比较超声与MRI诊断髋关节积液的差异，为临床合理选择影像学检查方法提供依据。

选择2018年11月至2020年1月在北京大学第三医院拟行髋关节腔内药物注射治疗的临床确诊为髋关节滑膜炎的患者132例。回顾性分析所有患者的临床及髋关节影像学资料，分别采用Pearson χ²检验和Student t检验比较超声与MRI诊断髋关节积液的数量和程度的差异，并与临床最终诊断进行比较。

超声检查提示59例患者（44.70%，59/132）存在关节囊肿胀、关节隐窝积液或周围软组织肿胀；MRI检查则报告92例患者（69.70%，92/132）出现关节滑膜增厚、关节积液、骨髓水肿及周围软组织肿胀。MRI检查发现髋关节积液的阳性率高于超声，差异具有统计学意义（χ²=6.294，P=0.015）；但超声阳性患者的关节积液液体深度大于MRI［（7.60±1.81）mm vs（5.32±0.94）mm］，差异具有统计学意义（t=3.155，P=0.003）。

MRI对髋关节少量积液的诊断效能佳；超声检查对髋关节大量积液的诊断效能好，可作为补充检查方式。

To compare the advantages and disadvantages between ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis of hip joint effusion, in order to provide a basis for the clinical rational choice of imaging examination methods.

From November 2018 to January 2020, 132 patients with clinically confirmed synovitis of the hip joint who were scheduled to receive intra-articular drug injection at Peking University Third Hospital were selected as the study subjects. The clinical and imaging data of all patients were retrospectively analyzed, and the number of cases and degree of hip effusion diagnosed by ultrasound and MRI were compared by Pearson χ² test and Student t test, which were then compared with the final clinical diagnosis.

US indicated that 59 patients (44.70%, 59/132) had joint capsule swelling, joint recess effusion, or surrounding soft tissue swelling. MRI examination reported joint synovial thickening, joint effusion, bone marrow edema, and surrounding soft tissue swelling in 92 patients (69.70%, 92/132). The positive rate of hip effusion detected by MRI (69.70%) was significantly higher than that of ultrasound (44.70%; χ²=6.294, P=0.015). However, the fluid depth of joint effusion in sonopositive patients was significantly greater than that detected by MRI [(7.60±1.81) mm vs (5.32±0.94) mm, t=3.155, P=0.003].

MRI is more effective in diagnosing hip joint effusion with a small amount of fluid, while US has a better diagnosis of hip joint effusion with a large amount of fluid and can be used as a supplementary examination.