浏览全部资源
扫码关注微信
超声定量评价成人正常髋关节盂唇大小的可行性研究
Feasibility of ultrasonic quantitative evaluation for normal hip labrum size in adults
- 陆军军医大学学报 2022年44卷第12期 页码：1255-1260
- 作者机构：
1.400038 重庆，陆军军医大学(第三军医大学)第一附属医院：超声科
2.400038 重庆，陆军军医大学(第三军医大学)第一附属医院：关节外科
- 作者简介：
[华兴，E-mail：huaxing_ultra@163.comHUA Xing, E-mail; huaxing_ultra@163.com
- 基金信息：
DOI：10.16016/j.2097-0927.202112054
中图分类号： R195.4;R322.72;R445.1收稿：2021-12-07，
修回：2022-02-05，
纸质出版：2022-06-30
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
陈练羲, 何芸, 覃折波, 等. 超声定量评价成人正常髋关节盂唇大小的可行性研究[J]. 陆军军医大学学报, 2022,44(12):1255-1260.
Lianxi CHEN, Yun HE, Zhebo QIN, et al. Feasibility of ultrasonic quantitative evaluation for normal hip labrum size in adults[J]. Journal of Army Medical University, 2022, 44(12): 1255-1260.
陈练羲, 何芸, 覃折波, 等. 超声定量评价成人正常髋关节盂唇大小的可行性研究[J]. 陆军军医大学学报, 2022,44(12):1255-1260. DOI： 10.16016/j.2097-0927.202112054.
Lianxi CHEN, Yun HE, Zhebo QIN, et al. Feasibility of ultrasonic quantitative evaluation for normal hip labrum size in adults[J]. Journal of Army Medical University, 2022, 44(12): 1255-1260. DOI： 10.16016/j.2097-0927.202112054.
摘要
目的
2
以髋关节磁共振(magnetic resonance imaging，MRI)测量数据为参考，对比分析超声(ultrasonic，US)测量盂唇大小的可行性。
方法
2
纳入本院2020年7月至2021年6月因髋关节疼痛于本院就诊的患者健侧髋42例，男性20例，女性22例，年龄在18~69岁(39.1±12.5岁)，其中左髋12例，右髋30例。患者均接受影像学检查，包括磁共振、超声检查，磁共振及超声的测量参数为前盂唇、上盂唇和后盂唇的厚、长、面积；使用配对t检验、秩和检验比较两种检查方式的差异性，使用内相关系数比较两种检查方式的一致性。
结果
2
前盂唇厚：超声(3.41±0.62)mm，MRI(3.59±0.54)mm；长：超声7.90(6.50，8.75)mm，MRI(7.67±1.06)mm；面积：超声0.17(0.12，0.19)mm
2
，MRI(0.17±0.05)mm
2
。上盂唇厚：超声4.20(3.60，4.75)mm，MRI(4.20±0.65)mm；长：超声6.80 (6.05，8.10)mm，MRI(4.20±0.65)mm；面积：超声0.19(0.15，0.22)mm
2
，MRI 0.18(0.15，0.24)mm
2
。后盂唇厚：超声(3.77±0.61)mm，MRI(3.71±0.61)mm；长：超声(6.73±1.12)mm，MRI(6.71±1.09)mm；面积：超声0.16(0.13，0.21)mm
2
，MRI 0.16(0.13，0.19)mm
2
。超声与磁共振测量前盂唇厚度，差异有统计学意义(
P
=0.013)，其余数据差异均无统计学意义。除前盂唇面积、后盂唇长及后盂唇面积两种测量方式一致性较差(ICC＜0.4)外，其余位置测量数据均表现出较好的一致性(ICC＞0.4)。
结论
2
超声与磁共振测量盂唇有较好的一致性，可以作为髋关节盂唇初始显像的一种替代或附加方法。
Abstract
Objective
2
To analyze the feasibility of ultrasound (US) measurement for hip labrum with reference from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurement for hip joint.
Methods
2
From July 2020 to June 2021
42 patients with hip pain admitted in our hospital were enrolled in this study. They were 20 males and 22 females
and aged between 18 and 69 years old (mean 39.1±12.5 years old). Only the hip labrum of their healthy side were subjected for observation
including 12 left hips and 30 right hips. All patients underwent MRI and US examination for hip joint
and the measurement parameters included the thickness
and lengths and areas of anterior labrum
upper labrum and posterior labrum. Paired
t
test and rank sum test were used to compare the differences between the 2 measurements
and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was adopt to compare the consistency of the 2 methods.
Results
2
The measurements of anterior hip labrum: thickness 3.41±0.62
vs
3.59±0.54 mm
length 7.90 (6.50
8.75)
vs
7.67±1.06 mm
area 0.17 (0.12
0.19)
vs
0.17±0.05 mm
2
(US
vs
MRI). The measurements of upper hip labrum: thickness 4.20 (3.60
4.75)
vs
4.20±0.65 mm
length 6.80 (6.05
8.10)
vs
4.20±0.65 mm
area 0.19 (0.15
0.22)
vs
MRI 0.18 (0.15
0.24) mm
2
. The measurements of posterior hip labrum: thickness 3.77±0.61
vs
3.71±0.61 mm
length 6.73±1.12
vs
6.71±1.09 mm
area 0.16 (0.13
0.21)
vs
0.16 (0.13
0.19) mm
2
. There was significant difference in the thickness of anterior hip labrum between US and MRI measurements (
P
<
0.05)
but no such differences were seen in other measurement parameters. These 2 examination methods showed good agreement (ICC
>
0.4) in the measurements of hip labrum generally
except for the area of anterior hip labrum and the length and area of posterior hip labrum (ICC
<
0.4).
