[1]杨雅萍.超声定量评估腹直肌间距诊断腹直肌分离的价值[J].医学信息,2024,37(19):142-144,155.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2024.19.029]
　YANG Yaping.Value of Ultrasound Quantitative Evaluation of Inter-recti Distance in the Diagnosis of Diastasis Recti Abdominis[J].Journal of Medical Information,2024,37(19):142-144,155.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2024.19.029]
点击复制

超声定量评估腹直肌间距诊断腹直肌分离的价值()

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
37卷
期数:
2024年19期
页码:
142-144,155
栏目:
诊疗技术
出版日期:
2024-10-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Value of Ultrasound Quantitative Evaluation of Inter-recti Distance in the Diagnosis of Diastasis Recti Abdominis
文章编号:
1006-1959（2024）19-0142-04
作者:
杨雅萍
兴国县妇幼保健院超声科，江西 兴国 342400
Author(s):
YANG Yaping
Department of Ultrasound,Xingguo County Maternal and Child Health Hospital,Xingguo 342400,Jiangxi,China
关键词:
腹直肌分离; 腹直肌间距; 超声定量检测; 脐上方; 脐水平; 脐下方
Keywords:
Diastasis recti abdominis; Inter-rectidistance; Ultrasonic quantitative detection; Above the navel; Umbilicuslevel; Below the navel
分类号:
R445
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2024.19.029
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 研究超声定量评估腹直肌间距（IRD）对腹直肌分离（DRA）的诊断价值。方法 以2020年1月-2023年1月兴国县妇幼保健院收治的50例DRA女性为研究对象，设为DRA组，另取同期50名健康女性设为非DRA组，两组均开展超声IRD定量检测，比较DRA组与非DRA组的IRD测量结果，统计不同DRA类型（脐上方分离型、脐水平分离型、脐下方分离型、开放式分离型）最宽处IRD值，绘制受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线，分析超声定量评估IRD对DRA的诊断效能。结果 DRA组脐上方、脐水平、脐下方IRD值均大于非DRA组（P＜0.05）；DRA患者中，最宽处IRD值由大到小依次为开放式分离型＞脐上分离型＞脐下分离型＞脐水平分离型（P＜0.05）。ROC曲线显示，超声定量评估IRD对DRA具有确切诊断价值（AUC＞0.5，P＜0.05），其中，脐上方、脐水平、脐下方IRD值诊断DRA的AUC的分别为0.796、0.783、0.809。结论 超声定量评估IRD对DRA具有确切诊断价值。
Abstract:
Objective To study the diagnostic value of ultrasound quantitative evaluation of inter-recti distance (IRD) indiastasis recti abdominis(DRA).Methods A total of 50 DRA women admitted to Xingguo County Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2020 to January 2023 were selected as the DRA group, and 50 healthy women in the same period were selected as the non-DRA group. Ultrasound IRD quantitative detection was carried out in both groups. The IRD measurement results of DRA group and non-DRA group were compared. The IRD values at the widest part of different DRA types (supraumbilical separation type, umbilical horizontal separation type, subumbilical separation type and open separation type) were counted. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn to analyze the diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound quantitative evaluation of IRD for DRA.Results The IRD values above the umbilicus, at the umbilicus level and below the umbilicus in the DRA group were higher than those in the non-DRA group (P<0.05). In DRA patients, the IRD values at the widest range were in the order of open separation type>umbilical separation type>subumbilical separation type>umbilical horizontal separation type(P<0.05).ROC curve showed that the quantitative evaluation of IRD by ultrasound had a definite diagnostic value for DRA (AUC>0.5, P<0.05), the AUC of IRD values above the umbilicus, at the umbilicus level, and below the umbilicus in the diagnosis of DRA were 0.796,0.783, and 0.809, respectively.Conclusion Ultrasound quantitative evaluation of IRD has a definite diagnostic value for DRA.

