24h】

Comparison of gastric emptying scintigraphy based on the geometric mean of the gastric proportion of the abdominal radioactivity or on the geometric mean of the intragastric radioactivity.

机译:根据腹部放射性的胃比例的几何平均值或胃内放射性的几何平均值比较胃排空闪烁显像。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

PURPOSE: Using gastric emptying scintigraphy the gastric retention rate is commonly calculated within a gastric region of interest (intragastric method). This technique may have significant limitations when left oblique anterior views are acquired, due in part to attenuation resulting from intragastric redistribution. To minimize these drawbacks, it was proposed to express the intragastric content as a percentage of the abdominal radioactivity (abdominal method). Our goal was to compare these two methods when anterior-posterior scanning is used. METHODS: Antero-posterior scintigraphic data of 272 consecutive patients were analysed by both methods. Retention rates were obtained by both observation and calculation by power exponential fit. Gastric emptying parameters (half-emptying time of solids (T(50,S)) and liquids (T(50,L)), lag phase (T(lag)) time and real emptying time (T(RE))), and quality of fit were also computed and compared. RESULTS: For solids, the intragastric method resulted in weakly higher experimental retention rates, whereas retention rates were quite similar for liquids. Differences between experimental and calculated retention rates were smaller for abdominal method, for both liquids and solids. As a result, values for the quality of fit were higher for the abdominal method. Significant differences were observed only for calculated T(50,S) (122+/-46 min vs. 124+/-48 min, mean difference 2+/-2 min, P<0.00001) and T(RE) (163+/-64 min vs. 168+/-68 min, mean difference 4.5+/-3.8 min, P<0.05), respectively, for the abdominal and the intragastric methods. However, the Bland-Altman statistical method revealed good agreements (<5% outliers). CONCLUSION: Intragastric and abdominal methods can be used indifferently to treat antero-posterior data of gastric scintigraphy.
机译:目的:使用胃排空闪烁扫描术通常在目标胃区域内计算胃retention留率(胃内法)。当获取左斜前视图时,该技术可能会有重大局限性,部分原因是由于胃内重新分布引起的衰减。为了最小化这些缺点,提出将胃内含量表示为腹部放射性的百分比(腹部方法)。我们的目标是比较使用前后扫描时的这两种方法。方法:采用两种方法分析了272例连续患者的前后闪烁体扫描数据。通过幂指数拟合通过观察和计算获得保留率。胃排空参数(固体(T(50,S))和液体(T(50,L))的半排空时间,滞后相(T(lag))时间和实际排空时间(T(RE))),还计算并比较了拟合质量。结果:对于固体,胃内方法导致较高的实验保留率,而液体的保留率非常相似。对于腹部方法,无论是液体还是固体,实验和计算保留率之间的差异都较小。结果,腹部方法的拟合质量值较高。仅对计算出的T(50,S)观察到显着差异(122 +/- 46分钟vs.124 +/- 48分钟,平均差异2 +/- 2分钟,P <0.00001)和T(RE)(163+腹部和胃内方法分别为(--64分钟)与(168 +/- 68分钟),平均差异为(4.5 +/- 3.8分钟,P <0.05)。但是,Bland-Altman统计方法显示出良好的一致性(离群值<5%)。结论:胃内和腹部方法可无差别地用于处理胃闪烁显像的前后数据。

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