切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华医学超声杂志(电子版) ›› 2023, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (03) : 337 -342. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2023.03.014

超声医学质量控制

标准切面质量控制在Ⅲ级产科超声检查胎儿结构异常检出中的应用价值
刘会, 郑宇觐, 郭丹丹, 张波()   
  1. 100029 北京,中日友好医院超声医学科
  • 收稿日期:2021-05-24 出版日期:2023-03-01
  • 通信作者: 张波

Application of standard section quality control in improving the detection rate of fetal structural abnormality in second-trimester obstetric ultrasound examination

Hui Liu, Yujin Zheng, Dandan Guo, Bo Zhang()   

  1. Department of Ultrasound, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing 100029, China
  • Received:2021-05-24 Published:2023-03-01
  • Corresponding author: Bo Zhang
引用本文:

刘会, 郑宇觐, 郭丹丹, 张波. 标准切面质量控制在Ⅲ级产科超声检查胎儿结构异常检出中的应用价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(03): 337-342.

Hui Liu, Yujin Zheng, Dandan Guo, Bo Zhang. Application of standard section quality control in improving the detection rate of fetal structural abnormality in second-trimester obstetric ultrasound examination[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(03): 337-342.

目的

探讨超声标准切面质量控制在胎儿结构异常检出中的应用价值。

方法

回顾性分析2018年10月至2020年9月在中日友好医院进行Ⅲ级产科超声检查的4742例孕妇的资料,以开展标准切面质量控制的时间为分界点(2019年10月),将纳入病例分为质量控制前组(B-QC组)和质量控制后组(A-QC组),质量控制内容包括胎儿头颅、胸部、腹部、四肢及附属物的36个标准切面。计算每名孕妇图片存留数目,如图片清晰、切面完整正确则定义为标准切面符合。采用χ2检验比较2组标准切面符合率、胎儿结构异常检出率及漏误诊率有无差别。

结果

B-QC组平均每名孕妇留存超声图像47张,标准切面符合率平均为73%;A-QC组平均每名孕妇留存超声图像89张,标准切面符合率平均为89%。其中4个标准切面(左足底切面、右足底切面、膈肌冠状切面、双肾横切面)A-QC组较B-QC组检出率明显提高(84.5% vs 11.0%、84.5% vs 11.0%、91.0% vs 20.5%、92.5% vs 30.0%),差异均具有统计学意义(χ2=124.831、124.831、201.475、164.582;P均<0.001)。A-QC组胎儿双眼球水平横切面、鼻唇冠状切面、颜面部正中矢状切面符合率较B-QC组明显提高(89.0% vs 53.5%,100% vs 89.0%,94.0% vs 76.5%),差异均具有统计学意义(χ2=61.523、23.280、24.355;P均<0.001)。A-QC组左心室流出道切面、三血管切面、三血管-气管切面及胎心率测量切面的符合率较B-QC组明显提高(93.0% vs 84.0%,86.5% vs 61.0%,92.0% vs 53.5%,95.0% vs 36.0%),差异均具有统计学意义(χ2=7.959、33.588、74.769、154.044;P均<0.001)。A-QC组超声阳性检出率、胎儿结构异常检出率较B-QC组明显提高(15.7% vs 13.3%,1.3% vs 0.5%),差异具有统计学意义(χ2=7.566、7.571,P均=0.006),漏、误诊率较B-QC组降低(0.8% vs 0.9%,0.2% vs 0.3%),但2组间差异无统计学意义(χ2=1.156、0.269,P=0.604、0.282)。

结论

超声标准切面质量控制通过标准化图片留存和评估,促进了Ⅲ级产科超声检查规范化,提高了超声阳性检出率和胎儿结构异常检出率,为临床决策提供了必要依据。

Objective

To evaluate the value of standard section quality control in improving the detection rate of fetal structural abnormality.

Methods

A total of 4742 pregnant women who underwent second-trimester obstetric ultrasound examination at our hospital from October 2018 to September 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Taking the time of beginning to implement quality control as the cutoff point (October 2019), the included cases were divided into either a before-quality control (B-QC) group or an after-quality control (A-QC) group. A total of 36 standard sections of fetal skull, chest, abdomen, limbs, and appendages were analyzed. The number of images retained for each pregnant woman was calculated. If the images were clear and the sections were complete and accurate, the standard sections were defined as image coincidence. The χ2 test was used to compare the coincidence rate of standard sections, the detection rate of fetal structural abnormality, and the rates of missing diagnosis and misdiagnosis between the two groups.

