ADC值和标化ADC值诊断前列腺癌恶性程度价值的比较

发布时间：2018-04-26 04:31

  本文选题：前列腺肿瘤 + 标化ADC值　； 参考：《重庆医学》2015年29期

【摘要】：目的比较表观扩散系数(ADC)值和标化ADC值在诊断前列腺癌恶性程度中的价值。方法回顾性分析经病理证实的34例前列腺癌的弥散加权成像(DWI)扫描结果。测量患者49个癌灶及外周带正常区域的ADC值,计算癌灶标化ADC值。根据病理Gleason评分,49个癌灶分为:≤6分(低危组)、7分(中危组)、≥8分(高危组)共3组。对各组ADC值之间和标化ADC值之间的差别及ADC值和标化ADC值与Gleason评分之间的相关性进行统计学分析。结果前列腺癌ADC值及标化ADC值3组整体差异均有统计学意义(P0.01),但两两比较ADC值在中危组与高危组之间差异无统计学意义(P0.05),而标化ADC值在各组间差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。ADC值(r=-0.546,P=0.000)和标化ADC值(r=-0.575,P=0.000)与Gleason评分均呈负相关。在比较前列腺癌各组的ROC曲线下面积时,标化ADC值与ADC值之间的差异无统计学意义(P0.05),但当特异性调整至100%时,标化ADC值在区别低危组与中危组、低危组与高危组时较ADC值具有更高的灵敏性(47.5%vs.5.6%、78.2%vs.50.9%)。结论 ADC值和标化ADC值与Gleason评分均呈负相关,但标化ADC值在诊断前列腺癌恶性程度方面可能具有更高的效能。
[Abstract]:Objective to compare the value of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCC) and standardized ADC in the diagnosis of malignant degree of prostate cancer. Methods the results of DWI in 34 cases of prostate cancer proved by pathology were retrospectively analyzed. The ADC values of 49 cancer foci and normal peripheral zones were measured and the standardized ADC values were calculated. According to pathological Gleason score, 49 cancer foci were divided into 3 groups: 鈮，

本文编号：1804509