Objective To explore the advantages of Argus method by comparing the accuracy and timeliness of Argus and artificial methods for measuring femoral head necrosis area in MRI scanning.Methods Totally 17 patients (31 hips) were measured with Argus and artificial methods respectively for the necrosis area, and then the measuring results and time were compared, and the correlation was investigated between the results and the patients' pain degree, along with that between the results and the extent of femoral head collapse.Results The necrosis area ratios determined by Argus and artificial methods were (33.5±4.08)%and (34.6±4.06)%respectively, with no statistical difference between the ratios (P>0.05). The time consumed by artificial method was (21.3 ±3.62)min, significantly longer than (7.89 ±1.03)min by Argus method, with P<0.001. Regression analysis proved that the necrosis areas were positively correlated with the patients' pain degree, and the correlation coefficient by Argus method was 0.807 8, more than 0.740 9 by artificial method. The femoral heads of 11 cases(16 hips) collapsed in the follow-up period, the necrosis areas were positively correlated with the patients collapse level, but the correlation coefficient by Argus method was 0.783 8, more than 0.726 7 by artificial method.Conclusion Argus method gains high accuracy and timeliness when used in MRI scanning of femoral head necrosis area, and thus is worth popularizing clinically.%目的:对比分析磁共振扫描采用Argus法和人工法测量股骨头坏死面积的准确性和时效性,以探讨Argus测量法的临床应用优势.方法:对某院收治的17例(31髋)股骨头坏死患者的坏死面积分别进行Argus法和人工法测量,比较测量结果及所需时间,同时考察2种评定结果与患者疼痛程度及股骨头塌陷程度的相关性.结果:人工法和Argus法所测得的股骨头坏死面积比分别为(33.5±4.08)%和(34.6±4.06)%,2组结果之间无统计学差异(P>0.05);人工法耗时显著长于Argus法((21.3±3.62)min>(7.89±1.03)min,P<0.001).经回归分析,2组坏死面积均与患者疼痛程度呈直线正相关,但Argus法所得数据相关系数大于人工法(0.807 8>0.746 9);此外,随访期发生股骨头塌陷11例(16髋),2组坏死面积均与患者的塌陷程度呈直线正相关,但Argus法所得数据相关系数大于人工法(0.783 8>0.726 7).结论:磁共振扫描采用Argus法测量股骨头坏死面积的精确度和时效性高,值得在临床推广.
展开▼
