论文部分内容阅读
目的 探讨 Ｅ Ｕ Ｓ和 Ｔ Ｅ Ｍ Ｐ对食管癌的侵犯深度、周围转移的诊断价值，并比较二种超声的优缺点。方法 对３３ 例确诊的食管癌，术前１７ 例行 Ｅ Ｕ Ｓ检查，１６ 例行 Ｔ Ｅ Ｍ Ｐ检查，并与术后病理结果相比较，结果 Ｅ Ｕ Ｓ和 Ｔ Ｅ Ｍ Ｐ判断食管癌侵犯深度的正确率分别为８２．４％ 和 ９３．８％ （ Ｐ＞ ０．０５）。判断周围淋巴结转移的阳性率分别为６４．７％ 和５６．３％ （ Ｐ＞ ０．０５），但 Ｔ Ｅ Ｍ Ｐ组假阴性率较高达 ６３．６％ 。结论 两者对食管癌侵犯深度均有较高准确率， Ｔ Ｅ Ｍ Ｐ对小病灶及食管腔梗阻者更适合。
Objective To investigate the diagnostic value of EUS and T EMP in the depth and peripheral metastasis of esophageal cancer and compare the advantages and disadvantages of the two types of ultrasound. Methods 33 cases of esophageal cancer were diagnosed before surgery. EUS was performed on 17 cases before surgery. T E M P examination was performed on 16 cases. The results were compared with postoperative pathological results. EUS and T E M P judged the invasion of esophageal cancer. The correct rate of depth was 82.4% and 93.8%, respectively (P> 0.05). The positive rates of peripheral lymph node metastasis were 64.7% and 56.3% respectively (P> 0.05), but the false-negative rate was 63.6% in T E M P group. Conclusion Both of them have high accuracy in the depth of invasion of esophageal cancer. T E M P is more suitable for small lesions and esophageal obstruction.