Results

In the B-QC group, there were 47 ultrasonographic images per pregnant woman on average, and the coincidence rate of standard sections was 73%. In the A-QC group, there were 89 ultrasonographic images per pregnant woman on average, and the coincidence rate of standard sections was 89%. The detection rate of four standard sections (left plantar section, right plantar section, diaphragm coronal section, and double kidney transverse section) in the A-QC group was significantly higher than that in the B-QC group (84.5% vs 11.0%, 84.5% vs 11.0%, 91.0% vs 20.5%, and 92.5% vs 30.0%, χ2=124.831, 124.831, 201.475, and 164.582, respectively, P<0.001 for all). Compared with the B-QC group, the coincidence rates of the horizontal transverse section of the eyes, the coronal section of the nose and lip, and the median sagittal section of the face in the A-QC group were significantly higher than those in the B-QC group (89.0% vs 53.5%, 100% vs 89.0%, and 94.0% vs 76.5%, χ2=61.523, 23.280, and 24.355, respectively, P<0.001 for all). The coincidence rates of left ventricular outflow tract section, three-vessel section, three-vessel trachea section, and fetal heart rate section in the A-QC group were significantly higher than those in the B-QC group (93.0% vs 84.0%, 86.5% vs 61.0%, 92.0% vs 53.5%, and 95.0% vs 36.0%, χ2=7.959, 33.588, 74.769, and 154.044, respectively, P<0.001 for all). The detection rates of fetal structural abnormality and fetal malformation in the A-QC group were significantly higher than those in the B-QC group (15.7% vs 13.3% and 1.3% vs 0.5%, χ2=7.566 and 7.571, P=0.006 and 0.006, respectively). The rates of missed and misdiagnosis were decreased (0.8% vs 0.9% and 0.2% vs 0.3%, respectively), but there was no statistical difference between the two groups (χ2=1.156 and 0.269, P=0.604 and 0.282, respectively).

Conclusion

The quality control of the standard sections of ultrasound can improve the coincidence rate of the standardized image retention in grade Ⅲ obstetric ultrasound examination and increase the detection rate of fetal structural abnormality, thus providing a basis for clinical decision-making.

