|
|
Research on value comparison of 3.0T magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasonography in preoperative diagnosis of anal fistula |
ZHENG Chi1 QIAN Kun2 CHEN Yi-jun1 XIE Jia-jun1 WEI Ying3 WU Guo-hui1 |
1.Department of Imaging, Shangrao People′s Hospital, Jiangxi Province, Shangrao 334000, China;
2.Department of General Surgery, Shangrao People′s Hospital, Jiangxi Province, Shangrao 334000, China;
3.Department of Pathology,Shangrao People′s Hospital, Jiangxi Province, Shangrao 334000, China |
|
|
Abstract Objective To compare the value of 3.0T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasonography(TRUS) in preoperative diagnosis of anal fistula.Methods A total of 100 patients undergoing elective anal fistula surgery admitted to Shangrao People′s Hospital from February 2018 to September 2020 were selected as the research objects.All patients underwent 3.0T MRI and TRUS examination, the surgical results were taken as the gold standard,the consistency of the diagnostic coincidence rate of MRI and TRUS in preoperative diagnosis of anal fistula, detection of anal fistula typing and with the surgical results was compared.Results Diagnosed by the results of surgery, among 100 patients with anal fistula, 62 cases were intersphincteric fistulas, 29 cases were transsphincteric fistulas, 4 cases were suprasphincteric fistulas, and 5 cases were external sphincteric fistulas; there were 104 main ducts, 92 branch ducts, and 152 internal opening; 60 abscesses.The detection coincidence rate of main ducts, branch ducts and internal opening of MRI examination was higher than that of TRUS examination, the differences were significant statistically (P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in the coincidence rate of abscesses between the two examinations (P>0.05).The accuracy of MRI diagnosis of anal fistula classification was 96.00% (96/100), higher than 86.00%(86/100)of TRUS,the difference was significant statistically(P<0.05).According to Kappa consistency measure, the consistency between MRI diagnosis of anal fistula classification and surgical results was (Kappa=0.925, P=0.000),which was higher than that of TRUS diagnosis (Kappa=0.739, P=0.000).Conclusion 3.0T MRI has high accuracy and no damage in preoperative detection and evaluation of patients with anal fistula.TRUS also has high accuracy, fast inspection and easy operation.The accuracy of MRI is higher than that of TRUS, but the rapidity and simplicity of MRI is weaker than that of the TRUS, it is necessary to select or combine them according to the situation, which can accurately evaluate the operation, improve the cure rate and reduce the recurrence rate.
|
|
|
|
|
[1] |
高旭灿.括约肌间瘘管结扎术在单纯肛瘘治疗中的效果[J].黑龙江医药,2020,33(3):665-667.
|
[2] |
潘中平,李宾,刘军伟.复杂性肛瘘手术技巧的治疗效果分析[J].山西医药杂志,2020,49(3):298-300.
|
[3] |
王志良,周京贻.开放式瘘管切除术治疗肛瘘的效果[J].中国当代医药,2018,25(24):84-86.
|
[4] |
陈孝平,汪建平,赵继宗,等.外科学[M].9 版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2018:401.
|
[5] |
刘蔚,周璐,高记华,等.中国居民肛肠疾病常见症状分析[J].中国公共卫生,2016,12(32):1655-1659.
|
[6] |
张玉东,彭波,廖华强,等.3.0 T 高分辨率MRI 在肛瘘术前诊断中的临床价值[J].中国CT 和MRI 杂志,2017,15(3):118-121.
|
[7] |
张成生,张伟,张志龙,等.经直肠腔内超声在肛瘘诊断中的临床应用[J]河北医药,2019,41(19):2929-2933.
|
[8] |
金玉明,黄婷,洪桂荣.经直肠腔内超声诊断肛瘘临床价值[J].中国超声医学杂志,2019,35(10):940-942.
|
[9] |
闫有青,张翠红,郭颖,等.端扫式凸阵腔内探头经会阴超声术前定位男性肛瘘内口[J].中国医学影像技术,2018,34(7):1033-1036.
|
[10] |
杨帆.肛瘘的磁共振诊断[J].放射学实践,2019,34(11):1265-1270.
|
[11] |
吴如雷,符昕,杨来华,等.高分辨率MRI 在肛瘘分级诊断中的应用评价[J].江苏大学学报(医学版),2018,28(4):355-358,361.
|
[12] |
陈珊红,张杨贵,胡虞馨,等.复杂性肛瘘MRI 扫描技术在临床中的应用价值[J].中国CT 和MRI 杂志,2020,18(3):51-54.
|
[13] |
赵宝林.术前MRI 定位技术在复杂性肛瘘手术中的应用效果[J].中国当代医药,2019,26(33):129-131.
|
[14] |
刘卫英,邵志红,刘梦,等.磁共振成像诊断肛瘘误诊或漏诊分析[J].同济大学学报(医学版),2020,41(3):309-313.
|
[15] |
许小伍,汤晓敏.超声联合磁共振成像在肛瘘临床诊断中的应用[J].蚌埠医学院学报,2016,41(5):659-661.
|
|
|
|