急性心肌梗死患者恶性室性心律失常的相关因素分析

回顾性分析急性心肌梗死（AMI）患者和健康者的心电学、心脏形态学指标。结果AMI患者QT间期变异度（QTV）、QT间期变异系数（QTCV）、窦性心搏间标准差（SDNN）明显低于健康者；心率变异性（HRV）和QTV、QTCV、左室舒张末期直径（LVd）、左室射血分数（LVEF）与室性心律失常（VA）严重程度存在相关性；恶性室性心律失常患者与非恶性室性心律失常患者QTV、QTCV、SDNN、LVd有显著统计学差异（P〈0．05、0．01）。提示QTV、QTCV、SDNN、LVd均与恶性室性心律失常有关。     

经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除56例体会

目的:探讨经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的临床应用.方法:回顾性分析2010年2-5月间56例经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者的临床资料.结果:56例手术均获成功.手术时间30 ～ 50 min,平均40 min;出血10 ～ 100 mL,平均20 mL.无并发症发生.术后随访2周～ 3个月,腹壁瘢痕不明显.结论:经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术是安全有效的,手术创伤更小,美容效果更佳.     

心房颤动的折返激动机制

心房颤动的折返激动机制本世纪初以来，关于心房颤动（房颤）的发生机制有过三个学说。第一个是１９１４年提出的房内单个异位自律灶学说，异位自律灶以极快速频率发出冲动。第二个仍是自律灶学说，认为房内有多个自律灶，各自独立发出冲动。但是以后的实验结果并不支持自...     

重庆市中小学生心血管病流行病学普查报告

<正> 1980—1981年间,在重庆市抽样普查部分中小学生以了解其心血管病流行概况,兹将结果报导。材料与方法在市、区、郊区及农村选择36所中小学。应查人数19933人,实查人数19612人,普查率98.4%(农村9821人,城市9791人)。男∶女为1∶0.95,年令6—19岁。由心血管专科医师和进修医师组成普查组深入各校进行下列项目普查(1)询问病史。(2)测量血压。(3)     

药物洗脱法模拟阿片类药物戒断细胞模型的建立

目的应用药物急性洗脱法建立阿片类药物非纳洛酮催促戒断细胞模型。方法以稳定表达μ阿片受体（Mu opioid receptor,MOR）的CHO细胞CHO-MOR为研究对象,阿片类药物（D-Ala2,N-甲基-Phe,Gly-ol）-脑啡肽（DAMGO）及吗啡预处理细胞不同时间,然后采用药物洗脱法将药物去除,运用cAMP均相时间分辨荧光（HTRF）技术检测MOR下游信号通路第二信使分子cAMP的变化,以cAMP超射反映细胞水平阿片戒断。结果 DAMGO预处理细胞7.5 min、15min、30 min、1 h、2 h、3 h、4 h后,洗脱药物,使细胞脱离药物环境,cAMP含量随药物暴露时间延长逐渐升高,预处理3 h及4 h后,cAMP含量与对照组相比显著升高,即出现cAMP超射现象。吗啡预处理细胞1 h,胞内cAMP含量变化不明显,而预处理24 h后,将药物洗脱,cAMP含量与对照组相比显著升高。其cAMP超射值与应用纳洛酮催促戒断超射值无显著差异。结论药物洗脱法诱发的cAMP超射能够在细胞模型上较好的模拟阿片类药物戒断反应。     

许昌市饮水型氟中毒流行分布及干预情况调查

目的为了澄清许昌市饮水型地方性氟中毒的流行现状及干预措施落实情况,为防制地方性氟中毒提供科学依据。方法对全市所有自然村进行高氟水源筛查,随机抽取30%的水氟超标村进行儿童氟斑牙患病情况调查,对筛查出的所有水氟超标村的改水措施落实情况进行问卷调查。结果许昌市共筛查出645个水氟超标村,8~12岁儿童氟斑牙的总检出率为35.84%;氟斑牙流行指数为0.69;缺损率为4.38%,流行强度以轻度为主,水氟超标村改水率为31.40%。结论许昌市饮水型地方性氟中毒流行分布情况发生了很大变化,目前的改水措施落实情况不能满足防制要求。     

