Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU · 2012
Comparison of transcranial color Doppler sonography without and with contrast enhancement for detection and characterization of intracranial aneurysms.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Li-Shu, He Wen, Zhang Hui-Qin, Wang Shuo, Zhao Yuan-Li, Tian Feng-Lan, Xiang Dong-Ying
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic value of transcranial color Doppler sonography (TCCS) with contrast-enhanced transcranial color Doppler sonography (CE-TCCS) for the detection and characterization of intracranial aneurysms.
METHODS: Thirty patients highly suspected of having an intracranial aneurysm were imaged using TCCS and CE-TCCS. The ability to detect the aneurysms and determine their size and location accurately was compared with findings from digital subtraction angiography.
RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of CE-TCCS was greater than that of TCCS (24/30 versus 20/30, respectively) (p = 0.125), but the difference was not significant. Neither TCCS nor CE-TCCS could detect the three small (≤5 mm diameter) aneurysms. The detection rate for larger aneurysms (5-15 mm diameter, n = 17) was nonsignificantly greater with CE-TCCS (14/17) than with TCCS (11/17) (p = 0.438). Similarly, CE-TCCS detected more large or giant aneurysms (>16 mm diameter) than TCCS (10/10 versus 9/10, respectively) but the difference was not significant (p = 1.000). The benefit of contrast enhancement was identical for aneurysms ≥10 mm or <10 mm in diameter. All (7/7) middle cerebral artery aneurysms were detected by both TCCS and CE-TCCS. CE-TCCS yielded similar or slightly better results than TCCS for all other aneurysm locations.
CONCLUSION: CE-TCCS can improve the sensitivity and detection rate of intracranial aneurysms ≥5 mm in size.
METHODS: Thirty patients highly suspected of having an intracranial aneurysm were imaged using TCCS and CE-TCCS. The ability to detect the aneurysms and determine their size and location accurately was compared with findings from digital subtraction angiography.
RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of CE-TCCS was greater than that of TCCS (24/30 versus 20/30, respectively) (p = 0.125), but the difference was not significant. Neither TCCS nor CE-TCCS could detect the three small (≤5 mm diameter) aneurysms. The detection rate for larger aneurysms (5-15 mm diameter, n = 17) was nonsignificantly greater with CE-TCCS (14/17) than with TCCS (11/17) (p = 0.438). Similarly, CE-TCCS detected more large or giant aneurysms (>16 mm diameter) than TCCS (10/10 versus 9/10, respectively) but the difference was not significant (p = 1.000). The benefit of contrast enhancement was identical for aneurysms ≥10 mm or <10 mm in diameter. All (7/7) middle cerebral artery aneurysms were detected by both TCCS and CE-TCCS. CE-TCCS yielded similar or slightly better results than TCCS for all other aneurysm locations.
CONCLUSION: CE-TCCS can improve the sensitivity and detection rate of intracranial aneurysms ≥5 mm in size.