Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Head-to-Head Comparison.

IF 1.3 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Ultrasound International Open Pub Date : 2021-04-01 Epub Date: 2021-08-24 DOI:10.1055/a-1542-9146
Ingrid Kvåle Nordaas, Trond Engjom, Odd Helge Gilja, Roald Flesland Havre, Dag André Sangnes, Ingfrid S Haldorsen, Georg Dimcevski
{"title":"Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Head-to-Head Comparison.","authors":"Ingrid Kvåle Nordaas,&nbsp;Trond Engjom,&nbsp;Odd Helge Gilja,&nbsp;Roald Flesland Havre,&nbsp;Dag André Sangnes,&nbsp;Ingfrid S Haldorsen,&nbsp;Georg Dimcevski","doi":"10.1055/a-1542-9146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose</b> Computed tomography (CT) is the most used imaging modality for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis (CP), but advances in transabdominal ultrasound (US) technology have given US a position as a viable alternative. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal CT and pancreatic US compared to the reference standard, a modified Mayo score. <b>Materials and Methods</b> CT, US, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) were performed in patients referred due to suspected CP. The modified Mayo score included EUS results, clinical presentation, and results from exocrine and endocrine pancreatic function tests. We scored CT findings according to the modified Cambridge classification and US findings according to the Rosemont classification. <b>Results</b> In total, 73 patients were included. 53 patients (73%) were categorized as CP and 20 (27%) as non-CP. CT and US yielded similar sensitivities (68% and 64%, respectively) and specificities (75 and 85%, respectively) and similar areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnosing CP. We found no significant differences between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for CT (AUROC 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.87) and US (AUROC 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91). <b>Conclusion</b> We conclude that CT and US had comparable, moderate accuracy in diagnosing CP. Neither modality had high enough sensitivity to exclude the diagnosis as a standalone method.</p>","PeriodicalId":44852,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound International Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0f/5c/10-1055-a-1542-9146.PMC8384479.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1542-9146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/8/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose Computed tomography (CT) is the most used imaging modality for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis (CP), but advances in transabdominal ultrasound (US) technology have given US a position as a viable alternative. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal CT and pancreatic US compared to the reference standard, a modified Mayo score. Materials and Methods CT, US, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) were performed in patients referred due to suspected CP. The modified Mayo score included EUS results, clinical presentation, and results from exocrine and endocrine pancreatic function tests. We scored CT findings according to the modified Cambridge classification and US findings according to the Rosemont classification. Results In total, 73 patients were included. 53 patients (73%) were categorized as CP and 20 (27%) as non-CP. CT and US yielded similar sensitivities (68% and 64%, respectively) and specificities (75 and 85%, respectively) and similar areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnosing CP. We found no significant differences between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for CT (AUROC 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.87) and US (AUROC 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91). Conclusion We conclude that CT and US had comparable, moderate accuracy in diagnosing CP. Neither modality had high enough sensitivity to exclude the diagnosis as a standalone method.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经腹超声和计算机断层扫描诊断慢性胰腺炎的准确性:头部与头部的比较。
目的计算机断层扫描(CT)是诊断慢性胰腺炎(CP)最常用的成像方式,但经腹超声(US)技术的进步使US成为一种可行的替代方法。我们的目的是评估腹部CT和胰腺US与参考标准(改良的Mayo评分)的诊断准确性。材料与方法对疑似CP的患者行CT、US和内镜超声(EUS)检查。改良Mayo评分包括EUS结果、临床表现、外分泌和内分泌胰腺功能检查结果。CT表现按照改良的Cambridge分级进行评分,US表现按照Rosemont分级进行评分。结果共纳入73例患者。53例(73%)为CP, 20例(27%)为非CP。CT和US对诊断CP的敏感性(分别为68%和64%)和特异性(分别为75%和85%)以及受者工作特征曲线下的相似区域相似。我们发现CT (AUROC 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.87)和US (AUROC 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91)受者工作特征曲线下的区域之间无显著差异。结论CT和US在诊断CP方面具有相当的、中等的准确性。两种方法的灵敏度都不够高,不能作为单独的诊断方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ultrasound International Open
Ultrasound International Open RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Congenital coarctation of the aorta: Role of peripheral vascular ultrasound in young hypertensive patients. Lung ultrasound score for the assessment of lung aeration in ARDS patients: comparison of two approaches. Pancreatic ultrasound: An update of measurements, reference values, and variations of the pancreas. Insights Into Modern Undergraduate Ultrasound Education: Prospective Comparison of Digital and Analog Teaching Resources in a Flipped Classroom Concept - The DIvAN Study. Ultrasound elastography: a brief clinical history of an evolving technique.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1