切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华诊断学电子杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 06 ›› Issue (02) : 124 -128. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2018.02.015

所属专题: 文献

临床研究

凝血分子标志物检测在脑梗死早期诊断中的应用
宋长广1, 刘文国1,(), 穆爱君1   
  1. 1. 252800 高唐县人民医院神经内科
  • 收稿日期:2017-11-02 出版日期:2018-05-26
  • 通信作者: 刘文国

Application of detection of coagulation molecular markers in early diagnosis of cerebral infarction

Changguang Song1, Wenguo Liu1,(), Aijun Mu1   

  1. 1. Departmant of Neurology, the People's Hospital of Gaotang County, Gaotang 252800, China
  • Received:2017-11-02 Published:2018-05-26
  • Corresponding author: Wenguo Liu
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Liu Wenguo, Email:
引用本文:

宋长广, 刘文国, 穆爱君. 凝血分子标志物检测在脑梗死早期诊断中的应用[J]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2018, 06(02): 124-128.

Changguang Song, Wenguo Liu, Aijun Mu. Application of detection of coagulation molecular markers in early diagnosis of cerebral infarction[J]. Chinese Journal of Diagnostics(Electronic Edition), 2018, 06(02): 124-128.

目的

探讨血清凝血酶原片段1+2(F1+2)、血小板球蛋白(β-TG)、血栓调节蛋白(TM)和D-二聚体(D-D)联合检测在脑梗死早期诊断中的临床应用。

方法

采用病例-对照研究,病例组:选择2015年1月至2017年6月就诊于高唐县人民医院神经内科且诊断为脑梗死的患者,共125例。根据脑梗死患者颅脑CT或磁共振(MRI)病灶大小分组:大梗死组42例,中梗死组40例,小梗死组43例;按照美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分分型:重度组26例,中度组55例,轻度组44例;对照组选择50例门诊健康体检者。采用双抗体夹心酶联免疫法(ELISA)测定F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D水平。采用单因素方差分析比较各组间凝血分子水平差异,通过受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线下面积(AUC)比较各指标在脑梗死早期诊断中的价值。

结果

对照组、小梗死组、中梗死组、大梗死组,各组间血清F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D水平差异有统计学意义(F=62.42,43.26,56.73,22.34;均P<0.01)。病例组血清F1+2[小梗死组(2.67±0.24)nmol/L,中梗死组(2.84±0.26)nmol/L,大梗死组(3.19±0.30)nmol/L]、β-TG[小梗死组(61.83±5.64)μg/L,中梗死组(73.68±6.47)μg/L,大梗死组(81.32±7.75)μg/L]、TM[小梗死组(67.40±5.82)μg/L,中梗死组(74.84±6.37)μg/L,大梗死组(85.72±7.64)μg/L]、D-D水平[小梗死组(2 541.10±226.24)μg/L,中梗死组(2 658.38±232.01)μg/L,大梗死组(2 724.47±256.35)μg/L]高于对照组[(0.27±0.02)nmol/L, (3.74±0.32)μg/L,(5.75±0.45)μg/L, (106.10±81.24)μg/L],差异有统计学意义[小梗死组(q=18.62,23.45,12.76,28.56;均P<0.01),中梗死组(q=19.59,25.67,13.83,31.21;均P<0.01),大梗死组(q=21.24,26.38,14.12,31.97;均P<0.01)]。病例组血清F1+2[轻度组(2.42±0.21)nmol/L,中度组(2.77±0.25)nmol/L,重度组(2.98±0.27)nmol/L]、β-TG[轻度组(62.34±6.02)μg/L,中度组(78.17±6.94)μg/L,重度组(80.76±7.62)μg/L], TM [轻度组(71.93±6.34)μg/L,中度组(76.72±7.18)μg/L,重度组(88.94±8.62)μg/L], D-D水平[轻度组(2 583.37±237.04)μg/ L,中度组(2 667.46±249.33)μg/L,重度组(2 749.29±260.15)μg/L]高于对照组,差异有统计学意义[轻度组(q=16.58,21.22,12.37,21.64;均P<0.01),中度组(q=18.32,24.67,16.44,25.73;均P<0.01),重度组(q=22.47,32.53,19.59,34.65;均P<0.01)]。病例组各组间血清F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D水平比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D诊断脑梗死的敏感度及特异度分别为78.51%、86.73%, 82.62%、85.74%, 92.84%、86.22%, 67.46%、80.81%;F1+2与β-TG、TM、D-D联合检测后敏感度及特异度为96.32%、98.63%。F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D单项检测的ROC曲线AUC分别为0.854,0.823,0.876,0.781,TM曲线的AUC最大。