参考文献/References:

[1]黄淼,徐飞,尹爱桃,等.二维超声联合SWE技术在孕产妇腹直肌评估中的应用价值[J].昆明医科大学学报,2023,44(9):55-61.[2]谢双,杨明荣,蔡迁,等.高频超声检查用于评估电刺激治疗后产后腹直肌分离变化的临床价值[J].西部医学,2023,35(4):609-612.[3]Wang Y.High-frequency ultrasonography for the evaluation of changes in postpartum rectus abdominis diastasis treated with electrical stimulation[J].Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology,2019,30(2):54-62.[4]Theodorsen NM,Strand LI,B?尴 K.Effect of pelvic floor and transversusabdominis muscle contraction on inter-rectus distance in postpartum women:a cross-sectional experimental study[J].Physiotherapy,2019,105(3):315-320.[5]Wu L,Gu Y,Gu Y,et al.Diastasis recti abdominis in adult women based on abdominal computed tomography imaging: Prevalence, risk factors and its impact on life[J].J Clin Nurs,2021,30(3-4):518-527.[6]岑婉仪,龚宇萱,黄镇东,等.高频超声观察不同训练动作对产后腹直肌分离间距的即时影响[J].中国组织工程研究,2023,27(32):5091-5096.[7]孙秀丽,李环,苏园园,等.产后腹直肌分离诊断与治疗的专家共识[J].中国妇产科临床杂志,2021,22(2):220-221.[8]Keshwani N,Mathur S,McLean L.Relationship BetweenInterrectus Distance and Symptom Severity in Women With Diastasis Recti Abdominis in the Early Postpartum Period[J].PhysTher,2018,98(3):182-190.[9]Beamish N,Green N,Nieuwold E,et al.Differences in Linea Alba Stiffness and Linea Alba Distortion Between Women With and Without Diastasis Recti Abdominis:The Impact of Measurement Site and Task[J].J Orthop Sports Phys Ther,2019,49(9):656-665.[10]Benjamin DR,Frawley HC,Shields N,et al.Relationship between diastasis of the rectus abdominis muscle (DRAM) and musculoskeletal dysfunctions, pain and quality of life: a systematic review[J].Physiotherapy,2019,105(1):24-34.[11]刘洪,王大莲,李嘉舟,等.超声评价围产期妇女腹壁肌群动态变化的临床价值及影像学特点分析[J].湖南师范大学学报(医学版),2022,19(3):126-130.[12]南淑良,刘菲菲,刘莉,等.超声评估产后早期腹直肌分离与盆底功能障碍性疾病发生关系的研究[J].中国临床医学影像杂志,2022,33(3):206-209.[13]Bixo L,Sandblom G,Stackelberg O,et al.P075is Inter-Recti Distance (IRD) A Reliable Proxy for Evaluation of Functional Impairments Associated With Diastasis Recti Abdominis (DRA)?[J].British Journal of Surgery,2021,108(8):217-223.[14]陈刚,吴清.高频超声对产妇腹直肌和耻骨联合分离的预测价值[J].贵州医科大学学报,2022,47(2):229-233,248.[15]蔡留芸,邓芯茹,陆彦旭,等.超声评估初产妇产后6周腹直肌分离情况及影响因素[J].中国医学影像学杂志,2021,29(11):1134-1138.[16]Zhang HY,Li XY,Lu H,et al.The high frequency ultrasonographic features of rectus diastasis and their relationships with the modes of delivery in postpartum women[J].Chinese Journal of Ultrasonography,2020,29(11):982-986.[17]胡宇意,李秀美,刘燕青,等.超声检查在产后女性腹直肌分离及康复治疗效果评估中的应用分析[J].中国医学装备,2022,19(9):75-79.[18]张明珠,牛敏昌,刘菲菲,等.高频超声评价产后女性腹直肌分离类型的初步研究[J].中国临床医学影像杂志,2022,33(3):201-205.[19]王洁,王鑫璐,顾娇娇,等.超声检查评估产后早期女性腹直肌及盆底结构与功能[J].中国介入影像与治疗学,2020,17(1):39-42.[20]Amro C,Mcauliffe PB,Niu EF,et al.OC-081 Diastasis Recti Repair-Development of A Patient Reported Outcome Measure Through Qualitative Assessment[J].British Journal of Surgery,2023,110(2):80-84.

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01