Objective To explore the application value of prenatal ultrasound in the diagnosis of congenital valgus foot. Methods To select thirty-eight children (44 affected feet) with congenital horseshoe varus treated in our hospital from January 2016 to January 2019 as the observation group, and the screening time is 20 to 26 weeks of pregnancy. Another 35 cases of fetuses (70 feet) who were normal in our hospital during the same period were selected) as a control group. Color ultrasound diagnostic equipment was used to measure the foot length (FL) and foot width (FW) of the two groups, and the FL / FW value was calculated the children's disease severity was evaluated using the Dimeglio method, and their relationship with FL, The correlation between FW and FL / FW. The clinical value of FL, FW and FL / FW in the diagnosis of congenital varus equivatus were analyzed by ROC method. Results Compared with the control group, the children in the observation group had smaller FL and FL / FW values, while the FW values were larger, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05); there were differences in FL, FW, and FL/FW between different Dimeglio grades. All were statistically significant (P<0.055). FL and FL/FW values gradually decreased with the increase of Dimeglio classification (P<0.05), while FW values gradually increased with the increase of Dimeglio classification (P<0.05); Spearman analysis showed that FW was positively correlated with Dimeglio score, while FL and FL/FW were negatively correlated with Dimeglio score (P<0.05); ROC curve analysis showed that FL, FW and FL/FW diagnosed congenital valgus. The areas under the curve are 0.723 (95% CI: 0.591 to 0.926, P = 0.005), 0.661 (95% CI: 0.522 to 0.849, P=0.017), and 0.835 (95% CI: 0.709 to 0.984, P<0.001). The best diagnostic cutoff values are 4.01, 2.49 and 1.92, respectively, and the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity are 80.73 and 81.26, 81.07 and 78.93, 90.13, and 90.74. FL / FW has the largest diagnostic value for congenital valgus. Conclusions Prenatal ultrasound has important reference value for clinically accurate diagnosis of congenital horseshoe varus.
Key words
Congenital horseshoe varus /
/
/
Prenatal /
ultrasound diagnosis /
/
/
Application value
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] 李育泉, 钟彰宁, 廖世杰, 等. Ponseti方法治疗幼儿先天性马蹄内翻足疗效分析[J]. 中国骨与关节杂志, 2018, 11(6):1073-1074. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-252X.2018.06.012.
[2] 邵芳. 胎儿肢体畸形产前超声诊断价值研究[J]. 影像研究与医学应用, 2018, 2(2)：834-835.
[3] 刘宏雄.产前超声检查胎儿肢体畸形临床诊断价值研究[J].陕西医学杂志, 2016,45(7):829-831. DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1000-7377.2016.07.22.
[4] 吕国荣, 刘云萍, 吴家祥. 产前超声五趾-跖-跟骨足底平面筛查足畸形的价值[J]. 中国医学影像技术, 2015, 31(7). DOI：10.13929/j.1003-3289.2015.07.032.
[5] 中国医师协会超声医师分会．产前超声和超声造影检查指南［M］.北京:人民军医出版社，2013：9-12．
[6] 徐辉, 刘巍, 沈阳. 改良Ponseti法在先天性马蹄内翻足矫形治疗中的临床应用[J]. 中华解剖与临床杂志, 2018, 23(5):438-441. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-7041.2018.05.015
[7] 蒋雪飞, 范秀英, 谢学文, 等.“动静结合”治疗婴幼儿先天性马蹄内翻足的临床研究[J].中医药导报, 2019, 25(2):98-100. DOI：10.13862/j.cnki.cn43-1446/r.2019.02.025.
[8] 李忠民. Bensahel功能疗法治疗先天性马蹄内翻足76例疗效评价[J].健康之路, 2017, 3(5):529-530.
[9] 廖凤恒, 吴彩平, 陈梅. 超声诊断胎儿先天性马蹄内翻足的声像图特征和临床价值[J].临床医学工程, 2017, 13(8):950-951. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-4659.2014.08.0950.
[10]安鹏, 张加琪, 许金枝, 等. Cantrell五联征四例产前超声特征分析[J]. 中华全科医师杂志, 2018, 17(11):926-928. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7368.2018.11.016.
[11]焦阳,杜冬,董发进,等. 产前超声诊断胎儿肢体畸形的技术探讨[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2015,33(4):485-487. DOI: 10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2015.04.026.
[12] Ludwin A, Martins WP, Ludwin I. Uterine cavity imaging, volume estimation and quantification of degree of deformity using automatic volume calculation: description of technique[J]. Ult Obs Gynecol, 2017, 50(1):138-140. DOI: 10.1002/uog.15890.
[13] Andjelkov K, Llull R, Colic M, et al. Aesthetic improvement of undeveloped calves after treatment of congenital clubfoot deformity[J]. Aesth Surg J, 2018, 38(4):502-506. DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjy046.
[14]李学会, 苏建芬, 周意园, 等. 产前定量超声诊断先天性马蹄内翻足的临床价值研究[J].中国超声医学杂志,2019,35(6):535-538. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-0101.2019.06.018.
[15]黄婷婷,吕国荣,何韶铮,等.产前定量超声对马蹄内翻足的诊断价值[J].中华超声影像学杂志,2017,26(9):799-802. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1004-4477.2017.09.013.
PDF(1280 KB)
