MedElevator
Войти в исследования Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2004
Ultrasonography of salivary glands in primary Sjogren's syndrome. A comparison with magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance sialography of parotid glands.
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.
Niemelä R K, Takalo R, Pääkkö E, Suramo I, Päivänsalo M, Salo T, Hakala M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate ultrasonography (US) of salivary glands in primary Sjögren's syndrome (SS) and to compare US with parotid magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR sialography.
METHODS: US examination of parotid, submandibular and sublingual glands was performed on 27 patients with primary SS, 27 healthy controls and 27 symptomatic controls without SS. The results were compared with parotid MR imaging and MR sialography and the clinical features of the patients.
RESULTS: Salivary gland abnormalities, parenchymal inhomogeneity or adipose degeneration, were visualized in 21 (78%) SS patients, in one healthy control and in two symptomatic controls by US. Eighteen (67%) patients had changes in the parotid and submandibular glands and 8 (30%) changes in the sublingual glands. In the comparison, MR sialography was found to be the most sensitive method (96%), followed by MR imaging (81%) and US (78%), in detecting glandular changes. The specificity of US was 94%. The US and MR results were related to anti-Ro/SSA positivity but not to saliva secretion. The focus scores were related only to parotid MR imaging findings.
CONCLUSIONS: US, MR imaging and MR sialography with modern technology have reached such a good accuracy in visualizing glandular structural changes that they are promising alternatives to the conventional invasive examinations in the diagnostics of SS.
METHODS: US examination of parotid, submandibular and sublingual glands was performed on 27 patients with primary SS, 27 healthy controls and 27 symptomatic controls without SS. The results were compared with parotid MR imaging and MR sialography and the clinical features of the patients.
RESULTS: Salivary gland abnormalities, parenchymal inhomogeneity or adipose degeneration, were visualized in 21 (78%) SS patients, in one healthy control and in two symptomatic controls by US. Eighteen (67%) patients had changes in the parotid and submandibular glands and 8 (30%) changes in the sublingual glands. In the comparison, MR sialography was found to be the most sensitive method (96%), followed by MR imaging (81%) and US (78%), in detecting glandular changes. The specificity of US was 94%. The US and MR results were related to anti-Ro/SSA positivity but not to saliva secretion. The focus scores were related only to parotid MR imaging findings.
CONCLUSIONS: US, MR imaging and MR sialography with modern technology have reached such a good accuracy in visualizing glandular structural changes that they are promising alternatives to the conventional invasive examinations in the diagnostics of SS.