机构地区:[1]解放军总医院南楼心血管二科,北京市100853
出 处:《中华老年医学杂志》2007年第6期413-416,共4页Chinese Journal of Geriatrics
摘 要:目的评价慢性心力衰竭(心衰)和心衰合并下呼吸道感染患者的血栓风险。方法入选51例慢性心衰患者(CHF组)、26例慢性心衰合并下呼吸道感染患者(CHF+RTI组)、32例健康对照者(对照组),ELISA法检测血浆凝血酶-抗凝血酶Ⅲ复合物(TAT)、凝血酶原片段1+2(F1+2)、D-二聚体(D-D)、纤溶酶-抗纤溶酶复合物(PAP)、β-血小板球蛋白(β-TG)和血小板因子4(PF4)。结果3组的6种血栓标志物存在差异,CHF组的各项指标均高于对照组,TAT、F1+2、D-D、PAP、β-TG、PF4分别为(6.29±2.02)与(3.59±1.74)μg/L、(1.43±0.56)与(0.86±0.29)nmol/L、(1.57±0.66)与(0.46±0.28)mg/L、(397.0±117.7)与(238.1±58.1)、(30.84±11.37)与(23.10±7.72)μg/L、(10.28±4.03)与(7.40±3.07)μg/L,差异有统计学意义(均为P〈0.01)。CHF组除PAP与CHF+RTI组[分别为(397.0±117.7)与(408.8±87.7)μg/L3比较差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05)外,其余5项指标均显著低于CHF-RTI组[TAT:(6.29±2.02)与(8.14±2.51)μg/L,P〈0.01;F1+2:(1.43±0.56)与(1.83±0.52)nmol/L,P〈0.01;D-D:(1.57±0.66)与(1.90±0.56)mg/L,P〈0.01;β-TG:(30.84±11.37)与(41.92±12.91)μg/L,P〈0.01;PF4:(10.28±4.03)与(14.51±4.39)μg/L,P〈0.01]。各组内β-TG与PF4呈正相关(r分别为0.605、0.926、0.916,均为P〈0.01)。结论慢性心衰患者存在血栓前状态,若合并急性下呼吸道感染,则进一步增加血栓形成的危险性。Objective To evaluate the potential risk for thrombosis in patients with heart failure, especially those with acute lower respiratory tract infection. Methods Fifty-one patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), 26 patients with CHF and acute lower respiratorytract infection (CHF+RTI), and 32 control(CONT)subjects were enrolled in the study. Plasma levels of molecular markers for thrombotic status, fibrinolytic status and platelet activity were determined by ELISA method, including thrombin-antithrombin Ⅲ complex (TAT), prothrombin fragments 1 and 2 (Fl+ 2), D-dimer (D-D) and plasmin-α2-plasmin inhibitor complex (PAP), β-thromboglobulin (β-TG) and platelet factor 4 (PF4). Results Significant differences were found in almost all of the thrombus molecular markers among the CHF, CHF+RTI and CONT group. In CHF group, all six parameters reflecting pro-thrombotic state were higher than those in CONT group [TAT: (6.29± 2.02) μg/L vs (3.59±1.74)μg/L, P〈 0.01; F1+2: (1.43±0.56) nmol/L vs. (0.86±0.29)nmol/L, P〈0.01; D-D: (1.57±0.66)mg/L vs. (0. 46 ±0. 28) mg/L, P〈0.01; PAP: (397.0±117.7)μg/L vs. (238.1±58.1)μg/L, P〈0.01; β-TG: (30. 84±11.37)μg/L vs. ( 23. 10±7.72)μg/L, P〈0.01; PF4: (10.28±4.03)μg/L vs. (7.40±3.07)μg/L, P〈0.01], but lower than those in CHF+RTI group [TAT:(6.29±2.02)μg/Lvs. (8.14±2.51)μg/L, P〈 0.01; F1+2: (1. 43±0. 56)nmol/L vs. (1.83±0.52)nmol/L, P〈0.01 D-D: (1. 57±0. 66)mg/L vs. (1.90±0.56) mg/L, P〈0.01 β-TG: (30.84±11. 37)μg/L vs. (41.92±12.91)μg/L,P〈0.01; PF4: (10.28±4.03)μg/L vs. (14.51±4.39)μg/L, P〈0.01] except for PAP[(397.0±117.7)μg/L vs. (408.8±87.7)μg/L, P〉 0. 05]. There was a positive line correlation between β-TG and PF4 in CONT, CHF and CHF+RTI groups (r=0. 605, P〈0.01; r=0. 926, P〈0.01, r=0.916, P〈0.01; respectively). Conclusions A pro-thrombotic s
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...