64层螺旋CT胸部低剂量扫描方案优选的多中心研究

目的 比较自动曝光控制技术(AEC)与管电流恒定技术(CCC)2种不同低剂量MSCT扫描方案对胸部CT图像质量的影响,探讨更加合理的肺低剂量扫描参数方案.方法 采用前瞻性多中心研究方法,研究对象为7所医院就诊的280例行胸部低剂量MSCT检查的受检者,设定管电流(mA)为研究变量,方法一为AEC技术,下设噪声标准差值(SD)为25(A1)及30(A2)各1组,并设定管电流上限为80 mA,下限为10 mA;方法二为CCC技术,下设40 mA(C1)及50 mA(C2)各1组;共4组,采用同一机型64层MSCT行胸部低剂量扪描.2名放射科医师应用双肓法阅片,比较2种不同扫描技术的曝光剂量、SD值,横断面、MPR的图像质量以及体质量指数(BMI)对图像质量的影响.曝光剂量及SD比较行方差分析及t检验;图像质量比较行Mann-Whitney检验;医师对图像诊断一致性检验行Kappa分析.结果 剂量长度乘积(DLP)AEC组较CCC组明显降低[(82.62±40.31)和(110.81±18.21)mGy·cm,F=56.88,P＜0.01].AEC技术中A2组DLP较A1组低[(72.77±36.68)和(92.46±41.61)mGy·cm],差异无统计学意义(t=0.82,P＞0.05).前者SD值在肺窗[(41.50±9.58)和(40.86±7.03)HU]及纵隔窗[(41.19±7.83)和(40.92±9.89)HU]均略高于后者,差异无统计学意义(F肺窗=0.835、1.910,P值均＞0.05).横断面图像质量AEC组肺窗得分除右下肺静脉水平[(4.92±0.25)和(4.93±0.17)分]、[左膈顶上缘水平(4.91±0.27)和(4.93±0.22)分]较CCC组略低外,AEC组得分均较CCC组略高[头臂静脉上缘(4.49±0.56)和(4.38±0.64)分;主动脉弓上缘(4.86±0.23)和(4.81±0.32)分;右肺上叶支气管开口(4.87±0.27)和(4.84±0.22)分;右肺中叶支气管开口(4.90±0.25)和(4.88±0.21)分],差异无统计学意义(F=0.076～1.748,P值均＞0.05);纵隔窗得分除头臂静脉上缘水平AEC组较CCC组高[(2.57±0.77)和(2.46±0.59)分],且差异有统计学意义(F=8.459,P=0.047)外,余各层面AEC组得分均较CCC组略低[(主动脉弓上缘(3.36±0.63)和(3.45±0.60)分;右肺上叶支气管开口(3.94±0.56)和(3.95±0.51)分;右肺中叶支气管开口(3.80±0.58)和(3.87±0.50)分;右下肺静脉(3.72±0.56)和(3.78±0.53)分;左膈顶上方(3.58±0.63)和(3.68 ±0.56)分],但差异均无统计学意义(F=0.083～3.380,P值均＞0.05).MPR图像质量肺窗及纵隔窗观察均略好于CCC组(Z肺窗=-2.358,Z纵隔窗=-1.330,P值均＞0.05).偏瘦、正常或偏重人群组,A1组肺窗及纵隔窗图像质量均优于A2组,差异无统计学意义(偏瘦:Z肺窗=0.000、Z纵隔窗=0.000;正常:Z肺窗=-0.062、Z纵隔窗=-0.746;偏重:Z肺窗=-1.177、Z纵隔窗=-1.715;P值均＞0.05),但在偏重人群纵隔窗图像质量A1组更好于A2组(Z=-1.715,P=0.144).结论 AEC组总曝光剂量明显低于CCC组,而AEC组的图像质量及SD值无论在肺窗或纵隔窗均与CCC组无明显差异,故建议在胸部低剂量筛查方案选择中应用AEC技术,对偏胖者宜采用SD=25方案,对正常及偏瘦者宜采用SD=30方案.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the image quality of chest low dose CT (LDCT) using automatic exposure control (AEC) and constant current control (CCC) and explore a more reasonable scanning protocol. Methods Two hundred and eighty participants were examined with 64 CT scanner at 7 centers in China. All were divided into 4 groups. Two groups underwent LDCT using AEC with standard deviation set at 25 (A1) and 30 (A2) respectively and the tube current ranged from 10 mA to 80 mA. The other two groups underwent LDCT using CCC with tube current set at 40 mA (C1) and 50 mA (C2) respectively. The axial and MPR images were evaluated by two radiologists who were blinded to the scanning protocols.The radiation dose, noise and the image quality of the 4 groups were compared and analyzed statistically.Differences of radiation dose and noise among groups were determined with variance analysis and t test,image quality with Mann-Whitney test and the consistency of diagnosis with Kappa test. Results There was a significant lower DLP in AEC group than in CCC group [(82.62±40.31)vs ( 110.81±18.21) mGy·cm (F =56. 88 ,P ＜ 0. 01 )], whereas no significant difference was observed between group A2 and group A1 0. 05]. The noisy of AEC group was higher than that of CCC group both on lung window(41.50±9.58 vs 40.86±7.03) and mediastinum window (41.19±7.83 vs 40.92±9.89), but there was no significant difference( Flung =0.835, P=0.476, Fmediastinum =1.910, P=0.128).The quality score of axial image in AEC group was higher than that in CCC group (superior margin of the brachiocephalic vein level: 4.49±0.56 vs4.38±0.64,superior margin of the aortic arch: 4.86±0.23 vs 4.81±0.32,the right superior lobar bronchus Level:4.87±0.27 vs 4. 84 ± 0. 22, the right middle lobar bronchus Level: 4.90±0.25 vs 4.88±0.21) except on the right inferior pulmonary vein level(4. 92 ±0. 25 vs 4. 93 ±0. 17) and superior margin of the left diaphragmatic dome level (4. 91±0.27 vs 4.93±0.22) on lung window, but no significant differences (F=0.076-1.748, P＞0.05) were observed. A significant higher score in AEC group was observed on mediastinum window compared with CCC group on superior margin of brachiocephalic vein level (2.57±0.77 vs 2. 46 ± 0. 59, F = 8. 459, P ＜ 0. 05 ), however, the score of AEC group was lower than that of CCC group on other levels without significant differences (superior margin of the aortic arch:3.36 ±0. 63 vs 3.45 ±0. 60,the right superior lobar bronchus level: 3.94 ±0. 56 vs 3. 95 ±0. 51 ,the right middle lobar bronchus Level: 3.80 ±0. 58 vs 3. 87 ±0. 50,the right inferior pulmonary vein level: 3.72 ±0. 56 vs 3.78 ±0. 53, superior margin of the left diaphragmatic dome level: 3.58 ± 0.63 vs 3.68±0.56,F=0.083-3.380,P ＞ 0.05 ). The MPR image quality of AEC group was better than that of CCC group both on lung window and mediastinum window (Zlung =-2.258, Zmedlastinum=-1.330, P＞0.05). For all participants including the underweighted group, the normal group and the overweighted group, the image quality of A1 group was better than that of A2 group without significant differences (the underweighted group: Zlung=0.000, P=1.000, Zmedastinum= 0.000, P=1.000;the normal group: Zlung =-0.062, P=0.950, Zmediastinum =-0.746, P = 0.456; the overweighted group: Zlung = - 1.177, P = 0.239,Zmediastinum =-1.715, P=0.144) both on lung and mediastinum windows, and for the higher BMI participants, a better image quality was obtained in A1 group than in A2 group on the mediastinum window (Z = -1. 715, P = 0. 144). Conclusions The total radiation exposure dose of AEC group is significantly lower than that of CCC group, but no statistical significant differences are observed between both groups in image quality and noise level. The AEC technique is highly recommended in thoracic LDCT scan for screening program, and the SD25 ( SD value = 25) scan protocol is suggested for higher BMI population while the SD30 (SD value = 30) scan protocol for lower BMI population.     

