目的回顾分析应用第2版前列腺影像报告和数据系统(Prostate image reporting and data system,PI-RADS)在基层医院中诊断前列腺癌的价值。方法回顾性收集自2016年2月至今在我院行MR前列腺检查并有明确病理结果的20例病例,以病理结果为...目的回顾分析应用第2版前列腺影像报告和数据系统(Prostate image reporting and data system,PI-RADS)在基层医院中诊断前列腺癌的价值。方法回顾性收集自2016年2月至今在我院行MR前列腺检查并有明确病理结果的20例病例,以病理结果为金标准,评价应用PI-RADS version 2诊断前列腺癌的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值和阴性预测值。结果 20例患者经病理学证实的前列腺癌为3例,其余为前列腺增生。应用PIRADS version 2诊断前列腺癌的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值及阴性预测值分别为100%、75%、75%和100%。结论应用PIRADS version 2对前列腺癌的诊断效能很高,值得在基层医院中推广。展开更多
目的:分析前列腺多参数核磁共振检查第2版前列腺影像报告与数据系统(prostate imaging-reporting and data system version 2,PI-RADS V2)中低评分患者的临床特征。方法:回顾性分析2015年7月—2019年7月在上海交通大学附属仁济医院行经...目的:分析前列腺多参数核磁共振检查第2版前列腺影像报告与数据系统(prostate imaging-reporting and data system version 2,PI-RADS V2)中低评分患者的临床特征。方法:回顾性分析2015年7月—2019年7月在上海交通大学附属仁济医院行经会阴前列腺穿刺活检,并且术前行多参数核磁共振检查的2588例患者的临床资料,患者年龄25~91岁,平均(67.6±7.9)岁;PSA中位数11.49(7.49,20.74)ng/mL,其中983例PSA位于灰区(4~10ng/mL)。2588例患者中,PI-RADS V2评分2分302例(11.7%),3分238例(9.2%),4分1842例(71.2%),5分206例(7.9%)。采用logistic单因素和卡方检验对中低PI-RADS V2评分(≤3分)患者的临床特征进行分析。结果:2588例经会阴前列腺穿刺活检者中有1259(48.6%)例患者穿刺病理为前列腺癌(prostate cancer,PCa),以PI-RADS V2评分>3分为界,PI-RADS V2中低评分者占6.6%(83/1259),临床分期均≤cT2cN0M0期,其中48.2%(40/83)为临床无显著意义前列腺癌(clinically insignificant prostate cancer,ciPCa)。以PI-RADS V2评分>3分为穿刺指征,可使17.7%(457/2588)的患者避免不必要的穿刺,而且漏诊83例中所有患者均为局限性PCa,其中ciPCa占48.2%;在PSA值位于灰区的983例患者中,穿刺阳性率为33.9%(333/983),以PI-RADS V2评分>3分为穿刺指征,可使20.3%(200/983)的患者避免不必要的穿刺,而且漏诊26例中所有患者均为局限性PCa,其中ciPCa患者占69.2%(18/26)。结论:多参数核磁共振检查对评估患者是否需要进行前列腺穿刺具有指导意义,在PI-RADS V2≤3分的患者中,仍有部分患者穿刺病理为PCa,但是相对于PI-RADS高评分者其临床分期及Gleason评分明显偏低,其中ciPCa占大部分;而对于PSA值位于灰区的患者,采用PIRADS V2对患者进行评估可大幅减少不必要的前列腺穿刺。展开更多
目的初步探讨3.0 T磁共振成像条件下,前列腺影像报告和数据系统第2版(prostate image report and data system version 2,PI-RADS V2)评分诊断方法在前列腺中央腺体癌诊断中的应用价值。材料与方法回顾性分析50例经病理证实的前列腺癌(p...目的初步探讨3.0 T磁共振成像条件下,前列腺影像报告和数据系统第2版(prostate image report and data system version 2,PI-RADS V2)评分诊断方法在前列腺中央腺体癌诊断中的应用价值。材料与方法回顾性分析50例经病理证实的前列腺癌(prostate cancer,Pca)患者的多参数磁共振成像(mutli-parameter magnetic resonance imaging,Mp-MRI)资料和临床资料。根据6分区切割模型进行前列腺中央腺体分区。两位观察者根据PI-RADS V2评分标准及常规阅片,对入组病例Mp-MRI前列腺图像的有效预定义分区进行评分,分析评分结果的一致性。评分结果与该分区相应的病理结果进行对照,分析PI-RADS V2、常规阅片对前列腺中央腺体诊断中的敏感度、特异度、准确度、阳性预测值和阴性预测值,评价PI-RADS V2在前列腺中央腺体癌的诊断效能。结果 50例患者的Mp-MRI前列腺图像共分割为300个前列腺中央腺体分区,获得有效预定义的分区238个。结果显示,2位观察者PI-RADS V2诊断结果一致性极佳(K=0.84)。PI-RADS V2评分"4"分为诊断界值时,诊断结果准确度为79.2%,敏感度为70.4%,特异度为83.8%。常规阅片诊断结果准确度为72.7%,敏感度为49.7%,特异度为92.3%。PI-RADS V2评分诊断效能优于常规阅片。结论在3.0 T磁共振成像系统,Mp-MRI前列腺中央腺体癌诊断中,应用PI-RADS V2进行评分诊断结果的一致性较高,具有较好的诊断效能和临床应用价值。展开更多
