端粒酶活性与癌胚抗原诊断恶性腹水114例对比分析  

The comparison on the value of diagnosis in malignant ascites between telomerase activity and CEA

作　　者：杜新生[1] 敖亚洲[1] 薛承岩[1] 

机构地区：[1]承德医学院附属医院肿瘤内科,承德067000

出　　处：《陕西医学杂志》2005年第9期1132-1134,共3页Shaanxi Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的:比较端粒酶活性(TA)和癌胚抗原(CEA)指标诊断恶性腹水的价值。方法:良、恶性腹水各57例,应用端粒重复序列扩增-杂交-酶联免疫分析技术检测TA、磁性抗体分离酶联免疫测定技术检测CEA。比较TA与CEA诊断恶性腹水的特异性、敏感性、预测值、准确性等指标的差别。结果:腹水标本检测TA与CEA的阳性结果:恶性腹水组分别为48例(84.2%)与33例(57.9%)、良性腹水组分别为:4例(7.0%)与6例(10.5%),组间各指标阳性结果均具有极显著性差异(P<0.01)。TA与CEA诊断恶性腹水的特异性、敏感性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、准确性分别为:93%与89.5%,84.2%与57.9%,92.3%与84.6%,91.4%与57.9%,87%与73.7%。结论:TA是良好的诊断恶性腹水指标,其诊断价值高于CEA。Objective： To compare the value of diagnosis between telomerase activity （TA） and CEA in diagnosing malignant ascites. Methods： Telomeroc repeat amplification protocol- hybridismenzyme-linked immunosorbent assay （TRAP-Hyb-ELISA） and magnetic antibody immunoenzymetric assay （MAIA） were used to detect TA and CEA in 57 cases of malignant ascites （malignant group） and 57 cases of benign ascites （benign group）, The difference of the value between TA and CEA in the diagnosis of malignant ascites was analysed. Results： The positive results of TA and CEA were 48（84.2%） and 33 （57.9%） in malignant group and 4（7.0%） and 6（10. 5%） in benign group. The difference between the two groups bad statistical meaning （P〈0. 001）. The specificities, sensitivities, positive predictive values, negative predictive values and accuracies of TA and CEA were 93% and 89.5%, 84.2% and 57.9%, 92. 3% and 84. 6%, 91. 4% and 57. 9% and 87% and 73. 7%. Conclusion： TA is a useful index for the diagnosis of malignant ascites and its value is higher than CEA.

关 键 词：腹水/诊断 端粒末端转移酶/诊断应用 癌胚抗原/诊断应用 对比研究 癌胚抗原(CEA) 恶性腹水 抗原诊断 端粒酶活性 对比分析 端粒重复序列扩增 

分 类 号：R181.3[医药卫生—流行病学] R442.5[医药卫生—公共卫生与预防医学]