结论

联合测定血清F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D水平,有助于为脑梗死的早期诊断提供实验依据。

Objective

To explore the clinical significance of combined detection of serum prothrombin fragment 1+ 2 (F1+ 2), beta-thromboboglobulin (β-TG), thrombomodulin (TM) and D-Dimer (D-D) in the early diagnosis of cerebral infarction.

Methods

The case group selected 125 cases from the patients who were diagnosed as cerebral infarction in neurology department of the Gaotang County People's Hospital from January 2015 to June 2017. The patients with cerebral infarction were grouped according to the sizes of head CT or MRI lesions. There were 42 cases in the large infarction group, 40 cases in the middle infarction group and 43 cases in the small infarction group. According to the National Institutes of Health (NIHSS) score on the degree of nerve function defect: there were 26 cases in the severe group, 55 cases in the moderate group and 44 cases in the mild group. Fifty cases of health check-up outpatient were selected as control group. The levels of F1+ 2, β-TG, TM and D-D were measured by double antibody sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). A single factor variance analysis was used to compare the levels of coagulation molecules among different groups, and the values of each index in the early diagnosis of cerebral infarction were compared under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC).

Results

The serum levels of F1+ 2, β-TG, TM and D-D were statistically significant in the coutrol group, small infarct group, middle infarct group and large infarct group (F=62.42, 43.26, 56.73, 22.34; P<0.01). The serum levels of F1+ 2 [small infarct group (2.67±0.24)nmol/L, middle infarct group (2.84±0.26)nmol/L, large infarct group (3.19±0.30)nmol/L], β-TG[small infarct group (61.83±5.64)μg/L, middle infarct group (73.68±6.47)μg/L, large infarct group (81.32±7.75)μg/L], TM [small infarct group (67.40±5.82)μg/L, middle infarct group (74.84±6.37)μg/L, large infarct group (85.72±7.64)μg/L] and D-D [small infarct group (2 541.10±226.24)μg/L, middle infarct group (2 658.38±232.01)μg/L, large infarct group (2 724.47±256.35)μg/L] in each group were higher than those in control group [(0.27±0.02)nmol/L, (3.74±0.32)μg/L, (5.75±0.45)μg/L, (106.10±81.24)μg/L], the differences were statistically significant [small infarct group (q=18.62, 23.45, 12.76, 28.56; P<0.01), middle infarct group(q=19.59, 25.67, 13.83, 31.21; P<0.01), large infarct group(q=21.24, 26.38, 14.12, 31.97; P<0.01)] .The serum levels of F1+ 2 [mild group (2.42±0.21)nmol/L, moderate group (2.77±0.25)nmol/L, severe group (2.98±0.27)nmol/L], β-TG [mild group (62.34±6.02)μg/L, moderate group (78.17±6.94)μg/L, severe group (80.76±7.62)μg/L], TM [mild group (71.93±6.34)μg/L, moderate group (76.72±7.18)μg/L, severe group (88.94±8.62)μg/L], D-D [mild group (2 583.37±237.04)μg/L, moderate group (2 667.46±249.33)μg/L, severe group (2 749.29±260.15)μg/L] were higher than those in the control group [mild group (q=16.58, 21.22, 12.37, 21.64; P<0.01), moderate group (q=18.32, 24.67, 16.44, 25.73; P<0.01), severe group (q=22.47, 32.53, 19.59, 34.65; P<0.01)]. There were no significant differences in the levels of serum F1+ 2, β-TG, TM and D-D in the case groups(P>0.05). The sensitivity and specificity of F1+ 2 were 78.51% and 86.73%. The sensitivity and specificity of β-TG were 82.62%, 85.74%. The sensitivity and specificity of TM were 92.84%, 86.22%. The sensitivity and specificity of D-D were 67.46%, 80.81%. The sensitivity and specificity of F1+ 2, β-TG, TM and D-D were 96.32%, 98.63%. The ROC curves of the single item of F1+ 2, β-TG, TM and D-D were 0.854, 0.823, 0.876, 0.781, and the AUC of TM curve was the largest.