经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术265例临床观察

目的:探讨经脐单孔针式腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)的安全性和可行性.方法:2010年2月～9月,应用针式腹腔镜和曲线形器械,采用"一孔一壶腹三管"显露和胆囊三角区"后侧入路"的方法施行265例经脐单孔针式LC.结果:17例因胆囊三角区粘连、炎症、解剖变异和创面大需放...     

应用改进的器械行经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术

目的 探讨应用改进的器械行经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的应用价值.方法 回顾性分析2010年4月至6月间53例应用改进的器械行经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者的临床资料.结果 53例手术均获成功,无增加穿刺孔转为传统LC或中转开腹,未放置腹腔引流管.手术时间20～50min,平均30min;出血0～100ml,平均20ml.无并发症发生.术后随访2周～2个月,无继发出血、胆漏、切口感染、黄疸等并发症发生,腹壁瘢痕不明显.结论 应用改进的器械行经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术,减少了器械之间的相互干扰,提高了手术的安全性,具有应用价值.     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术中出血的原因和对策

腹腔镜胆囊切除术（laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC）中发生出血是导致即时中转开腹的重要原因之一,如处理不当,将造成严重后果,甚至危及患者生命。本文回顾我科2007年7月～2010年7月8631例LC术中出血的临床资料,对LC术中出血的原因、预防及处理方法进行分析。