论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨血清CA125联合经阴道彩色多普勒超声在监测卵巢癌新辅助化疗中的应用价值。方法选择2014年10月—2015年12月在本院住院治疗卵巢癌患者50例,应用血清CA125联合经阴道彩色多普勒超辅助检测化疗进行治疗,比较患者化疗前后各项指标及检测方法的正确率。计量资料比较采用t检验;计数资料比较采用χ~2检验,P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。结果与化疗前[(7.51±2.01)cm/s、(445.36±407.54)cm~3、(0.42±0.11)]比较,化疗后患者的最大血流速度、病灶体积[(2.88±1.45)cm/s、(214.65±203.23)cm~3]显著降低,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05);阻力指数(resistance index RI)(0.65±0.08)明显上升,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。多普勒超声检测灵敏度、特异度及正确率分别为74.41%、71.42%、74.0%,血清CA125为72.09%、57.14%、70.0%,两种方法联合为93.02%、85.71%、92.0%,联合检测方法与单独检测的灵敏度、正确率比较,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。结论血清CA125联合经阴道彩色多普勒超声可以清楚地反映患者血流反应,且联合检测的灵敏度和正确率优于单独一种方法,为临床提供了更有利的依据,值得推广使用。
Objective To investigate the value of serum CA125 combined with transvaginal color Doppler ultrasonography in the monitoring of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. Methods 50 patients with ovarian cancer hospitalized in our hospital from October 2014 to December 2015 were enrolled in this study. Serum CA125 combined with transvaginal color Doppler ultrasonography was used to treat the patients. The indexes before and after chemotherapy were compared Correct rate. Measurement data were compared using t test; count data were compared using χ ~ 2 test, P <0.05 for the difference was statistically significant. Results Compared with those before chemotherapy (7.51 ± 2.01 cm / s, 445.36 ± 407.54 cm ~ (3), 0.42 ± 0.11], the maximum blood flow velocity, volume of lesions [(2.88 ± 1.45) cm / s, (214.65 ± 203.23) cm ~ 3] (all P <0.05), and the resistance index RI (0.65 ± 0.08) increased significantly with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). The sensitivity, specificity and correct rate of Doppler ultrasound examination were 74.41%, 71.42%, 74.0%, 72.09%, 57.14%, 70.0% respectively. The combination of the two methods was 93.02%, 85.71%, 92.0% Sensitivity and accuracy of detection methods and detection alone, the differences were statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion Serum CA125 combined with transvaginal color Doppler ultrasound can clearly reflect the patient’s blood flow response, and the combined detection of sensitivity and accuracy is better than a single method for clinical provide a more favorable basis, it is worth promoting the use.