Conclusion

The combined determination of serum F1+ 2, β-TG, TM and D-D levels can provide an experimental basis for early diagnosis of cerebral infarction.

表1 不同梗死体积脑梗死组和对照组血清F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D水平比较(±s)
表2 不同病情严重程度脑梗死组和对照组血清F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D水平比较(±s)
表3 F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D单项检测脑梗死的AUC、95%可信区间及截断点
图1 血清F1+2、β-TG、TM、D-D单项检测脑梗死的ROC曲线图
[1]
中华医学会神经外科学会.各类脑血管疾病诊断要点及临床功能缺损程度评分标准[J].中华神经科杂志,1996,29(6):379-383.
[2]
孙占用,荀丽颖,吕佩源.X线计算机体层摄影术、磁共振成像和脑磁图描记术在急性脑梗死诊断中的应用[J/CD].中华诊断学电子杂志,2014,2(1):9-16.
[3]
李杰,刘娟.凝血酶原片段1+2在心脑血管疾病中的临床意义[J/CD].世界最新医学信息文摘(电子版),2016,16(18):62-63.
[4]
朱渝军,黄显凯.严重多发伤患者血浆凝血酶原片段1+2、D-二聚体血栓调节蛋白水平的变化及与DIC的关系[J].中国急救医学,2008,28(4):289-292.
[5]
徐耀铭,齐晓飞,吴占福,等.急性脑梗死患者OCSP分型与凝血指标变化相关性研究的临床意义[J].国际老年医学杂志,2015,26(5):198-201.
[6]
吴京凤,杨媛华,庞宝森.慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重患者血浆血小板因子4及β凝血球蛋白水平的变化及其意义[J].中华医学杂志,2013,93(18):1378-1382.
[7]
Kaplan KL, Owen J.Plasma levels of beta-thromboglobulin and platelet factor 4 as indices of platelet activation in vivo[J].Blood,1981,57 (2):199-202.
[8]
Olivot JM,Labreuche J,DeBroucker T,et al.Thrombormodulin gene polymorphisms in brain infarction and mortality after stroke[J].Neuro,2008,255(4):514-519.
[9]
王建茹,冯忠军,李娜,等.急性脑梗塞患者血IL-1、IL-6、TNF、TM水平的变化及临床意义[J].中国免疫学杂志,2004,20(6): 431-432.
[10]
Borawski J, Mys′liwiec M.Soluble thrombomodulin:a marker of endothelial injury,an antithrombotic agent, or both? [J].Med Sci Monit,2001,7(4):785-786.
[11]
张蕾,孙旦澄,张燕香,等.脑梗死和心肌梗死患者血栓调节蛋白的检测及临床应用[J].检验医学,2005,20(1):40-41.
[12]
周惠,李玲.糖尿病患者血栓调节蛋白测定结果分析[J].广西医学,2003,25(7):1129-1131.
[13]
刘群,赵冬,刘军,等.中国ST段抬高急性冠脉综合征诊疗现况调查[J].中华心血管病杂志,2009,37(3):213-217.
[14]
薛晔霞,张柱,任丽珏,等.糖尿病视网膜病变患者血浆血栓调节蛋白和D-二聚体水平的研究[J].中国糖尿病杂志,2014,22(3):224-226.
[15]
张琦,牛文彦,李晓亮,等.急性脑梗死患者血浆Hcy、eNOS、sTM、hs-CRP、vWF的变化及意义[J].山东医药,2015,55(1):17-19.
[16]
樊有龙,徐建民,王外梅,等.急性脑梗塞患者AECA、TM检测的临床意义[J].实用临床医学,2005,6(3):12-14.
[17]
王白石,李东阳,陈兴国,等.D-二聚体、纤维蛋白原等联合检测在诊断急性心肌梗死中的应用研究[J].中国实验诊断学,2017,21(2):205-207.
[18]