Conclusion
2
US and MRI measurements show good agreement for the hip labrum. US examination can be used as an alternative or in addition to the initial imaging of the labrum of hip joint.
关键词
Keywords
references
PETERSILGE C A.From the RSNA Refresher Courses. Radiological Society of North America. Chronic adult hip pain: MR arthrography of the hip[J]. Radiographics, 2000, 20 Spec No: S43-S52. DOI: 10.1148/radiographics.20.suppl_1.g00oc12s43.
BORIC I, ISAAC A, DALILI D, et al . Imaging of articular and extra-articular sports injuries of the hip[J ] . Semin Musculoskelet Radiol, 2019, 23(3): e17-e36. DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1688696.
PETERSILGE C A. MR arthrography for evaluation of the acetabular labrum[J]. Skeletal Radiol, 2001, 30(8): 423-430. DOI: 10.1007/s002560100386.
HARTIG-ANDREASEN C, TROELSEN A, THILLEMANN T M, et al . Risk factors for the need of hip arthroscopy following periacetabular osteotomy[J ] . J Hip Preserv Surg, 2015, 2(4): 374-384. DOI: 10.1093/jhps/hnv053.
EDWARDS D J, LOMAS D, VILLAR R N. Diagnosis of the painful hip by magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopy[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1995, 77(3): 374-376.
LERCH S, KASPERCZYK A, BERNDT T, et al . Ultrasound is as reliable as plain radiographs in the diagnosis of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement[J ] . Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2016, 136(10): 1437-1443. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-016-2509-6.
GRIFFIN D R, DICKENSON E J, O'DONNELL J, et al . The Warwick Agreement on femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAI syndrome): an international consensus statement[J ] . Br J Sports Med, 2016, 50(19): 1169-1176. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096743.
KANTARCI F, OZPEYNIRCI Y, UNLU M, et al . Cross-sectional area of the labrum: role in the diagnosis of anterior a cetabular labral tears[J ] . Eur Radiol, 2012, 22(6): 1350-1356. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-012-2384-7.
STUDLER U, KALBERER F, LEUNIG M, et al . MR arthrography of the hip: differentiation between an anterior sublabral recess as a normal variant and a labral tear[J ] . Radiology, 2008, 249(3): 947-954. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2492080137.
CONOVER W J. Statistical methods for rates and proportions[J]. Technometrics, 1974, 16(2): 326-327. DOI: 10.1080/00401706.1974.10489195.
AUDENAERT E A, DHOLLANDER A A M, FORSYTH R G, et al . Histologic assessment of acetabular labrum healing[J ] . Arthroscopy, 2012, 28(12): 1784-1789. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.06.012.
CADET E R, CHAN A K, VORYS G C, et al . Investigation of the preservation of the fluid seal effect in the repaired, partially resected, and reconstructed acetabular labrum in a cadaveric hip model[J ] . Am J Sports Med, 2012, 40(10): 2218-2223. DOI: 10.1177/0363546512457645.
CHANG C Y, HUANG A J. MR imaging of normal hip anatomy[J]. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am, 2013, 21(1): 1-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2012.08.006.
GARABEKYAN T, ASHWELL Z, CHADAYAMMURI V, et al . Lateral acetabular coverage predicts the size of the hip labrum[J ] . Am J Sports Med, 2016, 44(6): 1582-1589. DOI: 10.1177/0363546516634058.
KRAEUTLER M J, GARABEKYAN T, PASCUAL-GARRIDO C, et al . Hip instability: a review of hip dysplasia and other contributing factors[J ] . Muscles Ligaments Tendons J, 2016, 6(3): 343-353. DOI: 10.11138/mltj/2016.6.3.343.
KRAEUTLER M J, SAFRAN M R, SCILLIA A J, et al . A contemporary look at the evaluation and treatment of adult borderline and frank hip dysplasia[J ] . Am J Sports Med, 2020, 48(9): 2314-2323. DOI: 10.1177/0363546519881411.
SAIED A M, REDANT C, EL-BATOUTY M, et al . Accuracy of magnetic resonance studies in the detection of chondral and labral lesions in femoroacetabular impingement: systematic review and meta-analysis[J ] . BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2017, 18(1): 83. DOI:10.1186/s12891-017-1443-2.
0
浏览量
0
下载量
0
CSCD
- 网络PDF下载
- Meta-XML下载
- BibTeX下载
- Endnote下载
- RefMan 下载
- NoteExpress下载
- NoteFirst下载
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
- 技术支持由北京北大方正电子有限公司提供 京ICP备09064830号-19
京公网安备11010802024621 - 本系统建议在Chrome、 IE9+ 以上版本浏览器阅读本站内容，360浏览器请切换至极速模式
- Cookies帮助我们提供服务并提供个性化体验。使用本网站，即表示您同意我们使用Cookies
