| 1 | Comparative study of CEA and CA19-9 in esophageal,gastric and colon cancers individually and in combination(ROC curve analysis)显示文摘Objective:To determine the clinical serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen(CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9(CA19-9),individually and in combination,for the diagnosis of 50 healthy subjects and 150 cases of esophageal,gastric,and colon cancers.Methods:The sensitivities of the two markers were compared individually and in combination,with specificity set at 100%.Receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curves were plotted.Results:Serum CEA levels were significantly higher in cancer patients than in the control group.The sensitivity of CEA was determined:in esophageal cancer,sensitivity=28%,negative predictive value(NPV)=61.72%,and AUC=0.742(SE=0.05),with a significance level of P<0.0001;in gastric cancer,sensitivity=30%,NPV=58.82%,and AUC=0.734(SE=0.05),with a significance level of P<0.0001;in colon cancer,sensitivity=74%,NPV=79.36%,and AUC=0.856(SE=0.04),with a significance level of P<0.0001.The sensitivity of CA19-9 was also evaluated:in esophageal cancer,sensitivity=18%,NPV=54.94%,and AUC=0.573(SE=0.05),with a significance level of P=0.2054.In gastric cancer,sensitivity=42%,NPV=63.29%,and AUC=0.679(SE=0.05),with a significance level of P<0.0011.In colon cancer,sensitivity=26%,NPV=57.47%,and AUC=0.580(SE=0.05),with a significance level of P=0.1670.The following were the sensitivities of CEA/CA19-9 combined:in esophageal cancer,sensitivity=42%,NPV=63.29%,SE=0.078(95% CI:0.0159-0.322);gastric cancer,sensitivity=58%,NPV=70.42%,SE=0.072(95% CI:-0.0866-0.198);and colon cancer,sensitivity=72%,NPV=78.12%,SE=0.070(95% CI:0.137-0.415).Conclusion:CEA exhibited the highest sensitivity for colon cancer,and CA19-9 exhibited the highest sensitivity for gastric cancer.Combined analysis indicated an increase in diagnostic sensitivity in esophageal and gastric cancer compared with that in colon cancer. | Bhawna Bagaria Sadhna Sood Rameshwaram Sharma Soniya Lalwani | 2013 | Cancer Biology & Medicine2013，10，3： | 53 |
| 2 | 人工全膝关节置换后股骨假体角度的CT影像学评估:股骨外上髁线参照与间隙平衡技术的对比研究(英文)显示文摘[目的]虽然人工全膝关节置换术中假体旋转定位的重要性已得到公认,但术中以哪条轴线为参照能够更加精确的保证股骨假体的旋转定位,目前尚存争议。研究表明股骨外上髁线(TEA)与膝关节屈曲轴线平行,但这一轴线术中难以精确确定。本文采用间隙平衡技术(BG),对比TEA技术在股骨假体实际旋转角度测量的差异。[方法]30例人工全膝关节置换分为2组(每组15膝),分别采用TEA和BG技术,术后行CT扫描测量股骨假体旋转角度并行膝关节学会评分(KSS)。[结果]BG组中股骨假体平均外旋角度为2.7°±1.1°,TEA组为5.6°±1.6°(P=0.001)。术后KSS功能评分改善BG组高于TEA组(P=0.002),但两组的KSS膝评分无显著性差异(P=0.39)。[结论]研究表明,与BG技术相比,术中应用TEA参照确定股骨假体的旋转定位可导致股骨假体的过度外旋,其术后KSS功能评分亦较差。 | Shrinand V Vaidya Aditya V Maheshwari Rajesh M Gadhiya Vaibhav Bagaria Amar S Ranawat Chitranjan S Ranawat | 2008 | 中国矫形外科杂志2008，16，12： | 2 |
您所在的机构暂未开通此部分的功能，请联系管理员