刘付明军,颜沛云,苏晓明,等.联合检测血清D-二聚体、cTnI及Myo在急性心肌梗死中的诊断价值[J].国际检验医学杂志,2014,35(16):2247-2248.
[19]
Bayes-Genis A, Mateo J, Santal M, et al.D-Dimer is an early diagnostic marker of coronary ischemia in patients with chest pain[J].Am Heart J,2000,140 (3):379-384.
[20]
王伦善,贾建安,黄其峰,等.FDP和D-二聚体在急性脑梗塞和深静脉血栓中的诊断价值[J].临床输血与检验,2016,18(2):133-136.
[21]
王德才.同型半胱氨酸和D-二聚体在急性脑梗塞患者中的检测和临床应用[J].中国继续医学教育,2015,7(15):16.
[1] 刘欢颜, 华扬, 贾凌云, 赵新宇, 刘蓓蓓. 颈内动脉闭塞病变管腔结构和血流动力学特征分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 809-815.
[2] 肖志满, 龚煜, 谢景凌, 刘斌伟. 上下肢关节镜手术后患者下肢深静脉血栓发生的对比研究[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 601-606.
[3] 赵之栋, 李众利. 骨关节炎早期诊治的研究进展[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 689-693.
[4] 王璐, 樊杨. 子宫内膜癌相关生物标志物研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 511-516.
[5] 黄应雄, 叶子, 蒋鹏, 詹红, 姚陈, 崔冀. 急性肠系膜静脉血栓形成致透壁性肠坏死的临床危险因素分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 413-421.
[6] 李智铭, 郭晨明, 庄晓晨, 候雪琴, 高军喜. 早期乳腺癌超声造影定性及定量指标的对比研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 639-643.
[7] 顾睿祈, 方洪生, 蔡国响. 循环肿瘤DNA检测在结直肠癌诊治中的应用与进展[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 453-459.
[8] 宋碧萱, 郭海川, 韩子钰, 周瑞娟, 李承思, 姬晨妮. 开放式楔形胫骨高位截骨术后下肢深静脉血栓形成的危险因素分析及预测列线图的构建[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(04): 226-232.
[9] 许秀兰, 朱建建. 血压变异性与伴H型高血压的急性脑梗死患者预后不良的临床关系分析[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 199-204.
[10] 马丽. CT灌注联合血管成像预测急性脑梗死患者近期神经功能预后的价值分析[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 229-234.
[11] 朱敏, 李法强. 血清GFAP、UCH-L1联合VILIP-1水平对急性脑梗死神经功能预后不良的预测研究[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 452-457.
[12] 李秦鹏, 王其涛, 朱媛媛, 周琦, 刘笑言, 许勇. 颈动脉彩色多普勒超声、颈部CT血管成像及脑部CT灌注成像在脑梗死并发颈动脉狭窄患者中的应用研究[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 482-488.
[13] 邱甜, 杨苗娟, 胡波, 郭毅, 何奕涛. 亚低温治疗脑梗死机制的研究进展[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 518-521.
[14] 尹琛俊, 张喆, 李晓明. 卵圆孔未闭相关血栓形成机制的研究进展[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 307-311.
[15] 李安, 张秀萍, 白波, 赵阳, 薛国芳, 李东芳. 主动脉夹层术后并发神经系统并发症二例及文献复习[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 373-378.
阅读次数
全文


摘要