表1 Ⅲ级产科超声检查标准切面及观察内容
分类 观察切面 解剖结构观察内容
胎头 丘脑水平横切面、侧脑室水平横切面、小脑水平横切面 颅骨、大脑、大脑镰、透明隔腔、丘脑、第三脑室、侧脑室、小脑半球、小脑蚓部、颅后窝池
胎儿颜面部 双眼球水平横切面、鼻唇冠状切面、颜面部正中矢状切面 双眼眶、双眼球、鼻、唇
胎儿胸部及心脏 四腔心切面、左心室流出道切面、右心室流出道切面、三血管切面、三血管-气管切面、胎心率测量切面(多普勒或M型超声) 胎儿双肺、心胸比值、胎儿心轴、心尖指向、心房、心室、房间隔、室间隔、房室瓣、主动脉、肺动脉
胎儿膈肌 膈肌冠状切面(或左、右膈肌矢状切面) 膈肌的连续性、腹腔器官及心脏与膈肌的位置关系
胎儿腹部 上腹部横切面、双肾横切面(或左、右肾矢状切面)、脐动脉水平膀胱横切面、脐带腹壁入口处横切面 肝、胃、双肾、膀胱、肠道、脐带腹壁入口
胎儿脊柱 脊柱颈胸段矢状切面、脊柱腰骶段矢状切面、脊柱横切面 颈段、胸段、腰段、骶尾段脊柱及脊柱生理曲度
胎儿四肢 左、右肱骨纵切面,左、右前臂冠状或矢状切面,左、右手切面;左、右股骨纵切面,左、右小腿冠状切面,左、右足底切面 双侧上臂及其内肱骨,双侧前臂及其内尺骨、桡骨,双侧大腿及其内股骨,双侧小腿及其内胫骨、腓骨,双手及双足有无
胎盘及脐带 脐带胎盘入口切面、脐动脉血流频谱图 胎盘位置、成熟度、胎盘下缘与宫颈内口的关系、测量胎盘厚度、脐带胎盘及腹壁入口、脐带数目、评估脐动脉血流频谱
羊水量 羊水指数 超声探头垂直于水平面,测量区域不能有脐带和肢体
母体子宫及双附件 孕妇宫颈内口矢状切面 子宫壁、宫颈管、宫颈内口、双侧附件
图1 B-QC组和A-QC组Ⅲ级产科超声检查中标准切面符合率的比较 注:B-QC为质量控制前组,A-QC为质量控制后组
表2 标准切面质量控制前后Ⅲ级产科超声检查胎儿异常检出情况比较[例(%)]
表3 标准切面质量控制前后Ⅲ级产科超声检查中胎儿结构异常分布(例)
1
姚莉琴, 邹团标, 张山山, 等. 1986~2014年中国出生缺陷发生率的变化趋势及地理分布 [J]. 中国优生与遗传杂志, 2020, 28(3): 351-356
2
Salomon LJ, Alfirevic Z, Berghella V, et al. Practice guidelines for performance of the routine mid-trimester fetal ultrasound scan [J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2011, 37(1): 116-126.
3
朱霞, 陈欣林, 杨小红, 等. 开展胎儿系统超声筛查的研究意义 [J]. 中国产前诊断杂志(电子版), 2013, 5(4): 3-6
4
中国医师协会超声医师分会. 产前超声检查指南(2012) [J/CD]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2012, 9(7): 574-580.
5
荆春丽, 丁伟, 孙寒冰, 等. 超声在中孕期筛查胎儿唇裂及唇腭裂的价值 [J/CD]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2013, 10(4): 286-291.
6
李胜利, 罗国阳. 胎儿畸形产前超声诊断学 [M]. 2版. 北京: 科学出版社, 2017: 91-136.
7
Cargill Y, Morin L. No. 223-content of a complete routine second trimester obstetrical ultrasound examination and report [J]. J Obstet Gynaecolo Can, 2017, 39(8): e144-e149.
8
李胜利, 文华轩. 中孕期胎儿系统超声检查切面及临床意义 [J/CD]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2010, 7(3): 366-381.
9
Grandjean H, Larroque D, Levi S. The performance of routine ultrasonographic screening of pregnancies in the eurofetus study [J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1999, 181(2): 446-454.
10
李国政, 庄松岩, 李智瑶, 等. 胎儿肢体及手足畸形产前超声诊断及图像分析 [J/CD]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2014, 11(1): 53-60.
[1] 戴飞, 赵博文, 潘美, 彭晓慧, 陈冉, 田园诗, 狄敏. 胎儿心脏超声定量多参数对主动脉缩窄胎儿心脏结构及功能的诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(10): 950-958.
[2] 章建全, 程杰, 陈红琼, 闫磊. 采用ACR-TIRADS评估甲状腺消融区的调查研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(10): 966-971.
[3] 罗辉, 方晔. 品管圈在提高甲状腺结节细针穿刺检出率中的应用[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(10): 972-977.
[4] 杨忠, 时敬业, 邓学东, 姜纬, 殷林亮, 潘琦, 梁泓, 马建芳, 王珍奇, 张俊, 董姗姗. 产前超声在胎儿22q11.2 微缺失综合征中的应用价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 852-858.
[5] 包艳娟, 杨小红, 张涛, 赵胜, 张莉. 阴道斜隔综合征的超声诊断与临床分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 859-864.
[6] 孙佳丽, 金琳, 沈崔琴, 陈晴晴, 林艳萍, 李朝军, 徐栋. 机器人辅助超声引导下经皮穿刺的体外实验研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 884-889.
[7] 杜祖升, 赵博文, 张帧, 潘美, 彭晓慧, 陈冉, 毛彦恺. 应用二维斑点追踪成像技术评估孕周及心尖方向对中晚孕期正常胎儿左心房应变的影响[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 843-851.
[8] 史学兵, 谢迎东, 谢霓, 徐超丽, 杨斌, 孙帼. 声辐射力弹性成像对不可切除肝细胞癌门静脉癌栓患者放射治疗效果的评价[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(08): 778-784.
[9] 张商迪, 赵博文, 潘美, 彭晓慧, 陈冉, 毛彦恺, 陈阳, 袁华, 陈燕. 中晚孕期胎儿心房内径定量评估心房比例失调胎儿心脏畸形的价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(08): 785-793.
[10] 王益佳, 周青, 曹省, 袁芳洁, 周妍, 张梅. 中国经胸超声心动图检查存图及报告质控现状分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 657-663.
[11] 周易, 张红梅, 尹立雪, 杨浩, 付培. 四川省超声医学质量控制指标动态变化趋势分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 664-670.
[12] 顾莉莉, 姜凡. 安徽省超声产前筛查切面图像质量现状调查情况及分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 671-674.
[13] 王晓娜, 张宁, 宋伟, 杨明, 李丽, 薛红元. 河北省超声医学质量管理与控制现状分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 675-680.
[14] 张亚庆, 黄旴宁, 许珊珊, 刘小蓝. 海南省二级与三级医院超声医学质量控制指标分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 681-685.
[15] 刘畅, 蒋洁, 胥雪冬, 崔立刚, 王淑敏, 陈文. 北京市海淀区医疗机构甲状腺超声检查及TIRADS分类基线调查[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 693-697.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?