Introduction: This study aimed to develop valid and reliable scale with the intention of measure Coping Self-efficacy (CSES) of Iranian type 2 diabetic patients. Patients and Methods: Validity and reliability of Irani...Introduction: This study aimed to develop valid and reliable scale with the intention of measure Coping Self-efficacy (CSES) of Iranian type 2 diabetic patients. Patients and Methods: Validity and reliability of Iranian version of Coping Self-efficacy Scale (CSES) were measured by a cross-sectional study. Content validity, reliability and cultural equivalency were appraised through qualitative and quantitative study on 260 participants who have type 2 diabetes. Results: Reliability and validity of the scale and its four subscales, such as “stop unpleasant emotions and thoughts” (a = 0.92) “used problem-focused coping” (a = 0.71), Self-efficacy on diabetes problem solving (a = 0.74) and “get support from friends and family” (a = 0.67) were approved explicitly by a psychometric analysis;these show that the scale was slightly valid and reliable on the study setting. An intraclass correlation coefficient was satisfactory (p < 0.001). Criterion validity between total scale and metabolic control Index (HbA1c) of type 2 diabetic patients was significant (p < 0.001) and showed indirect correlation with the domains of the scale. Conclusion: Study findings supported the reliability and validity of the Iranian version of new Coping Self-efficacy-24 for measuring Coping Selfefficacy among Iranian type 2 diabetic patients. Based on our finding, we would like to recommend appropriate interventions in the future.展开更多
文摘目的回顾分析应用第2版前列腺影像报告和数据系统(Prostate image reporting and data system,PI-RADS)在基层医院中诊断前列腺癌的价值。方法回顾性收集自2016年2月至今在我院行MR前列腺检查并有明确病理结果的20例病例,以病理结果为金标准,评价应用PI-RADS version 2诊断前列腺癌的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值和阴性预测值。结果 20例患者经病理学证实的前列腺癌为3例,其余为前列腺增生。应用PIRADS version 2诊断前列腺癌的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值及阴性预测值分别为100%、75%、75%和100%。结论应用PIRADS version 2对前列腺癌的诊断效能很高,值得在基层医院中推广。
文摘目的基于第二版前列腺影像报告数据系统(PI-RAVS V2)对比双参数磁共振成像(BP-MRI)和多参数磁共振成像(MP-MRI)对前列腺癌(PCa)的诊断价值。方法选取2015年3月至2017年12月南京医科大学附属淮安第一医院收治的66例未经治疗临床怀疑PCa的患者进行MRI检查,包括T2加权成像(T2WI)、扩散加权成像(DWI)及动态对比增强磁共振成像(DCE-MRI),均经前列腺活检确定病理结果。两名放射科医师基于PI-RADS V2对BP-MRI及MP-MRI方案的诊断性能进行评估。结果病理证实27例PCa,其中23例位于外周带,4例位于移行带。BP-MRI检测PCa的灵敏度、特异度、准确度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为90.6%(25/27)、97.7%(38/39)、92.4%(61/66)、95.8%(23/24)、94.7%(36/38),MP-MRI为87.2%(23/27)、95.3%(36/39)、93.9%(62/66)、89.3%(25/28)、90.5%(34/43)。结论与常规MP-MRI方案相比,3.0 T BP-MRI方案具有相似的诊断精度,检查时间较短且无需使用对比剂。
