| Objective：To investigate the splenic diseases of conventional ultrasound,contrast-enhanced CT imaging. To compare the value of conventionalultrasound, contrast-enhanced CT, conventional ultrasound combinedwith contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of benign and malignantsplenic diseases.Methods：The conventional ultrasound, contrast-enhanced CT examinationdata of61patients with splenic lesions treated in the China-Japan UnionHospital of Jilin University from June2012to March2015, comparedthe pathologic results of conventional ultrasound, contrast-enhanced CT,conventional ultrasound combined contrast-enhanced CT topostoperative pathologic results referred as the diagnosis standard. Allpatients were proved by operation and pathology. SPSS17.0was usedfor statistical analysis. Compare the results of methods with X2test.Results：1. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate, falsenegative rate of conventional ultrasound were72.1%（44/61）、80.0%（16/20）、68.2%（28/41）、31.8%（13/41）、20%（4/20）；There wasstatistically significant difference between conventional ultrasound andpathologic results.2.The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate, false negative rate of contrast-enhanced CT were83.6%（51/61）、90.0%（18/20）、80.5%（33/41）、19.5%（8/41）、10.0%（2/20）.There wasno significant difference between contrast-enhanced CT and pathologicresults.3.The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate, falsenegative rate of conventional ultrasound combined with contrast-enhanced CT were90.2%（55/61）、95.0%（19/20）、87.8%（36/41）、12.2%（5/41）、5.0%（1/20）.There was no significant difference betweenconventional ultrasound combined with contrast-enhanced CT andpathologic results.Conclusions：1. Conventional ultrasound can distinguish benign and malignantsplenic lesions through the echo, morphology, blood flow, but theaccuracy is low.2. Conventional ultrasound combined with contrast-enhanced CThas a high value in the diagnosis of splenic lesions. |
PDF Full Text Request