首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        

磁共振成像和腔内超声联合血清癌胚抗原检查对直肠癌术前精准分期的意义
引用本文:池澈,彭泰松,庞尔国,阎庆,邢晋梁.磁共振成像和腔内超声联合血清癌胚抗原检查对直肠癌术前精准分期的意义[J].肿瘤研究与临床,2012,24(11):745-748.
作者姓名:池澈  彭泰松  庞尔国  阎庆  邢晋梁
作者单位:1. 037000,山西医科大学附属大同市第三人民医院普外科
2. 037000,山西医科大学附属大同市第三人民医院放射科
3. 037000,山西医科大学附属大同市第三人民医院超声科
摘    要: 目的 研究高分辨率磁共振成像(MRI)加直肠腔内超声(TRUS)联合血清癌胚抗原(CEA)检查对直肠癌术前TNM分期和术后病理pTNM分期诊断的一致性。方法 经手术治疗后病理证实的156例直肠癌患者按随机数字表法分为术前MRI组、TRUS组、MRI加TRUS组、MRI加TRUS联合血清CEA组各39例,回顾性分析4组术前T、N分期与术后病理T、N分期的诊断一致性。结果 4组直肠癌患者术前T分期与病理T分期诊断一致性差异有统计学意义(T分期:Kappa=0.685,P=0.000;N分期:Kappa=0.544,P=0.000),MRI组、TRU组、MRI加TRUS组术前N分期和病理N分期诊断一致性差异无统计学意义(Kappa=0.142,P=0.329;Kappa=0.154,P=0.645 ;Kappa=0.154,P=0.229);而MRI加TRUS联合血清CEA组术前N分期和病理N分期诊断一致性差异有统计学意义(Kappa=0.544,P=0.000)。MRI加TRUS联合CEA组与MRI加TRUS组、MRI组和TRUS组术前T分期的准确度比较,差异均无统计学意义(χ2=0.326,P=0.574;χ2=0.562,P=0.719;χ2=0.287,P=0.986),N分期准确度之间的差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.643,P=0.026;χ2=6.643,P=0.026;χ2=5.243,P=0.019)。结论 MRI加TRUS联合CEA检查可提高直肠癌术前分期的准确性,为手术决策提供更可靠的依据,提高手术方案预测的符合率,同时也为直肠癌术前精确诊断和个体化治疗提供可靠依据。

关 键 词:直肠肿瘤  磁共振成像  直肠腔内超声  癌胚抗原  肿瘤分期

Clinical significance of MRI and transrectal ultrasound combined with carcinoembryonic antigen examination on accurate preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma
CHI Che , PENG Tai-song , PANG Er-guo , YAN Qing , XING Jin-liang.Clinical significance of MRI and transrectal ultrasound combined with carcinoembryonic antigen examination on accurate preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma[J].Cancer Research and Clinic,2012,24(11):745-748.
Authors:CHI Che  PENG Tai-song  PANG Er-guo  YAN Qing  XING Jin-liang
Institution:. Department of General Surgery, Shanxi Medical University Affiliated Datong Third Hospital, Datong 037001, China
Abstract:Objective To study the consistency in the diagnosis of preoperative TNM rectal cancer staging using high resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MR1) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) combined with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and postoperative pathological TNM. Methods 156 cases pathologically proven were retrospectively analyzed and divided into 4 groups including preoperative MRI group (39 cases), TRUS group (39 cases), MRI and TRUS group (39 cases), MRI and TRUS combined with CEA group (39 cases). The differences between preoperative T, N staging and postoperative pathologic T, N staging were analyzed. Results There were statistically significant differences in the diagnosis of preoperative T and postoperative pathological T in 4 groups (T: Kappa = 0.685, P = 0.000; N: Kappa = 0.544, P = 0.000), but there were no significant differences in preoperative N and postoperative pathological N staging in preoperative MRI group, TRUS group, MRI and TRUS group (Kappa = 0.142, P = 0.329; Kappa = 0.154, P = 0.645; Kappa = 0.154, P= 0.229), and significant difference was observed in MRI and TRUS combined with CEA group (Kappa = 0.544, P = 0.000). There were no significant differences in the accuracy of T staging among the 4 groups (Xa = 0.326, P = 0.574; χ^2 = 0.562, P = 0.719; χ^2 = 0.287, P = 0.986), but significant difference in the accuracy of N staging were showed among the 4 groups (χ^2 = 4.643, P = 0.026; χ^2 = 6.643, P = 0.026; χ^2 = 5.243, P = 0.019). Conclusion Preoperative evaluation by the MRI add TRUS combined with CEA can improve the accuracy of preoperative staging, which can provide more reliable basis for decision-making and improve the coincidence rate of operative procedures in line with the estimate. It also provides the basis for the accurate preoperative diagnosis and individualized treatment.
Keywords:Rrciectal neoplasms  Magnetic resonance imaging  Endosonography  Carcinoembryonic antigen  Neoplasm staging
本文献已被 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录!
点击此处可从《肿瘤研究与临床》浏览原始摘要信息
点击此处可从《肿瘤研究与临床》下载免费的PDF全文
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号