文摘目的:分析前列腺多参数核磁共振检查第2版前列腺影像报告与数据系统(prostate imaging-reporting and data system version 2,PI-RADS V2)中低评分患者的临床特征。方法:回顾性分析2015年7月—2019年7月在上海交通大学附属仁济医院行经会阴前列腺穿刺活检,并且术前行多参数核磁共振检查的2588例患者的临床资料,患者年龄25~91岁,平均(67.6±7.9)岁;PSA中位数11.49(7.49,20.74)ng/mL,其中983例PSA位于灰区(4~10ng/mL)。2588例患者中,PI-RADS V2评分2分302例(11.7%),3分238例(9.2%),4分1842例(71.2%),5分206例(7.9%)。采用logistic单因素和卡方检验对中低PI-RADS V2评分(≤3分)患者的临床特征进行分析。结果:2588例经会阴前列腺穿刺活检者中有1259(48.6%)例患者穿刺病理为前列腺癌(prostate cancer,PCa),以PI-RADS V2评分>3分为界,PI-RADS V2中低评分者占6.6%(83/1259),临床分期均≤cT2cN0M0期,其中48.2%(40/83)为临床无显著意义前列腺癌(clinically insignificant prostate cancer,ciPCa)。以PI-RADS V2评分>3分为穿刺指征,可使17.7%(457/2588)的患者避免不必要的穿刺,而且漏诊83例中所有患者均为局限性PCa,其中ciPCa占48.2%;在PSA值位于灰区的983例患者中,穿刺阳性率为33.9%(333/983),以PI-RADS V2评分>3分为穿刺指征,可使20.3%(200/983)的患者避免不必要的穿刺,而且漏诊26例中所有患者均为局限性PCa,其中ciPCa患者占69.2%(18/26)。结论:多参数核磁共振检查对评估患者是否需要进行前列腺穿刺具有指导意义,在PI-RADS V2≤3分的患者中,仍有部分患者穿刺病理为PCa,但是相对于PI-RADS高评分者其临床分期及Gleason评分明显偏低,其中ciPCa占大部分;而对于PSA值位于灰区的患者,采用PIRADS V2对患者进行评估可大幅减少不必要的前列腺穿刺。
文摘目的初步探讨3.0 T磁共振成像条件下,前列腺影像报告和数据系统第2版(prostate image report and data system version 2,PI-RADS V2)评分诊断方法在前列腺中央腺体癌诊断中的应用价值。材料与方法回顾性分析50例经病理证实的前列腺癌(prostate cancer,Pca)患者的多参数磁共振成像(mutli-parameter magnetic resonance imaging,Mp-MRI)资料和临床资料。根据6分区切割模型进行前列腺中央腺体分区。两位观察者根据PI-RADS V2评分标准及常规阅片,对入组病例Mp-MRI前列腺图像的有效预定义分区进行评分,分析评分结果的一致性。评分结果与该分区相应的病理结果进行对照,分析PI-RADS V2、常规阅片对前列腺中央腺体诊断中的敏感度、特异度、准确度、阳性预测值和阴性预测值,评价PI-RADS V2在前列腺中央腺体癌的诊断效能。结果 50例患者的Mp-MRI前列腺图像共分割为300个前列腺中央腺体分区,获得有效预定义的分区238个。结果显示,2位观察者PI-RADS V2诊断结果一致性极佳(K=0.84)。PI-RADS V2评分"4"分为诊断界值时,诊断结果准确度为79.2%,敏感度为70.4%,特异度为83.8%。常规阅片诊断结果准确度为72.7%,敏感度为49.7%,特异度为92.3%。PI-RADS V2评分诊断效能优于常规阅片。结论在3.0 T磁共振成像系统,Mp-MRI前列腺中央腺体癌诊断中,应用PI-RADS V2进行评分诊断结果的一致性较高,具有较好的诊断效能和临床应用价值。
文摘Introduction: This study aimed to develop valid and reliable scale with the intention of measure Coping Self-efficacy (CSES) of Iranian type 2 diabetic patients. Patients and Methods: Validity and reliability of Iranian version of Coping Self-efficacy Scale (CSES) were measured by a cross-sectional study. Content validity, reliability and cultural equivalency were appraised through qualitative and quantitative study on 260 participants who have type 2 diabetes. Results: Reliability and validity of the scale and its four subscales, such as “stop unpleasant emotions and thoughts” (a = 0.92) “used problem-focused coping” (a = 0.71), Self-efficacy on diabetes problem solving (a = 0.74) and “get support from friends and family” (a = 0.67) were approved explicitly by a psychometric analysis;these show that the scale was slightly valid and reliable on the study setting. An intraclass correlation coefficient was satisfactory (p < 0.001). Criterion validity between total scale and metabolic control Index (HbA1c) of type 2 diabetic patients was significant (p < 0.001) and showed indirect correlation with the domains of the scale. Conclusion: Study findings supported the reliability and validity of the Iranian version of new Coping Self-efficacy-24 for measuring Coping Selfefficacy among Iranian type 2 diabetic patients. Based on our finding, we would like to recommend appropriate interventions in the future.
