Tổng số lượt xem trang

Thứ Tư, 26 tháng 3, 2014


Objectives—This study aimed to evaluate the clinical value of ultrasound elastography in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant cervical lesions and to compare the accuracy of the elasticity score and strain ratio in differentiating cervical lesions.
Methods—B-mode sonography and ultrasound elastography were performed on 84 cervical lesions (40 benign and 44 malignant) in 84 patients. All of the images were obtained transvaginally. The elasticity score was determined by a 5-point scoring method. Calculation of the strain ratio was based on a comparison of the average strain measured in the lesion with the adjacent tissue of the same depth, size, and shape. The
findings were compared with histopathologic results. With the use of receiver operating characteristic curves, the diagnostic value of the elasticity score and strain ratio methods was determined.
Results—The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the elasticity score in the differential diagnosis of cervical lesions were 81.8%, 85.0%, 83.3%, 85.7%, and 81.0%, respectively, whereas those of the strain ratio were 90.9%, 90.0%, 90.5%, 90.9%, and 90.0%. A strain ratio cutoff value of 4.525 was used as a standard to distinguish benign from malignant lesions. The strain ratio values of malignant lesions were much higher than those of benign lesions (range, 4.85–8.91
versus 0.62–4.50). The differences were statistically significant (P < .01).

Conclusions—Ultrasound elastography is a promising technique that is easy and rapid to perform and can help identify cervical lesions that are likely to be malignant. It is obvious that the strain ratio yielded better results than the elasticity score. Both methods are semiquantitative, but quantification of the strain ratio is finer than that of the elasticity score.

Key Words—cervical lesions; elasticity score; gynecologic ultrasound; strain ratio; ultrasound elastography

Không có nhận xét nào :